BUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!

Sometimes, certain things happen that bring a smile to my face, like the following:

JAMES DOBSON SLAMMED BY PROFESSOR FOR DISTORTING HER RESEARCH IN TIME MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON MARY CHENEY’S PREGNANCY

'I was mortified to learn that you had distorted my work,' NYU Professor Carol Gilligan Tells Focus on the Family Leader in Blistering Letter

Miami Beach, FLA. - New York University educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, PhD, today slammed Focus on the Family leader, James C. Dobson, for "twisting" and "distorting" her research in a guest column he wrote in this week's issue of Time Magazine. Dobson misrepresented her work in an effort to smear gay families while discussing Mary Cheney's pregnancy. In a pointed letter to Dobson, Gilligan demanded that he apologize and "cease and desist" from quoting her work in the future.

"Dobson's group is a fib factory that should change its name to Focus on the Fallacies," said Truth Wins Out Executive Director Wayne Besen. "This organization habitually lies and shamelessly mangles research to support its anti-gay agenda. Time Magazine should immediately withdrawal Dobson's column because it is so riddled with scientific errors that it is essentially fiction."

In a letter to Dobson, obtained exclusively by Truth Wins Out after the group contacted Gilligan and informed her of the Time article, Gilligan expressed her dismay and demanded that the right wing leader apologize. According to the letter:

Dear Dr. Dobson:

I am writing to ask that you cease and desist from quoting my research in the future. I was mortified to learn that you had distorted my work this week in a guest column you wrote in Time Magazine. Not only did you take my research out of context, you did so without my knowledge to support discriminatory goals that I do not agree with. What you wrote was not truthful and I ask that you refrain from ever quoting me again and that you apologize for twisting my work.

From what I understand, this is not the first time you have manipulated research in pursuit of your goals. This practice is not in the best interest of scientific inquiry, nor does bearing false witness serve your purpose of furthering morality and strengthening the family.

Finally, there is nothing in my research that would lead you to draw the stated conclusions you did in the Time article. My work in no way suggests same-gender families are harmful to children or can't raise these children to be as healthy and well adjusted as those brought up in traditional households.

I trust that this will be the last time my work is cited by Focus on the Family.

Sincerely,

Carol Gilligan, PhD
New York University, Professor

"No reputable media outlet should continue using Focus on the Family as a resource because they are chronically dishonest and lack credibility," said Besen. "James Dobson should start to wonder if there is something inherently wrong with his stance on gay issues if the only way he can support his positions is outright lying."

Truth Wins OUT is a non-profit organization that counters right wing propaganda, exposes the "ex-gay" myth and educates America about gay life. For more information, visit www.TruthWinsOut.org.

This is yet more proof that the anti-gay industry is lying about our community. This rebuke will go in my upcoming book as the 9th example of a professor or researcher going on record crying foul over the distortion of their work by Dobson and company.

Keeping our focus

I took a visit to Freeperland today.

From time to time I will hold my nose and read the comments on the forum having to do with the "homosexual agenda." Today was interesting.

There was a young man on one of the post who was sure that he had the right idea about what the "homosexual agenda" actually was. He kept posting links that supposedly proved all sorts of negatives things about the gay community.

I don't think that I have to tell anyone that those links encompassed "research" and "studies" done by Paul Cameron, Timothy Dailey of the Family Research Council, as well as other bits of propaganda issued by other groups such as the American Family Assocation.

Meanwhile a lot of our attention seems to be paid a ridiculous article on the World Net Daily site where some writer actually said that soy was turning America's children gay. His piece is ludicrous, so ludicrous in fact that I have seen it mentioned on several sites.

Then there is the "Wedding Wars." The "Wedding Wars" is an upcoming movie starring John Stamos that takes a comedic look at the marriage equality argument. I am sure the makers mean to entertain and take a satirical look at the issue of gay marriage.

I have not only seen many bloggers talking about the soy makes children gay articles, but I have received emails inviting me not to forget when the John Stamos movie is airing.

This mindset reveals something I don't like about my community. We tend to worry about public media events that are a lot of hot air, but don't pay attention to issues that could in the long run mean our survival or destruction. Pointing out the ridiculousness of one right-wing author or enjoying a movie with a "hot guy" with a message about gay marriage sounds like fun, but they are a waste of time.

Meanwhile, this young man on Free Republic and others who will buy into the lies of the anti-gay industry will repeat those lies. They will organize themselves on web pages, in groups, and in front of school boards. They will repeat those lies over and over again in front of legislative bodies.

How can we combat this if we are distracted by other things?

A John Stamos movie is cute but it is a waste of time unless it can refute the lies that we molest children at a high rate. Pointing out the inanity of a right wing column is momentarily empowering but unless it can refute the lie that we have a shorter life span due to promiscuity and disease, I don't want to waste my time commenting on it.

There has been an organized campaign to dehumanize the gay community and devalue our lives and we all must combat it head on, detailing and refuting every lie.

But yet we continue to lie to ourselves, thinking that our circle of friends, our distractions (i.e. the "Wedding Wars" et. al.), or our pursuit of material possessions will insulate us from the fact that the anti-gay industry is determined to devalue our lives with lies more scurrilous than those the Nazis said about the Jews or the Klan has claimed about African-Americans.

An old saying says that evil prospers when good men do nothing.

In that same spirit, propaganda does a lot of damage when those who can expose it allow themselves to be distracted by transitory things.

Another Ted Haggard

Ted Haggard lives again, nuff said - link

Dobson speaks (whoop te doo)

Mary Cheney's pregnancy seems to have brought all of the anti-gay industry leaders out of the woodwork. Last week, several of them (including our friends Peter LaBarbera and Paul Cameron) voiced their opinion on how Mary Cheney is harming her child by raising it "without a father by design."

I tell ya, you gotta love how they constantly push semantics.

Now, the grand poobah himself, James Dobson of Focus on the Family, has issued a column via Time Magazine on the situation. I guess he felt that since everyone else has something to say, why not him:

"With all due respect to Cheney and her partner, Heather Poe, the majority of more than 30 years of social-science evidence indicates that children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father. That is not to say Cheney and Poe will not love their child. But love alone is not enough to guarantee healthy growth and development. The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy -- any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl."

This statement is not true, but I will let this link from Media Matters for America do the work in refuting it.

Dobson also distorts the work of Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School. Media Matters does an excellent job in proving this point. I would just like to point out that distortion of Dr. Pruett's work is one of many times that the anti-gay industry has gotten in trouble for misusing studies.

In my book, I talk about the Pruett distortion, as well as seven others.

Dobson's comments point out one of the biggest problems with the anti-gay industry and their view of the world. They deal with aesthetics, not actualities.

Dobson and company seem to think that advocating for their view of family is the antidote for all societal ills.

This is not true. Dobson and company claim that gays raising children is an "untested social experiment," but this is also not true. According to the 2000 census, over 300,000 same sex households in the United States are raising children.

That doesn't sound like a social experiment to me.

Furthermore, what about the children who are taken away from their natural mothers and fathers because of abuse? Should they be kept in orphanages and foster homes until the "correct" type of family (not having anything to do with love and support but having two adults inlcuded) comes along?

What about single-parent families. My mother pretty much raised me alone. In the Dobson world, she is looked at in a patronizing manner; she would be tolerated but not looked upon as an actual good parent.

The fact of the matter is that this is a complex world. Man is not God, and therefore we cannot control the curves that life throws at us. All we can do is do the best we can with what we are given.

And personally, I think single parent families and same sex families are doing just that.

Dobson says "The traditional family, supported by more than 5,000 years of human experience, is still the foundation on which the well-being of future generations depends."

By this, he means a family led by a mother and a father. His claim is not necessarily true.

A good friend of mine (who I talked about before in this blog) is raising two children. He will probably adopt those two children. They refer to him as daddy. They aren't forced to do it and they aren't suffering from it. They would suffer if there was no one to give them love and support.

My friend didn't choose to be a father figure because of selfishness. He made the decision because he wanted the responsibility of supporting two children who needed it; that is the epitome of family.

My friend may not lead any nationally-known organization and may never get a column in Time Magazine, but I will tell you this:

Whenever I want to learn about family, I look at his example, not that of James Dobson.

Excellent weekend

I think I will post a short comment today because I am busy revising my book.

It has been a really good weekend for a number of reasons.

The most important and specific piece of good news is that I have finally found a copy editor.

And just in time too.

I reached a period of stagnation with this book a while ago. I wrote and said everything that I felt I could say but there was so much more to talk about when it comes to the anti-gay industry. I, like so many writers, am terrible when it comes to spotting the errors in my work.

After finding this reputable copy editor, I have been working nonstop on new information and new pages, naturally I am excited.

I think I found my muse again, so to speak.

So I am glad to say that my book is right on schedule to be completed in February and back from the publisher between the months of May-June.

I would like to thank everyone who has been reading my blog for the success I have been having so far in getting the information out.

And stay tuned.

I haven't even started to raise hell.

Paul Cameron crawls out of his hole

Mary Cheney has dominated the news and I didn't want to talk about her pregnancy any more, but something happened today that is just too good to go unnoticed.

Paul Cameron gave his opinion about Mary Cheney.

Now if you think he said, "I think this is positive and I wish her and her partner all the luck in the world, " you will also believe that Paris Hilton is a misuderstood genius.

Cameron had nothing positive to say about Cheney's pregnancy:

"Her pregnancy is further evidence that participation in homosexual activity distorts value systems, inducing practitioners to harm the commonweal. Our society already has too many children born without the benefits of marriage; Cheney's action is not only a bad example, but poor treatment of an innocent child."

Cameron's dubious history makes it so damned easy for me to rip his comments to pieces, that I am almost ashamed of my desire to do so. But it is important not to laugh Cameron off because he is a very dangerous man.

It was Cameron who provided the scientific (albeit through bad studies and distortions) framework that the anti-gay industry uses against us. Cameron's influence on anti-gay industry studies is so thorough that I devoted an entire chapter of my upcoming book solely on him.

Let's recap his history, shall we?

Paul Cameron is the author of a wide variety of studies about the gay community and all of them portray us as evil, child molesting, feces-eating, gerbil-stuffing monsters.

He has also gotten into trouble because of his questionable tactics in compiling his data:

On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists" by the APA Board of Directors. Cameron has posted an elaborate argument about his expulsion from APA on his website, claiming that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership. Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron's claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States (and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such lengths to disassociate itself from one individual.

At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it "formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality."

In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism" and noted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research."7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of "critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron."

At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee's report and passed the following resolution:
The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, "The Paul Cameron Case," is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron's frequent lecture and media appearances."

Cameron's credibility was also questioned outside of academia. In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade (1985), Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dallas referred to "Cameron's sworn statement that 'homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,'" and concluded that "Dr. Paul Cameron...has himself made misrepresentations to this Court" and that "There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron" (p.536).

If that is not enough for you all, then check out various Cameron quotes via this link including:

"At the 1985 Conservative Political Action Conference, Cameron announced to the attendees, 'Unless we get medically lucky, in three or four years, one of the options discussed will be the extermination of homosexuals.' According to an interview with former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, Cameron was recommending the extermination option as early as 1983." - Mark E. Pietrzyk, News-Telegraph, March 10, 1995

"I think that actually AIDS is a guardian. That is I think it was sent, if you would, about forty years ago, to destroy Western civilization unless we change our sexual ways. So it's really a Godsend." - Cameron quoted by Mark E. Pietrzyk, News-Telegraph, March 10, 1995

"Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous activities"-Paul Cameron quoted at http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron2.html

Now despite all of these things, Cameron is still looked at as a credible source regarding the gay community by people like Peter LaBarbera, Lou Sheldon, and Robert Knight.

Groups who dare call themselves pro-family (i. e. The American Family Association, the Family Research Council, the Concerned Women for America, and a plethora of statewide organizations) continue to use his work.

And many of them know of his controversial history.

Gotta love those conservative Christians.

Mary Cheney's Baby: The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Distraction

Unless you live in a cave with your fingers in your ears, you know that Vice President Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter, Mary, is pregnant.

Needless to say, the anti-gay industry is not happy about it, as seen in this link.

And they are all up in arms in Freeperland over it.

So what exactly is the problem here? Mary Cheney chose to become pregnant because she has a maternal instinct to raise and care for a child, just like the vast majority of women worldwide.

And for that, I applaud her. A child raised by gay parents can thrive and be successful and loved. All studies point to this fact.

Also, the birth of a child is a blessing from God, so I wish all the best for the entire Cheney family as they welcome two new additions (Vice President Cheney's other daughter is also expecting) to their circle.

I just hope that my fellow gays and lesbians don't get distracted.

I enjoy seeing the anti-gay industry show its true hateful colors just as much as the next gay man, but there is still work to do. Mary Cheney's pregnancy does not eliminate the fact that there is still a war going on. Mary Cheney's pregnancy does not eliminate the fact that the anti-gay industry continues to spread lies about our community in order to shape public policy.

Yesterday, I wrote about Linda Harvey and Mission America's phony risk audit plan. This plan is yet another attempt by the anti-gay industry to censor American gay students from establishing support networks. In my zeal to point out the errors in her plan, I excluded something very crucial; something that underscores Harvey and the rest of the anti-gay industry's knowledge that what they are feeding to people are lies.

One of Harvey's sources for her "risk audit" trash is a study by Timothy Dailey from the Family Research Council entitled The Negative Effects of Homosexuality.

Check out this link and read what is on the top of the page.

Just in case the Family Research Council tries to change it, this is what it says:

Please note: this article is an archived item on Family Research Council's website; the information contained therein may be outdated.

What you are reading is what is known as a "cover your ass" disclaimer. I have one question for the Family Research Council and their leader, Mr. Tony Perkins.

If you have problems with the truthfulness of Mr. Dailey's piece, then why is it on your web page for anyone to use in order to demonize the gay community?

I am happy for Mary Cheney and her family, but I am also concerned about the lesbian teenager who will have problems receiving support because of Linda Harvey's "Risk Audit Plan," a plan that cites Mr. Dailey's piece, excluding the disclaimer.

I am concerned for the people who will go to the myriad of sites that have The Negative Effects of Homosexuality on them (excluding the disclaimer) and actually believe the study to be gospel truth.

These people are going to form groups and committees, write letters to the editor, stand up in front of legislative bodies and school boards and repeat what they have read.

And that means more hell for us, especially our lgbt children.

For that reason, we cannot allow the controversy over Mary Cheney's baby to distract us.

She has the monetary and social support to make life better for her child.

Let's concentrate on making life better for those lgbts who don't have those trappings.

Parents urged to circumvent the law? How Un-Christian

Gay/Straight support clubs and anything else that looks at homosexuality in a supportive manner in America's schools is a major sticking point for the anti-gay industry.

However there is not that much they can do about it, particularly about gay/straight support clubs. According to the Federal Equal Access Act, students can form any club they want as long as:

Attendance is voluntary,
The group is student-initiated,
The group is not sponsored by the school itself, by teachers, by other school employees, or by the government, and
The group is not disruptive. i.e. it "does not materially and substantially interfere with the orderly conduct of educational activities within the school.

No matter what they do, say, or claim, the anti-gay industry has been on the losing end in a vast majority of cases when they try to attack students' right to form a gay/straight support group.

That doesn't mean that they won't stop trying to circumvent this law. Case in point, a recent article in Agape Press - Fighting Back -- Pro-Family Groups Find Ways to Combat Homosexual Agenda in Public Schools.

The article is pretty much up front in encouraging parents to think of ways to make it difficult for students to form gay/straight support clubs, including pushing for parental permission slips and encouraging students to form "ex-gay" clubs in hopes of undermining the purpose of the gay/straight alliances.

The hypocrisy of forming "ex-gay" clubs as a way of undermining gay/straight alliances is best served in reading the following article that appeared in a November 16th issue of Agape Press - PFOX Official: Homosexual Activists Want to Censor Ex-'Gay' Message.

The most egregious thing that comes out of this week's article is the following:

Linda Harvey, founder of the Ohio-based pro-family group Mission America, has developed one common-sense tool. Harvey's "Risk Audit Project" is a comprehensive survey which measures the promotion of homosexuality in a given public school district. (The survey can be downloaded for free at the organization's website.)

The Risk Audit Project measures the extent to which public school districts are collaborating with homosexual activists by determining, among other things, whether schools have adopted pro-homosexual policies or curricula, and whether the school district is sponsoring pro-homosexual clubs, events, or activities.

Common sense tool? Bull!

First of all, Linda Harvey is not any type of expert on the gay community. Her web page clearly states that she is a former "ad executive." Harvey is like so many other phony religious right experts, hiding her prejudice behind a Jane Wyatt cum Barbara Billingsley fascade. She, like so many of them, appeal to Christians' egos and fears with lies and stereotypes backed by junk science.

For example, her claim about gays and children:

“When people have views supporting homosexuality they should not be involved with youth in any way, period. Because they:
will provide inaccurate, misleading information to kids;
may limit a student’s opportunity to hear warnings about the behavior;
may advocate or model inappropriate behavior;
may be directly involved in the molestation of kids themselves; or
may be in a position to allow others to do so” - Fairy Tales Don’t Come True, February 13, 2006

Her "Risk Audit Plan," which can be viewed here is more of the same lies.
In the section called Why Homosexual Activism in Schools Endanger Students, the organizations list
several reasons why they think homosexuality is a danger including:

"(homosexuality) reduces life expectancy at age twenty by at least 8 to 20 years; increases by at least 500% the risk of contracting AIDS; increases the risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease by nearly 900%; increases by 4,000% the risk of developing anal cancer; substantially increases the likelihood of smoking, having mental health disorders (other than same-sex attraction), being the victim of “domestic” violence, and being involved in alcohol and drug abuse; substantially increases the likelihood of contracting hepatitis and other gastrointestinal infections; substantially increases the risk of contracting bacterial vaginosis, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer; and has high levels of participation in sadomasochism, coprophilia, sadomasochism, fisting, and other dangerous, deviant sex practices involves extraordinarily high levels of promiscuity.”

Those are Paul Cameron claims, but she does not list him as a source. She lists The Negative Effects of Homosexuality by Timothy Dailey and The Health Risks of Gay Sex by John R. Diggs as her sources.

But these two studies have a multitude of problems, which I cover in my book, including:

The Negative Effects of Gay Sex:

It lists Paul Cameron as a source

Twice, John R. Diggs includes the study done by Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg in their book,
Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, as indicative of the entire gay population. In one passage, he even refers to it as “a far ranging study of homosexual men . . .”
But Bell and Weinberg never said that their findings were indicative of all gay men. They actually said “. . . given the variety of circumstances which discourage homosexuals from participating in research studies, it is unlike that any investigator will ever be in a position to say that this or that is true of a given percentage of all homosexuals.”

Diggs cites a Canadian study twice in order to claim that gays have a shorter lifespan than heterosexuals. But his citation of the study is a mischaracterization. In 2001, the six original researchers (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. O’Shaughnessy, Julion Montaner, and Martin T. Schechter) who conducted that study have gone on record saying that religious conservatives (like Diggs) was distorting their work.

In another section entitled Physical Health, Diggs claims that gays are victims of “gay bowel syndrome.” The term is an obsolete medical term. exist and even the CDC does not use it. In fact,if one was to look at the endnotes of Diggs’ study, he would find that two of the sources he quoted concerning “gay bowel syndrome” were from articles in published in 1976 and 1983, which is consistent with the years that the term existed. One last source was a letter to the editor printed in 1994 but Diggs does not make it clear as to what were the circumstances surrounding it.

He generalizes convenience sample studies as indicative of the gay population at large.

Diggs takes studies done in foreign countries and claims that they are indicative of the gay population at large.

Diggs claims that there are five distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual populations including levels of promiscuity, physical health, mental health, lifespan, and monogamy. However, he spends very little time comparing the two dynamics. He uses all of his time castigating gay
populations.

He uses an out of date book, The Gay Report (published in 1979) to claim that gays are engaging in deviant sexual practices. Only once does he attempt to tie the alleged deviant practices of gays in 1979 to present day; and to do so, he cites two events that took place regarding bondage workshops. However, there is a strong indication that heterosexuals took part in these events as well as gays. Diggs ignores this dynamic.

The Negative Effects of Homosexuality:

It also lists Paul Cameron as a source

Timothy Dailey use a 1985 survey of lesbians at a Michigan music festival to claim that lesbians have a high rate of domestic violence. However, according to the reviewer of the study, Suzana Rose, Ph.D., of the 1099 lesbians participants, most were white and between the ages of 20-45.
She also said:
“Questions concerning perpetrating abuse need to distinguish between actions taken in
self-defense and actions initiated by the aggressor. This point was not assessed here. Findings are limited by the selective recruiting of participants.”

Dailey also uses the Weinberg and Bell book to claim that all gay men are promiscuous despite the fact that both authors said their work was not indicative of all gay men.

Dailey uses the term “gay bowel syndrome," even though the term does not exist.

Dailey cites a study that says young gay men are in danger of catching disease at a high rate. He omits the part of the study that said they need places to build their self esteem as homosexuals.

In addition, he performs mathematical manipulation on percentages gauged in legitimate studies in order to push forth a higher percentage of gay men catching diseases.

He generalizes convenience sample studies as indicative of the gay population at large.

Harvey and the groups who endorsed this latter day Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Concerned Women for America, Family Research Council, etc.) actually want parents to use it in order to make it more difficult for gay and heterosexual students to support each other. Harvey needs to realize that believing that homosexuality is a sin does not entitle her to be an expert on the gay community. Furthermore, exploiting people's fears and stereotypes through junk science is highly un-Christian.

Lastly, inviting people to circumvent federal law through lies, innuendo, and chicanery is not only un-Christian, it is also unethical and immoral.

I may not know what Jesus would do, but I know that he would not do what the anti-gay industry is advising parents to do.