Exodus’ Randy Thomas recently blogged:
Based also on minimal information, [Robinowitz] is far less an activist than Drescher. Drescher supports fringe activist groups [Randy’s link] and it has been reported by someone on that groups mailing list he has asked this group for help in promoting his APA candidacy.
Isn’t that cute? This coming from a guy who’s boss proclaimed gays are doing the work of Satan two months ago. And Soulforce is being called the fringe group… I honestly want to know, has Soulforce done anything that outrageous? Please post a comment for all to see. As always I expect full source citation. Any claims lacking that will be deleted.
I did a couple of hours of online reasearch to see if I could find anything attributed to Soulforce that could be taken as fringe. It was hard to find anything that could be taken that way, but here’s the two items that I found:
Karen Booth at WESLEYBLOG (Not a statement attributed to a SoulForce leader, but attributed to one of SoulForce’s protesters):
So what exactly qualifies as hate? Last year at General Conference I had several heated, though not nasty, exchanges with Soulforce folk outside on the streets. On one of those occasions, Joseph Cluse was with me……Joseph is the man who has been freed from transgender confusion…..So where did the rejection come from? From the loving, inclusive Soulforce guy. He called Joseph a “freak,” which was quite an interesting statement since the guy on his team across the street was wearing a woman’s muumuu.
It should be noted that further down on the page, a person followed up the “freak” comment and stated:
I attended the Soulforce training in Pittsburgh; it was made abundantly clear that participants could NOT engage the ‘other side’ with words of disrespect or rudeness. Mel White said: If you can’t restrain yourself, you may not participate in the action. So the use of the term “freak” was pointed out to be against Soulforce practice.
Soulforce demonstrators blame
church for violence against gays; By John H. Adams; The Layman Online:
In a demonstration against gay-bashing Sunday, Soulforce protestors did some Presbyterian-bashing – blaming the Presbyterian Church (USA) for beatings and deaths of homosexuals…..”Our denomination has blood on its hands,” shouted Grayson Tucker, soon to become an ex-Presbyterian minister and member of the faculty at Louisville Theological Seminary. Jane Spahr, who bills herself as a lesbian “evangelist,” said violence against gays was learned from the church. She said the church was responsible for a high death rate among gay teen-agers.
Let me make clear that I don’t believe myself that Soulforce is a fringe organization, but I’d thought I’d look online and see what I could find — I do a lot of internet article research as part of my daily routine. What’s said that’s attributed to Soulforce needs to be taken both in and out of context; that’s because those who agree with Soulforce will take the statements in context, and those who don’t agree with Soulforce’s opinions will likely take what is said in the worst posswible way it can be interpreted.
It’s part of Randy’s political agenda to portray any Christians that aren’t just like him as out of the mainstream.
Randy believes he speaks for all “real” Christians and this statement is evidence of that.
Side comment: I’m the person who is quoted on Wesleyblog defending Soulforce re: the alleged ‘freak’ remark. In the same comment, I objected to Karen Booth’s snarky observation that someone in Soulforce was wearing a tutu (the obvious implication was ‘who’s the freak?!’) That set off an all-too-familiar ex-gay defense of “I didn’t say that; you’re misrepresenting me.” I would love for someone here to look closely at Karen Booth and the Transforming Congregations ex-gay ‘ministry’. It’s one of the groups that has a direct impact on a large mainline denomination – the United Methodist Church.
oooops… I meant ‘muumuu’ not ‘tutu’ 😉
Rick,
Muumuu, tutu, at this point is the distinction really important?
On the subject of fashion, am I the only one who read “the guy on his team across the street was wearing a woman’s muumuu” and thought “Is there any such thing as a man’s muumuu?”
As far as the “fringe activist group” comment goes, that strikes me as a little out of character for Randy. I bet if you left a respectful comment on his blog, he’d back off that stance a little. (In my experience, Randy is very conscientious about responding to comments.)
Personally, I don’t know how you could call Mel White a “fringe activist.” He was Billy Graham’s ghostwriter for heaven’s sake!
If Mel is fringe, what does that make Peterson Toscano? The marabou on Liza Minelli’s Manolo Blahniks that’s what.
May I mention, that missionaries to Polynesia, alarmed at what they considered indecent exposure…bare legs and arms…etc. THEY constructed the blousy all covering garments, the natives called muumuu, for their flock to wear.
Banned the sensual looking hula, and pretty much relegated the indigenous population to serving Christians (not Christianity) so to speak.
It figures that European and American missionaries would take stifling, 16th century to Victorian era dress and make everyone wear it in humid, tropical heat.
And they just outright executed homosexual people in those islands and forced a once accepting culture, to not accept them anymore and on threat of suffering the same fate.
Anyone who has seen the different forms of hula and it’s language…
would have to wonder at why in the world anyone would want to ban such a beautiful form of expression, or wear an ugly assed muumuu?
There’s a big difference between serving God, and serving Christians.
They want heteros to have everything at the expense of gay people, while that isn’t true for gay people.
In this instance, the majority conservative heteros…or Christians want to be served.
And God has nothing to do with it.
Randy’s blog and ‘Artwork’ is so gay. It is easy to see why the ex-gay movement is so unconvincing.
Which is a shame… because there is something true behind all that lameness.
I don’t find Thomas’s blog “gay.” With all due respect, I’m not quite sure what that means.
Thomas’s blog is intentionally ignorant (or forgetful) of some basic facts about other people. And sadly, it is quick to stereotype anyone who questions Thomas’s sins.
Thomas is an insecure man. Victimhood provides him with refuge from his own insecurity, his moral relativism, his political correctness, and his intolerance. Victimologies are common among culture warriors of all sorts. And victimhood has a way of smothering charity, promoting self-centeredness, and gnawing at the integrity of one’s soul. I think it’s sad that neither the progressive movement nor the religious right see how unflattering self-pity can be.
I don’t blame people for doubting my assessment of Thomas. And I invite skeptics to correspond with Thomas directly. Like many culture warriors, Thomas can be very friendly — when he’s not playing the blame game.
Regan said “uggly assed muumuu”Hahaha — too true. For various reasons (actually, due to a sister AND maori heritage from one of us)… the pre-Euro dress of polynesia is a bit of an interest.The muumuu was only introduced into Hawa’ii (and, fortunately, never really took off elsewhere; except for one fat, Greek, male singer!). A yoke was later added, to try and reduce that “ugly assed” look. Largely, a complete failure.Elsewhere in Polynesia and Melanesia the most popular style is called a Mother Hubbard. It’s a bit more flattering, but still leaves LOTS of room for expansion (and as Polynesians are inclined to a “beefy” build — many do indeed manage to fill that real estate). They are very easy to whip up on a treadle machine that has only straight stiching. Eye-wateringly “vibrant colour” is de rigueur …Pre-Euro, the most common dress was a topless sarong-like affair made from beaten palm fronds. These fabrics feel a bit like linen. The Hollywood “grass skirt” (down to the knees etc) was not really everyday wear; apart from being really annoying to get about in, it is a real menace when tending a kitchen fire… A short “grass” hoop was more part of ceremonial costume, if anything. The kids, of course, just ran around in the nuddy.Now for the most interesting thing…There is a long, and still strong, cultural acceptance of gender non-conforming males in Polynesia. Going under various names, “we” tend to use fa’afafine. If you ever visit the South Pacific (the place, not the musical) and take in a show… those lovely lasses probably aren’t. Should you be sent to hospital, or send your kids to primary school — the gentle nurse and the much respected school missy is very often fa’afafine. Here’s a brief article.Now my point, and I do have one… the missionary people thought bare breasts were bad enough. But the idea of fa’afafine outraged them. They banned them. The only problem — for them — was that the introduction of a dress that covered ALL the body actually enabled fa’afafine to be better disguised. The inter-gender traditions in fact could survive as a direct result of the clothing that the missions introduced! Ha HA! The final laugh was on those 19th Century prudes.I think that’s enough GLBTetc history for today.
Thanks for the illumination Grantdale!
If you called Randy a self loathing mattachine type queen, I think you would accurately describe him. The blog is like something transported from the 1950’s, pre-liberation. Very sad. And very annoying.
Mike, you are correct in that Randy is a very friendly and approachable guy. I e-mail him from time to time and we’ve had very spirited conversations.
We’ve also had very good non-gay conversations which I have enjoyed quite a bit.
I know he reads here and was offended by an opinion I posted about his intentions and I’m sorry he feels badly but I honestly can’t take it back.
Regardless of how I feel about what he does for a living, he’s still a pretty nice guy.
Mike, you are correct in that Randy is a very friendly and approachable guy. I e-mail him from time to time and we’ve had very spirited conversations.
We’ve also had very good non-gay conversations which I have enjoyed quite a bit.
I know he reads here and was offended by an opinion I posted about his intentions and I’m sorry he feels badly but I honestly can’t take it back.
Regardless of how I feel about what he does for a living, he’s still a pretty nice guy.
I can’t vouch personally for your opinion because I’ve not had the same level of communication with him (Thomas). However I suspect the concept of separating the ideology from the individual will be lost on some. I have no doubt that more would be accomplished if there were fewer insults and more “spirited conversations”.
David
David, I agree that more would be accomplished with fewer insults all around.
Thomas knows where to go (among other places) for dialogue and spirited-but-respectful two-way discussion.
Okay, a pattern is emerging from some ex gays. ESPECIALLY ex gay men.
Impudent straight women: I get dismissed.
Gay guys, especially cute ones: hey bro, how are you?
I think I picked up on the insecurity angle too.
Working so excruciatingly HARD at convincing the public that you’re no longer gay is the stuff of insecure people.
Especially to the extent you abuse gay people is a dead giveaway.
Giving credence to the belief that some gay bashers have issues with their own sexuality.
Therefore, if you’re completely changed and wholly convinced that you are, you wouldn’t have to engage in broadcast, print, or online gay bashing.
And someone like me would finally conclude, they don’t really believe it so deeply that they’ve changed either.
Mike Airhart:I don’t find Thomas’s blog “gay.” With all due respect, I’m not quite sure what that means.
I guess I (over)reacted to the graphical elements of his blog – his artwork, blog template and very gay “bright-eyed” photo. I’m using the South Park definition of “gay” – meaning slightly pathetic in a rainbow flag sort of way.
As somebody who no longer believes “gay” is an option I should be defending Randy Thomas but, like a lot of the ex-ex-gays here, I suspect Randy really hopes to meet/marry Mr Right.
Well 1630r, if Randy decides to meet Mr. Right we should fully support him in that.
He seems pretty happy the way he’s running things right now and we should support him in that as well.
What we shouldn’t support his Randy (or anyone else) telling the rest of us we need to follow his path.
Scott, whether you support Randy or not his (stated) path is the right one. The gay path only leads to a hell shaped room.
In the meantime we are happy doing what we want to do…
Speaking as one who doesn’t particularly subscribe to your version of spirituality, I can easily reject your threats of hell.
Simply, prove the gay path leads to a hell shaped room.
If you can provide me with a gay person who’s actually gone to hell for being gay I’d entertain your ideas.
You need a score card to keep track of the players in here!
David