Noa referred to the ex gay movement as the “ex gay camp.” This is all I meant. I don’t see the relevance of how ex gays describe themselves — As long as they identify with “the camp.”

Encouraging people to find out about ex gays isn’t the same as recognizing them as they describe themselves, i.e., as “happy content ex gays.” Normally, I’d definitely expect an apology or some kind of recognition, but ex gays and the ex gay movement are treated as a joke pretty much. And you will respond that they are a joke, but still, the point stands. The ex gay movement isn’t all that bad that one can’t recognize any good that they do. They are seen as one big farce.

But that isn’t how the Ex Gay Movement would describe itself

I’m not sure what you mean by this. When I was talking about having problems with defining what Ex-Gay means, I was talking about the people within the movement itself – what are YOU talking about when you say the Ex-Gay Movement?

On the contrary, all ex-gay survivors I know of encourage everyone to find out as much as possible about the ex-gay movement. Of course, much of the commentary is critical but when ex-gay leaders does things that doesn’t fit the “ex-gay movement is abusive to it’s core” story line I read about it on places like ex-gay watch and box turtle bulletin.

I think generally that criticism such as the one you present benefits from being specific and not general.