Subtitle: A Biblical and compassionate response to same-sex attraction.
Main authors and editors: Joe Dallas, Nancy Heche.
This book is an anti-gay training manual. A veritable bible on how to be the best anti-gay Christian you can be. There are a list of key points at the end of each chapter, some of which include mock debates.
____________________________________
SUICIDE, BULLYING AND VIOLENCE
Nancy Heche on gay teen suicide:
Nancy Heche: A number of studies over the past decade have indicated that rates of suicide attempts, depression, and unhealthy behaviors are higher among gay teens than among their heterosexual counterparts … So the question we face is not “Where’s the blame?” Instead, it’s “Where’s the church?” [p353]
A’hem, Dr. Heche, what say you if the church is to blame?
She also writes the chapter on hate crime legislation. I realize the federal hate crimes law has already been enacted, but I think their defensive posturing on the matter deserves another healthy dose of attention.
Nancy Heche: So when we’re told that additional state and federal laws are statues are now needed, we should request the facts and documentation proving the point. [p439]
“facts and documentation?”
To quote Cecil Terwilliger of the Simpsons (Sideshow Bob’s younger brother):
Cecil Terwilliger: Goodness, I had no idea! For you see, I have been on Mars for the last decade, in a cave, with my eyes shut and my fingers in my ears.
She finishes the chapter with the proverbial cry of persecution.
Under the heading: “A Christian Response,” she says “Resist and oppose oppressive laws,” and then quotes George Orwell on the “evils of totalitarianism”:
…inconvenient minorities will be persecuted, even if laws exist to protect them. [p440]
(btw, 75% of the U.S. population identifies as Christian)
From Rational Wiki:
Deconstructing the Persecution Complex: What Are Individual Rights?
…no-one has a right to institutionalize legal discrimination against an innocent group, no matter how much they want to, and no matter what “values” this goal of discrimination is based upon. Thus, “persecution” of discriminators is justified.
Put another way, the individual has the right to do anything that does not infringe upon the rights of others. Unjust discrimination infringes upon another’s rights, and is thus not a right that should be valued.
The only other place that references gay youth suicides is in the chapter “Pro-Gay Education in Schools.” Contributing author, Mike Haley, author of “101 Frequently Asked Questions about Homosexuality,” former “gender analyst” for Focus on the Family, and former Love Won Out speaker has this to say:
Mike Haley: One of the more popular “findings” states, “Gay youth account for 30% of all teen suicides.”
…
As a foundation for his study, which states 10 percent of the population is homosexual (the real figure is around 2 to 3 percent). [Paul] Gibson reported that 3000 gay youth commit suicide each year, when the 1998 Statistical Abstract of United States states there were only 2200 suicides among all youth. [p425]
Taking that at face value (which I don’t), he does nothing to dispute the 30% gay youth suicide figure, he just uses it as a springboard to condemn “gay activists” for using the 10% (of the population is gay) figure.
And there you have it. What amounts to one page of this 501 page anti-gay training manual is devoted to the issue of gay teen suicide. And all of it rooted in the effort to abdicate themselves of any role in fostering an environment in which gay teen suicide is allowed to thrive.
—
Joe Dallas, author and editor of the book in review, trivializes the issue further in a previous book of his called “The Gay Gospel? How Pro-Gay Advocates Misread the Bible” (2007).
This is rich. The scary part is that this is what he came up with after having thought it through.
Does teaching that homosexuality is wrong, or preaching against homosexual behavior, or speaking publicly against pro-gay laws … really “help kill,” “spread hate,” and give “crazies and excuse to go on a witch hunt? I’m convinced it does not.
Teaching and preaching moral beliefs simply does not incite violence. If it did, every time a pastor preached on the evils of lying, cheating, or fornicating [or gossips, drunks, idolaters, rebellious teenagers p141], his parishioners would leave the sanctuary and attack the first liar, tax-evader, or fornicator they ran into. Logic tells us, then, that preaching or speaking against a certain sin cannot in itself move people to attack the person committing the sin…
…Seldom if ever have gay bashers approached a victim saying, “We just came from church and heard you’re a sinner, so we’re going to assault you.” [p140, em mine] —
Standing for biblical values has by no means contributed to the death or emotional damage of homosexuals. [p142, em mine]
Mr. Dallas, the “sin” of homosexuality is in a category of its own, because it deals with an intrinsic part of the human experience — sexuality.
Heterosexuals are by nature repulsed by the idea of having sex with a member of the same gender, just as homosexuals are by nature repulsed by the idea of having sex with a member of the opposite gender. By continually bringing attention to our bedrooms you conjure up images of disgust, visceral disgust.
And given that the anti-gay movement is religion based, every anti-gay TV appearance is a sermon. And every sermon defining our human-sexuality — our humanity — as perverted, sanctifies that visceral disgust.
As we’ve recently seen so vividly, hatred kills. No “we-just-came-from-church” excuse required.
Sticks and Stones
[youtube width=”200″ height=”200″]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE5yINOn4N4&playnext=1&videos=bvACQKZTxf0&feature=mfu_in_order[/youtube]
www.bullyfree4me.com
www.bullypolice.org
On a much more inspiring note…
The Trevor Lifeline was established and became the first and only nationwide, around-the-clock crisis and suicide prevention lifeline [1-866-488-7386] for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth.
Via the Trevor Project: “It Gets Better”
[youtube width=”210″ height=”190″]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeKI8biAglU[/youtube]
Bull—-! I have had to spend many years already undoing the emotional damage caused to me by a family and church community that made me feel guilty to the point of wanting to commit suicide because I could not get over my “moral depravity.” That quote incensed me!! How dare he say such an ignorant thing. All this book is, clearly, is a gigantic defense mechanism in which conservative evangelicals rationalize away their role in the harm their teachings are causing our community. I’m tired of reading this crap and I’m tired of living everyday knowing there are young men and women out there in these churches who think it better to end their life than give into their “homosexual temptations.” And all because some close-minded bigoted preacher tells them they’re an abomination in God’s sight and they have no recourse to other views. And the audacity to turn around and come up with excuses for themselves or to try and make it seem like the situation is not as bad as it really is! If they could just see how desperate they look to save face, it would do them a lot of good. The great thing is that less and less people are listening to their religious propaganda and the more those everyday people meet great people like you and me who they then realize can be deeply spiritual as a gay person, they start to see through this pious chicanery for what it really is.
Simon LeVay was interviewed for Salon yesterday on the origins of homosexuality. I just cannot believe a group like gay people still has to live down a thousands year old dictum about homosexuality, when such a feature is a part of all human life and always has been.
I don’t think I’ve seen a group of people under more scrutiny, study and in a constant state of defense and disclosure in all my life.
While at the same time, the people responsible for all this, refuse to simply LISTEN to gay people. The arrogance and condescension I see infuriates me no end.
You’d think it would be simple. Learn about others from the source. Be open to hearing from their experience.
It’s offensive to not only deny what another person knows, but insist on telling THEM what they should think and feel. But in the case of gay lives, ignorance and distrust has cost lives. Event the lives of children, and yet…the very people who want their religious belief or ignorance anesthetize them to that reality, won’t take responsibility for that fact.
We live in such an age of amazing access to knowledge, education, experiences and opportunity to be less fearful and ignorant.
I don’t expect people who pride themselves on being educated, and firm in their religious teaching, to be so DETERMINED to let so much paranoia and stupidity about gay people rule their days…and that of gay people.
It’s ridiculous.
No more being polite about it. Never again.
There is no excuse for so much failure of the most basic directive there is, and lack of even making the most ethic decision about how to treat gay people based on them.
Don’t tell me how faithful you are, and how much you believe in God…and have so much acceptance of the power of education, and the legacies of justice and equal protection…yet don’t want to share those principles with people who aren’t strangers to the entire of the human race.
Yeah, I was mortified when I read that. And it’s said in the context of admonishing the church for not showing enough of the love part of “hate the sin, love the sinner.”
iow, make sure to hate their sin, but be nice about it. It’s like one of those apology non-apologies; “I’m sorry for the words I used…”
That’s the WHOLE thing. They’re desperate to keep alive the belief that homosexuality a sin. It’s as though they conflate being saved with being saved from their self-loathing (aka God’s loathing of their “sin”). So to lose one is to lose the other.
I think coming out is the most effective thing an LGBT person can do to “change hearts and minds.” It’s a complex decision, though, that should be well thought through.
I came out to my parents at 19 after I’d been to my first gay bar (I’m 42 now), and that went well enough and was like a seed of comfort with being gay and being open about it, but it wasn’t an in-your-face political issue back then. I can’t imagine what it must be like to come out these days. Things are better AND their worse.
To quote a line from a movie:
They need prayer.
I know, Regan, it’s infuriating.
I’m just waiting for this one…
I know that’s terrible to even jest about, but you know some of them are just salivating at the thought of using it as part of their anti-gay propaganda platform — but oh so frustrated that they can’t because it would make them look like the hateful supremacists that they are.
@Regan DuCasse
If you really weigh the evidence and put aside self-righteous cant, you realize that it is not unreasonable to conclude that homosexuality may well be an adaptive psychological response in some individuals due to environmental factors experienced at formative stages of life. And if that is the case, then it also makes sense to try to treat those who were hurt before they were able to conceive of what was happening to them. The case has thus far not been made that homosexuality is a normal, inborn trait.
@justaguy,
And your point?
Because first of all, homosexuality IS an indigenous and universal aspect in ALL human life and ALWAYS has been.
Whatever ‘adaptive psychological response’ you’re talking about due to ‘environmental factors’, have been studied for centuries. There really ISN’T a factor that gay people are adapting to that CREATES homosexuality.
Because if you’re trying to talk about an adaptive response to trauma, or protracted abuse, then these are not exclusive in ways that affect heterosexuality if a similar situation occurs.
I find it infuriating that you’d consider in a heartbeat, as do others trying to rationalize the origins of homosexuality with some kind of psychosexual abuse or neglect from a parent.
Yet, the damage from oppressive laws, hypocritical and contradictory messaging, and systemic bigotry are not themselves considered abusive in any way.
Indeed, your point seems to be that debating that it’s a choice, absolves the kinds of civil and socio/political abuses that have plagued gays and lesbians for centuries because they have somehow deserved it or brought it on themselves.
The most credible medical and psychological peers consider SELF RELIANCE and equal standards of access and protection towards any given individual regardless of their supposed condition FIRST.
None would support abuses through the government,denial of humanity, nor standards in the law that KEPT a competent and even talented person from whatever their interests and abilities could take them.
In other words, your statement is without facts, and you come bearing false compassion.
It doesn’t make sense to ‘treat’ an individual, because of their sexual orientation, with oppressive laws that deny them their identity and civil rights.
A gay person shouldn’t have to make a case for such things to begin with. Nobody ELSE has to.
justaguy,
why do they need to be cured?
justaguy, is this how you want it to be?
Let me know when you find the gene that makes heterosexuals.
Hint: there isn’t one.
Let me know when you find the evidence that fixing something that isn’t broekn works.
Hint: there isn’t any.
justaguy may actually be justatroll.
The point I am making is that no one really knows what causes someone to have a particular sexual orientation. (The fact that something is “universal” says nothing about its causes.) There is evidence of differences in the brain structures between some gays and straights, but that, of course, may be an effect rather than a cause of homosexuality, or it may be a comorbid trait from an unidentified cause (e.g., hormonal imbalance). Or maybe the changed brain structure is irrelevant–no one really knows. Additionally, the psychological principle of conditioning has shown that when a particular behavior elicits a reward, the behavior will increase and be craved–I don’t think it has been proven that this principle does not apply to sexuality. And who can say why anyone finds something in particular erotic, or where that desire comes from. Modern mental-health sciences often focus on subconscious conflicts that cause overt behaviors; I believe the theory is that the behavior is a means of dealing with the subconscious conflict. It is thus in keeping with all of these scientific principles to hypothesize that homosexual acts are an overt representation of a deep inner struggle–e.g., a man who was deeply wounded by rejection from his father engages in homosexual acts to try to heal that wound. (On this point, I found it interesting to learn from “The Kids are Alright,” and news articles related to it, that lesbians like to watch gay male porn. If that is true, one might hypothesize without violating any scientific principles that women who identify as lesbians but watch gay male porn are expressing their sexual desire for men in way that is psychologically safe for them.)
While no one knows what causes heterosexuality as well, heterosexuality has several things going for it that homosexuality doesn’t. It is the predominant sexuality, so the majority of people can relate to it. Heterosexuality also leads to reproduction, which homosexuality never can. And because of its reproductive function, heterosexuality has historically been promoted by societies around the world. And homosexuality is associated with a greater incidence of mental illness (this may be an effect of discrimination and oppression or it may be a comorbid phenomenon tending to indicate that homosexuality is in fact an emotional or psychological disturbance).
How to respond to homosexual impulses and desires should always be left up to the individual, in my opinion. It seems reasonable to me that many homosexually oriented people would want to try to find a way to deal with these impulses other than by acting on them and politically identifying themselves as “gay.” Others, of course, decide to embrace a homosexual orientation, regardless of cause, and I don’t think they should be discriminated against. I’m just not convinced, given the inherent differences between homosexual and heterosexual relationships, especially in the area of reproduction, that it is unreasonable for society to decide to call one a “marriage” and another a “domestic partnership.” Nor do I find it particularly troubling that a male-female marital relationship is accorded particular tax breaks, since these people, by and large, bear the burden of raising the next generation. Other than that benefit, I’m not sure that there should be any other legal differences between the two types of relationships.
And even if a gay gene were found, I’m not sure that the outcome would be felicitous. You can be sure that a true genetic cure would eventually be developed, and that, in the meantime, many women would choose to abort gay fetuses. Think how that might impact the struggles over civil rights.
Ok. But that movie is fiction. I could cite “Imagine Me & You” as some sort of “proof” that straights, even satisfied and MARRIED straights, can “turn gay.” But I don’t actually believe that.
Anybody who has researched sexuality and sexual response knows that enjoying something from a distance (through a glowing rectangular screen) is different than jumping into the situation itself. It’s more complicated than that.
You can hypothesize til the cows come home, but in the end, it’s just a hypothesis. Really I think the major point is not whether being gay is inborn or genetic, but why you feel it should be cured.
“Really I think the major point is not whether being gay is inborn or genetic, but why you feel it should be cured.”
Emily– I didn’t have time to write, but you succinctly stated what I was going to get all verbalicious on.
I would add the two further questions: why you think that because it is not the majority’s preference, it is somehow a threat to the majority? If it’s not a threat to the majority, but is in fact identical to this majority except in the matter of object, then why do you think that the majority should be privileged and this minority be legally disadvantaged in the legal matters of how a family is created?
BTW, you portray your actual biases amidst your very lovely sounding reasonableness. “It is thus in keeping with all of these scientific principles to hypothesize that homosexual acts are an overt representation of a deep inner struggle–e.g., a man who was deeply wounded by rejection from his father engages in homosexual acts to try to heal that wound. ”
This isn’t science. It’s made up crap. And it ignores the basic question that emily asked.
Finally, here’s more made up crap. Marriage and reproduction are certainly connected, but they are not the same thing. your basic assumption that they are is as iggerunt as your proposal that homosexuality must be pathology. That’s ex-gay crap. It won’t sell here.
Marriage is not required for reproduction. We have a 40% illegitmacy rate in this country, and the only way gay people are contributing to that is because the gay parents of a certain percentage of babies are not allowed to be married, thus making their biological offspring legally illegitimate. That isn’t our doing, either. It’s YOURS, like all of the rest of the out-of-god’s-own-wedlock born children. But you get to blame us for it, so THAT’s all right.
Reproduction is not required for marriage, as much as religious conservatives would like to see that happen. Any man and any woman can get married if they are legally eligible to do so, including any people who just killed their own children. But you see, gay people do reproduce, they have children that are the products of previous heterosexual relationships, and most important of all, they adopt the castoff, unwanted products of irresponsible and unconscious heterosexual reproduction. We get all the work, you take all the credit for yourselves.
So tell me about THOSE children. Is domestic partnership good enough for THOSE children? Or is it only the children of heteroseuxals that are important.
Honey, other people have shown up at this and many other websites, peddling this very reasonable looking, but very subtle poison.
It doesn’t sell here.
I agree that the porn-viewing scene in “The Kids are Alright” is not proof of anything–it just was a phenomenon that I was not aware of before seeing the movie, and which seemed to cut against the idea of a fixed sexuality (as did Julianne Moore’s seemingly hot affair with Mark Ruffalo).
As to why one would want to be cured–an important precursor to answering that question is whether one believes homosexuality is an unadaptive response, in the long run, to a particular set of experiences and inborn traits, and whether one is unhappy being in such a condition. At this point, there is insufficient scientific evidence on either side of the first question to resolve it. So I suppose individuals make that determination largely based on philosophical and practical reasons. To each his or her own.
Ben in Oakland, sorry, but I don’t get your point about illegitimate children, etc. I don’t see how gay marriage would reduce the number of illegitimate children who are born, which would seem to be a worthy goal.
No, it’s not. Just answer the question, should gays be “cured” of their gayness? If so, why?
@Emily K
How an individual decides to respond to their own homosexuality is a personal choice.
@justaguy
The statement about the porn lesbians are interested in was seriously lame. So explain why straight men, while showing disdain for lesbians in the light of day, utilize girl on girl porn for their personal consumption (for a safe distance of course).
Really justaguy: are you trying to dress your prejudice up in sophist ‘research’?
Because evidently you’re not listening to actual gay people, nor could you personally know enough of a variety to get a consensus.
But since you’re on the internet, and if you really cared about what gay people thought, you’d understand how insulting you’re being.
Man, if you expanded your ‘research’ in the context of oppression, and systemic bigotry on minorities, you’d find some commonality that segregationists have with Nazis, and what supporters of slavery have with misogynists.
Somebody was always looking for a person with Dr. in front of their name to validate their purpose for that oppression.
They might even find a few members of that minority to go along with them so they could say: ‘”Look! See….that Jew agrees with the Nazis, that black person prefers Jim Crow, that woman really doesn’t want to vote or use contraception, and wow…look at THAT gay person that doesn’t want to marry!”
You’re doing this dance around the obvious. You should be way past the causation/correlation phase of trying to rationalize talking to us this way.
The truth is, you’re LOOKING for a cause and reason…and then you announce what would happen if the genetic code were found. Gays can be assured of being wiped off the face of the Earth through eugenics.
Because all the other means necessary really have never worked. Those gay people seem to defy Darwin’s theory AND everything else whatever stupid straight person can think of.
Can’t even let a gay person live down a 2,000 and counting year old religious list of no nos.
Even though plenty of others have fallen aside for the sake of getting out of the caves and into the space shuttle.
I don’t hear you entertaining the idea that perhaps gay people are a COMPLIMENTARY aspect to mankind’s gender tensions.
That the obvious COMPETENCE that gay people have, DESPITE and IN SPITE of all the hostility and brutality and agendas against the simplest of freedoms and rights, is saying something about the endurance and compassion of gay people.
That the sturdy character of a gay person, is something to ponder as an important part of an allied front. A combination of differing intelligence.
Why aren’t you considering THAT, instead of the same stale retread of insistence that different must mean inferior and less compatible to a more common group.
Just answer Emily’s question.
And then answer this: since when is equal treatment and protection under the law, EVER been a bad thing for a minority in this country, otherwise misunderstood and oppressed?
Hi Regan:
Wow, that was quite a blast! I don’t see any facts, however, elucidating the question of what causes homosexuality in your post, which I’m interested in. (I also tend to ignore anyone who resorts to bringing up the Nazis simply to make a shrill, obfuscatory point.)
It’s a yes or no question.
Justaguy, for obvious reasons we ask that people do not comment under multiple identities. You have already established a presence at XGW under the name “SFTom.” If you wish to continue participating, please do so under that name.
Previous comment threads here and here.
Thank you.
Justaguy: Answer Emily’s question.
The answer to what causes homosexuality, lies in the same things that cause heterosexuality. Period.
We’re born to be sexual, and the kinds of attraction that are the deepest, most trusted of one’s innate instinct, apparently has corresponding mutual attraction whether het or hom.
With homosexuality having similar frequency as redheads, left handers, geniuses and asexuality.
You’ve already insulted the folks you’re questioning. And you haven’t felt any obligation to answer OUR questions.
Of course you’d ignore the context in which I mention the sorts of people whose interests in the minority they thought inferior.
It was after all in answer to your statement regarding eugenics.
Speaking of obfuscating: you haven’t been especially honest about answering Emily’s question. It’s a simple one.
Go for it.
Justaguy:
1. You have enough facts, that you’re ignoring them shouldn’t be anyone else’s problem.
2. What facts are you expecting, or else you’ll do what?
3. The facts and evidence regarding an inborn, natural trait were made and have been. The problem is your own skepticism and living in a place all your life where YOU never had to prove anything to be treated with dignity, equal standards and fairness.
YOU never had to think at all about where YOUR orientation came from, why should gay people…or asexuals for that matter.
If you NEVER learn where orientation came from, or else WHAT?
Looking through the comments I linked to above, justaguy (aka SFTom) has previously claimed to be essentially bisexual. And Regan, this is not the first exchange you have had with him. Again, this is why commenting under multiple identities is not allowed — it just causes confusion and encourages deception.
Justaguy (aka SFTom), since you posted your email in the clear above (linked to your name in place of a URL), a Google search might also help us to understand your conflicted status: link.
How you deal with your own life is your business, SFTom, but please don’t use the people here to shore up your own self-doubt. That you left your wife and child only to find that life as a gay man was not magically perfect is not our fault. As with many ex-gays, perhaps you should look for something other than your sexuality as the basis for your issues. Either way, you will get more help if you are honest and open minded.
SFTom, please answer this question:
WHY should people try to “cure” their sexual orientation?
Ah. SFTom. I also exchanged a few with him.
David “How you deal with your own life is your business, SFTom, but please don’t use the people here to shore up your own self-doubt. ”
hits the old homo nail right on the head.
SFTom: less lore, more wisdom. and grow up. Gay people are not responsible for your unhappiness.
Wow…thanks David.
Not sure why I didn’t recognize SFTom.
This is still good mental exercise though. Especially when I’m mentoring kids, they might ask the same kinds of questions and parrot the anti gay adults around them, but it’s amazing to see a breakthrough when it all comes together in their heads.
Especially the question I ask about the sources being non/anti of who they are speaking.
I can attest, since you all know that I’m a black woman, that I remember well those times when it was hard to be black and female. I hated it because of the things said to me, or how hard it was to know who was being sincere.
Prejudiced people are very dishonest. With who the target of their prejudice is, as well as admitting if they are prejudiced at all.
I thought it doubly frustrating that even having an honest conversation about my feelings was impossible because of being dismissed as not knowing or understanding what my experience bore witness too.
And THAT coming from people who couldn’t possibly ever experience it.
From top to bottom, the unfairness of that could sting.
So when I see this same treatment against gay people, I won’t apologize for it sending me up a wall.
And at least we’re thoughtful and articulate adults, when young people go through that the risks of emotional damage are certainly there, with no way of knowing how to heal it. Especially if such things are lifelong and seemingly in perpetuity.
Not everyone has to go through it, and a person who does, doesn’t deserve to be criticized by someone who never has. And it’s unfair to be written off as bitter or mad, by the people who perpetuate the problem or do nothing to help solve it.
I remember my teen self vividly, trying to develop a healthy understanding of how to navigate all those negative things, and come out more positive and hopeful.
I never had to be honest about my orientation, gender, color or background. I could be quieter, less verbose or just not make much of a contribution in opinion one way or the other.
But I initially came here to learn. It’s taken me years to get a consensus about ex gays and their claims. I worked hard to understand without judgment.
I did the best I could to be fair and honest at least.
But I can’t help being empathetic. I would never say I understand what life is like being gay. I don’t think it really matters what makes a person gay. All anyone should care about is a person’s goodness and treating them right because it’s the right thing to do.
The rest usually takes care of itself by building trust and experience.
I was lucky. I grew up in a big city like Los Angeles, with a lot of opportunity. And I was taught not to be afraid and take those opportunities to know all kinds of people.
Wasn’t hard.
There was nothing to fear.
I have lost patience with the willful cowardice and dismissal. Especially after this rash of terrible suicides of young teens.
The writer, Mike Adams over at TownHall actually mocked these events with a column called “Eight Straight Suicides.”
And the comment threads of any given anti gay article from Maggie Gallagher, Mike Adams and Robert Knight, generates exactly the sort of nastiness that one could see would make a gay child feel what they do, and their tormentors very empowered.
Right before our eyes for anyone to see.
I understand what it feels like to be dismissed, condescended to, treated as if you have no feelings and shouldn’t be expressing them regardless of how much there is.
The folks that attack, truly don’t want to feel anything about it.
Doesn’t take a genius to know the reason why.
Allies like me are as underestimated, maligned and misunderstood as a gay person is. At this time in my life, I get what life must have been like for a white supporter of integration.
And I welcome the experience and it only makes my commitment stronger.
It’s not easy letting ourselves be known. But from the experience of being black, and a woman…and sometimes still fighting certain issues because I’m female, it’s been character building and exceptionally educational.
I think an ex gay could learn a lot from people who went though the same trials by fire, but came out with their character’s integrity and their identities intact.
No one will learn who you really are, if you’re not there to teach them.
And people like SFTom, with their endless rhetorical questions and unresolvable expectations, are an example of not knowing when the truth is already there, they just don’t really want to deal with it.
Cowardice of another kind.
We’re stronger for being here. THAT is the truth.
Hi folks:
I think it would be a blessing for many if it could indeed be proven that homosexuality is an inborn trait. (On the other hand, as I suggested above, that may have undesirable consequences as well.) As of now, however, we don’t have enough information. I think it’s up to each individual to decide whether to seek treatment for their homosexual impulses (which reportedly work for some people, per published studies by Dr. Robert L. Spitzer, who, I believe, was instrumental in having homosexuality removed from the list of mental illnesses back in 1973).
“As of now however, we don’t have enough information.”
According to who?
“Which reportedly work for some people.”
Again, according to who, and WHY they got involved in the business of controlling homosexual individuals to begin with.
All the people, as of now, involved in the ex gay business, are people who have no legitimate credentials, or whose impetus is religious, not scientific. They deal in stereotypes, and their particular research samples were too small and made no COMPARISONS to anyone else with similar paraphilias or pathologies.
And their support of discriminatory laws, coupled with predation on vulnerable people contradicts their assertions of compassionate reasons.
To say nothing of the fact that their methods and treatment are easily refutable as to effectiveness.
Apparently, you’re willing to believe that there is psychological damage from being homosexual that from environmental or abuse factors.
But you fail to address the absolute fact that bigotry and discrimination and social stigma carry serious damage.
I point to the Clark Study, of black children through the late 40’s and early 50’s. They researched children as young as preschool and how they responded to lives lived under Jim Crow. The constant messaging that their color rendered them inferior, less intelligent and less moral than white children.
That they were a threat to social order by even simple and casual contact with white people.
Sound familiar?
Couple that with outbreaks of anti black violence, support of such themes from churches and power political figures, inferior facilities or complete isolation from supportive social environments and you got children developing low self esteem and other risks to their general health and welfare.
Their rare and comprehensive research, helped overturn segregation in the Brown vs. Brd of Ed. decision.
But gay children have a marked difference even there. Gay children risk the same abuse at home, as they do outside of it.
We have historical context to inform us, SFTom.
That one’s genetic legitimacy is no guarantee that you won’t suffer abuse from the situations on which you’re most dependent.
Once your humanity is denied, all bets are off that you’re fair game for experimentation to assuage the consciousness of who created the problem in the first place.
If gay people aren’t around to inform on who and what they are, no one will know.
So, eliminating them by attrition, coercive means on condition of losing all civil and human rights, or exploitation of discrimination: you never WILL have “enough information.”
The dominant culture is trying to have omelets without breaking eggs. How gay people will respond to equality and openness and honesty as to who and what they are will open lots of doors to having LOTS more information.
Cutting off gay people and straight people from that opportunity, only serves bigotry and stereotypes.
It’s segregation that denies the ability to gather facts through experience.
Which is exactly why people in the ex gay business support segregation and controlling the information that gets through.
They’d be out of business if the opposite happens.
And those of us with a brain, KNOW it.
There is no profit in being gay. But there certainly is in being anti gay.
You already got told.
You don’t need any more gay people to submit like lab rats to never satisfy you or anyone else.
You’re not owed it.
And what would you do if nothing else YOU think you want is forthcoming?
You already quit looking. Not hard to tell that.
There is plenty of information and facts to support our side, SFTom. It shouldn’t be anyone else’s problem that you and many other people choose to ignore it or are too lazy and cowardly to find out for yourselves.
SFTom, I’ve corrected your nickname since you seem to have totally ignored my request. Please use your original nickname for any future comments. Also, this is not meant as a monologue, so please don’t completely ignore the questions of others. You can decline to respond to personal questions but please at least acknowledge them and make that declaration.
The Spitzer study is hardly a good source for making claims about orientation change. And Spitzer himself, while an important figure in the field, was never the gay icon that anti-gays seem to believe he is. I do believe he greatly influenced the criteria by which things are determined to be “mental illness” and one of many byproducts of that was the delisting of homosexuality.
Spending a few minutes on the phone with employees and volunteers of ex-gay organizations is simply not a reliable way to determine something as incredible as sexual orientation change. It was, however, all Spitzer could find despite two years of searching, and the participants would not consent to more rigorous diagnostic methods.
If you want to believe people can actually change their sexual orientation at will, more power to you, but don’t count on any accurate data to back that up.
Hi David:
Those are interesting points, and seem to confirm that the causation issue is unresolved. At this juncture, then, we are left with philosophical arguments on each side and, consequently, what has aptly been called a “culture war.”
SFTom, please answer the question:
WHY should people change their sexual orientation? What is the reason(s)?
We shouldn’t have to ask you again to answer the questions. They are straightforward honest ones.
Dodging the context of the questions is saying a lot about you, isn’t it?
Hi Emily K. and Regan:
It seems that a few reasons would be that someone’s sexual orientation causes them problems in their lives, that it is inconsistent with their lifestyle or deeply held beliefs, or they believe it is a dysfunctional adaption to abuse or other events in their early lives. It’s ultimately a personal choice. (I think I’ve said that several times now.)
Adults are free to make their own decisions, so any gay person who doesn’t like their sexual orientation, no matter what the reason, has a perfect right to go to an ex-gay or reparative therapy program to try to get it changed, just as they have a perfect right to go to a chiromantist to get their hand read. But they would be well advised to bear in mind Carl Sagan’s warning: “Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
SFTom, sexual orientation doesn’t cause problems or solve problems. It is not a trait that acts independently of its human body. It’s merely a descriptor of attraction.
People can of course believe a non-heterosexual orientation to be a “dysfunctional adaption to abuse,” but then people can consider just about ANYTHING to be a “dysfunctional adaption to abuse.” That doesn’t make it true.
my advice to you and others like you is to solve the real problems in your life instead of blaming it on your attraction to men.
@SFTom
Sure, the culture war is a philosophical debate, no bigotry or hatred involved. Could I also sell you some mortgage based derivatives today?
As none other than the noted geneticist Francis Collins has said, there is definitely a genetic component to homosexuality but it appears to involve other factors as well.
We can be reasonably certain at this point that homosexuality is a normal variation in the sexuality of most animals, including Homo sapiens. It is not a disease or disability, and sexual orientation in general cannot be changed. It’s “cause” is complicated, involving genetic and other factors as most traits do. It is unfortunate that our society tends to demonize the minority, people with features or traits different than the majority. It takes a lot of time for that to change, and we are just beginning that process with homosexuality.
Those same tendencies to fear and hate what is different have in recent decades come close to destroying us all. Here’s hoping we make it.
Dave, great point and it should be noted that Francis Collins is a committed Christian, so no secular bias here. Also, for SFTom, if homosexuality’s cause is unknown, as you claim, then how exactly, lacking knowledge of its causality, are you so certain that one can change that orientation? Would it not take certain knowledge of the contributing factors in its formation to have some general idea as to how to reverse it (if it were possible)? Just because a theory makes sense logically (the father neglect theory of Freud, for example), doesn’t mean it’s true. There has been no scientific study to date that has been able to establish this link with any sense of clarity. Trust me, I study this stuff for a living. If there was a study that showed this, I would be aware of it. The strongest case for biology (broader than just genetics) is what Dave mentioned about the animal world. Zebras don’t have “bad” relationships with their father. Since it is entirely biological in their cases, it is no small leap to think the same is likely in ours.
Pay attention to Emily’s first sentence, SFTom, because that’s a very serious fact.
You’d really have to understand what a paraphilia or pathology is, which is different from sexual orientation. But whatever one’s orientation, there ARE no paraphilias and so on, exclusive to one orientation.
It’s these that develop from environmental and traumatic factors.
It’s the orientation that’s neutral.
But you keep ignoring a fundamental part of the equation: that the dominant culture is consistently taught to distrust and create a hostile environment for gay people.
I seriously doubt anyone would be that way on their own, as they would eventually be when encountering paraphilias and pathologies in someone.
Credible medical and psychological establishments don’t support keeping someone from being self reliant who otherwise would be, nor do they support the kind of bigotry that gay people are forced to confront.
People who are schizophrenic, bi polar, hate children, have genetic disorders and so on, are not denied the freedom to marry who THEY want to.
You still haven’t put your statement in socio/political context compared to what I’ve mentioned.
It looks a lot like determined denial…and why should anyone accept that from you?
Oh, and as TJ has pointed out: if you don’t know the causation, and it’s known that sexuality is complex, then how WOULD it be approached correctly if treatment were the goal?
Curing sexuality is like trying to cure being hungry. Some things can’t and shouldn’t be messed with. And especially in a convenient target because they simply are of lesser number.
And I look at this issue as similar to that of trying to convert Jews. If you unsolicited have decided that Jews should be Christians, it looks inconsiderate at best, and predatory and arrogant at worst.
Jews, like gay people, have endured a long sad hatred in the history of mankind. They are already a minority under siege with the assumption that the world would be better off, and many have tried to eliminate Jews and gays from the Earth.
How arrogant that because it’s hard to be those things, you’d assume they wouldn’t want to be those things. It’s not hard because Jews or gays have decided to make their lives hard, but because those interested that they disappear want that to happen by any means necessary.
90% at least of the world is heterosexual. That’s not ENOUGH?
100% heteros is supposed to DO WHAT for anything?
Evidently, our natural world is amazing with so much variance and diversity you couldn’t name it all, nor see it all in a lifetime.
To assume that there is only ONE normal sexual orientation is pretty stupid considering there really isn’t any ONE kind of any human being.
I love my diverse and varied world.
And the idea of a world without gay people, like a world without Jews, sickens me to the core and it should sicken you too.
Leaving gay people in peace, to enjoy equal opportunity and inclusion would go a long way in changing what you think is messed up about them.
Ever think of THAT new and fantastic idea?
3rd time:
SFTom has ignored my requests, both public and private, to maintain his original identity so I finally held his last comment (which was just more of the same). I’m afraid Emily was probably right, his actions seem to be headed pretty fast to troll behavior. If he has any desire for genuine discussion, he certainly hasn’t shown it. Dropping in with a sound bite here and there, just enough to illicit questions over his non-responsive responses is more a method of manipulation than debate.
XGW is not the only place he does this. On this Trevor Project page of all places, he mocks the “It Gets Better” video using another one of his nicknames:
Both projects are aimed at suicide prevention, mainly in teens. A response like that above to such an effort can only be seen as trolling from where I sit, or worse.