Spitzer Study Published: Evidence Found for Effectiveness of Reorientation Therapy

[ar81]

Spitzer Study Published: Evidence Found for Effectiveness of Reorientation Therapy

Spitzer's findings challenge the widely-held assumption that a homosexual orientation is "who one is" -- an intrinsic part of a person's identity that can never be changed.

What do you think?

[Timbuk2]

What do you think?

Actually, scratch that.

[Bitter Jeweler]

I'll play!

First, can we compare this to alcoholism, and those who remain abstinate after twelve step programs?
I know, one is a "disease" and the other isn't. BUT, you are always an alcoholic, and you choose to suppress those desires. Isn't a similar thing happening with "reorientation"? Supression of desire?

Ok, the stupid study:

The study did not seek a random sample of reorientation therapy clients; the subjects chosen were volunteers.

and...

97% were of a Christian background, 3% were Jewish, with an overwhelming 93% of all participants stating that religion was either "extremely" or "very" important in their lives.

Interesting. The study only contain religious folk. How many religion deem homosexuality a sin?

Marital status at time of interview: 76% men were married

What?! So they picked a bunch of people trying to act str8 anyways.

they had had seriously contemplated suicide due to dissatisfaction with their unwanted attractions.

Hmmm...I wonder why that is? Social/moral teachings? Somebody has to tell you it's wrong...

The majority of respondents (85% male, 70% female) did not find the homosexual lifestyle to be emotionally satisfying.

I wonder how many straight (lifestyle) people are emotionally satisfied. Granted the numbers are probably higher (satisfied), but what about those who just can't get a date, like Knux.

79% of both genders said homosexuality conflicted with their religious beliefs,

There it is!

More of the male respondents (34%) than females (2%) had engaged in homosexual sex with more than 50 different partners during their lifetime.

Yikes. Maybe theres something else with that 34% going on.

As for completely reorienting from homosexual to heterosexual, most respondents indicated that they still occasionally struggled with unwanted attractions--in fact, only 11% of the men and 37% of the women reported complete change. Nevertheless this study, Spitzer concludes, "clearly goes beyond anecdotal information and provides evidence that reparative therapy is sometimes successful."

I don't see that as "beyond clearly anecdotal."

Is reorientation therapy chosen only by clients who are driven by guilt--that is, what's popularly known as "homophobia"? To the contrary, Spitzer concludes. In fact, "the ability to make such a choice should be considered fundamental to client autonomy and self-determination."

Apparently the answer to the question is yes.

I wonder what the world would be like if homosexuality wasn't demonized. If it wasn't taught to be a sin by any religion. Would we even need this study? All things being equal, would the suicide rate drop?



/me runs and hides from Loki.

[Loki]

Alpha cites a study that's so blatantly methodologically flawed that its results can only be laughed at. I'm shocked.

[Angel_Mapper]

Hello and welcome to 9 years ago.

Meanwhile:

[Nessus]

Alpha cites a study that's so blatantly methodologically flawed that its results can only be laughed at. I'm shocked.

A South American expressing anti-gay sentiments? I'm shocked, too!

[Loki]

He's Central American.

[Nessus]

They're all the same

[Bitter Jeweler]

Thanks for that, Angel.

[Loki]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8618878.stm

[Aimless]

I can accept the notion that, for some individuals, in some cases, intervention in the form of "therapy" may shift sexual orientation from predominantly homosexual to predominantly heterosexual. However, if their homosexuality causes them distress primarily due to pressure from the community or from family then such antigay-therapy are targeting the wrong problem.

And let's not force this sort of things on kids pls.

[littlelolligagged]

Mike Huckabee, a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2012, says the effort to allow gays and lesbians to marry is comparable to legalizing incest, polygamy and drug use.

Huckabee also told college journalists last week that gay couples should not be permitted to adopt. "Children are not puppies," he said.

And it continues... like that wasn't enough joy.

It's not that hard to imagine that in most cases when someone's sexual orientation causes them distress it is primarily due to pressure from the community or from family.

[CitizenCain]

Clicking the link, we find the "NARTH" website. And NARTH stands for... National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality.

</credibility>
</thread>

[EyeKhan]

9/11 demo, reorientation therapy, hmmm.... is there enough data to identify a pattern here?

[Nessus]

Who cares, I've got the pitchforks and torches all warmed up already!

[CitizenCain]

9/11 demo, reorientation therapy, hmmm.... is there enough data to identify a pattern here?

j00ish homos caused 9/11?

[ar81]

A South American expressing anti-gay sentiments? I'm shocked, too!

Aren't you a bit paranoid?
I posted an article and asked for opinions.
Now it seems that because you do not like it, then I am anti-something.
I may think you are anti-me using that reasoning.

The interesting thing is that if a person can be reoriented, it means that gays have a preference that can be changed.
One case in which person can be reoriented is enough as an exception that proves that gay statements on homosexual orientation as "who one is" are wrong.

The fact that someone does not like it does not prove the study flawed, it only proves personal bias.

[GGT]

I may think you are anti-me using that reasoning.

Bingo.

Must be a lot of elephant memories here, keeping post-it notes by their computer or something. Just another "clique", really. Score keepers.

You sometimes talk in strange ways, but that might be a cultural divide. (People tell me I ramble and don't make sense sometimes too, but that doesn't mean that everything I say should be dismissed out-of-hand.)

That's just a forum tactic meant to shut people UP. If we keep posting, the mafia has a consensus that divergent opinions is simply valued as entertainment. ha ha. Or they want to tell others how (insert negative descriptive here) they are, point and laugh.

Then they wonder why the place isn't very active? Right. I can talk to my cats or my mirror if the most important thing is being right all the time. There has to be a spectrum of challengers, odd balls and weirdos, to keep it going.

[Bitter Jeweler]

Aren't you a bit paranoid?
I posted an article and asked for opinions.
Now it seems that because you do not like it, then I am anti-something.
I may think you are anti-me using that reasoning.

The interesting thing is that if a person can be reoriented, it means that gays have a preference that can be changed.

Doesn't it depend if the subject is simply "choosing" to supress desires? How can you prove they aren't just simply stuffing it away?

One case in which person can be reoriented is enough as an exception that proves that gay statements on homosexual orientation as "who one is" are wrong.

No, one case doesn't prove anything. It has to be repeatable. I would argue that it would also have to be effective on those who don't wish to change. If there is already desire to change, there is a ton of psychological stuff going on, much of which can't be proven.

The fact that someone does not like it does not prove the study flawed, it only proves personal bias.

I don't like the flawed logic and stacked deck of the "study". Care to respond to my post at all?
It's not that I don't like the outcome. I don't like how they achieved it, and disagree with the logic.

Did you see the video where the guy giving the "study" explains that he had a hard time getting volunteers for the study?

[LittleFuzzy]

The interesting thing is that if a person can be reoriented, it means that gays have a preference that can be changed.
One case in which person can be reoriented is enough as an exception that proves that gay statements on homosexual orientation as "who one is" are wrong.

Except A) there's jack-all to demonstrate anything but a supression of undesired behaviors, and B) very few credible and informed people are going to make a blanket claim about the source of all "homosexual" behaviors/orientation, nor that one either is or isn't. "Orientation" is not an either/or binary. For those of you playing the home game, that's because gender isn't an either/or binary.

[GGT]

Except A) there's jack-all to demonstrate anything but a supression of undesired behaviors, and B) very few credible and informed people are going to make a blanket claim about the source of all "homosexual" behaviors/orientation, nor that one either is or isn't. "Orientation" is not an either/or binary. For those of you playing the home game, that's because gender isn't an either/or binary.

The subset of homosexual ambiguity is found in the bisexual community. That's where the binary thorn lives. If you follow behavioral psychology or anthropology AT ALL, there's a case to be made in cultural norms and acceptance, and people "choosing". Same as gender norms in different cultures. It was posited years ago that every human is born a natural bisexual, swaying one way more than the other, depending on many cultural factors.

Excluding our genome structure, XX or XY, we all start out as ambiguous creatures visually, cells dividing the same way, even under the microscope.

Women in pants is accepted as western, men in dresses is accepted as eastern....unless we talk about drag queens?

[ar81]

"All gays can't change preferences (because they ARE gays). He is gay. Therefore he can't change preference"
This study makes the first statement invalid.

Gays have a sexual preference. That's clear.
But it is not "who one is", just like if someone prefers videogames it is not "who one is".

Doesn't it depend if the subject is simply "choosing" to supress desires? How can you prove they aren't just simply stuffing it away?

How can you prove supression of desires?

[Veldan Rath]

"All gays can't change preferences (because they ARE gays). He is gay. Therefore he can't change preference"
This study makes the first statement invalid.

Gays have a sexual preference. That's clear.
But it is not "who one is", just like if someone prefers videogames it is not "who one is".


How can you prove supression of desires?

No, we have an orientation, not a preference.

[ar81]

If orientation can be changed, it is a preference.
I am oriented to like red cars, I am oriented to like videogames.
There is no way to prove gayness is "who one is".
Passionate statements proves nothing but the ability of being noisy.

Well you wanted something heated up for "debate" that could touch community nerves, instead of something to ignore or to move to General Chat, so here it is.

Be careful with what you ask. If you want debate, I may bring you debate.

[Veldan Rath]

If orientation can be changed, it is a preference.
I am oriented to like red cars, I am oriented to like videogames.
There is no way to prove gayness is "who one is".
Passionate statements proves nothing but the ability of being noisy.

Well you wanted something heated up for "debate" that could touch community nerves, instead of something to ignore or to move to General Chat, so here it is.

Be careful with what you ask. If you want debate, I may bring you debate.

If one's orientation can be changed, then they did not have said orientation you twat. Then they are either bisexual or they are shtooping the other gender due to pressure/brainwashing/guilt/need to conform issues.

I know yer an ESL, but please stop using words you do not understand.

[GGT]

....How can you prove supression of desires?....

By proving subliminal desires? Interesting question, though.

I've always thought that "straight men who get hot and bothered by the idea of women being sexual with each other" is a subliminal reference to their own same-gender erotica that they can't put into a neat, socially acceptable box.

But I have yet to find a man who'd admit that. Instead, they like to say, "If only they had ME, they wouldn't need each other!" Or, "I am such a studly man, I could please a bunch of women, all at once! But don't throw another guy in there, that's icky."

Flip side is the "I've been a gay male for as long as I can remember, and not one female has ever really attracted me. But I do like effeminate behaviors. Sometimes. Depending."

Straight men didn't usually know what to do with sexual OR gender ambiguity, but that's changed over the years. Thankfully.

Women are still trying to figure it out, as far as I can tell. Especially when it comes to "being mothers". We're still expected to do everything, for everyone, and be happy about it. Finding fulfillment in slacks and aprons, the board room and the bedroom. Lady in the street but a freak in da bed? Right.

There isn't any analogy to MILF yet, is there?

[Bitter Jeweler]

Well you wanted something heated up for "debate" that could touch community nerves, instead of something to ignore or to move to General Chat, so here it is.

Be careful with what you ask. If you want debate, I may bring you debate.

It actually seems you are best ignored.
You lose for answering my question, with the very same question.

Done.

[ar81]

By proving subliminal desires? Interesting question, though.

I've always thought that "straight men who get hot and bothered by the idea of women being sexual with each other" is a subliminal reference to their own same-gender erotica that they can't put into a neat, socially acceptable box.

But I have yet to find a man who'd admit that. Instead, they like to say, "If only they had ME, they wouldn't need each other!" Or, "I am such a studly man, I could please a bunch of women, all at once! But don't throw another guy in there, that's icky."

Flip side is the "I've been a gay male for as long as I can remember, and not one female has ever really attracted me. But I do like effeminate behaviors. Sometimes. Depending."

Straight men didn't usually know what to do with sexual OR gender ambiguity, but that's changed over the years. Thankfully.

Women are still trying to figure it out, as far as I can tell. Especially when it comes to "being mothers". We're still expected to do everything, for everyone, and be happy about it. Finding fulfillment in slacks and aprons, the board room and the bedroom. Lady in the street but a freak in da bed? Right.

There isn't any analogy to MILF yet, is there?

How can you prove this "subliminal desire" does not come from a disorder?
For example, people may hate their boss, but in the end it could be that the boss reminds dad or mom, so that person does not hate the boss but the symbolic representation of mom and dad.

Here an article on attraction:

Our animal instincts

[GGT]

uhm, what's an ESL?

[Bitter Jeweler]

Extremely Stupid Lifeform?

Just a guess.