You can purchase an autographed copy of Anything But Straight by sending a $35 check or money order to:
-------------------------
Wayne Besen
PO Box 25491
Brooklyn, NY 11202
Conversion therapist Warren Throckmorton made a stunning admission in the "comments" section of his blog. He claimed that "ex-gay" really means a person who says he is straight, even though he is STILL attracted to the same sex (SSA). In the real world we call this "false witness."
"Ex-gay usually really means 'I no longer identify as gay even if I have SSA,'" wrote Throckmorton.
Throckmorton is a Christian "therapist" who created an "ex-gay" film starring Joann Highley, an admitted demon extracting exorcist.
19 Comments:
I'm afraid I still have a fundamental problem with this whole "ex-gay" nonsense. It just seems to be a rather obvious scam to me for those who plant the seeds of guilt and depression inside a gay person to suddenly sell a way out of the dilemma. I don't care if it's packaged as "unwanted homosexual feelings" or the more forceful reeducation camps set up by the more ridiculous units of the Right...it smacks of dishonesty.
If the "christians" would start the process by deprogramming their "clients" of all the fear-and-smear and dramatic hysteria they've helped plant in the first place, then I'd be willing to listen to what Throckmorton, and others might have to say. Otherwise, it seems rather arrogant to me that "researchers" who base their outlook on a chosen religious belief (and one which they can always change to another religious belief - don't people do that every day?) encourage the manipulation of people with "unwanted" adult sexual and relationship feelings based on that chosen religious belief.
Perhaps the answer is to start establishing "ex-conservative christian" groups, where people are encouraged to help family members see the error in their chosen lifestyle patterns. I'm sure Dr. Throckmorton should be just as willing to assist those with "unwanted" religious feelings just as much as he is willing to dabble in deeply felt emotional and sexual identities.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 2:12 AM
CK - I'm afraid I don't get your point. First, I posted his quote before any subsequent spin. So, it was, as usual, 100% accurate. I went to bed before he reposted with further nonsense.
Second, who said he was alligned 100% with anything? In any case that is inside baseball that maybe 5 people in the country (I'm not one of them) really cares about The fact is, he is a conversion therapist and spouts a bunch of unscientific nonsense because he has an obvious problem with gay people. This is the issue that rally matters. Try keeping your eye on the ball without getting distracted.
posted by Wayne Besen, at
6/13/2006 8:00 AM
CK:
FACT: Throckmorton does have an obvious problem with gays. After all, he produced a movie - "I Do Exist". The very notion that a person should change implies that there is something wrong with homosexuality.
If there was a video suggesting any other minority should change, you would rightfully be outraged. (Or would you? Maybe you are a self-loathing lesbian Uncle Tom?)
CK - perhaps you should look at the facts before annointing yourself as the gay apolgist for reparative therapy. It is insulting and does a grave disservice to the people still trapped in these places who buy into these myths and lies. (especially young people who are there against their will)These are the people who need your help, not Throckmorton.
But helping these victims wouldn't give you the selfish satisfaction of annointing yourself "fair and balanced," now would it? CK - the "voice of reason." Give me a break!
As someone who wasted 10 years of my life in several of these awful groups, I find your contribution to this board naive and self-serving.
Also CK, about us all "demonizing each other", they started demonizing *us* first; in some cases literally!! Why else would they be aligned with exorcists!!!??? Pleezzze! It reminds me of that case in the news recently where an autistic boy was killed during an exorcism. A person's 'religious choices' END when they start destroying and totally fucking up the lives and heads of others--especially the young and innocent who are so easily indoctrinated and brainwashed. I believe in a Higher Power and an afterlife, BUT 99% of the time, when there's a conflict between sciend and religion--SCIENCE WINS!!!
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 9:31 AM
Absolutely. The demonizing begins when a child is forced to attend the Sunday School of the PARENTS choice and the abomination argument starts being taught long before a child ever reaches puberty. And it is enforced by strict gender roleplaying assignments that are so limiting that children are ridiculed and scared out of developing their own interests or identity in favor of the identity the religion demands must be instilled.
To me, this is all about power - and the "conservative christians" are much more concerned about exerted power over the daily lives of people (including children) than they are asserting any real interest in helping or "saving" anyone.
What is truly remarkable is that, despite all of the indoctrination, the fearmongering, the hideous demonizing, the identity crisis created is too often rooted in the same religious doctrine which claims to "cure" the "disorder." If a researcher is interested in helping someone deal with "unwanted" homosexual feelings, then I would expect that professional to deal first with the possibility that indoctrinated religious beliefs may really be the unwanted factor. After all, religious belief is supposed to be a CHOICE.
To me, this gets to the heart of the claim that the church and state MUST be as one - something which "conservative" christians contend is the essential foundation of our country. Yet these same people deem free will and self-determination as evil in itself - so in many ways they conflict directly with democratic government and individual rights. To them, the only individual right one has is to follow God as they determine FOR you - or worship according to THEIR conscience, not yours.
Then they take this basic premise, demonize people, and then offer to sell a "loving" way out of the whole mess - quite the scam. Do they accept an individual who says "I have unwanted feelings about my southern baptist upbringing" by encouraging a client to go to a United Church of Christ which might better suit their identity? I find that's doubtful - instead, they use the indoctrinated religious belief as a tool to feed the need to rid a subject of "unwanted" homosexual feelings rather than explore the right of the adult to question those imposed beliefs.
This shows up, in my opinion, in every public statement that the Right uses regarding gay Americans. They regularly project and assume that gays use the same tactics that the "christians" have used for centuries to encourage coercion to their narrow belief systems. And those projections are based on their own hunger for power and control, rather than legitimacy. In their minds, people cannot be free unless their ministers have decided to remanipulate biblical text to actually free them - and government is supposed to follow the religion's lead - not the other way around.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 10:11 AM
Why ostracize people who want to make religious choices that differ from ours?
Because turn about is fair play, CK. And because they're not ostracizing me for my "religious choice." They're ostracizing me because I was born gay. They're vilifying ME because I choose to have love and make love with a person of the same gender. THEY'RE demonizing ME because of THEIR interpretation of a collection of mythologies that shield them from the reality of the world, a delusion that they would love to force upon everybody who they preceive as different.
Hiding behind "religious choices" is a fallacious argument in this case. Would you say the same thing to in regards to a Satanist? What would you say if these "religious choices" expressed nothing but hate and loathing for you and your "happily partnered"?
Gays have too long been the underdogs and the victims. We are encouraged to roll over and play dead, to make nice with the people who would like to eliminate our voices, our existences from the public sphere. Why should we? These people aren't going to suddenly wake up one day and say "We're sorry...we'll respect the fact that you're a human being." What Wayne does is reflect a powerful attack back at people like Thockmorton, to remind them that we are here and not going to go away anytime soon.
you victimize yourself. no one else can do that to you. some people do not like being gay - let them change or become celibate or do whatever they choose. for anyone to force them to sexually act in a way that they don't feel comfortable is just as cruel as you say the others guys are!
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 12:30 PM
Wayne is right. Throckmorton's quote is very telling. What he is essentially admitting is that sure, a gay person can marry a woman, have children and live with all the outward trappings of a heterosexual life while, in reality, abolutely nothing has changed where it counts, which is on the inside. It's called a charade, friends. That's why even they do not say that they are "straight". They have to invent a whole new term for what they are, the "ex-gay".
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 1:23 PM
oh, brother! you confuse striaght people with the religious right and then you say ex-gay people call themselves ex-gay instead of straight. ha! if they called themselves straight - you'd laugh and say that's not possible - once gay always gay. to identify themselves to people like you they say ex-gay to show that once gay can be straight. no winning with your logic. as a liberal, i can't even support your thinking.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 1:42 PM
To the above anonymous posters: "you victimize yourself and no one else can do that to you"?!?! what the hell have you been smoking? Tell Matthew Shepherd and all the other people who have been gay-bashed that they victimize themselves. And no one is forcing anyone to have any type of sex that they dont want to. "They can change or be celibate"--half right, they can be celibate but being homosexual is BIOLOGICAL and no amount of snake oil or religion is going to change that.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 2:55 PM
mmmmm, i know what it is like to be bashed for being gay. i support the hate crime bill, and same sex marriage. so, get your panties uncrunched. and as long as you believe that everyone is out to get you then you will always be a victim. not all christians hate you, not all straight people misunderstand you. grow up.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 3:06 PM
Before anyone defends Throckmorton, I suggest spending a great deal of time on his website reading his views. He claims not to be a "reparative therapist", but he does promote religious-based suppression of one's same sex attractions. If a gay person wants to go that route, more power to them. It sounds like a horrible life to me.
HOWEVER, what quickly becomes evident from reviewing Throckmorton's site is that he is not a dispassionate scientist who upholds individuals' rights to make their own reigious-based choices. If that were the case, I'd have no beef with him. The truth is that he is actively fighting against equal rights for queer people, just like Nicolosi and others of their ilk.
The fact that he readily admits that so-called "reparative therapy" is usually ineffective does not make him a saint. Instead of using all the pseudoscientific nonsense about unresolved Oedipal complexes to cloak his hatred, he just comes right out and says that he thinks we're a bunch of disgusting sinners who don't deserve equal rights. This man is a standard fundie fanatic, nothing more, nothing less.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 5:06 PM
"usually"? I wonder if Dr. Throckmorton can produce even ONE person who doesn NOT still have "SSA" after "therapy".
posted by Anonymous, at
6/13/2006 6:36 PM
ck: wow. Some of the commenters here are not too accepting of a nuanced viewpoint!!
KJ "The very notion that a person should change implies that there is something wrong with homosexuality."
I don't think Doc Thock's said that every gay person should change or even CAN change, just that some can. I'm not convinced of his assertion, but "perhaps you should look at the facts before annointing yourself as the gay apolgist".
Mel: "How stupid is CK?? Does she realize that these "choices" are based on lies about gay life, fear tactics and selling therapy rejected by the APA."
Well, no. Sometimes these choices are based on a person's deeply held religious convictions. There are people who can understand that tehre are happy gay people living contented lives yet who also believe that to achieve peace with God that they don't want to be gay.
I wish they could find peace and remain consistent with their God-given orientation, but I'm not so arrogant as to assume I know what's best for their life and can dictate to them what religious beliefs they should have. In that way I'm different from both James Dobson and Mel.
kevin: "The demonizing begins when a child is forced to attend the Sunday School of the PARENTS choice..."
Ok, that one frightens me. I wonder just who kevin thinks should be in charge of selecting what Sunday School a child attends. Yikes!!
Johnny: "Why ostracize people who want to make religious choices that differ from ours?
Because turn about is fair play, CK."
I'll give Johnny some slack and assume he misunderstood you. You were talking about gay people who want to live "ex-gay" and celibate. I think he had a few cosmos before reading your comments and thought you were defending the religous choices of some anti-gay activist.
If not, then he's trying to say that celibate gays are not entitled to their own religous choices. Then again, maybe that's what he means. After all, kevin wants to get to decide where your children will go to Sunday School so maybe Johnny wants to decide your religious beliefs as well.
Peter - ah, at last someone who actually addresses the point that ck was making.
Yes. Everything you said is true (or at least a defensable position). However, I think that Warren is different that the other ex-gay quacks. He is open to fact and to scientific finding.
I do think that he gloms onto the most unlikely of interpretations for study conclusions, but he doesn't support making bald-faced lies.
Yes, he's anti-gay. But he doesn't buy into the "average death at 42" bs or the "no biological factors" crap. I've seen him admit that for some gay men (particularly those who have older gay brothers) there is a probable biological factor that can contribute to an inclination towards homosexuality (which he then thinks can be transitioned through on the way to heterosexual bliss). And he admits that some folks don't reorient.
In other words, unlike many in the ex-gay movement, he's not a complete nutcase.
I have this hope that someday there will be undisputable research that proves conclusively that some people are born gay and cannot ever find attraction to the opposite sex. And if that happens, I think Throckmorton will be the most likely to accept it.
And yeah, I know, he'll insist on celibacy. But still he's better than most.
As I've said before, READ HIS SITE THOROUGHLY before defending Throckmorton.
As Wayne has pointed out, these hatemongers are fond of doublespeak. On his site, Throckmorton claims that "many" people have successfully CHANGED their sexual orientation. Then, in the comments section, he blatantly contradicts himself.
So which is it? Do these "ministries" have a "cure" for same sex desires, or are they simply advocating repression of those desires? Their inability to give a straight answer (no pun intended) is rather telling. Throckmorton and his buddies are responsible for an enormous amount of suffering. Their lies must be exposed.
Throckmorton is not even remotely open-minded about this issue. He is a born-again whacko like all the others. Like Nicolosi, he tries to hide his bigotry behind the mask of science...however, this is a man who believes that donkeys can talk, people can fly, and a man named Jesus lives in the sky. His scientific pretensions are starting to wear a little thin.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/14/2006 12:20 AM
It's usually not a good idea to mischaracterize statements. I didn't write that I should make the decisions about someone else's spiritual journey, nor the choice of a Sunday School.
I believe the statement was about how the demonizing takes place when a minor child is forced to attend a spiritual indoctrination facility by the parents. Parents can be just as victimizing and abusive to a child as any other group or social institution.
Let's not pretend that there are many of us who were indoctrination, without our consent, in such a manner, and that ex-gay "ministries" prey on that very indoctrination as a hook to profit from "identity" issues - knowing fully that their own churches established and encouraged those issues from the time we were children.
A statement about such indoctrination is not an automatic endorsement of a solution. It is merely a statement.
One of the most glaring things about this "controversy" is how very easily too many smokescreens are set off - when often the situation is quite clear.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/14/2006 12:44 PM
For me, the bottom line is still the fact that, as I read it, Dr. Throckmorton is one of those who claims sexual desire CAN be changed from same-sex to opposite-sex through "therapy".
But can he produce even ONE person who has actualle done so?
A person who was celibate before the change, and has remained celibate after the change, and who does not make a living from selling "therapy", would be particularly impressive as an example.
Step forward please, if you exist.
posted by Anonymous, at
6/14/2006 1:14 PM
