The exgay blog Disputed Mutability posted some criticisms of the NGLTF’s recent report on the exgay movement.
I haven’t read the report, so I don’t know whether DM’s criticisms are accurate. The tone of the criticisms is moderate compared to typical religious-right rhetoric. Some of the criticisms are specific, while others are quite vague. Some of DM’s observations of moderation in the exgay movement are accurate, but overly optimistic: Let’s face it, the movement is led by would-be theocrats, and the moderates are not only allowing that leadership to happen, but also providing annual donations to the leadership.
Mike — you and Timothy need to divy up the posts better!Been there, done that! 🙂
Yikes, not this report again.
I got so much grief with my initial review of the report that I was hoping it would just fade into the distance never to be heard from again. But I do have to concur with some of DM’s criticisms. There was an opportunity to create as informative report based on sound observation and logical conclusion but NGLTF went for sensational over substantive.
In my opinion.
Nah, you didn’t get grief. It was just pointed out that you were, perhaps, in my opinion, and the opinion of others, not all concurring, that you were, perhaps, somewhat over critical.About a report you hadn’t actually read… :)Actually, having read it several times now — yeah… — it could have been a punchy 20-25 pages. Max. Sadly, it wasn’t.
I read it too (only because I felt I had to). My top criticisms have been well stated by the usual suspects above, plus a couple more:
Poorly written
Covers no new ground
Doesn’t leave Z alone when he specifically asked to be
Too Long
Selective on revealing the authors’ histories
Seems more directed to fundraising than societal change