Gay Conversion Therapy

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Do you really think conservative America is going to allow this to happen without action to 5 year old innocent children as seen in the article below?

Conservative policemen, firemen, construction workers, military, etc, are gonna sit and watch as liberals try to push homosexuality on their innocent children in a public kindergarten classroom?

American

At Rocklin Academy School in Rocklin, California, for example, a kindergarten teacher traumatized students with a lesson that culminated with a transgender child changing his clothes to match those of his so-called true gender.

The controversial school lesson included two books about transgenderism, entitled I am Jazz and The Red Crayon. At the end of the lesson, a student in the class who identifies as transgender changed his clothes to ones that matched the gender with which he identifies. The teacher then told the students that the five-year-old boy was now a “girl” who had a girl’s name by which he should be addressed.

The students reportedly went home extremely upset following the lesson.

“My daughter came home crying and shaking so afraid she could turn into a boy,” said one parent.

What's worse is that the efforts to normalize transgenderism are doing a disservice to transgender individuals, who should be seeking help for their gender dysphoria, not embracing and celebrating it

I think you're full of it. The schools aren't traumatizing students. By telling them the truth about people's sexual orientation. Or has some people are transgender. Just like I wasn't traumatized, when I was a little kid watching two lesbians kissing at the park. Or when I seen pictures of one uncles hiding behing a another picture. Dress as a female. Also All Conservatives do is complain. Because GLBT are getting accepted by more people. So they can try all the delay tactics they want. But eventually they won't be able to force their hate on everyone.

 

[Mayzoo]

Your article on a supposed hermaphrodite and self impregnation is "Fake News"

See below link:

Announcement: Trolling- 'Fake News'

 

[KarateCowboy]

American Psychological Association Course Correction: Sexual Orientation and 'Gender Identity' Not Fixed After All

Dr. Diamond tells LGBT activists near the end of her YouTube lecture, “I feel as a community, the queers have to stop saying, ‘Please help us. We’re born this way, and we can’t change’ as an argument for legal standing. I don’t think we need that argument, and that argument is going to bite us in the ***, because now we know that there’s enough data out there, that the other side is aware of as much as we are aware of it.” In other words, Dr. Diamond says, “Stop saying ‘born that way and can’t change’ for political purposes, because the other side knows it’s not true as much as we do.”

 

[SilverBear]

American Psychological Association Course Correction: Sexual Orientation and 'Gender Identity' Not Fixed After All

Dr. Diamond tells LGBT activists near the end of her YouTube lecture, “I feel as a community, the queers have to stop saying, ‘Please help us. We’re born this way, and we can’t change’ as an argument for legal standing. I don’t think we need that argument, and that argument is going to bite us in the ***, because now we know that there’s enough data out there, that the other side is aware of as much as we are aware of it.” In other words, Dr. Diamond says, “Stop saying ‘born that way and can’t change’ for political purposes, because the other side knows it’s not true as much as we do.”

"When people are motivated to twist something for political purposes, ya know, they are going to find a way to do it."

 

[KarateCowboy]

"When people are motivated to twist something for political purposes, ya know, they are going to find a way to do it."

Seen that video. Many times. Years ago. How does that relate to the AOI article?

 

[hedrick]

I've looked at the APA handbook article and a key research paper.

Diamond's work in both areas points out the difficulty of defining orientation. There are people who are exclusively homosexual or heterosexual, but most people have some degree of attraction to both. So when we talk about people who same-sex attraction we're not just talking about people we think of as gay, but bisexual and even a lot of heterosexuals. And some people with primarily attraction to the same gender still have some attraction to the opposite gender.

As an example one article mentioned that the fraction of gay people can range from 1% to 18% depending upon how narrowly you define it.

Because many people who have same-sex attraction aren't exclusively that way, behavior among people with same-sex attraction and even how people think of themselves can change. This doesn't necessarily mean that attraction (orientation) changes. Nor does it mean that there aren't people who are exclusively gay and will stay that way.

These observations are hardly news. The idea of a spectrum goes back to Kinsey. However the tendency in the past had been to think of homosexual, heterosexual, and bisexual, with the assumption that homosexual and heterosexual didn't change, and if you asked someone they'd tell you which they are. In my opinion Diamond's work points out that even if that is true of some kind of basic attraction, what you're going to see in practice isn't so simple. That's because people who have both kinds of attraction may at times think of themselves as gay and at other times as heterosexual, and those people outnumber those on the end of the spectrum that have a single attraction. It's going to be nearly impossible for researchers or people doing surveys to define who is gay and who isn't in a way that's going to be stable.

However this work doesn't cause all the other work looking at orientation to go away.

Incidentally, it's not just youth that change. Changes are also common in adulthood. That's because changes aren't primarily an developmental issue. It's simply that lots of people can be attracted to either sex, and their current behavior may change over time.

 

[expos4ever]

Sounds like a liberal doctor's jargon to me.

There is no scientific recording of hermaphrodite, you either are male or female.

The classic pattern:

1. A scientific finding is asserted.

2. The response evades the science and resorts to smear (“liberal jargon”).

We should be able to do better.

 

[Truth7t7]

The classic pattern:

1. A scientific finding is asserted.

2. The response evades the science and resorts to smear (“liberal jargon”).

We should be able to do better.

There is no scientific recording of hermaphrodite, you either are male or female.

 

[Mayzoo]

NM

 

[Liza B.]

The logic for some countries banning conversion therapy as I understand it, is that churches are practicing psychology and even some types of physical therapies when they have no qualifications in either field, and are practising in a manner that has no evidence of its efficacy, and has been the subject of multiple complaints for adverse effects.

Others may know more about this but this was my understanding.

To be fair, I'm not sure psychology itself is highly qualified. I mean study up on the quackery that passes for highly qualified among psychologists. And I'm not prone to conspiracy theories or against the medical field as a rule.

For example, Kinsey's sexual research in the 50s was considered untouchable and that guy was a complete and total quack. Frankly, psychology is full of a LOT of quackery, straight up. Doubt me? Homosexuality used to be considered a mental illness. By psychology.

 

[expos4ever]

There is no scientific recording of hermaphrodite, you either are male or female.

Can you defend this claim with a citation from a reputable source?

 

[Truth7t7]

Can you defend this claim with a citation from a reputable source?

Can you prove it wrong with a reputable source?

Hermaphrodite is found in "Greek Mythology"

 

[super animator]

Can you prove it wrong with a reputable source?

onus probandi

 

[hedrick]

For those who still care, I've located the video from Diamond on which the earlier quotes are taken. They were indeed taken out of context. (The video is from 2013, so she may well have more recent data. But this is the one from which the quotations where taken.)

Here's the video:

It’s long and complex. I took detailed notes, but I doubt that anyone would read them, so I’m going to summarize.

Many studies have found that many people are not exclusively gay or heterosexual. There are differences among men and women, with more exclusively gay men than women, and more mixed attraction ("bi") among women, but in both cases the majority of those with some same-sex attraction aren’t purely gay.

Recent work has shown that both people’s identification as gay or not changes over time, and that who they love may change between men and women. However looking at her data, this seems to happen with those having mixed attraction. You don’t see pure gays becoming heterosexual or visa versa.

This is also why the percentage of the population who are gay is so variable. By the narrowest definition, those only attracted to the same gender, it would be about 1.5% of men and a bit less than 1% of women. But some people have found up to 18%, because they included people with some same-sex attraction.

Her comments on politics should be taken in this context. She was referring to the fact that people who identify as gays change over time. She was not suggesting either that people can get rid of same-sex attraction or that they choose it, just that there are people with both types of attraction, and how they express it and how they think of themselves may change.

In 2013 she was concerned that this issue might be legally significant, because there was some precedent that groups could only have protected status if they were clearly defined and immutable. But people who are identified as gays are not immutable, as noted. She says it's dangerous to use "‘Please help us. We’re born this way, and we can’t change’ as an argument for legal standing." She is not saying same-sex attraction is changeable but that who are identified as gay changes. She's also concerned that we not protect just the 1 - 1.5% of gays who will never change, but bisexuals, though this is a concern that many here won't share.

My position, as expressed a couple of times here, is that while underlying attraction probably can't change, behavior can. I think it's legitimate for a counsellor to help someone who is strongly motivated not to have sex with some of the same gender. However I don't think it's legitimate either to claim to remove same-sex attraction or to do this kind of treatment without informed consent of the person.

 

[hedrick]

Can you prove it wrong with a reputable source?

Hermaphrodite is found in "Greek Mythology"

There is a long article on various types of ambiguous sexual here: Intersex - Wikipedia. Unfortunately the term "hermaphrodite" has been used differently. The article asserts that true human hermaphrodites don't exist. But in making that statement they're using a narrow definition. The term has been used to cover conditions that do occur in humans. See e.g. this article: What is a hermaphrodite?. It's all a matter of how narrow your definition is.

 

[expos4ever]

Can you prove it wrong with a reputable source?

Hermaphrodite is found in "Greek Mythology"

Not this again!

Who made the claim, me or you?

You.

It is your responsibility to support your claim, not mine to disprove it.

 

[Truth7t7]

For those who still care, I've located the video from Diamond on which the earlier quotes are taken. They were indeed taken out of context. (The video is from 2013, so she may well have more recent data. But this is the one from which the quotations where taken.)

Here's the video:

It’s long and complex. I took detailed notes, but I doubt that anyone would read them, so I’m going to summarize.

Many studies have found that many people are not exclusively gay or heterosexual. There are differences among men and women, with more exclusively gay men than women, and more mixed attraction ("bi") among women, but in both cases the majority of those with some same-sex attraction aren’t purely gay.

Recent work has shown that both people’s identification as gay or not changes over time, and that who they love may change between men and women. However looking at her data, this seems to happen with those having mixed attraction. You don’t see pure gays becoming heterosexual or visa versa.

This is also why the percentage of the population who are gay is so variable. By the narrowest definition, those only attracted to the same gender, it would be about 1.5% of men and a bit less than 1% of women. But some people have found up to 18%, because they included people with some same-sex attraction.

Her comments on politics should be taken in this context. She was referring to the fact that people who identify as gays change over time. She was not suggesting either that people can get rid of same-sex attraction or that they choose it, just that there are people with both types of attraction, and how they express it and how they think of themselves may change.

In 2013 she was concerned that this issue might be legally significant, because there was some precedent that groups could only have protected status if they were clearly defined and immutable. But people who are identified as gays are not immutable, as noted. She says it's dangerous to use "‘Please help us. We’re born this way, and we can’t change’ as an argument for legal standing." She is not saying same-sex attraction is changeable but that who are identified as gay changes. She's also concerned that we not protect just the 1 - 1.5% of gays who will never change, but bisexuals, though this is a concern that many here won't share.

My position, as expressed a couple of times here, is that while underlying attraction probably can't change, behavior can. I think it's legitimate for a counsellor to help someone who is strongly motivated not to have sex with some of the same gender. However I don't think it's legitimate either to claim to remove same-sex attraction or to do this kind of treatment without informed consent of the person.

Lisa Diamond not a reputable source, you watch the video and quote the sources within it, im waiting.

 

[Truth7t7]

There is a long article on various types of ambiguous sexual here: Intersex - Wikipedia. Unfortunately the term "hermaphrodite" has been used differently. The article asserts that true human hermaphrodites don't exist. But in making that statement they're using a narrow definition. The term has been used to cover conditions that do occur in humans. See e.g. this article: What is a hermaphrodite?. It's all a matter of how narrow your definition is.

Your wikipedia article is not even close to hermaphrodite.

Hermaphrodite is a mythological concept that is both male and female, and actually could procreate within itself.

Penis, vagina, eggs, sperm,

 

[hedrick]

Lisa Diamond not a reputable source, you watch the video and quote the sources within it, im waiting.

I described the video because one posting here quoted from it. I was simply checking whether the quote was fair. It was not.

 

[SilverBear]

To be fair, I'm not sure psychology itself is highly qualified. I mean study up on the quackery that passes for highly qualified among psychologists. And I'm not prone to conspiracy theories or against the medical field as a rule.

For example, Kinsey's sexual research in the 50s was considered untouchable and that guy was a complete and total quack. Frankly, psychology is full of a LOT of quackery, straight up. Doubt me? Homosexuality used to be considered a mental illness. By psychology.

and it lost that status when those claiming it was a mental illness were unable to show any evidence that it was a pathology or any kind.