Here on the Ex-Gay Watch I know I frequently point out logical fallacies in logical (or perhaps better said illogical) arguments, and my peers here do the same thing. My peers and I have noted ex-gay and ex-gay affirming organizations — such as NARTH and Exodus International — often use Statements Of Conversion to make their points, vice referencing statistically sound research or widely recognized subject matter experts.
Backing up a little, a Statement Of Conversion is where a person asserts that he or she used to believe one way, but now has a rejected that previous belief, and now because he or she has personally experienced belief in both sides of a particular argument that he or she is now a topic authority. This is a version of Argument From Authority — where the speaker is claiming to be, or has been asserted to be an expert, and it’s implied that because the person is an expert he or she should be trusted.
Americans For Truth‘s President Peter LaBarbera has recently used a Statement Of Conversion in his recent article Great News: IL Student ‘Trans’-formed by the Christ of Christmas! to argue for donations, and argue “change is possible”.
Long story short, suburban Chicago high school student John identified last year as transgender student Joanna, but now has converted back to John. From Peter LaBarbera’s telling of the story:
God intervened and John was “born again” through faith in Jesus Christ, he told his student newspaper.
Now “transgender” Joanna is no more and John is reestablishing his true, God-given male nature at his high school. His newfound reality is precisely the sort of story that homosexual/transsexual activist groups like GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network) do not want other teenagers to hear. Because GLSEN knows that such stories undermine the “gay” myth that people are born GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered), and that such aberrant identities are mere natural and innocuous “orientations.”
The problem with resorting to a tale of conversion as a tool for arguing is that other stories exist. For example, I’ve gone from fundamentalist Christian to agnostic to non-fundamentalist Christian, while also in my life going from identifying as a boy, to identifying a transsexual teen, to identifying as a cross-dressing teen, to identifying as an ex-transvestite, to realizing I needed to explore my gender with a professional therapist, to now identifying and living as a transgender/transsexual-identified woman. Is John more of an expert on transgender and ex-transgender experience because of his life conversions, or am I more of an expert due to my life conversions?
The reality is that one can’t draw wide conclusions by means of Statements Of Conversion. John’s and my conversions make us each a little more knowledgeable about transgender issues than John Q. Public (and Joanna Q. Public too), but our conversions alone don’t make us authoritative speakers on transgender issues.
If we want to draw wide conclusions, we need to ask:
– What do studies and research reveal?
– What do the subject matter experts in the field think?
– What do the professional organizations state about a topic in their position papers?
And, this is where we at the Ex-Gay Watch differ from ex-gay and ex-gay affirming organizations. We don’t rely on personal experiences alone to draw broad conclusions — we look for other information, and then don’t knowingly distort the information we cite.
It perhaps goes without saying that the experts don’t agree with the broad conclusions Peter LaBarbera draws from John’s conversion testimony. (To read up on what some of the experts say, one can read the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care, the American Psychological Association’s Answers to Your Questions About Transgender Individuals and Gender Identity, info about gender psychology at GenderPsychology.org’s Psychology Of Gender Identity And Transgenderism, and info about Gender Identity Disorder (GID) on Gid Reform Advocates.)
Peter LaBarbera in his piece further states:
But, of course, change is possible, because God is in the business of changing repentant sinners. If the Christ of Christmas can turn around the lives of drug addicts, murderers, and drunks, He certainly can save men and women — and adolescent children — trapped in gender confusion and homosexuality.
And Peter LaBarbera is an authority on the change is possible dogma because…?
I’ll end this answering that rhetorical question — Peter LaBarbera’s personal religious conversion alone doesn’t make him an authoritative voice on sexuality or gender identity.
Yes, this is clearly a grab for end-of-the-year donations. LaBarbara should know that teenagers change their interests and identities like clothing and John’s testimony is interesting but not a reliable indicator that ‘change is possible.’ I have two teenagers and my head spins trying to keep up with them. In this case, Change is Possible means it’s ‘possible’ next semester John will identify as transgender again. It’s even ‘possible’ John will no longer identify as Born Again. And… it’s even ‘possible’ John/Joanna will identify as both Christian and trans. By then, of course, Labarbara will have moved on to other testimonies to elicit donations.
Who wants to explain to Peter why transpeople are advised to cross-live for over a year before surgery, and why minors aren’t allowed to have it? Minds can change, and they do all the time!
Further, did anyone else notice the reference to “Joanna” being “teased and mistreated last year”? I’m sure that was a motivating factor.
The critical aspect that Labarbera ignores is that these feelings, the desire to be male or female and the attraction to men or women, exist on a continuum, the are not “either/or” things for many people. Because many of us have desires and feelings somewhere in the middle its not a surprise when one changes how they define themselves, saying they are female at one point and male at another. The intermixed feelings or desires remain the same, but what we wish we were or were feeling changes.
I get so tired of the wash-outs (no disparagement intended) from the Real Life Test (RLT) who run to the ex-gay/RR to take the right to experience the RLT away from everyone else. It is the height of arrogance to assume that since the RLT didn’t work for them, it won’t work for everyone else. And this is the precise arrogance of the entire political ex-gay movement. They want to take the right to choose how to live personal lives from everyone else based on how they’ve chosen to live their own.
The RLT is designed to be the acid-test for a TG person of whether transition from the birth sex to the true sex is indicated. The fact that John/Joanna decided to remain (at least for now) in their birth sex is a success of the RLT, just as much as if John had decided to proceed as Joanna.
The right to discover oneself should not be denied to anyone: gay, ex-gay, transgendered, ex-transgendered…whatever.
The sad truth about short term switching is nothing is lasting. If one is transsexual (transgendered) they can’t turn on and off the drive to be what their mind is telling them they are. They can suppress the drive, the emotions, the feelings, burn their clothes, their past and head toward their new future identity. Lots of luck boys and girls but the real truth is in the first three to six weeks after conception the embryo brain was designed as either male or female irregardless of what your body design is.
Who made up that malarky about transsexuals being out of step with Christianity needs a brain transplant themselves. I know exactly where those so called Christians are pulling up all their misinformed data out of the bible. Idiots repeating idiots comes to mind. Or junk religion?
always,
Rev Barbie Lee
Elk City, Oklahoma
Barb said,
the real truth is in the first three to six weeks after conception the embryo brain was designed as either male or female irregardless of what your body design is.
Barb, a statement of fact like this requires a reputable reference for us to consider. We enforce this requirement to maintain the intellectual honesty that Autumn touched on in her post. Please provide one so others may give your statement proper weight or revise the statement accordingly. Thanks.
Randi Schimnosky
wrote:
“The right to discover oneself should not be denied to anyone: gay, ex-gay, transgendered, ex-transgendered…whatever. ”
I say: AMEN! I am so grateful to be able to hear from both sides of this issue. I have struggled one way or the other all my life. I know that God, as I’ve come to understand God, has all my answers and THAT fact gives me great peace!
[RANT ON]
LaBarbera is among the most ignorant human beings in the world.
How dare he stand up and declare invalid the life experiences of cross-gender identified people around the world!
I for one, do not accept his “change is possible” mantra. It’s an utter crock. We all find our place in the world where we can cope adequately (or in a few lucky cases, happily).
When are these half baked nutcases going to realize that because one cross-gender identified person decides not to transition that it does not apply to ALL of us?
[RANT OFF]
Sorry, but clowns like LaBarbera really irk me. He hasn’t been inside my head, and he has no business whatsoever judging me on that.
Angela, that comment was by SharonB
please, open your heart and ask God to reveil himself to you. And I promise, if you humble yourself and ask — But really just wanting the truth, He will surprise you.
That Goes for all of God’s children.
I pray God blesses you precious Autumn.
Hello gang…
I was most concerned with the outside derision, harassment and threat this kid no doubt faced.
I would like for all of you to google the names of black psychologists
Kenneth and Mamie Clark. They conducted a now famous research test on the self esteem and self worth of black children.
They used color charts and dolls. Their test samples included a demographic in the Northern and Southern states and their findings were instrumental in the landmark Brown vs. Board of Ed. decision.
It should not surprise you that overwhelmingly, the children preferred white dolls, considered the lighter or white hues in skin to be more desirable and that white was prettier and being white would be nicer and easier in their overall world view.
The age range was 5 to 8 years old. Already the inculcation of white desirability was well entrenched.
I see a clear commonality not only in what a trans or gay teen would feel, but they would feel it according to people like PETER LABARBERA’s dictates, rather than that of themselves.
Self esteem and self worth shouldn’t be determined by one’s gender or color.
The unspoken framework that the ex gay movement is drawing from, is not individuality, but conformity to ARTIFICIAL gender roles.
And often, in the equation of sexuality and abuse, FEMALES have been virtually dismissed to the margins.
This gives away how little females are valued and obviously homophobia is deeply connected to misogyny.
Teens require guidance by the adults, but certainly self discovery and self knowledge are paramount to their well being, along with self esteem.
In Peter LaB’s world, self discovery and knowledge are anathema to ex gay control.
And exploiting the harassment and threat starts the youngster more on a path of self doubt.
This kid will look to his Christianity for identity, and this environment won’t respect his SELF expression, so much as expressing FOR Christian identity.
There will be no room for his real self, which is sad.
The requirement he will be charged with, seems to me overwhelming for someone so young.
You all can correct me if I’m wrong. I consider you much more expert than I am.
But I know how conformity to an unrealistic and unnecessary ideal killed the feelings of confidence and self worth in so many of my beautiful friends of color, I see the same damage to trans and gay teens in this way too.
I will be taking the Clark study to my friends at the Williams Institute of Gay and Lesbian Law at an event in Jan.
Perhaps there is a way to consider a class action suit against ex gay ministry and therapy.
Basing the precedent on the facts that attacking a person’s self worth and self knowledge, founded on intangibles, prejudice, unnecessary (non life threatening)and unsubstantiated results, are harmful and always have been.
And groups that participate (and sometimes forcibly) in such programs are required to stop, unless and until they can prove there is some immediate and urgent (life or freedom threatening) intervention required.
Or that there is NO other form of private therapy for other issues that are more universal (that occur in heterosexuals and non trans people as well.)
And that these situations MUST be differentiated from being gay and transgendered.
Sayeth “Child of God”:
please, open your heart and ask God to reveil himself to you. And I promise, if you humble yourself and ask — But really just wanting the truth, He will surprise you.
Been there, tried that, done that. Here’s two truths for you:
1) In organized groups, I found only judgementalism and hostility. Support was conditional, and often tainted with a truly irritating holier-than-thou tone. Often disclosure of my gender identity issues resulted in ostracization, not help. Telling me how “evil” and “sinful” I’m being is guilt tripping – no more, and no less. It didn’t help me come to any kind of peace, just taught me that some adults fail to grow beyond the playground cliques of grade school.
2) I have made my own peace with the universe around me. Transition has not been easy, but even with the price I have paid, it has been worth it to find a sense of peace. My relationship with “a god” is personal and private.
Never again will I allow others to define my thinking for me.
Regan Says:
This kid will look to his Christianity for identity, and this environment won’t respect his SELF expression, so much as expressing FOR Christian identity.
There will be no room for his real self, which is sad. The requirement he will be charged with, seems to me overwhelming for someone so young.
You all can correct me if I’m wrong. I consider you much more expert than I am.
Regan, that’s an excellent observation (and post overall!).
You’ve raised an interesting aside topic – namely that of the relationship between identity and self-worth.
My own experience is that identity is amazingly persistent – regardless of what strictures others may attempt to impose upon us. When I first started to attempt to understand my own gender identity, I ran into a book called “The Uninvited Dilemma” which contained the following commentary:
Transsexuals, no matter how hard they may try, just cannot seem to elude the clutches of gender discomfort. Many transsexuals I interviewed fought their feelings for years. Some of them did this by getting married and having children. Others avoided any serious commitments. I did get the feeling, however, that many of the men and women I talked to, even if they may have postponed any action, felt, in varying degrees, the inevitability of where their feelings might eventually take them.
I cried when I read that paragraph, because it reflected my own experiences and feelings so clearly.
Yes, I had tried (desperately) to “fit in” and “be normal” in what seemed to be a masculine role – and felt utterly miserable about myself in the process.
I refuse to accept anyone else (like la Barbera) telling me “I’m a bad person” for being TS. I haven’t harmed anybody by my transition, and I do not accept the BS about “change is possible”. I suspect that underneath all of the “Christian” salvation that “John” has testified to, he/she will find that their gender identity questions will always be there, just below the surface. No matter how many layers of inhibitions you put in place, identity is amazingly persistent.
Many people consider transition, but only go part way down the path, or turn back for a variety of reasons. I do not condemn these people, but recognize that they have found a balance point that works for them in their unique circumstances. The most honest will tell you that “they didn’t need to transition”, but they do not deny their gender identity either.
Ultimately, those of us who belong to minority (or low “social status”) populations cannot allow others to define our self-worth. We have to define self-worth in our own terms.
As an aside, I hope that this person has found a happy path for themselves, but I fear that may be unreasonably optimistic in the long run.
So LaBarbera waves his magic wand and suddenly every GLBT person goes to their knees in worship.
Hmmm. . .sounds like the typical wingnut fantasy.
Of course, Petey is right in one sense, Change is Possible.
That’s why I went up to Montreal in ’94.
Maybe it would be netter to say, “reassignment is possible,” or “congruence is possible, though.
Naw, “[Gender] Change is possible,” will do.
/sarcasm
If “change is possible” then it must work both ways, correct? Indeed, sexuality being shown on a continnuum would indicate change is inevitable. So a gay teen may feel obligated to play it straight for religious reasons, a trans adolescent may be fed poisionous misinformation…yeah, change is possible, but is that really saying a whole lot? Abuse is possible as well but that wouldn’t raise funds, now would it?
Fetus brain development into male or female irregardless of body design.
My apologies, due to computer crashes I have lost many of the research papers I had saved. Three different clinical research labs came up with the same results. The following is but a sample of over one million web pages listing this and other research.
always,
Barb
Elk City, Okla.
https://www.symposion.com/ijt/ijtc0106.htm
https://www3.telus.net/des1/
https://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/2034
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/queerscience.htm
https://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/TS.html
Barb,
I’ve only scanned them but these references don’t seem to be necessarily authoritative – certainly not conclusive. It would seem more accurate to say that some of the results tend to support the hypothesis that in the first three to six weeks after conception the embryo brain was designed as either male or female irregardless of what your body design is.
I’m not trying to be hard on you, but I’m sure you understand the reason behind this policy. Much of what we work to expose is junk science, often quoted and requoted from cites that were never valid to begin with. Statements of fact which do not represent obvious and common knowledge, must be supported by an authoritative reference. This is the responsibility of the person making the claim, not the readers. In this way we try to not be guilty of the very thing we fault in others.
Posted by: Michelle at December 24, 2006 01:30 PM
To be fair Michelle, there is nothing in ChildofGod’s comment that even mentions organized groups, church, denomination, or even Christianity. Your reply seems to assume an intent which can’t be derived from what was written. As far as spiritual appeals go, it seems pretty mild – almost generic.
It’s important that we don’t respond to every person of faith as though they were the ones who hurt us – and I do understand that hurt. But suggesting that anyone might seek strength and guidance from God is not beyond a number of authors on this site.
David,
My apologies, I didn’t log onto your web site to get bogged down in medical research data. However in the interest of knowledge…,
Sometimes you have to add two and two yourself instead of waiting for someone to hand you the answers. The url’s I posted for you had the data you wished if you had read down through them instead of scanning the top few lines for revelations.
My research data is on a HD that may end up costing me several thousand dollars to recover. Thousands of hours is on that HD. Let’s see if we can’t get you to thinking for yourself.
Approximately eight years back a research clinic found conclusive proof there is a physical difference between male and female brains. They published their papers in the medical journals. As you can imagine, there was an outcry from the medical community claiming it was bad research and bad science. In the next three years the research was repeated in two different clinics one of which was in the US. The results were the same as first.
Male and female brains are different in several areas. This wasn’t the problem. What caused such an uproar of “bad science” from the medical community was the rest of the published data.
Transsexual, gay and lesbian brains were part of those clinical research reports. All three clinics reported the same data.
Male and female brains are physically different.
Male and Gays have the same brain structure.
Females and lesbians have the same brain structure.
Females and male to female transsexuals have the same brain structure.
Males and female to male transsexuals have the same structure.
A sex difference in the human brain and its relation to transsexuality
JN Zhou, MA Hofman, LJG Gooren, DF Swaab
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:1CxjWC7b7r8J:www.w-o-m-a-n.net/PDF%2520FILES/Background/BG_file_20.pdf+related:fljZ-1kspQQJ:scholar.google.com/
Male-to-Female Transsexuals Have Female Neuron Numbers in a Limbic Nucleus – group of 10 »
FPM Kruijver, JN Zhou, CW Pool, MA Hofman, LJG … – 2000 – Endocrine Society
Sexual Differentiation of the Bed Nucleus of the Stria Terminalis in Humans
WCJ Chung, GJ De Vries, DF Swaab – Journal of Neuroscience, 2002 – neuroscience.org
Double duty for sex differences in the brain
GJ De Vries, PA Boyle – Brain, 1998
https://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~gjdlab/pdf/double-duty.pdf
Sex Differences in the Distribution of Androgen Receptors in the Human Hypothalamus
A FERNANDEZ-GUASTI, FPM KRUIJVER, M FODOR, DF
The following is some books you may check out.
Zhou, Hofman, Gooren and Swaab, ‘A sex difference in the human brain and its relation to transsexuality’ (1995) 378 NATURE, 68-70; Kruijver, Poole, Zhou, Hofman, Gooren and Swaab, ‘Male-to-female transsexuals have female neuron numbers in a limbic nucleus’, (2000) 85(5) JCEM, 2034-2041; Dick F Swaab, Book Review – Sexual Differentiation of the Brain’, Akira Matsumoto (ed.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 1999, (2003) 32(6) Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 585:3; Carina Dennis, ‘Brain development: The most important sexual organ’, (2004) 427 NATURE, 390-392
I only touched the data that is there. I really don’t have time for this. You may remove all the posts if this isn’t to your liking. You can’t hurt my feelings. I don’t know you.
always,
Barb
Elk City, Okla.
Dave says:
To be fair Michelle, there is nothing in ChildofGod’s comment that even mentions organized groups, church, denomination, or even Christianity. Your reply seems to assume an intent which can’t be derived from what was written. As far as spiritual appeals go, it seems pretty mild – almost generic.
I framed my comments in terms my personal experiences. In the context of a thread talking about declarations from outfits like La Barbera’s seemed quite appropriate.
My words – on review – do read more harshly than I had intended, and for that I apologize.
Barb,
Sorry. David wasn’t trying to insult you, he just likes to make certain that anyone challenging anything said on the site has access to the source of the statements. And in his efforts to be fair, David tries to be as tough on those supporting our general positions and opinions as he is on those opposing.
I have to say that I was unaware of the info you provided (though it doesn’t surprise me). I had known that female brains differ from males – this was the basis for the original Le Vay research on the hypothalamus. I know that there is research that supports the hypothesis that some gay people have some brain characteristics that were typical of the opposite sex. I didn’t know, however, that there was research relating to trangendered peoples (I guess that is an illustration of my own bias and ignorance).
Thanks for the sources. If anyone disagrees with you, I think you gave enough links to allow for adequate follow-up.
Barb,
The readers and commenters on this site are not, for the most part, professional researchers or scientists. In light of that we do our best to require statements made as fact such as yours be accompanied by references which support them. As with any environment where intellectual and scientific honesty are valued, the onus is on the one making the claim to provide the support.
Considering your apparent interest in sharing knowledge, I find your resistance to this concept puzzling. If we were to debate bogus claims as fact, well that would be a waste of our time as well as counter to the interests of this site.
Thank you for including further support. After reading your original cites more carefully, the best I could still say is that the data tend to support this hypothesis, not that it is conclusive. However this is not a strong area for me and others may do it more justice. Good luck with your hard drive.
Again, my apologies to David, Timothy, Autumn, and others if I have seemed harsh. Autumn’s article came across my screen because I reference research for transsexual, transgendered issues. In the interest of trying to share twenty one years of tracking these issues I may drop a note and move on. Seldom do I return unless the site comes back in my search. This blog did just that for whatever reasons known only to the computer gods?
Sometimes I loose patience because I have plowed this same ground for so long it seems everyone should know all this by now. I’ve crossed pens with the religious right and ultra liberal left for so long I have found trying to share data is a lost cause. They aren’t called “fringe radicals” because they have an open mind.
I have a million excuses why I was so short with the ladies and gentlemen aforementioned. The truth is, none of those excuses are plausible. If I seemed overly harsh, I didn’t intend to be. Sometimes I fail to lay down my sword when I intended to use my pen.
always,
Barb
Elk City, Okla