Connect with us

Popular Psychology Magazine Refuses To Ban ‘Ex-Gay’ Therapy Ads

Published

on

Psychology Today is refusing to eliminate its advertising section for harmful and dangerous “conversion” therapy.

For nearly 50 years Psychology Today has helped educate readers on a wide variety of psychological issues. Originally founded in 1967, it was once owned by the premiere psychological organization, the American Psychological Association. Now, it is endorsed by the National Board for Certified Counselors.

That endorsement is now problematic for those who wish to advance the credibility of the scientific discipline known as psychology.

Psychology Today is refusing to eliminate its listings for practitioners of so-called conversion therapy, also known as “ex-gay” therapy or reparative therapy. The magazine’s former owner, the American Psychological Association, along with nearly every major medical organization in the U.S. and several around the world, have deemed conversion therapy, which claims to turn gay people straight, possibly harmful and dangerous.

Two states and the District of Columbia now ban the practice for minors, and a New Jersey judge recently deemed conversion therapy a “fraud.”

The Human Rights Campaign has been in talks with Psychology Today, but has been unsuccessful in moving the magazine to remove the listings, and thus, its implicit stamp of approval, even if the listings are not intended to provide it.

“There is no credible evidence that conversion therapy can change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression, and it is abundantly clear that conversion therapy poses devastating health risks for LGBT young people,” Fred Sainz, HRC’s vice president of communications and marketing, told Psychology Today’s chief executive and publisher last week. “Psychology Today has the opportunity to take a leadership role in protecting the public from these harmful and illegal practices by taking prompt action to limit this type of advertisement and creating awareness about the danger of conversion therapy.” 

The Huffington Post reached out to Charles Frank, in charge of day-to-day operations at Psychology Today. Frank “told The Huffington Post he has no intention of removing health professionals who offer conversion therapy from the company’s listings.”

“We take care not to sit in judgement of others by allowing or denying individual participation” in the directory, he wrote in an email. The standard for inclusion, he said, is that practitioners are “who they say they are,” are licensed where relevant and are “under no sanction from their states (or countries) not to practice.” 

Frank said that Psychology Today is not “a fan” of reparative therapy, and that PT occasionally publishes editorials criticizing the practice. But he said this wasn’t enough of a reason to remove professional profiles from the directory. “There are many reasons why one group of people take issue with another, especially around the sensitive subject of relationships and therapy,” he said. “The Therapy Directory cannot pick winners.”

 

Image by Barb Watson via Flickr and a CC license

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

'BAD JUDGMENT'

Mike Pence Quietly Took a Huge Christmas Ski Vacation as Coronavirus Cases Soared – Costing Taxpayers Over $750,000

Published

on

More details continue to emerge about the Trump-Pence administration.

The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) said new documents show then-VP Mike Pence showed “bad judgment” during the coronavirus pandemic.

“While coronavirus cases surged to record levels late last December, Vice President Mike Pence went on a ski vacation in Vail, Colorado. The trip came with a massive bill to taxpayers, with Secret Service protection alone costing $757,527.85, according to documents obtained by CREW. At the time of his holiday travel, Pence was the head of the White House coronavirus task force, which put out dire warnings after Thanksgiving as the CDC recommended that Americans stay home over the holidays in order to limit the spread of the virus. Clearly, Pence did not follow the government’s advice, and in the process put dozens of Secret Service agents at heightened risk of infection,” the group said on Thursday.

“Pence’s trip extended from December 23rd to January 1st, and reportedly included a Secret Service entourage of at least 48 agents, contributing to both the high cost and the risk of infection.The agents stayed at several different hotels in the Vail area and rented 77 cars for the trip. The charges included more than $270,000 at the Marriott Vail Mountain and more than $80,000 at the Ritz Carlton,” the group reported.

“This also is not the first time Mike Pence stuck taxpayers with huge bills for his travel. Back in 2019, he traveled to Ireland for government business in Dublin, but stayed overnight at Donald Trump’s resort on the other side of the country in Doonbeg. Travel costs for that were more than half a million dollars, and also resulted in the Secret Service spending more than $15,000 at Trump’s resort,” the group noted. “While Pence’s December trip to Vail was less nakedly corrupt than his trip to Doonbeg, it showed another kind of bad judgment, by putting many government workers tasked with keeping him safe at risk in the midst of a raging pandemic. We would hope that the head of the coronavirus task force would know better.”

Image: Official White House photo by Myles D. Cullen via Flickr

 

Continue Reading

'GAY GAY GAY. WOW.'

Andrew Yang Tried to Get an LGBTQ Group’s Endorsement So He Talked About Wanting to Visit a Lesbian Bar: NYT

Published

on

Former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, who was a surprising breakout success but suffered criticisms about “tone,” and continues to, is running to become New York City’s next mayor. He’s currently the frontrunner in the very early race but once again, as The New York Times reports, his inability to build support among minority groups is hurting him.

Yang spoke to the Stonewall Democratic Club of New York City, a top LGBTQ organization, on Wednesday.

“It did not go particularly well,” the Times reports.

Yang’s approach and the way he treated LGBTQ people was seen as “outdated,” according to Stonewall’s president, Rose Christ.

“Yang cited gay members of his staff as apparent evidence of his openness to the club’s concerns, and expressed enthusiasm about the prospect of visiting Cubbyhole, a storied New York lesbian bar, participants said,” the Times reveals.

“He proactively talked about resurrecting the city’s Pride March, but failed to pay sufficient heed to more substantive issues they were actually concerned about, including homelessness and affordable housing, they said.”

“When I see a candidate come in just with Michael Scott levels of cringe and insensitivity, it either tells me Andrew Yang is in over his head or is not listening to his staff,” said Alejandra Caraballo, a member of the organization, referring to the character played by Steve Carell on “The Office.” “Those are both radioactive flashing signs that say he is not prepared to be mayor of New York.”

Yang also repeatedly referred to LGBTQ people as a “community,” telling members of the Stonewall Democratic Club how much he cares about “your community.”

“I genuinely do love you and your community,” Yang told members. “You’re so human and beautiful. You make New York City special. I have no idea how we ever lose to the Republicans given that you all are frankly in, like, leadership roles all over the Democratic Party.”

Filmmaker and Stonewall member Harris Doran said Yang “kept calling us ‘Your community,’ like we were aliens.”

“We have, like, this incredible secret weapon,” Yang also said. “It’s not even secret. It’s like, we should win everything because we have you all.”

“Gay, gay, gay. Wow,” one person wrote in the chat accompanying the forum, which was later shared with The New York Times. “More to us than just that.”

Continue Reading

News

Trump Loving Lawmaker Schooled for Claim Founders Oppose DC Statehood: They ‘Never Intended’ for GOP to ‘Commit Sedition’ Either

Published

on

Just before the U.S. House of Representatives voted 216-208 on Thursday to make Washington, D.C. a state, Ohio Republican state representative Mike Loychik posted a tweet insisting the “founders never intended for Washington DC to become a state.”

He’s not wrong, technically, but – as many corrected him – given that the founders never intended for many things, including for women and Black people to be allowed to vote, for people who did not own property to vote, and, as some noted, for Republicans to “commit sedition,” what difference does it make?

The founders also did not originally intend for Washington, D.C. to be the seat of government. First it was New York City, then Philadelphia.

Rep. Loychik, who just filed a bill to make Ohio taxpayers spend $300,000 to rename Mosquito Lake State Park in Donald Trump’s honor, did not respond to any of the people educating him, but hours later he posted a tweet attacking Democrats:

Loychik is clearly ignoring the fact that “the Republican Party has historically taken far more effective advantage of the addition of new states,” as The Atlantic reported in 2019.

In 1889 and 1890, Congress added North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Washington, Idaho, and Wyoming—the largest admission of states since the original 13. This addition of 12 new senators and 18 new electors to the Electoral College was a deliberate strategy of late-19th-century Republicans to stay in power after their swing toward Big Business cost them a popular majority. The strategy paid dividends deep into the future; indeed, the admission of so many rural states back then helps to explain GOP control of the Senate today, 130 years later.

Washington, D.C. could become the 51st state, if Democrats in the Senate can convince six of their Democratic colleagues currently opposed to the measure, and another ten Senate Republicans to support it, or kill the filibuster, which would allow passage with 50 Senate votes plus Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie.

Here’s how some are schooling the Ohio Republican lawmaker:

 

Image: screenshot via Facebook

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.