Gay science is all fake, how gays control psychology 同性戀科學沒有根據，同運團體如何控制心理學 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NyX5CxGraE An interview with Nicholas cummings, Ph.D. past president, American Psychologist Association. Part I the political history of the American Psychological Association Interviewed by Michel Lizotte 0:11 So first of all, I would like to know 首先，我想知道 0:14 you've been President of APA for several years and 您曾經擔任美國心理學協會主席數年 0:17 I just would like you to refresh my memory 我想請您回想一下 0:20 about when was the history of the reorientation therapy？ when did you 性別取向轉換治療的歷史大概是從甚麼時候開始的？ 0:26 start to hear about this disputed issue 您是從甚麼時候開始首度聽到這有爭議性的議題的？ 0:29 How... what can you tell me about the first reaction of the APA at that time? 可否請您告訴我那時美國心理學協會起初的反應是甚麼? 0:33 It probably started in the APA in the early 1970’s and 協會最初對此有反應大概始於 1970 年代早期 0:39 at that time the women's movement was in ascendency and 那時女權運動正轟轟烈烈地展開 0:43 tended to overshadow the gay rights issue 所以同性戀運動相對來說便不太被曝光 0:48 But the two seemed to melt and went on
但此後二者便彷彿持續融合在一起 0:51 and there was a time when 有段時間 0:55 I couldn't tell the difference between women's rights and gay rights 我甚至無法分別婦運與同運 1:00 because it involved the same people 因為鼓吹這兩者的都是同一批人 1:04 The first time it came up 當美國心理學協會首次在這個問題上表態時 1:08 I was a member of the Council sort of 我是協會的委員之一 1:11 in 1975 ‘cause I remember that’s when 那時是 1975 年因為我還記得 1:17 I made the resolution that 當時我曾經提出請協會決議 1:21 being gay was not a mental illness 認定同性戀並不是一種精神疾病 1:25 It was careful and logical. And it passed 那決議是既審慎又合邏輯的 1:29 the Council of representatives and that was the first issue that came up 該決議在委員會中通過，那便是協會第一次表態 1:34 I also said that, with that, that 但隨著那決議的通過，我同時也說 1:39 if the APA passed this resolution 如果協會通過那個決議 1:43
would also vote 則也應該同時通過 1:46 to continue research and 要繼續進行該方面的研究 1:50 demonstrates whatever the research demonstrates the 以研究結果來證明該決議 1:54 unbiased, open research. It was never done. 也就是用不預設立場又公開的研究來證實，但協會並未進行任何後續的研究 1:59 But the 但是 2:04 resolution that I made in the Council did get adopted 我當時所提出的決議確實曾被採納 2:08 and by a wide margin. In that era, 還是以高票通過的。在那個時代， 2:11 the Leona Tyler Principle was paramount “Leona Tyler 準則”是被奉為圭臬的 2:14 The APA would never take a position publicly 美國心理學協會絕對不可能公開表明任何立場 2:18 that wasn't supported by scientific evidence. That it had to be 除非那立場是有科學證據支持的。任何立場必須 2:22 scientifically demonstrated 是能以科學來證實的 2:24 and we abided, the presidents in my era 而在那個時代，我們每位協會的主席 2:29 abided by the Leonor Tyler Principle 都堅守“Leona Tyler 準則”
2:32 all of a sudden, things began to change. Things became more political 但突然之間，風氣開始改變了。各樣議題都開始朝向政治化 2:38 than scientific. The Leona Tyler Principle 而不再是科學化。“Leona Tyler 準則” 2:41 which was never withdrawn, disappeared. 雖然從未被協會廢止，卻消失了 2:45 In fact, you can’t even find that in the annuls of the APA. 事實上，你甚至無法在美國心理學協會所廢止的條文中找到它 2:51 If I didn't have it, it wouldn't exist, as far as they're concerned 要不是我手中還有該條文，對大眾來說，該準則根本就從來不曾存在過 2:54 I had no idea. None of us had any idea 我實在不知怎會變得如此，我們當中沒有一人明白 2:59 We were talking about open dialogue 我們當時所呼籲要有的就是公開，容多方對話 3:03 research unbiased 又不預設立場的研究 3:07 The gay rights movement 同性戀運動 3:11 in those days didn't have the kind of militancy it has now. I mean, Now it's all or 在那個時代不像今天這樣帶著火藥味。 3:16 none 現在是要求所有的權利一次到位 3:17 In the early years, it was more like 在早期，同運分子的態度比較是 3:20 “Let's see what's happening.” From your experience
「且讓我們隨著時勢運作」從您的經驗來看 3:25 when did you see this change of direction of APA coming? 美國心理學協會是從甚麼時候開始改變態度的 3:29 It started changing 協會在態度上有強烈的改變 3:33 pretty drastically by the late 1980’s 是在 1980 年代晚期已經成形了的 3:37 By the mid 1990’s 等到 1990 年代中期 3:40 the Leona Tyler Principle was absolutely forgotten 「Leona Tyler」準則早已被協會所遺忘 3:44 The political stances 政治觀點 3:47 seemed to override any scientific results 似乎已經超越所有科學研究結果 3:52 “cherry picking” results became the vote 以偏概全的結果取而代之，成為協會的決議 3:59 And the gay rights movement 同性戀運動 4:03 sort of captured the APA 似乎擄獲了美國心理學協會 4:07 It is very interesting the way it happened 很值得玩味的是 4:11 The APA bent over backwards to be 美國心理學協會遠超過一個客觀立場所當有的 4:15
understanding and open and 對同運格外能同理又開放 4:19 its understanding.... 這樣的認同 4:23 it left 便為 4:26 an open door for people to rush in and use it for 一群人廣開方便之門，讓他們得以藉著協會 4:31 other than scientific purposes, for political 來達成他們的政治目標，而不再是科學目標 4:34 purposes. It was preceded by 在協會轉變到這種態度之前 4:38 a number of issues. It became part of the movement 先發生了幾件事。這種態度 4:43 one called “diversity” 是「多元化」運動的產物之一 4:47 You want to bring 也就是強調 4:51 all under-represented peoples 必須在心理學研究中涵蓋所有少數族群 4:54 into psychology. And this is a very lofty idea on the surface of it 這從表面看來是個非常冠冕堂皇的想法 5:00 But when it becomes a bias 但當這樣的想法本身帶著偏見時…… 5:04 If I had to choose now, I would see a need to form an organization 如果今天我有能力選擇的話，我會覺得我們需要組成一個團隊
5:11 that would recruit straight, white males which are underrepresented today in the APA 特別招募異性戀的白人男性，因為那已成為現在美國心理學協會中的少數族群 5:19 What happened, step by step, 請問究竟是怎樣逐步發展 5:23 so that the organization changed like this with twenty years 導致這樣一個協會只不過在二十年之內便有這樣大的改變？ 5:27 We developed a group of psychologists 我們協會當中發展出由一群 5:31 that numbered around 200 to 250 為數在 200-250 人之間的心理學家 5:35 that rotated themselves throughout the offices of APA 輪流在協會中擔任委員 5:40 When the rule is passed that you couldn't serve more than X number of 當協會後來決議每個人在若干任後 5:45 sessions on the Council or on a certain, or particular office 便不得再擔任某個職位時 5:49 they would rotate. They would run for another office and then come back to 這些人就會輪換，去競選另外一個職位 5:54 the Council 好讓自己仍能留在委員會中 5:56 So for years, about 200-250 people 因此那許多年間，實際上只有 200-250 個人 6:00 were running the APA 掌握了整個美國心理學協會 6:03
And they were very select, in-bred group 並且這些人都是精挑細選，只有彼此意見相合才得留存的 6:07 They were ultra liberal 這些人是極端的自由派 6:11 and anything that was not ultra liberal was anathema 而對他們來說，任何不極端自由的想法都是可咒可詛的 6:16 so that things like questioning 所以只要有人提出 6:22 some of the statements about gay or lesbian rights 任何關於同性戀權利方面的質疑 6:27 was not being accepted 就都不被接受 6:31 It became a civil rights issue 這變成了一個人權議題 6:34 rather than a scientific issue. I believe in civil rights. 而不再是科學議題。我相信人權是該被爭取的 6:39 I was very active in helping 我自己那時就非常積極地幫助 6:43 gays be accepted in the APA 同性戀者能被美國心理學協會接納 6:47 To this day, I am NOT opposed to gay marriage 直到如今我也仍然不反對同性婚姻 6:50 I know I differ with NARTH on some of these issues 我知道在這些議題上我與「全國研究與治療同性戀協會」是意見相左的 6:53 But nonetheless, my position is 但儘管如此，我的立場仍是
6:56 that the person is 個人有權利 7:00 the one who decides what they want to do 按照自己的性別取向決定要如何行 7:03 with your orientation. And if somebody decides to be gay, I respect that. 如果有人決定要當同性戀者，我尊重他的決定 7:09 If somebody wants to marry the same sex, 如果有人決定要與同性結婚 7:13 I respect that. But I also respect the right 我也尊重他的決定。但我同時也尊重 7:18 to disagree. And 個人有反對同性戀的權利。 7:22 that's not allowed. You only hear one side of the issue. 而那反對的權利現在是不被允許的，你只能聽到此議題單方面的聲音 7:29 You've been President of the APA for how many years? 您曾經擔任美國心理學協會的主席多少年 7:32 I was President Elect Elect 我曾經被預定兩任後要當主席 7:35 then I was Present Elect. And then I was the President 然後被預定下任要當主席。接著我成為主席。 7:38 and I was the past President. And then the APA got rid of me. 然後我成為「前」主席。然後協會就不再讓我參選了。 7:42 You were President for how long? 所以您正式擔任主席是多久呢？ 7:45 I was President from 1979-1980
我正式擔任主席是在 1979-1980 7:50 I was on the Council of APA starting in the early 70’s. I was on the Board 我從 1970 年早期開始就擔任協會的委員，並且也是理事之一 7:55 of Directors 7:57 In the mid 70’s, I was elected 在 1970 年代中期，我被選為 8:00 President Elect Elect in 1977 預定兩年後擔任主席，那時是 1977 年 8:05 I don't know what the future is because people are 我不知道美國心理學協會未來前途如何 8:09 dropping their membership in APA. APA is shrinking. 因為協會的會員不斷在退出。協會持續在縮小當中 8:14 The income that they used to get from the special assessment is dried up 8:20 協會過去靠會費而得的收入已經用盡 So the APA is going through some 8:23 所以協會此時正在經歷 real changes at this point. What the future will be 重大的轉變。協會未來前途如何 8:28 I'm not sure. But 我不確定 8:31 the clinicians, for example, are disappointed in that the APA is not 但舉例來說，臨床心理醫師現在對協會非常失望 8:36 done 因為協會並未 8:37 for it what it should have been doing with all the millions of dollars and
好好使用那數百萬元 8:40 we're collecting all those years 在過去年間所收到的會費 8:42 What we need to do is have an open 我們現在需要做的是開始一個公開的對話 8:45 dialogue, no holds barred, and see where the research takes us 完全不設限，看看最後的研究結果會告訴我們甚麼 8:50 Right now, certain research does not get funded 現在有些研究無經費可進行 8:55 The funding agencies cherry-pick 那是因為決定研究哪些計畫的單位 8:58 what they fund. If we have an open dialogue will be much closer 是隨自己的喜好來決定的。如果我們能開始一個公開的對話 9:04 in the next five years, to a resolution to all of this 便可以在未來五年內，更快地為這些得出一個決議 9:08 but right now we are in turmoil 但現在我們仍在動盪不安中 9:11 If anything, the two sides have stiffened their 唯一能說的是，現在兩方都更強烈地堅守自己的 9:16 positions 立場