Dr. Joseph Nicolosi of the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) has posted a recent interview with Michael Glatze. Glatze is the troubled former editor of XY Magazine who made an ex-gay splash in a 2007 World Net Daily article. After dropping mysteriously out of site for a couple of years, he has recently been literally begging for attention from friend and foe alike (read summary). This interview reads much like the first one Nicolosi conducted with him in 2007, filled with the former’s trademark confirmation bias and the latter’s apparently ever-growing urge to please the good doctor.
But Glatze’ responses don’t come close to reflecting the truly disturbing things he has been saying elsewhere. In a blog he shut down after light was shown on it last month, Glatze revealed more of what caused us such concern about him in 2007. In the following quote, he runs the gamut from misogyny, to hatred of President Obama (a common theme in most of his posts) to finally labeling attempts to prevent bullying in schools “insidious” because the bullying is a learning experience.
We live in a culture that hopes to destroy manhood, by promoting policies that shame men, and make them out to be villians. “Patriarchy is bad! Down with patriarchy!” What is “patriarchy”? Patriarchy is the idea that men exist. There is nothing more. People invent “matriarchy,” otherwise known as a more emotional approach, a more flowy approach, to doing things, as though men have no emotions or desire to have a happy existence. The false duality created by non-“patriarchy” thinking leads to the corrosion of humanity, as exhibited by political correctness, Liberalism, and embodied by The One … a.k.a., Barack Obama, the world’s first official girl-man President.
Even so much as uttering the statement in the previous paragraph gets the victim-minded whiners, those lacking a backbone, those denying their manhood, to heights of hysteria and indignation. “That’s the very type of behavior that leads to bullying in schools.” Bullying in schools is a part of life, a part of growth. Every time somebody needs to grow up, even just a little bit, the process will be painful and probably not the first choice for what that individual might want to do. Take away every one of these instances in the name of “compassion,” and you will tear out the souls and spirits of everyone you hope to control with such insidious policies.
Last month we (reluctantly) called attention to Glatze’ blog postings which, among other things, reflected utter hatred for Barack Obama — and an admission that this hatred was in large part due to his race. Glatze goes on to claim that Obama wants nothing short of the “destruction of humanity.” These are not minor statements.
Have I mentioned lately how utterly *disgusting* Obama is? And, yes, it’s because he’s black. God, help us all.
What it comes down to is what your intention is. Obama’s intention, for example, is to dismantle America and destroy humanity.
Obama hates white people, America, capitalism, me, you, himself… need I go on?
At the very least these comments betray the idyllic, peaceful life that Glatze describes in his interview while reflecting on the Buddhist mountain retreat where he now works. Even a setting of beauty, devoted to meditation and soul searching does not seem up to the task of calming whatever demons haunt him.
NARTH is not exactly known for the sensitivity of it’s members. In 2006, NARTH Scientific Advisory Committee member Joseph Berger drew criticism for comments in which he condoned the bullying of a gender non-conforming child as a form of social correction — eerily similar to Glatze’ statement on bullying above.
I suggest, indeed, letting children who wish go to school in clothes of the opposite sex – but not counseling other children to not tease them or hurt their feelings.
On the contrary, don’t interfere, and let the other children ridicule the child who has lost that clear boundary between play-acting at home and the reality needs of the outside world.
Maybe, in this way, the child will re-establish that necessary boundary.
NARTH later renounced Berger’s comments, then quietly edited the original article to remove that section. They later pulled the article entirely, however Berger remains as a member of their Scientific Advisory Committee.
Barely a month after the Berger issue, XGW reported on a stunning defense of slavery written by yet another NARTH Scientific Advisory Committee member, Dr. Gerald Schoenewolf. In a lengthy essay posted to the NARTH website, Schoenewolf claimed that political correctness traced to Marxism, and that oppression was not necessarily a bad thing. In defense of this idea, he made the following statements:
With all due respect, there is another way, or other ways, to look at the race issue in America. It could be pointed out, for example, that Africa at the time of slavery was still primarily a jungle, as yet uncivilized or industrialized. Life there was savage, as savage as the jungle for most people, and that it was the Africans themselves who first enslaved their own people. They sold their own people to other countries, and those brought to Europe, South America, America, and other countries, were in many ways better off than they had been in Africa. But if one even begins to say these things one is quickly shouted down as though one were a complete madman.
The reaction to this was understandably quick and universal. The mainstream press, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the National Black Justice Coalition (NBJC) all weighed in, as did a number of NARTH members. Some even resigned over the poor judgment they believed was exercised over the matter. NARTH defended Schoenewolf, but did remove the essay and replaced it with a post complaining about the negative responses (which remains on their site to this day). And incredibly, Schoenewolf is also still a member of their Scientific Advisory Committee.
There was James Phelan, another NARTH Scientific Advisory Committee member, who “drop kicked the hell out of” a man who didn’t take kindly to Phelan’s gay baiting comments during a marathon in 2007. This led to a manic series of bizarre posts and comments from Phelan, and general condemnation from his peers. Exodus even dropped him from their referral network, something which has never been easy to accomplish.
NARTH, however, did not address the issue. Instead, Phelan spoke at their annual conference a few days after the incident where he received an award. While Phelan later seemed to calm down and even apologized in several venues, NARTH has never acknowledged that anything happened. And last, Phelan remains on their Scientific Advisory Committee.
Heading into their annual conference, it would appear NARTH is at least one strike over the limit. And to Dr. Nicolosi, who is supposed to be a licensed professional clinician, we ask simply, do you not see something wrong with this picture?