Chad Thompson, operator of Des Moines, Iowa-based Inqueery, has written a new review of Brokeback Mountain.
Thompson is also marketing his latest DVD release, Bringing Christian Love Out of the Closet.
E
Chad Thompson, operator of Des Moines, Iowa-based Inqueery, has written a new review of Brokeback Mountain.
Thompson is also marketing his latest DVD release, Bringing Christian Love Out of the Closet.
I’m fairly disappointed with Chad’s “review.” Rather than actually reviewing the movie, he gives just a few brief sentences about the movie and then moves quickly into the same old ex-gay and anti-gay arguing points.
To say the movie shows the beauty of God contrasted with two people that are ignoring God is unfair and typical–going back to the idea that gay people cannot also be Christian or believe in God (even if they are sinners in many ways).
Ok there is something about this I find a lot more freaky. I don’t know the history of this Chad guy, but he has his blog on Xanga.com.
Of all the blogging sites out there, Xanga.com has the youngest demographics. I’ve had a Xanga journal for two years and I can say that at 23 years old, I am WAY older then most of the people on this site. The average age of someone with a Xanga journal is probably 12-20.
Down the left side of his blog, you’ll see his blogring subscriptions. Blogrings are little groups for likeminded people. He is a part of several ex-gay blogrings. If you click on the Exodus International Brothers and Sisters ring, you’ll get to read the blurbs on 33 poor lost kids talking about how hard it is for them to be gay and how much they want to change. And that is sad as hell. If you read the journal entry from the guy who created the Exodus Blogring (JoHoDonKnow), he is 22 and wanted to kill himself yesterday. Breaks my fucking heart.
There is two other ex-gay/struggling blogrings I was able to find. christians struggling with homosexuality(24 people), and Gay ain’t Ok… but it’s hard to walk away (21). I see a couple of the same people, but not all.
I wonder how many of these kids will get into the ex-gay life only to fail and fail and fail again. I wonder how many will finally learn to love themselves and their sexuality. I wonder if one of them won’t turn into the next John Paulk or or Micheal Johnston. I’ll say a prayer for them tonight.
“I still found the movie somewhat uninteresting because of it’s slow pace, and because it didn’t really introduce any new ideas to our culture, it only reflected that which was already there.”
I think Chad is missing out on the purpose of the movie–it’s supposed to be a reflection. As well, the slow pace contrasts with the laspe of years (the characters meet as young men, get married, have babies, divorce–all within the span of two hours or so). I think this is intentional, to show how this one element of their lives (the part that you just have to stand, according to one character) remains constant.
I’ve read others comment on the beauty of the landscape pointing to God. Even though the apostle Paul says that the creation itself is testimony against unbelievers, there’s also the problem that it doesn’t communicate the facts necessary for salvation (at least according to much of traditional Christian theology). So obviously the main characters would act as if God doesn’t exist–that’s the assumed way that the non-believer/pagan/heathan (insert pejorative term here) would act, according to the Bible.
Chad appropriates what Jesus says to his disciples in service of criticism of two non-Christian (at least for all we know in the film) men who are not concerned to be saved by believing in Jesus’ name. That’s just not the point of the film.
He says, “isn’t that what this really is all about? The existence of God? The character of God?” and I would have to say, no, it’s not. At least not in the film. Not within the text and the imagery we are given–and a responsible film critic, Christian or no, would address this first before importing theology (which I would argue is badly framed).
This is not to rip on Chad, since he’s mostly a product of non-thinking evangelicalism–but it’s evident how little of a dialogue we can have (and here I’m disclosing how my views have changed over the last few years) with people who rush to open their Bible and make some bad puns (mountains? please…) rather than engage honestly.
His post makes me very sad–especially since as someone who struggles with same-sex attractions, he’s in an ideal place to dialogue honestly.
I agree with the sentiment, SarahS. I am generally an apathetic agnostic who sees no reason to bother people by challenging their deeply held beliefs, but the ex-gay organizations really disturb me. They cover the worst of the homosexual experience without mentioning the good, and they encourage guilt, denial, and heterosexual unions that may never give them the completeness of a homosexual one. Even worse, they encourage homosexuals to deny themselves in this life, which I believe is likely to be our only life. To go through our short time on this speck of dirt rejecting one of the best and most fulfilling aspects of living is to me the saddest of existences.
Both this review and the review he linked to seem very self-congratulatory – basically, “It’s a good thing I’m ex-gay because I am superior to most of those who are seeing this film and I can see the true horrors of godless homosexuals. How noble I am for seeing a movie which involves homosexuals.”
He also seems to think that if only the lead characters believed in God, then they would have turned straight and lived happily ever after. This seems to be wrapped in a fallacy – if God can bring back the dead and turn water into wine then why can’t He turn gays straight? Well if that is the case, then homosexuality would have been wiped off the map many decades ago, because for all the talk of the “gay agenda”, there was a time in very recent history when probably almost all people with homosexual urges spent a lot of time and effort looking for ways to make themselves heterosexual or to live a heterosexual life. Or God simply would have made sure that anyone who says, “Lord, please help me become straight” would immediately lose any attractions to the same sex. If God can turn water into wine, then why can’t He immediately end all attraction to the same sex?
I wouldn’t even call that a film review. I would call it propaganda. So much for any kind of a new approach towards how to discuss homosexuality. Even Focus on the Family actually reviewed the movie.
It seems like Chad have contrived a manner of placing his particular vision of God into the movie and used the beautiful landscape as a way to diminish the inner feelings of the two men.
Chad seems like a fairly nice guy overall, and I accept his statement that he has changed at face value, but I have to say his blog is very homosocial. Everything is about the males he meets, and he almost talks about them in love like terms:
” I thoroughly enjoyed the breakfasts we [Tim Wilkins] shared together as he imparted his wisdom to me…we didn’t agree on everything, we agree on almost everything. I also met an AMAZING guy named Ben who I hope to partner with in ministry some day. Ben and I spent hours talking and laughing and of course, dreaming.”
I don’t quite understand this focus on other males. There is almost no reference to females–and even the pictures with females look uncomfortable and awkward. I know Chad believes that gay males need to bond with males in order to get over homosexuality (at least that is what I have perceived as his thesis), but I know lots of straight guys, and none of them would talk about “dreaming” with other men. Brokeback Mountain is a movie about male bonding unlike any other in recent memory. I am not attacking CHad, and I will take him at his word. I am just trying to understand why there is such a focus on males on his page.
I went through a form of therapy that advised making strong connections with other males in order to get over homosexual feelings; I can now say with a high degree of certainty that it did not work, but at the time I was involved, it made perfect sense and seemed to be working. The problem, for me, was that I was required to value these other guys so highly and be so interested in them, as though my life hinged on their opinion of me, when in fact, they had no idea what I was going through, how to be any help, and weren’t even really interesting people that I genuinely wanted to be friends with. The whole thing was forced and it caused me to basically make idols out of the straight guys in my life– a very dangerous position, indeed. Don’t know if that enlightens anything, just saying I know some of where Chad comes from.
Cyrano,
I also think the advice you were given sets people up for either 1) disappointment 2) Emotional connection that leads to attraction 3) A place where people are looking for approval from someplace outside themself which is not that healthy. One needs to be able to validate themself rather than validatation from an outside person.
It is dangerous.
The program I was in also made us focus on the attention of straight males (and play sports and hang out), but for me that was a silly concept. I had always been around straight males and never seemed to have a need to be validated. While I never cared about competitive sports, track, swimming, weight lifting, and other sports were a part of my life (although the males at my church would frequently play sports–I just was not a fanatic about it). I have always had closer relationships to straight males than gay males (except for the person I was dating). Many straight males come to me for advice and friendship, and they will talk sex and other things with me. It never changed my gay feelings at all, and it reenforced how gay I am. I actually have straight male friends who get frustrated because I won’t spend as much time with them because I want to be at home with my spouse. They seem to want the validation of males more than I ever did. I will say one thing though–I never once sat around with my straight friends “dreaming.”
I just hope Chad finds what he needs in life.
“From a human perspective, changing something as deeply ingrained as one’s sexual orientation certainly is impossible, which is exactly why the world looks at people like me and assumes I’m a fake. But if God really is who he says he is; if God really can heal the sick, turn water into wine, and even bring the dead to life, then overcoming homosexuality wouldn’t seem that hard anymore would it?”
Chad’s right – it wouldn’t be hard at all for a God who can raise the dead. The real question that the ex-gays seem to avoid is, why doesn’t He? I have no problem acknowledging that some people’s orientation has changed to one degree or another; it happens just as often (which is to say, not very often) among those who have never even thought about trying to change.
So why, then, do the vast majority of those who go through ex-gay programs fail to change, apart from a few adjustments to their external behavior? If being gay is incompatible with being a Christian, why would God ignore the earnest prayers of those who are seeking to please Him? And if it’s their own fault for not doing the right things, why would God keep the formula for success such a secret that Exodus can’t articulate it after 30 years in business?
Posted by: Cyrano at January 29, 2006 03:54 PM
Yes, Cyrano, this was enlightening. I have a better idea now what people think at exgay camp.
“So why, then, do the vast majority of those who go through ex-gay programs fail to change, apart from a few adjustments to their external behavior? If being gay is incompatible with being a Christian, why would God ignore the earnest prayers of those who are seeking to please Him? And if it’s their own fault for not doing the right things, why would God keep the formula for success such a secret that Exodus can’t articulate it after 30 years in business?”
Excellent point Eugene. It amazes me that the anti-gay religious people can claim moral motivations and yet ignore the simplest of implications of the evidence at hand – what we see in reality is inconsistent with a loving god wanting gays to be heterosexuals.
For me the more likely explanation is that there simply is no god and in a fair society I ask that the religious people respect and understand my belief to the same degree they ask me to respect their’s.
We all view life from our own perspectives and are inclined to think that things are “about” whatever it is that’s most important to us. However, you can take it too far and that is what Chad has done in his review of Brokeback Mountain.
He came away from the movie thinking it was somehome about trying to be ex-gay or changing ones sexuality. He heard one of the most effective lines in the movie – “If you can’t fix it, you got a stand it” – but to Chad it was:
“If you can’t change [your sexuality] you just have to stand it.”
Actually, Ennis wasn’t talking to Jack about changing his sexuality. He was telling Jack about why he couldn’t get a ranch with him and settle down together. They each had obligations to others and Ennis had a real fear of being killed if anyone found out about him. Those were the things he couldn’t change (or “fix”) and just had to stand. His attraction to Jack was not something he wanted to be rid of, it was the most rewarding part of his life.
Chad entered this film searching to see whether it claimed that homosexuality is ok or whether it said gays can change. Brokeback doesn’t address either question. But Chad was so busy looking for a battle on these two areas that he missed out on the experience of a truly moving and emotionally honest story.
From Chad’s comments: “But if God really is who he says he is; if God really can heal the sick, turn water into wine, and even bring the dead to life, then overcoming homosexuality wouldn’t seem that hard anymore would it?”
I truly believe that God can, if he wishes, turn water into wine, heal the sick, and raise the dead, but I don’t live my life with an expectation that He will do so at my demand.
I don’t assume that it is His devine will that I not drink water simply because he can make it into wine, no matter how much I may want it to be wine. To do so is an arrogant assumption that God exists to fulfill my desires.
I stood by my mother’s bedside and watched her suffer from cancer – without any medication deadening the pain – because she did not want to rely on the hand of man instead of the hand of God. She stubbornly believed that God would miraculously heal her if she had enough faith. And she died.
And I did not demand that God raise her from the dead – though I do believe that if he wanted to, he could.
What Chad forgets is that the reason that miracles are miraculous is because they are not common. God does not perform for us like a trained dog. God is not a genie in a bottle that had to grant wishes – no matter how strong our faith.
When Chad and the others in ex-gay ministries imply is that if we demand it (have enough faith) God will miraculously change our sexual orientation. And that is the expected course for millions of people. With no exceptions. Millions of miracles.
Since that clearly isn’t happening, this statement of faith is tempered by terminology of process and gradual change. But God did not perform partial delayed-process miracles. The water did not become wine a few drops per day. Lazarus did not slowly each day actualize his living potential – he arose from the dead. And the sick were not made to feel a little bit better, and then some more, gradually – this would not be seen as miraculous.
God can perform miracles. But they are at his own time, for his own purpose, and not subject to our demands. But when He does, God’s miracles are truly miraculous.
If Chad and the others want to rely on the wonder-working power of God to reorient their sexuality, fine. Maybe God wants to perform miracles for him on demand. But don’t insult God by claiming that his miracles are a slow gradual struggle towards bit-by-bit maybe some tiny unmeasurable change.
The God I worship is more powerful than that.
Chad entered this film searching to see whether it claimed that homosexuality is ok or whether it said gays can change. Brokeback doesn’t address either question. But Chad was so busy looking for a battle on these two areas that he missed out on the experience of a truly moving and emotionally honest story.
I’m reminded of an old saying: “If the only tool you have in your toolbox is a hammer, then every problem starts to look like a nail.”
Timothy, that was a very wise and wonderful testament of of faith.
Timothy: To do so is an arrogant assumption that God exists to fulfill my desires.One of my personal bugbears about a particular type of religious person, and a viewpoint heavily promoted by many evangelicals.
Timothy said:
God can perform miracles. But they are at his own time, for his own purpose, and not subject to our demands. But when He does, God’s miracles are truly miraculous.
Outstanding point (and post). And I might add that sometimes He just knows better than to give us what we are asking for. And as for those charlatans to which grantdale refers, if someone is preaching a gospel that isn’t just as valid to someone with nothing material to give as it is to those who do, it’s not real and they are fakes.
David
I have tried to like Chad, and I’ve tried to continue contact.
No go.
It’s hard for me to know now if he understands how hard he’s making the job of educating expectant straight people.
Or expectant gay people for that matter.
NOT to be expectant, it requires more than owed.
He validates that expectation to change. And he acts as if that’s a new viewpoint. One as alterable as religious or cultural identity.
He wants to encourage that change if that’s what a person wants.
But he already told me when he was young he was terrified of being gay.
It’s in his book.
That didn’t happen in a vacuum and it never does.
That’s the sticking point that frustrates me with advocates for changing sexual orientation.
I have a difficult time thinking that someone like him, could be an effective defender of gay identity, when he couldn’t defend his own.
And at this point in time, we need the lion hearts.
Those strong enough to tell those who demand change to go pound sand and live to tell how they got through with their identity intact, regardless of their struggle with it or the relationship they had with their parents.
People have demanded change from gay people routinely.
Chad has to know that.
So he throws red meat to the anti gay, a bone to the gay….and a monkey wrench into the works to educate people on why demanding if not expecting or hoping for change at all, is making things worse.
Can you all understand how someone like me might feel?
I don’t know in what way Chad thinks he’s being effective.
Hard to qualify with someone who isn’t speaking to you.
And since he’s cut me off…a straight ally, not a wanna be straight ally…now I REALLY have my work cut out.
I will think what I like then, unless and until I have good reason not to.
I posted about 4 indepth responses to Chad’s movie review on HIS blog, since it seemed open to anyone (especially if like 9 out of 10 posters, they are offering abject adoration to Chad for his views).
Today I came back and checked. He had deleted all but my first post. For the record, the later posts were about how I am proudly gay, have been in a gay relationship for 29 years (yes! 29 years ) and have a deep love and concern for young gay men in their 20’s who are being led on a merry chase by this man, who takes advantage of their low self-esteem and right wing fundamentalist religious background to drive his agenda (which effectively is that gay men should and can easily become straight, the old “choice” cliche again).
I wrote and asked why he deleted them, and he responded that he is too busy working on his book to refute all the points I made, and suggested I read his book. Gee, thanks – no complimentary copy?
I came away from his blog site rather disgusted but also freed, since in one sense I felt obligated to stay there and speak of the dignity and integrity of being gay to these young men, to counter-act his “good pal” personality that at bottomline seeks to enforce their 2nd citizen status. If you just read the blogs of the guys at his site, they are filled with misery, confusion, agony about how to reconcile God and their natural sexuality, and despair. Good old Chad doesn’t seem to have an empathy or concern about any of that – he’s just the shining knight on the white horse, appearing now at a local red neck evangelical church near you (video and DVDs available). I feel free because he won’t let me get my message out there. He DELETES ANY OPPOSING POSTS! I suppose he has a right to do that on his blog, but it is in a sense unethical.
God Bless those poor young men who think Chad is their ally. As my partner said, they will learn a lot through the pain, hopefully SPIRITUAL DISCERNMENT. Chad will then just be an old unpleasant memory for most of them.
P.S. Yes, his website narration of his wonderful God Blessed Life is one happy thrilling adventure after another, always including cute guys to partner with for the glory of Jesus. Uh huh…get in a little squeeze here and there – I’m sure no one will mind.
My mouth feels dry and dirty from all this, and I’m going to have a cool drink and go out into the sun (like in Arizona where it is 75 today) and thank God I am gay and to watch over every single gay male that falls into Chad’s perhaps well meaning but potentially devastating clutches.