The 3rd part of the CNN special:

This whole experiment is wrong on so many levels and i feel kind of ashamed that i find it very interesting.

What's interesting about it? I find it disgusting to use human beings as lab rats for the inhuman experiments based off of false premises perpetuated by conservative cultural myths.

I love how people are commenting about this guy and how he was meant to be gay based on how he acted as a child. I have to say the premise of this experiment was absurd.

When I was younger I played barbies with my sister and did tea parties and shit. Played dress up etc...etc.. I grew up with a sister and single mom so I grew up very in touch with my feminin side. Today my friends consider me a MetroSexual. But to believe for a second that every guy who enjoys female passtimes is gay is pretty funny.

Now my audio on my computer is not working so I can't view the videos. But from the sound of it the doctor was trying to cure homosexuality by preventing what he thought to be a major cause. However I bet that this kid may never have been gay at all. Infact telling him from a young age that he was going gay, probably had a profound psychological effect on the child.

If you go through life always being told your something. Getting punished and mistreated and called something. Sooner or later you begin to think that you are that thing. I know a gay person who grew up with a mom who told him from very young that she never wanted a boy she wanted a girl. She dressed him in skirts and raised him as a girl, years later he came out of the closet and she was so happy. Fact is do i think he was born gay? No I don't but having that psychological pressure to be gay would definatly alter your viewpoint of yourself.

Now I find it funny that the doctor was found to be gay. What does that really matter? Wouldn't that have made him an expert on homosexuality as he claimed to be? I don't know why that was even used in the article, its not really useful information. So the expert on homosexuality was infact gay. So what?

Now let me clarify, this was a horrible experiment. It was done horribly and would have had very lasting psychological effects on the child. The doctor's treatment could have actually driven this child to believe he was gay whether he was biologically or not. But look at all the horrible things psychologysts and psychiatrists have done. Labotamies chaining people up in rooms , electro shock therapy. This was the 70's doctors were idiots.

Mistreating this poor child was wrong, absolutely deplorable. Look at what scientists and doctors are willing to do to prove their thesis. To prove their theories, scientists will do all kinds of horrible things to advance the name of science. To argue this man wasn't a scientist is sort of laughable. He just had methodology which is unnacceptable to modern society. But for the 70's he didn't really do much that wasn't being done by other scientists.

Look at Autism for example. Doctors tried electrocuting patients , frying their brains. They tried solutary confinement and lobotamy. Fact is those were also doctors and scientists.

So this one guy doing this to a gay kid, really Sapphi what about all the scientists and doctors who did the same horrible things or even worse to other mental patients. I find it funny that in all these years I have never seen a thread about how these kinds of treatments were used to deal with other mental patients. But when its done to a gay kid suddenly its a huge topic and everyone cares.

of course it is disgusting! Nobody should ever have to endure something like that.

when i say i find it interesting does not mean i actually like what i read. i just don't have a better word to describe it.

let me put it this way: i hate the fact that someone had to suffer so i can gain the knowledge of how wrong they were with their ideas.

@Joelcool7:

I love how people are commenting about this guy and how he was meant to be gay based on how he acted as a child. I have to say the premise of this experiment was absurd.

The premise was absurd, but it was the popular belief back then, and you can blame society's heterosexism for it. Trying to "change" him was wrong, and I'm not referring to the homosexual part. So what if he liked playing with dolls and other girly things? There's nothing wrong with that! The ideea that boys should act a certain way and gilrs should act a certain way is nothing but a cultural myth. I played with dolls when I was little too, and there was nothing no one could do to stop me.

Now my audio on my computer is not working so I can't view the videos. But from the sound of it the doctor was trying to cure homosexuality by preventing what he thought to be a major cause. However I bet that this kid may never have been gay at all. Infact telling him from a young age that he was going gay, probably had a profound psychological effect on the child.

He was never told that he was gay. He was only told things like "act this way, not that way", and when he'd act the way he was told not to he'd be punished. The result is that he grew up with a strong sense that he's "different", and that society wants doesn't like the way he is and that he should "change" (something that's impossible, as you can be no one else but yourself). It's quite hurtful to go your whole life thinking that everyone considers the way you are to be "wrong", "defective", and that they'll actually go as far as abusing you to try to change you.

I know a gay person who grew up with a mom who told him from very young that she never wanted a boy she wanted a girl. She dressed him in skirts and raised him as a girl, years later he came out of the closet and she was so happy. Fact is do i think he was born gay? No I don't but having that psychological pressure to be gay would definatly alter your viewpoint of yourself.

Psychological pressure to be gay? This seems like another one of your impossible-to-believe stories. Also, the guy from the experiment definately felt no pressure to be gay, but quite the opposite. The experiment was about crushing human diversity and trying to uniformize people.

Now I find it funny that the doctor was found to be gay. What does that really matter? Wouldn't that have made him an expert on homosexuality as he claimed to be? I don't know why that was even used in the article, its not really useful information. So the expert on homosexuality was infact gay. So what?

It shows that if his "treatment" would've worked, he wouldn't be gay himself.

The doctor's treatment could have actually driven this child to believe he was gay whether he was biologically or not.

No, the experiment could've not done this.

Look at what scientists and doctors are willing to do to prove their thesis. To prove their theories, scientists will do all kinds of horrible things to advance the name of science. To argue this man wasn't a scientist is sort of laughable. He just had methodology which is unnacceptable to modern society. But for the 70's he didn't really do much that wasn't being done by other scientists.

Back then doctors were considered "gods in white coats". However, this particular case isn't as much science's fault as it is the fault of religion and conservatism. The guy was funded and supported by conservative christian organisations, such as the Family Research Council, and he went on to be a proeminent memeber the ex-gay organisation NARTH. This is an example of what happens when religion interferes with science. I'm actually pretty sure the leading "scientists" who participated in this experiment were all Christians.

This experiment would never have taken place, had there not been no pressure from Christians and conservatives to "fix" gays, as they were and are the people who claim that homosexuality is wrong, and that gays need "fixing".

Look at Autism for example. Doctors tried electrocuting patients , frying their brains. They tried solutary confinement and lobotamy. Fact is those were also doctors and scientists.

So this one guy doing this to a gay kid, really Sapphi what about all the scientists and doctors who did the same horrible things or even worse to other mental patients. I find it funny that in all these years I have never seen a thread about how these kinds of treatments were used to deal with other mental patients. But when its done to a gay kid suddenly its a huge topic and everyone cares.

I found this article, and I decided to post it. Had I found a similar article about the treatment of mental patients, I would've posted that too.

The big difference is that experiments like this are still practiced today on gays. If you read about the experiences of people who survived ex-gay therapy, you'll find out that organisations who try to help gays "change" actualyl still use elctroshock treatment, and other abusive methods. While all this should be illegal because (a) there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, (b) you can not change someone'e sexual orientation, and these treatments are essentially torture (however due to pressure from conservative christian organisations, these treatments are not banned, and the organisations practicign them are not closed down).I also found a blog of a christian minister who "helped" people who were gay "change", and he was gloating how he was torturing his latest "patient", and how he was keeping him restrained against his will (the kid wanted to live, but the minister was keeping him locked in a room, and wasn't letting him out or have any contact with the outside world).

Well, it's pretty obvious why adversion therapy would fail. If I show you a piece of paper that's green, and I ask you "Porcupine, this piece of paper's black, no?", and you say "No, it's green" I will then slap you. We'll continue this, and eventually I'll start hitting you harder, possibly hiting you with objects. Eventually you'll learn that if you see the green paper, and say it's green I hit you, and if you say it's black I don't, so when I'll ask you if it's black, you'll answer "yes". However, that won't change the fact that you see a green piece of paper, no?

wait they stopped someone from being gay? why?

They only tried to. The "why" would seem to be very obvious, especially if you take a look at who founded these studies.

ohhhh i see