https://www.pjp.psychreg.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/smith-175-179.pdf

Greetings American Psychological Association! My name is Shawn Smith. I’m a clinical psychologist in Denver, Colorado. I’ve spoken to you before. You might remember my critique of your guidelines for working with boys and men.

Incidentally, you never responded to my invitation to discuss those guidelines. I’m not going to lie, that hurt. But I can’t stay mad at you, APA. You’re so darned cute when you play hard-to-get. So today, I’m going to take a different approach. I’m not going to yell at you about methodology or challenge you to a debate. I’m going to be nice, for the most part, and see if we can find some common ground about better serving our clients. I’m going to make you love me.

So, let’s get down to business. Our profession has been consumed by a dogmatic ideology, and it’s creating serious ethical problems out here on the front lines. You, the leadership of the APA, are in a unique position to get our profession back on track, and today I’m hoping to persuade at least some of you to try.

This problem of ideology in our profession is not new. I was speaking up about it a decade ago when I saw social psychologists producing passive-aggressive, low-rent studies claiming that conservatives are mentally inferior to liberals.

Those papers were really just editorials masquerading as research, and they were a symptom of a much larger problem that plenty of people were already aware of.

For example, this 2012 study uncovered open hostility against conservatives within our own ranks. Back then, conservative psychologists – both of them – were afraid to reveal their political leanings because doing so might harm their careers, and they were right to be anxious. Their liberal colleagues openly admitted that they would discriminate against them because of their political beliefs. In fact, the more liberal the respondents were, the more enthusiastically they said they would mistreat their conservative colleagues...... see link for rest