Tag Archives: Dr. Robert Spitzer

Ex-gay Research by Dr. Robert Spitzer is ‘not’ Retracted

Misuse of Science

It is always entertaining when fringe Left-wing actors fall victim to their own theistic worship of the scientific method and its inherent perpetual self-correction. Not long ago, a medical research team published its findings associating a list of disease pathologies uniquely common to homosexual activity. Later, the reseach team published an angry letter protesting “right-wing misuse of their data to advance their arguments.” Oh, really ? People used scientifically proven facts to advance their arguments ? A tragic misuse of science to be sure…

                                       activebrain

Long time sex behavior researcher Dr. Robert Spitzer was a leader in the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses in the 70’s. Of course, our understanding of the psychological and medical costs of homosexuality were still quite limited at that time. Spitzer argued that even though homosexuality may be an aberrant adaption, it was a harmless one not requiring treatment. Sadly, the 1980’s would follow bringing the AIDS pandemic that continues to disproportionately haunt homosexual conduct to this day. Heterosexual involvement would come later mostly due to tainted donated blood supplies, bi-sexual cross-infection and shared needle use. It remains exponentially less virulent among healthy heterosexuals nonetheless. Better research and education on the association of disease and homosexuality could have saved millions of lives not only on the subject of AIDS but many other diseases which have demonstrated a higher comorbidity among those engaging in same sex contact. To date, this of course remains a political correctness crime of the highest order – no matter how many lives it costs.

Spitzer found Homosexuality to be Harmless

While Dr. Spitzer found homosexuality to be harmless, he also worked to support the commonly accepted notion that while same-sex attraction had rooted motivations, these motivations could be therapeutically treated to address and correct the desires. This kept hope alive for many who had unwanted same-sex attraction but were unable to change without assistance. In October of 2003, Spitzer published a study to prove his point.[1] Instead of inspiring an exciting intellectual foray into neuro-science and therapeutic psychology, the paper sparked outrage by the well-entrenched LGBT activist community who did not want anyone to know that change, even for those who thought it impossible, was possible. It could incur individual pressure on them to change when they had no desire to do so. The LGBT juggernaut, in full motion by 2003, brought every pressure to bear on Spitzer and anyone having anything to do with his study. Sadly, Spitzer would fall victim to Parkinson’s Disease and begin suffering the deleterious effects throughout the following years. After suffering years of scorn, the aging and sick researcher expressed his sorrow that the study seemed to have caused more harm than good, and that he wished he could retract his interpretation of the data. His comment spread like wildfire through LGBT advocacy channels and the supportive mainstream media as a retraction of his study. However, the study was not and is not retracted.

To investigate why this was so, pro-homosexual advocate Alice Dreger, of the leftist periodical Psychology Today, contacted the editor of the peer-review journal ‘Archives of Sexual Behavior’ where Spitzer’s study was published[2] In her article she elaborates a conversation with journal editor Ken Zucker who expressed a willingness to publish any statement by Dr. Spitzer regarding his study but a refusal to retract the study itself due to the fact that the study results remain valid and unimpugned. In response to Dr. Spitzer bemoaning privately that he wished he could retract his interpretation of the data, Zucker responded aptly,

“I said, ‘I’m not sure what you want to retract, Bob. You didn’t falsify the data. You didn’t commit egregious statistical errors in analyzing the data. You didn’t make up the data.”

Personal regrets are no basis to retract a scientific study

Presently, two things have not happened. Spitzer’s study has failed to be impugned or disproven. It remains a highly cited publication. And secondly, Spitzer never did request a formal retraction of his personal interpretation of the data. And so as it stands, Spitzer’s study results remain concurrent with like studies, media reports of the Spitzer study being retracted are simply false and both hope and successful treatment for those with unwanted same-sex attractions continues.

Dr. Robert Spitzer died in December of 2015. It may only be that his formal retraction of his personal views on the data is still making its way through the mail.  In April 2012, scientific journal monitor Retraction Watch noted supportively that the study would not be retracted because the personal regrets of the author that the LGBT community did not like the results was no basis on which to retract a scientific study.

[1] Spitzer, R.L. Arch SexBehav (2003)32:403.doi:10.1023/A:1025647527010
[2] How to Ex an “Ex-Gay” Study, 4/12/12, ‘Psychology Today’

Sound Science (Not Politics) in the Post Exodus Era

CPlittlelogoBy Christopher Doyle, CP Guest Contributor

This commentary is in response to Gregory T. Angelo’s opinion editorial, “Gay Rights in the Post Exodus Era” (9/30/2013). In his article, Mr. Angelo opines on a number of issues surrounding the science of homosexuality and Sexual Orientation Change Effort (SOCE) therapy (pejoratively known as ‘conversion therapy’), neither of which he is qualified to do so as a politician. Such misinformation from gay activists, as was seen in Mr. Angelo’s article, is responsible for the present clouding between science and politics.

Mr. Angelo incorrectly cited Exodus International as the “standard-bearer” and Alan Chambers as the “poster boy” for SOCE therapy. However, Exodus International never existed as a therapeutic organization, but rather, a network of faith-based ministries providing support for individuals seeking to leave homosexuality. One must be very careful to distinguish ministerial and pastoral care from professionally trained psychotherapists and psychologists that provide therapeutic services for those who experience unwanted same-sex attractions.

Furthermore, to label Chambers, a man with no therapeutic or psychological training, the “poster boy” of the ex-gay movement, especially in light of the fact that he never received psychotherapy to overcome his own same-sex attractions, is disingenuous. It is no secret that Chamber’s poor leadership and lack of resolve to do his own therapeutic work played a significant role in the implosion of Exodus. Neither can Chamber’s or John Paulk’s personal failures speak for the many that have experienced change from a homosexual to a heterosexual orientation.

Angelo goes on to justify the unprecedented laws in California and New Jersey that are prohibiting the rights of minors to undergo SOCE therapy by citing Dr. Robert Spitzer’s retraction of his 2003 study: “Can Some Gay Men and Lesbians Change Their Sexual Orientation?” But Angelo failed to include a proper context for why Spitzer retracted this study, namely, that the esteemed Columbia University professor had literally been harassed for a decade by gay activists because of this work, and suffering from an advanced stage of Parkinson’s disease, caved to their demands. To read more, click here . . .