In 2005, the parents of a teen-aged blogger named Zach forced him to attend more than a month of live-in exgay conditioning at Memphis, Tenn.-based Love In Action. Zach’s father also announced the family’s identity and made an antigay political cause of Zach’s trauma on Pat Robertson’s program, “The 700 Club.”
Today, Good As You may have uncovered a similar incident that began less than a month ago: Dec. 19. In this case, the program appears not to be live-in. One can still hope the family will allow the youth to figure out — with unbiased, professional guidance if desired — what his orientation is, and how best to honor his values while respecting his family.
Good As You has thoughtfully concealed the identity of the family.
I said it during the public debate over Zach, and I’ll say it again: Youths, be careful about what you post online. And consider not posting anything. Find responsible, informed people in the real world whom you can talk to — and trust.
Well all we know right now is that the young man said his parents have hooked him up with a couselor, so let’s be careful about making more of this than it is. I have been in touch with him, and he said he will write something for me to post tomorrow, in which he will tell more about his situation.
Thanks, Jeremy, I’ve gone back and tweaked a few words the headline and text.
Cool; I’ve also added an update to my post. Just want to wait and hear what he has to say before turning this into something it’s (possibly) not.
Jeremy,I’ll add thanks for raising this, and for holding onto the identity. I’ll be interested to watch where it all goes. If it’s a ray of hope for the young guy… even Wayne Besen’s parents “offered” him some exgay material before they came to acceptance. And we all know how well that worked out.(PS — may I make a gratuitous suggestion? Enjoy the G.A.Y. postings but please, please, please convert the image thumbnails down your left side to real thumbnails. It’s a doozy of bandwidth hog to download a page. Takes forever, even with broadband.)
It says in the post that the kid is 19, so this isn’t quite exactly like the situation with Zach, who was (and still is) 16, and had just about no legal rights as far as being sent by his parents to Love In Action. That’s not to dismiss this 19 year old’s situation, it could still be very dire for him, just that, unless I’m deeply mistaken here (or the teen in question isn’t living in the United States), he can legally refuse whatever treatment they want him to go into. Zach (and other teens who have been taken into Love In Action) had no choice at all. At least not as far as the law was concerned.
I hope this kid knows that there are people out here wishing the best for him now. He has a right to live his life on his own terms, in his own way, as the person he is. It is obscene that any of these ex-gay operations or councilors would even consider taking in someone who doesn’t whole heartedly want to be in there, let alone someone who is comfortable with who they are. But of course, if they really believed in freedom of choice, groups like Exodus wouldn’t be advocating against gay civil rights issues would they? That pretty much says it all regarding where they stand on the issue of choice.
Please keep us posted. It’s heart-wrenching watching these little points of light out there call out for help, and then suddenly grow silent. Some days I just want to walk away from my computer and never look at it again.
I have a slightly different take on the post. I have no idea who this 19 year old is or where he lives, but 19 is significantly different than Zach’s 16.
At 19, he is an adult. According to the second blog entry, he asks what can he do? He can leave his parents. Or he can listen to the looney counselor and ignore him. Heck, I did the latter when I was 17. And that was in 1967. Let the counselor blather on, and just ignore him. A person who is 19 should be confident in his own personality and positions to just go into the “ignore” mode.
Actually, the 19 year old can do both. They are not mutually exclusive.
Regarding Zach, one might seriously wonder what the father wanted to accomplish by going on Diamond “Pat” Robertson’s program. I hate to beat on the horse again, but I wonder if he thought that he would get “contributions” from Diamond Pat’s nutty followers. I’ll merely cite an analogy. Remember John Walsh, of America’s Most Wanted fame? He turned his son’s death into a multi-year mini-industry. Maybe Zach’s father was hoping to turn his son’s “problem” into something similar.
One last point regarding Mike’s last paragraph: they should use chat rooms, and don’t log the chat. They aren’t going to meet many–if any–of the people who access their blogs. And, on at least some programs, it is possible to encrypt and/or password protect files that they create. ZIPed files come to mind.
Raj said:
Remember John Walsh, of America’s Most Wanted fame? He turned his son’s death into a multi-year mini-industry.
That was an incredibly cheap shot, Raj.
David
DL Foster reminds me of Percy Greene.
Percy Greene was the black founder, editor and chief of the Mississippi newspaper the Jackson Advocate.
So as not to offend his white subscribers and advertising bidders, he wrote often of the merits of segregation.
He supported segregation and wrote a seven point plan on how segregation would benefit blacks, that is as long as all facilities and accomodations were equally funded and maintained.
That of course, would never happen.
But Greene maintained this opinion in his editorials throughout his career.
Clearly, he benefitted from agreeing with the white power structure segregationists fought to maintain.
And during the rage resulting from the Brown vs. Brd of Education decision, segregationists worked to find studies and statistics that would illuminate black sexual mores and standards.
They used the higher illegitimate birth rates, and lower marriage rates among blacks (which could be tabulated)and layered them with opinions that this was evidence of “high sexual indulgence, larger sphere of permissive sexual relations and high rate of illegitimacy.”
This quote from James Jackson Kilpatrick.
The grounds for segregation and discrimination shifted from color to moral character.
This also was used to deny marriage for blacks if they had children out of wedlock or had lived in common law relationships.
These were state Constitutional AMENDMENTS voted in during the 50’s and early 60’s.
These bans and marriage controls on blacks gained popularity and were bounced around or rejected very similarly to the way gay marriage is now.
I reference Franz Fanon who wrote that througout history, immorality and sinfulness in general, in the white mind, came to be associated with black men.
This general association is attributed also to homosexuals.
So yes, it is fair to discuss civil rights laws and moral reforms in context to discrimination against people belonging to certain GROUPS, not as individuals.
Homosexuals NOW are being treated exactly the same as blacks THEN.
They are not the same kind of people (unless you are a black gay man), but the issue is about setting up unfair laws against a GROUP of people who historically had no power to determine their own lives.
This is about removing the fiction of one human’s primacy and supremacy over another.
And so is the Constitution.
Percy Greene and DL Foster, two of a kind.
I will say no more about Foster. I promise.
I am curious: Does anyone know if there has ever been any legal action against ex-gay ministries for psychological harm done against gay ‘patients’ (for lack of a better term)?
I’ve been in and out of the movement here in Canada, and while processing some anger around my involvement recently, I thought, “Someone should sue these people for all the damage they are doing!” And then I realized that I’ve never heard of a single case.
Hi Mike,
As a matter of fact, I brought such a question to the Williams Project, here in Los Angeles.
The WP is a think tank at UCLA Law School that reviews laws concerning gays and lesbians.
Brad Sears, one of their directors, and Gloria Allred, a prominent attorney here had me write out the precedent.
I presented it as a malpractice class action.
Any sort of doctor or psychologist or psychiatrist has to base their diagnosis on actual clinical problems (and these are suffered by straight people as well as gay people).
Homosexuality, as a clinical illness or disorder is no longer so and for good reason.
It bears no resemblance to DISORDERS and emotional problems. This analysis is based on function with and integration into the mainstream.
As well as success and productivity within and among the normal.
Homosexuality isn’t affected by organic factors such as hormones or drugs-and has no genetic anomolies or aberrance.
And among scientific circles, this is called normal.
The function of faith is not mandatory. Especially where public law and accountability are concerned. No citizen is compelled to comply with a faith based process for disorders or emotional problems.
For example: no serious cleric would tell a person with schizophrenia to pray for a cure of or in answer to discipline their illness. And no cleric SHOULD do such a thing.
And by the same token, no cleric should insist there IS a problem where there is none either.
No cleric, or psychologist or counselor.
And no laws should suspend equal justice and access in the law, based on the perception there is one.
For example: if a person with diagnosed bipolar disorder is assaulted, there is no law enforcement or justice suspended for that person. And their pain at the hands of another isn’t questioned as justified because of their disorder.
And people with bi polar disorder are not banned from marrying or bearing children.
And of all the those disorders listed in the DSM, all are considered IMMUTABLE.
Whereas homosexuality, by the same community that insists it’s a disorder, also considers it a choice, changable and curable.
But curable virtually exclusively by prayer and extraordinary religious discipline and social and political coercion.
I wanted to establish a lawsuit against these religious standards for the civil and political treatment of gay people.
Particularly where public civil law is concerned, where interventions by clerics and religious psychologists are concerned.
Their applications, when it comes to the lives especially of young homosexuals-is ultimately unfair, contradictory, hypocritical and places and undue and unfair burden on the gay person and distracts their emotional condition from their social condition.
Ex gay ministry and therapy relies on the individual’s insecurity, not outside hostility, ignorance and threat to further their intervention.
This precedent in the law is still being examined. And the experience of young Zach in Tennessee is another example of an unwilling, yet healthy young gay person, forced into an intervention by his ignorant and ill informed parents.
Were he taken to a medical doctor, who frightened his folks with a false diagnosis that mostly played on conjectural fears (he’ll die of AIDS if he’s not cured of homosexuality.), that doctor would be stricken from practice.
And no doctor would be allowed to practice who ignored current information, diagnostic and prognostic standards, in favor of those abandoned several decades ago, now would he?
So, this is why we do have to have lawsuits to compel ex gay ministries (who have no proof of their efficacy and results) to stop their exclusive practices against gay people.
Let me clarify a grammatical error. I meant to say that, ex gay ministry and therapy ALSO relies on outside hostility, ignorance and threat to further their intervention, while at the same time deny these exist, or they are jusitified because of the individual’s homosexual condition.
Instead of altering society’s understanding of homosexuality (indeed, continued ignorance furthers their ministry), ex gay ministries insist that the homosexual MUST conform in compliance WITH social hostility.
Just because they’ve gotten away with it for decades, doesn’t mean they should.
In my experience, for alot of teenagers, or kids even as old as 20 or so, there’s really not much change fro them once they turn 18and are considered legally on thier own. Alot of kids stil have so much coersion and sway from their family-And alot of families use this as leverage—You go to counseling/Love IN Action/similar, or we’re done with you-This means…we’ll take your car, not pay for your school, disown you. Over the past 6 months or so I’ve been contacted by 3 or 4 people who’ve had loved ones at Love IN Action or similar, and there’s been a few kids age 19 or so who’re still coerced to go. I just wanted to point out the fragility that still exists with these kids and their families regardless or their age. Yes, it’s different than, say-Zach’s situation, however, I don’t think it’s much different. Just wanted to put emphasis on that. It’s hurts me to know that I have many friends who’re out and comfortable to me, and my group of friends…however refuse to come out to their Southern Baptist familes because the reactions are already a given, and they’d rather forge some sort of relationship, and lead their already mis-lead parents along to avoid the pain’s of the truth. I’m not one of these people, but in having long talks with these individuals, of course, it makes sense….Even though I am strong on telling the truth and how much it’ll set us all free…for some…unless you’re there, now, with that family…it’s just so hard to understand otherwise.
QAC-Morgan,
Your heartfelt post is much appreciated. I’m one of those who understands that wall that is built between gay kids and their family and community.
A wall, not of their making. The wall is built on threat, lies, fear and angst.
Heteros set up gay people to lie, than resent it when gay kids MUST lie, to literally save their own lives.
You’re right, lies and deceit is a fearsome, heavy, heavy burden.
Heterosexual conceit forges that thick wall and becomes destructive to EVERYONE’S peace eventually.
That wall is a false security for heterosexual parents.
I have many teen and young adult friends. Sometimes I was the only one they found who would listen without judgement.
Listen without telling them their duty was to change. Understand the prejudice they faced and try to build bridges at every chance.
I’ll be frank.
I lost patience long ago with pastors and educators hanging on to long abandoned information and holy writings, that rather than help them deal with prejudice, give them cause to validate it.
And this tenacity is literally held on for gay people alone.
Queer Action is to be admired for it’s outreach.
Bless you and best of luck rockin’ the boat!
QAC-Morgan at January 18, 2006 05:21 PM
“It’s hurts me to know that I have many friends who’re out and comfortable to me, and my group of friends…”
Regan DuCasse at January 18, 2006 07:24 PM
“Sometimes I was the only one they found who would listen without judgement.”
If anyone here is thinking “I’m not important… I’ve never done anything that changed the world”, you might want to consider Morgan’s and Regan’s comments. Who knows what the people would have done if no one was around to listen and to care. They may have become depressed and done damage to themselves or others.
Sometimes just being an ear can change the course of history.
Timothy, I think I actually felt the hug in your post.
(((((TIM))))
backatcha!