BREAKING: Exodus International is Shutting Down
Liveblog of Exodus Conference
First Impressions Ahead Of Exodus 2013 Conference
Arizona group to put marriage back on ballot
Exodus International Issues Apology, Hints At Further Developments Tonight
Ex-Gay Leader Sentenced For Criminal Sexual Assault of Male Clients
Andrew Comiskey Doesn't Believe In Apologies
Murkowski makes three
Featured Reports
What Are Little Boys Made Of?
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
David Benkof: Behind the Mask
At first glance, David Benkof appears to be a young gay man who believes that same-sex marriage will damage the institution of marriage, that there are better options for gay couples than marriage, that the community should join him in prioritizing other more pressing issues, and that the marriage discussion is harming the efforts of gay couples in red states to get recognition for their unions. He also claims that he’s a gay columnist, that he speaks for an influential collection of gay thinkers, and that he is part of the gay and lesbian community and that he shares our goals and dreams. But none of that is true.
“Repeat After Me”: The Reparative Therapy Echo Chamber
The April 2008 edition of the pay-to-publish vanity journal Psychological Reports featured a new report from NARTH. Written by NARTH president A. Dean Byrd, past president Joseph Nicolosi, and Richard W. Potts, the report carries the unwieldy but self-descriptive title, “Clients perceptions of how reorientation therapy and self-help can promote changes in sexual orientation.” While the title describes what the authors meant to show — how clients describe the benefits of reparative therapy — the report itself actually illustrates something very different: the ex-gay movement’s remarkable ability to instill an almost robot-like parroting of ex-gay rhetoric among their clients.
Testing the Premise: Is MRSA The New Gay Plague?
The Toronto Star said that a new study “discover[ed] a new strain” of a super-bug “hitting gay men.” Headlines in Britain screamed, “Flesh-eating bug strikes San Francisco’s gay community,” and anti-gay extremists across America spread the alarm that gays were introducing another plague into “the general population.” But there was a small problem with all of this: None of it is true!
Paul Cameron’s World
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
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
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don't miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
Review: The Gay Report
When Karla Jay and Allan Young published The Gay Report in 1979, it quickly a favorite source of statistics for many anti-gay extremists. But before you accepts these statistic at face value, you should examine the inner workings of this survey very carefully. What you learn might surprise you.
Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count
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.
News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Tom
October 29th, 2010 | LINK
What a dissapointingly clueless post. The key issue is what is “some”? If “some” troops are so opposed to repeal that they will resign or refuse to reenlist and if “some” means as little as 10-20 percent, then this “study” will be authoritative proof that repeal would be disruptive to cohesion, recruitment and retention. It would be a disaster for repeal.
And that is what it was intended to be. In Washington DC, if you want to kill legislation and you don’t have the votes outright, you delay as long as possible in the hopes that political fortunes will shift, link the legislation to other, less popular proposals, and bring in as many “stakeholders” as possible in order to delay the process and increase the potential for opposition. This isn’t something new; it is the way things have been done in DC for decades.
The entire pattern of repeal established by DoD- taking a whole year to decide that it needed a study, which would in turn take another whole year, linking repeal to the recognition of gay couples and the provision of housing, targeting the release date of the study for after the midterms, and including in it a survey of 400000 troops and “their families” is a classic delay-and-kill approach. There is no question that the “some” referenced above will be anywhere from 20-45 percent and it will be more than enough for opponents to argue that repeal would be disruptive.
The failure by HRC, SU, and SLDN – not to mention the gay blogosphere – to take down this sham survey before the results come out, is epic. The consequences will reverberate for years.
Larry
October 29th, 2010 | LINK
I hope the report will tell the percentage who did not reply at all. This would be an indicator of lack of concern. Also, I would bet that the majority of those who said they would quit the military if DADT were repealed would not actually do so.
Ryan
October 29th, 2010 | LINK
Yeah, Tom’s right. This is terrible news. If “some” is more than two or three percent, this is all the ammo McCain and his ilk need. Frankly, the odds of repeal happening were tiny to begin with. Now they’re gone completely.
Hayden
October 30th, 2010 | LINK
If the percent of people who claim that they wouldn’t serve with a gay troop is 10 to 20% McCain and his ilk will have MORE than enough ammunition to scare the masses into a fearful frenzy.
DADT repeal is as good as dead, just as Obama and the joint chiefs planned it.
Jeff
November 1st, 2010 | LINK
But they serve with gay people now. If service men and women are that afraid of gay people then maybe they shouldn’t be in the service at all? The reason for enlisting should be to serve the country, not date or sleep with your fellow service memebers.
If all the other modern countries of the world can have straight and gay people in their militaries, why would we as a country that can’t fight a war without outsourcing it, be so against people that want to serve their country.
The Obama whitehouse has let us down. They should not have appealed the decision of the judge and DADT would have been over. If the president thinks that by appealing the DADT ruling that this will help him win a second term, then he is further removed from the pulse of the public than it appears.
For all the good he has done, and I think there have been good accomplishments, its doubtful there is anything he can do in the next two years that could repair the public’s confidence to support him for a second term.
It may have been under President Clinton, who de-regulated the banking and investment industries and elimated the controls put in place after the Great Depression, that put the wheels in motion for the economic problems of the past 5 years but if anyone thinks we’re going to get positive change from the Republican party, then I would ask where you were for the 8 years Bush was in charge. A small government doesn’t mean that it can save money any better than a large government. A small government can attempt to limit people’s freedom just as easily as a large government, and they generally do by pandering to fear and the religious right.
The American people wanted change immediately and I think that we were desperate enough to accept hardship to achieve it. Unfortunately, no one can wait 18 months or 48 months. In this culture we want it now. I feel that President Obama might have had a chance at becoming a great president like FDR but think that now he will probably only be remembered as the first President of color.
Leave A Comment