Turns Out You Can Go There

Kanye is a bright and ambitious high school student. He hears lots of controversy over how to teach about homosexuality in schools. He hears about ex-gays.

"What the hell are those?" he asks himself.

So, being the truly conscientous and truth-seeking young man that he is, he sets out to find out. He goes to a meeting of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX), and meets some people that were practicing homosexuals and now have rejected that lifestyle.

Then Kanye goes to a meeting of teachthefacts.org, a parents group that has formed out of the controversy in Montgomery County, Md, over their sex ed curriculum.

Kanye wants to ask some questions.

He runs into Jeff Rezmovic, a Churchill alumni, just moved back the D.C. area after getting his college degree at the University of Michigan.

Kanye: Do you think sex education, if it teaches about homosexuality, should teach about ex-gays?

Jeff: Some extremists want to teach Montgomery County children that homosexuality is a disease that can be cured with reparative therapy. But that's a claim that runs counter to any and all credible scientific and psychological organizations.

Kanye is confused. He didn't say anything about a disease, and neither did the PFOX people. But Jeff answered his question about ex-gays by assuming Kanye was saying homosexuality is a disease. Kanye is too confused to say anything else.

Next Kanye meets Jody Huckaby, Executive Director of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). He asks the same question.

Kanye: Do you think sex education, if it teaches about homosexuality, should teach about ex-gays?

Jody: No way. Reparative therapy and ex-gay ministries who espouse them have long been soundly rejected by all credible professional mental health associations who in fact call such therapy damaging.

That sounds pretty impressive to Kanye. How can he argue with that? The experts say the ex-gays are fakes. And who can argue with them. I can't go there.

But when Kanye gets home, he remembers a website someone at the PFOX meeting gave him. He visits the website for NARTH (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality).

Kanye sees a book review of a book about the experts that Jody Huckaby was referring to--the American Psychological Association (APA). The book is called, "Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm."

In the book review, Kanye reads things like this:

--The book is written "by two self-identified "lifelong liberal activists" and influential leaders of the American Psychological Association (APA), who vigorously oppose the illiberalism of their fellow psychologists."

--Authors Rogers H. Wright and Nicholas A. Cummings note that "psychology, psychiatry, and social work have been captured by an ultraliberal agenda" (p. xiii) with which they personally agree regarding quite a few aspects, as private citizens. However, they express alarm at the damage that such an agenda is wreaking on psychology as a science and a practice, and the damage that is being done to the credibility of psychologists as professionals.

--Cummings notes that though he and his co-editor lived through the "abominable" McCarthy era and the Hollywood witch hunts, still, there was "not the insidious sense of intellectual intimidation that currently exists under political correctness" (p. xv). "Now misguided political correctness tethers our intellects. Those viewed as conservative are looked down upon as lacking intelligence" (p. xv).

--Wright notes that the damage done by the obsession with political correctness prevents important research from being conducted, and contributes to personal attacks on the researchers themselves (p. xxvii). Accusations of bias, racism and bigotry have a chilling effect not only upon the research and the researchers, but upon the training of mental-health professionals and the delivery of services (p.xxviii).

--In the current climate, it is inevitable that conflict arises among the various subgroups in the marketplace. For example, gay groups within the APA have repeatedly tried to persuade the association to adopt ethical standards that prohibit therapists from offering psychotherapeutic services designed to ameliorate 'gayness,' on the basis that such efforts are unsuccessful and harmful to the consumer. Psychologists who do not agree with this premise are termed homophobic.
Such efforts are especially troubling because they abrogate the patient's right to choose the therapist and determine the therapeutic goals. They also deny the reality of data demonstrating that psychotherapy can be effective in changing sexual preferences in patients who have a desire to do so (pp. xxx).

--The APA's 1973 removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses came about this way: Psychiatry's House of Delegates sidestepped the conflict by putting the matter to a vote of the membership, marking the first time in the history of healthcare that a diagnosis or lack of diagnosis was decided by popular vote rather than scientific evidence (p. 9).

--In 2002, the APA considered a resolution that would have declared the treatment of homosexuality "unethical." The resolution was narrowly defeated.

--The authors note that there is no empirical data on political correctness because it is "politically incorrect to question political correctness" (p. 22). They pose two questions regarding political correctness, and offer a number of hypotheses for potential testing. The questions are: "What psychological functions does political correctness fulfill for the individual?" and "What is the attraction of political correctness to certain personalities?" The hypotheses offered to understand these behavioral phenomena include:

Political Correctness Harbors Hostility
Political Correctness Reflects Narcissism
Political Correctness Masks Histrionics
Political Correctness Functions as Instant Morality
Political Correctness Wields Power
Political Correctness Serves as Distraction
Political Correctness Involves Intimidation
Political Correctness Lacks Alternatives

The empirical study of the above questions may offer valuable data on the phenomenon of political correctness. Meanwhile, the authors note how this understudied phenomenon is hostile to science by allowing the dismissal of any finding not consistent with a particular ideology or agenda: "Thus, political correctness and the postmodernism that currently pervades academic psychology go hand in hand" (p. 24).

The authors assert that political correctness is hostile to certain research questions that may be unpopular, and can have a chilling effect on science. Further, political correctness can view certain questions as settled moral issues rather than empirical questions requiring scientific investigations. The authors note, for example. "...the status of homosexuality is a settled moral question in the PC movement," citing, for example, that the National Endowment for the Arts would likely view those who object to the painting Piss Christ as infringing on freedom of expression, while finding a similar painting titled Piss Gay as offensive and morally wrong (p. 24).

--Much of the extant research that finds no negative effects of gay parenting on children has serious limitations, for example, small sample size, nonrepresentative and self-selected samples, reliance on self-reporting subject to social desirability biases, and lacking longitudinal data. These limitations are often downplayed by advocates, who also frequently fail to consider fully the potential importance of having both male and female nurturance and role models for children (p. 308)

Kanye reads all this and is shocked.

"I can go there," he thinks to himself, feeling empowered with knowledge. He orders the book. He reads it. He talks about it with his friends. He writes up some notes. He starts an informal study group with other friends, and gives them copies of his notes.

His friends talk to their friends. And on and on.