According to Michael Bussee at Warren Throckmorton’s site, Alan Chambers seeks to do away with the term “Ex-Gay”.
Michael Bussee quoted Alan Chambers, Ex. Dir. of Exodus speaking about the term ex-gay as follows: “We need to do away with the term entirely and make sure it’s never used again.” Mr. Chambers confirmed this quote in an email.
While I agree with Bussee that “Ex-Gay” is a term that sets itself up for misunderstanding, I find the phrase used by Chambers, “former homosexual” to be even more deceptive. “Ex-gay” could legitimately be interpreted as no longer identifying as part of a community or identity. However, the much more clinical sounding “former homosexual” brings with it all of the connotations of the scientific and medical world. The only reasonable interpretation would be that the subject is no longer same sex attracted. As this is (by admission of a sizable portion of the ex-gay movement) simply not true, as a description it can at best be described as deceptive.
Personally, I don’t think that its deceptive nature has been overlooked in the selection of this term by some anti-gay activists.
In the first chapter of Tanya Erzen’s Straight to Jesus, she credits Bob Davies as coining the phrase “Ex-Gay” in a quote from Frank Worthen’s 1997 book, The Gay Theology
But I am a homosexual, really, even though I lay claim to my new life. The old hasn’t passed away. That’s man’s thinking, not God’s. God sees us as ex-gay, but He also sees us as struggling and dealing with the old nature with its spiritual warfare.
If the ex-gay movement were willing to be clear that they are homosexuals, really, whom God sees as ex-gay, there would be little issue with whichever phrase they used to self-identify. However, this clarity does not fit well with the political agenda of the current leadership of this movement.
Those unfamiliar with the above names can find descriptions below the jump:
Michael Bussee – one of the four (or maybe seven) founders of Exodus. Michael left the organization to be with Gary Cooper, an Exodus volunteer and leader. Michael has been critical of Exodus since and seems regretful for his earlier efforts in growing the organization.
Warren Throckmorton – a professor at Grove City College who is a leading proponent of ex-gay (or as he says, post-gay) efforts. Warren does not endorse reparative therapy because he is not convinced of either the practices or the “causes” RT groups use to explain the origens or orientation. Warren, while biased towards believing the claims of ex-gay testimonies, is less reactionary and is less likely to dismiss scientific studies offhand. Dr. Throckmorton recently disassociated himself from PFOX due to the extremely bizarre prime-time public behavior of its president, Richard Cohen.
Alan Chambers – President of Exodus International. Under Alan’s direction, Exodus has focused externally on an anti-gay political agenda and less on the spiritual guidance to those seeking to discard their gay identity. While Exodus does continue to refer same-sex attracted people to local ministries, the primary focus of the organization has become reaffirming anti-gay docrine in churches and lobbying legislative bodies. Even the national annual convention is focused more on pastors and parents than on actual ex-gay persons. In 1998 Alan referred to himself as God sees him: heterosexual, so perhaps this is the new term he wants to use for those in his organization that are attracted to the same sex.
Frank Worthen – the Father of the ex-gay movement. Frank founded Love In Action in San Rafael, CA in the early 1970’s after coming to believe that God required him to leave his “gay life”. Frank seems to fall more into the faith, devotion, and celibacy camp and less in the save-America-from-the-evil-homos camp.
Bob Davies – an early participant at Love In Action. He was President of Exodus International for several years. It is ironic that Bob coined the phrase “ex-gay” as Bob appears not to have “‘acted out’ his homosexual feelings with other men”. Although at the time that Bob was quoted he had little expectation of heterosexuality, he later married in the mid-80’s.
I don’t understand why such a term is even necessary. It seems to be the position of most ex-gay organizations that homosexuality doesn’t really exist in the first place. How can you no longer be something that never existed?
I understand the political motivation. If you have a following calling themselves ex-gays then they can really stand out. On the other hand if these people were simply heterosexuals now, who would even notice?
repentant homosexual?
Not only is that deceptive for all the reasons you mentioned, but it’s much harder to say and write. Not very friendly.
Well I’d say for truth in advertising, they should label themselves as “Straight”.
If they aren’t straight but inactive than “Celibate” works.
The movement will die under its own weight. I hope they go with “former homosexual” since the majority of people know that’s just silly.
How about Eunuch? That describes what they’re doing to themselves.
Stephen Bennett prefers the title of Former homosexual. His church hasn’t crumbled yet. It’s like the LGBT community individuals wanting to be identified by something other then gay. The Ex-Gay movmement will just lose that powerful word. If they want to stop all association with us they may prefer bible thunking hero’s, Born again Christians, or something that states their being. I am sure the young and old will keep the name Ex-gay alive.
Over the past couple of years we have begun using the labels gay identified and formerly gay identified in place of gay and ex-gay. I believe that this is respectful to those who happily identify as gay and clearly shows that there are those who once identified that way, but no longer choose to. This term does not get into any arguments over feelings, but does respectfully show that one has a choice as to how they identify based on the feelings that they have.
For the record, we have used the term former homosexual, but I don’t like that either. That label along with ex-gay are ones that were already in use when I came along 16 years ago.
One more point of clarification, Michael Bussee told me recently that he thinks he coined the label ex-gay. And, it has been disliked by most everyone in Exodus circles since. I decided several weeks ago to retire the word that I have long hated.
SO, what will you call this site now? http://www.Watchingthosewhoareformerly gay identified.com is available.
This debate over terminology seems like the demise of the old Ptolematic system of astronomy.
Once you had planets and the sun and moon circling the earth, but mathematical problems crept in over the centuries, so you added epicyles and talked of the apparent planets (those you could see) and the real ones (the idealized movements). But that didn’t work so you had to put the epicyles on sticks and move the sticks up and down.
Well, in the long run the whole system was overthrown and the debate about apparent planets, epicyles, etc. was seen as just talk about stuff that didn’t exist.
Ex-gay or whatever is the same. In the long run, since this whole position has no real relationship to reality, it will fall of its own intellectual disorder and uselessness.
The other thing is that Christianity has had a good long run but with these sort of behaviors by the Christian right and these new terms and ideologies as it tries to account for ever new modern social phenomena (and the advances of science), I suspect it is on its way out as well.
“Well I’d say for truth in advertising, they should label themselves as “Straight”.”
Except that “straight” means “person who is sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex,” and that’s not what these “ex-gays” are, so it would not be true, whether advertised or not.
I called Tdub a giant polka-dotted turtle the other day and he was cool with that.
grace
Responding to Alan Chambers’ points:
Whatever its origins, “gay” has come to describe an orientation, not an identity.
Exgay and “formerly gay identified,” on the other hand, are identities. They evasively imply what one is not, without forthrightly naming one’s predominant state of sexual and romantic attraction.
I’m open to suggestions for a new name for Ex-Gay Watch. Preferably four words or less, with a domain name of under 20 characters.
Given Exodus’ corrupt intermingling with so many unchristian heretics and anti-American ideologues who hate and exploit sexual strugglers, ExodusWatch is one possible name.
Mike – I disagree that gay-identified pretends there is no orientation. What it does do is separate inclination and desire from intention to do something about inclination. For people who have SSA and do not want to identify with or build a life around it, this is an important distinction. One’s erotic orientation may be one thing or another but there is always the ability to reflect on how one wants to live. I believe I have seen that message repeatedly on this blog. One may agree or disagree that it is proper or healthy to make this distinction.
Sure, Alan — and the person identified as Mike A. will grab that domain the day after you grab:
http://www.formerlyidentifiedodus.to
(that is also available, BTW)
You may have a struggle on your hands though. At least one of your people would prefer:
http://www.just…Randy.to
And, I hereby declare, from now on I expect all of you here, in love, and respectfully, to refer to me as:
A slight, but nevertheless distinct, curtsy would also be appropriate before you reply to any of my posts. My new identity makes me superiour to you, and I will hold public meetings to remind everyone else of your lower station in life.
On seconds thoughts, that’s a heck of a lot of letters to type out all the time. Perhaps I’ll stick with who I am. Still would appreciate a curtsy now and again though.
Warren — you know full well that what-ever-they-are-calling-themselves-todays are operating in a way completely contrary to other organisations set up to “control behaviour”. We’d be interested to know why they do this, and why you concur.
AA starts every meeting — and all are encouraged to clearly believe, state, and live by the fact that “I am Bob and I am an alcoholic.”
Why do they say “and I am an alcoholic” when they haven’t had a drink in years? (nor even an inclination to pick up the bottle again?). Why is it drummed into their heads that they were, are, and always will be an alcoholic?
AA doesn’t play games with semantics. Neither do other agencies dealing with drug addiction, sexual abuse etc etc. They push people to accept the reality, and the words that go with that reality, because only by doing so will those people begin to excert some control over that reality. To do otherwise is to invite dangerous rationalisation.
Alan,
I think “formerly gay identified” is actually not too bad (although “giant polka-dotted turtle” works pretty well, too).
I don’t think you’ll get gay people to now call themselves “gay identified people”. We believe that we are intrinsicly gay, not gay identified and that if we decided to identify as something else, we’d still be the same gay people inside.
But, as Warren points out, “formerly gay identified” does allow for a distinction between orientation and identity. And I think it correctly describes how you think of yourselves without all of the deceptive crap. Also, those who hear it understand that it is the identity that has changed, and does not imply anything about whether the orientation has changed or not.
By the way, I’m glad you don’t like “former homosexual” any longer. I look forward to that being taken out of use. I know it lends itself more easily to anti-gay political activism, but it’s downright dishonest.
Also, I’d recommend against using “Formerly-identified As Gay”. It would cause confusion if we changed our website name.
Whatever its origins, “gay” has come to describe an orientation, not an identity.
From what I understand, “gay” became the word for homosexual people according to the old-fashioned method, by simple language evolution. Because homosexuals in the pre-Stonewall eara needed code words to discuss their lives and find others (the code words help minimize the chances of legal trouble and/or physical attacks), words such as “gay” and phrases such as “friend of Dorothy” were gradually used.
What it does do is separate inclination and desire from intention to do something about inclination. For people who have SSA and do not want to identify with or build a life around it, this is an important distinction.
I’m sorry Dr. Throckmorton, but to claim that anyone does not “build a life” around their sexual orientation is bunk. Quite clearly a heterosexual marriage is a relationship built on the foundations of opposite-sex attraction (at least if it is going to be successful), and I would argue even current “ex-gays” certainly are building their life around their sexual orientation, albeit in their desire not to act on it. I mean, if one is going to regular suppport groups, printing and publicizing “testimonies” of one’s “rescue” from “the homosexual lifestyle,” working for groups like Exodus, etc., one is pretty much building a life around the concept of not acting on attraction. Certainly I remember my own attempts at being “ex-gay” – it required enormous, daily and conscious effort, involving not just celibacy, but speech and mannerisms, in order not to appear gay. That is because being gay is about far more than whether one is having sex or not (given my own hectic work schedule – I’ve flown nearly 60,000 miles this year for work – I can more than attest to that). It is also about one’s gender expression, one’s take on the world, one’s hopes and dreams for the future.
Now having had some time to reflect, and with CPT_Doom (or is the DVT_Doom!) additions…
Contrary to Alan’s assertion, calling someone “gay identified” when they are gay is not respectful.
“Mr Cohen is Jewish identified.”
When would one not want to say “Mr Cohen is Jewish?”
Well, when you wish to imply that he is not. Either because you think he is really something else (contrary to whatever he says) or because you don’t believe there is such a thing as a Jew in any case.
Quite apart from the fact I’m not about to allow an anti-gay group to determine what I call myself… here’s a prediction.
“Gay identified” will be used right alongside a reference to “gender confusion” and claims of “80% (of the poor souls) were abused as children” and all the other nonsense about “the roots of homosexuality”.
It’s done for the same reason as an editorial policy of writing “gay” when you mean gay.
I see the pickle they are in (no particular order, not all need apply):
1) cannot call themself straight, because they are not
2) don’t want anyone to know they are homosexual, or bisexual, in attractions
3) don’t want anyone to think that they are having gay sex
4) want others to know that they disapprove of openly gay men and women
And honestly I’m really too inclined to help resolve some silly mind-game that Nicolosi reinvented with his “non-gay homosexual”.
Probably need some help from you lot on this — brain fried after another night of spreadsheeting for a midday meeting — but what are the usual ways we would refer to, write about, mention, say:
> A Jewish woman who had rejected her faith?
> a light-skinned black man in the 1930’s who “passed” as hispanic to get a job. Would he have been “formerly negro identified”?
if you are no longer gay, wouldn’t you just be “straight”?
Hmm. I’m linking the two Guy Adams threads with this thread in my head. Since there seems to be Family Research Council linkage of homosexuality and pedophilia, does that mean we’re also going to start seeing phrases like “former gay/pedophilia oriented,” “former gay child molester oriented,” or any such other ilk? I’m not thinking these would be politically advantageous phrases to embrace, but it would be interesting to see “honest” embracing of Council for National Policy, Family Research Council, and the Traditional Values Coalition research/opinions.
According to novelist James Wheldon Johnson, he’d be ex-coloured.
Apparently the “ex-gay” side is losing public opinion and losing it fast. All the attempts to make “former homosexuals” seem favorable to the public are failing. A recent poll by the Pew Research Center found 49% of the public believe homosexuality cannot be changed. That is a 7% increase in three years (in 2003, it was 42%). The constant exposure and promotion of the ex-gay view is not helping and may be hurting their movement (seeing exgay therapists beat on pillows and hold other men could be seen as very bizarre).
ok, fine, I’ll be serious for a minute.
Aaron,
I am not one to engage in debate and I do have a sincere devotion….a sort of “mission” if you will, toward loving, understanding, and being compassionate toward not only my gay friends but gay folks in general. To me, gay folks are REAL people, not HIV statistics, public opinion polls, or percentages about promiscuity and monogamy. I really don’t care what “the public” thinks about gay folks or my desire to be in relationship with them. They are real, live people with intentions, desires, and determination to live out their lives as they see fit. They are on the same journey that I’m on….here on this earth….however we got here….and we all end up with one fate in the end. Death. So….that being said….I’d like it very much if you’d extend the same sort of courtesy to Ex-Gay folks (or giant polka-dotted turtles). They are real, live people. Not statistics. I understand entirely that you are railing against an entity here, namely the Exodus organization. But please remember, the VAST majority of ex-gays are not associated with some hidden agenda to change the public’s view of them. (sound familiar?) They just want to live their lives like you do. You can think whatever you want about them and it doesn’t change the fact that they are determined individuals, just like you.
I’m going to go ahead and apologize right now for anything I said that’s offensive in case I really ticked you or anyone else off with that writing. I don’t think it’s really aimed at you personally, if that helps! 🙂
love,
grace
I want to take back one thing I said up there….
“I really don’t care what “the public” thinks about gay folks”
That’s not true….I actually do care about that. I have this “wacky” notion that if Joe Blow were less “scared” of “the gays” then he’d in turn be less threatened by “the ex-gays”. Probably a crazy idea….but it’s what I think.
grace
Grace, I do not, and have not ever, felt badly toward sincere exgay people. The purpose of the statistics is to show that the exgay message is failing (it is not intended to be directed to anyone in particular). The exgay message is that everyone can change if he or she tries hard enough. Gay rights in Congress have been discussed in reference to this idea pushed by exgay groups. Being exgay is an individual decision, and I respect that, and almost everyone here does I believe. I have not attacked anyone personally for being exgay, and I had a friend who I gave Exodus info to because he was extremely unhappy with his homosexuality (this was well before the overly political Exodus we see now). However, the public is seeing through the falsity of Exodus and others. Can anyone change? No. Can people become actually straight? If so, it is very small? Do people suffer? Yes. Even though Exodus has been trying to be a blanket organization, it does not speak for everyone and seems to have abandonned its original mission. I think they do a disservice to actual sincere exgays. As far as using numbers, the only numbers I used were public opinion polls, and it was to show nothing about exgays–it is to show that the public is rejecting the Exodus view, and rejecting it quickly. There is no attempt to demean or hurt any exgay, and numbers are how we speak intelligently. Exodus and other groups are actually doing harm to sincere exgays.
Thanks Aaron! 🙂 You’re awesome! I think I just needed to hear all that. This stuff kinda “wears” on ya after a while, ya know? Actually, I’m sure you know because it’s really, to me, the same sort of thing either way you slice it. People use statistics all the time to make judgements about actual living, breathing gay folks. I just don’t get that. And I do see that you were not really doing that….I pretty much knew that when I wrote what I did but, hey, I feel better just having said it! So, thanks for being so gracious.
I’m thinking about writing a little book….you wouldn’t be an artist by any chance would you? I need someone (preferebly a gay guy) who could draw really cool looking giant-polka dotted turtle characters. 😉
grace
Hi Grace – I’m one of those ex-ex-gays here who thinks you’re tops. 😉 I also happen to be a published book illustrator – but polka dot turtles?! 😉
Rick
Hey Rick! Email me! If you have the time, that is…I’ll tell you my idea! I’d love to see your other work…did you know I’m going to be teaching 7th grade writing this year? OK…enough highjacking of this thread!
love,
grace
Sure, Grace, glad to. But… I can’t seem to find your email; is it listed somewhere on your site?
willfulgrace@yahoo.com
we’ll start there and then i’ll give you the real one! 😉 sorry…i thought it was somehow logged in here and would show up. keep this sort of thing in mind as you get to know me…tdub swears i have blond roots! ha!
grace
why do people need to force their dogma on others? if people want to try & change (wether or not it actually works) let them. personally i think it’s kind of silly but whatever.
However, if people are just fine and dandy the way they are, why continue to try & make them miserable?
It is the mark of true faith and intelligence to be able to tolerate different opinions, ideals, and lifestyles. if you don’t approve of it, then don’t do it, but don’t dehumanize those who do.
grace,
Thanks for reminding us. It’s important that we distinguish between ex-gay persons (I usually use the term “strugglers” – but someone should let me know if that’s offensive) and the anti-gay political ex-gay spokesmodels.
If “Ex-gay Watch” DOES change its name, I vote for “EXODUS WATCH”. With EXODUS favoring the abolition of hate crime laws, EXODUS should be the focus of our concern, not so-called “ex-gays”.
In 2002, I was almost killed and my best friend was stabbed five times in the back — both of us vitims of Hate Crimes. Jeffery was killed because our attackers hated gays.
Nevertheless, EXODUS thinks gays are “enormously priveleged” already and that Hate Crime Laws are designed to “crush Christian evangelism” and interfere with EXODUS’s “freedom of speech and assembly.”
As a subsitute for the temr “Ex-gay” (for which I think I may indeed be to blame) “Formerly Gay Identified” won’t work. Lots of people with homosexual attractions do NOT consider themselves “gay identified” — they just are aware that they are attracted to the same sex and are NOT heterosexual.
I like Joe Dallas’s (Past President of EXODUS) clarification of the term: “Christians with homosexual tendencies who would rather not have those tendencies”. At least it’s descriptive and ACCURATE.
When I originally used the term “ex-gay” (about 1975)I meant something like: “Christians who are trying to not act on their gay feelings and are hoping and praying that God will make them straight.”
I regret that it ever got into the English language, and I believe it will persist. Like Alan, I hate the term — but for different reasons.
Simply stated, it’s FALSE ADVERTIZING and it perpetuates the ideas that (1)being gay is sinful, immoral and (2) is a psychological illness/disorder that can and SHOULD be treated. That is, if you don’t want to end up burning in Hell — as Frank Worthen told me would happen to me for coming out against EXODUS.
It’s not about whether or not gays can “change” — of course we can. We change behavior all the time, but the basic PULL of our sexual attractions is toward the same sex — no matter what label we apply.
Thank you Michael for finally starting to speak out. We’ve kind of missed you.
I am glad to contribute to the discussion. I disappear for awhile (to enjoy the good life that God has given me) — and then I just MUST make a comment, especially when the ministry I helped to start opposes the very laws that PROTECT freedom of speech and assembly. We are a nation BUILT on the rights of the oppressed. OUr laws reflect that.
Hate Crime Laws don’t “crush evangelism” as EXODUS now claims. In fact, they protect it.
Another of EXODUS’s founders told me yesterday that they were “horrified” that EXODUS had taken such a stance. We (the original core-group or “founders”)wanted EXODUS to remain POLITICALLY NEUTRAL. Now, it seems to me, they have sold out to the Religious Right. Very disturbing and VERY sad.
Hate Crime laws provide extra penalties for anyone who would try to deprive ANY group of people (gay, muslim, jew, hispanic, etc) of their GOD-GIVEN rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”.
Be VERY concerned that EXODUS wants to abolish these laws.