2005-02-04

Rational Discourse???

Ryan....c'mon....rational discourse? I believe that this is probably the most rational discourse you have ever had with someone like me. The American College of Pediatricians is cherry picking? Ryan, we could argue all day about different studies, theories and "scientific findings." The truth is we can both pull up statistic after statistic from both sides of the issue if we wanted to. I will say this....that the Kinsey Studies have been proven to be terribly flawed...and I think you know this. And, it was primarily these studies that led to the removal of homosexuality from the list of psychological disorders. And you state this as though it was a unanimous vote by the APA...(see article below)
In the three years leading up to the 1973 APA meeting, the previous national meetings had been repeatedly disrupted by gay activists. At the 1970 meeting in San Francisco certain sessions were broken up with shouts and jeers, prohibiting any rational discussion or debate. At the APA's 1971 meeting in Washington, threats and intimidation accomplished what discussion could not. Ronald Bayer, in a work sympathetic toward homosexuality and the gay rights movement, recounts: "Using forged credentials, gay activists gained access to the exhibit area and, coming across a display marketing aversive conditioning [i.e., punishing an organism whenever it makes a particular response] techniques for the treatment of homosexuals, demanded its removal. Threats were made against the exhibitor, who was told that unless his booth was dismantled, it would be torn down. After frantic behind-the-scenes consultations, and in an effort to avoid violence, the convention leadership agreed to have the booth removed."16 These tactics continued in the same manner at the APA's 1972 national meeting. It was against this backdrop that the association's trustees finally made its controversial 1973 decision. When a referendum on this was sent out to all 25,000 APA members, only a quarter of them returned their ballots. The final tally was 58 percent favoring the removal of homosexuality from their list of disorders. Four years later, Dr. Charles Socarides — who was at the meetings and was an expert in the area of homosexuality, having treated homosexuals for more than twenty years — described the political atmosphere leading up to the 1973 vote. He writes that during this time, "militant homosexual groups continued to attack any psychiatrist or psychoanalyst who dared to present his findings as to the psychopathology [i.e., the study of mental disorders from all aspects] of homosexuality before national or local meetings of psychiatrists or in public forums."17 Elsewhere Socarides stated that the decision of the APA trustees was "the medical hoax of the century."18 Was this the end of the debate? Did the vast majority of "competent" psychiatrists agree with the APA's decision? In 1977 ten thousand members of the APA were polled at random, asking them their opinion on this. In an article entitled "Sick Again?" Time magazine summarized the results of the poll: "Of those answering, 69% said they believed 'homosexuality is usually a pathological adaptation, as opposed to a normal variation,' 18% disagreed and 13% were uncertain. Similarly, sizable majorities said that homosexuals are generally less happy than heterosexuals (73%) and less capable of mature, loving relationships (60%). A total of 70% said that homosexuals' problems have more to do with their own inner conflicts than with stigmatization by society at large."19 But what about today? Has this issue been resolved in current medical opinion and research? Concerning this, Dr. Stanton L. Jones, professor of psychology at Wheaton College, states that there is a "mixed scorecard" among professionals on this. He writes: "I would not regard homosexuality to be a psychopathology in the same sense as schizophrenia or phobic disorders. But neither can it be viewed as a normal 'lifestyle variation' on a par with being introverted versus extroverted."20 One may debate whether or not homosexuality is a pathological disorder, but it is clear that the APA's 1973 decision cannot be cited as medical consensus that homosexuality is a "normal" condition.
You can view this entire article in its entirety by clicking the title of the post above. Now, as far as "rational" are you saying that I have been anything but rational in these posts? Am I "irrational" simply because I disagree? Have I been over the top on anything? I haven't been demeaning to you, or called you names, or condemned you. If anything, I think we've both been quite rational in our discussion, which I have appreciated up to this point.....

Works Cited 15 For those interested in the history leading up to the APA's 1973 removal of homosexuality from their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatric Disorders, see Ronald Bayer, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis (New York: Basic Books, 1981), 101-54; William Dannemeyer, Shadow in the Land (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 24-39. 16 Bayer, 105-6. 17 Charles W. Socarides, Beyond Sexual Freedom (New York: Quadrangle Books, 1977), 87. Prior to the 1973 vote Dr. Socarides led the APA's task force studying homosexuality, which issued a report unanimously declaring homosexuality to be a disorder of psychosexual development. This report, considered to be too politically inflammatory, was shelved, only later being published as a "study group" report in 1974. 18 Charles W. Socarides in Robert Kronemeyer, Overcoming Homosexuality (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1980), 5. 19 "Sick Again? Psychiatrists Vote on Gays," Time, 20 February 1978, 102. 20 Stanton L. Jones, "Homosexuality According to Science," in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990), 107.

6 Comments:

Blogger Ryan Dunn said...

Mike, the APA has had 30 years to change its mind. Obviously, it hasn't, no matter what the circumstances of the 1973 vote were. I never stated that the decision was unanimous, only that the stigma was removed by an organization that represents the vast majority of psychiatric professionals.

Further, I can't believe that the statistics you cite from a story that is 25(!) years old haven't changed along with a more accepting society. Perhaps the reason why many homosexuals weren't happy in 1979 was that the rest of society were trained to hate them?

The American College of Pediatricians is a right-wing coalition of doctors that cites such "sources" as Focus on the Family and Michael Medved, a conservative radio host. They were founded only in 2002, and is described as a "new, pro-life group for American Pediatricians".
http://www.santificarnos.com/indefenseofthefetus.html
Hardly the unbiased source that you claim it to be.

I refuse to cite any documentation in a rational debate from an obviously partisan organization, no matter their occupation. And while the Kinsey studies are terribly flawed, we cannot completely disregard the amount of information it provides, and the hundreds of thousands of participants from all walks of life who participated in the study.

The American Medical Association, the largest and most well-respected and widely respected group of physicians in this country, founded in 1847 and representing 90,000 physicians, has this to say:

Our AMA: (1) believes that the physician's nonjudgmental recognition of sexual orientation and behavior enhances the ability to render optimal patient care in health as well as in illness.
...
and (3) opposes, the use of "reparative" or "conversion" therapy that is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that the patient should change his/her homosexual orientation.

http://www.ama-assn.org/apps/pf_new/pf_online?f_n=browse&doc=policyfiles/HnE/H-160.991.HTM

The AMA isn't correct because it's older and bigger, it's correct because it represents the findings of the majority of medical professionals in business today.

For the record, I don't believe I have "been demeaning to you, or called you names, or condemned you" either.

11:19 AM  
Blogger Mike said...

No, you haven't been demeaning to me. My intent behind that statment was not to imply that you had, merely that neither of us has been "irrational."

Of course the cited works are 25 years old, because that's when all of this took place. You have to at least admit that there was much controversy surrounding the removal of homosexuality from a list of disorders and that there continues to be disagreement today. I think there is a hint of irrationality in the fact that you simply dismiss a scientific finding based on who it comes from. Could I not do the same? The facts remain that there are many on both sides of the issue...that the "wide acceptance" of homosexuality was born out of a deeply flawed study formulated by a man (Kinsey) who had these tendencies to begin with (based on your rationale he would have to be dismissed as being credible because he already had a formulated opinion) used known pedophiles as his research group, and had no scientific control group against which to measure them. You cannot fault me for using "old" sources when these were at the heart of what was taking place. In one case you say older is better and in my case you are dismissing the research because it is old!

I know (as we have both known from the start) that we will have to agree to disagree on this issue. But I would like to think that we both have a better understanding of each other, and I appreciate the time you have taken to share your thoughts. And perhaps you won't just dismiss people like me as "Angry, irrational homophobes" when you encounter us (though I know there are many that become angry and irrational when engaging this topic). I hope and pray that you stay safe and healthy....and have appreciated the thougtfulness and demeanor in which you've handled yourself...I will certainly continue to pray for you.....not, as I've mentioned, that you will "become heterosexual," but that you will truly come to know the Christ that I know and love so well.

12:01 PM  
Blogger Ryan Dunn said...

I'm not the one to debate Kinsey's methods with anyone. But the fact remains that his is the most comprehensive study of human sexuality, and he used far more than just pedophiles and homosexuals in it.

Even if Kinsey's study was flawed, 30 years after the APA's decision was made, it hasn't been changed, even after such contentious debate. In denying Kinsey's study you must then deny any work done by the American College of Pediatricians, who as a self-professed "pro-life" organization would surely have their minds made up about abortion and other issues.

I was referring to the age of the article to suggest that times have changed since 1979, and that the self-hatred and maladjustment that was mentioned by the psychiatrists might very well be the result of societal factors. Society has changed with the mild acceptance of homosexuality, and with it comes a much more friendly and healthy environment for us...leading to less self-hatred.

I read the blogs of Christian men suffering from what they call "same-sex attraction" and their pain associated with trying to deny it. It frightens me that these men could go through so much unneeded mental anguish for no real reason. I find nothing redeeming in a philosophy where self-hatred and repression of natural feelings is encouraged.

Mike, I didn't need this discussion to prove to you or anyone else that I am as normal as you or anyone else is. I live a "normal" life every day. Thanks for the prayers, and if I ever need Christ's "help" I know where to find it.

12:21 PM  
Blogger Mike said...

You are certainly welcome back anytime!

1:37 PM  
Blogger Ryan Dunn said...

Betty Jo, I'm not questioning the achievements of Dr. Dobson, just his motivations and agenda. Perhaps his own obsession with cartoon characters should be examined by members of his own supposed profession.

I simply state that the large, well-respected national associations of psychiatrists, psychologists and physicians find that homosexuality is not to be condemned. Please, find any source that considers the ACP more medically reliable and factual than the American Medical Association.

I question the 25-year-old statistics because that was a study taken 25 years ago. Perhaps you took a study of interracial marriage 50 years ago. I would think you would have found a similar difference in the numbers of psychiatrists condemning it then and now. Not 100 years ago, African Americans were judged by psychiatrists and others to be mentally inferior to others. The world changes and our understanding of that world changes, believe it or not.

I was noting that studies like that one taken in 1977 were causes, not effects of the society that was here 25 years ago.

I used the terms "pro-life" and "right-wing" from that group based upon its stated agenda. I'd be happy to change those definitions to "conservative" if you'd like. My point remains the same...statistics are fungible and data can be skewed by organizations with stated agendas such as ACP.

And please, if you're offended by the use of the word "right-wing", consider what I think of the word "amoral".

3:00 PM  
Blogger Mike said...

Again I don't understand, your "offense" at being called amoral. It is not IMMORAL, it is a lifestyle and line of thought that is absent of morality, which your (post-modern) philosophy embraces. Why are you concerned with "morals" or a moral "standard" since, in your argument, morals "evolve?" Secondly....I doubt very seriously Betty Jo is offended by the term "right-wing." I know I'm not.

I would add that those Christian men you cite as struggling with their homosexuality.... that's a good thing. As a Christian, any sin will "bother" you, so, as I've metioned before, a Christian homosexual will be bothered by these feelings and impulses much in the same way any other habitual sin is dealt with in the heart of the Christian. Christian is more than a label and a sphere of influence among other like-minded believers, it is "Christ in you, the hope of glory.."(Colossians 1:27) and His Spirit does deal with our hearts concerning sin when we truly know Him.

In either case, I thank you again for your time and thoughts and will continue to pray for Ryan Dunn.

7:35 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home