california boy Posted November 21, 2021 Posted November 21, 2021 1 minute ago, Calm said: Not McBride’s as his was both clothed and nude. Can’t remember the positive stimulus, bern too long. If by study, you mean McBride’s and not in general, I will take your word for it as that detail is even too trivial for me. Dang, having said that, now I want to confirm it, lol. Have you listened to the testimony I linked to by the men who were in the study?
Calm Posted November 21, 2021 Posted November 21, 2021 2 minutes ago, california boy said: I agree, without hard evidence it shouldn't be stated as fact. Or even likely…unless there are testimonies about Bergin using EAT (reading testimonies is as far in the past the McBride; while I read a number of testimonies, not a majority I am guessing…is there an estimate out there on claims of having experienced EAT at BYU as opposed to any therapy intended to alter homosexual behaviour?)
Calm Posted November 21, 2021 Posted November 21, 2021 (edited) 37 minutes ago, california boy said: Have you listened to the testimony I linked to by the men who were in the study? I have read a number before in and out of the study. I can’t track details well in listening, lose focus even more than reading. Since I believed many of them and accept that aversion therapy was used at BYU as well as by therapists connected in some way (referred off campus, for example) and that it was presented as do it or get expelled for at least some, I didn’t see a need to repeat the performance (I do make a distinction about the value of anecdotal though as far as level of confirmation, actual medical or psychological reports and research are better, but putting faces to experiences is important in activism, examining ethics, and preventing abuse and promoting good stuff). The use of EAT at BYU is not the controversial to me in that it was in common use in the field for quite some time and is still used today in lesser forms. What would be controversial to me would be coverups, including Pres Oaks potentially lying about it. I am unsatisfied by what I have read from him, but also want clarification from him on some points before I decide whether coverup, natural ignorance (knowing how universities operate and the standards of oversight back them), avoidance of specifics (weaseling if you prefer), or something else. Happy to take your word given my current state that someone reported a personal experience of Bergin using it. That would count as evidence increasing the probability he had. I will be honest and say no names besides McBride’s as definite either way (except some as “no way” themselves though they might have referred students) are popping in my head right now, but I can think of a few profs and grad students who might have seen it as helpful and close to other techniques I associate with them in my memories, but I don’t remember the topic of homosexuality coming up with them, so don’t know their biases. It was not a focus in any of my classes or research, though discussed like many other behaviours defined as disorders at the time. I heard quite a bit more about criminal behaviour as two professors worked at the prison and youth detention center. Bergin is not one of them I think of as possibles, but I didn’t know him beyond in passing, referred to on rare occasions by my profs, seen him in the halls iirc. Pretty sure he was more Rogerian than behaviourist. While I might use more Rogerian behaviours myself, it is rather blah to study, while behaviourism, even though I disagree with some fundamental assumptions, is much more interesting from a historical perspective to me. Love Walden II for fun reading. Edited November 21, 2021 by Calm
Calm Posted November 21, 2021 Posted November 21, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: sorry if I gave TMI. No, that is a crucial detail imo given it informs about the type of therapy or research being performed. It could be a type of biofeedback or research with behaviourist slant, for example, and definitely not relying on self report, so anyone describing as self reported isn’t using that method of measuring (unless perhaps they were trying to measure the accuracy of self reporting). Edited November 21, 2021 by Calm
Calm Posted November 21, 2021 Posted November 21, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Tacenda said: I think what can work is Pres Oaks may not be outright lying, but possibly lying by omission of further information? Also, in my readings I read that the therapies were taking place in a building not on campus perhaps. Now I need to find where I read it. Also, the instrument didn't shock the penis, but shocked maybe the arm or torso or ? And it happened when the penis was aroused, sorry if I gave TMI. And hopefully, I'm remembering correctly. ETA: Found where I read where therapies took place. Not sure if they always were done there: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/mormon-gay-cures-reparative-therapies-shock-today/story?id=13240700 "BYU said its counseling services never conducted such treatment, but O'Donovan counters that he was evaluated by Joseph Smith Family Living Center, another service on campus." There was also the CCC***(think that is the abbreviation,m, pretty sure Comprehensive Counseling Clinic) the psych department’s clinic that had students training to do therapy, in the big rusty box kitty corner from the Creamery. There were several departments doing counseling (psych, family therapy and social work, educational off the top of my head) as well as full time counselors at the BYU counseling center in the Smoot admin building while I was there iirc. I did group therapy in the elementary school south of the CCC, but highly doubt any EAT was done there, though the equipment might have been more portable than I am imagining. ***Maybe the Taylor building now. Quote Joseph Smith Family Living Center I took a weaving class in there, so who knows what else they got up to in that building. I should have taken more fun classes, it was that, pottery, and fencing I took just because I wanted to. Edited November 21, 2021 by Calm
Calm Posted November 21, 2021 Posted November 21, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, Tacenda said: I have this quote: https://universe.byu.edu/2014/04/08/a-history-of-the-byu-honor-code/Although therapy was required, Dye promised that “no student working through Standards will ever undergo aversion therapy.” Electroshock and vomiting aversion therapies were nonetheless used in special cases.119 Wrong link, it is http://signaturebookslibrary.org/the-abominable-and-detestable-crime-against-nature/#gay Mormons 119 —— PS: think I have responded as far as I saw necessary, there were some questions that were irrelevant once I had clarified my comments because based on false assumptions from either misreading or my sloppy writing. But point out if I missed something you (speaking generally) want me to address. Edited November 21, 2021 by Calm
Tacenda Posted November 21, 2021 Posted November 21, 2021 2 minutes ago, Calm said: Wrong link, it is http://signaturebookslibrary.org/the-abominable-and-detestable-crime-against-nature/#gay Mormons 119 Thanks!
Calm Posted November 21, 2021 Posted November 21, 2021 3 hours ago, california boy said: guess I am unclear what you are trying to assert about Bergin and how that would discredit what we absolutely know as fact that happened at BYU. Did I miss this one? . There is that one claim that Bergin admitted to EAT in the New Era article. That is my sole focus in any discrediting of claims, though not the sole focus of all of my comments, of course. I have explained my current view of what happened at BYU so won’t here.
Recommended Posts