OpenYourEyes wrote:
[
Replying to post 51 by Aaron Lindahl]
How were the people who reported sexuality change w/ no harm in the study I posted in post #1 'discredited'? Did you or any other scientific peer-review source evaluate the the exact participants and/or the study itself? Seems odd you keep sweeping these peope under the rug and then posting massive amounts of irrelevant info. that actually addresses my point.
Why are you ignoring the following refutation by a peer?
By Patrick M. Chapman. Dr. Chapman has a PhD in biological anthropology.
In the opening chapter Jones and Yarhouse honestly and correctly state this study cannot establish if long-term, permanent and enduring change occurs because that would require a long-term study (p. 17). Contrarily, they later suggest the results demonstrate sexual orientation is changeable (pp. 42, 325), evidenced by 11 “Success: Conversion� cases out of the original 98.
The conclusion is unwarranted because: 1) they acknowledge multiple anecdotal cases from previous “ex-gay� success stories who later recanted their “conversion� to heterosexuality (pp. 63-64, 72);
2) they freely acknowledge that people in ex-gay programs declare they are heterosexual even if they experience exclusive and powerful homosexual attractions (p. 220);
3) they admit that one of their 11 “Success: Conversion� cases recanted his claim of change, confessing his homosexual attraction was unchanged after the book manuscript neared completion (p. 285; Jones and Yarhouse did not remove his “success� from their data); and
4) the only way to determine if change actually occurred is through a long-term study, which this is not.
This study is littered with biased and sloppy scholarship. The authors suggest the results presented in Tables 7.4 through 7.6 (pp. 239-240) present a “modest portrait of positive progress� in the change process (p. 246). Yet, there is no change based on the data presented in Table 7.4: at both the start and end of the study nine participants declare themselves heterosexual while 51 declare themselves homosexual. Jones and Yarhouse state there is “no indication of significant change� based on the data presented in Table 7.5 (p. 248) and no statistically significant change in Table 7.6 (p. 249). Nonetheless Jones and Yarhouse declare the results represented in these three tables to be “positive progress.� Simply put, their conclusion is not based on the evidence: progress requires positive change.
When one examines the statements of the “Success: Conversion� participants it is once again clear that Jones and Yarhouse’s claim of change is unfounded. In addition to the “Success: Conversion� male who recanted his success, another male admits to still having “unwanted sexual attraction to men� (p. 297), while a third admits to continuing homoerotic dreams (p. 298).
Meanwhile, the authors report 23 percent of the participants achieved success in changing their sexual orientation by embracing chastity.
However, once again the actual desires and longings of the individuals remain homosexual.
Despite explicitly stating that this study cannot demonstrate whether long-lasting change is possible, despite admitting that individuals in ex-gay ministries misreport their condition, despite knowing that previous testimonies of change were untrue, despite knowing that one of their own “Success: Conversion� participants later recanted his proclaimed “conversion� to heterosexuality, and despite the fact that “Success: Conversion� and “Success: Chastity� participants retain a homosexual orientation (using Jones and Yarhouse’s own definition), the authors still claim that homosexual orientation is changeable! Clearly their conclusion is not consistent with the evidence: a continued homosexual orientation is not evidence of “healing� from homosexuality.
Why are you ignoring that the group included in the study you cite was disbanded and admitted by its founders to not work, and in fact to be harmful ?
Why are you ignoring all of the following reports?
All of the nation’s leading professional medical and mental health associations have rejected conversion therapy as unnecessary, ineffective, and dangerous.
http://www.nclrights.org/bornperfect-th ... n-therapy/
John Paulk, 'Ex-Gay' Leader, Apologizes For Involvement In Reparative Therapy Movement:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/2 ... logy_n_315...
Robert Spitzer has written a letter to Kenneth Zucker, editor of the Archives of Sexual Behavior, in which he expresses his regrets for publishing his 2003 study of highly religious individuals who said their sexual orientation was changed by reparative therapy.� I believe I owe the gay community an apology for my study making unproven claims of the efficacy of reparative therapy. I also apologize to any gay person who wasted time and energy undergoing some form of reparative therapy because they believed that I had proven that reparative therapy works with some "highly motivated" individuals.�
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_s ... nging.html
A 2009 APA task force found that conversion therapies, despite being touted by religious organizations, have almost no evidence to back them up.
http://www.livescience.com/25082-gay-co ... facts.html
Conversion therapy has no grounding in mainstream medicine. It is a pseudoscience—junk science.
http://www.tolerance.org/therapy-of-lies
A Christian ministry that led the so-called ex-gay movement, which professes to rid people of their homosexuality, has announced that it will shut down, and its leader apologized extensively to gays for causing “pain and hurt.�
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06 ... its-shutti...
Evangelical leader Russell Moore denounces ex-gay therapy- Southern Baptist leader Russell Moore denounced reparative therapy at a conference here, saying the controversial treatment that attempts to change a person’s sexual orientation has been “severely counterproductive.�
http://www.religionnews.com/2014/10/28/ ... e-denounce...
Earlier this year, a group of former ex-gay leaders — individuals who made a career at some point in their lives promoting or administering ex-gay therapy — published an open letter decrying all forms of sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE). “It is our firm belief,� they wrote, “that it is much more productive to support, counsel, and mentor LGBT individuals to embrace who they are in order to live happy, well-adjusted lives.� The letter helped launch the National Center for Lesbian Rights’ #BornPerfect campaign, which calls for more laws protecting people from the harms of reparative therapy. Among the signatories was Tim Rymel, who at one point in his life was an evangelical Christian minister and a vocal advocate for ex-gay therapy, offering his own personal testimony to support his cause.
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2014/10/2 ... el-ex-gay/
There has been no proven evidence that efforts to change sexual orientation are effective. There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of reparative therapy as a treatment to change one's sexual orientation. Alternatively, the attempt to change one’s sexual orientation can cause serious mental health problems, such as depression and thoughts of suicide. Every major American health organization and the United Nation’s human rights charter has discredited conversion therapies.
http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/sexinfo/article ... on-therapy
For a more detailed analysis, please go here:
http://www.exgaywatch.com/2007/11/a-cri ... ys-part-2/
