Musician Rufus Wainwright tells the New York Times about his journey to “Gay Hell” and back.
Wainwright is blunt about his recent-past drug abuse and casual sex with strangers.
His method of recovery was quite practical. Hold your breath, now:
He entered rehab.
He did not blame his abuses on same-sex attraction, scapegoat any particular set of political enemies, demand allegiance to one particular religious sect, or count on “Jesus alone” for a miracle healing. He did not ditch his music career and adopt a “masculine” career pursuit such as coal mining or corporate embezzlement.
He simply got the help that he needed from experts and moved on with his life.
The Times article explores Wainwright’s unsettled relationship with his father Loudon, noting that many of the people whom Wainwright encountered in group therapy at Hazelden also had troubled paternal ties. The article writer was, however, mature enough not to turn Loudon into a political or sexual scapegoat or a quick fix for Rufus’ issues.
Ultimately, Rufus seems to accept responsibility for his actions, and where he’s going in life. He probably won’t pursue celibacy, but makes him no less a role model for people seeking to reduce or stop compulsive or undesired behaviors.
Next magazine also profiles Rufus.
Addendum: Concerned Women for America predictably distorts Rufus’ battle against drugs and compulsive sex. It cites his feelings about his father, while excluding all the other factors that played into the breakdown.
*gasp* You mean queer people have problems that have nothing to do with their sexual orientation, just like straights?
I have some problems myself, and it upsets me tremendously when some people try to connect them to my bisexuality, which is no problem at all.
Way to go, Rufus.
On the whole I found Rufus’ comments confusing and not very helpful to the gay community. They are probably confusing because he is new to recovery and just beginning to deal with his addiction. It probably would have been better if he avoided the press on this issue at this time, or maybe did not discuss this in the press at all. It may very well be that a segment of gay men are getting involved with crystal meth and having unsafe sex. None of us knows how large this segment is and how these behaviors are related to internatlized homophobia (which Rufus speculated about on the basis of no objective evidence) but the guesses of a songster are not necessary helpful and I regret that he is the one out there speaking on it.
I don’t think Rufus is the role model. So what happens if Rufus relapses? Is he our role model then? The real role models are the gay men who have shed their addictions, stayed sober for years, and done so without going to the press as soon as they got into recovery. They are role models for those around them and have helped others in countless quiet ways.
Rufus, girlfriend, there are no stars in recovery !
I realize that the article suggests Rufus as a role model for ex-gays, not for gays, but I was reacting to my own question which was, “Is this article in the NY Times good for gays”.
I also think ex-gays would do well to model themselves after those gays in their communities who have stayed sober quietly for years and not publized either their problem behavior or recoveries from addictions. I keep thinking if these guys got into gay positive therapy, or a gay positive 12 step group, before they got into their particular homophobic brand of religion they might be in a better place today.
Much of what is good in communities (gay, straight, black, white) is happening below radar and not being picked up by the press or by bloggers. Inasmuch as he is running immediately to the press and making uninformed speculations Rufus is not the model for anyone.
Some good points there, DW.
Being a lousy absolutist, I don’t see Rufus’ choices making him *the* role model, but he is certainly *a* model for taking responsibility for his behavior. My esteem for what he’s done so far won’t vanish if he doesn’t end up being absolutely, perfectly abstinent for the rest of his life.
Historically, there have been times when folks thought it best to stay out of the public eye while in the midst of, or soon after, difficult transitions. Folks with cancer, married men coming out, pregnant teen girls all disappeared for a while or permanently, thus supporting (if inadvertantly) the aura of fear and shame that surrounded their issue.
I respect those who find it best to refrain from public talk about their recovery in the early stages, and I also respect Rufus for being up front about where he’s at. I hear him simply relaying his story in the same direct fashion that he’s handled his orientation from the beginning.
Frankly, wouldn’t it be more difficult for an expressive guy whose living has come from baring his soul to somehow start hiding now?
In what way is Rufus Wainwright a “role model” for anyone? He is an entertainer. I have yet to find an entertainer–whether a singer, a musician, and actor, or a sports figure–who is a “role model.”
The idea that anyone in the public eye is a “role model” is preposterous.
I wasn’t saying his entire life serves as a model.
I was saying ex-gays could learn from Rufus entering rehab and simply treating the problems.
He chose not to join a sect that escapes from the problems by practicing political partisanship, religious intolerance, calcified and conformist gender roles, and ostracism of anyone who disagrees with the sect leaders.
A point I think many of you are missing is the fact that the majority of ex-gays do NOT come out publicly about their change. Most live quiet lives as do the majority of gay men and women.