Wow, that looks bad for sure. Clearly unwise to quote an author whom I knew little regarding his background. Clearly, those who write for the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality have a monetary invested interest in their perspective. But Paul and others, not all the studies were from that journal. Is the perspective that early interaction with parents felt by most of you to be irrelevant in the development of sexual orientation? I remember when Masters and Johnson started working with homosexuals who had come to them (not vice versa) for assistance and the visceral attack they experienced from the gay rights movement. So, while I fully accept the point of your post Paul, I also would like you and others to consider the investment that many people have in the nature/inborn perspective of sexual orientation and how they also might be attempting to also prevent, repress and discredit research to the contrary. I realize I'm really on the 'wrong side' here but I simply feel that many psychologists as well as the general public aren't aware of how strongly gay activists have impacted the direction of research as well as what is considered appropriate to even discuss and suggest. It has become as much a political issue as a scientific one. I am so neutral here relative to how and why folks are heterosexual or homosexual. But I feel that certain perspectives are being interpreted as anti-gay if the person has a conclusion that gay rights activists don't agree with. I clearly recall that with Masters and Johnson--and they were nothing of the sort.
As a side note, is it fair to take one small section of my rather long post and only reply to that one? Seems a bit unfair but so it goes. But I realize I'm getting into highly charged territory and didn't wish to offend in any way. Joan Joan Warmbold Boggs Associate Professor of Psychology Oakton Community College [EMAIL PROTECTED] > At 4:01 PM -0600 3/15/06, Joan Warmbold wrote: >>I'll provide the research studies you folks have asked for but will start >>with a quote from an article authored by Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D. in an >>article he authored in the National Association for Research and Therapy >>of Homosexuality, "Fathers of Male Homosexuals: A Collective Profile." > > I thought that the organization rang a bell; their claims that their > research is being suppressed by the mainstream sounds a bit like the > ID people. > > from Wikipedia > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_for_Research_and_Therapy_of_Homosexuality> > > =================================================== > > From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia > > The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality > (NARTH) is a non-profit organization dedicated to "affirming a > complementary, male-female model of gender and sexuality". NARTH is a > proponent of the controversial idea that it is possible to alter > one's "sexual preferences" or "sexual orientation", that > homosexuality is a psychological disorder, and their primary goal is > to make reparative therapies available to homosexual men and women > who want to try to change their "sexual adaptation". > > NARTH claims to protect the rights of clients who suffer as a result > of their homosexual behaviour and who wish to change this and to "get > rid of homosexual feelings", as well as the rights of the therapists > who treat these clients. As such, NARTH supports reparative therapy > in addition to providing an open forum for dialogue between > psychiatrists and psychologists on issues related to homosexuality. > (See NARTH position statements). > > History > > In his article In Defense of the Need for Honest Dialogue, Benjamin > Kaufman, M.D. explains the events that led himself, Charles > Socarides, and Joseph Nicolosi in 1992 to found NARTH. In his own > words, Dr. Kaufman stated that "[the APA and similar professional > organizations] had totally stifled the scientific inquiry that would > be necessary to stimulate a discussion [of understanding the nature > of homosexuality]." NARTH claims that it has become "politically > incorrect" to make even the suggestion of a dialogue that opens up > the question of the normality of homosexuality. He states the reason > they formed NARTH was in response to "censorship of a politically > unpopular position". NARTH currently claims to have at least 1,000 > members among psychiatrists and psychologists. NARTH's website > contains a wealth of clinical and other research which suggests that > there is today a widespread propaganda in favour of "normalizing" > homosexuality in law and education which ignores many of the real > medical and psychological conditions associated with the condition. > > Controversies > > Theories of therapeutic methods for changing sexual bias are no > longer endorsed by professional mental health organizations, such as > the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychological > Association, American Counseling Association, National Association of > School Psychologists, and the National Association of Social Workers. > Other health care associations have also condemned reparative therapy > including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American School > Health Association. Professional organizations of educators have also > added their voice opposing this therapy, such as the American > Association of School Administrators, American Federation of > Teachers, and the National Education Association. > > The Human Rights Campaign, which is a homosexual advocacy > organization, issued a press release that in 1999 NARTH President, > Charles Socarides, had "run into trouble with the American > Psychoanalytic Association (APsaA), of which he is a member. > According to a letter from Dr. Ralph Roughton of the APsaA, Socarides > misrepresented the position of the APsaA in a published paper and a > court affidavit. Socarides attempted to make it appear that the APsaA > agrees with his positions on homosexuality. He did this by quoting an > APsaA document written in 1968, which supported his views and which > he called the "official position" of the APsaA, while ignoring a 1990 > revised statement that drastically contradicted his views. The > Executive Committee of the APsaA instructed the organization's > attorney to write a letter to Socarides asking him to cease this > misrepresentation and threatening legal action if he continued. > Additionally, the APsaA newsletter decided to stop printing > advertisements for NARTH meetings because the organization does not > adhere to APsaA's policy of non-discrimination and because their > activities are demeaning to our members who are gay and lesbian, > according to Roughton." > > On May 17, 1997, NARTH published the results of a two year study > involving 860 clients and 200 psychologists and therapists. > Mainstream psychological associations called the study "heavily > biased", because each of the therapists supplied data only on their > "success stories". The organization did not report their success rate > at converting patients with a homosexual orientation to a > heterosexual orientation. They did not make distinction between > homosexuals and bisexuals in the program. They also did not > differentiate between homosexuals, bisexuals and heterosexuals among > those leaving. This study has not been accepted to be published in > any peer-reviewed medical journal. But consultation of the NARTH > website shows that many of its research results have been accepted by > peer-reviewed journals. > > -- > * PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] * > * Psychology Department 507-389-6217 * > * 23 Armstrong Hall Minnesota State University, Mankato * > * http://krypton.mnsu.edu/%7Epkbrando/ * > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
