94 responses

  1. Timothy Kincaid
    August 6, 2009


    This is not the place to convince me that I’m wrong about people of faith. We dedicated a thread to that recently and if you have any additional points which you have not already posted there, please feel free to revisit that thread and make them.

    I am going to ask you to not turn every thread into an anti-religion assertation. It is distracting rather than informative.

  2. Priya Lynn
    August 6, 2009

    Timothy, I’d certainly be interested in seeing some documentation of the education level of the typical participant in an Exodus type program.

  3. Timothy Kincaid
    August 6, 2009


    Read Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation.

  4. Priya Lynn
    August 6, 2009

    Timothy, the initial point of mine you took issue with was directly related to the merits of Narth’s approach to gays. It was you who chose to take that off into a tangent on the nature of religious people.

  5. Priya Lynn
    August 6, 2009

    Read Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation.

    LOL, Timothy, you must be kidding, the Jones and Yarhouse study?! It dealt with a non-randomly sampled group of only 98 individuals, it can’t be used to generalize about the education levels of the “typical Exodus participant”, not to mention the fact that Box Turtle Bulletin itself heavily criticized their report for its inaccuracies. Even overlooking that there is no readily available google link to it that actually discusses its “findings” on education levels.

  6. BeckySue in Poway
    August 6, 2009

    While I appreciate the clarification of the APA’s policies being separate from the various journals’ research, from what I have read, congress looked to the APA to respond in their position as experts and advocates of psychological issues. And they ultimately did respond after several months. This link shows that it was a controversial process as the APA initially emphasized defending the peer reviewing process that allowed the publication of the research.
    Two quotes from the article indicate that the APA didn’t see a problem initially:
    “No matter how clearcut its emphasis that, from a scientific perspective, the study was appropriate, it wouldn’t fly in Peoria. ”

    “Not surprisingly during the height of the controversy, Steve Mirin, M.D., head of the American Psychiatric Assn. entered the spectacle, grasping at the opportunity to pummel its counterpart APA by distancing itself from “junk science,” a term imputed by Dr. Laura. The ApA leader added that “academic hair-splitting over applying either “adult-child sex or child sexual abuse obfuscates the moral issues involved.””

    What I am trying to say is that the APA and many other scientific associations including NARTH are political. They are not dogma. They evolve. It is a process.

  7. Jason D
    August 6, 2009

    Beckysue, NARTH is not a scientific organization, period. They would NOT be defending and promoting ex-gay therapy if they were scientific as there is NO credible evidence that it works, is safe, permanent, or ethical.

  8. Ephilei
    August 6, 2009

    What about this report is different from what the APA already did and stated? From what I can tell, this is the same but more widely articulated. I’m sure I’m missing something.

  9. Jim Burroway
    August 6, 2009

    Again, BeckySue, this incident shows no such thing.

    The controversy was over one article that just one of 61 journals chose to publish. The article certainly was very controversial within psychiatry and psychology, within and outside the APA.

    But what you are trying to claim is that the APA adopted a position based on that one single article in one signle publication, and then changed their position in light of public outcry. They didn’t.

    The article never represented an APA position, so there was nothing to evolve or change. The APA did — and continue to do — support the editorial independence of their editors to make decisions, much as any other reputable organization defends the editorial integrity of their publications, whether that organization is the APA, the AMA, or Time-Warner.

    But the APA did not — and I’ll repeat this until I’m blue in the face because it is just the simple truth whether you want to accept it or not — did not, as an organization or as a governing body, take a position that adult-child sex was not harmful in one instance and repudiate it in the next. Your example is simply flat wrong.

    But let’s stick with your example, just to indulge you. That was just one study which purports to show no harm. Stacked against a multitude of other methodologically sound, peer-reviewed studies, it would not have had much of an impact if the APA had performed a wide-ranging literature review as they had in this case with change efforts. And so following the same process, they would have certainly come to the same position that they currently hold. The responsible one that respects the preponderance of peer-reviewed literature.

    This is very much unlike the process that NARTH followed, which began with a premise and carefully selected studies to support their premise while ommitting or dismissing all studies which refuted it.

    I encourage you to read the complete APA report. I think you will be impressed by how well balanced it is. It describes how they reviewed the literature, the criteria they used in evaluating the literature, and the results of that evaluation. Then read the NARTH report. It is like night and day.

  10. Burr
    August 6, 2009

    “Very few people who claim that change from homosexuality is possible say that it is easy, can be accomplished quickly, or is possible in all cases. There’s nothing surprising in the fact that I haven’t succeeded in changing my sexual orientation as yet (something I’m perfectly stoical about) and that doesn’t disprove anything I’ve said.”

    That just means they know it’s a load of BS. It’s a nice little convenient throwaway excuse for the absolutely piss poor results such “therapies” have when you look at the statistical analysis.

    Making excuses for failure. How appropriate.

  11. Quo
    August 6, 2009


    “There are no studies of adequate scientific rigor to conclude whether or not recent SOCE (Sexual Orientation Change Efforts) do or do not work to change a person’s sexual orientation” is not a scientific way of saying it doesn’t work. It’s a scientific way of saying we’re not sure.


    No, it means that supporters of change are honest and admit that it’s a slow and difficult process that won’t necessarily work for everyone.

  12. Priya Lynn
    August 6, 2009

    Quo, if supporters of change were honest they wouldn’t be constantly implying that a change in behavior or what a gay person calls themselves is a change in orientation. If they were honest they’d acknowledge that there are virtually no documented cases of someone changing from having predominant same-sex attractions into someone having predominant opposite sex attractions.

  13. Jayhuck
    August 6, 2009


    I think the fact that there have been DECADES of opportunities for such evidence to reveal itself – and that we still find no evidence to back up such therapies – is pretty darn telling!

  14. Ben in Oakland
    August 7, 2009

    Quo’s problem is his own tragedy.

    Quo’s problem is his self hatred, not his homosexuality. It is a tragedy.

    I lost my brother to homo-self-hatred. don’t lose yourself, quo, while you are attempting to find yourself.

  15. Ben in Oakland
    August 7, 2009

    Quo, Your belief system is the source of your problem, not your sexual orientation. You have been brainwashed into believing that what the bible allegedly says about a subject that is allegedly about homosexuality as in fact an accurate translation. Or if you don’t believe in the bible, substitute NARTH.

    What homophobic religion, or homophobic “psychology’ does to gay people is sickening. The idea that it is a sin, or a mental illness, (or formerly a crime) to love another human being is a damnable lie, and the fact that people suffer so tragically from believing such a thing is profoundly sad.

    you have nothing to lose but your chains.

  16. Ken in Riverside
    August 7, 2009

    I appreciate Quo’s participation if, for no other reason, because he accurately portrays a mindset to which the rest of us are not frequently presented.

    But sometimes he makes me want to scream. Primally.

    I agree whole-heartedly. I appreciate his perseverance in participating in these discussions despite so many direct attacks. Whether or not I agree with his positions, I recognize that his opinions are well-informed. I also appreciate that his tone is less argumentative/combative than some of the people who spar with him.

  17. Jayhuck
    August 7, 2009

    I appreciate Quo’s participation if, for no other reason, because he accurately portrays a mindset to which the rest of us are not frequently presented.

    But sometimes he makes me want to scream. Primally.

    Tim and Ken – I agree with you both. I think its hard for some gay people to understand Quo’s mindset, and it would be nice to see more gay people who aren’t struggling with their sexuality present a more compassionate approach to those who are instead of calling them names.

    I used to identify as ex-gay, as I’m sure others on here may have, and I know that for some people who struggle with their SSA its not always a question of self-hatred or brainwashing.

  18. Ben in Oakland
    August 7, 2009

    I’m not interested in attacking quo.

    As a carimg human being, i hate to see anyone suffer needlessly, especially if they are choosing suffering rather than joy.

    as a caring gay man, I hate to see someone who is gay trash the best part of himself and make his life a struggle instead of a joy simply because he has swallowed, hook, line and sinker, the ideological position that being gay is bad, and the the deity actually cares about this far more than just about any other subject.

    There are those of us who, though not perfect, are in the light, at least on this subject, as well as those, though not seriously flawed, are nonetheless in the darkness, at least on this subject.

    I can see many gay people living out, fulfilled, dare we say happy, spiritually fulfilled, positive contributing lives. I wish nothing but good for quo, as for any human being. but I seriously doubt that he has found or will find it in the embrace of people who would teach him (or have) to take the best part of himself and turn it into something bad, sinful, or sick. It is none of those things, and anybody who says something different has his or her own interests at heart, the his victims.

    I can’t find other words to describe that except for self-hatred or brainwashing.

  19. Priya Lynn
    August 7, 2009

    I find it hard to be sympathetic to Quo. If he were solely dealing with his own desires to be straight, that’d be one thing, but he comes here trying to convince the wider gay community that they’re wrong for being the way they are, that “The idea that opposite sex attractions and relationships are preferable to their same sex equivalents is perfectly true”. He’s not content with being who he wants to be, he wants to coerce other people to live according to his desires – I find that reprehensible.

  20. Jayhuck
    August 7, 2009


    Yes – I confess I must agree with you as well. His struggle and his beliefs are one thing, but if he did indeed come to a site that does not view homosexuality as a “sin”, then he has no business trying to convince people that it is – IF that really is what he was doing – I’m still not sure about that.

  21. Priya Lynn
    August 7, 2009

    We could ask Quo why he comes here, but I doubt he’d answer. He’s had many questions posed to him that he’s ignored. I suspect he senses that if he answers such questions honestly it’ll refute the positions he’s taken.

  22. Timothy Kincaid
    August 7, 2009

    I don’t see any evidence of Quo trying to coerce anyone into doing anything. Perhaps I missed that.

  23. Priya Lynn
    August 7, 2009

    When you go around trying to spread “The idea that opposite sex attractions and relationships are preferable to their same sex equivalents is perfectly true” you’re trying to coerce people into denying themselves same sex relationships.

  24. Timothy Kincaid
    August 7, 2009

    Perhaps we use a different dicionary:

    co·erce (k-ûrs)
    tr.v. co·erced, co·erc·ing, co·erc·es
    1. To force to act or think in a certain way by use of pressure, threats, or intimidation; compel.
    2. To dominate, restrain, or control forcibly: coerced the strikers into compliance. See Synonyms at force.
    3. To bring about by force or threat: efforts to coerce agreement.

  25. Priya Lynn
    August 7, 2009

    No, we use the same dictionary. I see Quo as attempting to use pressure to force people to act or think in a certain way. I understand that you have a bit of a soft spot for religious anti-gays.

  26. Priya Lynn
    August 7, 2009

    Let me put it this way Timothy:

    Its difficult to see how Quo’s presence here in anyway assists his efforts to change his orientation. Absent that the only plausible purpose for his being here is to harrass gay people.

  27. Timothy Kincaid
    August 7, 2009

    Your dictionary seems to differ from mine also in the definition of the words “pressure”, “force”, and “harrass”.

  28. Priya Lynn
    August 7, 2009

    That’s strange, not from my perspective.

  29. Burr
    August 7, 2009

    “Its difficult to see how Quo’s presence here in anyway assists his efforts to change his orientation.”


    And it’s difficult to see how he’s doing his argument any favors without succeeding himself first.

    So how about a deal? Fix yourself, and then you can come back and sell us your product. Because right now it’s hard to buy..

  30. Timothy Kincaid
    August 7, 2009

    Priya, Burr,

    Its difficult to see how Quo’s presence here in anyway assists his efforts to change his orientation.

    I’m inclined to agree that his presence here is not likely to make him any more heterosexual.

    However, dismissing and condemning Quo benefits no one. And we all may benefit from respectful conversation.

    We may learn other perspectives which help us to be empathetic and sympathetic to others around us and guide us in our desire to achieve a measure of peace from the culture war.

    And Quo may learn facts that might at some future date help him make choices that he might not even consider as possible for him today. If we just exhibit hostility and reject him, he can’t hear what we say.

  31. Ken in Riverside
    August 7, 2009

    I would rather listen to Quo’s respectful anti-gay position than Priya being disrespectfully pro-gay.

    Priya, in this one thread you have called Quo a fool, BeckySue a liar and insinuated that Timothy’s value system/religion is the result of indoctrination and irrationality.

    To those of you saying that Quo shouldn’t post here until he’s pro-gay or a successful ex-gay: That is how echo chambers get created. The conversation is enriched when more voices participate. And if there has to be “anti-gay” voices, I would prefer them to come from gay people, wouldn’t you?

    Its hard to imagine why someone convinced of their own self-worth would be offended by Quo’s opinion that his homosexuality makes him inferior.

  32. Quo
    August 7, 2009


    You wrote, “I see Quo as attempting to use pressure to force people to act or think in a certain way.” If that is how you see me (and my, for the most part politely disagreeing with the views of the pro-gay regulars here), then this may explain why you find it necessary to reject everything I say without real argument.

    Since you ask how my commenting here helps me to change my sexual orientation: sometimes (not very often, but sometimes) I have doubts about whether my views about homosexuality are right. Then, I come here, listen to the arguments against those views, see how feeble they are, and leave feeling reassured that my views were right along. Now you may not believe it, but that does help me with my sexual feelings.

  33. Christopher Waldrop
    August 7, 2009

    Quo, when have you ever listened to the arguments made by others? You dismiss them as “feeble”, but it seems to be your own arguments which are feeble, since you feel compelled to distort or ignore criticisms of your statements. From your very own description, you make it sound as though you come here solely to prop up your own sense of self-worth.

    If that’s the case, it would explain why you refuse to accept others as they are and instead seem to feel compelled to try and make everyone hate themselves as much as you do.

  34. Jayhuck
    August 7, 2009


    LOL – I don’t mean to be glib here, but you and I use similar methods for supporting our differing opinions on this issue: As a former Ex-Gay I sometimes go to various anti-gay or pro-ex-gay sites because I’m uncertain if my feelings on homosexuality are correct, and when I’m there and see the reasons given for those views, I leave feeling reassured – THAT is interesting ;)

  35. Emily K
    August 7, 2009

    My beliefs on homosexuality:

    Falling in love with other women is as natural to me as falling asleep when I go to bed. And since I didn’t feel the need to question it, or to torture myself over it, well, I never felt any conflict about it.

    “Feeble?” Doubt it. How can someone’s confidence in who they are as a human being be considered feeble? The feeblest here are those who are so insecure about their same sex attractions and their “daddy didn’t love me right” childhood that they need to dump on others to change even though they haven’t.

  36. David C.
    August 7, 2009

    The feeblest here are those who are so insecure about their same sex attractions and their “daddy didn’t love me right” childhood that they need to dump on others to change even though they haven’t—Emily K

    Similarly, there are those so feeble of spirit and so dependent on the approval of others that they would deny themselves their own potential for happiness and full self realization. To me, that’s a “loving disorder” analogous to anorexia. If one cannot love themselves, it is impossible to love others.

  37. William
    August 7, 2009


    Let me just say a few things. People can get very heated on here sometimes, and as a result the “decencies of debate” are not always observed.

    I do find it depressing, however, that you seem to be intent on making the same mistakes that I have made in the past and now regret, or that I have known others to make.

    Although I have long accepted myself as a gay man, I waited until I was well into my twenties for my sexual orientation to change. It didn’t. I’m now very happy to be gay and wouldn’t now want my orientation to change even if I believed such a thing to be possible (which I don’t), but I’ve realised of late that I don’t just need to grieve for the mum and dad that I’ve lost – that happens to everyone sooner or later and, as Columbo said, it’s the way of the world – but also for those years that I wasted trying to ignore or repress my natural sexuality instead of coming to terms with it. You don’t give any indication of your age; the younger you are, the more distressing it is think of the years that you’re wasting, and the older you are, the more distressing it is to think of the years that you’ve wasted already and seem determined to keep on wasting.

    I never blamed my parents for my homosexuality – and it’s not something for which there’s any need to blame anyone or anything – but, as I’ve mentioned before, I had a work colleague who did blame his parents. Over the years that I knew him his relationship with them steadily and needlessly deteriorated, and by the time that he’d realised that there was no need to blame them for anything it was too late: they’d passed on.

    Finally, Quo, just consider this. Suppose that you meet in the next few weeks, months or years a really super guy. I don’t mean a pin-up style guy suitable for a raunchy gay mag, but a guy who’s really nice in every way and who could potentially be your boyfriend. Are you going to turn and walk away on the off-chance that your orientation might just conceivably change at some time in the future?

  38. Mary S
    August 9, 2009

    Let’s shed some light on this research. The APA intentionally and deliberately rejected as committee members APA members holding ‘a different view’ of gender affirming therapy. The committee consisted of six individuals who are gay or gay activists. Of course, they found ‘little evidence that this therapy is effective’ — they rejected hundreds of studies that disagreed with the opinion the six hold.

    Let’s get real here — is this research really authentic – isn’t having six gay or gay agenda activists discount change therapy like me inviting 5 girl friends to lunch so we can discuss how we all successfully avoided prostate cancer!!!

  39. David C.
    August 9, 2009

    …they rejected hundreds of studies that disagreed with the opinion the six hold. —Mary S.

    Yes, 100′s of studies with little or no scientific merit, and those that were to tangential to make sense in the context of the evaluation.

  40. William
    August 9, 2009

    Mary S, I’m intrigued by your reference to “gender affirming therapy”. What is that, please?

  41. Alex
    August 10, 2009

    Mary S,

    How do you know that any of the APA task force members are gay? Could you provide some evidence, please?

  42. Priya Lynn
    August 10, 2009

    Ken in Riverside said “Priya, in this one thread you have called Quo a fool, BeckySue a liar and insinuated that Timothy’s value system/religion is the result of indoctrination and irrationality.”.

    Okay, I’ll accept the criticism for telling Quo, “don’t be a fool”. However, Beckysue is a liar and it is a mighty rare religious person that didn’t blindly accept their religion as a child when they were too young to rationally consider the evidence for it. If you think I’m going to deny or hide the truth you can forget it.

  43. Timothy Kincaid
    August 10, 2009

    Mary S,

    Can you please list a few of those studies which were ignored. Please include only those which are peer-reviewed English-language studies published since 1960.

    Thank you.

  44. Load More Comments…

Leave a Reply




Back to top
mobile desktop