Chad Thompson, one of the most fair-minded exgay activists I know just wrote a piece on X-Men 3. (I know he’s a wee bit late.)
Instead of ignoring the obvious ex-gay themes of the movie like the AgapePress and Focus on the Family did, Chad tackles them head on and applies them to his ex-gay perspective. I admire him for that. His article cites metaphors from the movie and argues those with noble and valid reasons for seeking change deserve to be treated with compassion, understanding, acceptance and respect.
It is exceedingly fair. I also found it interesting that he seems to hold out hope for peaceful co-existence with happy LGB people who don’t want to change.
Unlike many other exgay leaders, Chad actually conducts himself in such a way that peaceful coexistence with happy LGBT people is more feasible.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve never heard that Chad claims people can change their orientation. He seems to be the rare protestant who embraces celibacy.
I’ve never met the guy but I’ve tried to read and listen to everything he has put out there. To be blunt, he seems a bit shallow. By that I don’t mean stupid but that he doesn’t seem to have much knowledge (experience?) to draw on when he speaks and writes. If I remember correctly, he can barely be called gay, much less ex-gay.
He may want to build a kinder, gentler ex-gay movement, but I sincerely hope he isn’t going to make that attempt his career. And I find it hard to imagine that philosophy can ever be packaged in such a way as to hide the ugliness at it’s core.
I think its harmful that Chad is telling people they can change from homosexual to heterosexual. Note the last line in this link where Chad talks about “the potential that all people have to change from homosexual to heterosexual.”.
https://www.inqueery.com/
He’s lying by encouraging people to think same sex attractions are completely changed into opposite sex attractions – I strongly suspect if you cornered Chad and wouldn’t let him talk around it he’d agree this is not the case.
Several points:
1. I was very confused by ex gays for this reason. There wasn’t a lot of honesty about what they most strongly identified with at the moment.
Chad Thompson failed to approach me as a Christian, and that part of his Christian discipline was to essentially live like a priest.
2. Many ex gays are ex basket cases. They promote this former life as common and inevitable for ALL gays and lesbians, which is confusing to those with limited experience, gay or straight, with a variety of gay people.
3. I grow weary of Hollywood films as metaphors for real life issues. Chad can comment all he wants on X-Men, but the fact remains that the FICTIONAL mutants of the movie, often were a dangerous (however unintentionally) to non mutants.
Rogue’s choice was so that she could have the love she wanted and deserved, without killing him.
The mutants didn’t require lies to be feared for reasons such as that.
Unlike that situation, gay kids RARELY are given ANY choice to pursue their own feelings and happiness. It keeps being made for them from the beginning.
Chad never had the choice either, however much he insists he did.
He’s a tiny voice in a huge wilderness of people who EXPECT gay people to change, on condition of having no other freedoms and happiness until they do.
Let alone the option to not be religious if one doesn’t want to be.
He helps fuel that expectation. And there is little ex gays like him can do to illustrate just what a commitment it is to BE like him, and who it’s really for.
However, well meaning Chad is, I find his activity harmful, if not useless to the voices of gay youth being constantly shouted down by people Chad validates.
The ones who want gay kids to change, pressure or threaten them to.
The only choice for gay kids is fear or denial.
Fear of God, fear of the straight world’s control, fear of being oneself.
Denial of who you really are, and what you really need and want.
Denial of what God made you.
Denial of real, in depth and intense attraction.
Chad is doing what was expected of him all along, that’s all.
And gay kids bear the pressure he helps heap on them.
Chad’s a nice guy, not a tough one.
And nice guys…come up last.
Does anyone else’s gaydar go off the charts when they visit Chad or Randy Thomas’ website?
I’m still trying to wrap my mind around the idea that there is somehow some noble idea in repressing your sexual/relationship orientation. Particularly when most of those ideas come from taught, non-instinctive, non-innate “religious” beliefs.
As much as Chad´s talk look fair at first glance, unhappily it´s not. At most it´s a sweet poison, and at that an enormously more dangerous one. He talks about supressing his sexuality to be able to love (and be loved by) God. Unless it applies to ALL and EVERY human being, despite his or her sexual orientation, it´s unfair. This is the (old) preaching of the catholic church, all sexuality is wrong except if it´s to bear children, but even the catholics now recognize the bonding nature of sexuality (or else they would have to condemn sterile people´s marriages). So by this way of thinking, the gay orientation is wrong only and all because of itself, because – in Chad´s and other religious people´s opinion – “God doesn´t like it”, period. And why is this reasoning any different from the westborough loonies? Just because Chad´s mouth isn´t foaming? sorry, but the results are the same. No matter how sweet is the poison, if we drink it, we will be dead, just the same.
“She changed not because she feared man, but because she loved Bobby. She knew that giving up her superpowers was the only way she could ever experience true intimacy with the man of her dreams.
And he was worth it.”
Someone get this guy a boyfirend.
“Chad you know I’ve been down that road, and I’ve felt all that pain, and I can tell you now that I’m at the end of the road that he’s worth it. He’s worth it.”
From Chad’s bio at
https://www.inqueery.com/html/my_story.html
Non-sexual affirmation from members of one’s own gender can devour homosexual attractions. The power of this concept was brought home to me when I went on a three-day pleasure trip to Colorado with two college guys from my church, Justin and Ben. To them, we were just three guys having a good time, but to me, the intensity of the experience was almost overwhelming.
Is that all it takes? A three day weekend with a couple of straight dudes? Damn, how many times have I tried that one? Just doesn’t work. Usually just exacterbates the problem. I keep trying though.
Yeah, well, whatever.
Regardless of personable contact… Chad came here to XGW, one two occasions, and blatantly lied to all of us. We really wish he had not. We had higher hopes. Plainly mistaken. He’s never apologized. In fact, he does the opposite; contrary to the facts. For this reason we think Chad is polite, but basically dishonest.
And only speaking for ourselves, but being nominated as ‘the most honest exgay’ would still place us 2 million miles under a pile of manure. Would it not?
OK. “Nice guy”. But why do I need a snorkel to get to him???
Reminded at this point old Latvian saying translated into English (from friend’s Grandmother who escaped death because she was blonde… an immutable trait )
–
*** sorry Mike et al. Hope the s— word OK, in a literary sense. According to this 92 year old woman… that’s the exact word we need to use, in English. Cannot be otherwise accurately translated. 🙂 It needs to flip from sweet to crude to “work”.
“Non sexual affirmation from one’s own gender can devour homosexual attraction”?!
That’s just STUPID!
1. Our society is very conflicted about AFFECTION between men, not sex.
2. Confusing or identifying sex WITH affection is part of the problem, Chad’s statement is evidence of this.
3. Gay men or straight men have non sexual bonding and affection with each other all the time, affirming their friendship in this matter has nothing to do with sexual orientation, but how society views men and their demonstrative natures regarding affection.
4. This is also a dispararity along gender lines, women have far more freedom to express affection.
5. Chad might be a nice guy, but he’s misguided…and seems really messed up to me about this issue.
Perhaps Ex-Gay Watch need to define what qualities/principles ex-gays must have/endorse to interact with this site. An “honest conversation” between gays, former ex-gays and ex-gays would be more interesting than everyone going for the easy insults.
guidelines:
https://exgaywatch.com/blog/archives/2006/06/draft_guideline.html