In an article on the Christian webzine Boundless, Exodus Youth’s Mike Ensley offers advice to those who “struggle with same-sex attraction” but who do not find themselves turning into heterosexuals.
While some of what Mike spouts is parroting dogmatic nonsense (“Homosexuality is an experience you have, it’s not a thing that you are”), he also gives some practical advice that would be useful for avoiding anything that you find a temptation. And Mike broaches a subject that I believe is too often hidden from the public face of ex-gay ministries.
Stop obsessing about how much you will (or won’t) enjoy heterosexual sex
You’ve thought about it, and so have I. What if I don’t enjoy sex with my spouse? What if I still want to have sex with other men (or women, if you’re a woman)? The skeptics certainly say all the time that we “ex-gays” only have sexually frustrated lives ahead of us.
I believe this is an important question for those pursuing change to consider. Unfortunately, I think that Mike gives advice that displays immaturity and self delusion.
People often ask me if I have sexual fantasies about women now, because that’s what the world would consider change. But God wants me to change not into a man who still wraps himself up in self-absorbed fantasy, but one who’s ready to put my wife before myself — and put Him first.
Afraid you won’t enjoy the sex? Well, if your priority is your own satisfaction and the living out of your overly-developed obsessions, no, you won’t enjoy the intimacy of sex within marriage. You know what? Neither would an “ever-straight” with the same mindset. They might be able to marry according to their worldly desires, but it will never fulfill the endless hunger of selfishness. Real closeness grows out of commitment to a person, and following God’s will.
Don’t worry; sex God’s way will be the best.
In other words, don’t worry that you aren’t attracted sexually to the opposite sex. Just think of sex as a duty to God and this will fulfill you sexually.
I know many who read here have tried exactly that approach. Perhaps some of you can share whether Mike’s advice is likely to lead to happiness… or to broken homes and devastated lives.
Mike writes, “Well, if your priority is your own satisfaction and the living out of your overly-developed obsessions, no, you won’t enjoy the intimacy of sex within marriage.”
I have been with women, and it felt unnatural for me. There was nothing there. That said, I think sex with the opposite sex when you are same-sex attracted is about the self more than anything. Either you are trying to prove that you can give pleasure to the opposite sex (and thus be about building your own confidence and ego) or it is about salvation (which is the most selfish thing possible). The idea of doing anything for the sake of God’s duty or God’s way goes back to salvation–and that is about the saving of self. How many times have I heard someone proseltyzing and the first thing is about not going to heaven. I rarely have a conversation with Christians that is not about reward (interestingly, the Muslims I know about about law only–not about reward). Christians are sold on this idea that something will be rewarded by following God. If that reward was not promised, would there even be Christianity?
I do not have sex for myself only. It is about intimacy with the only person I love. Sex is very minor in fact. If it ever was about me, it may be in the beginning, but not now. I don’t have sex for duty or reward or any other silly reason other than spending time with my loved one.
Aaron said:
…or it is about salvation (which is the most selfish thing possible).
That is not my experience at all, i.e. that salvation is a selfish matter. To see a love of God as only about a reward (or punishment) is quite shallow. For all I know you may have met a lot of shallow people who said that, but I would have to disagree with this as a blanket statement.
I can’t read some of Mike Ensley’s writing without feeling sad for him. I remember a time in my own life when repeating such things to myself and others gave it some measure of reality to me. I truly hope for his sake that he can break out of that self-imposed purgatory and just live his life. I think it is promising though that he has the honesty to come as close as he does to his feelings. Randy Thomas lost that ability some time ago it seems.
And more directly to the question, what woman out there really deserves to get a husband who thinks this way about sex? I know many conservative Christian, heterosexual couples and I have to say that the ones close enough to share their views on this do not think of sex that way at all. That is not the way it’s supposed to work.
Will you be honest and tell the woman you begin to date that this is your goal? Or will you settle for a lesbian who is also trying to deny the reality of her attractions and will gladly settle for the same out of the relationship?
Think seriously about this Mike, because in this respect you are being rather selfish.
Notice I did not say that David–in fact, I stated that the Muslims I know do not seem to treat belief in God as such. You stated salvation is not selfish, but you do not say how. Let me give an example–two people are in the ocean and about to die. One person is in a raft and only able to save one. The raft boat owner says, “I will only save the one who is willing to fully acknowledge my act of grace.” The person who accepts is the selfish one. God demands a selfish act. I was a minister. Every single religious experience was selfish one in my church. Notice often in religious experiences how the person is isolated–how he/she sees himself/herself in relation to God. How many times have I heard someone say how he or she wants to walk with God (which is a lone act typically)? How many walk the “narrow” path–because it is selfish? How many Christians see themselves as elites and persecuted by others (martyrdom is often seen as a selfish act)? How many cars say, “In case of rapture, this car will be unmanned”? How many “prospective” Christians are dropped by churches because they do not accept the gospel quick enough (don’t even let me get into the numbers issue–people counting people they have saved even though “Christ really did it”)?
You say it is a blanket statement, but notice how I placed salvation in the context of philosophy. David, if philosophically you can show me it is not a selfish issue, I will accept that, but you gave no response. Also, blanket statements are not always wrong. If you can demonstrate how it is otherwise, I will accept that. Yet, again, I don’t know how salvation can be anything other than selfish. It is the individual accepting something on the basis of reward for the self. The other person is not considered in the process. By its very nature, it is a selfish act. Also, answer this–do you believe Christianity would be a living religion if there was no reward?
One last example, I was involved with a church branch that was disturbed that blacks were part of the congregation. The whites even said that the main church was full and they put the blacks in the basement and filmed the church ceremonies for them. One day the church broke into the black members houses, kidnapped them and dropped them and their household objects in a town more welcoming of blacks. On Christmas day, after the act, the members stood up and testified what a wonderful, brave, selfless act they performed. Yet everything they did was to make themselves comfortable. The story is a bit more complicated, but I left that church because I was disgusted by the “selfless” actions of the members. Isn’t salvation about making ourselves feel more comfortable with the idea and rule of God? Again, I will change my mind if you can show me how Christian salvation is not a selfish thing. The thing is the philosophy is enherently selfish (not that there is anything wrong with that).
One more thing–how many times do people profess, “I can’t believe what God has done for me–that He sacrificed himself for me”? I never hear that God did it for us. Maybe some people say us, but I almost always hear the former.
Aaron, I wrote three short sentences and you reply with half a page. I didn’t mean to lead us into a major OT tangent, and I honestly don’t want to continue to do so. Suffice to say that most of what you have said is outside my experience. I’m not going to answer the hypothetical because I think it’s pointless and I honestly don’t know the answer anyway. If your intention is to imply that the only reason I love God is because of the promise of a reward (or the threat of punishment for that matter), then I think I’ve already answered that.
Concerning the scenario you describe about the church and it’s black members, I’ll take your word for it but I find it extremely difficult to believe. Again, I hope you are not implying that this is somehow representative of a majority or even a significant minority.
A relationship with God as described in Christian scripture is both vertical and horizontal. “The Church” is a manifestation of the horizontal, but my personal relationship with Christ is an example of the vertical. If you can get “selfish” out of the Gospels, then we aren’t reading the same book. My apologies to all for taking this OT, the subject of the post is quite important.
I read Mike Ensley’s post a while ago. At the time, it occurred to me just how inexperienced and naive he is about heterosexual sex and relationships.
He talked about the selfishness of pursuing a homosexual relationship if one is so inclined, and then went on about taking the unselfish path of heterosexual marriage to somebody you are not attracted to. This makes no sense at all, and the only reasons to pursue a heterosexual marriage under those circumstances is the pure selfishness of fitting into his particular religious community.
It seems to me that the far less selfish path for someone in Mike’s shoes to take is the path of celibacy. If he wants to deny himself sexual fulfillment, that is fine.
David, this is my last comment on it, but I don’t think it is OT. I think if someone is doing God’s duty, inherently it comes back to them in reward. That is why I brought it up. I am not talking about you and your faith (and it is not an attack), so I am sorry if you felt that way. That was not my intention. I was discussing the philosophy of salvation, especially in relation to Mike’s article. His statement is that he is focusing on God’s duty in sex. That goes back to why? If there is duty or commandment, it is for reward.
My argument is about philosophy, and I won’t continue this, but let me say that the Christian God presents Himself as selfish and always has in the Bible. If we are created in God’s image and are to follow God’s example, we are about self-desire. I am not criticizing selfishness per se since God presents himself as a selfish, vain God (go to https://christianstudy.homestead.com/files/classes/defending_the_faith/lesson11.htm , a Christian site that presents scripture on this). If we are following God’s example, we cannot escape sex as a inherently selfish act–it is either for us or God. If for God, it comes back as reward. This brings us back to Mike’s ideas–there is some kind of reward even if it is for God. Thus, it is a selfish act. I will drop this, but again I feel it is relevant to Mike’s ideas. He thinks it is not selfish, but it is in the end.
David, you can respond privately if you want, but why do you think someone believes in God or obedience to God’s idea? If there is not reward, what is the purpose? Just because it is?
Aaron said:
…why do you think someone believes in God or obedience to God’s idea? If there is not reward, what is the purpose? Just because it is?
In my case it is simple – love. I can’t explain it any other way.
aaron,
as odd as this may sound….yes…i choose to walk in the way of Christ simply because I’ve discovered it to be the best way….even if there’s no reward at the end and it’s just basically nothingness after this….what He offers is the best plan out there in my opinion.
Timothy,
I totally “get” what you’re saying as far as Mike’s slant toward sounding like sex is a duty and just suck it up and let God take care of it. That still doesn’t always “cut it” for a whole BUNCH of men who are same sex attracted….and yes, it does often lead to devastated families and much hurt. Mike does show his youth and inexperience but at least he sounds very sincere and not “mean-spirited” in his approach to others. It sounds like this is working for him right now…or at least this is how he’s got it worked out in his mind.
Sex, at it’s heart, is one of those paradoxes because we get and give at the same time and the whole thing is, or can be, greatly enhanced because of the giving…….which yeah, ends up being selfish but then….well…you get the idea, it’s a circle sort of thing. Pretty cool, actually. I do think God intended for both parties to derive a great deal of pleasure from it and I think that Mike will come to that realization more fully, in whatever way he works it out….eventually. Making it a “duty” in any way, shape, or form pretty much spoils it….even if one is trying desperately to make it not seem “dutiful”….if it is….the other party knows.
I’m enjoying getting “caught up” over here. Will be in touch soon! 🙂
love and grace,
pam
This is a really interesting glean in to the mindset of the professional ex-gay. This question of “how does the ex-gay-but-not-quite-straight experience sexual passion” is something that I think all people eager to become ex-gay have to think about at least once. I know it’s a question I’ve personally always wanted to see addressed by the ex-gay community.
It’s important, I think, because the way I see it, the ambiguity of the term “ex-gay” is one of the strongest tools that the ex-gay community/ministry/industry has in its arsenal.
When “ex-gay” doesn’t mean any specific thing, then you don’t have to answer to any analysis of critical thinking that suggests that concept just doesn’t work, in theory or in practice.
Ex gays, at least the ones who are the most prominent…don’t especially strike me as mature about relationships with the opposite sex.
I don’t think THE most important aspects of intimacy are articulated by this crowd.
This whole argument is based on ONE thing, and called another.
It’s hetero supremacy, but called a commitment to God.
All the directions are supposed to point to heterosexual activity, however unnatural or uncomfortable it is for the gay person.
Thing is, the church has been VERY irreposponsible and unrealistic with it’s directives regarding heteros too.
Especially regarding contraception and women’s roles in their own homes, as well as church communities.
When real needs are not met (and realistically, the ex gay ministries are not meeting GAY needs, but STRAIGHT ones conditional that gay people act straight), so if anything STRAIGHT people in this entire scenario are the ones who are beyond exteme selfishness.
This is beyond how and in what way any human being can service God.
We can serve God as individuals, gay or not.
Church communities are an extension, outside of the home.
Heterosexuals engaged in the ex gay ministry or therapy call themselve compassionate practioners.
It’s a good cover, and won’t readily be challenged.
But at it’s foundation, there is selfishness. And it’s selective.
They are not so invested in curing the urges in a human being that makes them LIE. Betray another human being, or forget the most basic directive of treating another person as they’d want to be treated.
There is an especially serious obssession with homosexuality. It’s strange.
It IS selfish, because this obssession defies all evidence contrary to belief and activity.
But they persist.
And considering the political activity against gay men and women to participate in NON religious communities and professions, there is no hiding the selfishness and arrogance of heterosexuals.
The church simply validates it, regardless of how hurtful, or how little impact celibacy or heterosexual activity changes things for the better.
They have YET to explain, how their success does anything so good for society at large, or how hurting gay people in the meantime makes society better.
Arg…typos that for valid words but incoherent sentences…so frustrating.
“analysis of critical thinking” should be “analysis or critical thinking”
I read this article a few months ago back when it was only on the Exodus Youth website. Mike and I had a semi-heated exchange about a few points of contention (mostly concerning the sinfulness of gay indentity), but I didn’t bring up the segment in question, even though I largely disagreed with it also.
My own objections to Mike’s claims really remind me of some of the philosopher Ayn Rand’s writings about love and, specifically, sex. She believed, as do I, that treating love like a charity case (or worse, a duty) sets it up for failure. Who wants to be told: “I love you out of duty and selflessness; I don’t exactly have any selfish pleasure in you?”
I mean, is Mike saying that a woman will not care if her husband takes no real physical pleasure in her? What kind of message does that send? I’ll somewhat agree with Mike that for those seeking to live out an ex-gay or Side B life, stressing out about whether or not you could ever enjoy heterosexual sex is not a good thing, just for the simple fact that it’s always best to look at what’s in front of you when it’s actually in front of you, and not years away.
However, it is naive and irreponsible to say that one should only worry about their partner’s pleasure during sex. Having a good handle on how much pleasure you take in potential mates, for a man at least, is pretty important. The mechanics of sex require that at least someone has to be attracted, right?
I was raised in the LDS Church (Mormon), and while I knew I was gay since high school, never acted on those feelings as I had been taught they were wrong and my “trial” to overcome. After almost killing myself due to the dissonance in my life between my feelings and the things I had been taught, I chose to marry and hope that God would change me and allow me the life I was told would bring me happiness. I loved my wife, we had always been friends, but I was never sexually attracted to her or able to have sex. We went to therapists and counseling suggested by our bishops, but after 12 years, I was tired of beliving there was something wrong with me that had to be fixed. I was not happy after all I had done. I was faithful, went to the temple, prayed, fasted, and never acted on the urges I felt. Finally, I grew tired of living a life to meet the expectations of others and a church I was raised in, but never felt passionatley about. I was lucky in that my divorce, while painful, has allowed me to remain friends with my ex-wife. I was not warmly embraced by my family, but I was not rejected outright, and my family have met my partner and invited him to family functions and holidya gatherings. The relief I have felt has been palpable, and I feel as close to God as I ever did. I am glad I finally had the courage to go against all the “truths” I had been taught and listen to my heart. I don;t beleive God would make me gay and then ask me to live a life of infulfilled lonliness…
Thanks for sharing that Todd. I’m very glad you made it through that dark period intact to enjoy your life – I can relate.
Jay said:
The mechanics of sex require that at least someone has to be attracted, right?
That made me giggle 🙂
Boy, it’s really nice not to have to worry about what some supposed invisible spirit wants you to do. I’m glad I left Christianity and I’m not coming back!
The mechanics of sex require that at least someone has to be attracted, right?
That, or have a pretty active imagination.
Anybody else getting a creepy 1984 vibe?
‘I could have stood it if it hadn’t been for one thing,’ he said. He told her about the frigid little ceremony that Katharine had forced him to go through on the same night every week. ‘She hated it, but nothing would make her stop doing it. She used to call it — but you’ll never guess.’
‘Our duty to the Party,’ said Julia promptly.
Shalom,
It feels very sad and arrogant to have the author assume that he has the cornerstone of truth regarding God’s design and plan for a fulfilling sexual relationship/partnership. The focus solely on the genital parts of human beings to determine God’s plan for loving, intimate, and committed sexual partnerships reduces sexuality and takes it out of the context of relationship.
I think it is much more “selfish” and dishonest to put oneself into this sacraficial lamb place for a spouse and deny your feelings of sexuality, feelings I believe are a gift from God.
In my brief marriage, the love was there but it was as if we were brother and sister, not able to partner as husband and wife. The sexual intimacy was not present, and this created depression, confusion, and anger. The fruit of the Spirit was not in my marriage. We were not designed by our hearts to live together in that way, yet my ex husband and I both are Christian and deeply love Jesus. We thought if we got married, God would do for us what we wanted Him to do (make us sexually attracted to each other). How arrogant was that? We actually thought we could pray GOd into changing us and making us what WE thought we needed to be for His love….very sad.
My prayers continue to be for voices of alternative perspectives to be allowed into the minds of those in the ex gay ministry movement.
Amen,
Jennifer
Being a person that never got married to a women or have had sex with a women…I wont know but jsut reading it doesn’t make logical sense but most of the Christian belief doesn’t make loglical sense since it is built on faith and not logic. All he is doing is WHITE KNUCKLING IT AGAIN!!!!
As a woman who was married to a gay man for 2 years and can tell you beyond a doubt that it is a horrible feeling to know that your husband does not want you; desire you. I think it is cold hearted of these people to place men and women and the people they marry in a position of marriage without passion and deep committed love. My ex and I are still friends, but that is really all we ever were to begin with. I pity these wives, for if they stay with these men, they will never understand true love.
I was in a long term relationship with a male once. The sex felt so wrong, I can’t really think of any way to discribe how unnatural it felt. I’d much rather forego sexual expression for the rest of my life than have to sleep with a man again.
I agree with what many here have said: It is folly to think a gay man could love a woman as passionately as she deserves.
Somehow I get the feeling some members of the LDS Church, the Catholics and Religions in general relishes misery for their gay folk. (How is that for crass generalization? Calm down…I’ll support my feelings).
Todd, the LDS Church still opens the way for a gay man to even get a Temple marriage (“sealed”) to a Daughter of God…if the circumstances dictate. Of course, it’s not official doctrine and only the opinion of one its Elders in the Quorum of Seventies. But, there are some General Authorites in the LDS Church who still feels there are a rare occasions when marriage and a union of a gay man and of a women is sanctioned.
It’s either that option or celibacy…Strict celibacy.
I’ll add another characterization: What about a gay man who never experienced same-sex intimacy? Is it easier for that virginal gay man to live celibate or establish a quasi-hetero sexual relationship with a woman…:
1. …to keep up the appearance of being heterosexual.
2. …because of family/peer pressure.
3. …raise a family.
4. A mix of the above.
I came to the realization I was hopelessly a homo a lot later in life than most. (I blame it on deep-seeded denial.) I knew my family and my religion at birth would never accept me as gay or living in a gay relationship of any kind. So, I got introspective and accepted my affliction and determined I could live the rest of my life celibate. I was happy. I thought I was happy for many years.
The God(s) must have heard my thoughts and laughed. Admittedly, I was curious and it took me being FAR away from home on business trips to venture out into the gay culture. I got stung. I got bit by the viper of love and had a torrid relationship with a man. It did not last long but I learned a lot. I learned the principles of love, of sharing, of caring, of sex and the realization of just what true love meant (and what all those silly country/western lyrics were talking about).
Then, I discovered that love is an opiate. I tussle with the thought of “better to have loved and lost than to never have loved” in my bedroom some nights. Damn…if only I hadn’t tasted the fruit (double entendre intended).
It MIGHT have been easier for me to remain celibate but it’s too hard now. The feelings I once had I deeply want to re-establish with some other man. It’s hell.
Right now my family is happy I’m celibate. I occasionally get invited to dinner with other couples and I know one man is as gay as I am. Their inference is to live celibate or find a Daughter of God who will accept the second-tier down from True Love.
Maybe I can rationalize it’s the lot I drew…the short/gay straw. But I wonder do they understand how cruel can my family be….or how religion can be…when they give me only those options.
By this logic, heterosexual attraction is unnatural and irrelevant. Oh, the cosmic circular reasoning we must cultivate to make God happy! It’s like a comet chasing its tail!
At 38, I married my best friend (female) in a desperate attempt to please everyone except myself. We both entered the marriage with an open mind and with the knowledge that I was NOT attracted to women. During our time together we tried everything to make it work. But the bottom line was and is that I am in no way or form attracted to women. We were great shopping partners but that was all!!!
Well….as expected…it ended in a bitter divorce in which she was devastated and crushed. I came out of it scarred and depressed. All we accomplished was to destroy a beautiful friendship and hurt each other very badly. So….to those who say that all you have to do is play the part and God will take care of the rest I say “Bullcrap”!! Just like everything else about the ex-gay fantasy…..it is all smoke and mirrors!!
I’m always a bit mystified by the idea that a gay person won’t be able to cope sexually in a straight marriage. I was married over 20 years, and though I’m gay as a goose (whatever that expression means), the sexual side was not a problem. In fact, it was extremely enjoyable.
Now, I’d love to think I’m just a real stud. But I have many gay friends my own age (mid-50s) who were married for one reason or another. Very few report big problems with the sex part. I also have many friends who have been out as gay their whole lives but enjoyed occasional flings with the opposite sex.
So as I say, I’m a little mystified when ex-gay spokesmen like this Ensley character go on and on about how you shouldn’t expect to enjoy the sex.
The problem I see in pushing gays into heterosexual marriage has to do not with sex, but with intimacy and honesty. I just don’t believe any couple can build a healthy relationship on a fundamental denial of who one partner really is.
This is where I see the big difference between my former marriage and my current relationship with another man. My partner and I have been together just four years. Our sexual relationship was originally very intense, but at this point we’re not having as much sex as I once had with my wife.
Why? Well, he had a very serious coronary episode two years ago and now must take some “libido-reducing” medications. Add that to the normal course of middle age, and you see some slowdown in your sex life.
But whatever our level of sexual activity, I feel a sense of fulfillment, wholeness and honesty in this relationship I could never achieve in my former marriage. I’m able to be more true to my partner because I am fundamentally truer to myself.
So from the perspective of my gay partnership, I actually agree with some of Ensley’s statements:
“If your priority is your own satisfaction and the living out of your overly-developed obsessions, no, you won’t enjoy the intimacy of sex within marriage. … Real closeness grows out of commitment to a person …”
Intimacy, closeness, commitment–they all require one other ingredient. Honesty.
Well, if Mike Ensley ever does get married, maybe he can follow Lady Hillingdon’s advice: “Close your eyes and think of England.”
Jim Burroway beat me to it. I was going to suggest that Ensley’s entire post could be put more succinctly as, “Close your eyes and think of Jesus.”
OK, someone help me out here… but I seem to recall that there was an ex-gay who wrote about exactly that, thinking of Jesus.
I recall thinking that his article was both slightly sacreligious and quick icky.
Timothy – I believe you’re thinking of Rev. J Grace Harley. Specifically I believe you’re referring to the following (rather disturbing) comment:
“The good reverend tells us the best way to overcome our own homosexuality is to imagine Jesus as a gay man. “The love and the passion that you feel for another of the same sex, try to see Jesus and try to give him that same passion and love and desire,” she says. “He can handle it. He takes it, and he will rework it and give you the deepest, greatest love affair.” She whispers: “Jesus is a man. What if he were a gay man and he desired you, and he wanted your body totally for himself? Whoa! What if?””
Gee Timothy, thanks ever so much for remembering that one, ugh.
Actually its sort of funny in a way. Her message seems to be that gay relationships are bad… except with the Son of God. So, gay sex bad, but its OK for Jesus. I guess she didn’t see all the WWJD signs.
religion is SO stupid ……get over all that …..spoken by one who TOTALLY knows……was married 21 years, did HUGE church music, played for Billy Graham, YFC, and all the rest …..
gave it all up for reality…..and REAL friends.
don’t have any more time to waste on this silliness.
luv my husband now of 15 years now!
John
I’m glad you are happy with your current life John, but there are many people of faith here (authors, commenters and readers) and it’s not our job to disparage anyone’s beliefs one way or the other. Please try to be respectful of that when posting. Thanks.
I am quietly observing this thread. As I quietly listen in my social situations to gay folks. I’m not gay, I know how I feel about men. There are ebbs and flows of attraction, depending on my moods…and situation. I’m the sort of woman who’d prefer to love who I have sex with. I don’t and wouldn’t do it for it’s own sake.
That’s risky and always, the social implications are different for women.
Right now, I have a close friendship with a younger gay man. He’s been my best friend for eight years. Sometimes we’re mistaken for a couple, but our relationship has been supportive and intimate as a friendship can get.
We’ve joked that, if I hadn’t been already married, and he weren’t gay….perhaps, maybe…we had arrived at that zenith in a relationship that most men and women would like to hang a marriage on.
What I have learned though, is exactly what I’ve spoken of often. The caring bridge gay folks can be between heterosexuals. What woman wouldn’t benefit from having a man in her life with all the attendant presence the opposite would bring, but without the sexual tension that eventually messes up the most platonic friendships between heterosexual men and women?
It’s the best of both worlds, for gay and straight.
Yet, straight people want to place themselves and gay men and women, into the greatest breach of that spiritual commitment, having sex.
The incompatibility is ignored, strained into place…given ultimate consent…but it’s still wrong to forcefully commit gay and straight to this, when it’s a risk to trust and emotional dependency and growth to make that happen.
It’s like burning that caring bridge, and to what purpose?
What has it served ultimately, but a perverse need that straight people keep asserting their sexuality constantly and brutally.
And it is perverse…for straight people to insist on this at the expense of all else, INCLUDING compatible intimacy between straight people and the gay people they love, AND gay people and the gay people they love.
This is why, it is also the ultimate arrogance that straight people don’t listen to or believe what gay people tell them.
What purpose does it serve that straight people do NOT?
What gives straight people the moral superiority to EVER question what gay people say for themselves.
Straight people OWE that much to truth, to honesty and to the intimacy and trust that all men and women deserve so that such hurtful and unnecessary destruction to friendships and marriages and families wouldn’t happen.
What’s it to straight people that a gay person NEVER sleep with them?
Why insist that a gay person do that?
Is there some ultimate reward to forcing the issue?
What medals and accolades for bedding someone whose just not into you are to be had?
This is why it’s something more than strange I observe in so called ex gays or celibate gays.
To live within the disciplines of heterosexual standards doesn’t make one blessed or especially meeting a higher standard in my opinion.
Heterosexuals don’t meet their OWN standards, and set different and higher ones for gay people, rather than set equal standards commiserate with their own words and deeds.
I can’t be impressed, I can only be saddened at the waste of effort for an unnecessary cause, and mostly a selfish one at that.
Finding the right love for oneself can be a lifelong endeavor. Renewing love over and over again within a longtime relationship is work. Having that at all, is lucky.
None of us can dictate the terms on one another for such things between adults.
The straight world, forcing itself on gay people. Dictating terms that they can’t uphold themselves, or ignoring the needs and realities of gay people, especially gay youth…is rape.
It’s non consenting forced sexuality on those who are different and should be left to their own full potential.
Straight people demand a debt from gay people that isn’t owed to straight people.
That even God isn’t demanding, but straight people are.
I’d won’t question gay folks, ever.
I’ll always question the straight folks.
After all, they are the ones committing this assertion and always have.
@Regan – I’m devistated – I didn’t know you were married. You were my last hope for happiness with a woman! My only recourse now is to accept Brad Pitt’s proposal.
Which raises that age old question of what position Jesus plays in the great baseball game of life.
Has anyone ever tried to discuss sex with a virgin? That’s what Mike’s article feels like to me. I like him and wish him well, and wish he could find something better than following Alan and Randy into emotional self-mutilation.
In high school english we discussed a poem which discussed love in the language of roses – red for passion and white for purity. I seem to recall the line “my love is a red tipped white rose” (or perhaps the other way around).
Being rather young, idealistic, and very inexperienced, I argued that love is pure and distinct from passion. Real love could exist outside of the lustful drives.
My excuse is that I was about 16 and heavily influenced by religious teachings that hinted that all things sexual were lustful. And, of course, I had no lustful feelings for girls at all which left my rose perfectly white.
I argued that love is pure and distinct from passion. Real love could exist outside of the lustful drives.
I would agree with that, but not when talking about romantic love 😉
“Afraid you won’t enjoy the sex? Well, if your priority is your own satisfaction and the living out of your overly-developed obsessions, no, you won’t enjoy the intimacy of sex within marriage. You know what? Neither would an “ever-straight” with the same mindset.”
Actually….my first husband was an “ever-straight” who fit this description pretty perfectly….and…well….I can say from experience that it IS indeed possible to for someone like this to enjoy the sex. Straight people can and WAY too often DO enjoy sex outside of healthy intimacy…..even married straight people. *gasp*
I agree with what Mike says about real closeness growing out of committment to a person and following God’s will….and yes….that CAN result in the enjoyment of sex with that person…..but not always.
Pam said:
I agree with what Mike says about real closeness growing out of commitment to a person and following God’s will….and yes….that CAN result in the enjoyment of sex with that person…..but not always.
The point, at least to me, is that Mike is portraying this scenario as the way God intended it to be, and I don’t agree with that. Closeness and appreciation for a mate may certainly grow out of time and commitment, but sexual and romantic attraction are more often the energy that begins this journey in the first place, not the result of dedication and faith.
The most obvious interpretation here is that Mike is trying to make sense of his lack of physical attraction for the opposite sex and how that will play out in his future, minus any allowance for intimacy with the same sex to whom he is attracted.
Why is it that every time the fundamentalist anti-homosexuals discuss gays and lesbians, they feel the unrestrained need to present it only as a “sex” issue? Gay men and women don’t spend their entire lives thinking about sex. Well, at least most of them don’t. Damn it, we are people, not walking sex organs. Perhaps the right approach for the homosexual community is to start bringing this fact to the attention of those who waste so much of their time and our time finding new ways to debase us. Stop looking at us as over-sexed walking hormones and start seeing us for the human beings we are!
In effect, Mike is advising that one play a role and have mechanical heterosexual sex like an actor rather than be who God made you to be. I tried that for many years, and ultimately, it falls apart, hurting your spouse, your children and causing major upheaval.
Sadly, the ex-gay proponents NEVER factor in the damage/deception done to the straight spouse. All that matters is that one pretends to be “changed” or “cured.” They care nothing about the collateral damage done to others. Not exactly a Christian approach in my view.
Gordo, Gordo, Gordo…
My marriage is no more. I have been officially separated from my husband for two years. We are not yet officially divorced. URGH!!
I was unwilling to divorce, I was forced into it. And after so much work and devotion too. Me and The Beast (my nickname for the ex), took our time. Letting a years long, platonic roommate situation develop into romantic love and marriage.
We were far from young when this happened and were married for nearly thirteen years.
I’m kinda in flux about dating, relationships and marriage right now.
I’ve been leaning heavily on my ‘caring bridge’, my gay friends have been tremendous. Literally keeping me alive.
Other priorities have developed that will take precedence over having a boyfriend, or whatever they call the amours of the mature set.
My writing career has been calling, and I must answer.
But, I’m flattered Gordo. I am. Being appreciated by ANYONE, gay or not, is a blessing.
I can’t imagine being married to any of my gay male friends though.
However, truth be told, I never had a very developed gay dar either.
So a marriage to a gay man, with me being clueless wouldn’t have been impossible.
Right now, there is a hotter than hot gay man living with me as a roomie.
And he sings like an angel too. What’s not to love?
I don’t need a husband. But a mannerly man, a warrior prince who is there for me, will fight for me and help me in times of need….don’t need to be my HUSBAND.
But just himself….on that, me and God, are cool.
Regan – sorry to hear about your situation. I’m a lot of fun to hang out with but in the long run I fear I’d leave you unhappy. Good luck in finding your warrior prince.
g