Britain’s BBC2 will broadcast “Sad to Be Gay” tonight at 9 p.m. local time.
From the program description:
David Akinsanya hates being gay. He has been living as a gay man for 20 years but if he could take a pill to make him heterosexual he’d pop it without a second thought. In Sad to be Gay, David sees if it’s possible to go straight. David believes his homosexuality is learned behaviour, but will it be something he can unlearn?
David decides to attend a controversial treatment centre in America that promises “freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ”. Many of the centre’s staff and its clients are also “struggling with same sex attraction”.
David makes a revealing and tearful admission about his unhappy past to the group – yet he starts to doubt the centre’s methods, and begins to question whether its prayers and support will succeed in making him straight.
The documentary follows the ups and downs of David’s turbulent journey and asks whether being gay is something you can change.
In advance of the autobiographical program, BBC Radio interviewed Akinsanya and Jason Pollock, director of pride London. Here’s a RealAudio broadcast of the interview.
XGW’s Timothy Kincaid discusses Akinsanya’s struggle here.
Former exgay Peterson Toscano discusses Akinsanya’s unhappy ordeal with the U.S.-based Love In Action program here.
(Hat tips: Jimbo, Nicolas, Richard Sparrow)
Anybody know how to get a copy of this for those of us living in the US? I couldn’t find a current cable listing for BBC2 anywhere. If this is on their site, I missed it. Thanks!
ReasonAble, sometimes some of the media senders have internet feeds. I did some clicking around on the BBC2 web site but was unable to find one.
Regarding the subject matter of the post, I sincerely do not understand this “struggle” bit. If they don’t want to have homosex, don’t have homosex. (I’m using an abbreviation, so don’t flame me) It’s as simple as that. If they want to have children, but don’t want to have sex with the woman, why don’t they just whack off into a cup and go through IVF (In Vitro Fertilization) with a willing female?
Presuming they can find a willing female, of course. But hetero males also have the problem of finding a willing female.
And, if they still have same sex attractions, there is always gay porn that they can make use of.
I sincerely do not understand this “struggle” bit.
And lest I get flamed for sexism, I am responding from a gay male perspective. I recognize full well that there are other perspectives via Lesbians.
Akinsanya gave a further insightful interview about the program to Black Britain and a review of the BBC programme appears in The Herald.
Overall I found the TV program had something of a mixed message, and Akinsanya certainly bears the scars of a difficult childhood which he is still coming to terms with. His comments made it apparent that he was probably happier describing himself as bisexual rather than gay. He seemed to have some inner conflicts, noting on one hand that he didn’t like one-night stands and didn’t fit the promiscuous gay stereotype, yet also admitting that he “can’t imagine a couple of weeks without sex”.
A good chunk of the program concentrated on his time with Love In Action in Memphis. He found the course rules somewhat bizarre. He had to remove all jewelry and shave off his beard even though, as he noted, “Jesus had a beard”. Contrarily, two of the course leaders had goatees.
John Smid spoke about the term gay as “labelling people with an identity that doesn’t really work”, and comparing it to alcoholism. I always find this comparison distinctly inappropriate, and assume that even Smid might have no problem with moderate social drinkers (yet be disapproving of stable gay relationships?).
In the end, Akinsanya leaves LIA after four days. Despite being very moved by the process of delving into his childhood, and commenting (when prompted) that he did not feel coerced by the course, he noted that he was unable to deal with the religious convictions required. He noted that around half of the attendees were ministers of religion and he considered that all those on the course were “destined to being unsatisfied and loathing of themselves”.
Two months after the program, Akinsanya has remained without sex. He considers sexuality “does change and can change” but is “not something you can force to change”. He will remain celibate, having learned the ability to say no to sex, “until someone comes along who gets me interested again”.
The program fades out with the overlying music “Respect Yourself”.
But the “Voice” interview from March, which is after he got back from LIA, says that he has had a girlfriend for 7 years and plans to have a family with her someday. Why isn’t she mentioned in this new documentary?
This just seems jarring to me, the differences in the March article and what is said in this documentary.
So, basically, LIA opened every old wound and provided no solution…Sounds like a fab 4 days.
In reply to James, a heterosexual relationship is referred to in the TV program but not in the detail (7 years since 1998) noted in the “Black Britain” interview, and in the one you mention.
It does seem that the story is not quite as simple as the 50 minute programme made out, but TV documentaries such as this do tend to pick on just a few points and ignore others – in order to get their particular message across.
As I mentioned before, to my mind, the message given is pretty mixed, and the stereotypes inferred in the documentary, do not seem to exist in the programmes major players.
OK… do I have this correct? (it’s hard to tell, the reports are not consistent)
He has had a girlfriend for the past 7 years and as a result of LIA is now living celibate???
It sounds like from LIA’s perspective he was a success before he got there. After all, he had already left the “gay lifestyle” and was involved with a woman.
Now he describes himself as a celibate gay man (except he doesn’t like labels).
So, considering that LIA turned him from a “practicing heterosexual” to a celibate gay man, would they consider this a success? Which is more important to LIA: celibacy or heterosexuality?
I suspect the most important issue to LIA would be rejection of a gay identity and acceptance of Jesus as Savior, neither of which happened.
Timothy, according to the Voice interview in March:
https://www.voice-online.net/content.php?show=6273&type=1
He was still in this relationship even after he left LIA. He never even suggested in that March interview that he was looking towards celibacy. He said someday he wanted to have kids with this woman. He also said (as he said in the August interview) that he has always been attracted to women. So really, why did he need to be ex-gay to begin with? He didn’t HAVE to worry about going out to gay bars or sleeping with men if he was not only attracted to women, but in a 7-year relationship with a woman. Why does he say he had lived as a gay man for 20 years if he had been with a woman for 7 years? If he is having a sexual relationship with her, then some parts of him are not gay. If he was happy with this woman and STILL unable to stop wanting men, that all comes down to self-control. I’ve known few people who are in a relationship and never feel lust towards others. If he loves this woman, and can have sex with her, then he doesn’t need ex-gay therapy.
This all seems like some kind of attention-grabbing thing to me.
Reading the Black Britain article, I guess you guys were right, and his relationship with the woman has ended. That’s odd. One would almost think that he was having sex with this woman but still identified himself as gay, and now that he wants to stop being seen as gay, he has to find a new relationship so he can push his whole new identity on this woman. So is the purpose of LIA and other groups to help gay men “go straight”, or about beating down gay men so they will hate themselves?
It really does sound very “queer” (no pun intended) to me, and hard to believe. I think he is doing himself and the viewers a disservice if he does not talk more about this 7-year relationship in his documentary.
Actually that doesn’t sound that queer to me James. Dating and a relationship with a woman will do nothing if what you desire is men. The woman could have provided him cover or perhaps he thought she could change him. Additionally love and lust are two different emotions. You can be in love with someone and not think of them sexually and I really don’t buy the bi label either. Not that I don’t think that bisexuals don’t exist, but too many men who would be better labeled as gay use that label to describe themselves(esp. if they are uncomfortable with possibly being gay). I used to know a few married men who did guys on the side and rarely did I see a married man go seeking both men and woman to cheat with. Usually it is just men.
As a woman, and married woman with lots of gay friends….
This conversation concerning this Brit, LIA alum brought something to mind.
A lot of gay men have women BEST friends. Women they are close to a love spending time with. It’s an ideal situation because the sexual dynamics are different.
No pressure.
Even better for married heterosexual couples, it’s like having an additional sister or brother.
All the emotional support and intimacy, just without the sexual tension.
I’ve spent many days and evenings with my gay men friends without my husband having a problem with it.
And he’s not tempted by my lesbian friends he meets.
Gay men who are closeted, usually marry a woman friend they are already close to.
The thing is, polite society doesn’t inquire about what sex lives they might be having.
Once a couple is married, the bedroom door is shut and friends and family draw their own conclusions.
We don’t always know about the frequency or styles our neighbors and friends engage in sex, unless they are exhibitionists or way too eager to divulge.
People like that tend to make us blush and avoid them.
Dissatisfaction with one’s sex or love life is common among so many people these days.
It’s because it’s rare to find someone who really wants to train themselves to be a committed companion.
Who is willing to go the distance over the bumps and really listen to and get the hang of serious adult relationships, instead of playing at it like children.
Too many prefer all the sex, without the meaninful intentions.
And you won’t get what you’re not willing to work for.
I know that gay men and women aren’t supported from early on to train themselves in their relationships, and haven’t had the same opportunities and range of options right for them.
That’s why it looks like openly gay people AREN’T always finding mutually mature partners.
Which leaves many frustrated and on the brink of giving up.
Like the gentleman in this article.
But that’s how the heterosexual majority would like it.
Gay people not having relationships so that heterosexuals won’t have to acknowlege them and respect they happen with or without hetero approval.
A lot of abstinence is involuntary. At least for people who want to have real love be a part of their sex lives.
Sex is easy to get.
Love and relationships take patience, focus and hope.
Reagn said
Too right — and I can also add that we spend time with our straight male friends without their wives and girlfriends having a problem.If anything, finding out that these guys genuinely had gay male friends (and not just a vague acquaintance they called “my gay friend”) was a good indication about a whole range of positive attributes. Least of all, that they were secure in their own masculinity and wouldn’t see any need to pull a macho B.S. stunt etc.As one wife said “I could never marry someone anti-gay — what if one of our kids were gay?”(Should have remembered for her: there is always LIA/R for that predicament…)
Good to read such intelligent debate here. I hadn’t realised he had had a seven-year relationship with a woman. It did come out that he was bisexual in a radio programme he gave on Tuesday, the morning of the broadcast, but not in the actual documentary.
More of my thoughts on the programme in a short review here as well as a link to the radio interview.
Dermod, London, UK
Regan, I agree a lot of gay men feel that way about their female friends, but this guy describes himself as bi and said he wanted to settle down with his girlfriend and have a family with her. So it seemed he had a lot more options than many gay men have. Yet he still went on TV and had the suggestion that he was a miserable, lonely gay man.
Regan DuCasse at August 11, 2005 10:52 AM
Quite correct.
Succinctly stated, life is not an on/off switch. People have friends. People have sex partners. They aren’t necessarily the same. People should just chill out. And I don’t know why they don’t (chill out, that is).
One of my best friends when I was a teenager growing up in Cincinnati was a woman up the street who was originally from Tennessee. (Her husband worked with my father) I remember her name to this day. I would sit on the stool in her kitchen and she would regale me with stories. It was wonderful.
In retrospect, I wish I had a tape recorder recording these conversations. I really do.
No sex was involved, merely conversation.
I wanted to get laid by the boy down the other side of the road. Actually three of them. Actually more in the neighborhood.
Just to lend MHO about the man Mr. A in the program-his relationship with the woman would of course give him the ability to have an open relationship with her with the social approval that goes with it.
Having children is only an option with a woman somewhere in the mix. And a longtime woman companion would fit that bill.
I don’t know if this man mentioned family inquiry and pressure.
When you get of a certain age, family inevitably want you to come up with a kid or two to show you’re serious about increasing the tribe.
People are unabashed (and annoying) in their nosiness and expectations with such a thing.
Perhaps this had a lot to do with his attitude as well.
As a woman who decided not to have children, I can attest to many times someone decided for me that I would be sad and miserable without children.
Funny, plenty of folks are sad and miserable who do have children.
Indeed, I am VERY happy to not have been a mother.
Anyway, Mr. A seems to have fallen into that self fulfilling prophecy.
That he’s SUPPOSED to be a miserable, lonely and incomplete person because he’s either NOT a heterosexual or married with children.
To say you’re bisexual is splitting the difference.
He’s still leaving the door and hopes open to his social network at large that he’s REALLY not gay and can be expected to rejoin all the happy heterosexuals out there by and by.