Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 5

[aCultureWarrior]

I stand corrected on an earlier comment about the pro homosexual American Psychological Association wanting to remove pedophilia from it's list of mental disorders a few years back, it was the pro homosexual American Psychiatric Association that attempted to do so.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/apa-correct-manual-clarification-pedophilia-not-se/

That being said:

Report Highlights Pedophile Connections of American Psychological Association

Americans for Pedophile Advocacy? Dutch pedophilia advocate Theo Sandfort is a Fellow with the American Psychological Society (APA). As part of his “research,” Sandfort once interviewed 25 boys from between the ages of 10 and 16 who were in “sexual relationships” with adults. The adult predators took Sandfort to interview their underage sexual “parters” (i.e., their child victims). “For virtually all the boys … the sexual contact itself was experienced positively,” Sandfort duly reported. Not surprisingly, the APA, which has an overwhelming pro-homosexualist bias, has worked to cast doubt on the idea that people practicing homosexuality can make the healthy transition to heterosexuality.
https://americansfortruth.com/2009/...ctions-of-american-psychological-association/

Dutch pedophile advocate and a Fellow with American Psychological Society (APA), Theo Sandfort

 

[Kit the Coyote]

seems good to me :idunno:

Not if the claim is that the therapy actually changes sexual orientation, in that case, they are failures.

 

[ok doser]

Not if the claim is that the therapy actually changes sexual orientation, in that case, they are failures.

i'm not seeing it

if one chooses to orient himself towards homosexuality and then chooses to orient himself towards celibacy or heterosexuality, how is that not changing their orientation?

 

[Kit the Coyote]

Effects of Therapy on Religious Men Who Have Unwanted Same-Sex Attraction
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0024363918788559#articlePermissionsContainer

Why stop at one?

A Longitudinal Study of Attempted Religiously Mediated Sexual Orientation Change
https://www.researchgate.net/public...eligiously_Mediated_Sexual_Orientation_Change

Ah heck, why stop at 2 studies?

JOURNAL OF HUMAN SEXUALITY (Volume 1)
What Research Shows: NARTH’s Response to the APA Claims on Homosexuality
https://static1.squarespace.com/sta.../What-research-shows-homosexuality.NARTH_.pdf

Of course when talking about the pro homosexual APA I have to remind the readers of this thread that it's the same APA that wanted to remove pedophilia (adult-child rape) from it's list of mental disorders a few years back.

Anticipating that you were going to throw studies at me I did a little research on what peer-reviewed studies there were. Cornell University completed a recent analysis that lists all the peer-reviewed studies on this subject. Oddly the three above are not on the list. The first is not a study of the effectiveness of conversion therapy but on the treatment of the negative effects. The second is a study of the subject though I do not know if it qualifies as peer-reviewed reading over the document it appears to suffer from the same problems I will reference below of another peer-reviewed study. The third is not really a study but NARTH complaining about the APA and citing what they considered evidence.

The Cornell University review of peer-reviewed studies on whether conversion therapy can change sexual orientation without undue harm found that as of 2015 there were 47 peer-reviewed studies on the subject but only 13 were actual research studies that directly addressed whether CT actually works. The remainder addressed issues related to the subject such as ethical considerations or like the first study in your list the effects of such therapies.

And now here is where I will stand corrected. Of those 13, one does find that CT can be effective but only in a minority of cases.

Only one study concluded that sexual orientation change efforts could succeed—although only in a minority of its participants, and the study has several limitations: its entire sample self-identified as religious and it is based on self-reports, which can be biased and unreliable.

Cornell's Conclusion:

However, after reviewing the research, we concluded that there is no credible evidence that sexual orientation can be changed through therapeutic intervention. Most accounts of such change are akin to instances of “faith healing.” There is also powerful evidence that trying to change a person’s sexual orientation can be extremely harmful.

Tried to post a link but TOL's firewall is acting up on it again and I don't recall how to get around it. Search for What does the scholarly research say about whether conversion therapy can alter sexual orientation without causing harm?

Ahhhh, so if someone leaves the homosexual lifestyle behind, they weren't a 'real homosexual' to begin with.

You could look at it that way in some cases, probably most.

 

[Kit the Coyote]

I stand corrected on an earlier comment about the pro homosexual American Psychological Association wanting to remove pedophilia from it's list of mental disorders a few years back, it was the pro homosexual American Psychiatric Association that attempted to do so.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/apa-correct-manual-clarification-pedophilia-not-se/

It is nice to see you willing to stand corrected but your correction is wrong also. The story is not saying they are trying to remove pedophilia from the DSM-5. They are correcting an error in the text of the entry that implied pedophilia is a sexual orientation. Given your position on the subject, I would think you would agree with them.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Anticipating that you were going to throw studies at me I did a little research on what peer-reviewed studies there were. Cornell University completed a recent analysis that lists all the peer-reviewed studies on this subject. Oddly the three above are not on the list.

What you mean is that Dutch pedophile advocate and a Fellow with American Psychological Association Theo Sanfort and his homosexual/pedophile associates at the APA didn't approve of any of them.

The first is not a study of the effectiveness of conversion therapy but on the treatment of the negative effects.

"In our study, most of those who participated in group or professional help had heterosexual shifts in sexual attraction, sexual identity and behavior with large statistical effect sizes..."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0024363918788559#articlePermissionsContainer

The second is a study of the subject though I do not know if it qualifies as peer-reviewed reading over the document it appears to suffer from the same problems I will reference below of another peer-reviewed study.

"The authors conducted a quasi-experimental longitudinal study spanning 6-7 years examining attempted religiously mediated sexual orientation change from homosexual orientation to heterosexual orientation. An initial sample was formed of 72 men and 26 women who were involved in a variety of Christian ministries, with measures of sexual attraction, infatuation and fantasy, and composite measures of sexual orientation and psychological distress, administered longitudinally. Evidence from the study suggested that change of homosexual orientation appears possible for some and that psychological distress did not increase on average as a result of the involvement in the change process. The authors explore methodological limitations circumscribing generalizability of the findings and alternative explanations of the findings, such as sexual identity change or adjustment."
https://www.researchgate.net/public...eligiously_Mediated_Sexual_Orientation_Change

So what you're saying is that pedophile advocate Theo Sandfort and his associates at the pro homosexual APA don't approve of the above study?

The third is not really a study but NARTH complaining about the APA and citing what they considered evidence.

"We wrote a reasonably comprehensive, historical review of more than 100 years of clinical and research literature. The literature we reviewed includes older, less methodologically sophisticated studies as well as more recent, representative, and methodologically rigorous studies. We acknowledge in advance the methodological limitations of the earlier studies, but include them because these earlier reports for the most part met acceptable research and publication standards at the time they were written, and because their conclusions are supported by the most current, methodologically sound studies available."
https://static1.squarespace.com/sta.../What-research-shows-homosexuality.NARTH_.pdf

100 years of old and new studies, of course not approved by the LGBT movement which is well represented at Cornell University.

https://hr.cornell.edu/lgbt-resources

 

[ok doser]

It is nice to see you willing to stand corrected but your correction is wrong also. The story is not saying they are trying to remove pedophilia from the DSM-5. They are correcting an error in the text of the entry that implied pedophilia is a sexual orientation. Given your position on the subject, I would think you would agree with them.

logically, does it make any sense not to treat it the same way as homosexuality? Especially considering that the prevalence of pedophilia is estimated to be up to 10x that of homosexuality?

 

[Kit the Coyote]

What you mean is that Dutch pedophile advocate and a Fellow with American Psychological Association Theo Sanfort and his homosexual/pedophile associates at the APA didn't approve of any of them.

So what you are saying is you don't understand how peer-review works. The APA is not who approves or disapproves.

 

[Kit the Coyote]

logically, does it make any sense not to treat it the same way as homosexuality? Especially considering that the prevalence of pedophilia is estimated to be up to 10x that of homosexuality?

It is a good question and one that is under debate I believe. But that is not the point.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I stand corrected on an earlier comment about the pro homosexual American Psychological Association wanting to remove pedophilia from it's list of mental disorders a few years back, it was the pro homosexual American Psychiatric Association that attempted to do so.

It is nice to see you willing to stand corrected but your correction is wrong also. The story is not saying they are trying to remove pedophilia from the DSM-5. They are correcting an error in the text of the entry that implied pedophilia is a sexual orientation. Given your position on the subject, I would think you would agree with them.

With all of the pro homosexual/pedophile organizations out there, it's difficult to differentiate between them.

This from a watchdog group that oversees the mental health community:

Holding the American Psychiatric Association Accountable for Minimizing Pedophilia to a “Disorder” Rather than Criminal Child Abuse

"...according to the APA’s Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), should a person not feel guilt or shame about their pedophilic impulses, then this ceases to be a “disorder” and becomes a pedophilic “sexual orientation.”[1] After public outcry about pedophilia being designated as a sexual orientation, the APA released a statement that the phrase “sexual orientation” was used in error and that the correct terminology was “sexual interest,”[2] a term which still seeks to normalize a criminal offense."
https://www.cchrint.org/2017/12/21/american-psychiatric-association-pedophilia-adisordernotacrime/

Oops, busted! I guess we better claim that it was a typo.

Let me use an analogy to show what the APA was talking about:

Let's say that Human Rights Campaign founder Terry Bean has sex with a 12 year old boy at his Portland OR condo and feels guilty about it the next morning. Pederast Terry Bean would then be suffering from a mental disorder because of the guilt. If HRC founder Terry Bean didn't feel guilty about adult-child sex (after all, love is love, right?) then he would fall under the new "sexual orientation" category of being a pedophile/pederast.

If we need to go over the pro homosexual history of both APA's, I'll gladly do so.

Edit: I like the ending statement by the mental health community watchdog:

"This is a case of fact, not fiction. The fact is that psychiatrists and psychologists should not be allowed to determine the standards of criminal conduct in any court and the APA held to account for both redefining criminal behavior as a “disorder” and any consequence of this resulting in harm to individuals. Its “billing bible,” the DSM, is the tool used to excuse such conduct and must be abolished. The APA, as an association, would be doing our society a tremendous service if it dissolved itself."
https://www.cchrint.org/2017/12/21/american-psychiatric-association-pedophilia-adisordernotacrime/

 

[aCultureWarrior]

So what you are saying is you don't understand how peer-review works. The APA is not who approves or disapproves.

I know quite well how peer review works. If you're not a rainbow flag waver, then the evidence to support your case isn't worth a hill of beans.

 

[Kit the Coyote]

i'm not seeing it

if one chooses to orient himself towards homosexuality and then chooses to orient himself towards celibacy or heterosexuality, how is that not changing their orientation?

They are not changing their orientation, they are choosing not to pursue certain actions. If you choose to fast it does not mean that your love of pizza does not exist.

 

[Kit the Coyote]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I stand corrected on an earlier comment about the pro homosexual American Psychological Association wanting to remove pedophilia from it's list of mental disorders a few years back, it was the pro homosexual American Psychiatric Association that attempted to do so.



With all of the pro homosexual/pedophile organizations out there, it's difficult to differentiate between them.

This from a watchdog group that oversees the mental health community:

Holding the American Psychiatric Association Accountable for Minimizing Pedophilia to a “Disorder” Rather than Criminal Child Abuse

"...according to the APA’s Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), should a person not feel guilt or shame about their pedophilic impulses, then this ceases to be a “disorder” and becomes a pedophilic “sexual orientation.”[1] After public outcry about pedophilia being designated as a sexual orientation, the APA released a statement that the phrase “sexual orientation” was used in error and that the correct terminology was “sexual interest,”[2] a term which still seeks to normalize a criminal offense."
https://www.cchrint.org/2017/12/21/american-psychiatric-association-pedophilia-adisordernotacrime/

Oops, busted! I guess we better claim that it was a typo.

Let me use an analogy to show what the APA was talking about:

Let's say that Human Rights Campaign founder Terry Bean has sex with a 12 year old boy at his Portland OR condo and feels guilty about it the next morning. Pederast Terry Bean would then be suffering from a mental disorder because of the guilt. If HRC founder Terry Bean didn't feel guilty about adult-child sex (after all, love is love, right?) then he would fall under the new "sexual orientation" category of being a pedophile/pederast.

If we need to go over the pro homosexual history of both APA's, I'll gladly do so.

Nothing in your quote or example shows that there was an effort to remove pedophilia from the DSM. Fine tuning the definition is not doing what you claimed.

 

[ok doser]

They are not changing their orientation, they are choosing not to pursue certain actions. If you choose to fast it does not mean that your love of pizza does not exist.

you're approaching from the perspective that orientation is fixed, immutable

i'm approaching it from the perspective that orientation is chosen, fluid


in my context, you aren't fasting, you're choosing not to look at pizza ads, not to drive past pizza parlors with your windows down, not to linger on the frozen foods aisle in the grocery store



now i want pizza

 

[Kit the Coyote]

you're approaching from the perspective that orientation is fixed, immutable

Actually, I don't hold that it is fixed and immutable but I do believe it is part of the base personality and as such extremely hard and dangerous to try and change.

i'm approaching it from the perspective that orientation is chosen, fluid

in my context, you aren't fasting, you're choosing not to look at pizza ads, not to drive past pizza parlors with your windows down, not to linger on the frozen foods aisle in the grocery store

Even if correct this doesn't change anything. Your example doesn't counter my point, it illustrates it. All of those things you listed are a choice not to act on a desire, you can do all those things and still love pizza.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Nothing in your quote or example shows that there was an effort to remove pedophilia from the DSM. Fine tuning the definition is not doing what you claimed.

Like homosexuality, once pedophilia is established as a sexual orientation*, it would eventually be removed from criminal statutes.

*Definition of sexual orientation
: a person's sexual identity or self-identification as bisexual, heterosexual, homosexual, pansexual, etc. : the state of being bisexual, heterosexual, homosexual, pansexual, etc.
Last summer a proposal submitted to Family Dollar Stores … persuaded the company's board to adopt a policy prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexual orientation

As the evidence shows, we're almost there.

 

[ok doser]

All of those things you listed are a choice not to act on a desire, you can do all those things and still love pizza.

not if you don't think about pizza, if you do all you can to avoid pizza


consider:

i used to smoke cigarettes - i was a smoker, i identified as a smoker, i liked smoking, smoking was part of my life and part of my lifestyle

when i quit for good (when my wife was pregnant with our first) i got rid of cigarettes in the house, in the car, in the boat, etc etc - if you've been a smoker you'll know what i mean - those places i used to smoke i avoided where i could and substituted other things where i couldn't avoid (chewing gum in the car, for example)

i trained myself to stop thinking about smoking, to stop thinking of myself as a smoker, to stop identifying as a smoker

i didn't identify as a non-smoker unless asked directly

i had chosen to be a smoker, i chose to stop being a smoker

i no longer worry about being tempted to smoke, i no longer have that urge to smoke

 

[aCultureWarrior]

not if you don't think about pizza, if you do all you can to avoid pizza

consider:

i used to smoke cigarettes - i was a smoker, i identified as a smoker, i liked smoking, smoking was part of my life and part of my lifestyle

when i quit for good (when my wife was pregnant with our first) i got rid of cigarettes in the house, in the car, in the boat, etc etc - if you've been a smoker you'll know what i mean - those places i used to smoke i avoided where i could and substituted other things where i couldn't avoid (chewing gum in the car, for example)

i trained myself to stop thinking about smoking, to stop thinking of myself as a smoker, to stop identifying as a smoker

i didn't identify as a non-smoker unless asked directly

i had chosen to be a smoker, i chose to stop being a smoker

i no longer worry about being tempted to smoke, i no longer have that urge to smoke

You've had your fun here Aaron, now please leave my "homo haven" and allow me to show others

Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized!

not unless you want me to report you for attempting to derail the thread

go back to your homo haven

shoo

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...iggered-Left&p=5310670&viewfull=1#post5310670

 

[ok doser]

Actually, I don't hold that it is fixed and immutable but I do believe it is part of the base personality and as such extremely hard and dangerous to try and change.



Even if correct this doesn't change anything. Your example doesn't counter my point, it illustrates it. All of those things you listed are a choice not to act on a desire, you can do all those things and still love pizza.

if you're interested in continuing this, i'll meet you over here: http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...-and-the-Dishonest-Use-of-Language&highlight=

 

[aCultureWarrior]

if you're interested in continuing this, i'll meet you over here: http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...-and-the-Dishonest-Use-of-Language&highlight=

Thank you, as it's a huge insult to those who have contracted homosexual desires because of childhood trauma (through sexual molestation, dysfunctional family, etc.) to compare the struggle they're going through with quitting cigarettes.