First published at 365gay.com on March 3, 2008
People often ask me what I think about ex-gay ministries. I have no objection to them in principle, but serious problems with them in practice.
I have no objection to them in principle because I believe we should give others the same respect that we ourselves demand. That includes giving people wide latitude about living their lives as they see fit. If you really believe that you're heterosexual deep down, and you want to take steps to help realize that identity, far be it from me to insist otherwise. I'll let you be the expert on what you feel deep down, as long as you show me the same courtesy.
In fact, many ex-gays do not show me the same courtesy. I've had several tell me, "C'mon-deep down you know that being gay is wrong." I know no such thing, and I resent it when other people tell me what I know "deep down." So let's make a deal: you don't tell me what I know deep down, and I won't tell you what you know deep down.
I'm not denying that people are capable of deep self-deception; indeed, I know it firsthand. For years I insisted that I was "really" straight, even though (1) I had gay feelings, (2) I had no straight feelings, and (3) I knew that people with gay feelings but no straight feelings are gay. (This, from someone who would later teach elementary logic.) Somehow, by not letting my thoughts "touch," I could avoid drawing the feared conclusions from them.
Maybe ex-gays are engaged in similar self-deception; maybe not. The point is that it's their feelings, their life, their decision to make. So I won't oppose their efforts in principle.
In practice, I have at least three serious problems with ex-gay ministries.
The first is their tendency to promote myths about the so-called "homosexual lifestyle" by generalizing from some people's unfortunate personal experiences. Ex-gay spokespersons will often recount, in lurid detail, a life of promiscuity, sexual abuse, drug addiction, loneliness, depression, and so on. "That is what I left behind," they tearfully announce, and who can blame them? But that experience is not my experience, and it's by no means typical of the gay experience. To suggest otherwise is to spread lies about the reality of gay and lesbian people's lives. (The best antidote for this is for the rest of us to tell our own stories openly and proudly.)
The second problem is the ex-gay ministries' abuse of science. Many of its practitioners are engaged in "therapy" even though they are neither trained nor licensed to do so; some of that "therapy" can cause serious and lasting psychological damage. Ex-gay ministries tend to lean on discredited etiological theories-domineering mothers, absent fathers, and that sort of thing. They also tend to give false hope to those who seek such therapy. By all respectable accounts, only a tiny fraction of those who seek change achieve any lasting success. Even then it's unclear whether feelings, or merely behaviors, have been changed. While we shouldn't reject individuals' reports of change out of hand, nor should we pretend that their experience is typical or likely.
The third and related problem is that many ex-gay ministries promote not merely a "change," but a "cure." "Cure" implies "disease," which homosexuality is not. Insofar as ex-gay ministries promote the long-discredited notion that homosexuality is a psychological disorder, I oppose them. ("Spiritual" disorders are another matter, but then we've left the realm of science for that of religion. Ex-gay ministries have an unfortunate habit of conflating science, religion, and politics.)
I am not at all threatened by the notion that some people can change their sexual orientation, if indeed they can. In reality, it seems that at best only a small number can do so, and only with tremendous effort. But if they can, and that makes them happy, good for them. I'm confident enough in my own happiness that I need not doubt theirs.
Nor do I feel the need to insist that I was "born this way." Maybe I was, maybe I wasn't. What I can say with confidence is that these feelings are a deep and fulfilling part of who I am, and I see no reason to mess with them. Quite the contrary.
So when ex-gays announce, from billboards and magazine ads, that "Change is possible," I say: Possible? Maybe. Likely? No. Desirable? Not for me, thanks.
Corvino, John
{ 123 comments }
← Previous Comments
Why is it you can perpetuate the myth that ex-gay therapies use electroshock therapy and I can’t state the fact that many gays use meth? It is a reprehensible lie that ex-gay therapy uses any draconian methods–it mainly uses talk therapy to sort out absent father issues. While this doesn’t cure homosexuality, it’s not particularly draconian or even harmful. When I left ex-gay therapy, I thanked my therapist for allowing me to sort out many significant issues, but I didn’t want to pursue heterosexuality, even it was possible. It was amicable on all sides. Again, talk to the people you actually know who’ve undergone ex-gay therapy and you will see a very similar experience to mine.
And since I can’t respond to all posts directed to me, let me just give a blanket response which covers all bases: I know you are, but what am I?
Alpha,
easily found through the Pew Foundation, Association of Families and Churches and other research bodies on children and families.
Pretty much the prevailing information on single parent households broken down by ethnicity and income are out there.
However, once you compare these to just about anything that anti gay or pro ex gay organizations put out, it’s not hard to see where their theories (not facts) fall apart.
Hence, since nearly 70% of out of wedlock births are black, and a slightly smaller number of that are black mothers…then what you have here is just doing math.
Ashpenaz…sometimes it’s hard to have much respect for you.
Heterosexuals who suffer similar family trauma are at risk for promiscuity, drug addiction, passing on domestic violence generationally and other pathologies.
The ex gay industry is inevitably going to blame homosexuality. And some young people, gay or not, are going to believe that gay people ONLY act one or two ways and all those pathologies are inevitable.
That’s BIGOT BAIT, and vulnerable gay person bait.
Exploiting your pain is easy for the ex gay industry.
Blaming gay people or homosexuality for it is too.
Which doesn’t much explain heterosexuals suffering from the same thing, does it?
I’m a black woman who came of age and dealt with a myriad of things before they had a name, even.
Like sexual harassment. DEALT WITH THEM…Ashpenaz.
Without falling for any pathetic excuses for not succeeding in life.
Many of us in this world are born strong. Make it because there isn’t anything else to do. I knew who I was, wanted to be and knew myself better than anyone could tell me otherwise.
It’s not any easier to be a black woman, than a homosexual, Ashpenaz.
But I’m the kind of person that if ANYONE tries to tell me I’m not worthy, that I have no value…I know how to say **CK YOU!
Hoorah for any gay kid or adult that can do the same to the ex gay industry which is their way of saying you’re not fit to walk the Earth except on THEIR terms.
Ashpenaz, I HAVE talked to many gay people who have undergone ex gay therapy.
And the few who identify now as EX GAY, don’t usually answer questions, but tend to PREACH and regale with how fabulous they all are now.
There is a VERY common behavior among ex gays though.
A pathological need to get medals and accolades for living a life I’ve lived my whole life as a heterosexual.
I think to myself: big, fat, hairy deal!
It’s tough to be homosexual, and tough out whatever risks there are to being known as one.
Being known as heterosexual is like being known as a redhead. Big whoo.
There is a difference between being on a journey that you know is tough, as opposed to being on one to AVOID the harder things.
Passing is a way of doing that.
Well, as I said, I”m also a black woman. None of which has made my life all that easy.
I could try and pass for a man, and see if my life would be easier.
But why do that?
I LOVE knowing I’m strong enough to be what I am.
That’s the difference between a gay person and an ex gay…you’re NOT so tough. You DON’T want to have to fight in the trenches with your brethren left behind and you’re willing to bear false witness to make things even harder.
At least many ex gays engage in political policy AGAINST gay people.
That’s a lot like an ex Jew colluding with anti Semites.
Would YOU be impressed by someone like that?
Not wanting to be Jewish isn’t the issue, it’s bad mouthing Judaism and Jews while doing it that shows a lack of moral backbone.
Or any backbone.
That’s why there isn’t the respect and back pats so craved by ex gays.
WE who respect gay people, and those gay people who respect themselves KNOW what you are.
It’s past annoying to try and listen to you tell us what we know you aren’t.
You dig?
Regan,
‘easily found through the Pew Foundation, Association of Families and Churches and other research bodies on children and families.’ So they have accurate statistics about what proportion of black people, and other ethnic groups as well, are homosexual? That does come as a surprise.
Ashpenaz asks; ‘Why is it you can perpetuate the myth that ex-gay therapies use electroshock therapy .’
I have known gay men who were subjected to this type of torture. They had scars that I saw. There were credible claims of this continuing published in 2000 by psychologists. Check out exgay watch for more information.
I’ve known young gays who were abused by older men and I’ve seen their scars, that is, the long ones up and down their forearms–no one believes me. Why should I believe you?
How do the ex-gays you say you know describe the gay world they chose to leave?
Dale,
Good God, ex-gay “conversion therapy” STILL includes electroshock treatments in 2008? I know a man who went to Brigham Young University in the 70s, and he was subjected to it there after another student outed him. He has since gladly left the mormon church. But that stuff still goes on today? Apparently the photos of Abu Ghraib don’t mean anything to some people. That’s horrible.
I would love to find this “gay community” Ash keeps talking about. I think the closest I’ve come to it was the Melissa Etheridge concert in Honolulu last night. It was a great show, by the way. Melissa is putting together her format for the next tour, and tried it last night for the first time. Good stuff! New songs! She encored with “Take Another Little Piece of My Heart.” Everyone went nuts.
“the gay community rejects those with faith and traditional values.”
—Perhaps, but they also reject fat people, republicans, ugly people. And you know what they do? They form their own little groups within the gay community. Besides, you don’t think straight women reject straight men all the time? You think it’s any easier to be straight? Hell no, it’s the same crap. I hate how ex-gays keep painting the straight world as some kind of paradise. It isn’t.
“I’ve known young gays who were abused by older men and I’ve seen their scars, that is, the long ones up and down their forearms–no one believes me. Why should I believe you?”
—So because you have met the victims of some bad gays you assume this community is full of bad people?
I’ve seen gays that where told by their parents “I’d rather see you dead than gay.” I’ve met gays who where kicked out of their homes. Evil is not exclusively gay, you know
I thought the article was good as well. I also do not have a problem with a person who is not happy with their sexuality and wants to change. Unfortunately, as pointed out, change is very difficult at best, and most likely impossible. And those involved in “reparative” “therapy” clearly have no clue about sexuality to administer help. And, as Last of the Moderate Gays pointed out, I also have a big problem when these people get their claws on young gay persons. They are as bad as Ashpenaz’s gay predators that he keeps on running into in Omaha.
I think the real failure of ex-gay ministries is seen when a former “leader” in that group while still under the pretense of being “cured” stumbles into a gay bar. And also when bigoted “Christian” leaders who obviously don’t buy the ex-gay ministries and sneak around having homosexual trysts. Further, if this doesn’t show that sexuality isn’t a choice, I don’t know what else does.
Reparative therapy DOES NOT involve electroshock therapy.
It is better for a young confused gay to turn to reparative therapy and live than to turn to the gay mainstream and die from drugs, suicide, or STDs.
Oh, god…
“Reparative therapy DOES NOT involve electroshock therapy.”
How do you know? Just because your particular therapist doesn’t use it doesn’t mean nobody uses it. Since there is no science behind “reparative therapy”, there is no single, coherent methodology behind it; hence, every reparative “therapist” does his own cooked-up thing, ranging from simple conversation, to pillow-punching, to cuddling with the patient, and in some DOCUMENTED cases, electro shocks.
“It is better for a young confused gay to turn to reparative therapy and live than to turn to the gay mainstream and die from drugs, suicide, or STDs.”
That’s a false dichotomy. And again, there is no such thing as a “gay mainstream”; what you think is “drugs, suicide, or STDs” refers to some kind of “circuit party subculture”, which only a minority of gays (and straights, think Spring Break) partake in. I could point you to relevant studies, but I guess that would be a wasted effort.
It’s obvious to me that your reparative therapist has brainwashed you quite well. Too bad not only for you, but for us — for having to put up with your claptrap.
Ban him already!
Reference for shock therapy:
http://www.amazon.com/Sexual-Conversion-Therapy-Clincial-Perspectives/dp/0789019108/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205085839&sr=1-4
Ariel Shidlo, Michael Schroeder, and Jack Drescher are all practicing psychologists and researchers. This book is an indepth survey and critique of reparative therapy. And, yes, they include shock therapy as part of repartive. Dr. Dresher has written at least 18 published works on gay people and psychology. Among them are 4 books examining examing the claims of exgays.
Ashpenaz is a living, breathing display of the psychological harm that reparative therapy can do. Ash, when people are telling you to get therapy, they don’t mean the reparative kind. There are tons of counselors ready & waiting for you to have a gay-postive attitude towards society & stop being an effin self-loathing freak that no self-respecting gay person wants to have contact with.
The problem with “ex-gays” is not gay people refusing to respect their identity — it’s “ex-gays” (and their heterosexual oppressive “supporters”) refusing to recognize any sort of homosexual reality.
An “ex-gay” person is not “ex-gay” — rather, he is a repressed (and often oppressed) homosexual. His entire “identity” is not an identity so much as it is an anti-identity — a reactionary fiction created by others which he imposes upon himself to gain tolerance from the wickedly intolerant.
The most compassionate thing we can do for these people is point out to them that “ex-gay” is not a real identity, and that self-oppression is far more toxic than oppression from others. Reaching out to them with compassion, we can help them on the way to self-actualization (or at the very least, help them think clearly about the big old lies they’re being told to parrot to all and sundry, for the political benefit of people who care not a whit about them).
It is interesting that the most homophobic Christians I know don’t treat me like this. I really wish you would look at how you respond to me, and then look at how you claim homophobics treat you. And this insistence on therapy! No fundamentalist Christian ever urged therapy on me–it was my choice based on my understanding of myself at the time. Shaming someone into therapy seems to be the tactics of the gay mainstream–if you don’t think that the gay world is the most wonderful, warm, and diverse place ever, you need therapy.
I’m not seeing the respect for ex-gays this article suggests.
Actually Ashpenaz, it isn’t really all that interesting. It is obvious, though, why they would like to have you around as you share homophobic Christians’ negative opinion of gay people.
“No fundamentalist Christian ever urged therapy on me-”
—They never told you that being gay was a choice, that your choice is wrong, that you can change?
“Shaming someone into therapy seems to be the tactics of the gay mainstream–if you don’t think that the gay world is the most wonderful, warm, and diverse place ever, you need therapy.”
—No, the gay mainstream is more likely to ignore those who don’t fit their stereotypes or who aren’t comfortable in their scene. But frankly, I don’t care. The straight mainstream works the same way.
http://freedomphobia.blogspot.com/
If there is no such thing as ex-gay, how do you explain David Bowie, Lou Reed, Tom Robinson, Anne Heche, et. al.? or the new icons like Mika and Sean Hayes and Babydaddy who don’t claim any particular identity? Many gays no longer believe in a fixed orientation. They believe sexuality is fluid. If that’s the case, why couldn’t therapy help you increase heterosexuality and decrease your homosexuality? If sexuality is fluid, why couldn’t therapy help give you control of which way the fluid flows?
Why is it OK for a Buddhist to give up meat for his religion and wrong for an evangelical Christian to word to move his fluid sexuality towards heterosexuality?
(I have to stop. All this talk about flowing fluids is making me think of Brett Favre and we all know where that kind of thinking leads. :0 )
Yes, according to the investigation of the online service BiLoves, there are about six per cent homosexuals, including at 3 percent gays, except lesbians and bisexuals. So gay are the most among the homosexuals.
“If there is no such thing as ex-gay, how do you explain David Bowie, Lou Reed, Tom Robinson, Anne Heche, et. al.?”
—Come on, Anne Heche? She never claimed that she stopped being straight, or that she was no longer attracted to men. She only said she fell in love with Ellen. She just did the whole bisexuality thing for fun and profit, in fact, she might not even be bisexual, she was probably craving attention and hooked up with Ellen to get it. Oh, and she never went to an ex-gay meeting. Steve Martin was right, she was an opportunist, anything to get her name in the papers. Frankly, she’s a piece of trash, I remember how she cheated on Ellen with the cameraman that was filming Ellen’s comedy tour, she also got stoned and wondered around a town naked. Us gays have bathhouses for that sort of thing.
“or the new icons like Mika and Sean Hayes and Babydaddy who don’t claim any particular identity?”
—They’re either bi, in the closet or straight guys that think they’re cool by not telling people what they are.
People don’t change, Ash, they simply pretend to be certain things.
“Many gays no longer believe in a fixed orientation. They believe sexuality is fluid.”
—Where are those many gays? Sexuality seems quite fixed, go ahead, try to get a straight man to sleep with you. Good luck at that. Dude, just because women are more willing to experiment than men doesn’t mean sexuality is fluid. It only means there’s less stigma for a woman to sleep with a woman than for a man to sleep with a man. Of course, full-time lesbians do get a lot of grief.
“If that’s the case, why couldn’t therapy help you increase heterosexuality and decrease your homosexuality? If sexuality is fluid, why couldn’t therapy help give you control of which way the fluid flows?”
—IF therapy did work, you’d be straight already. Therapy can’t change who you are, it can only help you accept who you are. You can’t control biology.
“Why is it OK for a Buddhist to give up meat for his religion and wrong for an evangelical Christian to word to move his fluid sexuality towards heterosexuality?”
—You mean hindus, only buddhist monks avoid meat. The reason it’s ok for them is because nobody is born a smoker, a meat eater, or any of those things that are choices. However, all of us are born straight, gay, bi or asexual.
If you think sexuality is so fluid, look at the catholic sex scandal. So many gays and others went into the seminaries, trying to escape their sexualities, only to find a den of iniquity, worse than the lowest s/m sex room. In fact, it’s the catholic church that has turned innocent seminarians into future child molestors.
I have yet to meet a single “ex-gay” who has “changed his sexuality.” Even the most radical ones simply claim they don’t act on their urges — not that the urges have changed. They’re less “ex-gay” than “enforced celibates,” often in loveless marriages.
Be careful, y’all, that you don’t fall into the trap set by ex-gays, who misuse the word “identity” to refer as an ontological reality.
“Identity” in its simplest form is just that: how you see yourself, how you categorize yourself. If you think you’re an “ex-gay”, that’s your identity, if you think you’re “gay”, that’s your identity. It’s as simple as that.
How you see yourself is a result of your *individual* experiences. Leftist identity politics, thinking in collectivist terms, assume gays (or blacks, or women) all encounter the same kind of “oppression”, therefore all share a similar oppressed identity. This insistence on collective oppression then, for some authors, turns into misleadingly talking “identity” in terms of an ontological reality. In other words, the collectivist mode of thought in identity politics leads to an essentialist fallacy.
Ex-gay claims, historically based in opposition to gay politics, are based on this fallacy, treating identity as a “kind of being”, and since they deny the existence of homosexual beings, they deny that homosexuality is an “identity”.
Therefore, when ex-gays claim, as Corvino writes, that “that you?re heterosexual deep down, and you want to take steps to help realize that identity,”, it is patent nonsense because there’s no such thing as a “non-realized” identity, because identity is not an independent ontological reality you can suddenly become aware of. Either you say “I’m straight”, then that’s your identity, or you say “I’m gay”, then that’s your identity, as deep-seated as the REASONS for choosing that identity may be.
James, you are not an “ex-gay”, you are a gay person who once tried to be ex-gay and has since seen folly and futility of that endeavor. You are an ex-ex-gay.
Most ex-ex-gays came to that place by recognizing that the claims of ex-gays and their leaders are basically all lies and exaggerations. They realize that it is simply NOT TRUE that embracing a gay identity means wallowing in a sordid cesspool of vice. They realize that the claims that their therapy “works” – even in the loosest definition – are not true.
You have not come to ex-ex-gayness this way. As a Christian, you simply “discovered” an interpretation of the Bible that allows you to be gay. But you still accept as true some of the most basic lies of ex-gay “ministries” – that meaningful change of your sexuality is possible through prayer and their “therapy”, and that such change is necessary, not merely because of their religious belief that God has certain plans for sexuality, but because otherwise you will be inevitably trapped in a hideous, empty life of drugs and meaningless sex.
Because you believe you are so very special and unique, somehow that inevitability is not inevitable for you. But it still is for everyone else, which is why you steadfastly believe in the face of evidence to the contrary that you are one of the only gay men anywhere with such values as integrity and responsibility.
The part of ex-gay therapy that we respect is the religious freedom/personal choice aspect, not the lies. If you truly believe that same-sex intimacy is forbidden by God, and you want to commit yourself to living without same-sex intimacy and suppressing the desire for it in yourself, then I can respect that choice, as I respect the choice of Mormons not to drink coffee or Hindus not to eat meat.
You have all of the lies of the ex-gays despite ample opportunity to discover the truth – and you have none of their religious conviction against gayness, so no, we don’t respect your “choice” to come in here telling us that all gay men except you lack integrity and values.
It’s quite proper to urge therapy – REAL therapy, not fraudulent anti-scientific nonsense – for someone as out of touch with reality as you are. You’re incorrect that we think you need therapy “if you don’t think that the gay world is the most wonderful, warm, and diverse place ever”. We have repeatedly acknowledged that the “gay world”, as you put it, is not without its problems. It’s the scope and the provenance of the problems that we disagree on. You believe that a gay man just starting out in the world will encounter only the circuit party scene as examples of gay life. We know this to be as untrue as the idea that a young straight person will only encounter the straight club scene as examples of straight life.
Not only that, but you utterly refuse to acknowledge the role that religious suppression and societal condemnation of same-sex activity has played in driving gay life to the fringes and margins of society. You seem to argue that the invisibility of everyday gay people (insofar as you will even admit they even exist outside of your home), their inability to reach young people with examples of moderation and temperance and faithfulness, is somehow inherent to them, and that they would be invisible and unheard even in the absence of those shaping forces. If that young gay boy only knows about the gay circuit party scene and can’t even consider the possibility that any other manifestation of gay life exists to go looking for, you argue, it can’t possibly be the fault of his parents and his church. It can’t possibly have anything to do with the constant drumbeat of “DO NOT under any circumstances imply within earshot of my child that being gay is acceptable.” His low self-esteem and hopelessness and tendency to fall in with the wrong crowd can’t have anything to do with his broken home life, either. No, it’s much more likely that his broken home life made him gay, and THEN he discovered that the gay world was a terrible, awful place without a good crowd to fall in with, and THAT is what made him sad. Right.
Here is a link to a reparative therapy website which was put together by my therapist and to which I frequently contributed:
http://www.peoplecanchange.com/
I hope this clears up the myths about reparative therapy. Read the testimonies of some of the people.
I bet if you think through all the many gay people you’ve met, you will find lots of couples made up of gay men and lesbians who surprsed themselves by falling in love. They will say things like, “I’m still gay, but I just happened to fall in love with someone of the opposite sex.” If their sexuality is that flexible, why couldn’t therapy help strengthen their heterosexual impulses and decrease their homosexual impulses? A cure would not be a 100% change, which no reparative therapist claims, but a stronger sense of heterosexuality.
No one
Ashpenaz
The Ex-Gay Movement is selling snake oil to lots of loney, sad, downtrodden, confused and frustrated people. Their is a special ring of hell resereved for such people who peddle it.’
Ashpenaz, if you hate gays so much and you think the people at Independent Gay Forum represent those gays you hate, why do you bother coming here? Is it just so you can bitch at the people here? Do you think you’re punishing us and that gives you satisfaction?
James,
Again, the problem isn’t the idea that “people can change”. People can do many things, and changing their emotions and behaviors is certainly within the realm of possibility, even if it’s highly questionable whether or not they are really changing their “orientation” as we think of it. My problem is the assumption that frequently follows: that if it’s even remotely possible that I could change this aspect of myself with a lot of work and struggle, then a) I SHOULD change it, or at least try to and b) I certainly don’t deserve to have my relationship recognized or be protected in any way from discrimination should I choose not to. Another problem is the emotional damage – and sometimes physical – that is done to participants who are not successful. Is the rare “payoff” of being sort-of straight worth those risks? And finally, my problem is also with the lies they tell. They lie about the current state of scientific opinion – like making the APA out to be in the grip of a small group of “radical gays” – and about gay lives in order to convince people that gay life is inherently incompatible with the various things that they value, like family and monogamy and sobriety. These last are the lies that you have bought into wholesale.
My problem with YOU, specifically, is related to the really stupid and insulting generalizations you continually make about gay people, and your refusal to actually address any valid challenges to your logic.
Did you go to the link I provided and read their stories? Look at their evidence? Again, I don’t agree with it, but it’s not filled with pathetic, lonely people, and there is some evidence that it works for some people.
I come here because I am an Independent Gay–apparently, I’m too independent for many of the Borg Gays who come here, but I’m holding out hope that some genuinely Independent Gays will start posting.
James you assert over and over that all gays are evil so it makes no sense for you to hold out hope that “some genuinely independent gays will start posting”.
You’ve been pointed to places where you can find gays that share your beliefs yet you avoid them and come to a place where you claim no one shares your belief – you want to be miserable, you’re the epitome of dysfunction. That’s why people keep suggesting you get some therapy (and not “reparitive therapy”).
Regan,
I have a couple more questions, if you are still reading this. How exactly can I get these statistics from the organisations you mentioned? Do they have a website where this information can be found? Alternatively, can I write to them and ask for it? What are their addresses? Also, what are the names of the people who ocnducted the research that reliably established what the rates of homosexuality among different ethnic groups are, when did they do it, and where was the research published?
And finally, my problem is also with the lies they tell. They lie about the current state of scientific opinion – like making the APA out to be in the grip of a small group of “radical gays” – and about gay lives in order to convince people that gay life is inherently incompatible with the various things that they value, like family and monogamy and sobriety.
Really?
The Senate’s legal affairs committee is studying a Harper government bill that would raise the age of consent from 14 to 16. It will almost certainly pass ? no political party has opposed it ? but queer and youth-led groups came out Feb 22 to insist on their sexual freedom.
The proposed changes will have a disproportionate impact on gays, said Richard Hudler of the Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Rights in Ontario.
“My first lover was 17 years older than me. And this is common [among gay people],” he said.
Or:
Some of the most unlikely attendees of Sunday’s kinky leather fetish festival were under four feet tall.
Two-year-olds Zola and Veronica Kruschel waddled through Folsom Street Fair amidst strangers in fishnets and leather crotch pouches, semi and fully nude men.
The twin girls who were also dressed for the event wore identical lace blouses, floral bonnets and black leather collars purchased from a pet store.
Fathers Gary Beuschel and John Kruse watched over them closely. They were proud to show the twins off……
Father of two, John Kruse said it is an educational experience for children. He said there were conservative parents against having kids at the event.
“Those are the same close-minded people who think we shouldn’t have children to begin with,” he said.
Or the Beyond Marriage petition, in which it is made clear that gays and lesbians want legalization of ALL relationships regardless of structure, including poly relationships — and which is fully endorsed and supported by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.
Finally, as is well known, gays and lesbians believe people with religious beliefs to, as I cited here, have “mental sickness”, be “facist” (sic), and have holy books that are “evil” and encourage “murders, genocide, and all manner of injustice”.
You really think the ex-gay folks aren’t aware of all of this?
Cry me a river, ND30.
Joseph and Mary in the Bible lived in a time when families “arranged” marriages with the girl at 15 and the man at 30.
Hi Alpha…I was doing some creative cross referencing.
http://www.pewresearch.org, I think is the link.
If you have trouble, let me know. The other referrals come from WorldNetDaily’s articles.
I cross check them with the WilliamsInstitute or Anti Defamation League and cross check that way.
Some of this stuff I stumble on, or I get Exodus e-newletter regularly and THEY post information.
So does the Family Research Council and I cross check from THEIR sources.
Not hard to figure out who is full of shit and who isn’t.
Ashpenaz: what’s it to YOU what WE think? What do you care? You’re in a forum of people, including myself who have spent a lifetime dealing with some form of rejection.
Might be based on sexual orientation, looks or some other feature.
The point is, you’re displaying a serious symptom so EVIDENT in ex gays, you think that being or claiming heterosexuality is some magic bullet to unchallenged ACCEPTANCE.
And you can’t handle it when you’re not accepted fully for what you claim.
So?
So WHAT? What’s it to YOU?
Bobby made a good point and I’ve reiterated it here, heterosexuality is fraught with rejection, dating and sexual compatibility issues.
Don’t they tell you that in ex gay school?
Or did they tell you that gay people have some irrational hatred of ex gays?
I just said, what ex gays foment and represent is like a Soviet Jew coming around and joing anti Semites in their political agenda.
The Soviet Union was a horrible regime for Jews. I’ve met young Jews from that country that hated being Jewish.
However, being here in America they wouldn’t necessarily suffer the same isolation, but THEY would bear scars too.
So the RIGHT and HEALTHY course wouldn’t be to join a group that ALSO rejects Jews!
DUH.
The healthiest course would be to find more socially healthy and compatible gay people.
I found plenty, and I’m not even gay. So maybe in looking for a place for yourself, you haven’t had as much opportunity for healthy introspection.
I’ve had my own share of not especially liking being black or my black features.
In a world with the narrow white beauty standards for women when I came of age, that wouldn’t be a surprise.
But it’s healthier to reject those with an irrational rejection of YOU.
And you didn’t do that. You’re spending such a lot of time trying to convince US that you’re a happy heterosexual now.
Well, why do you need US for that?
“I’m still gay, but I just happened to fall in love with someone of the opposite sex.”
—And how does that help society, Ash? Don’t straight women deserve a “real man?”
What ex-gays are doing is completely against nature.
The world is already 90% to 95% straight. Some homophobes even say that we’re only 1%-3% of the population. So, do you really need to encourage more people to become straight? Don’t they have enough numbers? Aren’t they breeding like rabbits already?
Wouldn’t it be a better world if everyone embraced whatever sexuality they had and left their neighbors alone?
North Dallas Trinity:
“Or the Beyond Marriage petition, in which it is made clear that gays and lesbians want legalization of ALL”
Complete BS (as usual). The Beyond Marriage petition does not claim to speak for “gays and lesbians” as a group, only for its signatories. It directly criticizes the “LGBT movement” for focusing on marriage equality and thus directly contradicts your false claim.
“fully endorsed and supported by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.”
The NGLTF is well-known to be a lefty organization, which is why the Human Rights Campaign as a less ideological group was founded in the first place and thus has far more influence now.
It directly criticizes the “LGBT movement” for focusing on marriage equality and thus directly contradicts your false claim.
That’s an interesting definition of “criticizes”, inasmuch as it praises the “progressive LGBT movement” and makes it clear that they support it.
In short, how can they be criticizing something they are praising?
And I don’t see “National Leftist Task Force”. I see “National Gay and Lesbian Task Force”. They make it clear what REAL gays and lesbians support.
I am not a heterosexual. I am gay. I don’t think reparative therapy works.
Just to clarify.
“Some of the most unlikely attendees of Sunday’s kinky leather fetish festival were under four feet tall. Two-year-olds Zola and Veronica Kruschel waddled through Folsom Street Fair amidst strangers in fishnets and leather crotch pouches, semi and fully nude men.”
How unfortunate. But is such a lack of concern with decorum exclusive in gay people? When I was a kid, I remember prebupescent girls from my neighborhood dancing the “dan
I don’t believe any of this points that there’s something in homosexual persons that makes it inevitable for them — or at least the large majority of them — to live peacefully with the customs and values they were taught. But do you, ND?
Of course not — as I have said repeatedly.
If not, why did you contest Karen’s words when she accused ex-gay ministries of lying when talking about the inherently immoral character of homosexuality?
Because the gays and lesbians I cited made it clear that their behavior is inherent to and part of their homosexuality.
And that brings us to the last:
What is your point, as a gay man, in being involved with gay activism (in you self-styled manner) if you do believe homosexuality is inevitably at odds with morality?
I don’t. That’s why I am so adamant about getting rid of the people who use their homosexuality as an excuse for immoral behavior.
Regan,
I tried searching the Pew website and did not find anything about the rate of homosexuality among different ethnic groups. The only thing I found that was remotely relevant was an article showing that whites, blacks and hispanics were almost (but not quite) equally likely to know a homosexual (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/485/friends-who-are-gay).
One can’t necessarily conclude from this that there are no differences in the rate of homosexuality between different ethnic groups.
“That’s why I am so adamant about getting rid of the people who use their homosexuality as an excuse for immoral behavior.”
What exactly does that mean “get rid of”? How do you “get rid of” them?
What do you have against Adam Ant, ND30? And what does that have to do with this discussion?
I can respect “ex-gays” as long as they respect me and do not push their agendas on me. I disagree with ex-gay ministries as they are ineffective of changing sexual orientation and solely preying on gays and lesbians “as the miracle cure”. Even if these people become “ex-gay”, ex-gays are still faced with discrimination within evangelical-type churches and this has been noted in many religious journals. Becoming an “ex-gay” offers no more than one being gay. Gays can go to church any time—-everybody on this Earth is a sinner anyway, when it comes to sin there is no distinction between heterosexuals and homosexuals.
To ND 30—You cite the same examples ad nauseam. You sound like a one-act play. Jerry Lee Lewis and Charlie Chaplin were known for having extremely young women as wives and lovers.
Polyamorous relationships—
The Mormons are still attempting legislature in Utah for legalization and instead practice discreetly. Moslem men are allowed to marry up to 4 wives. Many animist African men have multiple wives.
Children in the gay pride parades—-How many kids are exposed to drugs, prostitution, sexual and physical abuse and this is by heterosexual parents.
You still take a narrow view of gays and remain silent about heterosexuals.
Colorado, I’d compliment you for the Adam Ant comment – but then I’d get slammed for not rising up in righteous indignation at your words.
So, what you said was NOT FUNNY.
You still take a narrow view of gays and remain silent about heterosexuals.
That would be because, just as one example, heterosexuals prosecute parents who expose their kids to “drugs, prostitution, sexual and physical abuse”.
It’s only the gay community that seems to have this odd worldview that a) as long as a gay person does it, we need to make excuses for it, and b) it’s OK for us to do it if a heterosexual ever did it.
I don’t believe in making excuses for gay people who behave abysmally because they happen to be gay – and I have zero tolerance for their claiming that being gay is what caused their behavior. To Patrick’s query, you “get rid of” people like these by refusing to enable them.
It’s only the gay community that seems to have this odd worldview
Besides some in the gay community, the same is unfortunately also true for some in the religious community.
“Heterosexuals” do not prosecute anyone, ND30. The public prosecutes. I.E. “The state vs. John Smith”. The public (represented by the office of the Attorney General) INCLUDES gays; gays cannot, on their own, prosecute another gay person.
This world view that you think “the gay community” has – it doesn’t exist. Nobody thinks that anything a gay person does must be excused. Nobody believes that anything a heterosexual person has ever done is OK to do. Your examples do not support such claims.
What you are mistaking for such a world view is the idea that we are scrutinized and presumed guilty far beyond the scrutiny that heterosexuals receive.
A gay person sexually harasses her employees? It’s national news, of course. But straight people get sued for sexual harassment every day without anyone blinking an eye. And if we so much as raise the possibility – the VERY REAL possibility – that the charges are trumped up or simply caused by homophobia – a nervous straight interpreting signals the wrong way, etc – then you decide we are “making excuses”. If we point out that it’s as unfair to presume that this person “represents” gay people any more than the numerous sexually harassing straight people “represent” straight people, then you decide we believe it’s ok because some straight people did it too.
We’re not. No one said sexually harassing was right or ok for gay people to do for ANY reason. No one said it was ok for those foster parents to molest their charges for any reason, either. Or for grown men to have sex with underage boys.
What we do attempt to do is caution people – including you – from drawing false conclusions based on examples. We point out that there are far more examples of NON-gay offenders than gay, and that the research does not support the notion that gay people are any more likely to sexually harass or molest or be bad parents than anyone else.
It’s not that you have ‘zero tolerance’ for people claiming that being gay is what caused their behavior. It’s that you see it where it doesn’t exist, and you give it weight that it doesn’t deserve, and you never actually DO anything about it except complain that WE are not “doing anything” about it and therefore do not deserve fair treatment or equality. We’re not enabling anything of the sort, ND30. We’re just defending ourselves from being unfairly judged from a few examples.
ND30- Then why not just write refuse to enable? I don’t think you are being candid, “get rid of” sounds sinister.
And if we so much as raise the possibility – the VERY REAL possibility – that the charges are trumped up or simply caused by homophobia – a nervous straight interpreting signals the wrong way, etc – then you decide we are “making excuses”.
In the case of Bonnie Bleskachek, to which you are referring, had you actually bothered to inform yourself on the details of the case, you would have noted that the majority of the complaints filed were by other lesbians.
But that is typical; you automatically assumed that a lesbian was being falsely accused and that it was all the result of straight “homophobia”.
Gee, doesn’t THAT sound familiar.
“The only thing I can come up with is that this is a whole lot of homophobia and sexism.?
Bleskachek knows which buttons to push; blame straight people, claim it’s “homophobia”, and the gay community will rally to and protect you, regardless of facts. I feel for those lesbians; they’re probably treated like dirt by the rest of the LGBT community for “squealing” on Bleskachek, not just keeping their mouths shut, and thus making the “community” look bad.
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed.