And that reminds me: another thing on the to-do list that I haven’t…

What? — like the RT dialog and exgay testimonies?

These are scholarships offered to kids who are kicked out of home etc. So, yes, I’d have assumed that the applications will ask if the applicant fits the description; and that the applicants will emphasise the reasons they should be accepted. Grove City does the same with their application, as no doubt do applicants.

I’d also assume that many of the parents would indeed start behaving reasonably once their child is no longer under their control. I’m unsure of how that dynamic works at Grove City…

Oh, about 25 or so in the last year or so. I wouldn’t be able to say before that. I am getting on in years.

I’m sorry, maybe I’m too slow this morning but only one part of that makes sense (the first sentence).

Are you saying you met 25 gay teens in the past year, but prior to that you hadn’t met any? Or gay men and lesbians in therapy. Or gay couples over dinner?

(I’m also not sure what your age has to do with it — aren’t you and Jennings roughly the same age?)

What is representative when it comes to “gay teens?” Those of the camp of Savin-Williams do not seem to be on the same page as the Kevin Jennings camp.

GLSEN is not made of “gay teens”. The “S” stands for straight. The two groups are also not mutually exclusive — as the article makes clear. You could have a better idea of what is representative of gay teens by joining GLSEN, or PFLAG, instead of just talking about them. (Guess that is not possible: Grove City wouldn’t permit you to do that… ).

The overwhelming majority of young gay men and women have always successfully negotiated their adolescence, as do their straight peers, regardless of efforts against them. Support groups are not intended for those who don’t need it.

At the same time, I have little doubt that the efforts of GLSEN (and others) is what has enabled larger numbers to successfully pass through adolscence and helped the following to be true:

young Americans–including many young conservatives–are becoming thoroughly, even nonchalantly, gay- positive.

This, of course, refers to both gay and straight teens. Now, apart from the “really gay” ones, more are able to be open and honest, be supported by understanding families and to keep and maintain their peer friendships without a constant reference back to a single dimension of themselves (from all sides).

Do you imagine that situation is at all a bother to us???

Drag out copies of Time’s 1969, 1979, and 1998 editions if you need to trace the timeline. GSLEN is but one step along the way, and hopefully it will make itself unnecessary.

Also review the 1967 CBS special “The Homosexuals” for a clearer picture of what it was like before a GLSEN was even possible. It shows what life was like before therapists such as Socarides and Bieber were exposed as ignorant.

I still don’t know if you think the current laws about sexuality edication should be changed by removing the anti-gay components.

As far as being representative of gay teens, I think that is one of the interesting aspects of the Time article. What is representative when it comes to “gay teens?” Those of the camp of Savin-Williams do not seem to be on the same page as the Kevin Jennings camp.

But he says he and his wife sent Bryan to Casa not because he was gay but because he was a “totally unruly kid” who was “just so mean … To go get that scholarship, I understand he had to be the poor little victim. But for three years, my wife and I were the victims.”

But one night at the retreat, he also said, “I know they sort of want you to focus on the negative when you’re telling your story.”

Looks like they scholarship people want you to add stuff that is about victimization and so on.

I read the Time article, and while I did see that many benefactors of the Point Foundation said they often dwelled on the negative side of their gay experiences, the article seemed to be clear that they did not embellish the actual application itself. Did you see somewhere where kids admitted to embellishing their application, or is that just conjecture on your part?