Originally posted by Nellinator
Reparative therapy... it exists.
Please show me a success story for reparative therapy, which has lasted for years, in which the individual man or woman is truly heterosexual, and not just "back in the closet"
Originally posted by Nellinator
Yea its crime but Quran never mention to kill gays , In my country they just send them to jail and treat them if they need help
🤨
Originally posted by Nellinator
They do have to want to do it, in which case it is available and studies (albeit not peer reviewed) have been done on it. Since this is the case in North America, it is not a bad thing.
People are manipulated into "wanting" to do it by pressure from those around them.
And yes it is a bad thing (not to mention worse than useless and insane)
It does work, you are welcome to get in contact with any ex-gay group if you want, that's up to you. There may be no peer reviewed articles that can confirm successful reparative therapy, but that does not mean it does not happen. I'd be willing to share some of the research that has been done on the matter if you want, but I suggest that we take that to the Homosexuality and Relgion thread. And no it is not condemned by all reputable medical associations. I would know.
Originally posted by Nellinator
I'd be willing to share some of the research that has been done on the matter if you want, but I suggest that we take that to the Homosexuality and Relgion thread.
Good idea
Originally posted by Nellinator
And no it is not condemned by all reputable medical associations. I would know.
How would you know?
That does nothing to change my opinion that changing someones personality is wrong (unless they truly want it to be changed)
Psychology is my field and I know what we are allowed to do and what we are not. We are allowed to attempt reparative therapy. The official position of the CPA is that there is no peer reviewed evidence suggesting reparative therapy can be successful. That said, no worthwhile attempt has been made to create a peer reviewable study. There are a lot of articles indicating that it is possible and far fewer declaring that it is not.
Originally posted by Nellinator
Psychology is my field and I know what we are allowed to do and what we are not. We are allowed to attempt reparative therapy. The official position of the CPA is that there is no peer reviewed evidence suggesting reparative therapy can be successful. That said, no worthwhile attempt has been made to create a peer reviewable study. There are a lot of articles indicating that it is possible and far fewer declaring that it is not.
Still waiting for those credentials by the way.
I find it interesting that so many of the die hard bible thumpers on our little board are members of the scientific community, despite the very communities to which they belong disagreeing with their life long views on society, behavior, evolution, history, science, fact, fiction.
It must be that damned liberal media telling us lies about our intellectual leaders again.
Originally posted by Nellinator
There may be disagreeances, but the scientific communities are not against anything I believe.
I don't give out my credentials for a variety of reasons, not the least of which being my personal privacy.
I suppose you're right. You're probally the most scientifically oriented, bible thumping, world-wide flood myth believeing, evidence-ignoring, psycologist to grace these boards. And that's saying a lot since there are so many of you on the internet. I mean, someone with your credentials (would citing some professors you've studied under, or schools you've attended or types of degrees you've obtained really be like tossing out your credit card numbers on the internet?) has gone so far in their feild that the only thing you have left to you is to debate gay marriage and bible fairy tales on teh internet with 15 year olds.
Originally posted by Nellinator
There may be disagreeances, but the scientific communities are not against anything I believe
Once again, the first half of your sentence totally negates the second half. Let me translate what I mean:
"The scientific community may disagree with me, but it's not like they disagree with me." wtf?
Since homosexuality is not a disease or disorder, there is nothing to cure. A few therapists claim that they can cure gay people of their homosexual desires, but their methods remain extremely questionable and rarely, if ever, have resulted in permanently changing anybody's sexual orientation (Haldeman, 1994).
According to the American Psychological Association, no scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness of any therapies that attempt to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals.
The American Psychological Association Executive Director Dr. Raymond Fowler also states that "Groups who try to change the sexual orientation of people through so-called conversion therapy are misguided and run the risk of causing a great deal of psychological harm to those they say they are trying to help."
The American Academy of Pediatrics states: "Therapy directed at specifically changing sexual orientation is contraindicated, since it can provoke guilt and anxiety while having little or no potential for achieving changes in orientation."
The American Medical Association "does not recommend aversion therapy for gay men and lesbians. Through psychotherapy, gay men and lesbians can become comfortable with their sexual orientation and understand the societal response to it."
The American Psychiatric Association states: "There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of reparative therapy as a treatment to change ones sexual orientation." The American Psychiatric Association also states: "gay men and lesbians who have accepted their sexual orientation positively are better adjusted than those who have not done so."
But you already know that. 🙄
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I suppose you're right. You're probally the most scientifically oriented, bible thumping, world-wide flood myth believeing, evidence-ignoring, psycologist to grace these boards. And that's saying a lot since there are so many of you on the internet. I mean, someone with your credentials (would citing some professors you've studied under, or schools you've attended or types of degrees you've obtained really be like tossing out your credit card numbers on the internet?) has gone so far in their feild that the only thing you have left to you is to debate gay marriage and bible fairy tales on teh internet with 15 year olds.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Once again, the first half of your sentence totally negates the second half. Let me translate what I mean:"The scientific community may disagree with me, but it's not like they disagree with me." wtf?
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Since homosexuality is not a disease or disorder, there is nothing to cure. A few therapists claim that they can cure gay people of their homosexual desires, but their methods remain extremely questionable and rarely, if ever, have resulted in permanently changing anybody's sexual orientation (Haldeman, 1994).According to the American Psychological Association, no scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness of any therapies that attempt to convert homosexuals to heterosexuals.
The American Psychological Association Executive Director Dr. Raymond Fowler also states that "Groups who try to change the sexual orientation of people through so-called conversion therapy are misguided and run the risk of causing a great deal of psychological harm to those they say they are trying to help."
The American Academy of Pediatrics states: "Therapy directed at specifically changing sexual orientation is contraindicated, since it can provoke guilt and anxiety while having little or no potential for achieving changes in orientation."
The American Medical Association "does not recommend aversion therapy for gay men and lesbians. Through psychotherapy, gay men and lesbians can become comfortable with their sexual orientation and understand the societal response to it."
The American Psychiatric Association states: "There is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of reparative therapy as a treatment to change ones sexual orientation." The American Psychiatric Association also states: "gay men and lesbians who have accepted their sexual orientation positively are better adjusted than those who have not done so."
But you already know that. 🙄
Most of what you posted supports what I said (that there is no peer reviewed records of it) and the rest merely indicates that caution is needed and that further study is needed. If you can't understand the reasoning and implications of these positions then that's fine, I know what is acceptable in my profession.
Originally posted by Nellinator
I haven't been as shady as your making me out to be. Would be happier if I told you that I am currently working at the University of Alberta and did my undergraduate degree in Science with a major in psychology there?
I haven't made you out to be shady at all. I've made you out to be full of shit.
Originally posted by Nellinator
To clarify, there are disagreeances between members of the field which is definitely not limited to theists and atheists, but the community as an official body is not officially against anything I believe, nor is there a majority consensus against what I believe. The scientific communities are far from unanimity.
I never said that the community is unanimous in it's opinion. There are as many opinion as there are experts. But the specific scientific communities you've used to substantiate your opinions do not agree with you.
Originally posted by Nellinator
Most of what you posted supports what I said (that there is no peer reviewed records of it) and the rest merely indicates that caution is needed and that further study is needed.
Let's suppose you haven't used carefully worded excerpts from papers published by this group.
Enlighten us to what sort of caution is needed in tampering with someone's sexual identity in such a way as to teach him or her that their natural sexual identity is wrong?
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Enlighten us to what sort of caution is needed in tampering with someone's sexual identity in such a way as to teach him or her that their natural sexual identity is wrong?
One cannot possibly argue that there is anyway that you could convince people that they are crazy perverts without doing a lot of damage.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Let's suppose you haven't used carefully worded excerpts from papers published by this group.Enlighten us to what sort of caution is needed in tampering with someone's sexual identity in such a way as to teach him or her that their natural sexual identity is wrong?
Originally posted by Nellinator
I could discuss a report that suggests favourable ways to attempt reparative therapy as reported by the people in therapy if you would like.
You can discuss it all you'd like. But it needs to be from a reputable source. and it should really be in the homosexuality thread. Or at least one that is more topic relevent.
Originally posted by Nellinator
It does work, you are welcome to get in contact with any ex-gay group if you want, that's up to you. There may be no peer reviewed articles that can confirm successful reparative therapy, but that does not mean it does not happen. I'd be willing to share some of the research that has been done on the matter if you want, but I suggest that we take that to the Homosexuality and Relgion thread. And no it is not condemned by all reputable medical associations. I would know.
I love how you will defend ex-gay testimony which you admit has no evidense to validate it, however, you will still insist that Homosexuality is a chosen behavior, based on lack of proof that it's genetic...even though there are multitudes of evidense that Homosexuality, is genetic...
You never responded to me about the thread PVS made regarding Gay Animals.... 😬
Are you intentionally ignoring evidense, because it;s not convienent and compatible with your religious beleif ?