Homo No Mo’? A report from the June 10 Love Won Out conference.

National Review Online ^ | June 15, 2006 | Eve Tushnet

[Mrs. Don-o]

Eve Tushnet

Although evangelical “ex-gay” ministries began in the 1970s, recently they’ve started to come under the public eye. Ex-gay groups have turned up on TV shows like Malcolm in the Middle and Veronica Mars (not to mention the painfully funny satire But I’m a Cheerleader!), and subway ads with cute young adults proclaiming that they “questioned homosexuality” or “chose to change” appear every couple of years in the D.C. area. Last summer, a Tennessee ex-gay program run by the group Love in Action gained (or suffered) national prominence when one 16-year-old posted on his MySpace blog about his unhappiness at his parents’ decision to send him to the camp.

Homo No Mo’? 06/15

Tamny: Does the Laffer Curve Apply to Interest Rates?

Fundraiser: Why I Read NRO

Writers: Why I Write for NRO

Lopez: Put Your Money Where Your Mouse Is

York: Plameologists in Crisis: With Rove Off, CIA Leak Fans Wonder What’s Next

Editors: The Gitmo Club

Blyth: Cats Gone Wild

Miller: Save the World, Dump the U.N.

Freedman: Not Worth It

Hibbs: There He Stands

Novak: The Dems Will Lose

Muhlhausen: Rising Crime

So what are these programs? Are they havens for wounded people exiting a self-destructive lifestyle? Cruising grounds for self-hating, hypocritical predators? Places to heal from past hurts, or places where teens are indoctrinated into shame and despair?

From what I can tell, ex-gay ministries can be all of the above, to different people in different situations.

What they aren’t is what many conservative evangelicals seem to want them to be: the ultimate answer to the gay-rights movement. The groups’ problems are deeply embedded in their self-understanding.

Even some who consider themselves “ex-ex-gays” acknowledge that the programs help some people. Joe Riddle, who spent five years in the Mormon ex-gay group Evergreen, told me, “I definitely think the ex-gay choice is valid, and for some people it truly [works].” But, he added, “I think those people tend to drop out of the ex-gay groups and fly solo. The people who make it work are the people who do it on their own and depoliticize it.” And in his experience, such people were few: “I only met two people who shared convincing stories of [change of sexual orientation].”

The ex-gay movement attempts to bring psychoanalytic techniques into the service of Christian ministry. Many of the conference speakers — Joseph Nicolosi of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality was the most insistent — proclaimed that there were several types of homosexuals, due to a small set of identifiable, fixable traumas. (I noted that I fit many of Nicolosi’s criteria for a “pre-homosexual” boy — imaginative, theatrical, lonely, quick to internalize criticism — but only a strained interpretation could fit me into any of his categories for lesbians.) This leads to easily-disproved statements like Nicolosi’s claim that gay men don’t remain friends after they stop being sexually interested in one another, because if they had strong, non-sexual male friendships it would “heal their homosexuality.” Some men with same-sex attractions find that Nicolosi’s categories and prescriptions fit them very well — I spoke with one man, who wished to be identified as “Frank,” who said he’d gained a lot of insight through work with a Nicolosi-inspired therapist. But he added that he had not yet experienced any change in his sexual orientation.

During the entire nine hours of the conference, none of the speakers I heard discussed how to live chastely while experiencing same-sex attractions. The focus was entirely on the goal of switching sexual orientations.

Mike Haley, the director of gender issues for Focus on the Family and probably the speaker at the conference with whom I disagreed least, told me afterward that one small-group session had discussed chastity. “We don’t want people to believe that change means you have to be married and have to have kids,” he said, and then added, “The opposite of homosexuality isn’t heterosexuality, the opposite of homosexuality is holiness. We’re not trying to create people from homosexual to heterosexual.” These statements don’t line up with what I heard at the conference; but it’s much easier to be nuanced in one-on-one conversations than in lectures to big audiences.

Haley argued that the “origin stories” of homosexuality offered by Nicolosi and others “almost always ring true. With 12 years of involvement in the gay community I never met a homosexual man who had a positive relationship with his father at the ages of 8, 9, or 10 years old. All I can go by is my experience with the hundreds and hundreds of men I come in contact with who say, ‘Oh, you just told my story.’”

Lance Carroll, who spent eight weeks at a Love in Action program last year (when he was 17), strongly disagreed: “I don’t fit their stereotypical homosexual background. …I had a good relationship with my father.” He described his experience with Love in Action as “horrendous,” recalling “group activities where one person was singled out and made to associate shame with something homosexual that they had done. This was done many times for each person, in an attempt to condition you to believe that being homosexual was shameful. Other ‘therapies’ included isolation, where you wouldn’t be allowed to make eye contact, much less talk, with any of the other participants; making the women wear skirts and makeup to help them become more feminine; and making the men play sports in an attempt to help them become more masculine.”

Peterson Toscano, creator of a performance piece (“Doing Time at the Homo No Mo’ Halfway House”) based on his experiences as a self-described “ex-gay survivor,” spent 17 years seeking to change his sexual orientation. Toscano recalled that in the ex-gay programs, “I felt very much cared for and comforted in my struggles. In the midst of it, it didn’t feel like something horrible was happening.”

Nonetheless, he said, “The vast majority, and I am not exaggerating, of the scores and scores of people I know through these organizations, are out now, accept themselves as gay, and look back on that time as very traumatic and difficult. …Many of them have walked away from God and any sort of faith tradition because they were so disappointed — they’d been lied to over and over again by people speaking in Jesus’ name.”

At Love in Action’s residential program, Toscano said, “You could not spend more than 15 minutes a day in the bathroom with the door closed — you had to break that time up as best as you could. You were not allowed to wear Calvin Klein [underwear]; they didn’t want us to have facial hair; you couldn’t wear aftershave. It was very controlling. If you were in the early phase of the program you couldn’t be by yourself. You couldn’t watch television, listen to anything but Christian music; you had very limited access to people in the outside world. …The rules were inconvenient; but what makes it worse was the moral stigma: ‘You cannot be trusted.’ It eats away at a person, it’s very detrimental.”

While he was in the program, one of his friends attempted suicide. “Miraculously, he survived,” Toscano said, “but he was ready to put himself out — he was so tired of failing.”

—Eve Tushnet is a writer in Washington, D.C. She blogs here.

[DJ MacWoW]

Great answer. But it had nothing to do with what I was commenting on. I addressed your "singling out only gays" comment.

[Antoninus]

It's not a psychological problem in need of a cure. It's a sin problem in need of repentance. True transformation is the work of the Holy Spirit, and He only transforms persons with repentant faith. If you want to offer therapy based on psychological theories, then fine. Just don't call it Christian because it isn't.

Agree 100%. Psychotherapy has an abysmal "cure" rate in general. This is the main reason they preach "acceptance" of your disorder or deviant behavior--because they've got nothing else.

The most successful forms of counseling are the ones that most closely resemble "tough love" or redemption through suffering as opposed to endless self-affirming blather sessions. Hmmmmm....

[Mrs. Don-o]

OK. I think we're coming at it from slightly different angles, but in substantial agreement.

[Antoninus]

FYI, the 'gay' juggernaught sees the ex-gay ministries as a humongous threat--and love to portray them as doing horrible damage to poor, innocent homosexuals. More importantly, the ex-gay ministries challenge the myth of the 'unchangeable' homosexual--a myth which, coincidentally, is also held by the "god hates f#gs" crowd.

She makes a good point: it is not essential that everybody should "function" as heterosexual: get married, have kids, etc. It is not essential that everybody should "feel" heterosexual. It is very hard, for some people perhaps possible but for some people not possible, to have full control over spontaneous, unwilled feelings.

I think it's an absurd point. A man who has a sexual attraction to another man is not obligated by his desires to sodomize that person. Just as a married man who is attracted to a woman on the street is not mandated by his desires to have intercourse with her. We are supposed to be men, not rutting animals.

Homosexual attraction is almost always the product of some traumatic event in puberty that has crossed up the sexual wires in the victim's head. The problem is not solved by normalizing the trauma--and making it something "cool" for kids to try out. Any homosexual can leave the deathstyle if they have the will to do so.

Fence-sitters, like the women who wrote this article, only serve to muddy the waters.

Regardless of the increasingly shrill homo-propaganda, change is possible and the homo-positive agenda must be fought tooth-and-nail at every turn.

A Game of Truth-or-Dare [Michael Reagan was molested by a camp counselor]

The coming conflict between same-sex marriage and religious liberty

The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement (Caution, graphic contents)

[Mrs. Don-o]

You misjudged the author. Eve Tushnet herself is an ex-Lesbian, and a convert from an agnostic family to solid, orthodox Catholicism. She is in categorical agreement with the Catholic Church on sexual ethics.

In no way is she saying that experiencing same-sex attraction means you have to act on it through perverse sexual behavior.

Check out her blogsite at http://eve-tushnet.blogspot.com

Realistic about the persistence (and complexity) of temptation, she's actually inspirational as an advocate of chastity.

It's instructive to know that she, too, is attacked by the Gay Agenda people for supporting --- no, insisting upon --- purity, modesty, chastity, honesty.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Mt 15:19 - "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.

Mr 7:21 - "For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries,

Lu 6:45 - "The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.

Ac 5:4 - "While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."

Ac 7:51 - "You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did.

Ac 8:21 - "You have no part or portion in this matter, for your heart is not right before God.

Ro 2:5 - But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,

Mt 5:27-28 - "You have heard that it was said, `YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

[Antoninus]

Realistic about the persistence (and complexity) of temptation, she's actually inspirational as an advocate of chastity. It's instructive to know that she, too, is attacked by the Gay Agenda people for supporting --- no, insisting upon --- purity, modesty, chastity, honesty.

I have heard her name before. Her background notwithstanding, I have to question the point of her article here. She seems to be on-board with the whole "homosexual identity" movement. She seems to think that people can have an unchangeable homosexual "identity." The difference, it seems, between Ms. Tushnet and the homo-gandists is that they see the unchangeable homo identity as a good thing, while she recognizes it, correctly, as evil. That, at least, is to her credit.

Here's the primary complaint of her article: "During the entire nine hours of the conference, none of the speakers I heard discussed how to live chastely while experiencing same-sex attractions. The focus was entirely on the goal of switching sexual orientations."

While I agree with her that this subject should have been addressed, her chagrin about 'the goal switching sexual orientations' is a red-flag.

We are all oriented toward sin as a result of our fallen nature. We are all trying to "switch our orientation", with varying degrees of success through faith in Christ Jesus and the belief that He can help us achieve Heaven if we follow his teachings.

My sense is that Ms. Tushnet somehow thinks that same-sex attraction is somehow beyond the normal temptations that the rest of us endure--worthy of status as a part of your identity. Heaven forbid I ever get to the point where I start self-identifying based on my sinful desires. I think when you get that point, you're already half way to hell.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Well said, all of it.

[MEGoody]

the ultimate answer to the gay-rights movement.

So this is what the author thinks we evangelicals think the ex-gay ministries are? Nah, the only thing these ministries can do is help people who want help. The answer to the gay-rights movement is Jesus.

[Stone Mountain]

You were not allowed to wear Calvin Klein [underwear]

Uh oh...

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Heaven forbid I ever get to the point where I start self-identifying based on my sinful desires. I think when you get that point, you're already half way to hell."

Very true and well-said. I don't think she advocates self-dientifying based on sinful desires. Her point is like what we could say about recovering alcoholics. They are no longer drunkards. They may be sober and abstinent from alcohol for the rest of their lives. AND YET they may always be "recovering," always having to be on guard against this particular weakness.

You don't revel in the temptation. You don't feed it. You don't romanticize it. With God's help, you resist it. And yet you may be fighting that same temptation for the rest of your life.

See what I'm saying?

[Das Outsider]

There's something wrong with merely singling out gays as candidates for comprehensive head-bending "reparative" programs; because the sexual disorder in our society is broader than just "gays" with a "problem.".

There is a greater disorder, but the ex-gay ministries deal with getting men and women out of the homosexual lifestyle. These programs and services cater to a specific subset of sinners, just as Christian recovery programs for drug and/or alcohol abuse do.

Ex-gay ministries get the publicity, I believe, due to the entertainment/news media's dual fascination with the gay lifestyle and disdain for "evangelicals."

[fwdude]

The problem is that everyone is trying to make something Christian out of secular psychological therapy.

AMEN! The two are diametrically opposed.

[little jeremiah]

Interesting discussion - I was able to sneak onto FR for a few minutes!

SoulMan - great thread for your input, if you're around!

[SoulMan]

As a man who struggled with homosexuality, I was greatly disappointed that the National Review published this article. I may write to them directly.

Yes, the "ex-gay" movement" has flaws. Its not hard to find people who are disgruntled because "change" didn't work for them. But who are these people? What type of effort did they put into it?

Ultimately, the "ex-gay" movement (as a broad term for people who promote change from homosexuality saved my life. That's all I know.

[SoulMan]

Here is the letter I wrote to the National Review in response to the article

Dear National Review Editors,

I was greatly disappointed with your decision to publish the article entitled "Homo No Mo" by Eve Tushnet. You have done a grave disservice to humanity.

Essentially, this article is no different from the hundreds of articles in the mainstream media that attack the "ex-gay" movement. It emphasizes the flaws of the "ex-gay" movement and people who failed to achieve the change they were seeking. The frustrations and biases of the author are apparent in every line.

As a man who struggled with homosexual fantasies and attractions for most of his adult life, I cannot emphasize enough how important it is for conservative publications such as the National Review to speak out with the message that homosexuality is NOT innate or inborn and that ANYONE can recover from homosexuality. Yes, the “ex-gay” movement like any human endeavor has its flaws and its failures, but the National Review should be emphasizing the essential truth of the “ex-gay” message, the hopeful concept that growth out of homosexuality is possible.

Growth out of homosexuality is the truth ingrained in my own soul. I live it every day. I struggled with homosexual attractions for years but through patience, faith, therapy, abstinence, the love of family and friends, thinking for myself and the help of God I have come out on the other side. I am now developing a physically and emotionally intimate relationship with the most wonderful woman in the world (God has been exceptionally good to me) and we will marry the end of October. Homosexual fantasy is becoming a distant, vague memory.

Rather than repeat the gripes of disgruntled individuals who for a million possible reasons (including poor psychiatric care and lack of strength of character) may not have achieved the change they seek, the National Review should emphasize the political and social history that brought us where we are today.

Consider this, I was born in 1960. In 1973, when I was thirteen the American Psychiatric Association said homosexuality no longer qualified as a mental disorder. By the time I was graduating college, there was a virus going round that no one knew much about, but that would kill off a significant portion of my brothers, the misfit boys of my generation, the boys who weren't picked for the basketball team. Yet no one said the obvious, obvious truth that these boys needed help to get out of the homosexual lifestyle. Instead the graves were dug. What is man that he would rather face death than face the truth?

Today, the mainstream media (including now the National Review), the educational establishment, and the therapeutic professions continually broadcast the lie that homosexuality is inborn, genetic, an essential character trait, a characteristic that defines the human being, that nothing can be done to change. After my life experiences this lie is so absurd it's hard to respond to it.

News flash: There ARE homosexual feelings and homosexual attractions. Indeed it is not uncommon for people to experience homosexual feelings, especially given a particular set of circumstances. Indeed, such feelings can become quite fixated. But there is NO SUCH THING AS A "HOMOSEXUAL," a special species of human being, a separate species that is incapable of finding emotional or physical satisfaction with a member of the opposite sex (as God intended all humans to do).he media, the "Gay" rights movement, the educational establishment and the medical/psychological establishment is entrapping people in a horrible and sometimes even fatal lie.

It is up to publications like the National Review to speak out about this, not parrot that attacks on the "ex gay' movement that we hear from the mainstream media. There are few causes in our time that require more bravery or are as important.

[SoulMan]

I looked at her blog. Now I understand where this woman is coming from.

Ms. Tushnet is one of those people who believes she can deal with her homosexuality through faith alone (be chaste and all that) but she has not done the hard psychological work of understanding and coping with her own homosexual feelings (and trust me it is hard work). She expected to pray and her homosexual feelings would go away. It didn't work and now she is bitter, as reflected in the National Review article. I have known many people like her.

The role of religion vs. psychology in growth out of homosexuality has been debated in this thread. Both approaches have their role, both are essential. Ms. Tushnet shows the problems of a strictly religious or theological approach to overcoming homosexuality: Without the hard psychological work of dealing with one's past and one's feelings -- it won't work. Now, in bitterness, she is attacking the ex-gay movement publicly.

Modern psychology and the "ex-gay" groups both are very flawed...but these are the tools we have right now to work with to grow out of homosexuality. We have to make the best of them.

I am believer. I believe in God. God will provide for me, but I still have to go to work to make a living. God will heal us, but we still have to do the hard psychological work of dealing with our feelings, understanding our past, moving beyond our past, and correcting our thinking. God will heal us, but we have to use the hearts and minds he gave us.

[Mrs. Don-o]

SoulMan, I sincerely appreciate your important contribution to this thread. God bless you.

[little jeremiah]

Thank you for your comments which illuminate the truth, like light destroying darkness.

What is man that he would rather face death than face the truth?

But there is NO SUCH THING AS A "HOMOSEXUAL," a special species of human being, a separate species that is incapable of finding emotional or physical satisfaction with a member of the opposite sex (as God intended all humans to do).

WIth the small addendum that some people are fine with celibacy, no matter what sexual attraction/s they may or may not have had.

[little jeremiah]

I believe in God. God will provide for me, but I still have to go to work to make a living. God will heal us, but we still have to do the hard psychological work of dealing with our feelings, understanding our past, moving beyond our past, and correcting our thinking. God will heal us, but we have to use the hearts and minds he gave us.

Have you thought of writing a book? You should consider it seriously. Will freepmail you later today.