As a public school teacher, I’ve been calling for the reversal of the “open forum” ruling on student backpacks for quite some time, including this little blurb in the 5th paragraph of an XGW article last March. As far as I’m concerned, backpacks should be used to carry materials to and from school which pertain explicitly to the education of the student as outlined in the school’s curriculum and implemented by the student’s teacher.
Instead, we have the once again upheld “open forum” ruling which allows any Tom, Dick, Harry, or PFOX organization to print up flyers and send them home in the interest of free speech for all community groups. The lawyers representing PFOX refer to them as
“a community outreach program to people involved in homosexual behavior”
and says they provide
“support to children and families of children with same sex attraction”.
And this is an appropriate sort of flyer to send home in the backpacks of elementary school children? Long gone are the days when little Suzy and Johnny arrived home with nothing more than a book, a math page, and possibly information about signing up for Karate, Girl/Boy Scouts, or a community sport. Suzy and Johnny can now arrive home with information letting them know it’s possible to “overcome” their unwanted same sex attractions and encouraging their parents to seek “help” for them.
A backpack is a tool to be used for the purposes of the school and it’s curriculum; it is not the place for promoting unproven, unsupervised, and overwhelmingly harmful psychological techniques.
OK, so let me see if I have this correct:
• PFOX and Cohen want to send out flyers to CHILDREN (the oldest of the bunch would be 13-14 year-olds).
• PFOX’s main customers – the people who advocate reparative therapy – are so-called “family values” people.
• “Family values” people are the same lot who protested the “traumatic” moment of Janet Jackson’s exposed nipple on TV.
• PFOX wants the children of “family values” parents to come home and start talking openly about their struggles with homosexual feelings.
And how exactly would this frank discussion of “deviant” sexuality start?? I have friends of LIBERAL parents who had a hard time talking about basic sexual stuff. And, I don’t know about anyone else, but I didn’t really start to become aware of my sexuality in a mature sense until I was in 9th grade (high school.) Even as a 13-year-old, everything that made me a sexual being in any way had to be sorted out, so there wasn’t any point in going into therapy to change any of it. After all, you can’t do laundry until you sort the clean and dirty clothes.
It’s like the front yard lemonade stand kids trying to tell the local grocery store how to do their business. Why are these people not being laughed out of court?
Not to mention the fact that they EQUATE homosexuality with anal sex. They’d have to teach it to the kids first before teaching that it was wrong?!
I’m with you, Pam, handouts to kids should be limited to the curriculum or to health and safety information from public officials/organizations.
But I know that the Catholic school I grew up in would likely be happy to hand out a PFOX flyer.
I think it’s important to note that this was a settlement that lead to the dismissal of the case, NOT a victorious legal ruling setting precedent for later challenges. The important message here is that we should all support our schools when forced to litigate against radical religious organizations such as PFOX.
It didn’t appear clear from the linked blurb what the specifics of the settlement were – for example, perhaps the fliers are more clearly labeled to indicate that they are not the official teachings or message of the school, or a disclaimer that it contains a religious message parents may disagree with? It’s not uncommon for ADF to spin victory in ambiguous decided or dismissed cases; it probably boosts donations! I’ll see if I can dig up more on this case if I have time later today….
You know that after reading this article and other similar ones I see it as only part of the big picture of a growing and now collosal case against the ex-gay movement (not to mention calling to mind other civil and human rights issues) that is growing across this country due to the neo-fascist religious zealotry that has swept across our country all in the name of God. There is going to be a huge backlash against all of this in the next few years (it has already begun) and it will involve implementing new laws and there will be zero tolerance for this kind of bigotry in our public schools. It will be spelled out very succinctly and clearly which will not allow for any loopholes or legal exceptions that PFOX, FOF or any other similar organizations or individuals may try to use.
These are Constitutional Issues and as Thom Hartman says “democracy begins with you. Tag you’re it.” We need to speak out and speak out loudly to all of our political representatives regarding bigotry and hatred against the GLBT people in our public schools and everywhere. Our Constitution is in peril if we do not speak out for what use is this great document if we do not use it in the protection of our freedoms and rights?
It is an open forum, right? PFOX can send their materials home just like the Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts or a myriad other extracurricular activities? Where are PFLAG’s brochures and fliers? What about GLSEN? What about local LGBT teen/youth support groups? Hey, PFOX wanted an open forum, I’m sure we could help in their effort.
Matt, I think such a scenario is one of Pam’s concerns. She is a teacher, and as such deals directly with all the non-school related materials teachers are asked to deliver to kids who will most likely never read them.
If PFOX can bring their vile material in schools, then what’s to stop the Church of Jesus Christ-Christian (Aryan Nations) from bringing racist propaganda to these kids as well?
Understood; completely. Correct me if I’m wrong, but from what I understand, PFOX and the school board have already settled and their fliers will be distributed. If this is a real thing, if PFOX *will* be doing this, then is it not in the best interest of LGBT youth and LGBT families and others related to LGBT people for LGBT-affirming groups to counter the message of PFOX with their own literature?
I’m not saying flood the schools, but if PFOX will be doing this, then some sort of positive and affirming counter measure is surely needed. If the Gay-Straight Alliances already present within the schools might be the best avenue toward accomplishing this, then perhaps our community needs to think of some great new ways of supporting them if we don’t want to go the route of putting in our own literature.
Just a suggestion.
PS – I’m already upset that the Boy Scouts get to recruit through public schools. I was dismissed from Scouting at the age 14 for being openly gay and for starting a GSA at my high school.
I understand completely, Matt. I just know that Pam is sad to see this situation forced by that decision. I personally think a well rounded sex-ed program as part of the standard curriculum is the best answer, while limiting the “backpack” handouts to official school information only.
I’m truly sorry about your experience with the Boy Scouts. Their actions over the past 15 years or so have been a real black eye for that organization.
Speaking as a queer whose GSA helped in creating a wonderful environment at my high school, I say GLSEN orgs should NOT distribute countering materials should PFOX act. Let PFOX’s own actions explode in their face.
(sorry for the novel)
From TeachTheFacts.org
February 05, 2007
In fact that whole TTF February archive page is rife with understanding. (and yet in a good way..)
I get the sense that this is Dover all over. They’re trying to get religion into the schools for the purpose of political gain. What I don’t understand is why this isn’t getting the press play it deserves.
This isn’t about flyers, or even necessarily the well being of students. It’s about a political power grab, and then it’s about allowing the ciminally insane to indoctrinate children who go to public schools into their immorally supremacist lifestyles. IMO
Just because some of them may be “sincere,” and not “intending” to cause harm, does not mean that they are not a definable and measurable THREAT.
I guess my issue/question is, imagine if that flyer was promoting Intelligent design, and they called themselves something like ‘Parents and friends of Ex-evolutionists.’ Would we be treating the situation differently? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m thinking that the Main stream press would be.
The parallels to me are striking, not just in implimentaion tactics, but in principle.
Evolution is a workable theory because it’s based on empirical evidence, Creationism, even dressed up as ID, is an assumption. An assumption–religion based or not–is not a theory.
One could say the same about the relationship with the “theory” of homosexuality and the idea of being ex-gay. The evidence of the innateness of homosexuality is overwhelming. It can’t all be proven any more than evolution can, but the political ex-gay reality exists for the sole pupose of poking holes in what is already known to be true. Just like ID does for evolution.
They screwed up on implementing ID in the attempt to usurp the foundation of science, and therefore rational thought (for the sake of Theocracy). But also did so on an argument based on assumptions. Which speaks volumes about their own “intelligence.”
I’m not even suggesting that there’s any ‘centralized’ conspiracy. There’s plenty of evidence for that, and much if not most of it true. But it’s been my experience that these people ALL THINK EXACTLY ALIKE.
Their defense mechanistic answers to every legitimate question thrown at them are ALWAYS THE SAME, no matter who or where they are. Ok I’m generalizing a bit there, but I think that most people here can relate to my point.
So other than the mainstream press not catching up with this (and I realize that this story is not as tangible as ID/Dover et al), but simply speaking, how is this different than Dover? How is it any different from the political attempt to “teach the controversy?” (of ID)
I say we need to be on every iota of this particular ex-gay controversy ALL THE TIME.
To “teach the ‘ex-gay’ controversy,” is to teach the question as to whether or not being gay is a choice.
Whether they realize it or not, the content of PFOX’s flyers isn’t the controversy, it’s about their “right” to be controversial that’s at issue. And I think we need to be able to articulate, at a moment’s notice, why they in particular do not have this right.
And that’s specifically WHY they don’t have that right, because it is indeed about THEM, PFOX, in particular — and NOT about the right to be controversial.
David and Emily,
Thanks for conveying my thoughts and feelings so well. Emily, it’s early and I don’t have all 5 of my brain cells working at full speed, but I applaud your analysis above.
While I’m certainly no PFOX fan, my point remains that the Open Forum ruling is not in the best interest of public school students based on the simple fact that it steals valuable instructional time (you’d be surprised how much time we spend doling this stuff out). I’m an advocate for a media space where this stuff is displayed and folks can browse through and pick up flyers of interest. As it stands now, most schools do offer this service and this is so the office staff doesn’t have to spend their valuable time giving little Johnny another baseball sign-up since Mom accidentally used the first one in the cat box.
I’m sure the Open Forum ruling has it’s merits in specific situations, however, it’s become ridiculous when folks like PFOX can highjack it’s intended purposes for their hate-filled agenda.
Pam I do not think PFOX has a hate-filled agenda. Is the only gay-politically correct conclusion for a teenager who discovers his same sex attractions to come out gay? PFOX´s agenda is that having same sex attractions does not necessarily mean one is gay. PFOX wants to be granted equal access, such as organisations such as PFLAG has. PFOX does not claim that having same sex attractions is a choice. But they rightly claim that some can overcome their same sex attractions. PFOX has a lot of moms, who love their children and want what they think is best for them. These moms and PFOX also fight against intolerance and bullying of those who have same sex attractions.
Many involved in PFOX are raised with Christian values and have a hard time accepting that their sons and daughters come out gays and lesbians. Many believe that PFLAG and other pro gay organizations are promoting a sinful “lifestyle” and that they are trying to “recruit” children and pushing “The pro gay agenda” that gay sex is normal and desirable. PFOX stands for Parents and Friends Of ex-gays and gays. There is no doubt that they are friends of ex-gays. Proving that they are friends of gays still need to be seen and should be given some more focus by PFOX. Otherwise they should come clean and say that their love for people with same sex attractions, gays and lesbian are conditional upon these trying to change. PFOX strongly believe that no one is born gay and that same sex attractions are the result of various sorts of “Brokenness” that needs to be overcome. PFOX supporters most often think sexual relations outside of a marriage between a man and woman are sinful. That includes gay sex. That is in opposition to pro gay organizations that sees same sex attractions as a natural variation in human sexuality, and same sex relationships as natural and just as healthy as heterosexual relationships. PFOX supporters are most often devout conservative Christians belonging to various Christian denominations.
Perhaps Pam could expand a little on, what she sees is the hate filled agengda PFOX has?
Marcus, the accusations about PFLAG that are made by you and PFOX are unsubstantiated. So is your assertion that PFOX merely wants equal access. And while I have little doubt that some in PFOX are raised with Christian values, so are those that PFOX is battling.
Please substantiate your assertions from material evidence, so that we can have a productive discussion. Without substantiation, we’re left with meaningless he-said-she-said bickering.
Specifically, here are some things that I encourage you to substantiate:
What specific actions or statements has PFLAG issued, which justify your claims?
Why does PFOX oppose antidiscrimination laws, and how does that relate to being in favor of equal access?
Why does PFOX refuse to submit scientifically and medically substantiated materials for review by Washington-area school officials?
Why should PFOX’s materials — which contain no objective and verifiable evidence that sexual orientation is changeable, and which suppress evidence of biological factors — be included in school educational curricula that are required to be based on facts, not ideology?
Many thanks in advance for helping me better understand your perspective.
Take note of all the reasons Mike mentions. They are the same reasons that “Intelligent Design” (Creationism) failed to make it into the curriculum in Dover, PA – and most of the schools in the US.
Marcus, you provided the very example:
PFOX strongly believe … same sex attractions are the result of various sorts of “Brokenness” that needs to be overcome.
1) I’m not broken. Neither is my partner. Nor any of our families. Nor any of the many gay, bi and lesbian friends that we have. We all have our quirks, as does everyone, but we are demonstrably not broken and tortured individuals.
Even taking out any of the religious mumbo-jumbo (which people will either believe or they won’t), the way PFOX talks about us is slanderous. And they will do this regardless of all the evidence put before them.
2) I don’t “need” to do anything to please the people in PFOX. That sort of talk betrays an attitude that is disrespectful.
Frankly, they can mind their own business — and my life isn’t part of their business. Get it?
I fail to see why I should remain silent about (let alone admire) a group that lies about my life, wants to have people conform to their ideas about how people should live for no agreeable reason, and actively campaigns to put me at a political, religious, social and legal disadvantage.
With friends like that, who needs enemies?
These moms and PFOX also fight against intolerance and bullying of those who have same sex attractions.
So PFOX doesn’t think that bombarding gay kids with the message that there is something wrong with them isn’t a form of bullying? PFOX doesn’t think that bombarding their peers with the message that there is something wrong with gays doesn’t encourage bullying?
Nice alibi.
Mike I do not make any “accusations” or claims about PFLAG. I only stated what most supporters of PFOX think about PFLAG. I Wrote
I hope you saw all the ” ” ” ” ” ” . I do not use the words; lifestyle, recruit, or the pro gay agenda. And yes it is my assertion that PFOX merely wants equal access to promote their viewpoints.
This is a question I can not answer on behalf on PFOX. What antidiscrimination Laws have PFOX opposed and why? Personally I do not oppose any antidiscrimination laws for LGBT-people. I do however wish that ex-gays will be included in these antidiscrimination laws. Some ex-gay individuals are beeing discriminated against and subject to the same hate and antidiscrimination as LGBT-people are. Do you support the inclusion of ex-gays in the antidiscrimination laws you mentioned?
Did PFLAG and GLSEN submit “submit scientifically and medically substantiated materials” before they could make GSAs or hand out materials? Is this not applying a double standard?
I really hope that objective and verifiable peer-reviewed scientific evidence showing that change in sexual orientation will be produced. And what objective and verifiable evidence is there that Same sex attractions are CAUSED by biological factors? I think many factors contribute to an individual having same sex attractions. The best answer however is that we do not know. Personally I do tend to believe that biological factors may be involved.
But that is a long debate. It was discussed in this article, and I subscribe to the statements made there:
https://www.adherents.com/misc/glbt_science.html
So whose ideology should the curricula be based on? PFOX or PFLAG? Or both? Is it a matter of political correctness or facts?
Grantdale: I am happy for you that you are wholesome and not broken. A minority of people with same sex attractions do however feel that their attractions are unwanted and a result of a brokenness and they hope to heal from that brokenness. Others can not find anything they are in need of healing from and they embrace their same sex attractions as part of who they are. I know having same sex attractions is not “A choice”. How we deal with it is however. And different people will make different choices based on many factors. I subscribe to libertarian standpoints and I want everybody to have the freedom to pursue a life in congruence with their values. Ex-gay individuals do not deserve the witch hunt they are being subjected to. As long as they grant others freedom and equal rights to pursue happiness, they really pose no threat to GLBT-people.
I, and many like me, are or have in the past been “broken and tortured individuals.” Not because of being gay, but because of the reaction many have to that fact. Having to grow up in a closet because gay is “sin, etc.,” is torture and some break from the torture. Ex-gay ‘ministries’ add a few of their own devices of torture to the closet to help the breaking process along.
Marcus Loewe –
Right now it should be about facts – and those facts do not favor PFOX!! The only thing science says for certain is that homosexuality is not a disease, and that while some in the small minority that have sought help with their orientation have benefited, many others have been damaged and traumatized by the help they received. THAT is what we should teach our kids – That Reparative Therapy isn’t supported by any of the major medical, nursing, social work, or psychiatric organizations in this country. Kids should learn THE FACTS, and not the ideology of a tiny minority.
I don’t know of any reputable scientist who doesn’t believe that all behaviors: straight, gay, etc, aren’t influenced by both genetic and environmental factors. I’m pretty certain that is well-established at this point. AND, much to the chagrin of some uber-conservative Christians, there is evidence for a strong genetic component – Try this article:
Gay Choice????
And as far as I know, PFOX tows the Exodus line when it comes to equal rights and anti-discrimination, and that is they battle equal rights for gay people in marriage and in other arenas. They don’t seem to think that “equal access” applies to others, just to them. You might want to understand their hypocrisy, and the harm they espouse, before you go championing them.
MARCUS –
In addition, the link you gave to that article at adherents.com, is published on a religious site, and is written by two people who are religious conservatives and who have contributed to NARTH – one of the most biased and non-scientific organizations in this country. Their article talks about the politicizing of the immutability of homosexuality, and yet their writings are the most political I’ve seen. They are obviously driven by their own conservative religious beliefs and by politics as well – especially if they are willing contributors to NARTH. That is the most biased article I have seen outside of those at NARTH – and frankly, I’m surprised you didn’t see this yourself.
I’m all for objective and peer-reviewed studies as well, but articles like the one you published a link to, don’t even come close to being real science – that article is nothing more than a justification of political and religious beliefs.
Marcus — nice try at avoidance, but we are not discussing your opinions or your access to school children. We are discussing PFOX and their awful message.
As long as they grant others freedom and equal rights to pursue happiness, they really pose no threat to GLBT-people.
In that case, are you agreeing that PFOX (and Exodus, and Warren Throckmorton, and NARTH etc etc) are a threat to GLBT-people?
(It is a simple fact that each have at some time or other campaigned to either maintain or extend the unequal legal or social treatment of GLBT-people.)
Also feel free to detail this witch hunt — the “hate and discrimination” — that ex-gays are being subjected to. You keep making this statement, here and elsewhere, but you haven’t once provided any evidence to support the claim.
The last time I checked there were no organised groups going into schools (or anywhere, for that matter) telling straight kids that they were sexually broken and both should and could become gay; if only they tried hard enough.
I also cannot remember the last time someone was beaten up for being straight, a teacher was fired for being straight, someone suicided because they were straight, or a time when groups of people have attempted to outlaw straight marriages. Has a parent ever kicked their child out of home for being straight, or forced them into gay conversion therapy?
Again, examples please.
And yes it is my assertion that PFOX merely wants equal access to promote their viewpoints.
Swell. I’m sure white supremacist groups merely want to have equal access to promote Their viewpoints in the schools too. But what good does it do the kids? That’s the question here.
Holding the people who are ‘ex-gay for pay’ accountable for their actions and words is hardly a witch hunt. These are people who are using their stories to gain access to people of political power, people who can influence how gays and lesbians are treated. If other ex-gays are feeling targeted because of the problematic words from their fellow ex-gays, maybe they should turn their frustration on their own instead of blaming those of us who’ve decided enough is enough and we aren’t going to be puppets of the religious right anymore. As I’ve said before, my choice to pursue ex-gay therapy was a personal one, I certainly didn’t pursue this so Mr. Chambers, Mr. Thomas and others could schmooze with Dobson and the President and run around this country lobbying against gay marriage and getting paid to tell straight people what they want to hear. I pursued ex-gay therapy because I thought that’s what was required of me. And yes I’ve since determined that I asked the impossible of myself and now decry that which I pursued, but there is no witch hunt here, just a demand for truth and honesty, something that Christians say they treasure but seem unwilling to pursue when it comes to the whole debate on sexuality.
So whose ideology should the curricula be based on? PFOX or PFLAG? Or both? Is it a matter of political correctness or facts?
Facts…did you say? Hey…I’m all about letting the facts speak for themselves. Let’s air a few facts here shall we?
The article you link to there says of A. Dean Byrd that he is “…a trained scientist and board licensed psychologist.” What it doesn’t say is that he’s is a vice president of NARTH and a member of its Scientific Advisory Committee. I doubt NARTH’s bogus junk science in the service of anti-gay prejudice needs any further elaboration here. Why weren’t his NARTH credentials mentioned there I wonder?
Shirley E. Cox is said at the end of that article to be :…a licensed clinical social worker”. She’s also served on the board of Evergreen International, a Mormon ex-gay ministry, and co-authored Evergreen’s “Workbook for Men”. She is a regular speaker at NARTH conferences. Why wasn’t that connection mentioned there I wonder?
Jeffrey W. Robinson is said to be “…a licensed marriage and family therapist.” He’s also listed in NARTH conference material for his workshop on “Context-Specific Therapy (CST) for Unwanted Homosexual Thoughts, Feelings and Behaviors” where he’s described as someone who “…specializes in the treatment of same-sex attraction.” No mention of his NARTH connection either. Or his Evergreen one. I see he’s been speaking at Evergreen conferences since at least 1998. Why not mention that?
So what you have in that linked article isn’t a group of doctors and scientists who dispassionately examined the evidence for a biological basis for sexual orientation and found it wanting. That was a NARTH document…and NARTH has a long and fragrant track record of not letting facts get in the way of their bar stool prejudices. But the connection of each and every one of that article’s authors to NARTH and the Ex-Gay Movement was carefully omitted. Why do you suppose that was?
Facts? Facts? Sure…let’s see some. How about finding us some real scientists who dispute the evidence of a biological basis for sexual orientation? Or doesn’t PFOX even know what real science looks like anymore?
Marcus,
“Some ex-gay individuals are beeing discriminated against and subject to the same hate and antidiscrimination as LGBT-people are.”
I am unaware of a single instance in which an ex-gay person was discriminated against because they were ex-gay. Please either provide evidence of this claim or cease making it.
I do not doubt, however, that there are ex-gay persons that are discriminated against because they appear to be gay.
Yet PFOX, the group you are championing, has lobbied to remove “sexual orientation” from school based anti-bullying efforts. They make the specious argument that identifying any type of bullying is unnecessary because anybody can be bullied for any reason. But the only type of identification they list as opposed to is – surprise surprise – sexual orientation. Their entire pamphlet on bullying is focused on not protecting gay kids. There is literally NOTHING in the pamphlet that shows any concern at all for the victim – just political nonsense.
Let me quote from the pamphlet from the section headed “Why is it wrong to use name calling like “gay” or “queer”?”
Really? That’s why you shouldn’t name call? Because there’s no medical test for a gay gene?
It has nothing to do with being cruel or hurtful. Nope. It’s because you might not be accurate in your hateful bigoted name calling. Yes, that is literally what they say.
They actually say that calling kids gay or queer is bad… not because it’s homophobic… but because the kid might believe it.
Well, perhaps I’m being extreme. Surely they say you should be compassionate to gay kids. Don’t they? Somewhere?
Ummmm, no. They don’t. What they do say is:
Students who have transitioned out of a homosexual Identity, or decide to pursue alternatives to homosexuality, deserve compassion and respect. Their decision should not subject them to discrimination, ridicule or hate. [emphasis mine]
And the gay kids who don’t go ex-gay… any thoughts, Regina? Ummm, no position about discrimination, ridicule, hatred, compassion or respect?
Nope.
If I were wanting to pick on gay kids, there’s nothing whatsoever in the PFOX pamphlet that says I shouldn’t.
Which I find to be difficult to reconcile with your claims that “These moms and PFOX also fight against intolerance and bullying of those who have same sex attractions.”
That simply isn’t true. At all. It would be true to say:
These moms an PFOX also fight against intolerance and bullying of those who have same sex attractions as long as they are trying to fight them and be ex-gay.
Marcus,
I’ll just add this one blurb here….been at school all day (being tolerant of kids of all stripes, i apologize for snarkiness) and I appreciate so many of the points being brought up here regarding your position regarding PFOX.
We don’t agree. Apparently there are things PFOX does and says that don’t translate as hateful to you. To me, those words/actions are driven by hate, which, I honestly believe is driven by fear when all is said and done. I could just as easily have described their agenda as a “fear-filled” agenda.
you asked:
I guess the truth of the “hate/fear” I see and sense lies deep within that question. I sense that you (and PFOX) equate the word “gay” with something henious. Maybe you don’t. Maybe it’s just me. But, my perception is that coming out gay implies ALL sorts of other things. It’s as if gay people are not individuals with a variety of beliefs, standards, MORALS (yep, they actually have them). Gay=bad…and….heck…come out as anything but please not THAT! I do have a difficult time understanding how a student, or anyone for that matter, could come out for the first time as “ex-gay”…wouldn’t that imply that you’d been gay in the first place???? If it’s your first time out, and you’re saying you want an opposite sex relationship……uh….I’m thinking that’s called straight.
The other folks above made lots of other points that I won’t rehash. Today was the first day of school here. I’m beat.
I do appreciate you joining the fray here and coming forward with your thoughts/feelings about PFOX. Some of this stuff just looks completely different depending on where you are sitting in the stands. I’d like to see PFOX get up out of their seat and move around a bit…..but I’m pretty sure that’s not gonna happen.
Since I seem to be the only ex-gay commenting on this, it gets overwhelming to respond to all the commentators. Obviously we disagree and that is OK. But we also agree on a lot of issues. Remember I used to be gay and even though I discovered my heterosexuality I have not become anti-gay or ex-gay for pay or forgotten about the issues gays are dealing with. I can only speak for myself. What ex-gay organizations have done have nothing to do with me. I only try to give my input and opinions and try to do anything to make life better for LGBT-people and ex-gays. This is really worth fighting for. I reread the PFOX Pamphlet Bullying – Safe Schools for All. And it is full of contradictions and obviously needs to be improved as Timothy Kincaid points out.
I will post some examples of discrimination against ex-gays on my blog, but I wonder if it will matter? Will most of you not just say that it does not matter since LGBT-people are subject to more discrimination than ex-gays? Well my opinion is that 2 wrongs don´t make a right. Both wrongs need to be amended.
Marcus, the only reason ex-gays are discriminated against is because of the word “gay” in their title. If the “gay” part weren’t so demonized, being an “ex” of that stripe wouldn’t have a chance at being the subject of discrimination. After all, the only reason ex-gays don’t call themselves “straights” is b/c they’re still “struggling with unwanted feelings.” And so long as they’re still struggling with those feelings people fear and hate so much, the hate and fear may possibly spill over onto them – despite whatever earnest efforts they make to rid themselves of them.
Marcus –
I am ex-gay and I completely and utterly disagree with you here – you should never make assumptions about who is and who isn’t ex-gay – even though that term (ex-gay) has more meannings than I can count – it seems to be different depending on who I talk to.
I agree that some ex-gays experience discrimination some of the time – but there is NO comparison to the kind of bigotry and discrimination that gay people face. Gay people are KILLED and abused physically EVERY DAY because of who they are. They suffer unending mental persecution from a society and culture that still largely doesn’t treat them as equals, that does not offer them enough safety to express their love around others, that does not allow them to marry the one they love – They are also often ostracized from family and friends.
It makes me ill when some ex-gays try and hop on the persecution bandwagon – because there is simply no comparison between what the two groups experience. That doesn’t mean some ex-gays don’t suffer discrimination or persecution – I know they do – but nowhere NEAR the level that gay people do – and to pretend otherwise is just fantasy.
I know that there is homophobia in the church against ex-gays. And, there’s no denying that many folks in the gay community react in a negative way to someone they know that considers themselves ex-gay. And if ex-gays are perceived as gay they are discriminated against as well in the world at large. No one stops and asks if you’re ex-gay before they discriminate or bash.
I don’t think that your average everyday ex-gay has an easy life, like some would like to think. If they don’t get read as gay, then yeah, things are easier because they can fit into the hetero culture and escape most homophobia. If they don’t tell folks in their church, they have ministry roles open to them that straight folks do (but if you tell them about your “struggle”, that often gets dicey). I found that it was a lonely existence where I couldn’t tell regular folks in my life (like at work) about a big piece of myself, and I couldn’t even count on many of my fellow Christians to understand and support me without judging me or treating me as inferior.
However, Emily is right.
It’s totally a by-product of regular ol’ homophobia. And the negative reactions from the gay community come about mostly because of the years of anti-gay rhetoric and actions by Christians, and now most recently by the anti-gay lobbying from Exodus and others who have used ex-gays as a reason why gays should not have equal rights (if they can change, then we should make them miserable so they can seek out God, essentially).
So I definitely think that ex-gays can suffer discrimination and lack of acceptance, but it’s not happening in a vacuum. It’s not just because they’re ex-gay. It’s because they are suffering the backlash of anti-gay lobbying by Christians and by other ex-gays. And they’re subject to the homophobia that the rest of us get. The sad thing is that some individual ex-gays support anti-gay legislation, and some let their stories be used to justify continued bigotry. But I still see them as victims of homophobia, just like us. It’s just that some have more of an active role in continuing to fuel the fire.
AMEN Christine!!! 🙂
Marcus, isn’t being ex-gay a choice?
Marcus,
I will post some examples of discrimination against ex-gays on my blog, but I wonder if it will matter? Will most of you not just say that it does not matter since LGBT-people are subject to more discrimination than ex-gays? Well my opinion is that 2 wrongs don´t make a right. Both wrongs need to be amended.
No… not at your blog. But it might matter here.
I, for one, want to know what kind of discrimination ex-gays have experienced. I will want to know if it is “discrimination against the message” of the sort that PFOX claims (falsely as it turns out) or if it is against real living breathing walking talking ex-gay persons.
And I will be interested in seeing if it is the sort of discrimination that would be protected by sexual orientation non-discrimination laws. If so, then hey join the cause.
But there may be other examples of which I am unaware. And I don’t like being in ignorance, so… tell me.
Thank you, Christine. 8)
I think that Christine has really hit upon the thought that I always have about how ex-gays are treated. Alan Chambers and Randy Thomas frequently complain that they are not respected by gay people, but I have always been convinced that members of conservative evangelical churches would be very unlikely to see Alan or Randy as anything other than homosexual. I have to believe that they face more difficulty in their churches than they acknowledge. That difficulty isn’t due to their being percieved as ex-gay, but instead it is due to their being percieved as gay.
John,
I’ll bet you and Christine are right. It’s not something I had ever given much thought to – I appreciate the insight
John,
It’s the same thought that made me wonder what ex-gays and organizations like PFOX are against hate crime and antidiscrimination laws, when exgays are themselves being discriminated against conservatives. These troglodytes don’t differentiate between gays and exgays, and the more honest of them have a saying about homosexuality I’ve heard a few times: “you can’t unsuck a cock.”
Warren,
I have written to the HRC and GLSEN to see if they would be able to shed any light on this situation – I’ll share with you whatever I find!
Jason
I cannot believe I just read this. I have nothing more to add here.
@ Marcus
Please be more specific about which of the 41 comments you are talking about.
@ Xeno
Please clean up your language. That stuff doesn’t belong here, and I’m sure you can find a more civil way to express your thoughts. Thanks.
Marcus said:
The discussion is here, so post them here if you want responses. The naming of your blog in a transparent attempt to piggy-back on our traffic is hardly inspiring any respect or trust from us. We did not name ourselves “Exodus Watch” because we cover much more than Exodus. Likewise, even in your brief few posts you have covered other blogs besides XGW. Can you not build your own place on the web through hard work and good reporting? Do you really need us that much?
Are you a member of PFOX Marcus? It’s only fair at this point that you make that clear. There is little about you that I trust, but you are free to comment if you can participate in a genuine discussion with those here.
Marcus, you seem to believe that XGW somehow is attacking your right to consider yourself straight. Well I’m having trouble seeing that, because when has anyone on this site said you should lose your job, your family or be denied your civil rights for being ex-gay? When has anyone used their story as an excuse to deny you anything? You’ve told us your personal story on another thread and I can tell you that it’s not a typical ex-gay story. Your quest to understand your sexuality was not primarily motivated by religious conviction but rather a deep sense of confusion, and an understandable one given your history. I doubt that even the harshest critic of the ex-gay movement would argue that you should have stayed gay. You sought psychological help because you genuinely needed it. What we are discussing here is not your situation, rather what XGW is discussing is the phenomenon of otherwise healthy people putting themselves through hell because their religion, their family and society dislikes their sexuality and how certain parties, namedly PFOX, Exodus and others are exploiting this for their political agendas. By aligning yourself with PFOX, intentionally or not, you indicate you wish to be part of the problem rather than the solution.