On his personal blog, Exodus Executive Vice President Randy Thomas recently complained about an interview with a Florida newspaper. He took issue with the interviewer’s use of the word “alleged” to describe what he reported as a change in his sexual orientation:
You say that you left behind homosexuality fifteen years ago and three years into it you had this alleged sexual orientation shift away from men and sexually attracted to women?
To this Mr. Thomas responded:
I said that there was nothing “alleged” about the sexual orientation shift. It is my sexual orientation and it changed. There is nothing “alleged” about it…
… I told her, I hope kindly, that I thought her question revealed an inherent bias. For example, if someone told her that he was gay, you wouldn’t state that they are “allegedly” gay. You would think that if they say that about themselves, they would know.
This struck me as incredibly hypocritical considering Mr. Thomas’ own habitual use of the word “identified” (as in “gay identified”) when referring to individuals who have stated that they were gay, just as suggested in the hypothetical. To quote Mr. Thomas’ own words, you would think that if they say that about themselves, they would know. Yet he insists on interjecting this little bit of ex-gay newspeak as if those who report they are gay are not really, but only playing a role – something like gay house perhaps.
I would like to submit the obvious in the interviewer’s defense. Saying that one is gay, even today, is basically a statement against interest – people don’t seem to do so unless it’s true because they have nothing to gain and often a lot to lose. On the other hand, those suggesting that they were once gay, but now are not, are relatively rare, often paid to speak about it (Mr. Thomas himself), connected with scandal, or just move on. In other words, give the interviewer a break, she has good reason to distrust your statement Mr. Thomas. If you are still uncertain as to why, try Shakespeare, though this quote seems more appropriate to me.
Though I have never seen Randy Thomas but some ex-gay men may claim to be non-gay but do they act gay? By this I mean: Is he much like Ross the Intern (Jay Leno, The Tonight Show) and no matter how much you protest about not being gay you ‘act’ gay nevertheless. Does Randy Thomas exhibit some of those flaming attributes and therefore the interviewer was justified questioning his claim to be not gay?
Do not construe this to be denigrating of Ross and I was hesitant is using the term ‘flaming’. We are well aware there are certain attributes about gays that are screaming billboards they are gay…gay…GAY. For example: No matter how much I try to avoid overt demonstrations about my orientation I got busted when a friend opened my cell phone and saw my screen saver. (A picture of Rusty Joiner.)
Or: Is Randy Thomas constantly thinking of not extending his pinkie when he drinks his coffee anymore? How does Mr. Thomas act and therefore is perceived by the general public? That’s more likely why there was an inherent bias in the interviewer’s question, comprende?
Love the Hamlet quote and the dig about polyps in an earlier post, Mr. Roberts. The humor is appreciated by me. Letting down your hair (so to speak) is needed here sometimes.
If I’m not mistaken, it’s possible that Randy Thomas may be Evangelical-identified.
Cowboy, I believe the association of gossipy queeniness with “gay” is ill-conceived and presumptuous. Anecdotally speaking, in the two recent Bravo-TV reality shows Top Design and Shear Genius, several of the more flamboyant male gossips were — achhem — heterosexuals with kids. Perhaps flamboyance is more common among artsy types like Thomas, whether they are heterosexual or something else. But I’m not even sure that would be a safe assumption.
Besides, cowboy, you’ve sidestepped (somewhat) the real problem with Thomas’ gossipy and gender-variant communications: Years of exposure to the reparative therapy movement have done little to make Thomas more traditionally masculine. Yet despite the failure of these programs in Thomas’ own life, he continues to help the ex-gay movement scapegoat flexible gender roles, parents, and sexual abuse as causes of nonheterosexuality.
Let me see if I can do the math… Randy started reorientation 15 years ago. And 12 years ago Randy became heterosexual.
And last year he found a girlfriend.
Un huh
I can’t imagine why the reported used the word “alleged”.
Remember that Thomas frequently capitalized Girlfriend, as though she were an object or idol, and not a person. He described the relationship with the Girlfriend using language that contained no hint of sexual attraction or chemistry.
A healthy relationship with marriage potential is not something that one parades on blogs and in the media as though it were a badge of honor. For his own benefit, I wished that Thomas had kept his relationship private. To do otherwise simply handed fodder to Thomas’ detractors.
Oh, I would not say that “Randy Thomas may be Evangelical-identified” because he is not evangelical in the sense that he and his boss are not evangelizing for Jesus. Instead, they should be “Fundamentalist-‘Christian’-identified.” I a moderate and an Evangelical Believer; but, I am not a “Fundamentalist Christian.” Fundamentalist Christians do not practice the fundamentals of Jesus’ Gospel at all.
The last entry on the Google “habitual use” search for randythomas.org was Thomas’ “Brokeback Transamerica” blog posting. I haven’t see the movie Transamerica; but, I read first Annie Proulx’s complete, as copyrighted by her company, Brokeback Mountain short story. The New Yorker Magazine editors left out the introduction to the story which she submitted. I not only saw the movie in the theater; I purchased the DVD. The screenplay writers and director added a lot of heterosexual stuff which was not even in the short story and there was only one paragraph in the story that had anything to do with religion and it happened up on Brokeback Mtn. Everything that happened outside of Wyoming was either in the narrative or talked about by Jack Twist when he was with Ennis Del Mar in Wyoming. Jack’s wife only talked one time in the whole story. (I will add more in the next entry related to the OP here itself)
I met a guy who claimed to be an ex-gay and Church of Christ on a classmates.com Christian Discussion Forum. On “his” official profile website which was not connected with Classmates, he had a posed picture which had been taken with woman friend at a Texas Wal-Mart. It looked like she had been caught off-guard and he did have his eyes on the camera so that others could see that it was him. When I and others mentioned what we actually saw, he did remove the picture. He was not a stable person and because he knew how to create website pages, he would do that for pay. And without the owner’s permission, he would add “ministry” pages of his own promoting himself. They just did not know he did that.
Thomas’ boss, Alan Chambers, as is linked in that blog entry I cited above. Chambers publicly tells his supporters he is now a heterosexual, although he admitted to a CNN reporter he still experiences sexual attractions to men. I saw that on Anderson Cooper’s 360 program series “What is a Christian.”
Oh, I believe that “Ross the Intern” is gay; but, his being a reporter for Jay Leno’s Tonight Show is just a part of Leno’s comedy. Ross might be as effeminate in real life; but, he apparently is just camping it up as Jay’s Intern. If he was really what he acted like, none of the famous people he meets and knows whom he is would not be very comfortable in his presence. IMO, of course. I do know a few things about acting, too. I was paid for being an extra once and as a high school teacher, I was paid extra to be a Junior Class Play director.
I can “act gay,” too. But, most folks who don’t know me can’t even guess that I am gay when they see me in person. When I was hiding in the closet, none of the women whom I dated ever knew that I was not heterosexual. Most of those I dated showed they were interested in me first and I just took advantage of that. Since I like hugging, kissing and holding hands with friends, even women, I just acted like any other man would with them while on a date. I did want to get married, too.
While I will never know if Randy has changed his sexual orientation (that is up to him to tell the truth about it–and he may be telling the truth), he has always seemed like a shell on his blog. I also suspect there are people who are gay who seriously believe they are straight, but I do not know if Randy’s situation fits here.
As I said, he seems like a shell–everything is very pat in presenting a certain political viewpoint. The website seems rather shallow–almost never moving into real discussion, and any attempts are shut down. Everything is a Republican talking points. There is an old theory about exgays being used and created for Republican purposes, and Randy’s posts support that. He never goes against Republican points. The girlfriend issue has always felt that way too. There is no real discussion about his girlfriend and few pictures. His reference to girlfriend does feel like my attempts in high school to proove to people I was straight. I would not use my girlfriend’s name–she just was. Now, to be fair, Randy does seem to believe more in a feminine ideal–that she should be a woman of God and fit a certain type, and maybe he wants to respect that. Still, it does not seem like the blog of a heterosexual male.
Ultimately though, I can’t judge his orientation and neither can anyone else. Hopefully he is being honest with himself, his girlfriend, and the society who believes in him.
It probably does not matter how Thomas acts or speaks. The reason that the interviewer doubted his “alleged” reorientation was because it doesn’t really make logical sense.
Randy Thomas and others in the ex-gay movement seem to go out of their way to criticize gay folks who question the veracity of the ex-gay claims of change in orientation. What they aren’t acknowledging is that nobody really believes them unless they have a vested interest (like the parent desperately hoping that there is some way that their kid can’t be gay). Even amongst their evangelical supporters, is their any high profile heterosexual individual whose kid or grandkid married an ex-gay?
The normal response to anyone announcing that they were gay, and are now “completely heterosexual” is disbelief. That is not bias; that is being skeptical about outrageous claims. If the claim was that they werre bisexual (and probably always were), then claims that they were exploring their heterosexual side would be more believable.
Timothy mentioned Randy’s math problem and the Girlfriend about a year ago. I found it rather convenient that ever-single Randy found himself a Girlfriend just before he was promoted to Vice President of Exodus. Others on this forum probably know more about this, but it’s my impression that a marriage is probably a requirement to become President of Exodus.
I know that my sexual orientation shifted toward women three years into the process (12 years ago) and there is nothing alleged about it… it happened. And yes, I am much more sexually and romantically attracted to women today and have zero desire to be romantically or sexually involved with a man.
Would I ever want a same sex relationship again? I don’t think so but I am not stupid. Temptations come. The question then becomes will I allow that to determine who I am and how I behave. No, temptations do not and hopefully will not have that power over me.
Randy, honey.
Heterosexual men aren’t tempted to have sex with other men.
Robbi Kenney, an “ever-straight” woman who had been dumped by her gay boyfriend, and went on to become one of the founders of EXODUS: “Know what you are offering. … You are NOT offering heterosexuality… [but] the power to come into celibacy.”
Ed Hurst, EXODUS pioneer, commenting in a recent blog posting: “The notion that ex-gay means heterosexual is a total fallacy“. Ex-gay actually was meant to “vex and provoke the media” and only means “from gay” or “out of gay”, not straight.
Joe Dallas of EXODUS: “Ex-gay does not mean ex-homosexual. It’s just a convenient way of saying a Christian with homosexual tendencies who would rather not have those tendencies. It just rolls off the tongue a little easier…” Joe Dallas told the Joan Rivers’ show audience that “change” he was talking about only meant “moving closer to one end of the spectrum” (apparently, a “straighter” bisexuality) not heterosexuality.
Alan Chambers, EXODUS president: “We should do away with the term (ex-gay) and see to it that it is never used again.” Alan states that is “does not accurately convey what the change process is all about…” Interesting to note that he continues to call himself “former homosexual”— but does not bother to explain or define this.
With all of this semantic confusion (and sometimes deliberate “vexing” of the media) how can Randy Thomas get upset when the media reflects similar confusion about “alleged” changes in his sexual orientation? Even EXODUS leaders (1) can’t decide what to call themselves, (2) still have ongoing (sometimes daily) “gay struggles” (unlike straights) and (3) seem to admit that becoming straight, is not what “change” is really all about. And Randy is upset? Maybe EXODUS should hold a yearly conference to clear up this mess.
For someone who deals with the press, Thomas doesn’t seem to understand the notion of journalistic bias. The question was framed on the basis of his OWN admitted previous behavior and his CLAIMED behavior later.
This is part of the fundie dilemma. They are so committed to only certain kinds of acceptable sexual “behavior” that it is more difficult for them to prove their own sexual orientation, since ideally they are only allowed to express it in terms of procreation. Even then, the evidence points that merely the “second time around” expression of producing children does not make one exclusively heterosexual.
It might be Thomas’ ex-gay-for-pay job to professionally claim to be “heterosexual,” but his own admitted and publicized past contradicted that notion. No matter what, he can never be fully heterosexual because he already (and apparently instinctively) expressed himself as a homosexual.
The question was not out of line. He should have just admitted to bisexuality – except that would be professionally hazardous to his career.
Oh, on Thomas’ website which is really just a blog, is link to his online photo album at flickr.com Randy Thomas’ Photos
He has pics of his male room mate there, too. Does anyone know the roomie’s name?
Good thing he takes his camera with him for photo ops with politicos and with women whom he holds close, too.
gordo,
Can I amend your statement a bit:
True heterosexual men aren’t tempted to have sex with other men.
Sober heterosexual men aren’t tempted to have sex with other men.
Take your pick.
(Please don’t dash any of my fantasies!)**
But I concur: (as per John) it doesn’t matter how Randy Thomas speaks or acts.
In the comments section of the above referenced post from Randy Thomas’ Blog is the following statement from Randy:
“The story behind this story just got really … bad. We are investigating. I thought the interview went well … and it did but what she did with some of my other friends was unscrupulous.
More later I am sure.”
It sounds like the sort of intrigue from some bad 70’s cop show. I can’t imagine that this journalist is planning to do anything rmore than a very uncomplimentary expose. I would find it very entertaing reading to hear what tactics are going to be used in the “investigation.”
Joe, those pictures are well…weird. He has only 9 pictures with his girlfriend (out of over 600 pictures). The vast majority of pictures with people in them are male oriented.
Even the girlfriend pictures look very posed–they all have about the same pose.
To compare–a straight friend of mine who just married his sweetheart takes almost every picture with his wife (and before that, his girlfriend). His desk and blog are filled with pics of his girlfriend (alone and with him). Randy’s pics seem very, umm, comparmentalized. Maybe it is an oversight, but he loves pictures–is it simply his girlfriend does not like pictures taken of her? I think the journalist was not being unfair by saying alleged.
For my domestic partnership, I was required to show proof of relationship. I had to essentially prove I was gay to the state. What level of proof do we ask from exgays as evidence?
Here’s my comment on Mr. Thomas’ blog:
Randy,
I can understand your WANTING your sexual orientation to have changed. However, I know full well the power of denial, especially when it comes to not wanting to be gay. You see, I was in the closet for 37 years, got married, had children and tried all kinds of self-delusion to avoid admitting the truth. I feel sorry that you cannot accept that maybe, just maybe GOD made you gay. On my blog https://michael-in-norfolk.blogspot.com/ I am recounting my story so that others do not make the same mistakes, particularly the (in retrospect) selfish mistake of getting married in order to be “straight,” “normal, or whatever you may label it.
I pity the straight spouses in relationships with those you have helped to delude themselves into thinking they have changed their sexual orientation. Also, I am curious whether or not you draw a salary from Exodus. I am very familiar with those who are “ex-gay” for pay. Ask Michael Johnston, for example: https://www.washingtonblade.com/2003/8-8/news/national/exgay.cfm
Moderator Action: Comment removed because it was not a comment, but a full copy and paste of a book release, and off topic as well. This commenter was asked not to do this before and is now banned.
I wonder, has Mr. Thomas ever once condemned the Christian Press (Agape, CNSN etc) using quotes around the words “gay” and “marriage” even when it seems somewhat inappropriate to do so in a straight news story about gay issues? Mr. Thomas objects it seems to an attack on his personal identity. I can certainly understand this perspective but I question just how sincere and deeply held his concern is for others personal identities.
Gordo wrote:
My friend, John, who self-identifies as a Native-American “Two-Spirit” (gay) and likes to camp it up at times since he is otherwise masculine, would say, “Y’all got that right, girlfriend!” I also identify as a Two-Spirit who is masculine.
I have had bisexual acquaintances who were swingers and they told me men who are straight would have same-gender sex in orgy situations when there was a woman in the same room. But, when they had their clothes on and elsewhere, they did not want to have sex with men at all. I put Romans 1:26-27 in that category where pagan fertility rituals for heterosexuals actually turned into orgies with the men having sex with each other, instead of with the female votary/temple prostitutes. One has to go to extra-biblical sources for that information.
Aaron, I did look at all of Thomas’ photos on Flickr.com. It has lots of pics of flowers and other things which, stereotypically, would be of interest to gays or straight women unless the man was a professional photographer doing a travelogue with photos. I do have Flickr account, too.
Oh, Thomas did write in his Thursday, December 08, 2005 blog that “Alan Chambers was his boss.” Sounds like “ex-gay for pay” to me.
I just checked Randy Thomas’ blog and sure enough, he edited out the second paragraph of the comment I left yesterday evening (and posted above on this site). I guess he and other professional ex-gays for pay cannot tolerate their readers finding out how many of their advertised “success stories” are frauds. These “Christians” never let the truth get in the way of their marketing agenda.
Randy Thomas is the executive vice president of Exodus International, so there is no question about whether Alan Chambers is his boss, and from where he draws his salary. Is that what you meant?
This is one of the reasons I don’t post on his blog. Like NARTH (before they closed their blog), content is edited without any comment in the open, simply because the subject is inconvenient. He has tried to justify this on a number of occasions, but I don’t comment when the fix is in – it’s inherently unfair. If content must be edited, then it should be noted for others to see.
To their credit, Mike Ensley and Alan Chambers do not, to my knowledge, seem to do this on their blogs.
David wrote:
Yes, that is what I meant. Thomas does not seem to have another job and he definitely lives in Florida where Exodus International is HQ’d.
Yes, Randy’s inability on his webpage to have an actual dialogue bothers me.
I queried Randy regarding his thoughts on this particular article. He said that he does not read this blog nor was he willing to promote it on his own (he edited my comment ever so slightly). Here is what he wrote me regarding the main thrust of this post…
He also stated that he thought the writer (David) was
I guess I would buy that opinion a bit more had he actually read this article. But then, I don’t know all the history between this site and Randy.
j.
LOL, oh he reads it, trust me.
He has more history with Mike than me – I made an attempt to communicate with him early on but emails went unanswered and when he did post a comment on his blog, he would replace the XGW url in the field on the comment box with “blogwhichIdontwishtopromote.com” or something similar. When I saw that I realized he was a bit too childish to deal with.
As to the nuance comment, well if that is the case let’s see him stop using that silly “gay-identified” language, or for that matter “living homosexually” or “homosexually inclined.” He knows the implication – he’s been told many times – but using them is a passive-aggressive jab, a kind of “semantic evangelizing.”
I’ve avoided writing much about him because, well to be honest I don’t like reading his blog. I do read it because it’s necessary, but after a few posts you know what the next ones will be like. Considering his position in Exodus, we should report more on some of the wild things he says. I’ll put that on the To Do list.
David,
I would very much encourage you to post more about what Randy Thomas is saying and doing. My impression in monitoring his blog is that he has significantly ramped up his commenting and attacks on everyone since becoming Vice President of Exodus. He seems to have taken on the position of primary spokesperson for Exodus, with Alan shrinking more into the backround.
I’m serious about what I said earlier. If he’s not willing to respect how we describe ourselves, why should we believe him when he describes himself?
He’s Christian-identified. He wasn’t born Christian. He became Christian either through his parenting or through the influence of his peers. One way or another, it was entirely environmental.
In fact, the more I think about it, there really isn’t any such thing as a Christian. It’s just a label to describe a choice or a behavior. There’s not such thing as a Christian. He’s Christian-identified.
Again, I would have to agree – good point.
Since Randy indicates that many people still view him as gay, we could say that Randy is “gay identified.” He isn’t gay self-identified, but there is no indication of who has to do the identifying.
Well, Randy would call that “gay fundamentalism” (I’m not joking). There is a not so cryptic pretense behind all this “use different words for the same things” and it goes beyond just the insult. Even if we were to assume that Randy is just a Christian sharing his beliefs, the idea is to be all things to all people, not create your own language that puts them off before you even get your point across (or is what he says with his language the point).
If his overriding purpose in life is truly to evangelize, he is missing the boat with gays. There is no way that a truly compassionate Christian would let pet language idiosyncrasies get in the way of sharing the Good News, and yet he does exactly that. Narcissism knows no bounds with this one. I just can’t find a way to trust him on any level.
As Jim Burroway noted, Randy Thomas is not a Christian, he is merely Christian-identified.
Thomas worships a religion of political correctness in which words are policed and twisted, and actions are geared toward coercing and enforcing conformity of one’s surroundings to the artificial ideology that one has created around oneself.
As several commenters have noticed, Thomas dishonestly edits his commenters’ writings to mislead his readers and to make his commenters appear to conform to his artificial ideology.
Thomas demonstrates little faith that God is capable of running the world — instead, he is an insecure evangelist for correctness who hopes in vain to control and manipulate reality. He is perhaps a little bitter at God because He has not run the world in the correct fashion that Thomas desires, but more importantly, Thomas is deeply afraid that if he does not evangelize and win others to his political correctness, his artificial reality will crumble like a sand castle. Such fear is not, in my opinion, the mark of a man of great faith.
Thomas’ insecurity is demonstrated in political ways — his censorship of others, his relentless use of politically correct language, his unequal treatment of violent hate crimes, his defense of Repent America thuggery — and in personal ways, such as his inordinate amount of time spent writing of air travels, hotel stays, and photo ops with almost-famous partisans who share his insecurity and his correctness.
The reason Thomas hates politically correct leftists so much is precisely because he has become just like them: elitist, insecure, a bit immature, and determined to sin against others in order to preserve one’s flawed grasp of reality.
Jim Burroway wrote:
Jim, my writing here as an academically educated theologian in this reply, I definitely agree with you. None of the Apostles and Disciples in the New Testament books supported a Believer in Jesus calling himself “Christian.” I am also “Christian-identified” by those who call themselves, “Christian,” atheists, and agnostics. I got cussed out royally by atheists and agnostics in a My Space group for “Discussions WITH and ABOUT Fundamentalist Christians;” because I would not write “I am a Christian.” I am certainly not a Biblical Fundamentalist. I have never heard our current President say, “I am a Christian;” but, lots of folks who claim to know him say, “George W. Bush is a ‘Born-Again’ Christian.”
I am reminded of what I read on John Paulk’s Mezza Luna catering website. His bio does not say he is a Christian; it says that he and his wife are involved in the local faith community. Oh, loosely translated “Mezza Luna” means “half moon.”