In this article, we will demonstrate how the mechanism of cognitive dissonance, if well applied, is the road to indoctrination and thought-control. It is a mechanism that will conquer the mind, especially since using this technique will change the mind of the general public on their own accord. It surpasses rational thinking and fact-checking, and if well done, it is a winner.
1. Cognitive dissonance
Cognitive dissonance is the mental condition that occurs when two pieces of information are at odds with one another. In psychology, they are called cognitions and their incompatibility is called dissonance. The resulting awkward feeling yearns for relief, and usually, the person will subconsciously alter one of the two cognition’s so that the uncomfortable feeling fades away. But this is done at the expense of the cognition being altered. It is in effect a form of private brainwashing, not inflicted by others but by the person himself to ease the mind.
When studying how radical LGBT activism has managed over the past decade to influence a great number of people, we see how radicalized psychologists even deliberately use it to make people delude themselves in the desirable direction. It is not the psychologist presenting a new narrative, it is the other person doing the deluding in his very own language and way of thinking.
2. A car collision in the TV program ‘Mindf*ck”
On Dutch TV the other day, Dr. Victor Mids showed a splendid example of the phenomenon. Besides being a medical doctor, he is also an accomplished illusionist and highly regarded TV personality. In his show “Mindf*ck”, he deludes audiences all the time, making the viewer cry out: “how does he do it?” He always states “Oh, by the way, I never use actors”. And indeed, no evidence to the contrary has ever been demonstrated.
Last week, he did an extraordinary experiment with 30 volunteers. It has an enormous impact on our understanding of radical gay-lib tactics. The gag on his show this time was to claim he could read minds. Each volunteer was given a card with a question on it. He handed out a yellow, green or red card respectively after the mind of the volunteer had supposedly been read.
The volunteer group was asked to watch a video closely in which two cars collided with each other, and then to consider the multiple-choice question on the card about the car speed.
After viewing the short video, everyone was asked: “Raise your card if you feel the car speed was less than 15 km/hour”. All the cards that were raised turned out to be colored yellow.
Then he asked: “Raise the card if you feel the car speed was about 30 km/hour”. Almost all the cards that were raised turned out to be colored green.
Then the question was repeated for the idea that the collision speed was more than 45 km/hour. All cards which went up were colored red.
How did Victor predict this? As usual with Victor, the audience was staggered. How does he manage to read minds?
He laughed and explained that everyone had seen the same video and responded to his same verbal question, but there was a slight difference in the question written on the card. On the yellow card, it read: “At what speed did the cars bump into each other?” The word “bump” led the volunteer to go for ‘less than 15 km/hour’. On the green card, it read: “At what speed did the cars hit each other?” The word “hit” led most volunteers to go for ’30km/hour’. The red card read: “At what speed did the cars crash into each other?”
The word “crash” led the volunteers to go for ‘more than 45 km/hour’.
The mystery was solved, and the volunteers were demonstrated how the cognition “bump” is only compatible with a speed of ‘less than 15 km/hour’, the cognition “hit” is only more or less compatible with a speed of 30 km/hour, and the cognition “crash” is only compatible with ‘more than 45 km/hour’.
In other words, by deliberately placing the volunteers in a situation of cognitive dissonance, Dr. Mids could influence their second cognition (‘speed’). The first cognition was the description of the collision that he deliberately (but secretly and casually) handed to them (“bump”, “hit” or “crash” respectively), the second cognition is then subconsciously altered by the volunteer to be in accordance with the first cognition, even though all the persons had closely viewed the same collision video. It was yet another remarkable edition of Victor’s highly credited TV program.
3. The APA Task Force of Division 44 (LGBT)
We observe how gay activists in the American Psychological Association who are united in Division 44 (the “LGBT” section) have used cognitive dissonance to delude audiences into concluding that therapy for unwanted same-sex attractions is highly undesirable, harmful even. In 2014, they constructed a lengthy document, aimed to point everyone’s nose in the right direction. They called it “Appropriate therapeutic responses to sexual orientation“
The activists’ opinion on this subject would be the only appropriate response. Members of the APA with other insights were excluded from the Task Force that wrote the document. In the activist world-view, each expression of same-sex attractions is considered to be the ultimate symptom of an “orientation”, a magical and deep-rooted psychological condition that would exist and would be genetically founded, making it immutable. It would be the final manifestation, the coming-out, of a dormant biological part of the individual’s state of being, the one and only ME coming into bloom.
They make it sound like the branch of a tree which just happened to have a twist for no reason at all, and then grew to become big.
Saying hello to this label means saying goodbye to every other sexual potential, including sexual feelings for the opposite sex. Those feelings become out of the question. Such is the power of the indoctrination which is part and parcel of the so-called ‘coming-out’ process. It is more a question of ‘going-in’ actually, into the cocoon of narrow-mindedness, forfeiting all human possibilities.
‘I am different, I am gay, I am a mutant and I am proud of it’,
Such is the battle cry to those who are confused and who are trying to make sense of a multitude of opposing feelings within themself.
In the year 2000 and in 2018, it was proven however that there is no correlation between genes/biology on the one hand and sexual feelings on the other. In 2000 Dr. Neil Whitehead of the UN published proof of this in his book ‘Homosexuality and the Scientific Evidence’ (download as pdf-file or epub file). In 2018 a study in the magazine Science also proved there is no single gay gene. It is not a biological affair and neither can any prediction or immutability be argued on medical grounds.
In the opening paragraphs of the 2014 APA document, the reader immediately gets placed in a state of cognitive dissonance. The first cognition is the title which claims that we are looking for an appropriate response to sexual behavior of this sort. The second cognition is written on page 2 when it says,
“We see this affirmative approach as grounded in an acceptance of the following scientific facts: Same-sex sexual attractions, behavior, and orientations per se are normal and positive variants of human sexuality—in other words, they do not indicate either mental or developmental disorders.”
This boils down to:
“Homosexuality is normal with no mental or developmental disorders to be found.”
So, the two cognition’s are
1. ‘what is appropriate therapy’,
2. ‘there is no disorder to be found’.
These two cognition’s are at odds with one another because therapy can never be appropriate if there is no disorder. The average reader must resolve this cognitive dissonance in his mind, and cannot continue if the mental conflict that has been induced by the cognition’s in the opening paragraphs, is not immediately dealt with.
The reader can either alter cognition #1 to make it sound as follows: ‘no therapy is appropriate for homosexuality because it is normal’ or he can alter cognition #2 to make it sound: ‘there are distinct mental or developmental disorders to be found in spite of what this Task Force sets out to assert and write.’
But because the writers also write that cognition #2 is based on scientific facts, then the chance that cognition #2 will be altered is minimal. In other words, most readers will already have made up their minds before proceeding further with the document, and they do so to diminish the mental conflict over the two incompatible cognition’s which the activists presented to them. The claim that science proves cognition #2 will be enough for most people to believe that these “scientific facts” exist. After all, the size of the document is so daunting and the language is so technical and cryptic that very few will assume that these alleged ‘scientists’ have got it wrong.
It is only a few experts in this field who know that those alleged “scientific facts” do not exist and that we are facing a lie. In fact, we are facing a lot of lies; the whole document is one big lie, but most people have already made up their minds through self-brainwashing, and have biased themselves in this fashion right from the start. Due to this self-acquired prejudice, they will disregard any information that rocks this boat. They have already made an assumption of their own free will, and this will inoculate them against further information to the contrary.
In the Encyclopedia Britannica, we read on this subject:
“Cognitive dissonance is the mental conflict that occurs when beliefs or assumptions are contradicted by new information. The unease or tension that the conflict arouses in people is relieved by one of several defensive maneuvers: they reject, explain away, or avoid the new information; persuade themselves that no conflict really exists; reconcile the differences; or resort to any other defensive means of preserving stability or order in their conceptions of the world and of themselves.”
The writers of the APA 2014 document have therefore manipulated the readers’ mind-frame right from the start in order to make them refrain from reading the document in an open-minded way, to the same extent as Dr. Mids manipulated his volunteers to choose an appropriate speed after seeing the video. He deliberately let them think for example “crashes occurs at 45 km/hour”, the Task Force deliberately lets you think “homosexuality has been proven to be merely a normal variant, therefore therapy cannot possibly be appropriate”. Why read the rest of the document when you have already reached your very private conclusions? This then is the power of utilizing cognitive dissonance.
4. A more open-minded approach
If the 2014 research assignment was not written by the radicalized activists themselves and if professionals with a more moderate approach would also have been invited to participate, a less manipulative research assignment could have read,
“When assessing the appropriateness of therapy, to what extent is homosexual behavior consistently associated with forms of internal discomfort, and to what extent can underlying internal causes be identified and considered to be problems worth tackling, if they exist at all.”
This phrasing leads to the conclusion that if there are no problems on the surface, nor underlying the condition, then yes, therapy is inappropriate. But if there is a multitude of problems staring you in the face and even more when you know how to carry out an in-depth interview, then yes, therapy is warranted.
There you go, a research definition with which activists and therapists alike can be happy. The 2014 document on appropriate therapy would have been open-minded with no built-in cognitive dissonance in the opening paragraphs. The conclusions would have been obvious: if there are underlying problems, go for it. And if there are none to be observed in any reasonable way, then retreat.
We know however that there is not a single document that proves that developmental problems are absent, neither does the APA document refer to such literature. They claim that these documents exist, but in all the 144 pages that were used for their plight, not a sentence or reference was jotted down. This is not due to a shortage of paper, but a shortage of these alleged ‘scientific’ facts.
5. Coming out ‘gay’
The process of ‘coming out gay’ can also be viewed as a form of cognitive dissonance.
In Britannica, we read,
“Suppose, for example, that a person is required to undergo a stressful initiation to join a select group. After undergoing this initiation the person discovers that becoming a member of the group does not provide the satisfaction originally expected. Such an outcome should produce cognitive dissonance because the behaviors required (initiation) and the current belief about the group are inconsistent. The behavior cannot be changed because it has already occurred; the belief, on the other hand, can be changed. Under these conditions, dissonance theory predicts that the person’s attitude will change and that he will come to believe that he likes the group more. Several studies have supported this prediction.”
Let us use this theory to understand the remarkable public performances called Gay Pride Marches. During the process of “coming out gay” which is an initiation process into a newly found imaginary tribe, or “LGBT-community”, we see how LGBT activists deliberately use cognitive dissonance.
The individual is insidiously led to leave a promise of heterosexuality behind forever, to believe that you cannot change your identity anymore because you are presumably ‘born that way’, and that trying to change your group membership by means of, for example, therapy is harmful and will lead to anxiety, depression, and suicide. Therapy is portrayed as the ultimate abyss, the end of life as we know it. Heterosexuality is the path to hell, to the same extent that a century ago, homosexuality was portrayed as the gateway to eternal fires tormenting the soul. Fear was a persuasive instrument back then, it has come back to be of use yet once again. Only now, the other way around.
This mantra is repeated over and over again. All information, tweets, and books which defy the LGBT-mantras of ‘immutability’ and ‘genetically born that way’ are deleted by activists from Amazon, Wikipedia and Google, so as a youngster cannot even find out if he/she wanted to.
Under these circumstances, according to the cognitive dissonance theory, the individual will change his attitude about his/her group membership and will not complain about the shallowness, emptiness, falseness or major health hazards of the gay identity.
The grassroots group Massresistance has published an outstanding document in 2018 on the darker side of the ‘gay coming-out’ process in terms Health-hazards (download).
Even though one could start a major ‘Me-Too’ discussion about sexual inappropriateness, harassment and rape with which newbies are consistently confronted until they become more assertive and hostile towards older sexual predators (men who consistently chase after new, naive and innocent-looking “hotties”), he/she will not complain about it. It is only the theory of cognitive dissonance that can explain this extraordinary behavior of the newbie and his enrolling in the Pride March.
As the Encyclopedia Britannica says:
“The behaviour cannot be changed because it has already occurred; the belief about the group, on the other hand, can be changed.”
6. Deleting books in the public space
The mechanism is actively utilized by the gay members of Division 44 of the American Psychological Association who are everywhere to be found in advisory committees of other organizations. In 2019, they even generously advised lay and gay activists how to fool Amazon into deleting all books by Nicolosi and others, as long as the deletion itself is not done under their professional name. The cognitive dissonance of inquisitive youngsters is deliberately kept intact. Youngsters are not to be confused with other information than handed to them in the activist cocoon.
7. The rainbow-colored flag
Cognitive dissonance also occurs when youngsters observe the noisiness of Pride street manifestations and the tremendous size of the rainbow flag that is dragged on these occasions. The cloth grows bigger by the year and its size is meant to intimidate. Surely you cannot get it wrong as a newbie with so much fabric waving in the streets. Doubting the legitimacy of the symbol on the one hand and being awe-stricken by its size on the other, creates yet another cognitive dissonance.
And so, most youngsters will delete their doubts about the correctness of the world-view being demonstrated in the streets. You will not say the cloth is ridiculous, you will usually assume that your doubts are ridiculous. And you are the one who reached that conclusion, it was not handed to you through persuasion with reasonable arguments and the weighing of pro and contra. You reached this conclusion to solve the state of cognitive dissonance that you were brought into.
That is why for activists it is imperative to make the flag bigger each year so as it will keep on doing its job, and to wave it everywhere, preferably from government buildings where it replaces the national flag, inducing yet another cognitive dissonance situation for the onlooker. After all, the government: that’s us!
The Trump administration, by the way, has recently voiced concern over rainbow flags flying from embassies. This policy was enforced by Barack Obama. The current administration feels that no lobby group from any constituency should monopolize the visual impact of the USA abroad. Radical activists are furious for daring to defy their symbols which are made to appear to be waved on behalf of all the American people.
8. Influencing politicians
Cognitive dissonance is a highly irrational way to influence opinion. A democratic debate becomes flawed because altering cognition’s happens subconsciously. It is self-brainwashing and it annihilates an open-minded exchange of ideas. The power of cognitive dissonance is so strong that even Nancy Pelosi could be led to exclaim that therapy for same-sex attractions is “barbaric”, a description which she solely generated on her own accord. No-one has ever used that phrase before, it is the product of her mind.
9 Influencing readers
Samuel Brinton, a notorious extremist gay activist, uses cognitive dissonance abundantly. In an op-ed (opinion article) in the New York Times in January 2018, he presented cognitive dissonance in the title of his essay: “I was tortured in Gay Conversion Therapy, and it’s still legal in 41 states”.
This title immediately places the reader in a state of CD. The uncomfortable feeling that is provoked is so compelling (“torture”!!!) that it must be relieved. You can either alter cognition #1 about the torture allegation, or #2 about all those states. You are led to suppose that they do nothing to stop this situation. Just like Dr. Mids, the illusionist does, Brinton uses a sleight-of-hand trick: he is not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, as they say in court. In this way, he manipulates his readers.
Had he been more honest, then an open-minded debate can ensue.
Regarding cognition # 1 (the torture allegation), he would have to admit that he does not know the name of the alleged therapist, nor the whereabouts of this alleged camp, nor place or date. Nor can he name anyone else who was there at that time or ever since. He has no witnesses to the alleged needles under his fingernails, neither has his family or schoolmates seen the alleged wounds from alleged freezing or electric burning, nor has he sought any medical help for these alleged grave conditions that he can name, neither has anyone in the USA filed a complaint at a police station about camps, harassment’s, lesbian rapes and electrical currents applied to genitals at any time. No-one has ever complained about months of interment, disappearance and shackles. He stands alone.
Regarding #2 (the 41 states who apparently have not gotten round to doing something about it), he fails to inform his readers that the debate has taken place in ten states where the proposal was declined. The legislators were not merely hanging around but they weighed arguments pro and contra, reaching well-balanced decisions. Had the gentleman named these facts, then an interesting debate could have taken place about alleged atrocities. And the arguments of the ten states who thus far have chosen not to comply to a ban could have been highlighted for debate.
Brinton manipulates his audiences to the same extent that Dr. Mids has shown us. That is how gay-lib does it.
Conclusion
Cognitive dissonance rules out critical thinking and purges the urge for fact-checking. The way that the victims of CD alter one of the two cognition’s is more far-fetched than the activist can even dream of. And the activist is not responsible for the outcome, he can sit back and enjoy the show. The outcome is emotionally driven, not rationally.
The aim of radical gay-lib is to prevent younger generations from finding opposing thoughts and facts, thereby making sure that the unsubstantiated world-view of APA Division 44 will reign supreme. It is a stealth technique making debate and persuasion superfluous.
To be continued.
Job Berendsen, MD.
(Job Berendsen is a psychiatrist and former gay-lib activist who has left the ranks. He lives in Belgium)