I don't know how long this video will remain viewable here, as YouTube said that it is not embeddable even though it is playing at the time of this posting. Also, I don't know how long the other parts of the series will be viewable here in the US on YouTube, as the BBC has YouTube enforcing copyright restrictions on 3 of the 6 parts. I'm not in control over such things and don't know what YouTube and/or the BBC's responsibilities are and what they have decided concerning the 3 parts that are viewable in the US on YouTube as of the time of this posting.
I found out about this series from a Reparative Therapist in the UK.
Here's what I told him about my impressions about the series:
Only 3 of the 6-part series were allowed (1, 3, & 6) on YouTube when I watch just now.
What I found in watching those 3 is that the "nurture" aspect was quite glossed over. His parents, siblings, and he did not go through deep psychological questioning concerning his family. Do we know that it is always reducible to only father and mother anyway? This raises the next thing that struck me.
If the pattern is a 30% increase in the likelihood of homosexuality in males with each older brother, then why did John assume that, that it was about the mother's womb and not anything to do with nurturing again, what with a household with an older brother or many brothers?
Correct me if I'm wrong (anyone), but there are other patterns concerning older siblings including that the 5th child appears more in personality type as the 1st born.
I can think of a number of psychological possibilities, not the least of which concerns primogeniture-type thinking where the older the son, the more he is "valued," even subconsciously. There is also what is called the pecking order (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pecking_order). If there is any bullying that goes on, the younger one or ones can often receive a great deal of it relative to the 1st. Where the bullying starts though would have to be determined, and only in-depth questioning with honest answers and real and not blocked memories would be able to begin to shed real light on it all.
In addition, John (as suggested in the last video) had been presented repeatedly with that he did not fit the other "markers." However, he didn't weight for that once he grasped onto the conclusion that it had to be because of the immunological aspects of his mother's womb, as if she was becoming more and more allergic to male offspring rather than that those other markers were still every bit as valid, so to speak, and that the presence of an older brother could have factored into his upbringing/culture.
Why has this come up? California law SB-1172 Sexual orientation change efforts, states the following:
(o) Nothing in this act is intended to prevent a minor who is 12 years of age or older from consenting to any mental health treatment or counseling services, consistent with Section 124260 of the Health and Safety Code, other than sexual orientation change efforts as defined in this act.
If that law is not blocked in the courts, then come 2013, any boy who is homosexually molested or even violently homosexually raped will be breaking the law if he receives consensual Reparative Therapy for his unwanted same-sex attraction the result of the homosexual-pedophile or homosexual-pederast abuse. That law mandates that the only legal treatment in California by California-licensed mental healthcare providers is homosexual-affirming therapy.