Homosexuality is Against Nature
-
The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality
Fact Sheet
Organizational Background
In 1973--under intense pressure from gay socio-political activists, and without scientific evidence--the American Psychiatric Association voted to remove homosexuality from its Diagnostic Manual, and effectively silenced professional discussion of homosexuality as a disorder.
Although modern psychology had considered the condition pathological for over 100 years, and all cultures have considered it deviant throughout recorded history, the official view of homosexuality changed overnight.
A campaign to make treatment of homosexuals unethical and illegal was recently set in motion by gay activists.
Psychiatrists, psychologists or researchers who so much as suggest that homosexuality may be a changeable disorder are persecuted and labeled "homophobic" by the pro-gay lobby.
Men and women--even teenagers and children--who struggle with homosexual desires and desperately wish to change have been blocked from finding the therapists who can help them.
There is only one clear and unequivocal voice in the mental health community which speaks out on behalf of homosexuals who want to change: The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality.
Against all odds, NARTH has made known the needs and desires of an ignored people, opened for public debate the questions surrounding the cause and treatment of homosexuality, and refuted the misinformation promoted by the pro-gay lobby.
NARTH Goals
NARTH's primary goal is to make effective psychological therapy available to all homosexual men and women who seek change.
Furthermore, the organization wishes to open for public discussion all issues related to homosexuality.
NARTH wants to build an atmosphere which allows honest debate, free of politically motivated distortion, and stands ready to combat the pro-gay misinformation thrust upon the psychological profession and the general public.
To achieve these goals, NARTH's ongoing projects and services include:
An international referral service of licensed therapists offering sexual reorientation treatment in the United States, Canada, Europe and Australia.
Research.
A worldwide survey of homosexuals who have changed.
Review of scientific studies documenting the psychological factors associated with a gay lifestyle.
Review of the psychological literature documenting treatment success.
Lectures by respected mental health professionals.
Scholarly publications and literature for the general public.
Literature distribution into college, high school and community libraries.
Distribution of reliable and truthful school sex-education guidelines to parents which will refute the barrage of misinformation given to children and teenagers by the pro-gay lobby.
NARTH welcomes the support of all lay organizations, including religious groups, which turn to the organization for scientific evidence that may support their traditional doctrines.
NARTH remains, however, a strictly professional organization devoted to scientific inquiry.
http://www.narth.com/docs/study.html -
PEOPLE CAN CHANGE :
Discovering same-sex attractions can cause tremendous internal conflict and struggle, especially when those feelings conflict with a person's values, beliefs and life plans, or the values and beliefs of his family and culture.
We know. We've been there.
But we've also learned that it needn't be like that.
There are positive alternatives for men who are conflicted over homosexual feelings.
For some, it may be choosing a celibate lifestyle, built on a solid spiritual foundation and supported by a network of extended family and friends. Choosing a celibate lifestyle is not a choice for loneliness or isolation.
On the contrary, many men who choose this path find great fulfillment in focusing their time and energy on close friendships, meaningful service, personal development and spiritual connection.
For others, it may in fact be choosing to live a homosexual life -- but a mature, spiritually grounded life of integrity and meaningful relationships, not a promiscuous, self-indulgent life where "anything goes."
Yes, many gays have shown it is indeed possible to live a happy, dignified, fulfilling life as a homosexual man, and we respect them and their chosen path.
Still, no matter how much a homosexual life may feel right and authentic for some people, we found it simply did not work for us.
For us, the choice that brought us the greatest peace and joy was to seek out the original, core source of our same-sex longings and fulfill (rather than deny) those needs and desires in non-sexual, healing ways.
Our choice was to work to fully and authentically develop our heterosexual potential.
The road we walked was a path of change -- a path of masculine affirmation, of rigorous authenticity, of genuine need-fulfillment and courageous surrender.
Perhaps you have heard that altering sexual attractions is impossible, and that even to attempt it can lead to shame and despair. Or perhaps, on the other hand, you've heard that change is not only possible but in fact rather easy -- simply a matter of prayer, or will power, or thought control.
Both views are extreme, in our experience.
We know from our own lives that lessening and even eliminating homosexual desires while developing and fostering heterosexual attractions is definitely possible.But we also know that it requires deep emotional and spiritual work and personal growth, often over a period of months and even years.
Change doesn't come easily, but we ultimately found it to be immensely rewarding.
Our path is, admittedly, not for everyone.
Anyone who is motivated primarily by shame to seek change is not only likely to fail at change but risks actually making the cycle of shame worse.
Shame never motivates lasting change.
Likewise, those who pursue change to satisfy other people -- whether family, friends, religious institutions or society at large -- are likely to find neither success nor satisfaction in trying to change when doing so is not truly their heart's desire.
But if you truly are self-motivated to changeÂ…if homosexuality just doesn't "work" for youÂ…if it doesn't feel like who you really are, or conflicts with what you believe in and most want out of lifeÂ…we invite you to explore the healing journey of change that worked for us.
For through it, we found the love, peace, brotherhood, wholeness and joy that we had been seeking all our lives.
http://www.peoplecanchange.com/ -
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY
New Business: Narth Los Angeles
Charles Socarides, M.D.
NARTH President
Memo regarding Poll to determine the opinions of members of the American Psychiatric Association, American Psychoanalytic Association, and American Psychological Association on the Normalcy of Homosexuality
Background
In late 1977, ten-thousand psychiatrists, members of the American Medical Association, were polled on the issue. Of 2,500 replies received, approximately 68% answered the question, "Is homosexuality usually a pathological adaptation as opposed to a normal variation?" in the affirmative.
This strongly suggested to the interpreter, Dr. Harold I. Lief, professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania, an authority on sexual problems, and a leading sex educator at the time, that the 'previous APA vote was influenced by political and social considerations, and that the vote was [misperceived as a step toward the denial of rights to homosexuals" (Lief, H. 1977, Sexual Survey #4: Current Thinking On Homosexuality, Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 11, (p. 110).
In 1995, a poll of various psychiatric institutions throughout the world revealed that a large majority of psychiatrists believed that homosexuality was a pathological adaptation when obligatory (see Psychiatric News' ).
In 1972-1974, the NYC District Branch APA Task Force Report, headed by Charles W. Socarides and twelve other seasoned clinicians representing (not formally) the thinking of the leading clinicians associated with the major medical centers of New York City, was submitted to the APA District Branch, NYC.
This task force, an official committee of that organization, attempted to shed light on the nature, meaning and content of homosexuality to psychiatrists and an increasingly bewildered public.
After two years of deliberations and sixteen meetings, the task force attempted to submit a report on homosexuality to the Executive Council of the New York City District Branch—a report which unanimously documented the fact that exclusive homosexuality was a disorder of psychosexual development, and, simultaneously, asked for civil rights for those suffering from this disorder.
The report was "not acceptable" to the new members (and some old) of the Executive Committee. Other business took its place at the Executive Committee meeting, and although general statements were accepted as to its content, it was not accepted into the minutes of the meeting.
Thus, the New York County District Branch headed by gay activists and gay activism, aggressively strove to discredit this report and suppress its conclusions.
It ultimately had to be published as a study-group report in 1973 (New York City District Branch APA Task Force Report on Homosexuality 1972-1973, Socarides, C.W., Chairman; Bieber, Byschowski, G.; Gershman, H.; Jacobs, T.J.; Myers, W.; Nackenson, B.I., Prescott, K.F.; Rifkin, A.H.; Stein, S.; Terry, J.; published as "Homosexuality in the Male: A Report of a Psychiatric Study Group," International Journal of Psychiatry, 2[4], pp. 460-479.
The vote taken in December 1973 and 1974, arising from the decision of the Board of Trustees of the APA taken in December, 1973, which wished to delete homosexuality from the official nomenclature of DSM-II has now been shown to have been loaded with gay activism, and may even be due to fraud.
It is a credit to psychiatrists in general that in the voting of the general membership (April 1974) that was to follow on this issue (voting marred by hidden lobbying by homosexual activists) held months later, forty percent of the psychiatrists who voted ( 10,000) took issue with the Board of Trustees action, asserting that there were no legitimate scientific reasons for the APA's change in fundamental psychiatric theory.
It is fallacious to conclude from this vote that the majority of psychiatrists in the United States were or are now in favor of the action, for only 25% of those eligible to vote (out of more than 25,000 psychiatrists) sent in their ballots.
Despite this fact, the decision to uphold the Board of Trustees' vote stood.
The Board of Trustees vote took place against a backdrop of several groups declaring homosexuality a psychological emotional condition.
For example, the report of the Committee of Cooperation Governmental (Federal) Agencies of the Group for Advancement of Psychiatry of 1959, The New York Academy of Medicine Report, 1964, the Task Force Report of the New York County District Branch of the APA, done in 1970-1972 (Socarides, et al., 1973).
A book by Ronald Bayer, Fellow of the Hasting Institute of New York, noted that Spitzer is sympathetic to the viewpoint of the Gay Liberation group, and that a chairman of the Nomenclature Committee was suffering from indecision and discomfort with Spitzer's aggressive assumption of leadership in this issue.
Even more important was the revelation, never previously acknowledged, that the Council on Research and Development of the APA did not officially investigate or study the issue thoroughly before it gave formal approval to the deletion of homosexuality from the DSM-II.
"It was to Monroe's council, composed of five senior psychiatrists who were responsible for providing the APA with advice on matters of policy and with information on current issues in psychiatric research, that Spitzer's proposal [for deletion] was first under consideration.
Though officially coming from the Committee on Nomenclature, in fact it had never been formally approved by its members, and thus presented Spitzer's own efforts to resolve what many APA leaders considered a 'hot potato"' (Bayer, pp. 130-131). (The above material is also described in detail in a paper by Charles W. Socarides, "Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality," Journal of Psycho-History, 10[3], Winter 1992, pp. 107-129.
It is a credit to psychiatrists throughout the world that they believe that the homosexual should be granted all his civil rights and be free of persecution for a condition over which he has no control (certainly in cases of obligatory homosexuality).
We wish to assert that just as alcoholism and drug addiction have become recognized as illness over the past several decades, so we see sexual deviations (i.e. homosexuality) increasingly to be understood as an emotional disorder, and, similar to other mental disorders, not to be penalized when practiced among consenting adults.
We believe freedom from persecutory laws, as well as the granting of full civil rights, constitutes an integral part of our approach to homosexual individuals.
However, we are of the scientific view, backed up by over a hundred years of scientific investigation, especially scientific clinical and theoretical documentation over the past twenty- five years, that homosexuality of the obligatory form is a form of emotional disorder.
Individuals suffering from this condition who wish therapy should be able to get it.
We therefore now suggest a poll of the American psychiatrists, psychologists, and psychoanalysts on whether they believe that homosexuality is not simply an alternative lifestyle but a form of emotional disorder.
We ask for a vote on this matter against the backdrop of our appreciation of the necessity for civil rights of homosexuals everywhere.
This article provided by NARTH
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1996papers/socarides.html -
MEDICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT HOMOSEXUALS DO
By Paul Cameron, Ph.D.
Dr. Cameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs, Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this organization. You may contact him at: Family Research Institute, PO Box 62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone number: (303) 681-3113.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet3.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Throughout history, the major civilizations major religions condemned homosexuality.1
Until 1961 homosexual acts were illegal throughout America.
Gays claim that the "prevailing attitude toward homosexuals in the U.S. and many other countries is revulsion and hostility....for acts and desires not harmful to anyone."3
The American Psychological Association and the American Public Health Association assured the U.S. Supreme Court in 1986 that "no significant data show that engaging in...oral and anal sex, results in mental or physical dysfunction."4
What Homosexuals Do
The major surveys on homosexual behavior are summarized below. Two things stand out 1) homosexuals behave similarly world-over, and 2) as Harvard Medical Professor, Dr. William Haseltine,33 noted in 1993, the "changes in sexual behavior that have been reported to have occurred in some groups have proved, for the most part, to be transient. For example, bath houses and sex clubs in many cities have either reopened or were never closed."
Homosexual Activities (in %)
{this table is best seen by clicking on the referenced site }
ORAL SEX
Homosexuals fellate almost all of their sexual contacts (and ingest semen from about half of these). Semen contains many of the germs carried in the blood. Because of this, gays who practice oral sex verge on consuming raw human blood, with all its medical risks.
Since the penis often has tiny lesions (and often will have been in unsanitary places such as a rectum), individuals so involved may become infected with hepatitis A or gonorrhea (and even HIV and hepatitis B).
Since many contacts occur between strangers (70% of gays estimated that they had had sex only once with over half of their partners17,27), and gays average somewhere between 106 and 1105 different partners/year, the potential for infection is considerable.
RECTAL SEX
Surveys indicate that about 90% of gays have engaged in rectal intercourse, and about two-thirds do it regularly. In a 6-month long study of daily sexual diaries,3 gays averaged 110 sex partners and 68 rectal encounters a year.
Rectal sex is dangerous. During rectal intercourse the rectum becomes a mixing bowl for 1) saliva and its germs and/or an artificial lubricant, 2) the recipient's own feces, 3) whatever germs, infections or substances the penis has on it, and 4) the seminal fluid of the inserter.
Since sperm readily penetrate the rectal wall (which is only one cell thick) causing immunologic damage, and tearing or bruising of the anal wall is very common during anal/penile sex, these substances gain almost direct access to the blood stream.
Unlike heterosexual intercourse (in which sperm cannot penetrate the multilayered vagina and no feces are present),7 rectal intercourse is probably the most sexually efficient way to spread hepatitis B, HIV syphilis and a host of other blood-borne diseases.
Tearing or ripping of the anal wall is especially likely with "fisting," where the hand and arm is inserted into the rectum. It is also common when "toys" are employed (homosexual lingo for objects which are inserted into the rectum--bottles, carrots, even gerbils
.
The risk of contamination and/or having to wear a colostomy bag from such "sport" is very real. Fisting was apparently so rare in Kinsey's time that he didn't think to talk about it. By 1977, well over a third of gays admitted to doing it.
The rectum was not designed to accommodate the fist, and those who do so can find themselves consigned to diapers for life.
FECAL SEX
About 80% of gays (see Table) admit to licking and/or inserting their tongues into the anus of partners and thus ingesting medically significant amounts of feces. Those who eat or wallow in it are probably at even greater risk.
In the diary study,5 70% of the gays had engaged in this activity--half regularly over 6 months. Result? --the "annual incidence of hepatitis A in...homosexual men was 22 percent, whereas no heterosexual men acquired hepatitis A." I
n 1992,26 it was noted that the proportion of London gays engaging in oral/anal sex had not declined since 1984.
While the body has defenses against fecal germs, exposure to the fecal discharge of dozens of strangers each year is extremely unhealthy.
Ingestion of human waste is the major route of contracting hepatitis A and the enteric parasites collectively known as the Gay Bowel Syndrome.
Consumption of feces has also been implicated in the transmission of typhoid fever,9 herpes, and cancer.27 About 10% of gays have eaten or played with [e.g., enemas, wallowing in feces].
The San Francisco Department of Public Health saw 75,000 patients per year, of whom 70 to 80 per cent are homosexual men....An average of 10 per cent of all patients and asymptomatic contacts reported...because of positive fecal samples or cultures for amoeba, giardia, and shigella infections were employed as food handlers in public establishments; almost 5 per cent of those with hepatitis A were similarly employed."10
In 1976, a rare airborne scarlet fever broke out among gays and just missed sweeping through San Francisco.10 The U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported that 29% of the hepatitis A cases in Denver, 66% in New York, 50% in San Francisco, 56% in Toronto, 42% in Montreal and 26% in Melbourne in the first six months of 1991 were among gays.11 A 1982 study "suggested that some transmission from the homosexual group to the general population may have occurred."12
URINE SEX
About 10% of Kinsey's gays reported having engaged in "golden showers" [drinking or being splashed with urine]. In the largest survey of gays ever conducted,13 23% admitted to urine-sex.
In the largest random survey of gays,6 29% reported urine-sex. In a San Francisco study of 655 gays,14 only 24% claimed to have been monogamous in the past year. Of these monogamous gays, 5% drank urine, 7% practiced "fisting," 33% ingested feces via anal/oral contact, 53% swallowed semen, and 59% received semen in their rectum during the previous month. -
OTHER GAY SEX PRACTICES
SADOMASOCHISM as the Table indicates, a large minority of gays engage in torture for sexual fun. Sex with minors 25% of white gays17 admitted to sex with boys 16 or younger as adults. In a 9-state study,30 33% of the 181 male, and 22% of the 18 female teachers caught molesting students did so homosexually (though less than 3% of men and 2% of women engage in homosexuality31). Depending on the study, the percent of gays reporting sex in public restrooms ranged from 14%16 to 41%13 to 66%,6 9%16, 60%13 and 67%5 reported sex in gay baths; 64%16 and 90%18 said that they used illegal drugs.
Fear of AIDS may have reduced the volume of gay sex partners, but the numbers are prodigious by any standard. Morin15 reported that 824 gays had lowered their sex-rate from 70 different partners/yr. in 1982 to 50/yr. by 1984. McKusick14 reported declines from 76/yr. to 47/yr. in 1985. In Spain32 the average was 42/yr. in 1989.
Medical Consequences of Homosexual Sex
Death and disease accompany promiscuous and unsanitary sexual activity. 70%25 to 78%x,13 of gays reported having had a sexually transmitted disease.
The proportion with intestinal parasites (worms, flukes, amoeba) ranged from 25%18 to 39%19 to 59%.20
As of 1992, 83% of U.S. AIDS in whites had occurred in gays.21 The Seattle sexual diary study3? reported that gays had, on a yearly average:
fellated 108 men and swallowed semen from 48;
exchanged saliva with 96;
experienced 68 penile penetrations of the anus; and
ingested fecal material from 19.
No wonder 10% came down with hepatitis B and 7% contracted hepatitis A during the 6-month study.
Effects on the Lifespan
Smokers and drug addicts don't live as long as non-smokers or non-addicts, so we consider smoking and narcotics abuse harmful.
The typical life-span of homosexuals suggests that their activities are more destructive than smoking nd as dangerous as drugs.
Obituaries numbering 6,516 from 16 U.S. homosexual journals over the past 12 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers.23
The obituaries from the regular newspapers were similar to U.S. averages for longevity; the medium age of death of married men was 75, and 80% of them died old (age 65 or older).
For unmarried or divorced men the median age of death was 57, and 32% of them died old. Married women averaged age 79 at death; 85% died old.
Unmarried and divorced women averaged age 71, and 60% of them died old.
The median age of death for homosexuals, however, was virtually the same nationwide--and, overall, less than 2% survived to old age.
If AIDS was the cause of death, the median age was 39.
For the 829 gays who died of something other than AIDS, the median age of death was 42, and 9% died old.
The 163 lesbians had a median age of death of 44, and 20% died old.
Two and eight-tenths percent (2.8%) of gays died violently. They were 116 times more apt to be murdered; 24 times more apt to commit suicide; and had a traffic-accident death-rate 18 times the rate of comparably-aged white males.
Heart attacks, cancer and liver failure were exceptionally common. Twenty percent of lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accident--a rate 487 times higher than that of white females aged 25-44.
The age distribution of samples of homosexuals in the scientific literature from 1989 to 1992 suggests a similarly shortened life-span.
The Gay Legacy
Homosexuals rode into the dawn of sexual freedom and returned with a plague that gives every indication of destroying most of them.
Those who treat AIDS patients are at great risk, not only from HIV infection, which as of 1992 involved over 100 health care workers,21 but also from TB and new strains of other diseases.24 Those who are housed with AIDS patients are also at risk.24
Dr. Max Essex, chair of the Harvard AIDS Institute, warned congress in 1992 that "AIDS has already led to other kinds of dangerous epidemics...If AIDS is not eliminated, other new lethal microbes will emerge, and neither safe sex nor drug free practices will prevent them."28 At least 8, and perhaps as many as 30 29 patients had been infected with HIV by health care workers as of 1992.
The Biological Swapmeet
The typical sexual practices of homosexuals are a medical horror story --imagine exchanging saliva, feces, semen and/or blood with dozens of different men each year.
Imagine drinking urine, ingesting feces and experiencing rectal trauma on a regular basis.
Often these encounters occur while the participants are drunk, high, and/or in an orgy setting. Further, many of them occur in extremely unsanitary places (bathrooms, dirty peep shows), or, because homosexuals travel so frequently, in other parts of the world.
Every year, a quarter or more of homosexuals visit another country.20
Fresh American germs get taken to Europe, Africa and Asia. And fresh pathogens from these continents come here. Foreign homosexuals regularly visit the U.S. and participate in this biological swapmeet.
The Pattern of Infection
Unfortunately the danger of these exchanges does not merely affect homosexuals. Travelers carried so many tropical diseases to New York City that it had to institute a tropical disease center, and gays carried HIV from New York City to the rest of the world.27
Most of the 6,349 Americans who got AIDS from contaminated blood as of 1992, received it from homosexuals and most of the women in California who got AIDS through heterosexual activity got it from men who engaged in homosexual behavior.23 The rare form of airborne scarlet fever that stalked San Francisco in 1976 also started among homosexuals.10
Genuine Compassion
Society is legitimately concerned with health risks-- they impact our taxes and everyone's chances of illness and injury. Because we care about them, smokers are discouraged from smoking by higher insurance premiums, taxes on cigarettes and bans against smoking in public.
These social pressures cause many to quit. They likewise encourage non-smokers to stay non-smokers.
Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous activities. Because we care about them and those tempted to join them, it is important that we neither encourage nor legitimize such a destructive lifestyle.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet3.html -
Born WHAT Way ?
- by Dr Paul Cameron
Gay activists regularly claim that they were "born that way" and thus cannot change their desires or stop their activities.
Yet there are numerous documented cases in which homosexuals have changed. The Masters-Johnson Institute reported that: "A 25-year-old man had had his first sexual experience when he was 13 years old.
It was arranged by his lesbian mother with an older gay man.
After that episode, his imagery and interpersonal sexual experience were exclusively homosexual.... The man was motivated to establish a heterosexual life style because he was sincerely distressed by public disapproval of homosexuality and his personal loneliness. [After treatment, he] has been followed for 3 1/2 years. His sexual interaction has been exclusively heterosexual. He has moved out of the gay community and has changed... his life style."(1)
Was this man's sexual orientation biologically deturmined?
If so, how was it initially set - toward heterosexuality or homosexuality?
And if it was set initially, how was he able to change?
The answers to these seemingly "esoteric" questions matter a great deal. For one thing, the political stakes are high.
The March 3, 1993 New York Times/CBS News Poll reported that a majority of those who believe that gays "cannot change" favored permitting homosexuals to serve in the military.
Only a third of those who believed it is a choice felt the same way.
Many opinions about gay rights hinge on the question of whether gays are "born that way" and/or "can't change."
For instance, 57% of those who believe it is immutable consider homosexuality an acceptable life style vs 18% of those who consider it a choice.
But if homosexual activity is no more inevitable or unchangeable than drunkenness or drug use, most people seem willing to insist that homosexuals abandon their destructive behavior.
Two prominent 'homosexual' psychiatrists, examining the evidence of their own lives as well as those of others, came to different conclusions in this long-running debate.
The first of these, Sigmund Freud, saw his homosexual urges as pathological.
Through self-analysis, he overcame them and eventually rejoiced in the "greater independence that results from having overcome my homosexuality."(2)
The second of these, Richard Isay, confronted his desires, pronounced them "natural," divorced his wife and joined the gay subculture.(3)
In 1992 Isay admitted that the "conviction among most, though not all, dynamically oriented psychiatrists in general and psychoanalysts in particular [is] that homosexuality can and should be changed to heterosexuality. " (4)
Yet, while acknowledging this consensus among his colleagues, Isay called attempts to change homosexual desire "the greatest abuse of psychiatry in America today." Why? Because the "attempt to change is extremely harmful. "(3) Instead, society should change to accommodate homosexuality.
Dr. Isay, who chairs the American Psychiatric Association's committee on Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Issues, argues that homosexuality "is constitutional [that is, biological in origin]. "(4) To support his position, he cited as proof two 1991 studies - the "gay brains " research of Simon LeVay(5) and the "gay twins " study of Bailey & Pillard.(6)
In 1993, Drs. William Byne and Bruce Parsons, researchers at the New York State Psychiatric Institute, critically reviewed "the evidence favoring a biologic theory " presented by LeVay and Bailey & Pillard.(7)
They concluded in the Archives of General Psychiatry that "[t]here is no evidence at present to substantiate a biologic theory " of sexual orientation!
How could these researchers dismiss as inadequate the very studies that were fundamental to Dr. Isay's argument - and that even conservative columnist William- F. Buckley referred to in 1993 as proving that homosexuals are 'born that way?'
Byne & Parsons remembered that from the 1940s through the 1970s it was widely argued and believed in the scientific community that male homosexuals had a deficiency of male hormones.
However, only 3 "studies had indicated lower testosterone levels in male homosexuals, while 20 studies found no differences based on sexual orientation, and two reported elevated testosterone levels in male homosexuals."
In spite of these other studies, textbooks alluded to the supposed "fact" of hormonal differences for three decades. But this "scientific" belief was false.
Gay Brains:
Byne & Parsons observed that the LeVay study was based upon a supposed functional correlation between the SDN-POA brain center in male rats and a brain center called INAH3 in humans.
LeVay reasoned that since the SDN-POA had an effect on male rat crouching/mounting behavior, then a corresponding difference in the same part of the brain would make men homosexual.
He assumed that the INAH3 in men was essentially the same as the SDN-POA in rats. But, as it turns out, the "effective lesion site within the anterior hypothalamus for disrupting mounting behavior [in male rats] lies above, not within, the SDN-POA.
Thus, the SDN-POA does not play a critical role in male-typical behavior in male rats, and the correlation between its size and mounting frequencies clearly does not reflect a causal relationship." LeVay compared human brains with rat brains but failed to locate the analogous region.
Instead of the "bullseye" that Isay and the mass media celebrated, it was an embarrassing miss!
LeVay's study also had numerous technical problems.
For instance, his samples included 19 brains of gays who died of AIDS and 16 brains from men whose sexual orientation was unknown. He assumed the 16 were heterosexual, even though 5 had died of AIDS.
More importantly, although LeVay argued that a small INAH3 "caused" homosexuality, some of the gays had an INAH3 that was larger than the average size of the INAH3 of the "heterosexuals," and some of the "heterosexuals" had an INAH3 that was smaller than those of gays. So some of his gays "should" have been heterosexual and vice-versa.
Gay Twins:
Bailey & Pillard reported that 52% of identical twins of homosexuals were also homosexual. But after the media finished hyping Bailey & Pillard's results, King & McDonald( published a new 'sexual orientation of twins' study, which found concordance rates for homosexuality of 25% in identical twins.
That's half the 52% reported by Bailey & Pillard.
Drs. Byne & Parsons noted the large proportions of identical twins in both studies "who were discordant for homosexuality despite sharing not only their genes but also their prenatal and familial environments... [which] underscores our ignorance of the factors that are involved, and the manner in which they interact, in the emergence of sexual orientation."
The evidence supporting the "born that way" claim of Isay and other gay activists is tenuous.
It has been uncritically accepted and hyped by the media and some less-than-careful researchers. But it hasn't been replicated by others and is riddled with technical problems.
On the other side is a body of scientific evidence that suggests that homosexuality is adopted by people who are confused, sexually adventurous and/or rebellious.
This evidence suggests that sexual orientation is flexible, not immutable. And the evidence comes from the largest studies on the subject, conducted by researchers on both sides of the gay rights debate. -
cont - Born WHAT Way ?
Sexual Preference Shifts
That sexual desire and behavior are flexible was demonstrated by the Kinsey Institute in 1970.
It reported(9) that 81% of 684 gays and 93% of 293 lesbians had changed or shifted either their sexual feelings or behaviors after age 12.58% of the gays and 77% of the lesbians reported a second shift in sexual orientation; 31% of the gays and 49% of the lesbians reported a third shift; and 13% of the gays and 30% of the lesbians reported even a fourth shift in sexual orientation before "settling" into adult homosexuality.
The shifts reported by these subjects varied in degree, but some were quite dramatic - about a quarter of gays and a third of lesbians once had heterosexual desires and 5% of heterosexual men and 3% of heterosexual women once had substantial homosexual desires.
Heterosexuals in the study were much less likely to report shifts in their orientation. Even so, 29% of 337 heterosexual men and 14% of 140 heterosexual women reported at least one shift; while 4% of the men and 1% of the women reported at least three shifts.
Immutable things like eye color or skin color don't change once, much less three or four times!
Unlike biological changes, the shifts in sexual orientation began at age 18 or later for half of both gays and lesbians.
Sexual changes, five or more years after puberty, are exceptionally late and without biological precedent in development. But changes in tastes (e.g., food or entertainment) often take place around age 18.
Other Evidence
The same Kinsey study also produced other evidence that can not be explained in terms of biological determinism, but would readily support the idea that choice is involved in sexual orientation and behavior:
74% of their gays admitted to having been sexually aroused by a female and 80% of lesbians said that they had been sexually aroused by a male;
19% of their gays and 38% of lesbians had been heterosexually married;
20% of gays, 5% of heterosexual men, 7% of lesbians and no heterosexual women had had sex with animals.
Consistent with these results, the Family Research Institute (FRI) 10 conducted a nationwide random survey of 4,340 adults drawn from 5 U.S. cities in 1983 and found:
82% of those currently lesbian and 66% of those currently gay said that they had been in love with someone of the opposite sex;
88% of lesbians and 73% of gays had been sexually aroused by someone of the opposite sex;
67% of lesbians and 54% of gays reported current sexual attraction to the opposite sex;
85% of lesbians and 54% of gays, as adults, had sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex;
32% of gays and 47% of lesbians had been heterosexually married; and
17% of gays, 3% of heterosexual men, 10% of lesbians and 1% of heterosexual women reported sex with animals.
These are the kinds of sexual choices one would expect from the sexually adventurous or confused.
Unless Dr. Isay and his supporters are willing to believe that people are "born" to fall in love, get married or to have sex with animals, some measure of choice, rather than biological inevitability, must have been involved.
The ability to change explains the FRI findings that:
Overall, 7.8% of women and 12% of men claimed to have been homosexually aroused at some point in their life. Yet 59% of the once homosexually aroused women and 51% of the once homosexually aroused men were currently heterosexual;
5.1% of the women and 9.4% of the men admitted to at least one homosexual partner. Of these, only 58% of the women and 61% of the men were currently gay;
4.1% of women and 5.8% of men reported that they had, at least once, been "in homosexual love."
Yet only 66% of those who had fallen in love with a member of the same sex were currently gay; and
almost a third of those who admitted to homosexual relations in adulthood were now heterosexual.
People Can Change
Where is the "biological inevitability " or "immutability " in these findings?
The evidence suggests that people can modify their sexual tastes.
The FRI survey in Dallas,(11) similar to the Kinsey survey in San Francisco, found that 1% of heterosexual females and 3% of heterosexual males at one time considered themselves homosexual (i.e., were ex-gay when interviewed).
And a survey of 50 wives who had no homosexual experiences or interests up to age 30, but who participated in homosexual sex acts as part of "swinging" (where married people swap partners) reported that all of these women eventually considered themselves to be bisexual.(12)
These are among the findings that seriously challenge the claim that sexual orientation is predetermined before or after birth, or even that it is permanently fixed in adulthood.
What is at Stake?
If sexual orientation is actually a matter of choice like drug use, we can expect that more of our youth will try homosexuality the more that it is tolerated and encouraged. Along these lines, Dr. Christopher Hewitt's(13) analysis of the frequency of homosexuality in various societies is summarized in the Table: societies that accept homosexuality have more of it and those that disapprove of and punish it have considerably less of it
With the above in mind, consider our society's future in light of D. Minkowitz's December 29, 1992 editorial in the national gay magazine,
The Advocate:
"I am increasingly impatient with the old chestnut that our movement for public acceptance has not increased and will not increase the number of gay men and lesbians in existence. `There are more of us than there used to be,` historian John D'Elmilio has written. Firmly believing this, I wanted to... argue the morality of teaching kids that gay is OK even if it means that some will join our ranks...."
Indeed. Youth are often attracted to excitement and rebellion.
The gay movement is growing.
Minkowitz also argued that the 'born gay' claim is nothing more than a smokescreen: "most of the line about homosex[uality] being one's nature, not a choice, was articulated as a response to brutal repression.... 'We didn't choose this, so don't punish us for it!' One hundred years later, it's time for us to abandon this defensive posture and walk upright on the earth. Maybe you didn't choose to be gay - that's fine. But I did."
When Kinsey (14) asked 1700 homosexuals in the 1940s how they "got that way," only 9% claimed that they were "born gay."
In 1970, a similar percentage was recorded for 979 gays in San Francisco.(9)
But in 1983, after the gay rights movement started to politicize the issue of homosexual origins, 35% of a random sample of 147 gays(10) said that they were "born that way.
Perhaps those who commit adultery, molest children or practice homosexuality are "born with" unusual biological influences.
But there is no hard evidence of this.
In fact, it appears that participation in these activities, like drug abuse or any other chosen behavior, is a combination of will and opportunity.
No matter how such desires come about, members of society are rightly expected to control their behavior and not endanger others.
http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet5.html -
it is because you cannot produce life from homosexuality.. however, i would not say it is abnormal, because looking from a homosexual's point of view, it is normal.
-
In the USA, the HOMOSEXUAL movement has taken advantage of the generosity and liberal ideologies of the various communities in the USA, and has manipulated Civil Rights Liberties to push their cause into center stage.
Should we allow the same insidious movement to take root in Singapore ?
Homosexual Agenda
Homosexual activist predicted takeover of nation
Randy Sharp
Projects Director
June, 2004
In 1987, gay revolutionist Michael Swift accurately outlined the homosexual movement in America.
In less than two decades, Swift's predictions have come to pass.
When first published, American Family Association reprinted it in the October 1987, edition of the National Federation for Decency (NFD is now American Family Association (AFA)) Journal.
Ironically, many in the Christian community scoffed at the contention that the homosexual movement could actually attain the article's outrageous goals.
In the text below are the ominous predictions by Michael Swift,
"Gay Revolutionary " printed in bold type, from The Congressional Record, first printed in Gay Community News, February 15-21, 1987.
Examples of these fortellings coming to pass follow each paragraph:
This essay is outre, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed dream of being the oppressor.
We shall sodomize your sons1, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of your shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools2, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups3, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses4 in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together. Your sons will become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.
1Although heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by a ratio of at least 20 to 1, homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses.
2Over 1,700 Gay/Straight Alliance (GSA) clubs exist in public schools in the United States. GSA is a project of the The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN).
In 1996, homosexual activists organized a Day of Silence for the public school setting. More than 1,900 schools across the country participated in 2003. Students gained endorsements from school administrators, who allowed them access to PA systems, bulletin boards, and "Safe Rooms. "
In August, 2003, New York announced it will open the first taxpayer-funded "gay " school.
3In July 2002, Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America announced a new policy allowing homosexuals to participate in after school mentoring programs without parental notification.
4In 1993, President Bill Clinton signed an executive order, allowing homosexuals to serve in the military. Until the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law, homosexuals were automatically discharged from the armed services.
Women, you cry for your freedom.5 You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will embrace them when they weep. Women, you say you wish to live with each other instead of men. Then go ahead and be with each other. We shall give your men pleasures they have never known because we are foremost men too and only one man knows how to truly please another man; only one man can understand with depth and feeling the mind and body of another man.
5 The National Organization for Women is the largest feminist organization in this country working for lesbian rights. The day-in, day-out activism of NOW's quarter of a million members and hundreds of chapters strongly favors same-sex marriage laws.
The YWCA announced it hired feminist Patricia Ireland as its new chief executive officer. Ireland has admitted to engaging in lesbian activities.
All laws banning homosexual activity will be revoked.6 Instead, legislation shall be passed which engenders love between men.
6 On June 26, 2003, the United States Supreme Court ruled sodomy laws were unconstitutional in its 6-3 ruling in the Lawrence v. Texas case.
This ruling subsequently struck down similar laws in 16 other states.
Twenty-eight states and over 400 U.S. cities have passed laws protecting the homosexual lifestyle. In addition, 400 colleges, universities,and public schools now offer domestic partner benefits to homosexual employees, as does most of the Fortune 500 companies.
Currently, homosexual activists seek to legalize same-sex marriage.
All homosexuals must stand together as brothers; we must be united artistically, philosophically, socially, politically and financially. We will triumph only when we present a common face to the vicious heterosexual enemy.7
7CBS reality television show Amazing Race 4 introduces two gay men as "The Married Couple." When questioned about the "married" men, CBS responded, "They're married and they're gay. Is there an issue?"
If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead puny bodies.8
8In 1999, a Temple University junior was involuntarily committed to a state mental hospital after he initiated a Christian response to a blasphemous play performed on campus. The play, Corpus Christi, portrayed Jesus Christ as a homosexual.
In 2002, a 19-year-old homosexual savagely beat an elderly woman to death simply because she questioned him about his orientation.
Numerous college and university codes prohibiting "hate speech" have been struck down by the courts. Yet several state-passed hate crimes bills will allow speech to slowly creep into them.
We shall write poems of the love between men; we shall stage plays in which man openly caresses man9; we will make films about the love between heroic men which will replace the cheap, superficial, sentimental, insipid, juvenile, heterosexual infatuations presently dominating your cinema screens. We shall sculpt statues of beautiful young men, of bold athletes which will be placed in your parks, your squares, your plazas [public funding of homosexual pornography by the National Endowment for the Arts, National Public Broadcasting Service]. The museums of the world will be filled only with the paintings of graceful, naked lads.
9The National Endowment for the Arts gave a grant to a New York group called Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS, Inc. and that part of the funding was used to create an obscene play called Broadway Bares XII: A Comic Strip.
This play featured homosexual super heroes who stripped off their clothing during the play.
In 2003, Philadelphia, Seattle, and Arlington were named as cities which would host "Puppetry of the Penis performances, in which males manipulated their genitals on a public stage.
Terrence McNally’s Corpus Christi depicts Jesus as a homosexual who has sex with his disciples, and then is crucified for being ‘king of the queers'.
continue below: -
continue from above:
Our writers will make love between men fashionable and de rigeur, and we will succeed because we are adept at setting styles. We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons through usage of the devices of wit and ridicule which we are skilled in employing.10
10By obtaining control of mass media markets, homosexual activists have succeeded in removing "negative" language from American society. Queer has become "gay," homosexuality has become "sexual orientation" and "alternative lifestyle," and sex-mate is now "domestic parter."
In July, 2003, NBC/Bravo introduces all gay programs Queer Eye for the Straight Guy and Boy Meets Boy. Normally sensitive corporate advertisers like Procter & Gamble jump on board because of the show's high ratings.
Prime-time shows like Dawson's Creek and Will & Grace project homosexuality as a normal lifestyle.
We will unmask11 the powerful homosexuals who masquerade as heterosexuals. You will be shocked and frightened when you learn that your presidents and their sons, your industrialists, your senators, your mayors, your generals, your athletes, your film stars, your television personalities, your civic leaders, your priests are not the safe, familiar bourgeois, heterosexual figures you assumed them to be. We are everywhere; we have infiltrated your ranks. Be careful when you speak of homosexuals because we are always among you; we may be sitting across the desk from you; we may be sleeping in the same bed with you.
11One website lists over 200 open homosexuals who have been elected to high offices and judgeships. They include Senators, Representatives, and court judges.
There will be no compromises. We are not middle class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less.
We shall raise vast, private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you. We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers.
The family unit12 — spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy and violence — will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.
12Lesbian film producers introduce "That's a Family!". This video redifines family to include homosexual couples. The National PTA, the Girl Scouts of America, and YWCA endorse its showing to children and in public forums.
By infiltrating public shools, homosexual activists continue their "scorched-earth policy to circumvent the definition of "family." In 2001, Homosexual targeted Massachusetts schools with a conference designed to indoctrinate children with pro-homosexual themes.
In 2002, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) insisted that new laws should be passed allowing homosexual couples to adopt children.
That same year, with the financial support of corporations, Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America required chapters to allow homosexuals to serve as after-schools mentors without parental knowledge.
All churches who condemn us will be closed13. Our only gods are handsome young men. We adhere to a cult of beauty, moral and esthetic. All that is ugly and vulgar and banal will be annihilated. Since we are alienated from middle-class heterosexual conventions, we are free to live our lives according to the dictates of the pure imagination. For us too much is not enough.
13Swift missed the mark on this prediction. Instead of shutting down churches, the homosexual movement has infiltrated them. Some denominations now accept and celebrate homosexuality to the point of ordaining homosexual pastors and ministers. Most notably, the United Methodist Church and the Episcopal Church have ordained or appointed homosexual leaders.
In June, 2004, a United Methodist Student Leadership Conference served rainbow-colored bread at a communion service.
The exquisite society to emerge will be governed by an elite comprised of gay poets. One of the major requirements for a position of power in the new society will be indulgence in the Greek passion.14 Any man contaminated with heterosexual lust will be automatically barred from a position of influence. All males who insist on remaining stupidly heterosexual will be tried in homosexual courts of justice and will become invisible men.15
14Catholic Priests, over the past several years, have been accused and charged with pedophilia and pederasty, a common "Greek passion."
15Homosexual groups attacked Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum for comments exposing homosexuality. So committed to their agenda, homosexual activists rabidly attack anyone who voices opposition to their lifestyle or agenda. Fear and intimidation have silenced many elected officials.
We shall rewrite history, history filled and debased with your heterosexual lies and distortions. We shall portray the homosexuality of great leaders and thinkers who have shaped the world.16 We will demonstrate that homosexuality and intelligence and imagination are inextricably linked, and that homosexuality is a requirement for true nobility, true beauty in a man.
16Many homosexual activists have "outed" great historians such as Abraham Lincoln, Walt Whitman, William Shakespeare, Eleanor Roosevelt, and T.S. Eliot.
We shall be victorious because we are filled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.17
17Homosexual activist groups use a "scorched earth" policy to force their agenda on America. Groups like ACT-UP encourage members to "Earn Your Attitude" through public demonstrations, yelling, civil disobedience, and to be "united in anger." Another suggestion by homosexual activists suggests using "blood terrorism," the act of HIV-AIDs victims deliberately donating blood to the American Red Cross.
Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks.
http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/takeover.asp -
Originally posted by coffeeortea:
Looking from a kleptomaniac's point of view, it is normal to steal.
it is because you cannot produce life from homosexuality.. however, i would not say it is abnormal, because looking from a homosexual's point of view, it is normal.
Looking from a sex maniac's point of view, it is normal to rape.
Looking from a psychotic's point of view, it is normal to kill.
Looking from a paedophile's point of view, it is normal to molest children.
Is sexual relationship with two persons of the same sex - NORMAL ?
Is the human body made to copulate with the same sex ?
Clever argument from the HOMOSEXUAL Community has suggested that SEX is not everything in the HOMOSEXUAL relationship.
Unfortunately, where emotional feeling exist, will it not develop into a higher plane of psycho-physiological relationship that can only be achieve through a SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP ?
Is the human body made for such a function to be effective with two persons from the SAME SEX ?
If sex has to take place without the NORMAL SEX ORGANS, should such sexual activities be considered ABNORMAL ?
Should it not be that the final and highest level of a psycho-physiological relationship is to lead to PRO-CREATION - as the supreme expression for such a NORMAL RELATIONSHIP ?
Can HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONSHIP result in such a SUPREME EXPRESSION in the end-result of PRO-CREATION from the feelings between the SAME SEX ?
Is it not correct to say that such ABNORMAL RELATIONSHIP is the cause to DEVIATIONISM ? -
Yup, that's NARTH's fundamental position.. Which is pseudo-science.. Thanks for posting this... =)Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Psychoanalysis? That's alot of pseudo-science anyway...
http://skepdic.com/psychoan.html -
Originally posted by Atobe:
What the use of using NARTH's website to justify NARTH's position? Didn't OM illustrate that NARTH's using pseudo-science all along?
[b]The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality
Fact Sheet
[/b]
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Did they conduct any studies to validate their therapies? No.. They just manage to quote some rather outdated studies..
[b]PEOPLE CAN CHANGE :
http://www.peoplecanchange.com/
[/b]
And they are using psychoanalysis still.. Pseudo-science..
http://www.peoplecanchange.com/Root_Problems.htm
In fact, if you examine further, it's still a religious outfit.. -
hello?Originally posted by vito_corleone:can.. in that case..since a guy has a hole in the back isn't gay sex part of nature? the prostate gand just happens to be located where only shoving something up your @$$ can reach..so anatomically speaking..isn't homosexuality part of nature too? 
That hole is for purging waste from body lah! Not for shoving anything in. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
For a critique of Charles Socarides, go look at my previous post.. He twisted words from another association he belonged to and kanna kick out from them.. sure he's credible?
[b]NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND THERAPY OF HOMOSEXUALITY
New Business: Narth Los Angeles
Charles Socarides, M.D.
NARTH President
This article provided by NARTH
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/1996papers/socarides.html
[/b] -
Homosexuality is mental and not physical. It is a mental disorder, which can be treated, provided the person is willing to fully cooperate. Stories about ex ex gays turning back to gays is because they make their own choice of living with same sex. Not because counselling or treatment doesn't work.Originally posted by CX:goodness! how did THIS topic find its way back here after being in "cold storage" for so long?
physical differences is a definitive guide to determining biological gender but it does nothing for the issue of homosexuality...
my point has always been the same: its stupid to judge people for by who they fark.
what's the point? there is no "crime against nature" committed here... who understands "nature" perfectly anyway?
bah... i expect the troll to barge in and unleash his bigotry anyway so what the heck... he's entitled to his views. i'm entitled to what i think of them too
They choose to live this way. They make their choice. They have to live with it. But they should not force the society into accepting them or legalising their marriage. Nobody is judging them. Just that they should not be making such demands from the govt or society.
My stand is simple. Our body is designed this way. So accept it.
Maybe we should start asking our fathers why don't they marry men. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
You want a critique of Paul Cameron?
[b]MEDICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT HOMOSEXUALS DO
By Paul Cameron, Ph.D.
[/b]
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron.html
Paul Cameron
Psychologist Paul Cameron has used his own studies to claim that homosexuals threaten public health, social order, and the well-being of children. His conclusions are generally at odds with other published research, and objective indices show that his work has had no apparent impact on scientific research on sexual orientation.
Although Cameron has been criticized in the popular press, extensive scientific critiques of his group's research have not been widely available. Those that have been published have been brief or appeared in obscure journals. This inattention by the scientific community is perhaps not surprising, given the poor quality of the Cameron group's data and the low prestige of the journals in which they have published. Most scientists have simply ignored the Cameron studies.
Lacking training in research methods and statistics, however, nonscientists may not be equipped to subject the Cameron group's results to the rigorous scrutiny that they warrant. Consequently, they may mistakenly assume that the Cameron group's papers are basically sound because they included lengthy bibliographies, reported many statistics, and were published in academic journals. Some members of the lay public may not understand that the mere presence of bibliographic references does not guarantee an assertion's accuracy or validity, that statistics can easily be generated from faulty data, and that academic journals vary widely in their quality and their criteria for accepting papers for publication.
This section of the site includes a critical review of the principal source of data for the Cameron group's publications, their 1983-84 surveys conducted in eight US municipalities. Six serious errors are identified in the Cameron group's sampling techniques, survey methodology, and interpretation of results. The presence of even one of these errors would be sufficient to cast serious doubts on the legitimacy of any study's results. In combination, they make the data virtually meaningless.
In addition, a brief note describes the fundamental methodological flaw in the Cameron group's study of obituaries in the gay press.
And data from objective indicators are reported to show that the Cameron group's studies have had no discernible impact on scientific research. Their papers have been published in journals with extremely low levels of professional prestige and scientific impact, and have been cited in only a handful of other academic articles, most of which criticized their methodology.
Information is also provided about censures of Paul Cameron by various professional associations, along with links to other relevant sites. -
This is the most damning study.. Anyone who's trained in research methodology will easily spot all the flaws in his study..
The Cameron Group's "Gay Obituary" Study
What is a convenience sample?
Cameron, Playfair, and Wellum (1994) counted obituaries in various gay community publications and claimed to be able to use them to calculate the average life expectancy for homosexuals.
Their conclusion – that homosexual men and women have a shorter life span than heterosexual men and women – provides a textbook example of the perils of using data from a convenience sample to generalize to an entire population.
Death Notices
and Obituaries Most city newspapers include a section containing death notices for community residents. These notices – which can carry a small fee for printing – typically list the name, age, address, and survivors of the deceased, along with information about funeral or memorial services. Funeral directors often assist the loved ones of the deceased in submitting such notices.
Gay community newspapers do not have sections of death notices. When the AIDS epidemic began to claim the lives of so many gay and bisexual men in the 1980s, however, many gay newspapers began to print obituaries. Except in the case of prominent community figures, these obituaries are typically written by (or based on information from) the loved ones of the deceased.
Assuming that the deceased person wasn't famous, an obituary appears in a gay community newspaper only if (1) a loved one or friend notifies the newspaper about the death (and, in many cases, writes the obituary) and (2) the editor decides to print the obituary.
Consequently, many gay men and lesbians who die never have an obituary in a gay community publication. Here are just a few examples of who is left out of gay newspapers' obituaries.
gay men and lesbians who were not involved in the gay community
gay men and lesbians who were in the closet about their sexual orientation
gay men and lesbians whose loved ones or family didn't want their homosexuality to be known
gay men and lesbians whose loved ones or family simply didn't think of sending an obituary to a gay community newspaper
gay men and lesbians whose loved ones did not write an obituary for some other reason (e.g., they were too grief stricken)
gay men and lesbians who died without leaving anyone to write an obituary for a gay publication (e.g., those whose loved ones and relatives died before them).
An accurate estimate of the life span of gay men and lesbians would have to count such people. By restricting their analysis to obituaries in gay newspapers, however, the Cameron group systematically excluded them from the sample.
Internal
Inconsistencies The inadequacy of the Cameron group's approach is evident from internal inconsistencies within their own data. Compare the data about lesbians reported in their obituary study, for example, to data from their so-called national survey.
In their obituary study, the Cameron group claimed that the average lesbian life-span is similar to that of gay men who do not have AIDS ("under 50 years" versus "mid-40s," respectively). But if this is true, and if obituaries are indeed a valid source for this type of data, the ratio of gay male obituaries to lesbian obituaries should be about the same as the ratio of gay men to lesbians in the population.
From their survey data, the Cameron group has claimed to know the number of gay men and lesbians in the population. If we believed their numbers, we would set the ratio of gay men-to-lesbians at about 1.6-to-1 (or approximately 2.6-to-1 if bisexuals are omitted).
But the ratio of gay male-to-lesbian obituaries in the Cameron group's study is quite different – approximately 6-to-1 if AIDS and violent deaths are excluded, 32-to-1 if they are included.
Thus, at least one data set has to be wrong. Either the obituaries data do not include a representative sample of lesbians, or the Cameron group's population estimates based on their survey data are invalid.
An observer with training in research methodology would most likely conclude that both sets of data are fatally flawed.
This example is provided as simply one illustration of the flaws in the Cameron group's methods.
Conclusion Obituaries in gay community newspapers do not provide a representative sampling of the community. This is evident in the fact that only only 2% of the Cameron group's obituaries were for lesbians. Moreover, community newspapers tend overwhelmingly to report deaths due to AIDS (only 11% of Cameron's gay male obituaries were not related to AIDS). In addition, community newspapers tend not to print obituaries for people who are not actively involved in the local gay community, those who are in the closet, and those whose loved ones simply don't submit an obituary to a local gay newspaper.
The Cameron group's gay obituary study reports many numbers and statistics. However, they are absolutely worthless for estimating the life expectancy of gay men and lesbians.
Postscript In a 1997 column in the Weekly Standard, former Secretary of Education William Bennett referred to the findings of Cameron et al.'s obituary study, although he did not cite Cameron by name. He again referred to Cameron's conclusion about the truncated life span of homosexuals in an appearance on ABC's "This Week" program.
In 1998, after Andrew Sullivan wrote an article challenging the statistic, Bennett wrote in a letter to the New Republic (1998, February 23, page 4): "Given what I now know, I believe there are flaws with Paul Cameron's study. One cannot extrapolate from his methodology and say that the average male homosexual life span is 43 years."
References Bennett, W.J. (1997, November 24). Clinton, gays, and the truth. Weekly Standard, page 13.
Cameron, P., Playfair, W. L., & Wellum, S. (1994). The longevity of homosexuals: Before and after the AIDS epidemic. Omega, 29, 249-272.
Sullivan, A. (1998, January 5). False Bennett: Gay bashing by the numbers. New Republic, page 15. -
And doesn't homo supporting site use pseudo-science too to prove that homo sexuality is part of nature?Originally posted by earthlings73:Yup, that's NARTH's fundamental position.. Which is pseudo-science.. Thanks for posting this... =) -
Ah.. His license as a Psychologist has been inactive since 1995 I wonder why?
Paul Cameron Bio and Fact Sheet
Paul Drummond Cameron was born November 9, 1939, in Pittsburgh (PA).
He received his BA from Los Angeles Pacific College in 1961; his MA from California State University, Los Angeles, in 1962; and his PhD from the University of Colorado in 1966. His dissertation was titled Age as a determinant of differences in non-intellective psychological functioning.1
He was affiliated with various colleges and universities until 1980. They include Wayne State University (1967-6, University of Louisville (1970-73), Fuller Graduate School of Psychology [part of the Fuller Theological Seminary] (1976-79), and the University of Nebraska (1979-80).
On his curriculum vitae, he describes himself as a "Researcher/Clinician." According to the web site of the Nebraska Department of HHS Regulation and Licensure, his license as a Psychologist has been "inactive" since 1995.
He is chairman of the Family Research Institute, PO Box 62640, Colorado Springs, CO, 80962-2640. Telephone: (303) 681-3113. Fax: (303) 681-3427.
In the mid-1980s, the gay press labeled Paul Cameron "the most dangerous antigay voice in the United States today."2,3,4 Here are some important facts about him.
On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists" by the APA Board of Directors.5 Cameron has posted an elaborate argument about his expulsion from APA on his website, claiming that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership. Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron's claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States (and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such lengths to disassociate itself from one individual.
At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it "formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality."6
Footnotes
1Biographical information obtained from various sources, including Cameron's curriculum vitae, Who's Who in the West, 26th Edition, 25th Edition; Who's Who in America, 52nd Edition, 51st Edition, 50th Edition. (return to text)
2Walter, D. (1985, October 29). Paul Cameron. The Advocate, pp. 28-33. (return to text)
3Fettner, A.G. (1985, September 23). The evil that men do. New York Native, pp. 23-24. (return to text)
4Pietrzyk, M.E. (1994, October 3). Queer science: Paul Cameron, professional sham. The New Republic, pp. 10-12. (return to text)
5Notice: Persons dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association. (1984). Internal communication from APA to all members. (return to text)
6The full NPA resolution read as follows:
The science and profession of psychology in Nebraska as represented by the Nebraska Psychological Association, formally dissociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality. Further, the Nebraska Psychological Association would like it known that Dr. Cameron is not a member of the Association. Dr. Cameron was recently dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists.
[Nebraska Psychological Association. (1984, October 19). Resolution. Minutes of the Nebraska Psychological Association. Omaha, Nebraska: Author.] (return to text)
7A copy of the full ASA resolution in Acrobat PDF format can be downloaded. It read as follows:
WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron, a psychologist, was dropped from membership in The American Psychological Association for violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists;
WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has been presented in the media as a sociologist;
WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism;
WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research;
WHEREAS the American Sociological Association is on record as opposing oppressive actions against lesbians and gay men and affirming its commitment to their civil rights;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: THAT the Association reaffirms its opposition to efforts to undermine the civil rights of lesbians and gay men through the distortion of sociological concepts and the falsifying of sociological research; and
THAT the Association articulates this opposition by charging the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology with the task of critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron.
[Sociology group criticizes work of Paul Cameron. (1985, September 10). Lincoln (NE) Star.] (return to text)
8 The final resolution and the committee report were published in ASA Footnotes, February, 1987, page 14. Available from the American Sociological Association, Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, 1722 N Street, NW, Washington DC 20036. (202) 833-3410. (return to text)
9On page 536 of his opinion, Judge Buchmeyer noted the following examples of misrepresentations by Cameron to the Court:
"(i) his sworn statement that "homosexuals are approximately 43 times more apt to commit crimes than is the general population" is a total distortion of the Kinsey data upon which he relies – which, as is obvious to anyone who reads the report, concerns data from a non-representative sample of delinquent homosexuals (and Dr. Cameron compares this group to college and non-college heterosexuals);
(ii) his sworn statement that "homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals" is based upon the same distorted data – and, the Court notes, is directly contrary to other evidence presented at trial besides the testimony of Dr. Simon and Dr. Marmour. (553 F. Supp. 1121 at 1130 n.18.)"
[Baker v. Wade, 106 Federal Rules Decisions 526 (N.D. Texas, 1985).] (return to text) -
Psychologists and Sociologists condemn him.. ha.. APA itself has 132000 members.. Not sure abt ASA though..
In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism" and noted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research."7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of "critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron."
At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee's report and passed the following resolution:
The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, "The Paul Cameron Case," is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron's frequent lecture and media appearances."8
Cameron's credibility was also questioned outside of academia. In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade (1985), Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dallas referred to "Cameron's sworn statement that 'homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,'" and concluded that "Dr. Paul Cameron...has himself made misrepresentations to this Court" and that "There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron" (p.536).9 -
Oral sex is the best!Originally posted by Honeybunz:hello?
That hole is for purging waste from body lah! Not for shoving anything in. -
Originally posted by earthlings73:Oral sex is the best!
Hear no evil, hear no evil -
1) Mental disorder? Should you judge or should mental health experts make this judgment?Originally posted by Honeybunz:Homosexuality is mental and not physical. It is a mental disorder, which can be treated, provided the person is willing to fully cooperate. Stories about ex ex gays turning back to gays is because they make their own choice of living with same sex. Not because counselling or treatment doesn't work.
They choose to live this way. They make their choice. They have to live with it. But they should not force the society into accepting them or legalising their marriage. Nobody is judging them. Just that they should not be making such demands from the govt or society.
My stand is simple. Our body is designed this way. So accept it.
Maybe we should start asking our fathers why don't they marry men. I shown in various posts that different psych associations from US to Europe to China to Australia has remove homosexuality from the list of mental disorder..
2) Own choice to turn ex-ex-gays? These are the people who felt ashame being gays.. If the therapy works, why aren't the figures more encouraging.. If it's just a choice, could u start loving a woman starting tomorrow (I think you are a lady)? Then change yourself back again maybe one year down the road..
3) Design, design, design.. Sigh..
4) Read the article you quoted from John Hopkin's research.. The part about sexuality is determined by genetics + embroyic interactions..