<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: NARTH Touts Jones and Yarhouse Study	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/10/13/narth-touts-jones-and-yarhouse-study/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/10/13/narth-touts-jones-and-yarhouse-study/</link>
	<description>A [retired] college psychology professor&#039;s observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 22:14:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Ken		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/10/13/narth-touts-jones-and-yarhouse-study/#comment-94872</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ken]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 22:14:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=10399#comment-94872</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Dave,
I know your question was for Warren (and I&#039;m sure he&#039;ll give his own opinion on that), but I have my own ideas.
When NARTH was founded, it members felt the removal of homosexuality from the DSM was wrong.  And I suspect they all believed that the science from studying homosexuality (and sexuality in general) would prove them right.  However, as more and more research was being produced showing the opposite of that, they refused to believe it.  Initially, they had an understandable skepticism of the results and challenged them.   As more scientific results supporting homosexuality as a normal variation of sexuality were produced, NARTH&#039;s healthy skepticism changed to a dogmatic refusal to see it.  And those members of NARTH who did see the research for what it was, started leaving (NARTH membership has dwindled significantly over the years), removing any voices of dissent and shifting NARTH to an even more extreme position.   Until NARTH has become an organization that is more about anti-gay dogma than scientific principles.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave,<br />
I know your question was for Warren (and I&#8217;m sure he&#8217;ll give his own opinion on that), but I have my own ideas.<br />
When NARTH was founded, it members felt the removal of homosexuality from the DSM was wrong.  And I suspect they all believed that the science from studying homosexuality (and sexuality in general) would prove them right.  However, as more and more research was being produced showing the opposite of that, they refused to believe it.  Initially, they had an understandable skepticism of the results and challenged them.   As more scientific results supporting homosexuality as a normal variation of sexuality were produced, NARTH&#8217;s healthy skepticism changed to a dogmatic refusal to see it.  And those members of NARTH who did see the research for what it was, started leaving (NARTH membership has dwindled significantly over the years), removing any voices of dissent and shifting NARTH to an even more extreme position.   Until NARTH has become an organization that is more about anti-gay dogma than scientific principles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Dave		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/10/13/narth-touts-jones-and-yarhouse-study/#comment-94871</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 22:14:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=10399#comment-94871</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Question for Dr Throckmorton...
What .. in your opinion .. drives NARTH to do the things they do?  ...  Why do you think they are spinning these tales?  Do you think it is honest scientific disagreement .. or a theological or political or _____ agenda?
Thanks,
Dave]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Question for Dr Throckmorton&#8230;<br />
What .. in your opinion .. drives NARTH to do the things they do?  &#8230;  Why do you think they are spinning these tales?  Do you think it is honest scientific disagreement .. or a theological or political or _____ agenda?<br />
Thanks,<br />
Dave</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Lynn David		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/10/13/narth-touts-jones-and-yarhouse-study/#comment-94870</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lynn David]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 22:14:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=10399#comment-94870</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Dang little box!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dang little box!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Warren		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/10/13/narth-touts-jones-and-yarhouse-study/#comment-84393</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Warren]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2018 18:46:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=10399#comment-84393</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Dave - Good question. I think Ken has a plausible narrative. I saw lots of examples of confirmation bias during my sojourn in the alternative universe that is NARTH.
Another facet of this is religious conservatism. The mix of  LDS, conservative Catholic and evangelicals firmly believe that science proves their religious views to be correct. Everything is passed through the grid of their religious views.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave &#8211; Good question. I think Ken has a plausible narrative. I saw lots of examples of confirmation bias during my sojourn in the alternative universe that is NARTH.<br />
Another facet of this is religious conservatism. The mix of  LDS, conservative Catholic and evangelicals firmly believe that science proves their religious views to be correct. Everything is passed through the grid of their religious views.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Teresa		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2011/10/13/narth-touts-jones-and-yarhouse-study/#comment-53483</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Teresa]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 20:02:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wthrockmorton.com/?p=10399#comment-53483</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Dave said:&lt;blockquote&gt;When people are ashamed of their (same sex) feelings and/or consider them sinful it is much more convenient to claim the feelings are gone or do not exist. Additionally, others around them (gay or straight) who have the same ideology are much more at ease to hear this than an honest introspective view. Thus I think it is very difficult to get an honest read on what is really going on in people’s minds because we can’t get inside people’s heads. This has the potential effect of skewing the results of any survey on orientation change.&lt;/blockquote&gt;I agree with you 100%, Dave.  Further, I believe in &#039;change&#039;.  But, let me qualify that term, by speaking of my own experience.
I&#039;m a gay woman.  My faith belief is more important to me, than my orientation.  Consequently, &#039;change&#039; for me is living a life in harmony with those beliefs.  Beliefs that are considered conservative, or traditional.  Living that &#039;lifestyle&#039; has helped me in any number of ways ... I&#039;ve grown and &#039;changed&#039;.  But, MY ORIENTATION HAS NOT CHANGED.
Do I like men?  Absolutely.  Can I have sex with men?  Absolutely.  Could I marry a man?  Sure.  However, I don&#039;t believe I could bring the type of love or emotional bonding that a str8 woman could bring to a marriage.  It would be unfair to do that simply to &#039;prove&#039; that I could.
I have my own pet theory on women and their sexuality.  I think that most women are closer to &#039;bi&#039; ... and, can move along a continuum throughout our lives.  I think the biggest drive for women is to have children, regardless of sexual attraction or not.  Some of us can get away with that situation, some not.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave said:</p>
<blockquote><p>When people are ashamed of their (same sex) feelings and/or consider them sinful it is much more convenient to claim the feelings are gone or do not exist. Additionally, others around them (gay or straight) who have the same ideology are much more at ease to hear this than an honest introspective view. Thus I think it is very difficult to get an honest read on what is really going on in people’s minds because we can’t get inside people’s heads. This has the potential effect of skewing the results of any survey on orientation change.</p></blockquote>
<p>I agree with you 100%, Dave.  Further, I believe in &#8216;change&#8217;.  But, let me qualify that term, by speaking of my own experience.<br />
I&#8217;m a gay woman.  My faith belief is more important to me, than my orientation.  Consequently, &#8216;change&#8217; for me is living a life in harmony with those beliefs.  Beliefs that are considered conservative, or traditional.  Living that &#8216;lifestyle&#8217; has helped me in any number of ways &#8230; I&#8217;ve grown and &#8216;changed&#8217;.  But, MY ORIENTATION HAS NOT CHANGED.<br />
Do I like men?  Absolutely.  Can I have sex with men?  Absolutely.  Could I marry a man?  Sure.  However, I don&#8217;t believe I could bring the type of love or emotional bonding that a str8 woman could bring to a marriage.  It would be unfair to do that simply to &#8216;prove&#8217; that I could.<br />
I have my own pet theory on women and their sexuality.  I think that most women are closer to &#8216;bi&#8217; &#8230; and, can move along a continuum throughout our lives.  I think the biggest drive for women is to have children, regardless of sexual attraction or not.  Some of us can get away with that situation, some not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
