Implications of the stereotyping and modification of sex role.

Strain et al. (1977) wrote a critique. They looked at the 1974 Rekers and Lovaas study. That study tried to make a young boy act more masculine.

The critics said the goals were harmful. They said the methods hurt the child. They told behavior analysts to stop fixing gender-nonconforming kids.

The paper found no good reason to change the boy’s play style. It said “normal” is just a label. It warned that forcing gender norms can wound a child for life.

Morris et al. (2024) shows how far we have come. Their assent checklist puts the child’s voice first. This extends the 1977 warning into daily practice.

Tissot (2009) moves past the old fix-it mind-set. Her team helped autistic teens explore their own sexual identity. She replaced “correct” with “support.”

The two papers do not clash. The 1977 piece attacked forced normal. The 2009 piece showed how to honor identity. Together they trace a line from harm to respect.

Today you write goals with clients and families. Ask, “Whose value is this?” If the answer is “society’s,” pick a new target. Use Morris’s six-step assent list to be sure the learner agrees. This keeps ethics modern and keeps kids safe.