They exist to promote their agenda. They want gays to stay in the closet. They consider it their civil right to discriminate and oppress gay people.

The good news is that they are no longer in the majority of opinion. They are really helping gay people because they are
saying the world is flat and almost everyone is laughing at them.

Awesome

Of course, this type of unscientific criteria has always been common in the medical community. Patients who don’t get cured can be blamed for not being motivated enough or accused of being “noncompliant” patients. (i.e. a patient who didn’t follow the doctor’s orders)

Even when the evidence and the researchers themselves revealed this, Dobson refused to deal with them OR retract his distortions.
And TIME didn’t compel him to do so, or correct this.

A lot stinks in the reportage on gay lives and it’s inexcusable. Let alone, completely wrong.

Are you actually asking if there is any evidence against something for which there is no evidence to begin with???

(You know the rule about proving the non-existence of something, don’t you?)

Read the concerns expressed by his wife. She worked alongside him. Publicly she supported him. In private she was horrified.

Refusing to open raw data files to peer review is prima facie evidence against any researcher. They need a damn good reason for refusing, and there is never a reason for refusing peer access to data that has been redacted to protect the privacy of the subjects. To refuse access to your leading associate is almost unheard of.

This ‘study’ stank when it was published due to it being tainted by use of a sample population that was overwhelming bisexual (by any definition). And now we have good reason to conclude that the smell came out of a can.

Aah, the fate of those who build their house on shifting sands…

Who can you trust…..

The majority of ex gay program’s most visible representatives are middle aged. Nor do they do any comparisons on gay people of the current generation not as affected by criminalization and institutionalization, which was still in effect in 1979 in some states.

And these studies seem to concentrate on sexual attraction and gender qualities only, and not so much how self esteem and isolation effects sexuality. I remember that Masters and Johnson book and thought it terribly thin and too general in that way gay sexuality usually is disseminated by STRAIGHT folks.

It’s like the real gay folks weren’t really asked or observed in ways that DIDN’T validate a kind of stereotype.

In fact, since so many anti gay organizations complain of public money (which can afford more expansive and comprehensive ones) going for studies on gay lives, they would be hard pressed to conduct their own. And if they have, they are still of extremely limited scope and pretty much a rehash of outdated and outmoded information.

Even the CENSUS bureau doesn’t want to count gay people in the situations they really live in!

There shouldn’t have to be such a heavy reliance on studies and research, the subject is right where everyone could get to know them if they cared to really try.

Or if there allowed for full integration into every aspect of everyday life, a lot could be proven that anti gay ‘researchers’ still discuss as if still an ‘unproven theory’. Looks to me like real proof is the last thing they really want.