Hatewatch Tweets
Hatewatch is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Report, an investigative magazine published by the Alabama-based civil rights group Southern Poverty Law Center.
Psychiatrist Repudiates Infamous ‘Ex-Gay’ Study
Retired psychiatrist and Columbia University professor Robert Spitzer has repudiated his own much-criticized 2001 study that has been used for years by anti-gay activists to buttress their claims that gay men and lesbians can be “cured” of their homosexuality through therapy.
In the controversial study, Spitzer claimed that some “highly motivated” LGBT people could become straight. His repudiation came in an article about the fringe “ex-gay” movement in the American Prospect. In an interview, Spitzer asked the author, Gabriel Arana, to print a retraction of the 2001 study so that he “wouldn’t have to worry about it anymore.”
Since its publication, the study has been one of the major weapons wielded by anti-gay groups, which frequently cite it as “proof” that LGBT people choose to be gay and can thus change their sexual orientation. At the heart of this argument is the belief that homosexuality is an unnatural deviation from normal sexual development, a form of mental disorder.
The ex-gay movement, according to Arana, “has relied on the Spitzer study as the single piece of objective evidence that therapy can work.”
Ironically, Spitzer, who is now 80, was one of the psychiatrists who pushed the American Psychiatric Association to stop classifying homosexuality as a mental disorder, a step the organization took in 1973. His 2001 study came as a shock and disappointment to many, and it received a storm of criticism over its suspect methodology and design.
Participants had been referred to Spitzer by ex-gay therapy practitioner groups like the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and Exodus International. Their claims were self-reported, and Spitzer did not compare participants to a control group. Yesterday, Spitzer told Warren Throckmorton, a psychology professor at Grove City College, that he “has regret for what he now considers to be errant interpretations” of study participants’ reports. He also said that he had “second thoughts” about the study and now believes that “his conclusions don’t hold water.”
“I actually had great difficulty finding participants,” Spitzer told Arana in the American Prospect. “In all the years of doing ex-gay therapy, you’d think [Joseph] Nicolosi would have been able to provide more success stories. He only sent me nine patients.” (Nicolosi is a clinical psychologist who practiced ex-gay therapy and helped found NARTH.)
Ex-gay therapy, also known as “reparative” or “conversion” therapy, has been widely discredited by the scientific community. Most strikingly, in 2006, the American Psychological Association (APA) stated: “There is simply no sufficiently scientifically sound evidence that sexual orientation can be changed.” The APA added, “Our further concern is that the positions espoused by NARTH and Focus on the Family create an environment in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish.”
Since his study’s publication, Spitzer has tried to make it clear that he didn’t want it used to justify discrimination against the LGBT community, and he emphasized that he did not think that most LGBT people could become heterosexual. Nevertheless, the study became a major part of the anti-gay movement’s arsenal, with claims that here, at last, was “proof” that “all” gay people could become straight through prayer or therapy. Spitzer attempted to point out over the years that such change was either highly unlikely or that anti-gay organizations had misused his research.
It’s not the first time anti-gay groups have used suspect studies or misused legitimate ones to further anti-LGBT sentiment.
In January, Seton Hall professor Theodora Sirota issued a statement taking NARTH’s Rick Fitzgibbons to task for using one of her studies to oppose adoption by same-sex couples. Sirota said that no conclusions about LGBT parents or the “fitness” of LGBT parents can be drawn from her findings. Fitzgibbons has yet to correct his own article or remove the Sirota citation from it
Several other legitimate researchers have publicly asked anti-gay organizations stop distorting their research. Now, with Spitzer’s on-the-record retraction, it remains to be seen whether they will stop using his 2001 study to justify their claims.
Don’t hold your breath.
on April 11th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
Probably, a great many more people are bisexual than we think, and if such a person goes from one phase to another, it looks like “coming out” or “conversion”.
on April 11th, 2012 at 5:23 pm
Cue the anti-gay crowd to start screaming about Spitzer retracting his claims due to his bowing to the Gay Agenda.
However, this is wonderful news, and it saddens me that Spitzer’s legitimate research has been perverted by those exact organizations he was hoping to avoid.
And I completely agree with both of his claims: that it is indeed possible for persons to ‘convert’ their sexualities through willpower, but it is a sample so small as to be statistically insignificant. An outlier among outliers, if you will.
on April 11th, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Um, the paper hasn’t been retracted. That has to be done by the journal and only if there are significant grounds. I hate to be pedantic, but as a scientist I insist that retraction has a specific meaning.
The fact that yahoos misrepresent the work is not grounds for retraction.
I haven’t read the paper, but I have read about it. There seems to be nothing wrong with the report itself. It is a perfectly reasonable and mild conclusion that _some_ people _might_ be able to change their sexual orientation.
on April 12th, 2012 at 6:56 am
Reynardine,
Certainly one of the many, many methodological flaws in Spitzer’s study was that he rejected the possibility of bisexual identity. Don’t expect the anti-gay groups to stop relying on Spitzer though, since the protests of an academic that their work is being misrepresented has never stopped them before.
And of course, the journal that published Spitzer’s article has so far refused Spitzer’s request to let him write a retraction for them to publish. Given that the Archives of Sexual Behavior published his 2001 article in the first place despite its flaws, and that the editor of said journal specializes in treating “gender variant children”, it’s pretty safe to assume the ideological beliefs that made them accept his flawed study in the first place are also responsible for their hesitancy in retracting it.
It’ll be interesting to see if that changes now that he’s publicly retracted his support for the study elsewhere.
on April 12th, 2012 at 7:38 am
¿Gender variant children? You talking about one of those creeps who bully “tomboys” and “sissies” until they behave the way they’re “supposed” to? That’s child abuse with a doctorate!
on April 12th, 2012 at 8:39 am
I’d point out that I was one of those kids who didn’t select either trucks or dollies- only endless farmsets. Doubtless those types would have called me a hermaphrotite for that. Now, in my golden years, I have a tiny orchard/grove and a rooster who looks like a featherduster.
on April 12th, 2012 at 10:40 am
Lest anyone think that this idiocy is restricted by the borders of the US:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl.....-ads-buses
on April 12th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
I remember back to my undergrad psychology courses, which where basically behaviorist in tone. You can cure anything and change any behovior through conditioning. For the most part this was true with everything except homosexuality, which had an extremely low “cure” rate. It may well be that those “cured” of homosexuality had chosen to be gay while not being actually homosexual at their core, as it were. I’m glad Dr. Spitzer has retracted this poorly done study.
on April 12th, 2012 at 1:21 pm
No one in their right mind would voluntarily choose to become a member of a persecuted minority group.
I have been a lesbian since the day I was born. Anyone who believes differently is either monumentally stupid or practicing unrestrained hatred.
on April 12th, 2012 at 1:50 pm
Dan Zabetakis, a person may change their sexual actions but that isn’t the same as changing their sexual orientation.
If a person is romantically/sexually attracted to members of their own sex, they are homosexual whether they ever act on it or not. If they’re attracted to both sexes but only have sex with the opposite sex, they are still bisexual.
If you think it’s just the sex act itself that determines what a person is, then would you say that a heterosexual who becomes divorced or widowed isn’t heterosexual any more if they remain celebate the rest of their lives?
on April 12th, 2012 at 2:56 pm
Thanks to our alert readers on retraction versus repudiation. You’re right. Spitzer asked for a retraction, but the journal that published his study in the first place has to do that and it hasn’t. We’ve changed the text to reflect that he repudiated the paper. It has not been formally retracted.
Mark Potok
Hatewatch Editor
on April 12th, 2012 at 6:22 pm
@Dan Zabetakis — Actually Dr. Spitzer has requested that the study be retracted, the journal in question refuses to even respond to him —
However — the grounds are clearly there, the study failed in every way it possibly could – starting with no control group and a biased sample and going from there.
I see no reason that the journal has not retracted, and I would hope that it would.
Reynolds Jones
(Empire State College, SUNY)
on April 13th, 2012 at 3:17 am
What took Dr. Spritzer so long to essentially condemn his own flawed & biased research?
on April 13th, 2012 at 7:43 am
It makes me believe this stinks of Nazi beliefs.
on April 13th, 2012 at 12:25 pm
“@Dan Zabetakis — Actually Dr. Spitzer has requested that the study be retracted, the journal in question refuses to even respond to him — ”
I can’t see where you have gotten that idea from. An article about this case has gone up on Retraction Watch which does not support your assertion:
http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com
Since I first posted on this I have looked up and read the paper. It is perfectly reasonable and sound. It is a survey of 200 people who claimed to have been helped by reparative therapy with a set of standard questions and an analysis of the result. The paper does not claim to have validated the therapy.
The only controversy about the paper is it’s misuse by homophobic conservatives.
Scientific validity is not determined by sociopolitical pressures.
on April 13th, 2012 at 1:19 pm
Hi Karen,
I’m a tired old lesbian too. :) Besides being physically and mentally tired, I’m tired of the ignorance and superior, self-righteousness of people who don’t know half as much as they think they do, especially about things that are none of their business to begin with, namely, personal feelings and relations between other consenting adults. Just the other day I had a woman who is now an ex-friend, tell me she believes that homosexuality is “wrong”. She’s in her 5th marriage. I wonder how she justifies that to fit in with her fundamentalist religion she’s gotten into.
on April 13th, 2012 at 5:35 pm
The rightness or wrongness of any sexual relationship is in how the partners treat each other. As for whether someone having desires other than the ones they’re expressing openly are “really” something else, I doubt that can be judged from the outside. We’re born, I’m convinced, with whole souls, but we only get one kind of body. Probably everyone starts out bisexual to a degree. Only a few Westerners believe in reincarnation, but to accept it as even a possibility increases the factors that may influence the expression of sexuality in a given life. It is best to be neither judgemental nor dogmatic.
on April 15th, 2012 at 11:29 am
Dan Zabetakis,
I have also read Spitzer’s paper, and was less impressed.
“It is perfectly reasonable and sound. It is a survey of 200 people”
200 people selected not by random chance but provided by the operators of various organizations peddling ex-gay therapy. 95% were Christian, and for 93%, religion was very important to them. 97% were white, and 76% of the men were married. The mean age was 42 for men and 44 for women. This doesn’t even come close to being a representative sample of gay men and lesbians.
“Who claimed to have been helped by reparative therapy”
In a single phone interview, with the researcher having violated basic ethical standards by providing no assurance through consent forms of the participants right to withdraw from the study or that their identities would be confidential. Their self reporting was taken on face value, despite the fact that these were people for whom admission that the therapy had failed would have had serious consequences for their family and church life.
“With a set of standard questions and an analysis of the result.”
Questions so standard that those who reported, on a scale of 100, with 0 being fully straight and 100 fully gay, that they were about a 60 were labelled homosexual and treated the same was as those reporting a 100. Bisexuality was discounted as an explanation for the change, though with the lack of control group, self reporting, and no effort to control for differing methods of therapy the idea that causality of the reported change could be determined at all is a laughable one.
Scientific validity is not determined by sociopolitical pressures, but it can be determined by a study’s methods. Anyone with even a basic understanding of social science research methods can tell you that Spitzer’s methods, not his hypothesis, completely destroy the credibility of his study and its conclusions.
on April 16th, 2012 at 11:16 am
Hi, writing again to this rerun topic, as it’s the same posters rerunning the same things be it Aron, etc. You know that I think the AMA is an evil group, that gay/lesbian activities are comparable to drug junkyism. Even if orientation doesn’t change, it’s best for people not to do gay/lesbian activities just as it’s best for people not to smoke crack. But some thoughts on Dr. RL Spitzer.
Dr. Spitzer in 2001 said that orientation change was POSSIBLE for highly motivated individuals but he did not say that orientation change was found for all. Dr. RL Spitzer has said that repair therapy must be an option for gays & lesbians who want to be straight. There has been distortion by gay/lesbian groups as predictable. Dr. E. Warren Throckmorton is an apologist for gay/lesbian activities. It wouldn’t surprise me if there was more to that interview which was left out.
Repair therapists have never said that a cure for homosexuality has been found. But if a cure for gay/lesbian activities is found, then the world is a better place without gay/lesbian activities & the world is a better place without sex change mutilations. But Dr. RL Spitzer in 2001 admitted his study was anecdotal, after a 2 year study. Anyhow, gay/lesbian activities are bad for health & comparable to crack smoking.
on April 16th, 2012 at 11:20 am
Ellen Myers, on another topic I posted to, you were an apologist for Harvey B. Milk the homosexual statutory rapist who by admission of gay rights groups & yourself, had homosexual sex with a 16 year old boy in 1964. That boy committed suicide in 1980 @ the age of 33. Homosexual statutory rape causes homosexuality. Harvey B. Milk also bragged about having sex in public parks. Gay/lesbian groups ideologies are evil in that they’re apologists for what Harvey B. Milk committing homosexual statutory rape, Matthew Shepard making false accusation against Cody bartender 2 months in Aug. 1998 before he was killed (Aron became hostile when I raised this fact), etc. Gay/lesbian groups are to be distrusted.
on April 16th, 2012 at 11:24 am
But even if Spitzer is now correct, it doesn’t logically follow that homosexuality is right. For an argument against engaging in homosexuality which doesn’t make use of ability to switch orientations, see: http://cognitiveparfait.wordpr.....sexuality/
on April 16th, 2012 at 12:42 pm
Reynardine,
are you bisexual? You believe in reincarnation?
on April 16th, 2012 at 1:12 pm
funinsnow the expert in all aspects of human sexuality is back to provide more comedy relief. I especially like the claim that “homosexual statutory rape” causes homosexuality. Of course, if that is true it obviously must follow that hetereosexual statutory rape causes hetereosexuality. And furthermore, it naturally follows under your theory that if someone doesn’t have sex with an adult as a teeanger they must grow up to be completely uninterested in sex. So anyone who is still a virgin at the age of 18 is apparently doomed to a life of absentence.
What a brilliant theory – you should get that published!! :)
on April 16th, 2012 at 2:09 pm
My, my, Funinsnow. Your reputation long preceded you, but now, having met you personally, I can only say that words do not describe you, at least not English ones.
on April 16th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
Everyone, if it helps, my experience with with FunnyStupid is to treat him the same way I would treat a disagreeable odor. Ignore it and hope it goes away.
on April 16th, 2012 at 7:15 pm
Jason, why are you curious? Am I on your bucket list for next time round? You’re not on mine.
on April 16th, 2012 at 8:39 pm
RLavigueur,
Once again, your post doesn’t make any sense.
Spitzer was trying to study people who claimed to have successfully participated in reparation therapy. You say he should have studied a representative sample of homosexuals. Since those groups are very nearly mutually exclusive, I question whether you have thought very carefully about the subject.
As for you other points, I’m sure that if you had read the paper you would know that Spitzer had received ethical approval for the study, that the responses were not taken at face value, that Spitzer discussed the difficulties of conducting more substantial work on this topic, and that no claim was made that the therapy had been validated.
You would also have noted that Spitzer pointed out that due to the difficulty of reaching his target of 200 subjects these respondents claiming at least some level of success must be a small minority.
It is clear that you simply reject the statements made by the respondents and reported in this paper because they are in conflict with your preconceived social and/or political views. There’s nothing I can do about that.
on April 17th, 2012 at 10:10 am
Erika, etc., it’s my view that people who deny the link between repeated homosexual rape in youth & adult homosexuality is usu. being dishonest. It doesn’t take to repeat an expert to understand that childhood sex abuse esp. homosexual rape can impact some1 to behave in ways they wouldn’t. Many boys who are homosexually raped take part in gay activities in adulthood as the sex abuse damaged mind. But since you rehash men raping little girls, lesbians are more likely to report being raped by men when they were girls & some lesbians say they take part in lesbian activities in adulthood because rape caused them to hate men which is why they have sex with women instead of men. Yes, many who take part in gay/lesbian activities were not sexually abused as children & not every1 who is sexually abused as a child will take part in gay/lesbian activities in adulthood. But what’s true is that childhood sex abuse BOTH homosexual & straight is linked to higher rates of adult homosexual/lesbian activities.
They have not conclusively proven that homosexual/lesbian activities is inborn, yet the AMA, etc. passes this off as fact. Even Simon LeVay who believes homosexuality is genetic & did the 1991 brain study says that he did not prove homosexuality is genetic. I believe it’s possible homosexual/lesbian activities could be result of genes, that would not change my belief gay/lesbian activities are comparable to crack smoking. There could be a rapist gene & there has been speculation as to whether violence is inborn, but if a man hits his wife or some cases if a woman hits her husband, we still punish domestic violence & we don’t excuse assault&battery because of possible violence gene.
So whether people take part in gay/lesbian activities because of sex abuse or bad biology (if it’s so be it hormones or genes), gay & lesbian activities would still be bad. Finally regarding repair therapy, repair therapy for many things has high failure rates incl. drug junkyism but we still offer this to junkies who want to go clean. If a gay/lesbian wants repair therapy to go straight, then that choice must be available to them as it is to drug junky. It’s hard to find neutrality on repair therapy because mainstream medicine such as AMA has been hostile to this since the 1990s esp. due to politics. Only Dr. RL Spitzer knows his intent, but as Dr. RL Spitzer has been condemned since the 2001 study, it’s possible he said this in 2012 to stop harassment by gay/lesbian groups. The burden must be on repair therapists to find cure for gay/lesbian activities, but as science always advances, a cure for homosexuality could eventually be discovered be it shot, pill or surgery. When this happens, the world’s a better place w/o gay/lesbian activities. The world will also be a better place without sex change maimings & the transexuals are worse than gay/lesbian activities.
on April 17th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
Might I also add, ladies and gentlemen, that SnowForBrains has been banned from nearly every forum on which he has posted his drivel. I would only suggest that we pretend that he has been banned from this comment forum as well.
To that end, I propose a (mock and totally non-binding) vote of censure for Funinsnow:
Aron votes ‘aye.’
on April 17th, 2012 at 12:16 pm
How does one measure a person’s sexual preferences? It simply is not sufficient to observe a person’s overt behavior; after all, have we not all, at various points in our lives, resisted urges or concealed feelings for someone because acting upon them or even mentioning them could jeopardize our existing relationships with our family and friends? I can easily see how a homosexual person who had been raised in a socially conservative circle, and then been given the opportunity to avoid permanent ostracism after his sexual orientation had been discovered, would be highly motivated to tell everyone that he had been “cured.”
on April 17th, 2012 at 3:04 pm
I’d add that there are men who marry women so they can have families and live in a “normal” milieu, and yet they are not “cured” of a predominantly homosexual orientation. I hate to agree with certain parties, but a certain number of women who enter lesbian relationships have done so after repeated abuse by men has convinced them that men are inherently abusive. This is far from the only cause of lesbian relationships, and anyone with any sense would realize that just because the end result looks the same, the cause is not necessarily the same. Nonetheless, if a society decrees that only women can nurture, then women who need reciprocity in nurturing are likely to find it only with other women.
on April 17th, 2012 at 3:57 pm
Come to think of it, Reynardine, I did grow up with a girl whom I knew very well, and who showed interest only in boys and (later) men all through her teens and twenties. None of these males were abusive that I know of, but I do recall that most all of them were emotionally distant, and tended to be opinionated and bigoted; this was a source of immense frustration for her. She later began a relationship with a woman whom she has been with for over a decade, and they seem very happy together. But interestingly, she insists that she is not a lesbian, and in fact, does not want to be labeled at all.
on April 18th, 2012 at 8:46 am
Reynardine, you fell into funinsnow’s trap
Funinsnow initially was talking about statutory rape which is consensensual sex between a teenager and an adult – in order words that if a 19 year old man would have consensual sex with a 15 year old boy, the 19 year old was indoctrinating the boy into homosexuality. The riduculousness of that notion is that nobody would claim that a 19 year old man having sex with a 15 year old girl was indoctrinating the girl into hetereosexuality.
Then he totally shifted to be talking about sexual abuse and forcible rape of children which is a totally different subject than consensual sex involving teenagers and adults. Effectively he is trying to claim that there is no difference between a young child getting raped and a teenager who already knows that she is attacted to men, women, or both having consesual sex. Thus, he is trying to spread the myth of homosexual indoctrination by mixing two totally different concepts.
on April 18th, 2012 at 9:27 am
No, Erika, I am only addressing the issue of whether male brutality towards female children or sometimes adults can cause them to seek “safer” relationships with their own sex, and my observation over the years is that it can and has. The rest of what he said is a pond full of carp.
on April 18th, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Reynardine, I don’t believe you or Erika are honest esp. when you call my theory of the link between homosexual rape in youth & adult homosexuality as a pond full of carp. There are gays themselves who say that they think being repeatedly homosexually raped in youth is a reason they have adult homosexual activities. This will repeat but why people take part in gay/lesbian activities is the same as why people get heart attacks. Some people take part in gay/lesbian activities because maybe it’s the result of bad biology possibly genes if it’s inborn or bad hormones just as some people have heart attacks because of bad genes. Then some people take part in gay/lesbian activities because they learned this sexual behavior esp. as a result of sex abuse such as homosexual rape. These people are gay/lesbian behaviorally speaking though orientation may not be gay/lesbian. It’s the same way that some people have heart attacks because they eat poorly & don’t exercise.
Again, it’s irrelevant to me why some1 takes part in gay/lesbian activities. Gay/lesbian activities are useless & it’s best for gays/lesbians to be celibate. Sorry for repeating but if SPLC is going to keep writing about gay/lesbian topics, they’re going to get the same answers by me because this topic is a rerun.
on April 18th, 2012 at 4:23 pm
Like I said, censure the unpleasant odor.
on April 18th, 2012 at 4:59 pm
Aron, that must be the dead carp.
on April 19th, 2012 at 11:40 am
“Gay/lesbian activities are useless & it’s best for gays/lesbians to be celibate.”
So are heterosexual activities after a woman reaches menopause, if you are talking strictly about reproduction. Should couples over 50 remain celibate as well?
But what if someone realizes genuine happiness through a gay/lesbian relationship? My friend that I mentioned above certainly seems to have, and that is good enough for me. Happiness and loving companionship have their uses.
on April 19th, 2012 at 1:10 pm
Rey,
You know what dead carp means: time to make the gefilte fish!
on April 19th, 2012 at 1:11 pm
Y’know something, Funnyshow, I am reminded of the best line ever from “Lady 9hatterly’s Lover”. It’s where Mellors said that if folks would do their own effing, they wouldn’t talk a lot of clatfart about other people’s.
on April 19th, 2012 at 1:12 pm
Chatterly. Hit alt instead of shift (tiny keyboard)
on April 19th, 2012 at 1:26 pm
ModerateMike,
You will find that SnowForBrains feels that post-menopausal women SHOULD NOT have sexual relations. For what legitimate reason, I don’t know. Not that he has any legitimate reasons for any of his other opinions…
on April 19th, 2012 at 2:27 pm
Funinsnow said, “can impact some1″ “every1″
….The very fact that you did not bother to spell out “one” invalidates any argument you made, homophobic and ignorant drivel that it is. You fail at spelling, you fail at grammar, you fail at arguments, you fail period.
on April 19th, 2012 at 5:28 pm
Well, Aron, the more he visits this forum, the more exposure he gets to tolerant viewpoints. As much as he complains about topic reruns and repeat posts, these things obviously don’t bother him as much as he says, or he would not keep posting to this site.
On another note, I sure hope my wife doesn’t decide to become celibate when she hits menopause!
on April 19th, 2012 at 8:00 pm
ModerateMike,
But your wife MUST become celibate! Funinsnow is the Supreme World Arbiter for Sexual Morals, and His word is Law. Defy Him at your peril!
on April 20th, 2012 at 12:17 am
My $0.02: At this point, the only annoying thing about Funi are those who respond to him as though he were a serious participant in the conversation. Honest mistakes, usually, earnest attempts at engagement by those who have never interacted with our linguistically and intellectually challenged friend.
His shtick has become so repetitive and predictable that it barely merits ridicule. At least “Jason Smith”, or the committee posting under that moniker, introduces new elements of stupidity with each comment. As a classic attention whore, he has taken Wilde’s comments to heart, that the only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.
Anyway, I will understand if the moderator chooses not to publish my little rant, because it has fuck all to do with the topic.
on April 20th, 2012 at 1:50 am
While it may be emotionally unhealthy for both parties for a 33 year old to have sex with a 16 year old, in many states 16 is technically the legal age of consent. None of the allegations against Harvey milk or Matthew Shepherd can be proven, and neither is as bad as shooting Harvey Milk or beating Matthew Shepherd and leaving him to die slowly, tied to a fence.
on April 20th, 2012 at 7:54 am
Gregory,
You are absolutely right. But I do get a minor power trip smashing Funi into powder. You’d ve gotta get your jollies where you can, right?
on April 20th, 2012 at 8:17 am
Gregory, I don’t really think that anyone responds to fun(maybeforhimbutnotforanywomanunfortuanteenoughtobewithhim)insnow seriously. I basically see him as hilarious because nobody can possibly be that backwards in their view of sexuality (unless fun(forhimbuttheprostituteheswithisfaking)insnow is really Doug Wilson). Hmmm – maybe the SPLC should investigate.
on April 20th, 2012 at 3:37 pm
Sam Molloy, gay & lesbian groups admit that Harvey B. Milk committed homosexual statutory rape on a 16 year old drug addict in 1964-Calif. age of consent is 18. Yes, many states have lowered the consent age (which is a bad idea) to 16 & in some nations 16 is the consent age, but Harvey Milk was a homosexual statutory rapist. Harvey Milk also bragged about having sex in parks, so his other crime was indecency. Dan (DJ) White as mentioned in a past post by me was a decorated Vietnam War Sergeant, SF Fireman & Policeman who once saved the life of a woman & her baby from a burning building & as I see it, Daniel James (DJ) White killing Harvey Milk in 1978 was doing what the Calif. authorities didn’t do to Harvey Milk in 1964. Harvey Bernard Milk in 1978 should’ve been a convicted felon & I don’t mourn his death.
As to Matthew Shepard, his mom Judy Shepard doesn’t deny that her son made up a story of being homosexually gang raped by 3 in Aug. 1998, 2 months before his death against a Cody bartender. The excuse Judy Shepard makes is that her son was drunk , had PTSD & once the medical tests disproved his story, he ‘dropped’ the charge, when it’s the Cody authorities who did so. Maybe MW Shepard believed his story-only he knows his intent. But MW Shepard chose to be reckless in the last year of his life by getting drunk, using drugs such as Ecstasy & he continued to be promiscuous even after he feared he had AIDS. Do you see something wrong with this? If a man were to keep having sex with women after he believes he has a Venereal Disease (I like old word VD), many would say what a dirty pig the straight man is. MW Shepard was a reckless person who chose to worsen himself.
Finally, yes I’m predictable on the homosexual topic. I’ve talked to Dr. Paul Drummond Cameron-called him on March 23, April 3 & 4 2012 to inform him of how I defend him here on the SPLC message board where he thanked me. But the SPLC is predictable & the views given by Erika, Sam Molloy, Aron, Richard L, Karen a old tired lesbian & Ruslan, etc. are also predictable because it’s not like SPLC offers much which is new on this.
on April 20th, 2012 at 3:45 pm
1 thing to add surrounding Matthew Wayne Shepard. Any1 who sees nothing wrong with MW Shepard’s reckless conduct in the last year of his life has something wrong with them. THis will be repeat but why MW Shepard was killed, only he & his killers know. If it had been a straight man with a history of harassing women who got killed in the same way MW Shepard was in an unrelated crime, my guess would be many of those who mourned MW Shepard would say what a pig the straight man was & why they can’t mourn him.
If that is your belief, then don’t complain about me not mourning Matthew Shepard. I see something wrong with what MW Shepard did to the Cody bartender 2 months before his death. I also see something wrong with MW Shepard continuing to be promiscuous even after he feared he had AIDS-incidentally there are even gays who have said that MW Shepard was a despicable person for doing this so it’s not just homophobes like me (I’m glad I’m a homophobe) who say this about MW Shepard. I also see something wrong with MW Shepard taking Ecstasy & alcohol which worsened his PTSD & depression-he also took depression Meds. His killing in Oct. 1998 is a minor topic & no he should not have been killed, but his killing in Oct. 1998 does not change the fact that MW Shepard was a reckless person who worsened his PTSD & depression in the ways written.
on April 20th, 2012 at 4:20 pm
Looks like we’re getting the usual funnySnowjob. Lying for jeebus again. Coal in his stocking…
on April 20th, 2012 at 5:47 pm
……………………………………………………..Funinsnow. You fail. Stop trying. You get nothing. You lose. GOOD DAY SIR.
on April 20th, 2012 at 6:13 pm
Notevenremotelyfuninsnow,
I’m so insulted you didn’t list me first among your list of ‘usual suspects.’ And congratulations on your being approved by Paul Cameron. I’m sure your imaginary friends are SO proud of you!
on April 22nd, 2012 at 9:50 am
Oh, Hell, Aron, most of us are “usual suspects”. Don’t tax his simple little memory with long lists.
on April 23rd, 2012 at 7:54 am
Reynardine, either you have a poor memory or you’re not honest when you wrote ‘lying for Jebus’ because assuming you forgot, in past posts I’ve written the fact that my parents came from mostly Hindu India & I’m a non-JudeoChristian who is against gay/lesbian activities. There are non-religious people like me who are against gay/lesbian activities & who oppose sex changes, so don’t assume it’s just Christians. Also Aron, I did name you in the post. Ad hominems that you, Reynardine, etc. make against me are expected when you don’t have serious rebuttal. Keep insulting me.
on April 23rd, 2012 at 9:34 am
Something to add re. gay bashings, incl. the MW Shepard case. Unsure if I can name the journalist but will hint. From Dec. 2011 to Feb. 2012, I wrote on the blog of a former Wyoming reporter who covered the 1999 murder trial. This reporter now lives in Hawaii (never been there) & has her own blog called Big Island Chronicle, where among the topics she has was her 1999 coverage as journalist just out of college.
Anyhow (perhaps some of you have read it under this same ID), I commented on this reporter’s blog mentioning what MW Shepard did 2 months before his death where a drunk MW Shepard 1st proposed to a bartender in Cody for a walk around lake where the bartender told him no. But rather than end it, MW Shepard continued proposing, grabbed the bartender’s arm & jacket (misdemeanor assault&battery) & made the statement of ‘you’re afraid of what I can do to you’ after which the bartender decked MW Shepard temporaily KO him. MW Shepard was then taken back to hotel where he was staying with his family. The next day MW Shepard went to Cody cops & made up a story of being homosexually gang raped by 3. The medical tests only found a fat lip & disproved the rape story as no sex happened. Cops interviewed bartender, a waitress who saw what happened & concluded the bartender self-defended.
As I wrote on her blog, MW Shepard should’ve been arrested for assault&battery + falsely reporting crime. When I 1st wrote about this on the reporter’s blog, she became hostile & called me disgusting, not because I said anything she disputed, but rather she got mad that I raised thes facts. She later toned down. The fact is that the journalist who had her own bias in favor of homsexuality allowed my comments about MW Shepard such as what he did to the Cody bartender, MW Shepard’s drunkardism & Ecstasy use, because it was factual.
With gay bashings, it’s hard to get neutral media coverage, because if a reporter were to bring up alleged criminal act the gay did before the man reacted by bashing or killing the gay, gay/lesbian groups can complain to a newspaper or TV stations advertisers & that can be bad business. Case would be the media coverage in Manhattan Beach Calif. where 18 homosexuals were arrested for indeceny in beach bathrooms-gay/lesbian groups complained after the media gave out the names & photos of the 18 arrested. The bathroom is the place to use the toilet & wash up. Those 18 committed a crime, yet the gay/lesbian groups complained after the media announces this.
In 2007, TV host Tucker Carlson talked of how during the 1980s as a teenager, he had beaten up a homosexual who was harassing him in a mall restroom & then he & his friend tied up the gay for the cops to arrest. Gay groups protested him-they saw nothing wrong with the homosexual harassing Tucker Carlson in the bathroom. The gay committed a crime & he got bashed by Tucker Carlson.
Gay groups call it ‘gay panic’ but I call it reacting to gay abuse. Harassing some1 by repeatedly proposing after no has been said is harassment. Unless you’re self-defending, grabbing some1′s butt or groin against will is assault&battery if the intent is not sexual to something more serious such as sex abuse or even attempted homosexual rape if intent is. If a homosexual grab’s a man’s butt or groin against will after which the man reacts by bashing or even killing the gay, then the man reacted to a crime the gay did. Whether the man reacted justly or excessively is a jury topic & if it’s excessive, jury decides what degree it is such as Manslaughter rather than 2d Degree.
I know what I’m writing here is mostly repeat but I support the right of defense lawyers in gay bashing cases to bring up crime such as harassment, indecency or assault&battery the gay did before the man reacted by bashing or killing him. If a gay is going to expose himself, then it’s a crime. Anyhow, I don’t trust media accounts when it comes to covering gay bashings because the topic is ideological that it’s hard to know the reporter’s bias. With the Internet, if a gay bashing case is not honestly discussed in the press (which it often isn’t), then we’ll use the Internet to bring out facts that the media gave little coverage or distorted & then we’ll make our own conclusions as to what we believe the right verdict is whether it’s acquittal or conviction even if the media & gay groups dislike it.
on April 23rd, 2012 at 10:10 am
Funnyshow, we can’t insult you. We can only describe you.
on April 24th, 2012 at 9:24 am
Richard Lavigueur & I discussed before here on SPLC the ideology of ‘gay bashings’ where RLavigueur discussed my scenario of a man who bashes or kills a gay after the gay grabbed the man’s butt or groin against will. To repeat, the gay committed a crime assault&battery if his intent was not sexual to something more serious such as sex abuse if intent was-which it usu. is. Richard Lavigueur said that it was excessive force to kill the gay in that situation but what he wrote may not be that easy.
1st those situations are unpredictable. If the gay is committing a crime such as harassing a man in the bathroom or assault&battery, the gay may have other violent intent such as commit a more violent act if he does not get his way or even homosexual rape. What if the gay is high on drugs when he does what is described? What if the gay has a past history of committing violence in bathrooms or committing violence on others? I’ve heard people say that if a gay proposes to a man in the bathroom, that the man should just say ‘no thanks’ but as the gay is committing a crime indecency by proposing in a restroom, there’s no need for the man to say no, just as there’s no need for a shopkeeper to put up a sign which says don’t steal-no need to say no to a crime.
Bashing or killing a gay who is harassing a man in the public restroom or killing a gay after he has grabbed a man’s butt or groin against will is a jury topic. Yes, the more violent the reaction, the harder it is to justify, but it’s possible to say that a man who kills a gay after the gay has been harassing him in the bathroom self-defended if he can prove the gay had a more violent intent such as homosexual rape, esp. if the gay was high or has a history of committing violence in bathrooms. These cases are not so easy.
on April 24th, 2012 at 10:14 am
Oh, my GOD, shut UP already, Funinsnow. You’re ignorant, moronic, and you have no argument. I REALLY doubt you’ve ever even MET a gay man, to have formed such hateful and STUPID opinions. I hope that from this day forward, every single gay person in your city decides to show up at your door day in and day out to hit on you. It’d be fitting punishment for someone so BIGOTED.
on April 24th, 2012 at 10:55 am
Funinsnow,
I wasn’t complaining that you DIDN’T LIST ME. I was complaining that you DIDN’T LIST ME FIRST. Afterall, I’m usually the first one you bring up as a ‘defender of The Evil Gays.’
And I second Supersonic’s comment. Have you ever, ONCE met a homosexual at any point in your life? Because your opinions are so ridiculous as to suggest you haven’t.
And since you seem to enjoy StormFronter company so much, why don’t you head back and STAY THERE.
Better yet, stay here. You provide some much needed comic relief on the site. Keep up that brilliant rhetoric!
on April 24th, 2012 at 12:12 pm
Aw, gee, Aron, now the little fellow’s a Hindu whose family came from India. I wonder how he explains certain Hindu dieties who were hermaphroditic.
on April 24th, 2012 at 1:12 pm
Rey,
(I can’t believe I’m doing this) but in YellowSnow’s defense, he did state that he is of Sub-Continental lineage some months ago. This isn’t a new development.
But a Mohandas K Gandhi, he ain’t.
on April 24th, 2012 at 4:16 pm
I’m sure that Funi has met many homosexuals in the course of his life. He may not acknowledge that because those men and women do not conform to his notions of what gay people are like.