Mike Airhart was the founding editor of Ex-Gay Watch, until he left in 2007. He has returned as a contributing writer. He is a project manager and data scientist for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and an interfaith advocate, living near Phoenix, Arizona.
Thanks for posting this. I look forward to what they have to say. To date it’s been difficult to determine exactly what Spitzer found out, if anything, and what reliance can be placed on it. I hope this book helps shed some light.
Unfortunately, people on both extremes will immediately dismiss anything that doesn’t fit with their predetermined notions either because it will be “demeaning the lives and choices of gay Americans” or be “liberal athiest activists defying God”.
I’m hoping, however, that we can take from this analysis some better understanding of what the Spitzer study says and doesn’t say.
If careful analysis suggests that further research be performed to ascertain if certain individuals can change their orientation, we should support that effort even if it empowers those who seek to harm us and our loved ones. I, for one, believe that the truth is to be sought. If there is some small percentage who can shift orientation, let’s find out what that percentage is and what factors are at play.
If, however, the analysis suggests that there is no merit to Spitzer’s telephone survey, then reasonable anti-gay people (and there are some) can be disuaded from using Spitzer as a tool to oppress the lives, families and general welfare of gay people.
Mike, do you know if there’s any way to get an advance copy of the book. It would be useful for one of our analytical types to have a review ready for when it’s released.
Mike,
Thanks for posting this. I look forward to what they have to say. To date it’s been difficult to determine exactly what Spitzer found out, if anything, and what reliance can be placed on it. I hope this book helps shed some light.
Unfortunately, people on both extremes will immediately dismiss anything that doesn’t fit with their predetermined notions either because it will be “demeaning the lives and choices of gay Americans” or be “liberal athiest activists defying God”.
I’m hoping, however, that we can take from this analysis some better understanding of what the Spitzer study says and doesn’t say.
If careful analysis suggests that further research be performed to ascertain if certain individuals can change their orientation, we should support that effort even if it empowers those who seek to harm us and our loved ones. I, for one, believe that the truth is to be sought. If there is some small percentage who can shift orientation, let’s find out what that percentage is and what factors are at play.
If, however, the analysis suggests that there is no merit to Spitzer’s telephone survey, then reasonable anti-gay people (and there are some) can be disuaded from using Spitzer as a tool to oppress the lives, families and general welfare of gay people.
Mike, do you know if there’s any way to get an advance copy of the book. It would be useful for one of our analytical types to have a review ready for when it’s released.
I for one would love to get a hold of an early copy.