Comments on: CNN’s Kyra Phillips: Richard Cohen Not Appropriate Guest for “Cure the Gays” Segment http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Wed, 22 May 2013 07:39:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Quo http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66540 Quo Wed, 14 Apr 2010 02:10:00 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66540 John, "Forced" was a figure of speech. Your comments about LeVay's views have no basis in what he wrote. John,

“Forced” was a figure of speech. Your comments about LeVay’s views have no basis in what he wrote.

]]> By: John http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66537 John Wed, 14 Apr 2010 02:03:34 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66537 Quo suggests that exgays would be "forced" to watch gay porn. Peer reviewed studies conducted by legitimate researchers in organizations that have review committees that assess experimental protocols would never approve any study that involves "forcing" people to do anything. Interestingly, while Quo finds the thought of exgays watching porn to be "immoral," he strongly advocates in favor of parents being able to force their children to be subjected to sexual abuse. I personally find watching some unwanted porn far less offensive than being forced to endure unwanted sexual acts against my will. Also, Levay does not consider the study type that he outlined as necessary to be done. People don't change their sexual orientation through therapy or prayer. The study would only be necessary for those (like yourself) who are arguing that people can change their sexual orientation. Those making the arguement have never provided any evidence to support their claims. This is the sort of evidence that would be necessary to back up the rather incredible claim that sexual reorientation therapy actually results in a change of sexual orientation. Quo suggests that exgays would be “forced” to watch gay porn. Peer reviewed studies conducted by legitimate researchers in organizations that have review committees that assess experimental protocols would never approve any study that involves “forcing” people to do anything. Interestingly, while Quo finds the thought of exgays watching porn to be “immoral,” he strongly advocates in favor of parents being able to force their children to be subjected to sexual abuse. I personally find watching some unwanted porn far less offensive than being forced to endure unwanted sexual acts against my will.

Also, Levay does not consider the study type that he outlined as necessary to be done. People don’t change their sexual orientation through therapy or prayer. The study would only be necessary for those (like yourself) who are arguing that people can change their sexual orientation. Those making the arguement have never provided any evidence to support their claims. This is the sort of evidence that would be necessary to back up the rather incredible claim that sexual reorientation therapy actually results in a change of sexual orientation.

]]> By: Quo http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66535 Quo Wed, 14 Apr 2010 01:36:48 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66535 Priya, No, it wouldn't be simple, given ex-gay people's natural (and perfectly proper) reluctance to be subjected to things that they consider immoral and humiliating - like being forced to watch gay porn. Priya,

No, it wouldn’t be simple, given ex-gay people’s natural (and perfectly proper) reluctance to be subjected to things that they consider immoral and humiliating – like being forced to watch gay porn.

]]> By: Priya Lynn http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66531 Priya Lynn Wed, 14 Apr 2010 01:21:56 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66531 Quo said "The reason why the sort of study LeVay considers necessary has not been done is that conducting such a study would be extremely difficult – for reasons which are so obvious that I’m not even going to point them out.". LOL, such a study would be simple to do, the only reason why it hasn't been done is that the vast majority of "ex-gays" know they are lying when they claim they've changed sexual orientation so they refuse to submit to objective testing. Quo said “The reason why the sort of study LeVay considers necessary has not been done is that conducting such a study would be extremely difficult – for reasons which are so obvious that I’m not even going to point them out.”.

LOL, such a study would be simple to do, the only reason why it hasn’t been done is that the vast majority of “ex-gays” know they are lying when they claim they’ve changed sexual orientation so they refuse to submit to objective testing.

]]> By: Quo http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66521 Quo Wed, 14 Apr 2010 00:26:10 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66521 John, The reason why the sort of study LeVay considers necessary has not been done is that conducting such a study would be extremely difficult - for reasons which are so obvious that I'm not even going to point them out. Emily K, Guess what, I consider YOUR comments to be trolling. They're an attempt to provoke me. I'm not taking the bait. John,

The reason why the sort of study LeVay considers necessary has not been done is that conducting such a study would be extremely difficult – for reasons which are so obvious that I’m not even going to point them out.

Emily K,

Guess what, I consider YOUR comments to be trolling. They’re an attempt to provoke me. I’m not taking the bait.

]]> By: Neon Genesis http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66480 Neon Genesis Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:00:30 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66480 The argument from presenting two sides of the issue is nonsense and utter rubbish. This is just the "teach the controversy" argument that people use in defense of creationism but now being applied to sexuality issues. I fail to see how this is professional journalism. When Rachel Maddow had Richard Cohen on her show awhile back debating the kill the gays bill, she did not present him as a legitimate therapist. She even pointed out he was kicked out of the American Counseling Association and she tore his arguments and claims of credibility to shreds. Is not Rachel Maddow also a professional journalist? The argument from presenting two sides of the issue is nonsense and utter rubbish. This is just the “teach the controversy” argument that people use in defense of creationism but now being applied to sexuality issues. I fail to see how this is professional journalism. When Rachel Maddow had Richard Cohen on her show awhile back debating the kill the gays bill, she did not present him as a legitimate therapist. She even pointed out he was kicked out of the American Counseling Association and she tore his arguments and claims of credibility to shreds. Is not Rachel Maddow also a professional journalist?

]]> By: Emily K http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66440 Emily K Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:51:16 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66440 Glad to see Quo took time out from his bath-house visits to troll through here once again, for whatever reason... Glad to see Quo took time out from his bath-house visits to troll through here once again, for whatever reason…

]]> By: John http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66438 John Mon, 12 Apr 2010 23:51:49 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66438 Quo knows very well that there is no convincing evidence demonstrating successful sexual reorientation through any of the therapies and prayer strategies that have been used and advocated by reorientation advocates. This would include the torture, electroshock therapy and forced sex reassignment surgeries conducted during the apartheid era by his South African compatriot, "Dr. Shock" who was recently arrested in Canada. The reason that the proposed Levay study hasn't been done is because sexual reorientation therapists have a vested interest in obscurring their (lack of) success rates. Sexual reorientation therapy isn't scientifically studied by sexual reorientation therapists because they do not want to call attention to their much less than 1% success rate. It is particulary ironic that the most ardent proponent of sexual reorientation therapy success on this website, Quo, has elsewhere acknowledged his own personal utter failure to change his sexual orientation (or for that matter to curb his own sexual behavior that he finds personally distasteful). Quo knows very well that there is no convincing evidence demonstrating successful sexual reorientation through any of the therapies and prayer strategies that have been used and advocated by reorientation advocates. This would include the torture, electroshock therapy and forced sex reassignment surgeries conducted during the apartheid era by his South African compatriot, “Dr. Shock” who was recently arrested in Canada.

The reason that the proposed Levay study hasn’t been done is because sexual reorientation therapists have a vested interest in obscurring their (lack of) success rates. Sexual reorientation therapy isn’t scientifically studied by sexual reorientation therapists because they do not want to call attention to their much less than 1% success rate.

It is particulary ironic that the most ardent proponent of sexual reorientation therapy success on this website, Quo, has elsewhere acknowledged his own personal utter failure to change his sexual orientation (or for that matter to curb his own sexual behavior that he finds personally distasteful).

]]> By: Quo http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66435 Quo Mon, 12 Apr 2010 23:26:05 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66435 Timothy, LeVay's point, obviously, is that whether sexual orientation can ever be changed or not is unclear. I wasn't trying to suggest that he was saying that it definitely is possible. Timothy,

LeVay’s point, obviously, is that whether sexual orientation can ever be changed or not is unclear. I wasn’t trying to suggest that he was saying that it definitely is possible.

]]> By: Timothy Kincaid http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/09/21719/comment-page-1#comment-66433 Timothy Kincaid Mon, 12 Apr 2010 23:10:49 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=21719#comment-66433 Quo, You have an astonishing ability to hear language that is intended to convey "it's simply not possible but we never say never" and still hear it as "it's possible". Quo,

You have an astonishing ability to hear language that is intended to convey “it’s simply not possible but we never say never” and still hear it as “it’s possible”.

]]>