From queernet.org!gaynet-owner Mon Aug 1 06:32:14 1994 Subject: The Cameron Memorandum To: gaynet@queernet.org Date: Thu, 28 Jul 94 22:02:42 CDT From: Al Geiersbach Paul Cameron, bits and pieces, by Al Geiersbach, 7/23/94 This is "raw" material. Someone might like to organize and index it. Someday I'll try to get around to it. I'd also suggest somebody familiar with posting to QRD might want to undertake that task, perhaps breaking it back into neat pieces. I'm posting this without proofreading it, though trying to be very careful to get at least the numbers in references correct. The Gay Agenda, fundanazi hate tape: excellent article in Los Angeles Times, Monday, February 22, 1993. The LA Times article has a commentary on the tape's "statistics" by Gregory Herek, of the Uof C at Davis. When I contacted him in March 1993, he was Principal Investigator, AIDS Psycho-Social Research Group, Dept. of Psychology, Univ of Calif, Davis, CA 95616. I have a phone number (916) 757-3240, but am not sure if it is the one I called. Herek is a longtime "Cameron watcher", and a good source of information. He has supplied material on Cameron to lawyers and others who had to face the ogre. * * * * * * * * * * De-fanging Cameron as "expert witness". Here are two letters Dr. Herek circulates: Doyle, Klein, Otis, Frey, Hellerich & Lazar, Attorneys at Law, Suite 300, Affiliated National Plaza, 822 7th Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631 (303) 353-6700 June 4, 1992 Gregory M. Herek, Ph.D. University of California, Davis Department of Psychology Davis, California 95616-8686 Dear Dr. Herek: With regard to your letter of May 29, 1992 you do have my permission to circulate a copy of my letter of May 18, 1992. For clarification, I would like to add that the basis for the judge's excluding Dr. Cameron as an expert witness was not entirely clear, but part of the reason he was excluded as a witness was that he did not personally interview the parties involved. It was only after I was able to cross examine Dr. Cameron about his qualifications from the information that you provided me that the judge entered his ruling. In other words, the background information on Dr. Cameron that you provided I'm sure made it much easier for this judge to not allow Dr. Cameron to express his opinion as to why the court shouldn't award custody to a lesbian mother. Once again, thank you for your assistance in this matter. Very truly yours, (signed) Roger A. Klein [on the same letterhead] May 18, 1992 Gregory Herek, Ph.D. P.O. Box 487 Berkeley, CA 94103 Dear Dr. Herek: As you may recall, I spoke with you over the last month concerning a change of custody case in which I have been representing a lesbian mother of three girls who was defending against a motion for change of custody filed by her former husband. Dr. Paul Cameron of Washington, D.C. was endorsed as the husband's expert witness. For your information the trial judge would not accept Dr. Cameron as an expert witness and Dr. Cameron was not allowed to testify about his research. After a two day hearing the trial judge maintained custody with the mother. The materials and information that you provided me assisted me greatly in my representation of my client. The information that you provided me on Dr. Cameron was most helpful in preventing him from testifying as an expert witness. My client and I cannot thank you enough for the assistance that you provided. Please let me know if I can return the favor someday. Very truly yours, (signed) Roger A. Klein Here is material on Cameron's career from Dr. Herek I have put my own comments in brackets []. I have also moved the footnotes Cameron had to the appropriate place in the text and put them in brackets []. [Date of vita unknown, but probably mid-1985. Cameron has comments on his publications "to be published in 1984", "possibly in 1983". At the same time, he lists 1985 dates for expert witness appearances, etc. Given that this vita dates no earlier than mid-1985, it is curious that the "pending" publication information was not updated. Could it be that his ejection from the APA caused cancellations?] Vita: Paul Cameron Theoritician | Researcher | Clinician | Lecturer Interests locate in the social policy / ethical / personality / developmental / medical / anthropologic interface. Major concerns center about: 1) personal and social effects of various habit-systems (e.g., drug abuse, homosexuality, smoking) and life-events / choices (e.g., marriage, divorce, abortion, religiosity) particularly as they bear upon the dynamic involving intimacy, lethality, and religio-moral systems, and 2) economic and sexual factors in social cohesion/disintegration and cultural viability. Education: B.A. 1961 Los Angeles Pacific College (social science) M.A. 1962 California State @ Los Angeles (psychology/sociology) Ph.D. 1966 Univ. Colorado (social personality: "Age as a determinand of differences in non-intellective psychological functioning") Experience: Fourteen years of full-time teaching, research and administration in higher education (1966-1980). Posts included associate professorships at Wayne State (1967-69), Univ. Louisville (1970-73) & Univ. Nebraska (1979-80) and a combination of associate professor | director services to senior adults at Fuller Graduate School of Psychology (1976-79). Currently chairperson, Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality (ISIS), Inc. and a licensed psychologist. Major Professional Achievements: Pioneer investigator: 1) effects of second-hand tobacco smoke upon health of resident children and spouse, 2) social psychology of second-hand tobacco smoke, 3) social-psychological correlates of obtaining abortions, taking human life, and pet ownership, and 4) first national random comprehensive study of human sexuality. Substantial contributor to: 1) life-satisfaction of sub-populations (retarded, aged, malformed), and 2) social-psychological correlates of sexual preferences/activities. Memberships, editorships, committees, honors: Eastern Psychological Assn, Midwestern Psychological Assn | Reviewer for _American Psychologist_, _Journal of Gerontology_, Psychological reports_ | faculty senate (St. Mary's college of MD), chair ethics committee (Fuller), secretary-treasurer Pasadena Psychological Assn | _Who's Who_ (East, Midwest, Innovators in Science) Courses Taught: Developmental, marriage & family, sexuality, counseling, personality, philosophy of science, motivation, social, organizational, gerontology. Born: November 9, 1939; married 26 years to Ginny (M.A. Home Economics); three children: Kirk (working on Ph.D. in statistics at Stanford), Kim (undergraduate Univ. Nebraska), Karyn (elementary school). Addresses: ISIS, 2940 South 74th Street, Lincoln, NE 68506 Practice: Physician's Bldg., Suite 1, 2221 South 17th Street, Lincoln, NE 68502 Phone: Home: (402) 489-6176 Practice: (402) 475-2665 Publications [footnotes in original appended to text in [] brackets] Cameron, P. & Wertheimer, M. Kinesthetic after effects are in the hands not in phenomenal space. _Perceptual and Motor Skills_, 1965, _20_, 1131. Cameron, P. Ego strength and happiness of the aged. _Journal of Gerontoloty_, 1967, _22_, 199-202. Confirmation of the Freudian psychosexual stages utilizing sexual symbolism. _Psychology Reports_, 1967, _21_, 33-39. [Reprinted in _Adolescent Development_ (M. Gold & E. Douvan, Eds), Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1969, and _Scientific Studies of Psychoanalysis_ (S. Fisher & R. Greenberg, Eds) New York: Basic Books, 1975.] Introversion and egocentricity of the aged. _Journal of Gerontology_, 1967, _22_, 463-468. [Abstracted in _Empirical Studies in the Psychology of Aging_ (I.M. Hulicka, Ed) New York: Hackett, 1977.] The imminency of death. _Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology_, 1968, _32_, 479-81. Masculinity and feminityof [sic] the aged. _Journal of Gerontology_, 1967, _23_, 63-65. Kastenbaur, R.J. & Cameron, P. Cognitive and emotional dependency in later life. In _The Dependencies of Old People_ (R. Kalish, Ed), Institute of Gerontology, Ann Arbor, 1969, 39-57. Cameron, P. Age parameters of young adult, middle aged, old and aged. _Journal of Gerongology_, 1969, _24_, 201-202. [Abstracted in _Empirical Studies in the Psychology of Aging_ (I.M. Hulicka, Ed) New York: Hackett, 1977.] Frequency and kinds of words in various social settings, or what the hell's going on? _Pacific Sociological Review_, 1969, _12_, 101-104. [Reprinted in _Sociology and Student Life_ (A.B. Shostak, Ed) New York: McKay, 1971; _Sociology for Pleasure_ (M. Truzzi, Ed) New York: Prentice-Hall, 1974; and _The Process of Interpersonal Communication_ (F.E. Jandt, Ed) New York: Harper & Row, 1976.] The generation gap: beliefs about sexuality and self-reported sexuality. _Developmental Psychology_, 1970, _3_, 272. [Reprinted in _Developmental Psychology_ (W.R. Looft, Ed) Hinsdale, IL: Dryden, 1972 and _SIP Readings in Psychology_ (W.J. McKeachie, Ed), New York: Xerox, 1973.] The generation gap: which generation is believed powerful versus generational members' self-appraisals of power. _Developmental Psychology_, 1970, _3_, 403-404. A comparison of the cultural values of Scot and Unites States Children. _International Journal of Psychology_, 1970, _5_, 135-139. The presence of pets and smoking as correlates of perceived disease. _Journal of Allergy_, 1967, _40_, 12-15. Cameron, P., Kostin, J.S. et al. The health of smokers' and non-smokers' children. _Journal of Allergy_, 1969, _43_, 336-341. Cameron, P. The generation gap: beliefs about adults' stability of life. _Journal of Gerontology_, 1971, _26_, 81. The generation gap: time orientation. _The Gerontologist_, 1972, _12_, 117-119. The affective-instinctual level and age. _International Journal of Aging and Human Development_, 1971, _2_, 73-78. Children's reactions to second-hand tobacco smoke. _Journal of Applied Psychology_, 1972, _56_, 171-173. Happiness of the malformed. _APA Proceedings_, 1971. Sound, noise, and health: community parameters. _Journal of Applied Psychology_, 1972, _56_, 67-74. [Reprinted in _XIP Readings in Psychology_ (W.J. McKeachie, Ed) Xerox, 1973 and MSS Information Corp. in the _Effects of Noise Upon Man and Animals_ (S.J. Strausber, Ed), 1976.] The effect of home environment tobacco smoke upon family health. _Journal of Applied Psychology_, 1975, _57_, 142-147. Second-hand tobacco smoke: children's reactions. _Journal of School Health_, 1972, _42_, 280-84. The generation gap: which generation is believed to have the most fun and happiness and how do the generations rate themselves on desire for fun and happiness? _The Gerontologist_, 1972, _12_, 120=123, 190. Teenagers' attitudes towards a date's smoking. _Adolescence_, 1973, _8_, 433-438. Sexual thought throughout the life-span. _The Gerontologist_, 1973, _13_, 144-147. [Reprinted in _Life: The Continuous Process_ (F. Rebelsky, Ed), New York: Knopf, 1975.] Consciousness of death across the life-span. _Journal of Gerontology_, 1973, _28_, 92-93. Suicide and the generation gap. _Life-Threatening Behavior_, 1972, _2_, 194-208. Thing vs. self vs. other mental orientation across the life-span: a note. _British Journal of Psychology_, 1973, _64_, 283-286. The happiness of retarded children. _APA Proceedings_, 1973. The generation gap: which generation is believed to be intellectually superior and which generation believes itself intellectually superior? _International Journal of Aging and Human Development_, 1973, _4_, 207-214. Generational homophyly, _Journal of Gerontology_, 1974, _29_, 232-236. The life-satisfaction of non-normal persons. _Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology_, 1973, _41_, 207-214. The three faces of happiness. _Psychology Today_, 1974, _8_ (8), 63-64. Mood as an indicant of happiness: age, sex, social class, and situational differences. _Journal of Gerontology_, 1975, _30_, 216-224. How much do mothers love their children? Indexed in _Research in Education_, ERIC/ECE, 1976. Effects of TV-violence upon at-home behaviors of kindergarteners. Indexed in _Research in Education_, ERIC/ECE, 1977. Emotionality across the life-span. Indexed in _Research in Education_, ERIC/ECE, 1978. Masculinity and femininity in adulthood. _International Journal of Aging and Human Development_, 1976, _7_, 143-151. The Swedish 'children born to women denied abortion' study: a radical criticism. _Psychological Reports_, 1976, _39_, 391-394. Temporality across the life-span. _International Journal of Aging and Human Development_, 1978, _8_, 229-259. Loving death: our failing reverence for life. (Elizabeth hall with Paul Cameron) _Psychology Today_, 1976, _9_(4), 104-113. A case against homosexuality. _Human Life Review_, 1978, _4_(3), 17-49. Immolations to the juggernaut. _Lincacre Quarterly_, 1977, _44_(1), 64-74. Social psychological aspects of the Judeo-Christian stance toward homosexuality. _Journal of Psychology and Theology_, 1981, _9_(1), 40-57. Age and sex differences in self-centeredness. _Journal of Gerontology_, _in press_ Values, needs and wants across the life-span. _International Journal of Aging and Human Development_, _in press_. How human-oriented is the mind of man? _International Journal of Aging and Human Development_, _in press_. Abortion, capital punishment, and the Judeo-Christian ethic. _Lincacre Quarterly_, 1981, _48_(4), 316-332. And coffee too. _International Journal of the Addictions_, 1982, _17_(3), 569-574. Sexually transmitted disease and sexual orientation. _Nebraska Medical Journal_, _in press_ _Books_ _The Life Cycle: Perspectives and Commentary_. Oceanside, NY: Dabor Science Publications, 1977. _Sexual Gradualism: A Solution to the Dilemma Of Teenagers and Young Adults_. Sun Valley, CA: HumLife, 1981 (Second Ed). _Sexuality: Uniquely Human_. Little , Brown, (possibly in 1983). _Encyclopedia Articles_ Homosexuality: personality and psychopathology (_Baker's Encyclopedia of Psychology_, David Benner, Ed) (to be published in 1984) Kinsey, Alfred (_Baker's Encyclopedia of Psychology_) Intimacy (_Baker's Encyclopedia of Psychology_) Homosexual Child Molestation: Myth or Reality? (_Christian News Encyclopedia_, 1983) Colloquia Profanity in our time SRSA 1968 Detroit Second thoughts about TV-violence Kentucky Broadcasters' Assn, 1971 Lexington Friendship patterns across the life-span Penn State U. Developmental Dept 1974 The love of death: American style Howard U. Psychol. Dept 1976 Medical disethics national Federation of Catholic Physicians 1976 Chicago* [* presentations captured major media attention (UPI and/or AP etc.) <From a 1990 compilation of background material on Cameron received from Dr. Herek: Paul Cameron Fact Sheet In 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists" on December 2, 1983, by the APA Board of Directors [Notice: Persons dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association. (1984). Internal communication from APA to all members.] At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it "formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality." [SOURCE: L.S. Madison, _Minutes of the Fall Meeting_, Nebraska Psychological Association, October 19, 1984. Available from the NPA; c/o Dr. Lynda Madison, President; 8111 Dodge Street, Omaha, NE 68114. (402) 390-8117{as of 1992, at any rate}] {NPA Forum, Winter, 1984, volume 25 #3 pp2-3, Minutes of the Fall Meeting, 10/19/94, Lynda S. Madison, PH.D. I. President John Hunziker opened the Fall Meeting at the Marriott Regency West at 1:30 p.m. ... IV. Committee Reports: _Academic Affairs_.... _Ethics Committee_. Kay Gustafson announced that two cases are under continuing investigation by the Ethics committee and that the committee has responded to a number of inquiries. She encouraged NPA members to use the committee as an educational resource for inquiring as to the ethics involved in any of their activities. Several inquiries about potentially serious issues may result in additional investigation. The need for a more specific procedures manual has become clear, and the committee voted to recommend that a statement be approved for public release by the NPA membership: "The science and profession of psychology in Nebraska, as represented by the Nebraska Psychological Association, formally dissociates [sic] itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality. Further, the Nebraska Psychological Association would like it known that Dr. Cameron is not a member of the Association. Dr. Cameron was recently dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association for a violation of the Preamble to the _Ethical Principles of Psychologists_". _Legislative Committee_.....} In August 1985, the American Sociological Association adopted a resolution which included the following: "WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron, a psychologist, was dropped from membership in The American Psychological Association for violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists; WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has been presented in the media as a sociologist; WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism; WHEREAS Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research; WHEREAS the American Sociological Association is on record as opposing oppressive actions against lesbians and gay men and affirming its commitment to their civil rights; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: THAT the Association reaffirms its opposition to efforts to undermine the civil rights of lesbians and gay men through the distortion of sociological concepts and the falsifying of sociological research; and THAT the Association articulates this opposition by charging the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology with the task of critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron." [SOURCE: "Sociology group criticizes work of Paul Cameron," September 10, 1985. Lincoln (NE) Journal Star, 1, col. 1., and text from August, 1985 ASA meeting.] At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee's report and passed a resolution which stated, in part,"The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research." [The final resolution and the committee report were published in ASA Foolnotes, February, 1987, page 14. Available from the American Sociological Association, Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, 1722 N Street, NW, Washington DC 20036 [phone (202) 833-3410 {note: _Footnotes_, Feb 1987 contains a very brief report, and an indication that a longer report would be published in an unspecified issue of Footnotes: Report of the Committee on Homosexuals in Sociology. In response to a Council motion passed in August 1985, the Committee presented its report on Paul Cameron. Although the American Psychological Association has repudiated Cameron, he continues to misrepresent his credentials as a social scientist and take inflammatory stands on the issue of homosexuality. After discussion, Council passed the following motion. MOTION: The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the status of Homosexuals in Sociology, "The Paul Cameron Case," is to be published in _Footnotes_, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron's frequent lecture and media appearances. Carried. Council discussed how best to implement this action so as to maximize communication to all concerned. It also encouraged the Gay Caucus and other parties to inform the Executive Office of any instances in which Cameron claimed credentials as a sociologist or misrepresented sociological research.} In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade, Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dalls referred to "Cameron's sworn statement that 'homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,'" and concluded that "Dr. Paul Cameron...has himself made misrepresentations to this Court" and that "There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron." [Baker v. Wade 106 F.R.D. 526 (N.D. Tx 1985)' see page 536] [Dr. Herek included what is presumably a copy of the APA notice dropping Cameron, which I quote in part: _NOTICE_ Under the provisions of Article II, Section 18 and Article X, Section 5 of the Bylaws of the American Psychological Association, the following information is being furnished the Association Members: _Persons Expelled from Membership in the American Psychological Association_ The Committee on Scientific and Professional Ethics and Conduct recommended to the Association Board of Directors and the Board approved on the dates specified, the expulsion from membership of the following persons for delicensure: 1. Harold D. Esler Michigan (6/15/84) 2. Ronald Matias Wisconsin (12/2/83) 3. William Herman Smith Maryland (8/22/84) Under the provisions of Article II, Section 18 of the Bylaws of the American Psychological Association, the following information is being furnished the Association Members: _Persons Dropped from Membership in the American Psychological Association_ On December 2, 1983 the Board of Directors took the following action: Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the _Ethical Principles of Psychologists_. [the rest of the notice announces 7 other actions] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * excerpts from Baker v. Wade, 106 F.R.D. 526 (1985) p 535-537 No Fraud or Mesrepresentation The next argument by Hill-Brundren-DDAA is distressing. They claim that Dr. William Simon and Dr. Judd Marmor misrepresented facts to this Court and committed fraud with respect to their testimony.... At first, this claim was totally unsupported--by affidavit or otherwise. Then, after the plaintiff objected, Hill-Bundren-DDAA "supported" their claim of fraud and misrepresentation by two affidavits, both by Dr. Paul Cameron. Even then, Dr. Cameron did not _directly_ accuse Dr.s Simon and Marmor with fraud: instead, he merely expressed opinions contrary to theirs. _To seriously contend that a difference in "expert" opinions constitutes fraud and misrepresentation is ridiculous_.{28, which says: _A reference to footnote 9 is much too kind_.] This Court will not dignify such a baseless assertion with a discussion. It will only emphasize two things: _First_, the opinions expressed at trial by Dr. Simon and Dr. Marmor -- which were adopted by this Court -- were supported by other evidence which is totally ignored by Hill-Bundren-DDAA, in their charges of fraud and misrepresentation. For example: (i) Dr. Marmor's testimony that, "although there was 'some disagreement' almost all American psychiatrists feel that 'homosexuality per se does not constitute any form of mental disorder'" (553 F.Supp. 1129 at n. 15) is supported by resolutions passed by the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association and others (553 F.Supp. at 1130).[29, which says: _See In re Longstaff_, 716 F.2d 1439, 1450 (5th Cir.1983) ("That homosexuality is no longer considered a psychopathic condition is established by the opinion of the government's highest medical officer, the Surgeon General.")] (ii) Dr. Simon's testimony that homosexuality is the result of "a relatively long complex process of pshchological [sic] and social development" is supported by the Task force on Homosexuality, among other exhibits (553 F.Supp. at 1129-30). _Second_, this Court reaffirms its findings that Dr. Simon and Dr. Marmor were very credible witnesses and that their qualifications were impeccable. In contrast, _Dr. Paul Cameron_ -- the basis of the claim that Drs. Simon and Marmor committed fraud in their testimony -- _has himself made misrepresentations to this Court_. For example: (i) his sworn statement that "homosexuals are approximately 43 times more apt to commit crimes than is the general population" is a total distortion of the Kinsey data upon which he relies -- which, as is obvious to anyone who reads the report, concerns data from a non-representative sample of delinquent homosexuals (and Dr. Cameron compares this group to college and non-college heterosexuals); (ii) his sworn statement that "homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals" is based upon the same distorted data -- and, the Court notes, is directly contrary to other evidence presented at the trial besides the testimony of Dr. Simon and Dr. Marmour [sic]. (553 F.Supp. 1130 at n. 18.([30 which says: Similar testimony by Dr. Cameron was totally discounted by the Fifth Circuit in "Gay Student Services v. Texam A & M University_, 737 F.2d 1317, 1330 (5th Cir.1984); there, the Court rejected the claim that Texam A & M's recognition of a gay student organization "was justifiable as an appropriate means of protecting public health" because: "... TAMU has simply not proven that recognition will indeed imminently result in such dire consequences. _The speculative evidence offered by the defendants' experts [including Dr. Paul Cameron]_ 'for which no historical or empircal [sic] basis is disclosed,' cannot justify TAMU's content-based refusal to recognize GSS. _Gay Lib [v. University of Missouri] supra_, 558 F.2d [848], at 854 [8 Cir.1977]. We think that on this record TAMU's public health argument is precisely the kind of 'undifferentiated fear or apprehension' that the Supreme Court has repeatedly held 'is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression.' _Tinker [v. Des Moines Independent School Dist.], supra_, 393 U.S. [503] at 508, 89 S.Ct. [733] at 737 [21 L.Ed.2d 731 (1969)]; _Healy [v. James], supra_, 408 U.S. [169] at 191, 92 S.Ct. [2338] at 2351 [33 L.Ed.2d 266 (1972)]." (emphasis added.)] There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron, the supposed "expert" for District attorney Hill.[31 which says: Indeed, the plaintiff contends that Dr. Paul Cameron is not a credible witness because he resigned from the American Psychological Association to avoid investigation into charges of his unethical conduct as a psychologist. The charges of unethical conduct against Dr. Cameron included his continuing misrepresentation of Kinsey data and other research sources on homosexuality; inflammatory and inaccurate public statements about homosexuals; and his fabrications to a Nebraska newspaper about the supposed sexual molestation of a four old boy by a homosexual. See _Psychology, Homosexuality, and Human Rights in Lincoln, Nebraska_, by Dr. James K. Cole; Affidavit of Dr. William Simon.] Accordingly, the motion under Rule 60(b)(3) is baseless. .... * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Herek's note: Cameron and the APA In 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association (APA) received an announcement concerning persons who had been removed from the Association for various reasons. The announcement included the following: "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the _Ethical Principles of Psychologists_." The APA is the major professional organization of psychologists in the United States and Canada. It has more than 60,000 members. Membership in the Association represents acceptance by the community of professional psychologists, and it carries with is certain responsibilities. Among these is the duty to follow the APA's "Ethical Principles of Psychologists." The Preamble to that code (which Cameron was judged to have violated) reads as follows: "Psychologists respect the dignity and worth of the individual and strive for the preservation and protection of fundamental human rights. They are committed to increasing knowledge of human behavior and of people's understanding of themselves and others and to the utilization of such knowledge for the promotion of human welfare. While pursuing these objectives, they make every effort to protect the welfare of those who seek their services and of the research participants that may be the object of study. They use their skills only for purposes consistent with these values and do not knowingly permit their misuse by others. While demanding for themselves freedom of inquiry and communication, psychologists accept the responsibility this freedom requires: competence, objectivity in the application of skills, and concern for the best interests of clients, colleagues, students, research participants, and society. In the pursuit of these ideals psychologists subscribe to principles in the following areas: (1) Responsibility, (2) Competence, (3) Moral and Legal Standards, (4) Public Statements, (5) Confidentiality, (6) Welfare of the Consumer, (7) Professional Relationships, (8) Assessment Techniques, (9) Research With Human Participants, and (10) Care and Use of Animals. "Acceptance of membership in the American Psychological Association commits the member to adherence to these principles. "Psychologists cooperate with duly constituted committees of the American Psychological Association, in particular the Committee on Scientific and Professional Ethics and Conduct, by responding to inquiries promptly and completely. Members also respond promptly and completely to inquiries from duly constituted state association ethics committees and professional standards review committees." Cameron also was censured by the Nebraska Psychological Association, which adopted the following resolution at its membership meeting on October 19, 1984" "The science and profession of psychology in Nebraska, as represented by the Nebraska Psychological Association, formally disassociates [sic] itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality. Further, the NPA would like it known that Dr. Cameron is not a member of the Association. Dr. Cameron was recently dropped from membership in the American Psychological Association for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists." Cameron responded to his expulsion by protesting that he resigned. In a letter to the Lincoln (NE) _Star_ (12/19/84), Cameron wrote: "The Star reported that I was 'dropped' from the American Psychological Association. Even though I offered to share all of the actual documents with a reporter, the offer was refused in favor of alluding to possible ethical horrors of which I might have been guilty. "I was dropped, after I resigned in good standing with no charges of any kind pending against me, solely because I refused to cooperate with the committee given I was no longer a member of the APA. "I wonder if it was thought more important to harm someone who dared disagree with the staff of the paper that to do an adequate job of reporting?" Cameron was, in fact, dropped from APA membership. He was, in other words, expelled. This action was taken because of his repeated misrepresentations of scientific data concerning human sexuality and his advocacy of discrimination against gay men and lesbians. It is true that Cameron submitted his resignation to APA when he learned that he was under investigation by the Ethics Committee. Like many organizations, however, the APA does not permit a member to resign during an investigation (since guilty members would always resign rather than being expelled). Cameron works very hard to obfuscate the facts surrounding his expulsion from the APA. In doing so, he exploits the right of confidentiality guaranteed to all APA members (including those expelled). The APA is not allowed to make any public statements concerning a former member who has been dropped. Thus, the APA is not even allowed to acknowledge publicly that Cameron was dropped (although individual APA members can publicly state that they received the announcement of a member's expulsion). Cameron often taunts the APA to make public statements about his expulsion, realizing that they are not permitted to do so. Perhaps if Cameron would officially waive his right to confidentiality in matters of APA membership, the truth could be told. Given that Cameron already knows the truth, he is not likely to take such an action. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Professional Condemnation of Cameron by colleagues. A letter from A. Nicholas Groth, author of "Men Who Rape" and many other works in his field. State of Connecticut, _Department of Correction_, Connecticut Correctional Institution, Somers, P.O. Box 100 Somers, Connecticut 06071 August 21, 1984 Dr. Wayny Price, Chair Nebraska Board of Examiners of Psychologists Department of Health State Office Building Lincoln, NE 68509 Dear Dr. Price; It has come to my attention that Paul Cameron, Ph.D. is quoting my research in an offensive pamphlet he has authored entitled "Child Molestation and Homosexuality". He misrepresents my findings and distorts them to advance his homophobic views. I make a very clear distinction in my writing between pedophilia and homosexuality, noting that adult males who sexually victimize young boys are either pedophilic or heterosexual, and that in my research I have not found homosexual men turning away from adult partners to children. I consider this totally unprofessional behavior on the part of Dr. Cameron and want to bring this to your attention. He disgraces his profession. Yours very truly, (signed) A. Nicholas Groth, Ph.D., Director, Sex Offender Program * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Articles on Cameron, or mentioning him (a very incomplete list, to be sure): The Advocate, 29 Oct 1985, pp 29-32. "Paul Cameron" by Dave Walter. "His 'facts' are misleading. His statements are graphic and extreme. He's discredited in the psychological establishment. Still, Dr. Paul Cameron just may be the most dangerous antigay voice in the United States today." Los Angeles Times, front page, Monday, 22 Feb 1993. "Anti-Gay Video Highlights Church's Agenda" by David Colker. [Cameron is mentioned as originator of the "statistics" in the hate video "The Gay Agenda". Dr. Gregory Herek is interviewed on him.] New York NATIVE, Issue 127, September 23-29, 1985, front page: Manipulating AIDS Hysteria: An Interview With Paul Cameron by Ann Giudici Fettner (P. 23). [quote: "I'd be surprised if a quarantine is not in place by the end of next year."]pp 23-24. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The 1982 controversy in Lincoln, Nebraska, over at attempt to add "sexual orientation" as a protected class in the city's human rights code. >From the Linconl Star, Point of View, 1/2/82, page 8. Majority rights will suffer Editor's note: Because of the controversial nature of the subject, different interpretations of data and in the interests of fairness, The Lincoln Star is printing a response to the following article on this page today. By Paul Cameron Lincoln The first responsibility of our society is to provide equal protection to all in their quest for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Protecting those of a homosexual appetite under an anti-discrimination ordinance will reduce the amount of protection enjoyed by the majority. The majority's claim to equal protection overrides the sexual desires of this unfortunate minority. A taste for homosexual acts and involvements is an infectious appetite which is harmful both to those who harbor it and for the society in which it is housed. Any social policy that legitimizes or tends to legitimize this socially disruptive taste will compound an already serious social problem, and reduce the ability of the majority to pursue life and happiness. Homosexual practice is disproportionately associated with severe physical health risks for the participants and for those living around them. The most recent Civilian Disease Control surveys indicate that 49 percent of all syphilis in the U.S. is carried by males who practice homosexual acts (a rate over 50 times higher than for exclusively heterosexual males). This same tribe harbors a rate of infectious hepatitis at least 25 times higher than the general population. These are but the tip of the infectious iceberg of about two score diseases peculiar to or disproportionately associated with homosexual activity. Since a large proportion of these diseases can be transmitted by other than direct sexual contact (e.g., through exhalation, mucus, feculence) a judicious restaurateur might choose to avoid contamination of food by not hiring gays, or a medical administrator might decide not to subject those already at medical hazard to further infectious assault. Citizens who go to restaurants have the right to expect that their visit will not subject them to the fallout of someone else's sexual taste. While homosexuals may choose to live shorter lives in furtherance of their sexual desires, there is no valid reason why the rest of the citizenry should also pay in greater risk. The principle of equal protection would suggest that homosexuals ought to be excluded from certain occupations. Those who fancy homosexuality disproportionately recruit among the young. If homosexuals are granted protected status the chances of children coming to adopt this unfortunate sexual taste will increase -- both through direct seduction and exposure to homosexual models. The first Kinsey study reported that 37 percent of gay adults vs. less than 9 percent of heterosexuals admitted to sexual relationships with those under the age of 17. Likewise, Lesbian adults were about seven times more apt to have sexually recruited such youngsters than their heterosexual counterparts. Similarly, when asked "how many virgins they had had" hays averaged about twice as many as heterosexual men and lesbians about four times as many as heterosexual women. In the only random probability study done in the Western world regarding childhood sexual experiences, Schofield reported that 35 percent of 15- 19-year-old English boys and 9 percent of the girls reported being approached for sexual favors by adult homosexuals. In the Kinsey study, about a quarter of the females reported being sexually approached by men (not all of which were heterosexual, from what we know of child molestation a considerable fraction would have been bisexual). While the studies are not completely comparable, it would appear that about 80 percent of the sexual molestation of boys and about a third of the molestation of girls is accomplished by those who practice homosexual acts. My random probability study of the incidence of homosexual desire in the U.S. suggests that perhaps 4 percent of the population is bi-to homosexual. It would thus appear that this 4 percent of the population accounts for perhaps half or more of all the molestation of children. Kinsey also reported that 4 percent gays and 7 percent of lesbians claimed that their first homosexual experience was with a teacher or other caretaker, as compared to no heterosexuals who made the same claim. (This year I have been involved with a situation involving two lesbian Nebraska public high school teachers and three of the students whom they seduced. After being abandoned at the end of the affair at least two of these girls attempted suicide). Our children are our most valuable resource. They have the right to be protected from being seduced or charmed into a dysfunctional sexual taste. An organization that cares for children (e.g., school, daycare) might systematically exclude homosexuals from employment just because of the greater risk of molestation that children under their tutelage would be required to bear. An apartment owner who rents to families might exclude homosexuals for much the same set of reasons. Without exception, every large-scale comparative study has yielded differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals that suggest that homosexuals are less desirable citizens (in the Kinsey study homosexuals were 33 times more apt to choose criminal careers and over 100 times more apt to practice prostitution). Again without exception, homosexuals have revealed themselves as considerably less pleased with their lives. The responsibility of the city fathers is clear. Since not a single civilization, nor a single society has ever granted homosexuality and heterosexuality equal status, the city council must demand the strongest sort of evidence in order to abandon the wisdom of our ancestors. In point of fact, the overwhelming bulk of the recent social science evidence buttresses the opinions of our forefathers. Neither babblings of the miscreants nor the opinions of those swayed by a current intellectual fad should influence the council. The citizens of Lincoln will only enjoy equal protection if protected status is denied homosexuals. -- Paul Cameron, Ph.D., has served as an expert witness regarding social and psychological aspects of homosexuality and has written a number of articles on sexuality. 'Rational, informed' discussion needed By James Cole and Louis Crompton Lincoln The proposed amendment of Lincoln's anti-discrimination law to cover homosexuals is a controversial issue that deserves the thoughtful attention of everyone interested in city government. It is important that its merits be debated in an informed and rational way. The tone in which minority questions are discussed in modern America has changed markedly from the emotional style of a generation ago. It is unfortunate that Dr. Paul Cameron has chosen to return to this earlier style. The most emotional of all of Dr. Cameron's charges is undoubtedly his contention that homosexuals are especially likely to molest children. Such a view has been repeatedly disavowed by specialists on sexual offenses. One such specialist is Dr. Paul Gebhard of the Kinsey Institute. When Dr. Cameron refers to "the first Kinsey study" or to "Kinsey" he means in fact Gebhard and Johnson's study, "The Kinsey Data." Bur Dr. Gebhard has gone on record to the effect that "there is no evidence that homosexuals are more interested in children than are heterosexuals." Dr. Cameron's use of Gebhard's tables raise [sic] many questions. To begin with, the figures in "The Kinsey Data" make a poor basis for the comparison because of the radically different populations used for computing statistics for heterosexuals and homosexuals. The heterosexual tables are divided into college and non-college populations. The homosexual tables, by contrast, are divided into non-delinquent and delinquent (in prison) populations, the latter a notoriously unrepresentative group as fas as sexual behavior is concerned. Dr. Cameron's treatment of these statistics does not inspire confidence in his scientific objectivity. The figure for non-delinquent homosexuals over the age of 17 who had relations with adolescents under the age of 17 is 24 percent; the figure for non-college heterosexual males is 20 percent; for college-educated heterosexual males it is 8 percent. Dr. Cameron misleadingly cites 37 percent as "the" homosexual figure and 8 percent as "the" heterosexual figure. In all tables, we may note, the greatest percentage of contacts was with 16-year-olds. Dr. Cameron reports that "twice as many" homosexual as heterosexual men have had relations with virginal partners. In fact the figures for heterosexual college men who reported virginal partners is 58 percent, and for heterosexual males it is 58 percent (Table 243). On the other hand the figure in Table 467 for homosexual males is 48 percent. (This is one of the few cases where the delinquent and non-delinquent figures agree). Dr. Cameron's use of Michael Schofield's study, "The Sexual Behavior of Young People," published in England is 1965, is equally open to question. He quotes Schofield to the effect that 35 percent of the boys interviewed reported adult male advances. But he does not repeat Schofield's warning that because of the special circumstances of the study "it would be a mistake to attach much importance to any of these figures about homosexual activities." Even more notable is his failure to report Schofield's finding that "the number of adult males who have introduced girls to sexual intercourse is quite large." Dr. Cameron's statement that the Kinsey study shows that homosexuals are "33 times more apt to choose criminal careers" is difficult to credit. If that were so there would be three times as many homosexuals as heterosexuals involved in crime in America. The fact is that the Kinsey statistics on the occupations of their heterosexual and homosexual samples (based on answers to the question "What job or occupation have you had that lasted more than a year?") do not in any way purport to reflect accurately the criminality in either group, let alone to be capable of extrapolation to the general American population. To treat them in this way can only be called a flagrant misuse of statistics. Even at than, the figures that appear in no way bear out Cameron's estimate. Using Cameron's selective methods it would be possible to mount a superficially plausible attack on literally any group (racial, educational, female or male, occupational, etc.) by picking and choosing figures from among Gebhard and Johnson's more than 500 tables. Dr. Cameron's figures on disease call for at least some cursory comment. We know of no published statistics that support his percentages, which seem highly inflated. But, of course, all statistics for disease show varying rates of infection for different groups when one takes into account such factors as race, ethnic origin, sex, age, etc. Rates of venereal infection, for instance, are higher among men than among women, among certain races, higher for young people than old, for urban groups than for rural. But would one argue for removing people in these categories from the protection of anti-discrimination laws on this basis? Or because of the prevalence of other diseases far more easily communicable? Surely the way to protect the public from disease is by appropriate public health measures, not by using scare tactics by stigmatizing whole groups through statistics. Indeed it is just this use of stereotypes, by which individual men and women are judged not as individuals but as members of a group with a purportedly undesirable trait, which has in the past led to discrimination in our society. It is this kind of thinking, which Dr. Cameron endorses, that makes anti-discrimination measures necessary. It is surely significant that none of the studies Dr. Cameron cites adopts his hostile attitude toward homosexuals or draws the inflammatory conclusions he does. We regret that Dr. Cameron has chosen to lend his prestige as a social scientist to a campaign of vituperation and vilification. Since his intent seems to be not to instruct but to inflame anti-minority passions, we feel that he leaves himself open to severe criticism. -- Dr. James Cole, professor of psychology, is director of the Clinical Psychology Training Program at UNL. Dr. Louis Crompton, professor of English at UNL, has published a number of articles on historical and cultural attitudes toward homosexuality. * * * * The above opinion pieces were used as the basis of a complaint against Cameron, and this may very well have been the start of the investigation that led to his expulsion from the APA: January 11, 1982 State Board of Examiners of Psychologists Bureau of Examining Boards Nebraska Department of Health 301 Centennial Mall South Lincoln, Nebraska 68509 Dear Board Members: Enclosed you will find a copy of an article published by Lincoln psychologist Paul Cameron in the _Lincoln Star_ January 2, 1982. We believe that Cameron made a number of statements in this article which may be in violation of the code of professional conduct (Ethical Principles for Psychologists, APA, 1981) adopted pursuant to Nebraska law, Chapter 71-3807. We are writing to you both as citizens concerned about the effect of Cameron's statements, and as psychologists and mental health professionals obligated, under Principle 7, Section g, to bring this potential violation "to the attention of the appropriate local, state and/or national committee on professional ethics and conduct." Specifically our concerns are as follows: 1. _Principle 1-Responsibility_ includes the following language: a) ... [Psychologists] "provide thorough discussion of the limitations of their data, _especially where their work touches on social policy or might be construed to the detriment of persons in specific age, sex, ethnic, socioeconomic, or other social groups_. In publishing reports of their work, they never suppress disconfirming data, and _they acknowledge the existence of alternative_ hypotheses and _explanations_ of their findings..." Cameron's article was written to argue that "...In point of fact, the overwhelming bulk of the recent social science evidence buttresses the opinions of our forefathers (implying the city of Lincoln should not adopt a proposed lesbian/gay rights amendment because 'not a single civilization, nor a single society has ever granted homosexuality and heterosexuality equal status.')" Thus his article has clearly "touched on social policy" as referred to in Principle 1. Yet, we believe he did not provide a "thorough discussion of the limitations of [his] data," nor did he acknowledge the existence of alternative explanations for various claims he made. (see below for further details) It is not our intention to suggest that a psychologist should not express the viewpoint that _some_ psychological research supports a position in opposition to gay civil rights legislation. We do believe, however, that Cameron's article, which clearly "touched social policy," did "suppress disconfirming data" and failed to "acknowledge the existence of alternative explanations." Thus we ask you to consider if Cameron has violated those sections of Principle 1 cited above. 2. _Principle 3-Moral and Legal Standards_ includes the following: "c. In their professional roles, psychologists avoid any action that will diminish the legal and civil rights of clients or of others who may be affected by their actions." Again, we do not interpret this section to preclude psychologists from expressing professional opinions in opposition to gay civil rights, but we believe that by publishing an inaccurate and inflammatory article, Cameron may have violated this section. 3. _Principle 4-Public Statements_ include [sic] the following language: "...In public statements providing psychological information or professional opinions...psychologists base their statements on scientifically acceptable psychological findings and techniques _with full recognition of the limits and uncertainties of such_ evidence." g. Psychologists present the science of psychology and offer their services, products and publication fairly and accurately, avoiding misrepresentation through sensationalism, exaggeration, or superficiality. Psychologists are guided by the primary obligation to aid the public in developing informed judgments, opinions, and choices." We believe that the Cameron article misrepresented, through both sensationalism and superficiality, in several instances. The enclosed article by James Cole and Louis Crompton illustrates some of the specific distortions Cameron has made in "interpreting" Kinsay data. Instances in his language in the article, as well as the overall content and tone, open him to charges of sensationalism. Specifically, his reference to homosexuals as a "tribe" and referring to their "sexual appetite" would seem to be fairly characterized as "sensationalism." Particularly striking are his statements: "Citizens who go to restaurants have the right to expect that their visit will not subject them to the fallout of someone else's sexual taste" and "(in the Kinsey study, homosexuals were 33 times more apt to choose criminal careers and over 100 times more apt to practice prostitution)." Cameron has not presented psychological research on this subject "fairly and accurately," nor has he recognized the "limits and uncertainties" of his evidence. In particular, his concluding generalizations should be carefully compared to the facts. Cameron states, "Without exception, every large-scale comparative study has yielded differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals that suggest that homosexuals are less desirable citizens... Again, without exception, homosexuals have revealed themselves as considerably less pleased with their lives...In point of fact, the overwhelming bulk of the recent social science evidence buttresses the opinions of our forefathers..." These statements are a serious misrepresentation of current opinion on this subject. Indeed, any claim that research "without exception" supports a particular conclusion should immediately be suspect. Rarely if ever are there _no_ exceptions to any particular conclusion. It is our perception, contrary to that expressed by Cameron, that "recent social science evidence" has lead [sic] scientists and mental health professionals away from the "opinions of our forefathers" on this subject. Perhaps the best way to illustrate Cameron's overall misrepresentation of current scientific opinion regarding the question of lesbian/gay civil rights is to point out that the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Public Health Association had all adopted resolutions which support lesbian/gay civil rights legislation and which declare that homosexuals are no less reliable or capable than heterosexuals. Thus the majority of professionals in these fields have reached essentially the opposite conclusion to that which Cameron asserts would be the case. (Copies of these statements are attached).[not attached here] Another example of Cameron's failure to present information fairly and accurately, with recognition of the limits of such evidence, is his claim that "without exception, every large-scale comparative study has yielded differences between homosexuals and heterosexuals that suggest that homosexuals are less desirable citizens." This claim should be compared to the concluding statements in the major study published by Benn and Weinberg (1978). Bell and Weinberg wrote: "As for homosexuals' social and psychological adjustment, we have found that much depends upon the type of homosexual being considered...Most are indistinguishable from the heterosexual majority with respect to most of the nonsexual aspects of their lives, and whatever differences there are between homosexuals' and heterosexuals' social adjustment certainly do not reflect any malevolent influence on society on the part of the homosexuals concerned...Thus, decisions about homosexual men and women...should never be made on the basis of sexual orientation alone."[* footnote citing: Bell, A.P., & Weinberg, M.S. _Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women_. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978.] Certainlyu the Bell and Weinberg study should be included in any discussion of "_every_ large-scale comparative study." And surely their conclusion as stated above is not consistent with Cameron's claim. Indeed, it would appear to be very much the opposite. In view of our comments above, we would ask that you consider the possibility that Cameron has violated the sections of Principle 4 as excerpted below. 4. We have become aware of information regarding another public statement regarding Paul Cameron which may also have violated sections of Principle 4-Public Statements as excerpted below: "...Psychologists represent accurately and objectively their professional qualifications, affiliations, and function... b)...[Public statements] do not contain (i) false, fradulent [sic], misleading, deceptive, or unfair statement..." Enclosed [not here] is a copy of an article which appeared in _Nebraska PTA News_, September, 1981. This article describes Cameron as employed at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. However, it is our understanding that Cameron had left his position at UNL more than a year prior to the data of this article. Also, in the same article Cameron's research findings are described as having been reported on the major wire services "more frequently than any other living scientist (17 times in the last 14 years)." In checking with United Press International, they have indicated that they do not keep logs of such data, and it seems unlikely that such a claim could be verified through other sources. Thus we ask that you also investigate this matter to determine if Cameron has violated the sections of Principle 4 as stated above. Nebraska Law, Chapter 71-3820 provides for the suspension or revoking of the license of any psychologist upon proof that the psychologist "Has been guilty of unprofessional conduct or...willfully misrepresenting his or her professional qualifications, affiliations, and purposes, or those of institutions and organizations with which he or she is associated..." We ask that you initiate an investigation to determine if Paul Cameron is guilty of unprofessional conduct as defined by Nebraska law. Should you feel after reviewing the enclosed material that further information is needed, we would be happy to meet with you, appear at a hearing or submit further written statements. Your acknowledgement of receipt of this letter and an outline of the procedures and time frame which will govern processing of this complaint would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, [signed by 6 people] Natalie Porter, Ph.D., member APA,NPA, Director, Psychological Consultation Center, UNL James K. Cole, PH.D., member APA, NPA, Director, Clinical Psychology Training, UNL Karen L. Kelly, Ph.D., member APA, NPA, Certified Clinical Psychologist, University Health Center, UNL Tim North-Shea, Ph.D., Psychologist Daniel J. Bernstein, Ph.D., member[missing text] Associate Professor, Dept. of Psyc [missing text] UNL Katherine Brzezinski-Stein, Ph.D., Psychological Counselor, Counseling Denter, UNL cc: Nebraska Psychological Association, American Psychological Association * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * The following report is mentioned in footnote 31 of the Buchmeyer supplemental opinion in Baker v. Wade (106 F.R.D.526 (1985)). PSYCHOLOGY, HOMOSEXUALITY, AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN LINCOLN, NEBRASKA James K. Cole, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln On May 11, 1982, a large turnout of Lincoln voters overwhelmingly (about 78%) rejected an amendment placed on the ballot which would have added "sexual orientation" to the city's human rights section of the municipal code as one of about ten groups protected from discrimination in housing, employment, or public accomodations [sic]. The vote followed a long and often bitter campaign conducted by groups both for and against the amendment. Nationally about 40 local governments have adopted similar legislation. Ordinances of this type are historically an outgrowth of the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed by Congress which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion or national origin. Along with other municipalities, Lincoln has adopted a human rights ordinance which has been amended a number of times to include not only the original groups, but also other group designations such as "marital status", "age", and "disability." The Lincoln City's Commission on Human Rights held public hearings and reviewed evidence of discrimination against homosexuals. As a result of their study, the Commission recommended to the City Council that the amendment be added to the City Charter and the proposed amendment was placed by the Council on the Spring election ballot. At the Nebraska Psychological Association's biannual meeting on April 17, 1982, two important professional and ethical issues related to the proposed amendment were raised by myself, Dr. Theo Sonderegger, and Dr. Natalie Porter. One issue was the argument that the Nebraska Psychological Association had a responsibility to speak out in support of the amendment. In December 1974, the Board of Trustees of the American psychiatric Association (1) adopted a resolution which "deplores all public and private discrimination against homosexuals in employment, housing, public accomodation [sic] and licensing" and which further urges the "enactment of civil rights legislation at the local, state and federal levels." The resolution was based in part on the conclusion that homosexuality per se implies no psychological or social impairment. In January 1975, about a month after the "little" APA's resolution, The American Psychological Association(2) also produced a similar resolution which urged the enactment of civil rights legislation. It was argued that mental health professionals in particular have a responsibility to take the lead in "removing the stigma of mental illness that has long been associated with homosexual orientations." The American Public Health Association(3) ;made a similar declaration in November 1975. It was the position of these associations that the removal of the _label_ of psychopathology should be clearly associated with removal of the _belief_ held implicitly or explicitly that homosexuals are second class or undesireable [sic] citizens deserving of social hostility. Also implicit in these actions was a recognition that the mental health professions have themselves too often promoted an anti-homosexual bias in the history of the mental health treatment of homosexuals, a treatment which at times contributed to the fear, hostility, and ignorance about homosexuality. The second issue raised at the NPA meeting involved public statements made against homosexuality by Dr. Paul Cameron. The American Psychological Association's code of ethics(4) requires psychologists who interpret psychological knowledge to the public to exercise scientific caution and to report fairly and accurately. Exaggeration, sensationalism, superficiality or any other form of misrepresentation are listed as violations of the code. Furthermore, psychologists are expected to avoid "any action that will violate or diminish the legal or civil rights of clients or of others who may be affected by their actions." Psychologists must "base their statements on scientifically acceptable psychological findings." Through numerous tracts, public appearances, and interviews with public media, Cameron reportedly attacked homosexuals as being socially and individually undesirable, disturbed, and dangerous both to themselves and to society. Homosexuals do not deserve the same rights as others (for example, the title of one of Dr. Cameron's tracts is "Should Christians Discriminate Against Homosexuality?").(5) In a companion article to a "Point of View" article by Cameron published by _The Lincoln Star_ on January 2, 1982(6) Dr. Louis Crompton and myself(7) pointed out how Dr. Cameron consistently misrepresented Kinsey data and other research sources on homosexuality to support his contentions against homosexuality. For example, he failed to report that in comparing homosexuals unfavorably in terms of criminal behavior or child molestation he compared tables of delinquent and nondelinquent homosexuals with college and non-college heterosexuals. It was the opinion of these authors that Cameron's treatment of statistics "does not inspire confidence in his scientific objectivity." Some appeared to be clearly inappropriate; some were simply incomprehensible. However, it is Dr. Cameron's conclusions that were particularly disturbing. In a widely distributed tract put out by the Temple Baptist Church of Lincoln(8) Cameron is quoted as follows: "Homosexuality is an infectious appetite with personal and social consequences. It is like the dog that gets a taste for blood after killing its first victim and desires to get more victims thereafter with a ravenous hunger." An advertisement in the _Lincoln Star_ newspaper(9) on April 11, 1982, attributed to the "Committee to Oppose Special Rights for Homosexuals, Dr. Paul Cameron, Psychologist, Chairman; Helen Larson, R.N., Treasurer" reads as follows: "Sexual Mass Murders have occurred 17 times in the past 15 years and claimed 210 victims. Although only four percent of the populace regularly practice homosexual acts, seven (41%) of these vicious murderers practiced homosexuality, and they accounted for 136 (62%) of the victims. Don't be fooled -- vote against the 'Sexual Orientation' Amendment." Perhaps the most disturbing statement made by Dr. Cameron, however, occurred at the University of Nebraska Lutheran Chapel on May 3, 1982. In a tape recording obtained by the _Lincoln Star_ newspaper, Dr. Cameron is quoted as saying: "Right now here in Lincoln there is a 4-year-old boy who has had his genitals almost severed from his body at Gateway in a restroom with a homosexual act." A _Lincoln Star_ article,(10) May 8, a982, was titled "Cameron Used False Report." This article and articles in the _Star_(11) and _Lincoln Journal_,(12) May 6, 1982, pointed out that checks with the Lincoln police indicated that this and similar rumors about a 7-year-old boy and a 14-year-old son of a prominent Lincoln family have no factual basis. Police were reported as "baffled as to the origin of the story." On May 10, 1982, the following editorial statement appeared in the _Lincoln Star_:(13) "A leading opponent of the proposed Lincoln Human Rights Amendment spreads rumors of an alleged vicious incident calculated to damage the proposal's chances at the polls. When asked about it, he admits the rumor was without foundation. He refused to say from whom he heard the rumor. He says he will not use the rumor again unless he finds it to be true. Nonetheless, he still insists it 'could be true', even though responsible authorities in the city say there is not a shred of evidence that such an incident ever took place. The seed is planted, recantation to the contrary." These examples are among the more extreme statements among many made against homosexuals, or the homosexual "tribe," a not-too-subtle label Cameron frequently uses in describing homosexuality. It was a result of the alleged abuses of the APA Code of Ethics as well as the prior statements by the APA and other mental health associations regarding discrimination against homosexuals that the following two part resolution was proposed to NPA at its May meeting and passed _unanimously_ by the members present: 1) The Nebraska Psychological Association endorses the Human Rights Amendment which would prevent discrimination against people regardless or [sic] their sexual orientation as well as race, color, religion, sex, etc. 2) Furthermore, NPA deplores the misleading and untrue statements about psychological research on homosexuality which have been circulated during the campaign to defeat the Human Rights Amendment. Psychological research simply does not justify the allegations which have been made in an attempt to abridge the Civil Rights of gay and lesbian persons. It is hoped that the large vote against the proposed amendment in Lincoln reflects primarily a misunderstanding of the Civil Rights issues involved or simply ignorance about homosexuality. These hopefully can be addressed in time. More difficult to address is bigotry exploited and fueled by so-called "experts" who abuse scientific knowledge. Unfortunately "psychology" was represented frequently by the numerous statements and appearances of Dr. Paul Cameron. Unfortunately also Cameron's statements were apparently accepted as valid by the Lincoln area churches affiliated with the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran Church in a full page ad placed in the _Lincoln Journal Star_,(14) May 9, 1982. The ad says in part: "Finally we are concerned that there exists evidence yielded by historical study of past human societies, various contemporary sociological studies, and the experiences of professional counselors which indicates that homosexual behavior has an unhealthy effect upon the lives of those who practice it and upon the society in which it is practiced." This was the "witness" of at least some "Christians" in Lincoln. For some of the Lincoln public, the "witness" of psychology often was seen as supporting (exploiting?) existing hatred of homosexuals. A question for at least some psychologists is whether the APA Code of Ethics is worth the paper it is written on if, in fact, licensing and professional agencies fail to respond to an individual and action such as occurred in Lincoln. REFERENCES NOTED IN PAPER (1) News release, American Psychiatric Association, June 30, 1975 (untitled release referring to resolution or [sic] homosexuality passed by the Board of Trustees, December 15, 1974). (2) News release entitled "News", American Psychological Association, January 24, 1975. (3) News release, American Public Health Association, Novemner 19, 1975 (resolution on "homosexuality and public health"). (4) Ethical Principles for Psychologists, American Psychological Association, 1981. (5) Cameron, Paul, "Should Christians Descriminate Against Homosexuality?" (tract released by Dr. Paul Cameron) (6) Cameron, Paul, _Lincoln Star_, January 2, 1982, "Majority Rights will Suffer" ("Point of View" special invited article)[text in this computer file]. (7) Cole, James and Crompton, Louis, _Lincoln Star_, January 2, 1982, "Rational, Informed Discussion Needed" ("Point of View" special invited article)[text in this computer file]. (8) "Lincoln's Homosexual/Lesbian Issue" (tract put out by Temple Baptist Church, 4940 Randolph Street, Lincoln, NE 68510). (9) _Lincoln Journal-Star Sunday Edition_, April 11, 1982, "Sexual Mass Murderers" (ad placed in #148 _Personals_). (10) _Lincoln Star_, May 8, 1982, news article titled "Cameron Used False Report".[text in this computer file]. (11) _Lincoln Star_, May 6, 1982, news article titled "Police Say Mutilation Stories Are Rumors Only". (12) _Lincoln Journal_, May 6, 1982, news article titled "Mutilation Rumor Said Unfounded". (13) _Lincoln Star_, May 10, 1082, editorial, "Lazy Electorate Will Harm Political System". (14) _Lincoln Journal-Star Sunday Edition_, may 9, 1982. Full page ad with titles: "Please Vote Against the 'Sexual Orientation' Amendment" and "Lincoln's Homosexual/Lesbian Issue", political advertisement paid for by the concerned members of LC-MS Churches in Lincoln. Represented by Rev. Daniel Ondov and Rev. James Bauer.) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * _The Lincoln Star_ Saturday, 5/8/92, page 16 Cameron used false report By Kathryn Haugstatter, Star Staff Writer The Lincoln Star has learned Paul Cameron, chairman of the Committee to Oppose Special Rights for Homosexuals, earlier this week told an audience in Lincoln a child was mutilated in a homosexual attack in the Gateway Shopping Center. An investigation by the Lincoln Police Department has produced no evidence of such an attack, a fact which was first publicized Thursday morning. Cameron made the statement Monday night during a discussion of the proposed addition to the city's human rights ordinance at the University Lutheran Chapel, 1510 Q St. Rumors of the attack have circulated for a week but a Police Department investigation produced no evidence of such an attack, nor could police discover how the rumors got started. Cameron told the audience male homosexuals disproportionately are attracted to boys and he used his account of the attack to illustrate that view. "Right now, here in Lincoln, there is a 4-year-old boy who has had his genitals almost severed from his body at Gateway in the rest room with a homosexual act," he said. Cameron said Friday night a woman he considered honorable had told him of the attack, but he admitted he had no direct knowledge of it. "It's really awkward," he said. "I could see where Gateway would wish to suppress this. I could see where the parents would want to suppress it. It could be just a rumor. "But enough things have happened recently so that such a thing doesn't have to be invented," he said, referring to sexual attacks on newsboys that have occurred in recent months. He added he immediately would investigate the allegations. Lt. Lyle Roberts said he has received several phone calls from concerned parents who he said have been needlessly frightened by the rumors. Boberts said he can't recall any incident similar to the rumors ever occurring during his 12 years on the department. "The logs of emergency runs in the three Lincoln hospitals were gone over with hospital personnel to insure that no one was admitted under those circumstances," he said. Scott Stebelman, co-chairman of the Coalition for Gay and Lesbian Civil Rights, said the group is upset Cameron would spread "unsubstantiated rumors" about gay people. "If his statement about the mutilated boy is wrong, the public must ask if his other statements about homosexuals are also unfounded," he said. "Cameron's reliance on rumor should trouble all citizens seeking accurate information on this issue." * * * * Another article appears below on my copy, which is presumably from the same paper issue: Bishop favors jail bond issue Lincoln Bishop Glennon P. Flavin has taken stands on two local political issues in the Catholic diocese's weekly paper. In a signed article in the May 7 issue of the Southern Nebraska Register, the bishop supported Lincoln's proposed $6.8 million jail bond issue, but in an unsigned piece readers were told "the church cannot support the sexual orientation amendment" as proposed on the May 11 ballot. Carol McShane, chairperson of Catholics for Active Liturgical Life, a group that has criticized the bishop for a lack of communication, said the church leader's taking a stand is "a welcome change." She said she believes a bishop has the responsibility to take public stands on issues that affect moral judgment. However, she said, some Catholics would have difficulty aligning his opposition to the sexual orientation amendment with a 6-year-old statement by the U.S. National Council of Catholic Bishops declaring homosexuals "should not suffer from prejudice against their basic human rights." The diocese newspaper piece says in any amendment to the city ordinance, a clear distinction would have to be made between sexual orientation and sexual activity. "A vote in favor of this amendment would be a vote in favor of sexual practices which are immoral according to the teachings of the Catholic Church," it states. On the jail issue, Flavin wrote human decency requires that prisons respect human rights of privacy, safety and opportunity for self-confidence and self-respect. "The proposed plan to alter existing inadequacies should appeal to the conscience of the voters," he wrote. #30# [editorial NOTE: interesting that the good bishop shows more concern for the murderer than for the faggot.] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Recently (1994) Representative Dornan of California joined Cameron's Family Research Institute. Here is an earlier article on another California Representative's affair with Cameron. San Francisco Chronicle, 8/19/85, page 7 Anti-Gay Adviser Stirs Controversy Santa Ana A conservative California congressman has hired a controversial anti-homosexual psychologist to serve as a consultant on AIDS and other gay issues, the Orange County Register reported yesterday. Paul Cameron, once wrote a brochure titled "Murder, Violence, Homosexuality," in which he linked homosexuals to criminal behavior -- including mass murder and child molestation -- and said gays should be quarantined to stop the spread of acquired immune deficiency syndrome, the newspaper said. Representative William Dannemeyer, a Republican, told the Register he hired Cameron for one month to advise him on the malady that greatly weakens the body's immune systems and mostly affects homosexuals, intravenous drug users and hemophiliacs. Dannemeyer is a ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on health and environment, which has jurisdiction over AIDS research and financing. On Cameron's advice, Dannemeyer said he planned to send a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Margaret Heckler urging a national ban on blood donation by male homosexuals, including monogamous gay couples. Cameron was expelled in 1983 from the American Psychological Association "on findings of ethical violations," the newspaper said, and recently was repudiated by the Nebraska Psychological Association. "He has grossly distorted and misrepresented other people's research." Dr. Natalie Porter, assistant professor of psychology at the University of Nebraska, told the newspaper. Porter, one of six Nebraska psychologists who asked the 65,000-member national association to examine Cameron's work, said she believes Cameron's reputation makes him an inappropriate consultant to a legislator. "The idea that a member of Congress would lend some credence to this man's ideas is frightening," said Ron Najman, spokesman for the National Gay Task Force in New York. Cameron was also discredited by a federal judge as an expert witness in a federal court challenge of Texas sodomy laws, the newspaper said. "Dr. Paul Cameron...has himself made misrepresentations to this court," U.S. District Judge Jerry Buchmeyer wrote in April 1984. "His sworn statement that 'homosexuals are approximately 43 times more apt to commit crimes than the general population' is a total distortion of the...data on which he relies." Dannemeyer says he trusts Cameron as an adviser and sees the Lincoln, Neb., psychologist as "a man of conscience" who has fallen victim to those who have lost their "moral compass." -- United Press * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Cameron's Nebraska Medical Journal article (copy seen was "Reprinted from The Nebraska Medical Journal, August, 1985, Vol. 70, NOs. 8, p. 292." A letter critical of it was apparently copied from a bound volume of the same journal, the November 1985 issue, pp 410-414 (letter writers Robert D. Brown and James K. Cole, who were mentioned previously in this computer file -- see the articles after Cameron's vita, and elsewhere) This study uses the data of the same survey as Cameron's 1989 _Psychological Reports_ paper, "Effect of Homosexuality Upon Public Health and Social Order". The latter paper should be read in conjunction with the Nebraska one, for it throws come very revealing light on Cameron's distorted figures. >From the Synopsis: "4,340 adults randomly drawn from five metropolitan areas were questionnaired.... Bi/homosexuals of both genders (4.4% of the sample)....Homosexuals appear to contribute no less than 15% of the nation's STDs and probably act as a significant vector in generating additional fractions to the STD pool." First, Cameron combines bisexuals with homosexuals (self-identified) to make his unfavorable comparison worse (e.g., using "homosexuals" instead of "bisexuals/homosexuals" in the last sentence of the synopsis, thus trying to blame gays for the activities of bisexuals). His presentation of the data in the Psych Rpts article (PR), shows, however, that his bi/homo sample of males consisted of 39 bisexuals and 41 homosexuals, while his sample of women consisted of 44 bisexuals and 25 homosexuals. In the PS paper, of the MALES, 404 heterosexuals, 23 bisexuals, and 35 homosexuals reported ever having had STD. Of the FEMALES, 503 heterosexuals, 19 bisexuals, and 5 homosexuals reported having had had STD. There doesn't seem to be any data presenting whether the bisexuals got there diseases through hetero or homo contacts. One could easily imagine that in the case of the women, at least, it was more likely through hetero acts, simply due to the physical nature of the sex acts. (And the low incidence among the homosexual women lends credence to this.) While the most probable "incidence" of STDs among homosexual women is 5/25=20% (PR paper), versus 503/2094=24% among heterosexual women, thus making gay women LESS likely than het women to have had STD, Cameron's inclusion of bisexuals and reportage as "homosexuals" in his Nebraska paper reverses the situation, and claims gay women MORE likely to have had STD (32.5% versus 50.7%, which derives from the figures he actually presents in Nebraska, namely had "none of the 15 STDs above" in his table: het women 67.5%, homosexual women, 49.3%) It should be noted that his small sample of 41 gay men and 25 gay women is so small that it is subject to extreme error if used to make projections to the gay population as a whole. Statistically, the figures Cameron derives are nearly meaningless. * * * The letter of Brown and Cole criticizes the Nebraska paper and should be read in conjunction with it. Here is the last section of the letter: Concerns for Publication Finally, we must register our sincere concern that *The Nebraska Medical Journal* [*...* = bold type for ...] would lend credence to such an article, particularly the discussion section of the article. What do we have left once this article has been pruned of its rhetoric and major sources of invalidity? We have percentages and statistics on a sample that is questionable in terms of its representativeness and based on a questionnaire and sampling procedure of highly doubtful validity. What we have left is gross overgeneralization and misrepresentation of useless data. The evidence presented would not stand up to the scrutiny of competent researchers. It is unfortunate that the *Journal* has provided a forum for an article that would probably not receive a passing grade in any early graduate course in research methodology or questionnaire design. Between us we have read several thousand student research papers and prospective authors' manuscripts in the past ten hears. The publication by Cameron et al. would not pass as a senior research paper or masters thesis in any respected psychology department. It is unfortunate that the good name of *The Nebraska Medical Journal* will now be cited by Cameron et al. in the future to give credibility to sloppy research at best and gross misrepresentation at worst. This is particularly true when the negative tone of the discussion seems more intended to suggest punishment than compassionate medical treatment you might hope to see in a medical journal. One possible positive side-effect is that now the Cameron data are pubic, it is possible for everyone to see the study for what it is -- useless and questionable data. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * By Dr. Herek: A Note on _Psychological Reports_ The majority of Paul Cameron's publications appear in _Psychological Reports_. He frequently claims that publication in this scientific journal legitimizes his research. As with most of Cameron's claims, this one requires some background information in order to refute it. _Psychological Reports_ is generally regarded by psychologists as a "vanity journal". Although papers submitted to it are sent to other researchers for peer review, their rejection rate is very low. They accept most papers for publication, and then charge the authors for the costs of publishing. (Although per-page charges are common in biomedical journals, this practice is not followed by social science journals.) In other words, this journal exists primarily to publish papers (for a price) that can't be published elsewhere for various reasons. Publisning a paper in _Psychological Reports_ is not necessarily an admission that the research described in the paper is of low quality. For example, when a researcher wishes to make a newly-developed attitude scale available to other researchers, s/he may decide to publish it in _Psychological Reports_. The reason for this is that most mainstream journals are unwilling to devote their limited space to attitude scales. Publishing it in PR provides the author with an easy way to get it into circulation and does not reflect badly upon the author. However, because _Psychological Reports_ has such minimal standards for publishing, it does not bring prestige to researchers who publish in it. An occasional publication in this journal is generally regarded as acceptable. However, when _Psychological Reports_ is a researcher's principal outlet (as in Cameron's case), it indicates that the researcher cannot get the work accepted in a journal that has higher standards. Of course, Cameron has to publish his work in _Psychological Reports_ because reputable journals won't accept it. Not only are his claims clearly based on bigotry, his methods are highly biased and his interpretations of his data are irresponsible. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * A brief note on KOOP, The Memoirs of America's Family Doctor, by C.Everett Koop, M.D., former Surgeon General of the U.S., Random House, 1991, page 208 and page 230 mention of Cameron: "Some California congressmen had come under the sway of a group who despised not only homosexual behavior, but also homosexuals. They perpetuated a number of myths about AIDS transmission and called for unnecessary quarantine and testing. Among these propagandists was Paul Cameron, one of the country's most outspoken anti-homosexuals...." .... "The next evening, at the AMFAR gala (held along the Potomac in a sweltering tent), Reagan's excellent speech -- the key sentence was that we would _offer_ routine testing -- laid to rest the danger of mandatory testing and kept the federal government off the wrong road on AIDS. I was so pleased that I barely noticed the picketers, led by anti-homosexual Paul Cameron, who were shouting obscenities as they milled around carrying placards: 'Quarantine Manhattan Island,' 'Burn Koop,' and other encouraging messages." * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Criticism of Cameron in Homosexuality: Research Implications for Public Policy, Edited by John D. Gonsiorek and James D. Weinrich, Published in cooperation with the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. SAGE Publications, The International Professional Publishers, Newbury Park, Longon, New Delhi, 1991 from the introductory article by the two editors, "The Definition and Scope of Sexual Orientation" pp4-5: The work of Paul Cameron and associates (CAmeron, 1986, 1988; Cameron, Proctor, Coburn, & Forde, 1985; Cameron, Proctor, Coburn, Forde, Larson, & Csmeron, 1986) has received recent attention. Some of his statements appear scientific: "The only reports of reasonably randomly obtained, non-volunteer samples yielded estimates that about 98% of the general population is heterosexual" (Cameron et al., 1985), or "We found that about 2% of U.S. males claimed to be homosexual and about another 2% claimed to be bisexual in 1983" (Cameron 1988). Cameron's work, however, is deeply flawed methodologically and contains misstatements even of his own previous results. For example, subjects in one of the two "randomly obtained" samples mentioned above (Cameron & Ross, 1981) answered a questionnaire whose first question was "When, in your opinion, does human life begin?" This and other political questions leading off the survey might have caused many respondents to decline to answer the questionnaire, but such bias was never considered. Likewise, Cameron's statement (quoted above) that approximately 4% of U.S. males were homosexual or bisexual is a misstatement of the data from his own survey; Cameron actually found that 5.8% of the men in his survey were homosexual or bisexual (Cameron et al., 1985). The 4% figure is the rounded version of a 4.45% _average_ of the figures for men (5.8%) and for women (3.1%). Scientists have a responsibility to be more accurate than this. Although the difference between 5.8% and 4% might not seem like much, the former is 45% higher than the latter (Weinrich, 1988a). Misstatements such as Cameron's do not represent scientific accuracy but rather are examples of right wing attempts to manipulate scientific data for political purposes. Cameron's intent appears to be to portray homosexuals as a rare minority and so inflate the incidence of HIV infection among homosexuals by reducing the absolute number of homosexuals estimated in the population. In a published letter (Cameron, 1986), Cameron attacked a previous author who was trying to estimate the proportions of homosexual men, drug abusers, and hemophiliacs with AIDS. To do so, one must divide the number of homosexuals with AIDS by the total number of homosexuals in the population under study, and so on with the other groups. As Cameron adjusted the absolute number of estimated homosexuals downward, the proportion affected by AIDS substantially increases -- an attempt to make the rate of HIV infection appear higher among gay and bisexual men than it actually is. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * In a letter published on Science,, vol 240, 13 May 1988, p 867, Cameron comments on a previous Science article on Kinsey Sex Surveys: While it is always intriguing to wonder about the results of "long lost sex surveys," when it comes to "better estimates of the true numbers of homosexuals" we would like to inform you that they exist. Further, the "lost data set" of the Kinsey Institute is not the "only one...in which a large number of Americans from across the country were selected at random and quizzed about sexual behavior." Our broad-scale (over 500 items) survey of sexual activity and attitudes of 4340 adults from five metropolitan areas (1 P. Cameron, Lancet i, 36 (1986)))has generated results that closely match data sets that address more limited aspects of sexuality (2, which cites J.M. Siegel et al., Am. J. Epidemiol. 126, 1141 (1987); S.B. Sorenson et al. ibid. p. 1154.). We found that about 2% of U.S. males claimed to be homosexual and about another 2% claimed to be bisexual in 1983, in agreement with estimates we generated in 1975-1978 based on 2551 respondents." (3 which cites P. Cameron and K. P. Ross, J. Psychol. Theol. 9,40 (1981), which is cited in his vita as: Social psychological aspects of the Judeo-Christian stance toward homosexuality. _Journal of Psychology and Theology_, 1981, _9_(1), 40-57, without giving credit to "Ross".) If the Centers for Disease Control are basing their estimates of the spread of AIDS on the original Kinsey work, then they are probably erroneously high by a factor of at least 2 and more probably 4. * * * on page 16 of Science, vol 242, 7 Oct 1988, a letter from James D. Weinrich, UCSD Treatment Center, University of California, San Diego, CA 92103, responds: Readers may be interested in further information about the two surveys conducted by Paul Cameron, cited by him in his letter of 13 May (p867), in which he stated that he has "better estimates of the true numbers of homosexuals" than those obtained elsewhere. His first cited study (1, which is P. Cameron, Lancet i, 36 (1986) refers to an earlier study of 4340 respondents (2, which is P. Cameron et al., Neb. Med J. 70, 292 (1985)). This paper did not say that "about 2% of U.S. males claimed to be homosexual and about another 2% claimed to be bisexual in 1983...." In that study, 5.8% of the male respondents reported themselves as "bi- or homosexual" (2, p. 293). Making a mountain out or a molehill? Not at all. This 4% figure was applied to the denominator of a fraction expressing the incidence of AIDS among homosexuals (1). If the 5.8% figure is changed to 4%, the estimate of this incidence is increased from 0.0019 to 0.0027, a difference of more than 40 % * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *