Updated July 4, 2005
Two recent articles at MSNBC.com offer fairly well-written primers on recent exgay activism — though, in sticking to the basic issues, the articles are kinder to both exgay and pro-equality activists than is, perhaps, deserved.
Two stories cannot reasonably be expected to cover the entire exgay issue. For example, the articles do not mention persistent efforts by organizations such as Focus on the Family and PFOX to obstruct antidiscrimination laws and antiharassment programs in public schools. Nor do the articles mention a recent battle by Warren Throckmorton, the antigay parents/spouses group PFOX, and local and national abstinence-only proponents to compel Montgomery County, Maryland, public schools to provide exgay literature to teen-agers.
Efforts by Focus on the Family to legislatively and socially coerce same-sex-attracted people into pursuing unspecified and unquantified “change” constitute an important component of modern exgay politics. Backlash occurs when tolerant parents move to protect their children from what they perceive to be exgay stereotypes and harassment.
No story can cover every angle, and I do not fault any given set of stories for missing one or two angles. But I do hope that, in time, news media will conduct more analysis of both the antigay political activities and strawman arguments of exgay activists — and periodic lop-sidedness in tolerance advocates’ defense of free speech and scientific inquiry.
–Mike Airhart, July 4
They’re actually very balanced articles. It’ll be interesting to see how you handle them.
Peter, I would disagree. They appear to be rather glib, but then so much media does.A balanced article would ask — point blank — “What proportion of people change?” and then ask for the evidence. They would also ask “And what happens to those who do not change?”.I mean, the reporter was talking about a “therapy” here, and discussing it with the “foremost authorities on sexual-identity change” — I don’t think it’s unreasonable for them to be clear on these two points, at the very least.But, sign of the times and the media culture — readers have to do their own investigative reporting… I’m aware you’ve been involved in an ex-gay group for some time now, and I’d be very interested in your own data in this regard. As you can safely assume, I am sceptical but would be willing to drop that if the evidence is available. I’d also welcome your perspective on Courage Trust.P.S. Any opinion on the latest Dr Who? I have to admit, not happy to see a Dalek flying. Not good. Very bad. I now must lie awake in fear, knowing that simply running up a flight of steps isn’t going to save me. Sigh, another childhood memory destroyed. (for anyone else who reads this — I wasn’t asking a weird question out of the blue. I’m sure Peter understands perfectly well…)
Balanced? Ummm, no.
Does this statement sound balanced:
NARTH has been mischaracterized by opponents who accuse it of gay-bashing and rejecting any predisposition to homosexuality.
To state that NARTH has been mischaracterized (as opposed to reporting that NARTH claims to have been mischaracterized) is a judgement of the reporter. One would assume it is based on something other than what NARTH told him. Anyone aware of NARTH’s history knows that NARTH consistently plays a big role in trying to reduce or eliminate civil rights for gay people.
NARTH bashes gays – no matter it they deny it.
Also, the point of these articles seems to be to suggest that there is a non-religious movement by scientists to support the notion of ex-gay reorientation. If that is so, why is it near to impossible to find a reorientation group that isn’t religious based?
Either the author was hopelessly unaware of his facts (and willing to believe things on their face value) or he’s trying to sell the ex-gay agenda. He’s either a fool or a fraud.
OK,
i) Doctor Who – So, so, so, so COOL. Daleks flew already (Remembrance of the Daleks) and the last two episodes were just amazing. I am overjoyed that the Beeb brought it back. I’ve been a fan since I was 5 years old (1979) and now in Oxford I live 4 doors down from Lalla Ward (Romana #2) – How cool is that?!?!?!
ii) Courage – I’m happy to have a private chat, preferably voice – email me your number and when would be good to call.
*** Everyone else tune out please : or witness dorks at work ***That is very cool. Well, I think it is. Jeepers, she must be umm 50? or more now. That was 25 years ago… Unfortunately the ABC had a habit of airing the episodes out of sync, so took awhile to work out Astra/Romana. (For anyone else who hasn’t tuned out — Lalla Ward married Richard Dawkin, yes that Richard Dawkin.) Still prefer Leela — early Xena anyone? — I think it was the knife.A major confession to make: I once, for a dare when I was about 13, decided enter the cake decorating competition at the Royal Show… and I’m not talking skanky old scones or sponges here (toooo easy, been there done that). This was the decorated royal icing / wedding cake deal, with a fruit cake and all. Now, imagine a hall full of all these ladies delicate little twee pastel lemon and pink cakes — and right in the middle is a honky big, steel grey Dalek!If I remember, I was awarded “Distinguised”; and they got that right at least. We could overhear all these elderly “cake ladies” (who are a strange breed to themselves) pondering what on Earth they were staring at… but every single kid was yelling out “Oh look Mum, a Dalek, can you make one for me?” And I remember one snooty cake lady say “You can see a boy made that!” (so? shoot me)Mum (mine) is an excellent decorator, so I got help, but I’m not sure anyone had ever tried to make grey icing before; at least not deliberately. It tooks weeks of experimenting to get the colour right. That was the first and last time — I don’t even like wedding cake! God only knows what possessed me at the time.As for the call — you’re more than welcome, but you’ll be calling the antipodes. I’m happy to email you in any case.
“Anyone aware of NARTH’s history knows that NARTH consistently plays a big role in trying to reduce or eliminate civil rights for gay people.
NARTH bashes gays – no matter it they deny it.”
Please supply several concrete examples of this that go beyond guilt by association. I’ve done research on NARTH, and as for the civil rights issues, it all depends on who within NARTH you ask. For instance, Dr. Robert Sternberg is a liberal with very liberal beliefs regarding gay rights and he’s also leader of the APA’s division of humanistic psychology. Dr. Robert Perloff, a strong NARTH supporter, was a prominent member of the APA’s gay and lesbian division. About the only thing they have in common with Nicolosi is the belief that some gays can change, and that those who desire to change ought to be offered options. They disagree with any attempts pathologize gayness, or to deprive them of rights. It just so happens that NARTH’s current leader is a conservative Catholic. But recently, even Nicolosi himself has been softening his stance. In fact, from the “Social Work Today” article he states that he does work with gays whose goal is not necessarily to go straight, but rather to strengthen their masculine identity.
“Also, the point of these articles seems to be to suggest that there is a non-religious movement by scientists to support the notion of ex-gay reorientation. If that is so, why is it near to impossible to find a reorientation group that isn’t religious based?”
I believe that the reporter stated that these scientists were a minority. Which would explain the difficulty in tracking them down. One could also assume that, due to the politically correct climate, such a scientist would want to keep his mouth shut for fear of loss of tenure or respect, or accusations of bigotry.
You should read the book “Invitation to Personal Construct Psychology.” The researchers have an innovative, fascinating way at looking at human sexual orientation. And, in case your wondering, the researchers are secular.
John.
John,Welcome to the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) — a non-profit, educational organization dedicated to affirming a complementary, male-female model of gender and sexuality.This is clearly stated on the front page of the NARTH site Their gay-negative foundation is clear. Someone who has described themselves as a strong supporter of NARTH has aligned themself with this view.For future research — and I’m sure we’d all be interested to see what you find — please go through the NARTH site and it’s articles, find out what the overwhelming bulk of it’s members think, and trawl through every occassion that someone from NARTH has made a public statement. Please nominate an occassion — any — where a NARTH person has had something wholly positive to say about gay men or women or homosexuality. Happy hunting.
Hi. I’m the author of the MSNBC articles being discussed here. I’m dropping in not to make any particular point but simply to clear up a question left by Timothy’s comment on Thursday about my use of the word “mischaracterized” in regard to allegations of gay-bashing by NARTH.
That was a poorly drafted sentence on my part, not an assessment of NARTH or its critics; my intent was to say that what was sometimes mischaracterized was NARTH’s position on the origins of homosexuality, while separately noting that many critics accuse it of gay-bashing. I rewrote that sentence pretty quickly after we published it, because it truly wasn’t what I meant to say.
Timothy’s right; the sentence was terrible. It was just bad writing, however, not any statement one way or the other about whether NARTH indulges in gay-bashing, and I fixed it as soon as I recognized the problem.
Cheers …
Alex Johnson, MSNBC.com
RE: Alex Johnson, MSNBC.com
NARTH has continuously made the statement that the origins of homosexuality are based around terrible parenting (which makes the parents feel bad – they did they best they can, but according to the self appointed parenting experts at NARTH, they didn’t do a good enough job) and they use dodgy sources when citing information, such as that Cameron chap who was booted out of the APA for suspect sources for his homosexuality report.
NARTH uses the same old-wives tales commonly used for transgendered people – that they were abused when younger, that there wasn’t a strong male/female role model etc. etc. when in reality, for every one case of *that* occur, there will be at-least 9 other gays or transgendered people willing to stand side by side with their family and state that they had a wonderful childhood, the parents were caring and both parents took an active role in their development
The issue isn’t so much the idea of selling a service of changing ones sexual orientation – thats ok, its the free-market, and if people wish to sell that service, then let them – let the market dictate whether there is a demand, by the number of clients who go through the door.
But at the same time NARTH like EXODUS does their own set of anti-gay bashing; labelling us (GLBT) child rapists, dysfunctional, violent, disease ridden – I’m sure there are many other people here from the GLBT community who can stand up and tell you of the many other things these organisations preach.
When somebody from the news media uses the word “balanced,” I immediately roll on the floor laughing. It has become clear to me that what passes for the news media gets many of its stories planted with them, they listen, they get a quotation from someone in the opposition–which they include in the story–and that’s what passes for balance. It’s clear from the structure of many of the stories.
BTW, MSNBC is only slightly less idiotic than Faux News. And, a few years ago, shortly after the Chinese forced down the American surveillance plane, Faux News was covering the “story” 24/7. I heard one of their commentators essentially say that they had no idea what was happening, but they would keep covering it anyway. That sealed it for me. I literally rolled on the floor laughing. I get most of my news from foreign sources.
BTW, Cameron wasn’t booted out of the APA (the psychologists) for suspect sources for his homosexuality report. (Well, that may be part of the reason he was kicked out.) He was kicked out because he was mischaracterizing the results of research that had been performed by others. That was the primary reason. The researchers complained about the mischaracterization, and he was ejected.
Kaiwai,
Can you document specific statements by Exodus or NARTH activists that gay people are “child rapists, dysfunctional, violent, disease ridden.” Perhaps from specific entries at the Exodus blog or the NARTH web site? Thanks in advance.
Raj,
I’m not sure how media bias (Fox News in particular) relates to this discussion.
Mike, apologies. My comment here wasn’t about media bias. It was about the reliability of a report. Just because a report is published by a media outlet doesn’t suggest that the report has anything to do with reality.
That’s true of an outlet such as the NYTimes, BTW. Recall the Jayson Blair affair? And the Janet Cooke affair at WaPost? And a few years ago the NYTimes basically reprinted a comic web post regarding translations of names of movies from China, that originated on a website topfive.com. It was hilarious. But the issue had nothing to do with bias–it had to do with reliability.
Note: I have replaced Dan Gonzales’ original post, saying that I might comment, with my actual comment.
Coming late to the table here (was spending a week on Cape Cod with my sister and her family), so I read the articles only today. I agree that they are “fair and balanced,” for want of a better term, but I still question their being written at all.
I understand that news outlets are in a difficult position, as they must report on events in the world with as much objectivity as is humanly possible (I don’t believe you can ever completely eliminate bias in any writing), and the forces mounted against full gay and lesbian participation in society are certainly worthy of a story.
But why is there a perceived need to report on those who believe gays and lesbians can/should change, especially without tying the “reparative therapy” movement to the larger political context? And why was there no reporting on the supposed “success cases” produced by the movement?
As we know from following the “ex-gay” movement, there is a significant link between the idea that gays can change and the idea that we therefore should not be included in anti-discrimination legislation. In fact, the very idea that gays can change would be uninteresting WITHOUT the link to the political opposition to gay rights. After all, we know that lefties can, and sometimes still do, change their behavior and become righties, and vice versa. In fact, IIRC, the most recent winner of the Men’s French Open, Raphael Nadal, plays tennis as a leftie, although he is right-handed otherwise. But this fact becomes merely interesting filler for commentators during a rain delay because there is no political movement to use the idea of handed-ness change as a means to restrict the rights of left-handed people, for instance.
The author did note that some of the experts claim to be supportive of gay people living gay-affirming lives, but failed to note that the groups behind the religious side of the movement, at the least, use their ideas to fight gay rights laws. I also seem to remember many postings here on this blog that questioned the commitment of some of the “ex-gay” experts to the notion of tolerance – e.g., their rhetoric about gays living gay-affirming lives changes when they are not talking to a national media outlet.
And there was absolutely no discussion of the failure rate of “ex-gay” treatment, including the existing testimonies of many self-proclaimed “ex-gays” in which they describe on-going struggles with same-sex attraction. Those testimonies, along with the experiences of so many former “ex-gays,” paint a very different portrait of the nature of the “change” that is experienced.
Finally, why did the author not mention (perhaps it was not researched) the fact that England’s version of Exodus closed up shop a year or two ago? Is it not worthy of mention that at least one of these groups has now admitted they cannot prove ANYONE ever changed in their programs, and they are rethinking their opposition to monogomous same-sex relationships?
I look forward to the day when a news program will do a segment like Liz Crenshaw’s “Does it Really Do That” consumer pieces (she gets regularly people to test products sold on informercials). Perhaps instead of looking at “reparative therapy” as an alternative viewpoint, the media can scrutinize this medical/psychological practice to see if its claims can be substantiated.
Alex,
Thank you!! I appreciate the clarification.
RE: Mike A.
This is the SECOND TIME I have posted this – why does this site keep losing posts? In regards to the issue at hand, I care not to repeat what I said before, as it was long, and I don’t wish to waste my time AGAIN with the possibility of losing yet ANOTHER well written reply.
My argument in a nutshell is this; they link to othersites and questionable people – ergo, rather than them doing the dirty work of dishing gays, lesbians and transgendered individuals, they get third parties to speak for them.
The people who run NARTH and EXODUS have *NO* backbone, they hide behind Christianity, psuedo-science and badly written reports to bolster their view point – the worst part is when they try to pass off their *OPINION* as fact.
I’ll bet my bottom dollar, if these people were confronted, one on one about these issues, they would scurry away or quickly crumple; they can’t put up a decent defence or argument when faced with a ‘in your face poofter’ – I’ve challenged these sorts of people, my religious education teacher was the prime example of the sorts of people who hide NARTH and EXODUS; get in their face, start challenging them, and they suddenly crumble.
Kaiwai, I have learned that, when you do a post of any significant length, you have to do it in a separate word processor (I use Windows Notepad) then copy it to the message box of the page I’m posting on. And I make sure that it posts before I delete the Notepad box.
This is the SECOND TIME I have posted this – why does this site keep losing posts?
I suspect that comment threads on this site are being heavily spammed by adbots (advertising robots) that are advertising porn web sites, because of the “gay” part in its title. It’s unfortunate, but we have to give Mike and his associates some slack. Otherwise, the site will probably go by the wayside.
Compose your comments in a separate word processor (I use Windows Notepad) and check back to see if they get posted before you delete the Notepad screen.
BTW, I’ve noticed the adbots in AOL and gay.com chat rooms, too. They aren’t just in message boards. Hopefully, they will eventually go away.
RE: Raj
Na, its ok, I found out what the problem was; I thought I was logged in using the speecial key thingy, but it turns out that the cookie mantainer on Safari is crappola – I’ve just got to make sure that I’m signed in before sending it.