> If you think being gay is due even in part to environmental factors, then reparative therapy would have to be able to do something according to your hypothesi

> If you think being gay is due even in part to environmental factors, then reparative therapy would have to be able to do something according to your hypothesis. This is false. Even if sexual orientation is due in part to environmental factors, that does not imply mutability once established. To answer your question, I don't think it should be allowed in principle - probably not for anyone but particularly not for minors. The effectiveness of the treatment has not been established at all, for one, and it causes a variety of disturbing side effects in people in the form of serious mental health issues, regardless of the outcome of the 'treatment'. For that matter, since sexual orientation is not a mental health issue in the first place, it's impossible to justify treatment even if it is effective. If reparative therapy were a pill, and I were the FDA, there is no way in hell it would pass human trials. In fact, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't even make it to human trials. This is complicated somewhat by the fact that psychological treatment (i.e. as opposed to psychiatric treatment which involves medication) is more lightly regulated in many jurisdictions, if at all. Perhaps that should also change. But especially in the case of minors, and especially for reparative therapy in particular, where in the overwhelming majority of cases parents are clearly not approaching it from the perspective of what's best for their child - no it should not be allowed. > How about convincing you they weren't doing it deliberately, but instead were chasing ratings using controversy and not caring about long-term societal results? I don't think that's exclusive to using media for social control. In fact, it's sort of an important part of it, since you need everyone paying attention and giving all the bullshit the undue consideration it totally doesn't deserve. To be clear, I don't think there is a single grand conspiracy to bring all of Western civilization under the control of a handful of oligarchs, and that this conspiracy involves media control. Rather, I think that various psychopaths in positions of power are involved in various petty conspiracies with other psychopaths, and some of these people happen to own media organizations. And, probably some of them have also convinced themselves that in fact they are involved in such a grand conspiracy - it would be something to point out and laugh at if the effects of it weren't so awful.