A Mormon in the Cheap Seats blog post referenced an email exchange between Rob Lauer and David C. Pruden, the director of Evergreen International, Inc. (http://evergreeninternational.org/, http://www.thessavoice.com/, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evergreen_International). The entire exchange appears here. The first-person commentary is by Rob Lauer. This exchange took place on or arond May 21, 2012.
*****
Saturday morning after reading in the New York Times that famed psychologist Dr. Robert Spitzer had renounced his early belief that sexual orientation, I emailed Evergreen International–the LDS gay therapy organization that bases it’s organization’s entire operation on earlier statements made by Dr. Spitzer.
Below is what I wrote to them:
Dear Brethren
Will you continue to have a full page on the Evergreen website about Dr. Robert Spitzer when in this morning’s New York Times, Dr. Spitzer himself has publically renounced his former theory that same-sex attraction can be changed and has now publically proclaimed that he believes attempts to alter sexual attraction are harmful?
Here’s a link to this morning’s New York Times cover story:
-Rob Lauer
Below is the reply I recieved from David C. Pruden, who has the Executive Director of Evergreen since 1995:
Gee, I thought their might be gravity. I did a study. There is gravity! I proved it with my scientific study.
Ten years of academic (gay) harassment pass. I am now 80, sick, and old. Never mind, I now suspect there is no gravity. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe none of those apples fell (people changed) but maybe they did. I didn’t ask them. Didn’t conduct new experiments. I just got tired and now I’ll say I was wrong.
Science doesn’t work that way. The study is important. Spitzer is not. The study stands on it’s own. The people he studied didn’t withdraw their data. Spitzer can’t just wish them away.
-Evergreen
David C. Pruden, M.S.
307 West 200 South, Suite 3001
Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
(801) 363-3837″
I sent a brief but polite email. What I recieved was a snarky reply that assumed things (“ten years of academic ((gay)) harassment”) and that took a cheap shot at Dr. Spitzer’s age.
I honestly expected a brief but thoughtful and professional reply from someone at an organization that routinely holds conferences and events at which LDS General Authorities speak.
I’m truly taken aback by the juvenile tone and callousness from the Excecutive Director of an organization that prides itself on upholding the highest moral standards of one of the nations largest churches.
I sent the following email:
Dear Brother Pruden:
I politely asked you a straight-forward, serious question. I’m more than a little taken aback by the tone of your reply–not to mention the content.
Perhaps the “Ten years of academic (gay) harassment” that you allude to was because, as Dr. Spitzer contends, his research consisted of accepting the words and opinions of individuals with no outside, objective scientific verification of their accuracy.
Your characterization of Dr. Spitzer and the cheap shots at his age and health are, quite frankly, juvenile and unbecoming of someone in your position.
You represent an organization that claims to uphold the highest standards of one of our nation’s largest religious denominations. This organization has routinely held events at which LDS General Authorities have spoken. This organization exists to help LDS men and women who are suffering because of their sexual orientation; they come to your organization in desperation, with faith that it can help them.(And you know all too well the success rate this organization has in actually changing their sexual orientation.)
Give your position over an organization that exercises such power over the emotions, hopes and fears of vulnerable men and women–and does so in the Name of Jesus Christ and on behalf of one of this nation’s greatest religious traditions–I am surprised and disappointed by your flippant response.
If your tone is any indication of the attitudes found at Evergreen, LDS men and women trying to deal j with their sexual orientation would probably do well to look for help and advice elsewhere.
-Rob Lauer
I then received this email in reply (I’m posting it here because I’m honeslty astounded that the Executive Director of Evergreen could be so flippant):
I know Dr. Spitzer. Do you? I know what his current health situation is. Do you?
Science stands alone. The expressed stories of 200 men who he intereviwed have not changed. He did no follow up research. Surely you understand at least a little something about science and research or maybe not.
Regardless, who are you? I don’t find your name among the Evergreen partners or supporters. Are you planning to become involved in Evergreen in some positive way or are you just the unofficial editorial board chairman reviewing posted documents on our resources site?
This is kind of a silly conversation isn’t it BROTHER Lauer?
-David
He emphasized “Brother” because, I suppose, he doesn’t think I’m really Mormon.
In reply to the above email I wrote Brother Pruden the following:
My name is Rob Lauer. I am a gay Mormon., I was baptized into the LDS Chuch in 1977. I graduated from Brigham Young University in 1983. I was the Associate Director of the Church’s Hill Cumorahg Pageant from 1997 until 2003. I am a Mormon writer/playwright.
You can call me Rob or Brother Lauer–since I am a fellow Mormon.
No,I do not know Dr. Spitzer personally–though I’ve followed his career for years since my teens (in the 1970’s) when he supported removing homosexuality from the list of psychiatric disorders.
Regarding his health, I know only what he has made public.
And yes, I understand science very well.
I do not support Evergreen–though until 2003 I agreed with many of its positions. Science, rational thought and my personal relationsop with my Heavenly Parents have lead me to accept the truth about the nature of sexual orientation.
Answering your question: No. I don’t think this is a “silly conversation” at all. I continue to be surprised by the casual, non- serious, even contemptuous manner in which you are conducting it, especially given the fact that you are Executive Director of Evergreen and I am a total stranger.
-Rob Lauer
Wow – how disappointing that an honest inquiry is responded to with such snark. But I’m not entirely surprised since the behavior is consistent with how apologists have responded to those who question them.
The fact that the study was not peer reviewed and did not have the scientific rigor necessary to withstand a peer review is telling. I think Evergreen would have more credibility if they were defending a study that was rigorously conducted – but they’re not. Once the author of the study says it was ill conceived, there isn’t anyone who can stand behind the study and say “no, the study is still valid because we’ve validated it”
I can’t help but think of a house of cards.
Rob Lauer, I am so sorry that this arrogant man treated your honest inquiries with such casual callousness and even coldness. Unfortunately, I have met General Authorities who were about the same. I have also met General Authorities whose private persona left me in awe of their humility, kindness, and love of humankind. The latter were, of course, shining examples of both the office and ministry to which they were called. The Brethren should be seeking greater light and knowledge from the Lord to guide us in these latter scientific days. The Gospel and the Planof Salvation MUST be universal. Jesus is the grand head under which all fallen mankind hetero- and homo-sexual shall be made free. The Plan, thus far revealed, tends to appeal more to the heterosexual male, than the heterosexual female, or to the homosexual of either sex. Surely there are many things pertaining to the Kingdom of God that our Father can tell us through his servants the Prophets. (and, yes, I am hoping that a few of them read this). Anyway, Rob, I am sorry for the way your honest inquiries were handled by this arrogant man. You did nothing wrong. In fact, you were much more patient with the fool than I would have been. Kudos to you.
No peer review means it’s not a legitimate study, and this is according to my husband who is a scientist. I’m sorry that man was so flippant with you. It’s sad and surprising and you deserved better.
This really is astonishing. Not only for the content of the exchange, but because it’s hard to believe that anyone in such a position would be so outride rude and dismissive to an outsider inquiring about that organization.
Thanks for sharing it. I think it’s important to shed light on the arrogance and condescension of some of the people in positions of power in the church and its affiliate organizations.
People who respond like Pruen did here are responding out of FEAR. The only way he can rationalize and justify his position is to villify the one challenging it. This is a pathetic response from a decaying organization.
@Richard Redick, one of the most beautiful responses I have ever read. It brought me to tears; touching, compassionate, wise. I wish more in the church (and out) had the same lovely viewpoints. Kudos to you. :)
@Rob Lauer, I too am shocked and saddened at such a response, especially considering your very honest (and kind) approach.
As a side note, I found this page as I did a search to find out who “M.S. David C. Pruden” was. I am so glad I found it, as I, too, in recent weeks, sent an email to Evergreen regarding some concerns I had regarding a blog post that mentioned Evergreen: http://micahunice.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/snowmen/.
The following is my email sent July of this year:
Good evening. As a single, heterosexual LDS woman, I am writing to express my concern regarding a blog post that I came across today. This gentleman, who is gay, described his feelings and struggles regarding his homosexuality; the years of shame and guilt about his sexual orientation, and how it conflicted with his church membership which he highly valued. In his blog, he mentioned “Evergreen” and a story that he heard of two men who were part of the program, who were attracted to one another and as such, made to read aloud their private emails to each other, in a group setting, which culminated in the men sobbing.
As I read his blog, my heart ached for him. . .but also for these men. I am not sure if the email story is true, but if so, I am not only concerned but heartbroken. Does Evergreen practice what I would refer to as “aversion therapy,” and shame people in an attempt to change their orientation? I am not a professional, but cannot imagine that this would help anyone, nor can I imagine the Savior or our merciful Father in Heaven, who is full of love, compassion, tender mercies, and who knows and loves each of us beyond measure, approaching a situation this way. On the contrary, I can only see this type of approach bringing more shame and guilt and self-hatred upon someone who, in my humble opinion, needs to be shown an outpouring of love and support and, should they wish, be provided with positive and hopeful suggestions and options should they wish to live a heterosexual lifestyle under the guides of the church. It is my hope and prayer that Evergreen is an organization who provides options without incurring more shame and guilt upon a person who may already be in the depths of despair, or worse. We see too many broken families, too many suicides, and the loss of our beloved brothers and sisters who are leaving the church due to their own personal torment and Gethsemane, the judgment of others; and the lack of support, tolerance and love from many of the members. I would hope and pray that Evergreen be the type of organization where those who want help can receive it while enjoying the blessings of feeling loved and cared for without judgment, shame, guilt or fear.
His response is as follows:
Nothing you have reported (since I have not read the blog post) has anything to do with Evergreen. We hold no such meetings. Use no such techniques. I have no idea where this person went, who they met with, or what they were attempting to do — but it had nothing to do with Evergreen. I would love to know where this was said and by whom.
-David Pruden
I was very disappointed in his response. It was not as harsh as the responses Rob received, but it felt defensive to me; and I have no intent of sending a copy of the blog (or discussing who wrote it) with him as there would be no point in arguing and in doing so could deeply hurt another individual (the blogger), which I absolutely refuse to do. As Richard Redick mentioned above, there are many in the church who personify goodness; those who express “humility, kindness, and love of humankind.” Why is it then, that the sentiments expressed by Mr. Pruden do not reflect those same qualities? And it pains me even more so that this is coming from a gentleman who holds a position within a church-sponsored group. I’m hurt, saddened, and left at a loss for words. My only hope is that more and more within the church can extend themselves to all of our brothers and sisters within the LGBT community, and that we can come together in a place of love, peace, support, charity, kindness and understanding.
Yeah. Someone needs to fire Pruden. ASAP. Major disappointment all around. Two thumbs down for Pruden and for Evergreen.
And for the church for supporting Evergreen.
I’m feeling the same way, Heather. My mother often says, callings can be the result of “desperation not inspiration.” In this case, the former seems to hold true.
I see I shouldn’t be surprised by the totally unprofessional exchange I had with this man recently.