advertisement
advertisement
|
KEVIN NAFF
Friday, June 24, 2005
GAY ADULTS LEARN from an early age to develop a thick skin. From playground taunts
to inappropriate jokes in the boardroom, many of us have endured the hurtful anti-gay
prejudice of our peers for a long time and, as a result, acquired the armor and
perspective necessary to protect ourselves.
I can endure hours of evangelical Christian diatribes about the evils of the
“gay agenda.” Or quietly suffer the barbs of pandering politicians
looking to win elections on our backs. Or turn the other cheek when a gaggle
of ministers calls a news conference to announce their support for a ban on
gay marriage.
Even the Washington Times’ practice of putting the words gay marriage
in quotation marks has ceased to send my blood pressure soaring.
There remains just one assault on the dignity of gay men and lesbians that
still drives me into fits of rage: the “ex-gay” movement. The quotation
marks are deliberate — and appropriate, because there is no such thing
as “ex-gay.” There is “repress-my-inate-immutable-characteristics-and-deny-their-existence,”
but no such condition as “ex-gay.”
The “ex-gays” usually make headlines only when their leaders are
caught emerging from a gay bar at 2 a.m. But they are everywhere these days.
LAST WEEK, THE tale of Zach, a 16-year-old gay Tennessee high school student
who was sent to a reparative therapy camp by his impossibly naïve parents,
made its way into the blogosphere. Zach’s story serves as a reminder that
the zany, funny film “But I’m a Cheerleader” was not entirely
a work of fiction.
Last month, the “ex-gay” crowd made headlines in Maryland, where
they joined a lawsuit to block implementation of an updated sex education curriculum
that included discussion of homosexuality and a condom demonstration. The “ex-gays”
are actually demanding that their views be included in health classes, which
are ordinarily based on that quaint concept known as science.
The “ex-gays” also caused a stir in Florida this month, after commissioning
billboards in Orlando that read, “Gay? Unhappy?” and included a
Web site address, www.exodus.to. The site for Exodus International offers various
services to those seeking escape from the “homosexual lifestyle”
and testimonials from self-described “ex-gays.”
In his testimonial, someone identified as Alan Chambers writes, “Disillusioned
and desperate, I remember going into my parent’s room nightly to see if
they had been raptured, taken to heaven, without me.” He recounts his
addiction to anonymous gay sex and how he turned to the Bible to be saved.
The Exodus site even offers a prayer request page, complete with a drop-down
box of prayer options: “for me to overcome homosexuality,” “for
my child,” “for my spouse,” “for a family member.”
The “ex-gays” got some ink in last Sunday’s New York Times
Magazine. The cover story, about a group of Christian activists in Maryland
desperate to protect the sacred institution of marriage from gays, references
the “ex-gay” movement as the antidote to gay marriage.
And the “ex-gay” debate comes to the Seattle area this weekend,
with two competing conferences. The first conference, sponsored by Focus on
the Family, is titled “Love Won Out,” and bills itself as “promoting
the truth that homosexuality is preventable and treatable.”
The second conference, “Love Welcomes All,” is intended to counter
the “ex-gay” confab and is sponsored by PFLAG and other pro-gay
groups.
AT A TIME when conservative Christians are resurrecting the debate over evolution,
pesky details like science matter little to the “ex-gays.”
Every reputable medical institution, including the American Psychiatric Association,
the American Psychological Association and the American Medical Association,
has repudiated reparative therapies as dangerous. As the Times story points
out, the American Psychiatric Association actually endorsed gay marriage in
the interest of promoting mental health.
In light of all the evidence that these reparative techniques are ineffective
and, in fact, dangerous to the mental health of young gays, it’s time
for these camps to be shut down.
An enterprising gay lawyer ought to step forward and, as at least one blogger
following Zach’s story put it, find grounds to sue these bastards out
of existence.
In an ironic twist, the ex-gay ministry at the center of Zach’s story
is now asking for “tolerance.” The request from Love in Action,
which sponsors the camp called Refuge, came during a June 16 news conference.
“This program is operated on the will of the guardian or parent. We will
work with the minor children as long as they are not overtly distracting to
their own program or the program of others,” said John Smid, the “ex-gay”
executive director of Love in Action. “If it is shown that the client
is overtly treatment resistant, we will work with the parent towards alternative
options for their care and overall relational health.”
What “alternative options” does Smid have in mind? Electro-shock
therapy? Solitary confinement?
THE DAMAGE CAUSED to young gays by the views of “ex-gays” should
not be underestimated. The two greatest weapons that opponents of gay rights
wield against us are charges that gay men are pedophiles and that homosexuality
is a choice. Overcoming those two obstacles would mean instant victory for the
movement.
And the “ex-gays” are doing their best to reinforce the refuted
canard that being gay is a choice; that I could just as easily choose a different
pair of shoes as I could choose a different sexual orientation.
Right-handed people can’t choose to be lefties, those with brown skin
can’t choose white and gays can’t choose to be straight. Yes, it
really is that simple.
Someday, science will discover the biological or genetic root of homosexuality
and finally put to rest the absurd notion that sexual orientation is a choice.
Until then, we must counter the damaging rhetoric of the “ex-gays”
and ensure that young gays like Zach understand that they are perfectly normal
as they are.
It’s the “ex-gays” that belong in a reparative camp.
|
