This evening the Fellowship of Christian Physician Assistants issued a press release regarding the American Academy of Physician Assistants House of Delegates action to oppose certain types of sexual reorientation therapy.
We have been discussing this matter on other threads. Bottom line, the professions discourage imposition of therapist views opposing homosexuality and they oppose therapies which begins with the premise that homosexuality is a mental disorder to be treated.
Michael,
I’m speechless. I kept wishing and hoping that we could find some common consensus…just one damn thing that would prove to me that we could actually carry on a conversation–and maybe even move on the discussing the weightier, more complex issues.
I honestly don’t know how I can say what I said in my last post any clearer…and it appears that Timothy got it…I wasn’t asking for a concession; I hoped for some sort of common ground where we could all say “okay, I can live with that, now let’s move on.” “Yes, there’s a communication problem” but would you rather be among the people who try to bridge the gap and resolve or would you rather just keep griping with no end in sight? Don’t bother. The answer is all too apparent. Every single time that I think we bloggers might be close to a consensus on anything, it seems you find your way off on some tangent.
Rather than answer my direct question, you went off on your usual tirade against the term ‘ex-gay’. “It could mean anything”…yeah, it could. How would that be different from any other new term??
Oh, you don’t want a new term. You think we need to just adapt to the ones that already exist. Well, have a nice time in fantasyland. I made it quite clear in my post why that just isn’t going to happen. You can wish it all you want. You can rant daily. But the ‘ex-gays’ are not going to adopt your psychological language for the reasons I went to lengths to explain.
–and regarding your repeated allegations that ‘ex-gay can mean anything to anyone’…so can homosexual or gay! You use the label but I’m willing to bet that your homosexuality is quite a bit different than the others who blog here. Some are in monogamous relationships; some feel monogamy is a bunch of hooey. Some have been entrenched ‘in the lifestyle’…have strong ties to the gay community…are very political minded while others see themselves more as sojourners. What I find so damned laughable is 1) you claim to hate the term ‘ex-gay’ because it’s misleading although I have clearly demonstrated that the term itself is not 2) you object to it because ‘it can mean anything’ but you apparently have no qualms with the ‘ex-gays’ accepting the label homosexual…boy, how will that color the definition of ‘homosexual’ 3) the real irony is that you haven’t challenged the words ‘gay’ or ‘homosexual’ for THEIR confusion. Open your eyes, man. The words actually CHANGE gender and connotation based on whether or not the words ‘and lesbian’ are added. “If we don’t say ‘and lesbian’, then ‘gay’ or ‘homosexual’ means a person sexually attracted to their own gender BUT, if we say ‘gay AND lesbian’, then ‘gay’ only refers to the guys.” And, desiring to be inclusive, we also accept bisexuals and transexuals into the word ‘gay’ but we’re iffy about using the word ‘homosexual’. Talk about straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel!
But, it’s your world. You are immersed in it. Those nuances of meaning and usage are second nature to you. So, they don’t look confusing. (But they are, Blanche, they are!) Your rantings about the ‘confusing’ term ‘ex-gay’ are prime examples of the pot calling the kettle ‘black’.
LOL! For a while there, I actually kinda thought that the Holy Spirit actually might have us hear each other and come to a consensus on just one point…where the term ‘ex-gay’ came from and what kind of constraints should be put on its use. But then I remembered your amazing knack for missing the point and detouring the discussion. Words can’t express how disappointed I was to see the same damned diatribe in response to my ‘point by point’ laying things out as I did. Imagine how it felt to try very, very hard to communicate…I’m thinking it was about an hour composing that comment…believing in what I was saying…believing that you would actually try to hear what I said. You at least owed me the courtesy of challenging my arguments if they were off-base but it’s like you wrote an opening sentence that REMOTELY connected to what I said and then punched up “Rant 49″ on your computer.
The political aspects…the misuse of the term…how to constrain Exodus from misrepresenting….they would have been future topics for discussion. But I see we are cursed to travel this same insufferable loop of yours until we die or cave in due to exhaustion. (Which, by the way, is MY take on why Alan Chambers said he wants to retire it…how many e-mails and phone calls did Alan receive from you? I assume you’re a touch nicer here than you are when standing up to the bullies… If I were in Alan Chamber’s shoes, I’d say just about anything to stop the broken record.)
I don’t even know why I’ve written this. Just more words for you to misunderstand…just more excuses for more repetitious ranting. I think I’m out of here for awhile. Right now, trying to communicate just seems like a huge waste of my time.
Wow. I’ll be brief. I’ll quit griping when EXODUS gets honest. Alan said he wanted to drop the term “Ex-gay” — the very first time we spoke. No rants. No e-mails. No pressure. It was a friendly conversation. Alan will tell you.. So will Dr. T.
I simply asked: “So Alan, what do you think of the term ex-gay?’ And Alan — with no prior contacts from me of ANY kind == gave his calm, refreshing and straightforward reply. It’s the truth. Ask him.
For some odd timing fluke, 5 posts–including another from Michael–appeared after I submitted 30671. That post was specifically commenting on Michael’s 30517.
LOL! Michael, you really baffle me. I hear some incredibly insightful things from you and then I also get a taste of the ‘fuzzies’….the very thing that you accuse ‘ex-gays’ of. Were you including me when you said “Exodus and its supporters were finally getting real with the general public”? (Please, answer this to yourself–yes or no–before reading on.)
I could be wrong but I think you were including both Mary and myself. My problem with that? The definition of ‘supporters’ and the definition of ‘finally getting real’. I have been on my own journey–apart from Exodus and apart from any ‘ex-gay ministry–for more than a decade. You and Warren pulled me out a very pleasant hibernation to clear up early Exodus history. And I can speak with clarity regarding much of Exodus’ evolvement for the first decade. But that’s it! When I’m speaking history, I’m speaking history. Otherwise, I’m here for personal reasons…you’re talking to ME, Eddy, solo…no church, no board, no organization or ministry. Some of my opinions are going to be similar to opinions held within Exodus but that doesn’t make me ‘an Exodus supporter’…I don’t know if they’ve seriously changed course in the past 20 years or if you’re just magnifying some relatively minor blemishes. I’m still trying to find an OBJECTIVE way to research that. Anyway, I don’t support things I don’t know. That’s simply never been my way. So, please, if I’m talking to you in the present tense, don’t respond to me with something Exodus says as if I’d said it or believe it. I don’t want to be put in the position of defending Exodus…or even discussing Exodus for that matter. I see myself as a middle man. And, truth be told, in most areas I’m not really in the middle…I’m closer to your perspective. (I have always had this radical belief, for example, that man-made laws restricting ‘sinful behavior’ actually get in the way of God ‘convicting’ via the conscience.) So, please, if you’re talking to me, don’t confuse me with Exodus…and if you’re responding to me, respond to MY words…don’t throw Exodus at me. It’ll be less frustrating for both of us!
BAck to point. If you were including me in the inference and you say “FINALLY getting real”…then you show you have no knowledge of a decades worth of honest and straitforward writings of mine…Wayward Emotions, The Reality of Temptation, Lessons for the Battlefield, Reckoning with the Roots, Masturbation Dilemma. Finally (?) getting real? We’re talking 70′s and 80′s here! (And this, by the way, was a realness that was embraced by most, but not all, of early Exodus.)
Anyway, if you WERE including me in the inference, you accidentally left two wrong impressions aka confusion…fuzzies. And, if you weren’t, my bad! I apologize.
Michael, the radio ad you describe makes me squirm. I agree with you that it’s hype…but, duh, isn’t that what advertising is? Don’t get me wrong. I want to see this stuff curtailed…but–through reasoning and mutual understanding and respect. We’ve GOT to start having on-track, constructive dialogue HERE before we can begin to make any inroads THERE.
Michael…
Thanks for the update re Alan Chambers and ‘ex-gay’. I will try to find out more about why he’s uncomfortable with it. I won’t labor why I still like it since I’ve done that at least a half dozen times. I don’t think I’ve told Exodus or Alan why I support the term.
I’ll try to discuss this with him but I don’t have faith that it will evolve into daily exchanges like this blog.
Eddy: Sorry for calling you an “EXODUS supporter”. I thought you were. My bad. From now on, I’ll talk respond to you and EXODUS separately! I promise.
If you do happen to talk with Alan, I think you may be surprised to learn that he dislikes “ex-gay” for most of the same reasons I do. At one point, he even suggested a joint press conference to “offically retire it”. He said, “It’s more negaitve than anything — and does does really reflect what the change process is all about.” I agree. Arguments like yours and mine on this blog seem to bear that out.
By the way, thanks for your valuable contributions to the history of EXODUS, for your faith, and for your heart for gay people. You’re a good man, Charlie Brown.
Oops. Typo. Alan’s remark was that (the term “Exgay”) does “NOT really reflect what the change process is all about.†And, as you know, I strongly agree.
Eddy gave me a great idea, in place of my insufferable rants, I think I’ll just call for “TIA” — Truth In Advertizing. Would save space, huh?
Michael,
I love you dearly. But… I think now everyone who has ever visited this site – or perhaps everyone in the universe – now knows that Alan doesn’t like the term “ex-gay”.
Good. I have done my job.
Oh, and TIA.
Umm- I have to say though ex gay is a debateable term it would be prudent to keep in mind that one person’s definition for it does not fit ALL people’s definitions of it. I for one have experienced re-orientation. So for me change means change. It does not mean that I will not think about a woman again or that it is not possible to be attracted to a woman in the future. It does mean my orientation is towards men.
Thanks Michael! Thanks Everybody actually. I was actually a little afraid to ‘tune in’ tonight but I’m glad I did. Makes me want to say “Throck, toss us a good topic while we’re being amiable.”
Regarding ‘the term’: LOL! It seems everybody but me has trouble with ‘ex-gay’. So, if we dump it, what takes it’s place? I’ll still need a ‘tag’ by which I can easily find others who may share my views…that magic word or phrase that I could google to learn more about others who share my views. Mary and I, though extremely different in experience and level of change, have some pretty fundamental things in common. Do we have to have separate ‘tags’ for every level of change?
As a very vocal supporter of the term ‘ex-gay’, I feel I need answers to those two questions before I could let it go. What takes its place? Do we NEED separate ‘tags’ for every level of change?
LOL! If we actually discuss this question here, we could create the longest thread in ThrockBlog history.
LOL – I only use the term ex gay in selected groups to identify the idea that I have been a lesbian and now am not. All the emotions and what not in between are SOOOOOOO varied. How does one decide on a term? We could be like Jack on Will and Grace and call ourselves “Just Me! 2007″
If you like it, use it Eddy. I think I may have actually made it up so you can have it. (LOL) BTW, I do believe that both of you have experienced REAL change. We all have. Christ changes lives.
Also, the word is part of the language now, even with all its varied meanings. As long as there’s a internet, you’ll be able to google it forever… (grin)
Like Mary, I don’t tend to think of myself in terms of my sexuality. But, when I do, I’d like a tag that fits. LOL! How about Evolvasexual? Uniqueasexual? Bibliadystonic Sexuality? (Makes “ex-gay” sound better all the time.)
Michael, did they ever apprehend the animals that attacked you and murdered Jeffery?
BTW: I have a framed quote hanging on my door frame that you might enjoy: “Never place a period where God has placed a comma.” Gracie Allen. (For the youngsters out there, she was George Burns comedy partner years and years ago.)
Eddy, Yes they caught ‘em. Five gang members and the girlfirend of one — who hid the gang from the police. All did time, ranging from three months (for the girl who hid them and the man who drove the getaway car — to seven years for the three guys who just punched, kicked and held Jeffery down so he COULD be stabbed.)
The first two are already out (of course) and the others have not yet been paroled. The stabber got 25 years. The Governor called it a Hate Crime, but there was not enough evidence to prove that in court.
Eddy, would love to correspond with you off the blog — I will give my email to Dr. Throc. Hey, I like the quote about the comma! And, no, I have not put a “period” yet… Thirty years later, I am still looking for that ONE man who went from 100% gay to 100% straight — sudden or not. I think Mary is the first female I have met who made such a change. Not saying it’s not possible or that God can’t do it, just that I personally have not met one yet. So, I keep looking… (I honestly believe that Bigfoot and Nessie may also be real…)
Here’s the info on my friend’s murder: http://tampabaycoalition.homestead.com/court.html
Just click on Jeffery Owens’ photo for the full story and photos of the gang.
Oh how true about that quote! Gracie is on of my hereos.
Michael, the photosof the criminals did not pop up??
My own belief is that you will likely NEVER see that 100% change that you speak of. Even in my ministry days I said I expected that most would continue to have homosexual feelings/urges/temptations but that they would diminish in frequency and intensity. (Yeah, I know age does that too…but I’m talking about 30 years ago!) I said quite emphatically that the Bible never promised the absence of temptation but rather that ‘with every temptation there would be a way of escape’. I recognized early on that people who were expecting 100% were getting tripped up. The expectation of 100% didn’t come from psychology OR the Bible but rather from an odd mixture of charismatic belief and homophobia. (As charismatics, they believed God could and would do just about anything and they couldn’t imagine God could let a person continue to have those ‘yukky’ feelings.)
Some people in my church were pushing me towards marriage in a matter of months; my pastor advised that IF a relationship with a woman was part of God’s plan for me, it would likely be several years before I would be ready for that ‘journey’. (Although I heeded his advice I do recall that as a ‘maverick charismatic’, I did think ‘his God was too small’ and that, if I was obedient enough, God would one day whap me over the head with heterosexual feelings and urges.)
Since neither God nor psychology expects 100%, I’m puzzled why it’s such an important search for you? I do think there are a number of 90% to 95%’ers out there. And I believe there are many others who are in a ‘celibacy of unknown duration’. They are experiencing personal and spiritual growth but nothing much measureable on a heterosexuality scale. I also believe that an individuals level of gay-identification factors in here. Those who were more bi-sexual to begin with have less to contend with and a shorter road to travel.
Glad the Gracie quote brought some smiles. I sang “Just Dropped In to See What Condition My Condition Was In” at karaoke Friday night and later realized that this blog is what triggered me to remember the song in the first place.
So far, karaoke is as heterosexual as I get. I can make the ladies swoon with Town Without Pity or a Neil Diamond tune. I am getting more comfortable with flirtation but I’m also expecting it to lead nowhere. What’s ironic is that karaoke is also about as homosexual as I get, as well. (Some songs just bring out the ‘inner camp’.) A few people know ‘my whole story’; many know that I’m not straight and, by default, assume gay. That’s fine with me. It’s one way that I still get to make a dent against homophobic attitudes and to encourage acceptance. And, of course, there are many others who I don’t know or who don’t really care what a person’s sexuality is. (The place where I sing gets the most unusual mix of people…truly eclectic. Gays and lesbians can sometimes make up to 30 percent of the mix.)
LOL, I love Karaoke! For three years after leaving EXODUS, I was a host at a gay Karaoke bar. Too bad there wasn’t some sort of conversion therapy for some of the singers! Ouch!!! Made my ears bleed, I swear. Now, I still do karaoke sometimes, but usually limit my singing to church choir and Master Chorale.
Regarding the search for 100%, back in my EXODUS days, I did not expect that. I didn’t really want that. I really would have settled for just a little heterosexual attraction towards my wife. Any straight arousal would do… We both believed that gay feelings would diminish over time and that God would bless our marriage by creating at least some “normal” heterosexual attraction — if only toward her. Sadly, that never happened. She deserved more.
Now, I am happy being gay. The search for 100% is in response to misleadiing “hype” (your word, Eddy) that would suggest that change is “sudden, radical and/or complete.” Radical, maybe? But not suuden. Not complete. Meanwhile, after decades of prayer and study, I have reconciled my sexuality and my sprituality — using the Bible as the foundation for my sexual identity. For me, they are no longer in conflict. I am looking for 100% change because I already know that those who are already BISEXUAL to some degree can become straighter bisexuals. That’s not for me. I don’t want attractions to both.
I am not cut out for celibacy. I have a very strong (and I beleiev God-given) need for emotional, romantic, sexual and spiritual bonding with one special man — a spouse, a life-partner — in a monogamous, committed, Christian relationship . I found that in Gary — loving and being loved on ALL those important levels… And I have been blessed to find it twice since his death.
TIA alert: “When [the guy with the homosexual problem] begins to trust men, his homosexuality disappears.” J. Nicolosi.
That’s amazing stuff! Why didn’t I think of that? I wonder… do I have to trust all men, or just Joe and his buddies (Cameron, Berger, Schoenewolf, et all)?
Eddy,
I too love the Gracie quote. But it is a bit ironic in this context.
“God is still speaking” is currently the motto of the United Church of Christ and is used in connection with their efforts to openly support gay men and women and their relationships within the church. It is based on the Gracie comma quote. It is this program that was not allowed to advertise on network television that they welcomed gay people because, as CBS said, showing gay people attending church is “controversial” and “and the fact the Executive Branch has recently proposed a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, this spot is unacceptable for broadcast on the [CBS and UPN] networks.” (apparantly showing gay people attending church runs contrary to marriage laws). Incidentally, overwheming UCC voted in 2005 affirming “equal marriage rights for couples regardless of gender.” It is left up to the individual churches whether to perform marriage ceremonies but many do – and a few have gone so far as to say that the will not perform opposite-sex ceremonies until such time as same-sex couples have the same rights. Those wacky Congregationalist/Pilgrims.
Timothy,
Not that it’s any consolation but the kind of censorship you cited is across the board. I still vividly remember when we tried to do a meeting called “Jesus Didn’t Come to Condemn”…we planned to evangelize but also to confront other attenders with their own homophobic attitudes. I lined up an ad with our local paper, even specifying for our $$ spent where I’d like the ad to appear. They buried it in a corner of the back page! I actually went through the paper twice before I found it! (This was years ago and the other POV but it demonstrates that there are still plenty of people out there who have redefined ‘free speech’ and what’s ‘appropriate for the community’.)
On the opposite doorframe, I have another quote by Abraham Lincoln: “Whatever you are be a good one.” Sometimes I get a good chuckle out of the ‘whatever’ but mostly I just try to live by the advice. (LOL! I’m wanting to write to Alan Chambers re the radio ad promising ‘sudden radical and complete change’ but I’m afraid I can be an extreme bitch when I’m all fired up…I need a cooling off period before I can become
a good bitch.) Hope that word didn’t offend anybody…in this case, it is the most accurate word for the situation…
Was ‘sudden’ really the first word or have I inadvertently substituted another? If they said ‘sudden’, then I’m not any closer to cooling down! ARRRGGGGHHH!!!