Today, Dr. Robert Spitzer repudiated his much-criticized 2001 study that claimed some “highly motivated” homosexuals could go from gay to straight.
Now it is up to anti-gay and so-called “ex-gay” organizations to show some dignity and class by expeditiously removing all citations of Dr. Robert Spitzer’s study from their web pages. This is nothing short of a major integrity test to show which groups are honest and decent enough to do the right thing.
PFOX should be the first to act. This group has relentlessly and shamelessly flogged Spitzer’s study, even when he first began to inch away from the findings and upbraid right wing groups for distorting and exaggerating his findings. Here is a video TWO shot of Spitzer in 2007 urging such groups to stop twisting his work.
Here are a few more examples of how Spitzer’s work is being used to harm LGBT people. We hope these groups will act quickly. The world is watching:
Stanton L. Jones and mark A. Yarhouse (Pg. 89)
“Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation”
“Perhaps the highly publicized recent study in which participants reported successful change of sexual orientation was authored by research psychiatrist Robert L. Spitzer. Spitzer could be construed to be the most qualified person in the world to conduct this sort of research; in addition to a distinguished research career, he was the lead scientist responsible for revision of the DSM of the APA.”
In a move that serves as a significant blow to “ex-gay” programs and anti-gay organizations, Dr. Robert Spitzer repudiated his much-criticized 2001 study that claimed some “highly motivated” homosexuals could go from gay to straight. His retraction occurred in an American Prospect magazine article that hit newsstands today. Spitzer’s rejection of his own research, which was originally published in the prestigious Archives of Sexual Behavior, is a devastating blow to “ex-gay” organizations because it decisively eliminates their most potent claim that homosexuality can be reversed through therapy and prayer.
Dr. Spitzer’s repudiation of his 2001 study is an earthquake that severely undermines the validity of ‘ex-gay’ programs. Spitzer just kicked out the final leg from the stool on which the proponents of ‘ex-gay’ therapy based their already shaky claims of success.
Spitzer’s 2001 study was a surprise and created a media firestorm because he had previously led the charge in 1972-73 to remove homosexuality from the list of mental disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of the American Psychiatric Association. At the time, this was a shocking story that captured the nation’s attention. Dr. Spitzer was the last person in America one would have expected to produce a study bolstering the claims of ‘ex-gay’ activists.
According to today’s American Prospect article:
“In retrospect, I have to admit I think the critiques [of my study] are largely correct,” Dr. Spitzer told the American Prospect in an article by Gabriel Arana titled, My So Called Ex-Gay Life. “The findings can be considered evidence for what those who have undergone ex-gay therapy say about it, but nothing more.”
He said he spoke with the editor of the Archives of Sexual Behavior about writing a retraction, but the editor declined. (Repeated attempts to contact the journal went unanswered.)
Spitzer said that he was proud of having been instrumental in removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. Now 80 and retired, he was afraid that the 2001 study would tarnish his legacy and perhaps hurt others. He said that failed attempts to rid oneself of homosexual attractions “can be quite harmful.” He has, though, no doubts about the 1973 fight over the classification of homosexuality.
“Had there been no Bob Spitzer, homosexuality would still have eventually been removed from the list of psychiatric disorders,” he said. “But it wouldn’t have happened in 1973.”
Spitzer was growing tired and asked how many more questions I had. Nothing, I responded, unless you have something to add. He did. Would I print a retraction of his 2001 study, “So I don’t have to worry about it anymore”?
Dr. Spitzer’s research was particularly harmful because he was the only non-socially conservative scientist to produce a study claiming some people could “pray away the gay.”
“This man is an atheist, so he’s not Bible thumping and doesn’t have an ax to grind,” said Greg Quinlan, President of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX), in an October 7, 2011 interview on NewsPlus with Mark Segraves. “He just decided, let’s talk about this ex-gay thing and see if it’s true. And he has concluded it can be true for people who are highly motivated to change.” PFOX currently has a video of Dr. Spitzer on the front page of its website.
Virtually every anti-gay organization in the country quotes Dr. Spitzer’s work. It will be an integrity test to see which groups remove citations of his work in the coming week. Those who continue to use his study to back their agenda are deliberately misleading people and we intend to hold them accountable.
This is not the first major “ex-gay” study to be debunked. For decades, anti-gay organizations gleefully pointed to Homosexuality in Perspective, a 1979 book written by Dr. William H. Masters and Virginia E. Johnson, that claimed to cure gayness. Indeed, the husband-and-wife sex research team went on Meet the Press on April 22, 1979 to discuss their findings. In his groundbreaking 2009 book, Masters of Sex, author Thomas Maier discovered that the results of Masters & Johnson’s study were entirely fabricated. Virginia Johnson acknowledged that the results were fake and she had actually argued in 1978 that the book should never have seen the light of day – but it was already too late in the publishing process to undo the damage.
Fortunately, the Archives of Sexual Behavior can honor Dr. Spitzer’s wishes and retract his study. They have an ethical and moral obligation to act as quickly as possible to right this terrible wrong that has fueled anti-gay campaigns for more than a decade. Truth Wins Out praised Dr. Spitzer, saying that his admission has solidified his legacy as a respected doctor and significant historical figure.
“It is never easy to admit wrongdoing and Dr. Robert Spitzer deserves much credit for reversing course,” said TWO’s Besen. “He acted in a noble and honorable manner which is consistent with the vast majority of his career.
Not one mainstream organization of medical and mental health professionals has found any evidence to support so-called “ex-gay” therapy; in fact, the evidence they have found suggests that it can actually be harmful to patients.
In May 2007, Invisible Children’s CEO Ben Keesey, and IC’s Development Director Chris Sarette, submitted an application, which identified Invisible Children as a “ministry”, asking for support from the Barnabas Group — a politically far right-wing Christian nonprofit which helps cutting edge stealth ministry evangelizing efforts that target Jews and Muslims, youth, Hollywood, and even apartment dwellers around the globe.
The Barnabas Group, which takes on only a small number of elite applicants per year from the Christian ministries that seek its support, accepted Invisible Children’s application. The Group assists such evangelizing efforts by networking them with Christian business leaders and entrepreneurs, and with Christian foundations.
In 2006, a post on the Invisible Children website declared that IC “is not a religious organization, meaning we are not affiliated with a certain church or ministry” and according to Josh Kron of The Atlantic, on March 18th of this year a statement on Invisible Children’s website read, “Invisible Children is not affiliated with any religious organization.”
Judging by its stable of ministries – which, along with Invisible Children, also includes the Family Research Council, identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group, the Barnabas Group is dedicated to evangelizing, fighting LGBT rights, and advancing Christian supremacy worldwide.
Leading up to this point, there has been considerable evidence of Invisible Children’s stealth ministry nature: a 2005 declaration from IC co-founder Jason Russell that Invisible Children functions as a “Trojan Horse” and 2011 statements made by Russell at evangelical Christian Liberty University; Invisible Children’s funding from major right-wing evangelical financing entities; and the organization’s extensive social and institutional ties to the Washington D.C. based global evangelical network known as The Fellowship (also known as “The Family”.)
In sum, that evidence is compelling. But Invisible Children’s membership in the Barnabas Group is unambiguous. The Barnabas Group only accepts applications from Christian ministry efforts.
The Barnabas Group is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, and its 2009 990 tax form filed with the IRS identifies the nonprofit venture as “a collaboration of church and marketplace leaders working together to change the world and build God’s kingdom”.
In a Barnabas Group promotional video uploaded to Youtube on November 30, 2010, Barnabas Group co-founder Bob Shank states that “The Barnabas Group is an environment in which ministries can come in looking for collaborative leaders who are going to partner with them, and the synergy that comes from those partnerships makes the contribution that they make go off the charts in terms of value and leverage.”
As a networking opportunity, Barnabas serves to connect ministries in its stable with some of the biggest foundations that back the politicized evangelical right on Earth – such as the National Christian Foundation, which gives on a financial scale roughly comparable to that of the Ford Foundation and has bankrolled both Invisible Children and The Fellowship – credited with having helped inspire and provide “technical assistance” for Uganda’s Anti Homosexuality Bill.
Many of the ministries supported by the Barnabas Group oppose or even actively fight LGBT rights, including Advocates For Faith & Freedom – a legal effort that has battled court challenges to California’s Proposition 8. Some Barnabas Group ministries do humanitarian work, such as running orphanages and distributing hundreds of thousands of low-cost wheelchairs in the developing world.
But most of the Barnabas ministries evangelize, in a dizzying array of niche efforts that target Muslims, Jews, the children of United States military personnel, even apartment building dwellers.
The group encourages bold thinking. In a September 2003 Barnabas Group newsletter, co-founder Bob Shank was described as having taught, shortly after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, a workshop in which Shank mused, “Learn? From terrorists? They were certainly evil but they were also effective… What were some of the transferable principles used by Al Qaeda that we should ponder?” The newsletter went on to list Shank’s noted principles, including “Decentralized command structure”, “Autonomous cells”, and “Innovative strategies”.
Some of those “innovative strategies” seem to involve stealth, judging by Invisible Children or by Lamplighter Ministries, whose head Mark Hanby, appears in a presentation given to Barnabas Group members and posted March 19, 2011 on Youtube.
In the video, Hanby advertises his ministry as having been launched off a serendipitous meeting at Focus On The Family; “My wife and I were invited to be part of a strategic planning meeting at Focus On The Family… Someone at Focus looked at me and said, “Have you ever considered adapting your books into radio drama?” ”
Hanby then describes a series of near-miraculous, last minute financial rescues that have allowed his Lamplighter Ministries theater to continue and expand. After one such cash infusion, according to Hanby,
“I called the producers, I said, “We’re on our way to Hollywood. Get the writers writing! The door is now open to infiltrate Hollywood!” With the help of Tim Conway and John Rhys Davies of Lord of the Rings, we produced an epic drama called “Sir Malcom and the Missing Prince” “
I am a fan of the late Mike Wallace and am very sad that he has passed away. I have always enjoyed his reports and consider him a first-rate journalist. However, there was one noticeable career snafu that caused an enormous amount of damage to the LGBT community. I wrote about it in my book, “Anything But Straight: Unmasking the Scandals and Lies Behind the Ex-Gay Myth”:
In 1967, the news magazine CBS Reports aired an hour-long segment, “The Homosexuals,” that gave America its first glimpse of gay and lesbian Americans. Thanks to the efforts of anti-gay psychiatrists, gays were vilified in front of 40 million people, solidifying despicable stereotypes that would last for more than a generation.
The landmark broadcast included an interview with a closeted homosexual whose face was concealed by dark shadows cast by a large office plant. “I know that I’m sick,” he told reporter Mike Wallace. “I’m not just sick sexually. I’m sick in a lot of ways, immature, childlike, and sex is a symptom, like a toothache is a symptom of who knows what.”
This memorable image of disease, timidity, and shame was juxtaposed with with the confident, self-assured doctors Irving Bieber and Charles Socarides, (These are the quacks who founded NARTH) who offered lurid illustrations of gay life. In one segment, Socarides appeared to be answering unprompted questions during a symposium at the Albert Einstein School of Medicine, where he taught. “I was wondering if you think there are any ‘happy homosexuals’ for whom homosexuality would be in a way their best adjustment to life,” a female student said. “Socarides replied, “The fact that somebody’s homosexual — a true obligatory homosexual — automatically rules out the possibility that he will remain happy for long, in my opinion.” Socarides went on to say that the notion of a happy gay or lesbian person is a “mythology.”
In the next segment, Bieber followed with his own devastating display of misinformation. “I do not believe it is possible to produce a homosexual if the father is a warm, good, supportive, constructive father to his son.”
The most damaging part of the broadcast came when the respected Mike Wallace offered his his calumnious assault on what he thought, at the time, was an objective view of gay life:
“The average homosexual, if there be such, is promiscuous. He is not interested in nor capable of a lasting relationship like that of heterosexual marriage. His sex life — his love life — consists of chance encounters at the clubs and bars he inhabits, and even on the streets of the city. The pickup –the one night stand — these are the characteristics of the homosexual relationship. And the homosexual prostitute has become a fixture on downtown streets at night.”
Nearly one out of every five Americans witnessed this incomprehensible catastrophe. With the ubiquity of this show, it is no exaggeration to say that this broadcast can easily be viewed as the single most destructive hour of anti-gay propaganda in our nation’s history.
To get a handle of the enormity of this PR nightmare, one only has to consider the time period in which this took place. There were no cable stations, satellite dishes, Internet websites, or countless other special interest magazines in which dissenting views could be aired. There were no obnoxious television shows where talking heads endlessly bloviated on divisive issues. There were simply newspapers–most of which would not publish gay-related stories unless they were about a homosexual getting arrested for public sex–or the omnipresent networks, where the point of view presented was often considered the gospel. The lack of venues to disseminate messages was compounded by the general absence of openly gay people in society. With few avenues to counter the destructive message of The Homosexuals, the show not only had a devastating impact on public opinion but also was a psychological nuclear bomb dropped on the psyches of gay and lesbian Americans, who prior to this show, had never been represented as a group on national television.
Imagine being a gay person from a small town who had never met another homosexual. This show sent the message that one had either to live miserably in the closet or to accept an underground gay life of crushing loneliness and breathtaking instability. We will never know how many lives were ruined as a result of this broadcast, but there can be no doubt that multitudes of people were driven to despair. Worse yet, they went to doctors such as Bieber and Socarides to help them overcome the despondency that these very doctors worked to create.
Mike Wallace has since come to regret his participation in this broadcast, blaming the anti-gay therapists for spreading misinformation about gay people. Wallace repented in an interview many years later:
“Well, I said it. That is — God help us — what our understanding of the homosexual lifestyle was a mere twenty-five years ago because nobody was out of the closet and because that’s what we heard from doctors–that’s what Socarides told us, it was a matter of shame.”
May Mike Wallace rest in peace. It is good that he acknowledged this error. Unfortunately, the quacks that pushed these lies and deceived Wallace and America are still out there profiting from the pain they deliberately inflict.
On another note — my book, Anything But Straight, will be available online as an E-Book in the very near future. If you have not read it yet, I urge you to do so.
Without fail, when one finds a homophobic holy man, there is a good chance he is a con artist using anti-gay sentiment to increase power and fortune. Never has this been more true then in Russia, where Patriarch Kirill I was busted for not exactly living like Jesus. According to the New York Times:
Editors doctored a photograph on the church’s Web site of the leader, Patriarch Kirill I, extending a black sleeve where there once appeared to be a Breguet timepiece worth at least $30,000. The church might have gotten away with the ruse if it had not failed to also erase the watch’s reflection, which appeared in the photo on the highly glossed table where the patriarch was seated.
The church apologized for the deception on Thursday and restored the original photo to the site, but not before Patriarch Kirill weighed in, insisting in an interview with a Russian journalist that he had never worn the watch, and that any photos showing him wearing it must have been doctored to put the watch on his wrist.
The controversy, which erupted Wednesday when attentive Russian bloggers discovered the airbrushing, further stoked anger over the church’s often lavish displays of wealth and power.
If this wasn’t bad enough, the excuse for the cover-up was a disgrace:
The church, after removing the doctored photo, blamed photo editors in its press service for the “technical mistake.”
“A gross violation of our internal ethics has occurred, and it will be thoroughly investigated,” the church said in a statement. “The guilty will be severely punished.”
Yeah, whatever.
So, basically this creep is working to ban homosexuality in St. Petersburg in the name of morality, while stealing the peoples’ money to enrich himself and wear king-like jewels. Then he and the church blatantly lie about the watch and botched cover-up.
Have these disgusting hypocrites no shame?
Will someone arrest this thief and put him in jail?
Ross Douthat continues to run interference for American fundamentalists, as demonstrated in today’s New York Times column, “Divided by God: A Nation of Heretics.”
Watch as he foolishly portrays Rick Santorum as a victim of those who oppose his radical extremism.
His traditionalist zeal has made him a bigger target even than Romney or Obama for fascination, suspicion and hysteria. In a nation as religiously diverse as ours, a staunchly orthodox Christianity can seem like the weirdest heresy of all.
Um, Ross, Santorum’s views are weird and they are decidedly Unchristian. Those raising alarms about this extremist candidate are not suspicious and they are not hysterical, as you flippantly suggest. People have read his positions, listened to his speeches, examined his legislative record, observed his bizarre life (fetus in a jar), and come to the undeniable conclusion that he is a sex obsessed creep with backward views. This is a very rational observation based on facts, and it is disingenuous for you, Ross, to pretend otherwise.
Another neat trick from conservatives like Douthat is to spin polls showing liberal unease with Romney’s Mormonism. Douthat is essentially pointing the finger at liberals and saying, “look, you are as intolerant as conservatives!” According to the oft-wrong columnist:
Likewise, while Santorum no longer has to worry (as John F. Kennedy did) about assuaging evangelical fears about Vatican plots and Catholic domination, his candidacy has summoned up an equally perfervid paranoia from secular liberals, who hear intimations of theocracy in his every speech and utterance. (And not only from secularists: The liberal Catholic writer Garry Wills recently resurrected the old slur “papist” — once beloved of anti-Catholic Protestants — to dismiss Santorum as a slavish servant of the Vatican.)
Well, Ross, maybe Santorum is a papist? Can you show us any sliver of disagreement he has with the Pope on social issues? Is it not telling that he is a member of the Knights of Malta and sent one of his children to an Opus Dei school? Is it not a tad strange that Santorum has led the “War on Women” and brought birth control back into the realm of pubic debate? Quite frankly, if Santorum is not an outright Papist, he isn’t more than a few inches away. Douthat continues:
Nor has Mitt Romney’s slow progress to the Republican nomination altered the fact that his fast-growing church is viewed by many with deep distrust. The same polls showing that many religious conservatives don’t want to vote for a Mormon also show that many independents and Democrats feel the same way, and explicit anti-Mormon sentiment percolates among evangelical preachers and liberal columnists alike.
While polls may be similar, they do not have the same meaning. Liberals are opposed to Romney’s brand of religion because they have clearly led to conservative policy positions (at least in the latest etch-a-sketch version of the oleaginous candidate). If there were a liberal Mormon who was not so closely aligned with LDS doctrine, liberals would be supportive. However, religious conservatives who oppose Romney based on his religion do so because they don’t believe he is a Christian. So, liberal and conservative opposition to Romney’s religion are entirely different. One group is rational and rejects Romney’s political positions. The other rejects Romney’s beliefs based on sectarianism and superstition. Of course, Douthat wouldn’t understand this and thinks liberals reject Romney for the same reasons as conservatives.
Most disturbing of all is Douthat’s continued dismissal of warnings about fundamentalist attempts to instill theocracy in America and throughout the world.
In this atmosphere, religious differences are more likely to inspire baroque conspiracy theories, whether it’s the far-right panic over an Islamified United States or the left-wing paranoia about a looming evangelical-led theocracy. And faith itself is more likely to serve partisan purposes — whether it’s putting the messianic sheen on Obama’s “hope and change” campaign or supplying the storm clouds in Glenn Beck’s apocalyptic monologues
Douthat does a neat little trick here. He draws a false equivalency between delusional right wing fears of an Islamic takeover and legitimate unease with the robust campaign of social conservatives to refashion America in their narrow, intolerant interests. One group, the Christian fundies, has significant political power, while American Muslims remain a small minority. Either Douthat is too naive to be writing for the Times, or he is a toady for conservative religious organizations.
Perhaps, it is time to for Truth Wins Out and others to take a closer look at Douthat to determine whether he is an unqualified pill or simply a shill for powerful social conservative interests. Something just doesn’t add up with his incoherent and deliberately misleading writing and attempts to serve as an apologist for Dominionist Christians.
Contact: Wayne Besen, Executive Director
Phone: 917-691-5118
E-mail: wbesen@truthwinsout.org
Audio Puts Motives and Goals of Invisible Children into Question, Says TWO
Burlington, VT – Today, Invisible Children released its much-anticipated sequel to its KONY 2012 video. But exclusive audio obtained by Truth Wins Out (TWO) reveals that Invisible Children may have a hidden agenda that is more ideological than idealistic.
In audio TWO discovered from a 2005 Christian conference in San Antonio, Invisible Children’s co-founder Jason Russell called his organization a “Trojan Horse” designed to infiltrate secular institutions and surreptitiously promote his group’s version of Christian fundamentalism. The audiotape reveals that that his organization is particularly focused on targeting youth in public schools. According to Russell’s remarks (0:44):
“Coming in January we are trying to hit as many high schools, churches, and colleges as possible with this movie. We are able to be the Trojan Horse in a sense, going into a secular realm and saying, guess what life is about orphans, and it’s about the widow. It’s about the oppressed. That’s God’s heart. And to sit in a public high school and tell them about that has been life-changing. Because they get so excited. And it’s not driven by guilt, it’s driven by an adventure and the adventure is God’s.”
“This vividly reveals Invisible Children’s invisible agenda,” said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen. “This group is not simply about exposing LRA leader Joseph Kony, but engaging in stealth evangelism. Invisible Children sold themselves as romantic idealists, but the evidence suggests that they are more like fundamentalist ideologues.”
Invisible Children first raised alarms after researcher Bruce Wilson showed the group was funded by the National Christian Foundation, a fundamentalist outfit that finances extremist right wing organizations and anti-gay groups. Wilson also discovered that Invisible Children was intimately linked to The Family, the secretive and powerful American fundamentalist group widely considered responsible for Uganda’s draconian “Kill the Gays” bill.
Forbes reported yesterday that conservative strongholds such as Oklahoma City and Alabama were surprisingly the driving force behind making the KONY2012 video go viral.
Truth Wins Out is a nonprofit organization that fights anti-LGBT extremism. TWO specializes in turning information into action by organizing, advocating and fighting for LGBT equality.
Tomorrow — Friday, April 6 — Truth Wins Out will be joiningVermont Freedom to Marry, RU12? Community Center, Outright Vermont, Vermont CARES, and members of the state’s diverse lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and ally (LGBTQA) communities in the 17th annual Leadership Day at the Vermont Statehouse in Montpelier. We are gathering to meet lawmakers, network, and discuss legislative priorities.
Even in a state as pro-equality as Vermont, it’s critically important for LGBTQA people to be visible, vocal, and positively engaged in the political process. After all, none of the civil rights laws and protections– trans-inclusive nondiscrimination laws, marriage equality, etc. — would have happened without organized and sustained leadership from Vermont’s LGBTQA community. And since there’s still more work to be done on issues like bullying and transgender health care, it’s vitally important for us to show up and be seen and heard! If you’re an LGBTQA Vermonter, we hope you’ll consider joining us in Montpelier tomorrow. If you’re unable to attend the entire event, come for as long as you can. Tomorrow’s schedule is below:
7:45AM – 9:15AM: Breakfast in the Statehouse cafeteria
8:45AM: Framing the day – conversations with Vermont’s LGBTQA organizations
9:15AM: Introduction on the House floor. Morning devotional by Rev. Emily Heath of the West Dover Congregational Church
9:45AM – 11:00AM: Discussion and Mingling with LGBTQA Statehouse regulars in Room 11. Meet and greet fellow Leadership Day participants; Q&A with LGBTQA legislators, Statehouse workers, and Statehouse regulars
11:00AM: Meet with Governor Peter Shumlin in the Ceremonial Office
11:30AM-12:45PM: Meet and greet with legislators in the cafeteria
1:00PM: A light luncheon for participants hosted by Vermont CARES in their new Montpelier offices at 58 East State Street
Vermont LGBTQ leaders, including TWO Director of Communications & Development John Becker and Executive Director Wayne Besen, will be available for comment during the mid-morning meet and greet in Room 11 on the first floor of the Statehouse.
There is also another important event happening in Montpelier tomorrow: an opportunity to visit the Vermont Supreme Court, learn about the court process, and talk with Justice Beth Robinson, the first openly LGBT judge on the Vermont Supreme Court. The event includes a tour of the court and a mock trial conducted by youth but open to the public. A question and answer session with Justice Robinson will follow. Participants will gather in the Supreme Court lobby, on the second floor of the Supreme Court building, at 12:45 and the mock trial will begin at 1:00. The Supreme Court is located in the gray building on the green next to and slightly in front of the Statehouse.
