I’ve recently subscribed to Duncan Bouwer’s ExGayTalk podcast. Duncan is an ex-gay, music teacher, father and husband in Johannesburg, South Africa. His most recent podcast titled “Yes I am in Denial” is of particular merit. He has a sense of humor that really shines, nor does he make outrageous claims like “complete change is completely possible.” Rather he admits to a continuing struggle and approaches his change from a biblical instead of pseudo-psychological perspective. Duncan notes his humor may raise the ire of ex-ex-gay folk like me. If all exgays had a sense of humor like Duncan my job would be much more enjoyable. His podcasts are filled with personal experience and simply quoted scripture. Even though many of us disagree with him, Duncan is pleasant, straightforward and honest; overall a refreshing change from the bombastic rhetoric I’m used to dealing with.
D
I wanted so much to believe you were about to send me to an ex-gay website that I might disagree with but not be utterly offended by either. That didn’t happen. His podcast may have been nice and not the norm, but his website is the same old same old.
homosexuality is accompanied by drugs and alcohol..
He feels he is gay do to a broken relationship with his father.
quote: After all, what we look for as gay men, is affirmation from another man. We think that if we are “loved” by another man, we are fulfilled.
It is the same old stuff with nice packaging.
I agree with you entirely – the ex-gay groups should change their approach to spreading the ex-gay message. But if they were all as pleasant, straightforward and honest as Duncan Bouwer, wouldn’t the ex-gay message seem even more hateful to those who have rejected it?
I accepted the ex-gay message (before I had even set foot in a church) but the “domineering” style of the evangelical and ex-gay ministries stops me from getting involved with them. I wish there were more Duncan Bowers too – but for a different reason.
Agreed, he presents a pleasant and approachable face to the ideology.
I still can’t find any common ground of understanding with people who believe that their actions are affected by demoniac influences until and unless they accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. I’m referring specifically to the passage where he describes his dream about ‘Mephibosheth’. This is just a few notches away from DL Foster’s television theophany on my personal weird-s**t-ometer.
I also notice how many of these men report
a) having had broken relationships with their fathers,
b) feeling inferior to straight men,
c) having had incredibly tortured relationships with other gay men, and
d) having problems with drugs and alcohol.
Now, I occasionally think that part of my smug satisfaction with my own gay life is due to the wonderful man I married, but he has informed me that one of the reasons why he _did_ marry me was that I seemed to be perfectly happy with my life before we got together, and wasn’t waiting for my ‘missing piece’. I also had a good relationship with my father, and the idea of feeling inferior to straight men because I’m gay strikes me as intensely bizarre. So presumably I’m not Mr. Bouwer’s target audience.
Joe you’re right, I didn’t have a chance to look at the rest of his site. If you want to spend some time examining it we could certainly do a post on it.
Dan, the “Wife” page is prob. the most interesting — the rest is too predictable.The points 6, 7 and 9 and 10 are clearly indicating ex-gay (as Bouwer uses it) does not mean heterosexual, let alone no longer same-sex attracted.I don’t know how many would be comfortable with a statement:
‘Nice’ to see she blames herself… appreciate the honesty, but what an icky Q&A
This statement from his Beliefs page does indicate a fundamental difference from other exgays I think:
I believe that same-sex attractions are not chosen, but acting out of same-sex behaviour is a choice which is not inevitable. [emphasis mine]
Now I think he might argue that “being gay” is not the same has “having same-sex attractions” but still this is an important difference, and I believe it makes his view a bit more honest. If my contention were that homosexual relationships (sexual) were a sin, then I would have to agree with what I heard in that particular podcast. In fact, with that caveat, I find it spot on with basic Christian teaching.
I have read virtually none of his site so please don’t hold me to anything beyond this scope.
David
The most important thing to read is the “tools” page, it is a sort of FAQ. That were I believe he sounds just like the rest of em.
He does say some more honest things and should be given credit for his honesty. I agree to that.
Wow folks, Thanks for your positive comments. Clearly you guys are thinkers and not jsut blindly dissing exgays out of hand.
Just a comment. The nature-nurture debate doesn’t really change anything… hey wait, I am not going to give it away. Check back to my podcast in a couple of days to see what I say about the whole issue of my dad and genes (yes, I am peddling genes too…!).
One last comment… I just love it… When I coverted my ex-lover of 7 years accused me of not having been gay enough (as doesn one of your coments here) and “that’s why I could change”. Now I am accused of not being straight enough. Somebody even commented on my podcast that “your voice is so gay!” It really is hilarious… Bless you guys. If you are happy gay, then I wouldn’t want to change you. It’s just not my job. But if you have some vestige of doubt, come and see me for a consultaion… 😎
dunx
Hi David — I think you’ll find that “attractions are NOT chosen” is actually very common. It’s bog standard Exodus.Here’s a longish opinion piece from a long time leader within Exodus off their site. You’ll note the wording is very much around the unchosen nature of attractions ie “they just are” and “attraction is not a sin” etc.If you read carefully, you’ll also notice the core dishonesty inherent in the contradictory way that Exodus present matters:starts with talk about attractions (note: not behaviour, but attractions)states these attractions are what must and can changeafter a lot of extensive verbage, give a few short concluding paragraphs that state that actually attractions do NOT change — “your goal is to no longer translate your feelings of attraction into sexual or romantic desire”. ie mere repressionThe falsehood of the public statements from Exodus — homosexuals (attractions) can change — and the reality that they are in fact only able, at best, to offer a hope of lifelong celibacy is where Exodus is a fraud of an organisation. You won’t find that on a bill board, or hear Chambers say that in a media sound bite.People are free, durh, to restrain themselves to only heterosexual outlets, or to celibacy, if that floats their boat. Frankly, fine by me. It’s the demand/pressure/coercion that everyone else do likewise, and a public lie that one can change to heterosexuality is one choses to, that makes them and their deliberately obscured message a menace.
Duncan, welcome and feel free to comment on the above post.One direct question: can all homosexual men and women become heterosexual men and women if they chose to?
I’ve find this interesting essay about genetic origins of homosexuality and thought that someone may be interested, https://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/em_homosexuality.html
grantdale said:
I think you’ll find that “attractions are NOT chosen” is actually very common. It’s bog standard Exodus.
I certainly hadn’t gotten this impression from the various exgay sources I’ve read, but perhaps it’s mostly the fundamentalist sector that still clings to that idea. That has always been a first step with me toward determining the reasonableness of someone in such a debate. If they start by telling me that I chose to be gay, I really can’t continue.
I agree that the article you mentioned to is conflicted. It reads like a wordy version of “snap a rubber band on your wrist each time you feel sexually attracted to a cute guy”. On the other hand, going back to Duncan, as a Christian I am definitely called to “die to sin” and to some that might be interpreted as repression. If I considered homosexual sex a sin, then I might do just as Duncan says in his podcast. There is a note of intellectual honesty there that I can appreciate.
I’m curious, if a heterosexual were to practice this aversion/repression technique with members of the opposite sex, would they achieve some measure of success? Not necessarily to become homosexual, but to become less sexual in general. Has there ever been a study?
And yes Duncan, please feel free to post here any time. We strive to be civil to one another and truthful about the issues. FWIW, I don’t think you sound gay (whatever that really may be), you sound British 😉
David
DavidIf I considered homosexual sex a sin, then I might do just…I’d have the same view of pork if I was Jewish. Beef if I was Hindu etc etc.Big diff. is — no one Jewish is asking that Jews stop eating completely. Ditto heterosexuals, esp. when a sneaky use of “No to sex outside marriage” is really code word for “No sex ever” for gay men or lesbians.And you Americans and your tin ears…sheesh 🙂 Duncan DOES NOT sound “British”. That’s a South African speaking English. I’d hate to ask to you tell a New Zealander and an Australian apart.True story: (but not to be taken as indicative of all Americans) a train carriage outside London. An American, a Scot, several English, a South African (Africaaner to make this even worse!) a New Zealander and me… all but one rapidly knew where each was from, just from a brief hello and nice weather type of thing. The American insisted we all sounded the same — for several hours.Urgh, that wasn’t you was it David???
I’ve just thought: all Americans think all British “sound gay” in any case.Well, it’s called the Queen’s English for a reason… perhaps.
The American insisted we all sounded the same — for several hours.
I’d have to wonder if the American had ever traveled much in their own country. Or maybe that one particular one just had a tin ear for speech. We don’t all sound the same here either.
If you are happy gay, then I wouldn’t want to change you. It’s just not my job.
That’s really swell of you guy…but some of the folks you link to on your site sure don’t seem to have that same live and let live attitude. Focus on the Family for one. PFOX for another.
Be nice if we could all just get along, wouldn’t it?
Posted by: grantdale at January 26, 2006 03:23 AM
Geesh grandale, lighten up on a poor, overworked American who doesn’t get out much 😉 Some days I feel as though the ozone hole is fixed firmly above my head and I can’t express a cogent thought! Seriously, I just meant that from his podcast I heard nothing out of line with my own understanding of Christianity, with the exception of the sin status of homosexuality.
Now, perhaps you mean that since one who is gay has no outlet for sexuality aside from the same sex, and that if following through with the idea that this is a sin this leaves no outlet, then I understand what you might mean. This does seem especially cruel. I have, in fact, had fundamentalists use that very argument to bolster their opinion that God will change one’s sexual orientation because leaving them only celibacy is not right.
However, my understanding of scripture still tracks more with what Duncan had to say (again, I have not had time to read almost any of his site) in his podcast. As a Christian, I must trust God above all else, and believe through faith that doing so will bring the most true happiness to my life. If I did believe that homosexual sex was a sin, how could I then not deny it (as in resist it)?
I didn’t mean for this to become a Bible study, but I don’t want to be misunderstood. The bottom line is that I thought there was an absence of hypocrisy in Duncan’s podcast and he seemed fairly true to himself and his faith. This is very much different to what I am used to from the exgay crowd, who casually ignore the strong admonitions against divorce for instance but clamp down hard on gays.
As for the accent, I can usually tell an Australian accent but I have trouble with South Africa. I suppose you might have some trouble distinguishing a few accents around here 🙂
PS: Sorry If I am not making my thoughts clear lately. I’m working on a rush project with a built-in penalty if I am late. I’ve been getting way too little sleep 🙁 I should be better next week.
David
Bruce said:
Be nice if we could all just get along, wouldn’t it?
I agree, let’s start with going easy on the new guy 😉 Maybe he truly doesn’t realize the kind of damage some of those organizations are responsible for. He should if he is going to link to them, but why not give him the benefit of the doubt, at least for a post or two. He might learn a lot here and find the hypocrisies in those same organizations he now “supports”.
So Duncan, what about it?
David
I just wonder if he is more bisexual on the continuum of sexual orientations. He says he enjoys sex with his wife. Ex-gay stuff might just “work” best with bisexuals who are strongly motivated (because of religion, or internalized homophobia, or some other reason) to give up gay behavior.
It says nothing about the truth of Christianity, or the overall claims of ex-gay ministries, and certainly nothing about those on the more homosexual side of the continuum.
Hi Mr. Bouwer,
Most often in my posts, because of the strong political influence of ex gay groups, I try to link historical context with regard to civil rights and the struggles of the same groups over and over again for social parity.
The politics of segregation is ongoing, gays and lesbians now the preferred target group.
This is not a good thing. And never has been.
Many times I have seen the propaganda films produced by Nazis that promoted changing gays and lesbians and their obligation to leave homosexuality to have ‘master race’ children.
The films are of high quality and sound common sense and benevolent and caring. That the Nazi agenda was to help homosexuals and bring them into the fold.
At least this was how it was in the beginning. But it was a way to bring gay people out, and ultimately they were murdered.
I know PHYSICAL murder isn’t the plan of the ex gay movement.
But the murder of gay identity still results in one less homosexual to represent themselves as such. To fully realize that identity and the part that would play in expressing themselves to their society.
They would be dead as a gay person.
And this is a tragedy Mr. Bouwer. There aren’t that many gay people in the world to begin with.
The ex gays promotional material is chillingly the same at that of pre-Final Solution Nazis, the agenda is the same and the underlying motive (although being heterosexual is only desirable because society accepts it. But it’s no more easier to be hetero in relationships or less risk of struggle with substance abuse either.)
The objective, to destroy the homosexual IDENTITY as well as activity- requires much, much more than inconveniencing having sex.
And the spectre of threat, on EVERY level, does not make the ex gay motive allowable by forces of good.
The religious basis, gives the unalterable judgement that being homosexual corrupts everything of merit a gay person could do.
The burden and responsibility to be heterosexual
is a more unfair burden, then heterosexuals learning to live with the reality that not everyone should be heterosexual and obviously was never meant to.
And this small percentage of humanity is not a threat on any level. Not to the numbers of heterosexuals, nor what pursuits a heterosexuals wants freely.
We could be a highly functioning and cooperative society anywhere, without the sacrifice of gay people and what happiness with each other they seek.
And the list the ex gay ministries have of why people become or are homosexual, is a set list.
Set FIFTY years ago, and no longer applies.
Every variable is rationalized into that small set of standards.
And disregards that heterosexuals have the same struggles, but can’t blame them on their orientation.
And disregards that many homosexuals don’t line up with those standards either.
And refuses to believe the current evidence on the normalcy of homosexuality and that homosexuality has no resemblence whatsoever to addictions or illness or disorder.
My own opinion is this: the ex gay movement isn’t new. It’s many, many decades old and it’s unnecessary.
Extremely unnecessary and hurtful because of the burden and expectations it places on young gay people.
If ex gays worked as fervently to allow for the general acceptance of homosexuality. Equal access and full integration in the mainstream and traditional institutions, such as marriage-then and ONLY then will I believe that ex gays truly believe in choosing to be heterosexual as one arrived at freely and without undue and extraordinary influence.
The world is still already very ignorant and fearful about gay people Duncan (unnecessarily), and will never know better if gay people are constantly under siege to be anything but themselves.
Having now listened carefully to ALL of those mp3 files of Duncan’s…No. I won’t be going “easy”. The religious stuff — well, who cares unless you do. It’ll either accord your views, or it won’t. Thankfully it’s no longer compulsory.But the rest… stright down the pipe Exodus swill. And not at all humourous (or maybe this database I’m coding is just putting me in a bad mood). I’ll stand corrected on any transcription errors:
And Brokeback Mountain (in an unsympathetic admonishment of any exgay that goes see the film — which I presume means Duncan himself has not seen it):
OK. We’re all entitled to our opinions. He’s welcome to them. But given the above is presented as universal Truth I won’t be pretending Duncan Brouwer is some sort of breakthrough product for exgays. It’s like walking into McDonalds in Jo’burg and discovering it’s all exactly the same as is dished up in Orlando Florida. Big fat surpriz.—-For Puddy Katz: I hope this answers your question 🙂
So yes. Bi. Another exgay that is bisexual in orientation, behaved appalingly when gay (and blames this on homosexuality, instead of poor choices), has stated that he is now repressing one side of his sexuality… etc etc etc.Same old, same old; alas.
Is Duncan saying that he was with another man when he “converted” (I usually don’t hear ex-gays use that word), or was this ex-lover of seven years already out of the relationship? If they were still in a relationship I can see why he made the “not gay enough” comment. Clearly he was surprised and hurt. And maybe he felt Duncan was bi.
I think a lot of people have bi tendencies, and when they have an unhappy experience with the gay side of themselves, they immediately run over to the heterosexual side, repressing and shoving down any gay part of themselves. They think that their attraction to the opposite sex means they are “converted”. What it probably means is they are just repressing a huge part of themselves and this homosexual aspect is going to build and build and ultimately wreck their “happy” straight relationship.
grandale said:
So yes. Bi. Another exgay that is bisexual in orientation, behaved appalingly when gay (and blames this on homosexuality, instead of poor choices), has stated that he is now repressing one side of his sexuality… etc etc etc.
Based on what you have discovered, I would have to agree. I wasn’t trying to claim he was anything revolutionary, just more consistent and honest about his beliefs than some I have heard. You really got your teeth into that one didn’t you 😉
I’ve always wondered, as many here seem to, if the mildly successful “exgay” cases were not bi in the first place. I guess I base that partly on my own experience. There is simply no way I could come close to becoming intimate with a woman. I don’t hate women by any means, but it seems quite unnatural to me to share that level of intimacy with, or certainly to have sexual feelings for, someone of the opposite sex. Not that I didn’t try a few times in my early 20’s – with utterly disastrous results. It’s one of the reasons I empathize with the candid responses of my straight male acquaintances when confronted with the idea of male to male sex. I just imagine the same with a woman and… eeeeew!
To my knowledge there is still no legitimate study displaying a consistant pathology leading to one becoming homosexual. So, this weak father, strong mother, or distant second cousin business is just rubbish. The same things seem to happen to gays growing up as happen to everyone else, and some turn out gay some don’t. If such a contrary study exists, I would be glad to look at it.
James: I think “converted” is used more in Europe to mean a change from the religion one was “brought up” with to that of one’s own conviction and choice. It could also just be a SA way of saying he washed the gay out, I don’t really know. After getting whacked about my lack of accent perception, I should leave this to the experts 🙂
Perhaps we can end this by saying at least Duncan didn’t seem to want to convert anyone here? Back to work.
David
“And you Americans and your tin ears…sheesh 🙂 Duncan DOES NOT sound “British”. That’s a South African speaking English. I’d hate to ask to you tell a New Zealander and an Australian apart.”
Hey, it’s not our fault we’re the only members of the former British Empire to speak English without an accent. 😉
Duncan Bouwer’s website is filled withclichéd anti-gay and ex-gay misconceptions. He also has links to the dominionist websites.
I can’t get over all these people on exgay watch acknowledging the existence of bisexuals. David, James, Puddy katz, Grantdale – finally as a bisexual I feel validated after hearing both gays and straights loudly and arrogantly tell me I don’t exist.
I also believe many, maybe all “exgays” who live outwardly heterosexual lives are bisexual. I base this on my own experience, I’ve tried to repress both same and opposite sex attractions at some points in my life. Unlike David or the straight men he knows I’m perplexed by anyone going “ewww” over either gender. Circumstance is responsible for the gender of my partners as much as any gender specific desire on my part. I feel fortunate to be free from religion and any ingrained anti-gay bigotry that goes with it, if I weren’t I might be suffering from the same life crippling belief that a “loving” god tortures people for an eternity for being in a loving supportive monogamous same sex relationship. I’m fortunate that as a loner religion hasn’t restricted me to either gender or I may have not found my current wonderful partner.
I also wonder about just how hypocritical ex-gay shops Pfox and the like are. They demand equal time for their anti-gay exgay message, but do they equally allow clients to choose to repress opposite sex attractions as well as same sex attractions? If I went to them as a pre-op male to female transexual and said my attractions to women are interfering with my relationship with my boyfriend would they help me repress my “heterosexual” desires? I seriously doubt equal time goes both way for these people
Randi said:
I feel fortunate to be free from religion and any ingrained anti-gay bigotry that goes with it, if I weren’t I might be suffering from the same life crippling belief that a “loving” god tortures people for an eternity for being in a loving supportive monogamous same sex relationship. I’m fortunate that as a loner religion hasn’t restricted me to either gender or I may have not found my current wonderful partner.
Perhaps one day some of us will attain this higher plane of existence with you 😉
I do not subscribe to this interpretation of scripture, however I am convinced that who God actually is remains constant regardless of our view of Him, and none of us can avoid the day when we each will find out for sure which view, if any, was correct.
David
David just say fairness comes first and you can join us ordinary people on that higher plane of existence.
I absolutely believe in fairness concerning my dealings with others. It is a necessary component of “treating others as I would have them treat me…”, as well as the free will imparted to all human beings.
But that still doesn’t eliminate the “eeew” factor when I think about hetrosexual sex 😉
David
HI There folks. THanks for your sound and thorough discussion of me and all I stand for. I think however that if we are all to be honest, we can only ever reflect the part of our journey we are on. There has been a time when I resolutely called myslf “no longer under the curse of death” (read: homosexual). After that I said I was no longer gay (read: that I had revoked my choice to live a gay lifelstyle). After that I started admitting that I still had same-sex attractions, but that didn’t mean that I was gay because the attractions were unwanted (and still are). Now I have moved one step further. I am in a place where I would rather stay in some sort of denial position and not say anything at all, because the issues are SO complex and it is simply not possible to reduce any person’s journey to a formula that will work for everybody. But I can tell you, that people are more important than their ideology and God thinks so too. I have been absent for quite some time, not posting on any websites and not updating my own. I have not posted any podcasts either. I have been through an extended process of mourning the loss of a church that my wife and I planted (it is not over yet…) The (extremely destructive) process through which we went has exposed many huge holes in my psyche which we are trying to sort out as we speak. (we: me, the Lord, my wife and my councellor, and my good friends!) In the process it has come to my attention that seeing people as their ideology is damaging and that Jesus cares not one whit about it. In recent time gay marriage has been ligitimised in South Africa. Do I rant and rave in the streets about what this does for the image of marriage? NO! Why? Because I know some very dear gay people and if they were to want to get married I for one wouldn’t want to be the one to say I wouldn’t attend because I care for them and I know that the Lord does too! Would I attend? I have no idea. But I would have to process my decision with them based on my care for them and my being true to what I believe. Hence I really hope that they never decide to get married (denial).
While I was in hiding, I received an email from one of the moderators of Ex-Gay Watch, asking if I was OK, snce I hadn’t posted on my podcast in a while. I melted, and it affirmed for me what is to be my guiding principle as long as I remian vaguely sane: Jesus was (and is) concerned with people and their hearts and feelings and so I should be.
I have a lot more to say, and I will say it here to you as well as on my podcast as time goes by. This is enough for now. I will be updating my website since it is outdated and doesn’t reflect where I am now. It would be more honest for it to reflect a developing journey, rather than a destination. GOd help me as I grow. And you too!
Duncan
Welcome back, Duncan!
I’m glad to see you “out and about” again. I hope you and your family are doing better all around. We all change and grow – if you ever stop you are probably dead so it’s a good thing 😉
One thing that is so sad about the current fundamentalist climate, at least here in the US, is that in some ways one is taught that embracing one’s humanity is a bad thing. Christ became human so he must have thought it was important, and so do I. It is the one thing that binds us all together, regardless of ideology. Give yourself permission to embrace others, even if you don’t see eye to eye with them.
Please feel free to jump into other discussions here and add your point of view. Disagreement is fine, as long as everyone respects each other enough to be civil. I think you might enjoy it. I hope to see more of you. When you get your site moving again, let us know so we can add the link back to our blogroll.
Take care.
THanks for the welcome. I must be honest, I don’t have the strength to debate. I realise that one cannot be anything without it somehow seeming like an indictment to somebody else. OUr very existence as people who have made a choice against homosexuality as a preferred lifestyle choice, is perceived as an accusation by some. Of course, when we make the choice, we need to justify it. It is such a radical decision it is just as well to know why one does it ;-). As of this moment, it is as much to do with my wife and children as anything else. Maybe more. But I wouldn’t go back. I love my wife and she and my kids are God’s greatest gift to me besides my growing sense of self-respect and love. My whole world works well the way it is. If I had to lose my family for some reason (God forbid!) I would really stay the way I am. My whole support system is heterosexual. And I don’t want to be gay. In my case it was a good plan to make sense of a chaotic childhood. I truly believe that my journey is towards heterosexuality as a by-product of Christlikeness. And no, I don’t know if it is the same for you, but I do know that Jesus has compassion for me the way I am and for you the way you are.
Does that mean that I am sliding towards a sort of post-modern relativism as far as the whole issue goes? No, I don’t think so. I still believe that it was never God’s intention for me to be gay and also for you. I believe that homosexuality is a product of the fall, as much as anything else in this world. Make of that what you will. But I don’t think you are bad because you are gay, any more than I think I am bad because I have an over-developed desire to please people in order to be loved. It is just something I have to deal with and hope that my relationship with the Lord enables me to integrate in the most God-hornouring and people-loving way possible. (LOrd! I even sound sanctimonious to myself! Pass the bag!)
A few of you have discussed the issue of whether I am actually bisexual and not innately gay. I couldn’t say for sure. The issue brings up a few points. One: I am not attracted to any other women besides my wife. Two: I am still attracted to men. THis is the additional attraction that I have to manage. Three: (and this is the can of worms) I most probably am not genetically gay (if there is such a thing). There are some men who know and have always known that they are gay. I am not one of them. It never occurred to me until I was 18. But once I discovered it I took to it like a duck to water.
The can of worms reveals the following: yes, I most probably should try and overcome my father issues and in the end outgrow my same-sex attraction. But what does that mean for those of you who are genetically gay? I honestly don’t know. Does the bible make a distinction between homosexuals and people like me? They say so. Do I believe it? Not sure. Probably not. OK folks, hand out the bag of stones…!
You see why I would just like to ignore the whole issue until Jesus returns to tell us what the whole truth is?
Cheers for now.
Duncan
I think I speak for most of us, certainly XGW, when I say that how you decide to live your life is your own business. As long as you are aware of the difficulties in such a life contrary to what appears to be your orientation, the decision is yours and of course your wife’s. Because of the serious issues and likelihood of marital failure, we always plead with people to be up front with their potential spouse so they too can make an intelligent decision.
The problem occurs when people take things further and try to deny the rights of others based on their personal beliefs about homosexuality. To justify this some use lies and bad science to make their position sound more reasonable. XGW tries to expose this and analyze issues surrounding the subject in general.
You don’t need to justify your personal decisions. But hearing your honest point of view might bring important perspective to the table and help others understand better the struggle behind what makes people feel the need to become ex-gay. So if you feel like it, join us sometime. Otherwise, good luck with your life and keep in touch.
Hey there
I fully intend to join you from time to time. I am just doing it in bits. Expressing my desire not to indulge in debate doesn’t mean I won’t. It just means that it is painful and I suppose honest debate always is!
Duncan,
Let me echo what David said. You and your perspective are welcome here.
From time to time we have commenters who are angry and hostile to those who choose your path. But they are infrequent and certainly do not represent the opinions or beliefs of the contributing writers.
I would probably disagree with you about God’s plan, the origins of your orientation, and the method, the likelihood, and perhaps even possibility of acheiving heterosexuality. But we don’t need to agree on all things to learn from each other and to find bases of commonality.
So I welcome you back to the conversation.
I am not fooling myself that I am more than a person on a journey, but if we as “ex-gays” are honest, (and that goes for your as gays as well) we are all on a journey.
Perhaps a dream I had would illustrate. I was in a deep dark swimming pool which had all sorts of muck in it (all the issues of my past which I have to process to heal and grow). From outside the pool a sort of machine (in SA we call it a creepy-crawly – a pool-cleaning machine) was lowered into the pool and started sucking the water out of the pool. I got out of the pool, and found Glen (my lover of 5 years – the one who said I couldn’t have been gay to start with if I was going to go straight) and my wife sitting next to each other on the side of the pool. I walked up to Glen and tenderly kissed him on the mouth (non-sexually but lovingly) and then did the same to my wife. For me these two facets of me (gay and straight) were cooperating to help me grow and heal. I deeply respect Glen because he never expected me to change. He accepted me just the way I was, disco-bunny and all. (I remember another intellectual, a friend of Glen’s who was around when I met him, asking him what he saw in me. He didn’t dignify it with an answer as far as I can remember, but he stayed around and loved me for 5 lovely years) Glen introduced me to family. His parents and family all accepted him (and me) as we were. Remember that was in the 80’s!
Only recently I realised that I mourned the friendship and love I had with him, which I lost when I gave up the gay lifestyle. He was justifiably very angry with me and rejected me. (We were not together at the time. He had moved to London 2 years before). The funny thing was that when I realised that I was deeply sorrowful about the love that I had lost there (he never “sent me on my way” but we ended badly) I connected to my “gay” self and a deep healing started to occur. THis person who I had become in those 12 years I was actvely gay, was and is an integral part of me which I should not deny or suppress. I will carry that person with me into the future.
I realise that I’m baring my soul here. thanks for this space…
I’m glad you trust us Duncan. There is a new post here that is also an open forum, meaning you can discuss the topic but also stray off topic within reason. The subject is an article in the New York Times about being gay and evangelical. That may dovetail with your current thoughts. Feel free to jump in there if you like.
You are clearly giving this a lot of serious thought, processing your feelings through dreams. I’ve done the same and therapy (not reparative) helped teach me to listen to what I was telling myself. Socrates said, “an unexamined life is not worth living.” I agree with him. I also believe God can speak to us through dreams, possibly because that is the only time during which He can get some of us to listen 😉
THis person who I had become in those 12 years I was actively gay, was and is an integral part of me which I should not deny or suppress. I will carry that person with me into the future.
Regardless of whether you believe your homosexuality came with you into this life or developed, this last sentence is a very important realization. Many in your position do not figure this out or, if they do, will not admit it.
Regardless of whether you believe your homosexuality came with you into this life or developed, this last sentence is a very important realization. Many in your position do not figure this out or, if they do, will not admit it.
The irony is that, in my search for identity, which manifested itself in many different efforts to conform, the “gay” identity was one of the most “real”! When I turned my back on homosexuality as a lifestyle, I abandoned that identity at the threshhold of my new life. So my “new creation” identity was hardly anything more than a new attempts to earn love and acceptance through conformity. But based on an emptiness, the new identity was a often stressful and in the end was part of what caused the breakdown of the church plant I mentioned. I was trying my best to please the congregants but they saw through it. Coupled with their own “stuff” it turned toxic. That last bit is by the way, but beacuse I was alienated from myself as I was/am, not only could I not exeperience God’s compassion for myself, they were not able to experience God’s compassion through me. Get it? The moment I remembered that gay self I abandoned, and saw how tenderly God saw/loved him/me, my gay identity sowed the seeds that may very well lead to greater healing! Weird, isn’t it?
This of course has great implications for others who want to transition out of homosexuality. The church expects them to turn over a new leaf. They are accepted as long as the gay past it truly a thing of the past. The moment that a gay identity begins to assert itself, they lose hope/patience and can’t figure out what to do. The gay person feels guilty/like a failure, and loses hope. Of course the first thing that happens is that the (safe/well-known) gay habits kick in. Because there is no legitimate outlet for those feelings, porn/trolling/whatever may ensue. During this extremly traumatic time, I suddenly developed a taste for pornography. Anything would do, but gay stuff was preferable. Ironically this provided the first real breakthrough in my councelling process. (I am ashamed of this last bit of info, but all the key people in my life know. I have software on my computer to protect me and my family and an accountability partner who is the administrator of the software.) But in line with what I mentioned before, the likelihood is that this gay identity that manifested itself in this way, is a part of key to future growth!
I think this is where it gets weird fo you gay guys, but I suspect that you may see the sense in it. Why would I want to put myself through this? Beacsue my conscience dictates.
By the way, I know that I may not be able to trust all of you, and that the likelihood is that I will get rejected here as well, but, well, as my growing sense of self-respect develops, it will hurt less and less. So I trust the Lord more than anything else!
cheers,
Duncan