In July 2020, John Blosnich of the LGBTQ+ Health Equality Center published another research about the "danger" of reparative therapy. In a survey of 1518 members of "non-transgender sexual minorities", Blosnich's team concluded that individuals who have been subjected to attempted sexual orientation change (hereinafter referred to as SOCE*) report a higher prevalence of suicidal ideation and suicide attempts than those who have not. It has been argued that SOCE is a "harmful stressor that increases sexual minority suicidality". Therefore, attempts to change orientation are unacceptable and must be replaced by an "affirmative withdrawal" that will reconcile the individual with his homosexual inclinations. The study has been called "the most compelling evidence that SOCE causes suicide".
However, when another group of scientists, led by Christopher Rosic, analyzed data from "the most representative sample of sexual minorities to date", polar opposite results were revealed. Comparing the scores of people who failed SOCE therapy and those who did not, did not reveal any difference in levels of psychological or social harm - the statistics of both groups were indistinguishable by any measure. Moreover, in contrast, SOCE was found to significantly reduce suicidality: adults treated with SOCE after suicidal thoughts or plans were 17 to 25 times less likely to attempt suicide.
Rosik and other scientists sent to the editor of a scientific journal writing, which noted three major flaws in Blosnich's study: first, the stress attributed to SOCE included all adverse events that occurred to the individual throughout his life. Secondly, the state of the individual before accessing SOCE was not taken into account and no comparison was made with the control group that did not resort to SOCE, which makes the assumption of the harm of SOCE speculative are more likely to seek treatment). Third, only individuals with homosexual identification participated in the study, which excludes sexual minorities who have succeeded in SOCE and stopped identifying as LGBT.
Rosick's colleague Paul Sullins points out a critical flaw in every study against SOCE: they all report an association of SOCE with suicidality, as if the former caused the latter, completely ignoring the possibility that suicidality may have preceded treatment. Simply relating suicidality to SOCE exposure without time reference violates the "correlation by itself is not causation" standard.
After reviewing the sample data, Sullins came to a startling finding: 65% of suicidal thoughts and 52% of suicide attempts had occurred before SOCE was contacted. Moreover, after undergoing SOCE, the risk of suicide is reduced by 81%. Therefore, Blosnich's research only shows that suicidal people turn to SOCE more often and that SOCE helps them.
“Imagine a study that finds that the majority of people who use antidepressants also had depressive symptoms,” Sullins explains. “And on this basis, the researchers conclude that people exposed to antidepressants are much more likely to experience depression, and recommend that antidepressants be banned. Isn't that stupid? This is precisely what Blosnich's erroneous and impudent conclusions were that SOCE therapy is necessarily harmful, not beneficial for sexual minorities with suicidal tendencies.
Thus, Blosnich's team drew unwarranted conclusions based on highly inconclusive results. Therefore, concerns about the dangers and harms of SOCE are unfounded, and attempts to limit SOCE may deprive sexual minorities of an important resource for reducing suicidality, thereby increasing the risk of suicide.
The full article by Paul Sullins is available here:
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.823647
*SOCE - sexual orientation change efforts (attempts to change sexual orientation).
Relatively recently, the news surfaced that homosexual orientation can be determined from a photo with a probability of 82% for women and 92% for men.
Will there be an article on this? I would like to hear scientific rebuttals regarding the relationship of homosexual and bisexual orientation with the face.
The facial features used by the classifier included both fixed (eg, nose shape) and temporal facial features (eg, grooming style). Lesbians tended to wear less eye makeup, have darker hair, and wear less revealing clothing. Homosexuals shaved more often. Straight men and lesbians tended to wear baseball caps.
Have LGBT activists already begun to look for genetic reasons for not wearing baseball caps and cosmetics?
experimental research in animals has shown that testosterone suppression affects craniofacial structures during puberty. Low doses of testosterone, with its deficiency, accelerate growth and craniofacial growth, especially in the slow components, which leads to the normalization of the size of the face. Higher risk of social isolation was tied with lower testosterone levels. Cortisol, produced under stressful conditions, can affect the action of testosterone and estrogen. So a minor contribution to fixed facial features can be made by life circumstances, including LGBT propaganda that convinced a child that he is a homosexual. This leads to social isolation, changes in hormonal levels and the appearance of a person.
In another Research the photo determined the political orientation, which was correctly classified in 72% of pairs of persons according to the liberal / conservative criterion, which is significantly better than chance (50%), human accuracy (55%) or a 100-item questionnaire (66%).
So that? Are liberals born, not made?
Hello, will there be an article about the life of homosexuals and bisexuals in different countries? That is, do all homos and biseks, without exception, have this culture, religion, etc. mental health the same? And about female homosexuality, the cause of itp ??????
Thanks for the smart answer!
But I still have 2 more questions.
First: is there a need and will there be an article that will study the results of the influence of a certain spectrum of hormones on sexual orientation?
For example, will such studies capture the stereotypical side of the research question? Like those statements that: gay men behave more feminine (do they have higher levels of female hormones compared to heterosexual men?) or that lesbians behave more masculinely (do they have higher levels of male hormones compared to heterosexual women?) and will also Is there a need to understand and study those cases where lesbians and gays are no different (except for orientation) from heterosexual men/women? At least in the sense in which the LGBT community illustrates this.
Second: what is the basis for the allegations that all women are bisexual from birth to one degree or another, and is this true? Why are men less likely to be bisexual then? And do women in general have pansexuality?
Many thanks in advance for your work and forthcoming response!
Who said that women are naturally bisexual? You know, when you watch gays, they do not correspond to their so-called orientation, tell me how much? Well, one wants his partner to introduce himself as a woman, that is, the inner natural desire of a woman, but you don’t need to talk about the other, since they change roles, but everyone, without exception, has this, the desire for the partner to introduce himself as a woman, this applies and women but in reverse in favor of the desire of the man. I don’t know, observing such conclusions are obtained, even regardless of the past and present, culture, etc. also applies to women but in the opposite direction (it is clear that I mean vvizhu). Just observing all this clearly, one can see their unchanging, original nature, the desires of a man of a woman, a woman of a man, they simply confuse an object (a woman or a man) with another, and imagine what a man (women) or a woman (husband) would do, they ask themselves questions that a partner would say, they themselves make compliments, etc. I don’t know again, just observing the same conclusions come
Who said that women are naturally bisexual? You know, when you watch gays, they do not correspond to their so-called orientation, tell me how much? Well, one wants his partner to introduce himself as a woman, that is, the inner natural desire of a woman, but you don’t need to talk about the other, since they change roles, but everyone, without exception, has this, the desire for the partner to introduce himself as a woman, this applies and women but in reverse in favor of the desire of the man. I don’t know, observing such conclusions are obtained, even regardless of the past and present, culture, etc. also applies to women but in the opposite direction (it is clear that I mean vvizhu). Just observing all this clearly, one can see their unchanging, original nature, the desires of a man of a woman, a woman of a man, they simply confuse an object (a woman or a man) with another, and imagine what a man (women) or a woman (husband) would do, they ask themselves questions that a partner would say, they themselves make compliments, etc. I don’t know again, just observing the same conclusions come