This is the MLA citation: Flentje, Annesa, Nicholas C. Heck, and Bryan N. Cochran. "Experiences of Ex-Ex-Gay Individuals in Sexual Reorientation Therapy: Reasons for Seeking Treatment, Perceived Helpfulness and Harmfulness of Treatment, and Post-Treatment Identification." Journal of Homosexuality 61.9 (2014): 1242-268. Web.

This article is found in an academic journal, which means that it is reliable.

The psychologists behind this study and article respond to the idea that conversion therapy is useful to the lgbt+ community because through their experiment they disprove this 'logic' of the other side's arguments. They want to prove that conversion therapy causes more issues for people then if these people were able to just express their lgbt+ identities. People with extreme religious backgrounds may disagree with this article because they want to believe that even though they are putting their children in harms way through this therapy, that the end result of their children being able to live an eternal life in heaven is more important.

Through the study that these authors conducted on lgbt+ people who had underwent conversion therapy at some point of their lives, the data and quotes from these people who have experienced the harshness of the therapy, they establish pathos. Pathos is shown because these people went through traumatic events and still identify as lgbt+. This study shows that the harm that they went through to become heterosexual was not worth it in the end.

This study is interesting to me because it shows that conversion therapy may never actually work on anyone. It makes me question if there is anyone who would say that it helped them realize that they are heterosexual instead of homosexual? If there are people out there who believe conversion therapy was a good thing for their identity, are they in denial because of the pain that conversion therapy brings or did it truly change their identity? This is something I would like to investigate more with in the future.

Flent Je, Heck, and Cochran decide to use arguments of the other side's perspective in order to show that the controversy of conversion therapy has multiple arguments and sides that show the complexity of the topic at hand. This evidence is reliable because they also cite their sources and invite the other side into the conversation. It may not be a recent discovery, since Zucker's argument appeared in 2003; however, it is an excellent idea on the authors' of this article to include to show the history of the controvery of conversion therapy being used on lgbt+ individuals. Since, they include arguments of the other side, it helps establish even more ethos because they are willing to acknowledge the people who have not agreed with their views on this therapy in the past. This shows that the authors are not bias and have done research on all angles of the controversy.

This is the claim that the authors are making through their observations of the certain lgbt+ individuals that they decided to write about. They state that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and should not be treated as one, especially not with conversion therapy, since it causes the individual more pain.

Flent Je, Heck, and Cochran are the authors of this article. They are all professors in Psychology, which establishes their ethos because they are all professionals in their field of study and will be able to analyze the harmful affects of conversion therapy successfully.

[](https://www.hongkongfp.com/2016/09/20/gay-pride-china-activists-fight-conversion-therapy/ This is a link to an article that is about a man who went through conversion therapy in China and how he is planning to fight for it becoming banned. This helps relate this article to what it is like in another country besides America.

Https://www.facebook.com/JournalistAmyWillis. "Gay Men Still Subjected to Electric Shocks to 'cure' Their Sexuality." Metro Gay Men Still Subjected to Electric Shock Therapy to Cure Theirsexuality. N.p., 08 Oct. 2015. Web. 12 Oct. 2016.

This is the MLA format for this source.

The documentary establishes pathos through talking to Chinese lgbt+ youth, as well as by showing disturbing clips of the conversion therapy process in China. The documentary does not include bias because it gives insight on what the doctors who perform conversion therapy in China believe and provides insight on what lgbt+ youth are subjected to.

The documentary amplifies that conversion therapy is something that Chinese parents are willing to make their lgbt+ youth go through in order to make sure that they will not shame their family. In China, it is less about the religious aspect of homosexuality and more about how lgbt+ youth affect the honor and status of the entire family. The documentary shows that the conversion therapy that happens in China is hurtful to the individuals that are forced into it by their family members to restore honor. The people who would disagree with this documentary, as to why conversion therapy is harmful, would be the families who feel that their lgbt+ youth should feel ashamed that they cannot bring future generations to their families. Personally, I think this documentary will be an excellent source to include in the future because it shows the perspective that China has on lgbt+ youth and also brings a new direction with how another country feels. Usually with the homosexuality argument and the conversion therapy debate, the opposing side is arguing due to their religion, but this debate is more about honor of a family.

The author of this article is Amy Willis; however, she is not the person who created the documentary. She is just reporting on the documentary that the source 'Unreported World' created.

The article appears on the internet to get the word out there that there is a documentary that will be airing live in order to show that conversion therapy takes place in more than just one country in the world.

The stakeholder in this video article are the lgbt+ individuals in China as well as the viewpoints of the doctors who are subjecting these people to conversion therapy. It is reliable because they interviewed both sets of people, since it was filmed it is known that this is exactly what they said about the topic.

This article would not let me use hypothesis.is in the actual article; however, I decided to write the entire source needs up here.

Erin Dean is the author of this article that appeared in the news. As a reporter, Dean is expected to research conversion therapy through out time. This source does not provide much insight on the conversion therapy or the lgbt+ youth that are subjected to it; however, it does provide an interesting viewpoint on how it affected the people who were on the other side of these tests.

Dean suggests that this 'cure' of conversion therapy on lgbt+ individuals through out the ages is unpleasant and harsh; however, it also explains that conversion therapy was not just harsh on the patients, but those involved with administering these treatments were also affected.

Dean explains that conversion therapy is harmful to more than just one group, which may be an unpopular opinion to people who believe this is solely an lgbt+ individual's issue because they may believe that by talking about the nurses and doctors involved in this practice that it takes away from the issue at hand.

The author of this article uses the facts of historic occurrences and suicides that happened to people who were involved in conversion therapy.

I would need to do more research on how the stakeholder of nurses and doctors involved are affected by doing following orders of hurting the lgbt+ individuals for their 'treatments'. The nurses are stakeholders because they have opinions on the horrifying therapy that they placed on another human being. [](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/28/gay-conversion-therapy-ruins-lives-lgbt-rights This article explains that conversion therapy hurts lgbt+ the most, however, it should affect the community as a whole.

Here is the MLA Citation: Dean, Erin. "Shock Therapies." Nursing Standard 30.23 (2016): 25. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.

This source is goes into more depth on the Islamic views on homosexuality, which provides a base on what their views on conversion therapy may be.

These are the authors of the article and are professors with PhD's. This shows that they are qualified and have knowledge in their field of study for homosexuality and conversion therapy.

This is a journal that this article is derived from in order to critique the journal that was created by Ahmed, as well as to explain the Islamic viewpoint on the situation of conversion therapy.

This is the MLA format citation

Junaid B. Jahangir and Hussein Abdul-latif establish credibility through the evidence that they use throughout their article. They explain that Kutty's reasons for supporting conversion therapy are not justifiable, and then provide statistics and research based evidence, as to why these reasons are not logical reasons for conversion therapy to be needed.

I think for the future of my research, that this source will be helpful because I will be able to include other countries views and reasons for using conversion therapy to strengthen my argument against it.

Since the author of this article is an American, he could be bias to the Islamic faith and viewpoints. However, this may be unlikely considering America has individuals who are religious as well with the same kind of approach to conversion therapy that doctors have over there.

The author of this article is arguing against the ideas of a different homosexual viewpoint through the perspective that Islam has. The author uses evidence from an Islamic source to point out the flaws of the idea that sexuality can be changed through a variety of ways that may be harmful to an individual. Also this compares and contrasts America's ideas of homosexuality versus another country. In the American culture many arguments against homosexuals is mostly based on religious affiliations, which seems to also be the same approach many of the Islamic faith have as well.

Junaid B. Jahangir and Hussein Abdul-latif are responding to the views of the Islamic faith and their views on homosexuality and the treatment that would be best for this 'mental illness'. The author's disagree with the point of views that are explained by conservative Muslims, who would also not share the viewpoints of the authors of this article. Since, the Islamic faith categorizes homosexuality under a mental illness, the way they handle it is harsh and meant to be solutions to an actual disease.

Not only would the Islamic faith disagree with the viewpoints presented in this article, but they would also be considered a stakeholder in the topic of conversion therapy. Since, conversion therapy is different for other cultures and does happen around the world, they do have different ways to go about the therapy. This is a reliable source for the Islamic faith viewpoint on homosexuals and conversion therapy because the article features many thoughts by a Muslim doctor.

This is a stakeholder because they are from the medical perspective of topic of conversion therapy. They are a organization that deals with mental health especially for youth. They are reliable with the information that they have because they are close to the field that is being observed for this research. Many of the people apart of this organization are doctors, social workers, etc. This is relevant to the current topic of the affects of conversion therapy because they are educated in the mental health category and have been apart of helping the individuals for years.

This is the citation in MLA format.

There is no cited author of this article; however, it seems to be someone associated with the SAMHSA organization, which is an organization that is for the mental health of lgbt+ youth. This article seems to appear in a pamphlet format, which is often displayed in doctor offices , in order to inform patients. If this is the case, then this may be seen by multiple kinds of people, including parents and the lgbt+ youth.

Throughout this article, the author uses research based evidence. Although, they never use quotes about other's opinions, they do paraphrase with the citations of where the information is derived from. The evidence always seems to support the idea that conversion therapy is harmful and does not seem to go into the other side's perspective, but the information is reliable and recent.

The author includes a list of individuals who contributed to the panel, which consists mostly of professionals with multiple different backgrounds. This is done to establish more ethos throughout the article.

The SAMHSA group establishes ethos through explaining that they collaborated with another organization called the Federal Agencies Project. This shows that they are credible, since it is not just the idea of one professional organization to end conversion therapy. There are multiple groups and organizations around the United States that have input on the situation. Although, this establishes credibility, it could also be believed that the author of this article only seeked out the opinion of another organization that already believed that this is a harmful therapy. This could show bias toward the idea that conversion therapy is harmful, since they do not seem to include much information about why the other side believes that it is not a harmful technique.

The author of this article realizes that therapies that try to change the identity of the youth are harmful and should under no circumstance be used to 'treat' their lgbt+ identities. This kind of conversion therapy is not a treatment, instead it hurts the person who is forced into it, especially if they are mostly sure that they are not heterosexual, but this is a discovery that the child has to make on their own. []http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/sexinfo/sites/default/files/files/styles/large/public/field/image/conversion%203.jpg This is a picture that relates to the standpoint of the author of this article. The picture is from a protest on conversion therapy because it is harmful for those involved. It is relevant because it is becoming more known by ordinary people (not doctors) that this kind of therapy is not helping the lgbt+ youth.

Moving forward in my research I would like to explore more of these symptoms that lgbt+ youth often have after the rejection of their identities. I believe this would be an interesting way to see what kind of emotions this kind of rejection leads to for many youth. For instance, do many youth who are rejected based on their lgbt+ identities feel shame, want to commit suicide, etc.?

Children need to feel a sense of security and confidence when it comes to learning about themselves; however, this is deeply influenced by the people around them. If someone 'comes out' at a young age or during puberty they often are met with multiple challenges, especially from the people they hold the closest. Many children do not know how their parents may take the news that they currently identify with the lgbt+ community. They long for validation and acceptance and are afraid of rejection, especially from their parents. Often, when a child has more conservative parents on the lgbt+ views, they are often afraid of what will happen to them when they decide to disclose the information of their possible sexuality. For instance, many of these children are afraid to be left on their own or kicked out because of their sexualities. Many years ago, I knew a boy who was older then I was, who grew up with a Catholic background. When he was open about it to his parents after years of struggling with finding his identity, he was met with rejection and acceptance. His mother could not accept that her son was gay and did not know how to handle the information in a positive manner, which caused a rift in their relationship. However, his father was completely accepting and never treated him differently for something he could not change.

SAMHSA is trying to explain that sexuality varies in human beings and is a perfectly natural attraction. The audience is most likely toward parents who do not know how to handle their feelings about their child being lgbt+, more specifically a parent who may be more conservative about their views. For instance, families with strict religious backgrounds have a tendency to believe that homosexuality is a sin. In order for the author of this article to continue with how a parent or guardian should handle these negative feelings toward their child for not being heterosexual, they use the word "normal" to validate the youths' sexualities.

The claim in this journal is placed in the summary and argues that lgbt+ youths experience multiple different issues in the mental health category, which is where SAMHSA comes in to exclaim the negative effects on the child that often occur when a family acts in a negative fashion to their child's sexual identity and/or gender identity. Ultimately their goal is to create a more positive environment for these youths, especially through getting the conversion therapy thoughts out of a parent's or guardian's head before it causes more damage to the lgbt+ child.

tlandrey