AgapePress reports that the ex-gay movement will be trying to influence the NEA at their upcoming conference. Something called the NEA Ex-Gay Educators Caucus will be presenting Janet Boynes, ex-lesbian, at a display booth to promote her ministry.
The former lesbian, now a born-again believer, strongly refutes claims that homosexuals cannot change. “Is it easy to come out of homosexuality? No, it’s not,” she acknowledges. “You hear a lot of people say, ‘I prayed to God. I prayed to God, and I just couldn’t come out.’ Well, you know what? It’s not easy to come out, but God can’t do it alone. You have to make some steps.”
Boynes’ own path out of homosexuality involved at one point moving in with a Christian family. “Everybody can’t do that,” she says, “but now I surround myself with healthy people.” Other homosexuals seeking freedom must take the steps Christ leads them to take; but she insists that even those who claim to have prayerfully tried but given up “can come out if they want. They just choose not to.”
But what does that mean? Does Miss Boynes mean that someone can leave a “homosexual lifestyle” or does she mean they can cease being attracted to the same sex? She doesn’t say. But if we look at her testimony on her website we have to assume that she is talking about a “homosexual lifestyle”. Boynes discusses a change in her surroundings and a wish for a husband some day but makes no mention of a change in her own orientation.
And in that context her words make no sense. Maybe there is someone out there who prayed to leave a homosexuality – as a “lifestyle” – but I’ve never met them. I have however met many people that begged God to change their orientation.
Miss Boynes may be a nice woman, but her message is cruel. She made it clear that if you don’t “come out of homosexuality”, it’s your fault. You didn’t take the right steps. You just chose not to come out.
And while this sort of language plays well to those who seek justification for their mistreatment of gay people, this does amazing damage to those who struggle with their same-sex attractions and may not have seen change. Boynes’ message to many – including some who participate on this site – is that if you don’t find yourself “changing”, blame yourself. And we can only believe this means that any actions taken against you by the anti-gay activist, you deserve.
I’d like to see us put “ex-gay” and “ex-lesbian” in quotes. I really don’t think that either of these labels is accurate, and to use them as literal labels gives them more authenticity than they merit.
I do not believe that it is possible to change one’s sexual orientation anymore than it is possible to permanently change one’s skin color or eye color. Yes, you can get a tan. Yes, you can wear colored contact lenses. Hell, you can even dye your hair. But these cosmetic changes do not alter your DNA nor do they change the fact that underneath the contacts, the hair dye and the fake tan one would still be just as pale, brown-eyed and blonde as one was the day he/she was born.
Having said that, I do respect the fact that people can abstain from acting on their sexual orientation. Most of us had to live that way at one point or another in our lives – it was called “living in the closet”. If an “ex-lesbian” chooses not to seek out a relationship with another woman then fine, no problem for me, that’s her little red wagon and she can push it or pull it. However it isn’t enough for those who are unable to accept their sexual orientation to make such decisions in their own lives. They also seek to force “change” on the rest of us, or at the very least to make our lives as miserable as possible by working to reverse and/or oppose every single progressive step taken towards our full equality and inclusion in society.
Let’s not enable or encourage the “ex-gay/ex-lesbian” crowd by using their labels as literal words. By putting the term in quotes we acknowledge that it is the term they wish to use but that it really isn’t a true descriptor of what they are. I think that “gay/lesbian in denial” would be a much more apt label for them anyway.
You know, from reading these “testimonies” and other rhetoric from the “ex-gay” movement, it occurs to me that they are “ex-gay” in the same way I am “ex-gray,” and I am not entirely being flip.
My genes drive me to have prematurely gray hair (started going gray at 14, totally gray by about 25). I choose not to accept that genetic predisposition by having a nice gay hairdresser dump potentially cancer-causing chemicals on my head once a month to keep it dark. I have changed the external, in a way that might be dangerous to me in the long haul, but I have not, and cannot, change the underlying biological phenomenon. And this change I undergo is time-consuming, expensive and requires constant maintenance. Sounds familiar, no?
Miss Boynes says “but God can’t do it alone”.
Well, I guess he wouldn’t be a god, then would he? Excellent points, Timothy and Jonathon.
See why I put the necessity of not being gay right up there with the necessity for breast implants?
There is no health issue that requires them. Having small breasts isn’t a handicap, nor does it have anything to do with intellect or character.
Those in the business of selling implants will tell you your self esteem will improve, so therefore your life will.
And therefore, droves of women risk their lives, physical comfort and serious debt to have breast implants.
But who are those implants REALLY for?
And if you never have big breasts, are you a failure?
I think this ex gay pursuit is about as worthless as the pursuit of breast implants.
Of course, addictions, personal depression or lack of esteem are things that can be helped through legitimate psychiatry.
A repressive and bigoted society (for all kinds of things) will cause depression and low self esteem, or relationship issues in a person.
But legitimate counseling helps you work through it, not GIVE INTO society’s lack of respect for you.
And this woman is EXACTLY the reason why messing with someone’s IDENTITY, is damaging!
And incidently, people who get plastic surgery and parade around AS IF it was an improvement on their character and brag about their ‘improvement’ can be as insufferable as ex gays.
One thing is for sure, the ex gays we are all familiar with are disgustingly immodest about their ‘accomplishment’ and so called ‘improvement’.
As an ever straight person, I think they are STILL really messed up, just with a different justification for not acknowleging it.
Jonathan,
Some of us here have discussed putting certain words in quotes. We decided to try and avoid that whenever possible.
While we don’t want to give the impression that we accept without question the claims made by ex-gay groups, we also do not categorically deny everything they say. I am skeptical about the successed claimed by Exodus, but I am unwilling to state that no one has ever changed their sexual orientation.
To put “ex-gay” in quotes would be to challenge the claims that an ex-gay person is making about their life. And if I find it offensive that anti-gay ativists put “gay” in quotes, then I have to be aware that putting “ex-gay” in quotes is being deliberately offensive to some who consider themselves ex-gay, including some who participate at this site.
Besides, ex-gays have to call themselves something and, frankly, they get to pick what that is – within reason. I do object to the term “former homosexual” because of the clinical association of “homosexual” and believe that is a claim that very few ex-gay people can legitimately make. As long as they have same-sex attraction, I think “former homosexual” is intentionally deceptive and will use it in quotes when appropriate.
Many ex-gays view “gay” as a term that shows acceptance of their orientation and connotes some sense of community. If they have rejected the “gay community” and are seeking to change their orientation, then I suppose “ex-gay” is not a completely dishonest description.
So we will not be putting “ex-gay” in quotes in our postings that open threads and as a matter of civility, I suggest you don’t either.
(as for “pro-family” as discussed on another thread, I’m still undecided)
I myself have not always been consistent in my use of quotes around the term. While I can appreciate that some may be offended by putting quotes around the word, I still feel that presenting the term as a literal legitimizes the idea that sexual orientation is mutable, which I categorically deny because the proof is just not there.
I know what it is like to “struggle” with sexuality. I grew up in a small, backwards, rural town in northeast Georgia, surrounded by nothing but rednecks, Klansmen and Southern Baptists. I awakened to my sexuality at an early age and for years and years during my teens prayed and begged God to “fix” me. Finally, after several years of unanswered prayers I asked God to either help me “overcome” being homosexual or to help me accept it. Fortunately for me, I was able to work through the confusion and shame that was attached to being homosexual. I educated myself and slowly became more and more confident in myself. Today (almost 18 years after I came out) I am very secure with my sexuality and also have the strength to stand up for myself and my fellow gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to those who used to taunt me.
Those who assert that “change is possible” through religious practices have failed time and time again to prove their claims. There is simply no evidence whatsoever that homosexuals have been able to change their sexual orientation completely from homosexual to heterosexual. Most “successes” are really only able to suppress their natural urges, not eliminate them entirely. Many (most?) of those involved with the founding of Exodus and other programs have themselves abandoned the organization and have resumed their lives as homosexuals. So if anything, the term “ex-gay” is false advertising!
I am not intentionally seeking to offend anyone. Perhaps it is my own animosity towards those who seek to perpetuate bias against gays and lesbians, but I find it hard to in any way legitimize the claim that I can or should change my sexual orientation. If Exodus and their ilk were to limit their activities to serving those who seek them out instead of becoming an activist group who seek to limit the civil rights of gays and lesbians then I’d be much less hostile to the use of the term “ex-gay” and much more open to dropping the quotation marks.
Jonathon,
“There is simply no evidence whatsoever that homosexuals have been able to change their sexual orientation completely from homosexual to heterosexual.”
True, there is no impirical evidence. But because this has never been proven one way or the other, I’m hesitant to claim it is NOT true that some small number of people have actually changed their sexual orientation.
Just because an ex-gay can’t “prove” to your satisfaction that his orientation has changed does not mean that it hasn’t. I’ve been having a similarly illogical argument on another thread with someone who says that because there is no inarguable proof that sexuality is biological (he finds some straw to grasp at) then therefore it has to be developmental.
We cannot simply reduce the debate to “i’m right until you prove me wrong (and I’ll never believe I’m wrong no matter what)”. This puts us in the same mindset as the anti-gay activists.
Granted, I think truly reoriented people are about as common as unicorns. But to tell someone on this site that they aren’t “really” ex-gay is offensive. And mean spirited. And uncalled for.
Some of the ex-gay stugglers who participate here are very nice people and I can’t think of any reason to be offensive to them.
It doesn’t offend me if anyone puts the word “gay” in quotes, its still going to mean same sex attracted to most people just as “homosexual” does. That I find one has a negative (not a clinical) connotation and the other a slightly positive connotation isn’t currently significant to a society trying to decide how to treat “gays” and “homosexuals” fairly. I believe its important to counter the public’s misconception that people are “exgay” or “exhomosexual” as in “ex” same sex attracted.
Any anti-gay who puts “gay” in quotes must admit it logically follows “exgay” should be in quotes as well
I don’t know of any “exgay” who doesn’t advocate that acting on same sex attractions is a sin. I don’t find that nice at all. In fact its pretty offensive to me.
Where are all the “ex-heterosexuals?”