Former exgay Peterson Toscano asks why the exgay movement is dominated by white males.
One tentative guess among many possibilities: Denied equal power and privilege by conservative churches, some white gay men seek to win back that elite membership in conservative religious communities by becoming exgay.
Who thinks this is just an exgay thing?The United States is dominated by white males. Other-than-white-males sometimes make an appearance. The exgay groups represent a particular social behaviour, but non-white exclusion hardly makes them unusual.
Anecdotally it seems like a lot of African-American men who sleep with men would never identify themselves (or even reveal their activities) as gay. So if you’re not “out” about being that way there’s bound to be a much smaller number (if any) of ex-gays etc.
I’m not African-America but when I was in the closet I didn’t think (for the second I considered it) that gay reparative therapy even APPLIED to me, since I was only having homo thoughts and never had sex of any kind with men or women. I would have never even looked at a program to “cure” my gayness b/c back then it just didn’t seem to work for me (someone who thought he just was confused in general).
In short, if it is true that communities like African Americans are on “the down-low” I’d wager you’re not going to find any ex-gay programs there b/c nobody will acknowledge the need for one.
Just my quick opinion as I sat here procrastinating from working!
Why mostly male? I came to the conclusion years ago that homophobia was basically an extension of sexism. I came to that conclusion by chatting with more than a few homophobes, most of whom were male. If you believe I am joking, I can assure you that I am not. I can detail the reasons behind my conclusions, but, unless someone wants me to, I’ll refrain.
Why not females? Because the anti-gay homophobes are titillated by the thought of having sex with two women having same-sex sex (whether or not they are lesbians). I’m not joking about that, either.
I’m not black either, but I have known a number of black men over the years who like to have sex with men, as has had my partner (this was a long time ago), but who would not admit to being gay. At the risk of being banned, I will relate a story. One of his “buddies” decided to get married. A second of his “buddies” (who knew the first buddy) chortled that the first buddy will be surprised when she doesn’t have the (appropriate equipment). The sad thing is that the homophobia in the black community is well known and, because HIV/AIDS is considered a gay disease, it is killing them.
Why not females?
This reminds me of various things I’ve read before (sorry, they were in books, so no links). Historically, most all anti-gay laws have been directed towards male/male activities–for instance, if you look at the verses in Leviticus, they say that men lying with men is a sin, but don’t mention women. This was also reflected in European laws, which one of the authors (I believe John Boswell in Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe) credited to the misogynist belief that women simply could not have sex without men.
Take this to mean what you will.
Following on what Raj said, it seems like for a lot of guys, whether consciously or unconscouisly, sex is a means of displaying dominance. When no men are involved, guys see no dominance factor. When it’s 2 men tho, they see a man being “submissive.” For a woman to take the “male role” isn’t as threatening, but for a man to “lower” himself to being penetrated is like a betrayal of masculine dominance. Or something.
PS- Dennis Prager’s at it again:
https://www.townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/dp20050913.shtml
Boo,
I read the article. I was actually embarrassed for Prager.
Women are emotional and can’t be trusted to be in charge of schools of higher learning. The role of a “good woman” is to be adored by a man. Yikes!!
But this is very much a part of the anti-gay movement. Women civilize men, etc. etc.
I need not even mention how this plays into the anti-trans rants.
ADORE ME!!!! ADORE ME!!!!
Or else I might take over a university and screw it all up with my emotions… you have been warned.
Prager’s column reminded me of a line from GB Shaw’s introduction to “Heartbreak House” – which I’m taking out of context. He describes someone as “without an idea in his head which his grandmother would have had to apologize for.”
I’ve long thought that that was an eloquent and succinct description of a certain type of individual – of which type Prager is an exemplar.