News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.“Love Won Out”: A Pause
Jim Burroway
March 23rd, 2007
Yes, I know. For those of you who have noticed, the right-hand column has been promising another installment on the Love Won Out series. I imagine many of you might have given up hope.
So let me explain. The next post will be about how the word “change” is used at Love Won Out. It’s used a lot, but the definition is often unclear. Just when you think it means one thing, somebody uses that word to describe something else. It can get confusing — at least for me.
Describing “change” really shouldn’t be that difficult. But it does require a lot of courage to be really accurate about it. I am very happy to report that at least one person had the courage it took to define it.
In one small session (NPR’s Rene Gutel estimated that only about 75 people attended that breakout session) entitled “Hope for Those Who Struggle”, Alan Chambers gave what I thought to be a very honest — and even vulnerable — talk about the importance of setting realistic expectations when talking about “change.” And in that talk, he finally gets to the heart of the matter.
Now I could very quickly pull out some very tiny quotes and remove the context and exclaim, “Aha! See? They finally admit it!” And it’s true. Someone finally “admits” to what we all suspect. But a drive-by post like that would leave an equally distorted impression of what “change” is all about. It would also be a distortion of what Alan was saying. I think his talk was thoughtful enough — and honorable enough — that the only way to do it justice is to carefully describe what he said.
And yes, I really do mean it when I say his talk was honorable. And no, I didn’t drink any Kool-Aid that day. We still disagree on fundamental things as well as less fundamental ones. But in that sparsely-attended talk, I finally got the sense that I could believe what he was saying, which is quite unlike my experience of hearing him speak elsewhere.
So that’s why it’s taking so long to write my next post. Alan’s talk could easily be used as a weapon against him. I’m sure he’s used to that by now. But that’s not why I’m writing this series. I’m trying to impart what really goes on at Love Won Out. I’m not interested in supporting assumptions and stereotypes. I didn’t see any one-eyed monsters, and I’m sorry if that disappoints anyone. Instead, I’m committed to describing what I saw as honestly as I am capable of describing it. I have an example, I believe, in which Alan spoke as honestly as he was capable of speaking.
Of course, I’m still critical of him and his mission. That hasn’t and won’t change. And because of that, he probably won’t agree with some of the conclusions I draw or some of the criticisms I make. But I hope to at least try to treat his talk with the respect and dignity that it deserves.
Ummm. So yeah. That’s why it’s taking so long.
Meanwhile…
If you haven’t already, you can look over the previous installments of the “Love Won Out” series:
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends on How The Meaning of the Word “Change” Changes (Coming soon. No, really!)
AlexM
March 4th, 2007 | LINK
I’ve been really enjoying the series so far, and appreciate how thorough and fair-minded you have been about getting the full picture across. So, just worry about keeping up the good job, and we won’t quibble about how long it’s taking. :-)
- Alex
Lynn David
March 23rd, 2007 | LINK
Jim…. just a thought for when you do publish the next post in the series. I imagine you have read the Exodus FAQ; could you apply what you found in “Love Won Out” to the two Exodus FAQs: What can I do to make a gay person change? [http://exodus.to/content/view/49/87/] and What’s your “success rate” in changing gays into straights? [http://exodus.to/content/view/43/87/]? It seems to me that “Love Won Out” speaks mostly to the parents, other relatives, and ministers of gay folk. Am I wrong in that idea, that most attendees are Parents & Friends Of Hopeful eX-gays (ie. PFOHX)? Then there are items such as what the second FAQ says, “Studies suggesting change rates in the range of 30-50% are not unusual, although “success rates” vary considerably and the measurement of change is problematic.” Do they mention that the subject must be “highly motivated” to effect any “change” and even that is may be no indication of success? Whatever “success” means; hey, maybe “success” should be what is discussed and not change – though maybe they are the same thing.
Lynn David
March 23rd, 2007 | LINK
Forgot to mention that the other FAQ in the “change” vein: How does a homosexual person change? [http://exodus.to/content/view/44/87/]; which appears to be empty – although it is the third most viewed FAQ. Perhaps it is “Under Construction” – being changed itself? Or perhaps they haven’t a clue?
This all goes back to the yearly 400,000 contacts which Alan Chambers says Exodus gets (re: Timothy Kincaid’s comment on Throckmorton’s blog). So I wonder what the demographic of those contacts are. My suspicion is that most are non-gay relatives or friends of the person in question. So it comes down to whom Exodus is primarily speaking.
Leave A Comment