How awful, how dreadful, how widespread, how wrong, . . . how in retrospect.
Just a few jolts off the old internet:
In the UK.
In residential schools.
In Britain in the sixties as archived by the NIH.
And Aubrey Levin from South Africa to Calgary.
Can you believe it? It was going on in places other than BYU? It still goes on. And I thought Mormons were the only ones involved in such sordid research and practice?
Any of you scientifically inclined souls care to have a run explaining the scientific community's one time fascination and embrace of Eugenics while we are at it?
Or care to at least tell the whole story in the context of the times?
I'm still waiting for the documentary evidence that BYU's "studies" occurred without informed consent.
The prodigal blogger
10 years ago
Hi, QS.
ReplyDeleteYou are feeling pretty angry about all of this, aren't you? Care to elaborate further?
I, too, want (all) things documented truthfully.
I don't know if anger is quite the right word here. Would it be annoyed?
ReplyDeleteOmission is just as bad as blatant falsehoods-it is still FRAUDULENT. Unfortunately, there is always a willing segment of the market willing to buy in because it suits their bias or the argument they hope to make. And they are making arguments here, and taking a pretty cheap shot in my opinion. But this has been going on for a very long time hasn't it?
Credibility. It still counts for something. Now I am off to monetize.
I would agree with you- "annoyed" is what I "heard" in your post. and, you make a very valid point: NOT telling the entire story IS fraudulent. And, they HAVE made it seem, haven't they, that BYU is the ONLY place where this unwanted pratice has occurred.
ReplyDeleteSurely, I do NOT want this sort of practice (shock/aversion therapy) happening anywhere, least of all on the Church campuses.
Good luck with the "monetizing"- does this mean you are running off your own currency? ;)
Love and respect, always.
I did not mean to imply that BYU was alone in the 60's and 70's in its collapse of research ethics (or that such things do not continue presently at places other than BYU, where aversion therapy is not currently practiced). Certainly some of the more extreme experimental treatments of homosexuality performed during that time period, such as chemical castration and experimental brain surgery, were not performed at BYU. However, for a church that claims exclusive revelation and prophetic insight into God's will, I would have hoped that it would not follow the trends of secular research, particularly when such research ultimately fails to produce the desired results. The BYU aversion therapy experiments are simply further evidence that the church's policies toward homosexuality are inconsistent over time, are not divorced from prevailing public opinion (at least among conservative religious thought), and fail to engender confidence that current church policies mirror God's will and will not change in the future.
ReplyDelete