Ex-ex-lesbian tells why ex-gay books should be banned

by CynthiaYockey on October 23, 2009

I was an ex-lesbian for almost eight years during most of my twenties. Except for one thing. I was just celibate. I was still sexually attracted to women. I could not force myself to be attracted to men. I could not will myself to be attracted to men. All I could manage was to be very shut down emotionally and always on guard. As an ex-ex-lesbian, I don’t believe there’s any such thing as an ex-homosexual.

It is wrong in every way for any society, or any religion for that matter, to force homosexuals to become heterosexuals for any reason whatsoever. It was devastating to me in every way to believe I had to do that to myself to be a good person. If I had had any relationship with a man under those circumstances, it would not have been good for him, either. I would have been faking my whole life, not just the sex.

I bring this up because today Van Helsing over at Right Wing News is wringing his hands over the banning from public school libraries of books with a religious agenda of destroying the self-confidence of homosexuals and manipulating them into becoming ex-gay heterosexuals:

One reason liberals hate Christianity so frenetically is that it teaches us that we can overcome sin and find redemption. According to moonbat ideology, we are hapless victims who cannot be held accountable for our own behavior. The idea that we have free will is heresy to progressives, so it is no surprise that books about ex-gays are getting banned by public school libraries ….

If you want to see your book on school shelves, you have to take a very different point of view — i.e., you have to promote homosexuality to children.

PFOX Executive Director Regina Griggs turned to the American Library Association for help. After all, the ALA has been promoting its annual Banned Books Week, devoted to shining a light on “the harms of censorship by spotlighting actual or attempted bannings of books across the United States” …. But these principles only apply to books that advance the degenerate agenda. Consequently, the liberal establishment’s ALA blew off Griggs, refusing even to issue a statement opposing bans on ex-gay books. When Fox News tried to learn more, the ALA blew it off too, no doubt pleasing The Anointed One immensely.

First, the best reasons to ban the books is that they are religion masquerading as science. As science, they are on a par with books asserting that the earth is flat and the moon landing was a hoax.

Second, there are plenty of very religious liberals so it is just crazy to paint all liberals as hating Christianity. And the founding of a Christian church that accepted gays was one of the first things that happened when the modern homosexual equality movement began in 1969 — it is the Metropolitan Community Church and it was founded by ex-heterosexual gay pastor Rev. Troy Perry. When homosexuals act rudely about religion, it is worthwhile to remember that the religions started it and encourage parents to throw away their homosexual children, even the dependent teens; tell the most vicious lies about homosexuals; and openly have an agenda to destroy the lives of homosexuals, deny us equality, keep us as second-class citizens and stigmatize us in every possible way. Case in point — see above, “degenerate agenda.” There are not many people so saintly that they can endure such comprehensive violence and hatred directed against them, even as vulnerable children, and extol the virtues of the religions that actively promote their persecution NOT because of anything they do but because of what they ARE.

And another thing — I first came out in 1972 when I was 18 and attending the University of Michigan. I began to speak to classes there about what it was like to be a lesbian when I was 19 or 20. So I have a rather long perspective. And I have observed that only people who are forcing themselves to be heterosexual believe that this can and should be done, plus the people they have browbeaten into believing them. So I find it VERY interesting that Van Helsing seems to be saying that sexual orientation is subject to free will — very interesting indeed.

Follow conservativelez on Twitter

  • I submit that we should spend more time ridiculing stupid books and encouraging authors to remain respectful of dissenting views,
    instead of delving into censorship.
    The religious in the crowd are prime offenders here.
    .-= smitty´s last blog ..NY23: New DKos poll — Dem gains? =-.

  • genes

    Van Helsing? Hit him where it hurts. Just tell him to go back to hunting vampires.

  • Stinky

    What hurts your arguments – and please note that I am NOT saying that you are incorrect – are people like Anne Heche and Julie Cyphyer (sp?) Straight, gay, straight . . . it makes one’s head spin. I suspect those women were never gay, just confused about a lot of stuff, and acted out sexually. But instances like those (and I’ve met a couple of people like that myself) serve to undercut the argument that sexuality cannot be chosen, that it’s immutable. I would be interested to hear your thoughts about folks like that.

    • Stinky,

      First, the vast majority of lesbians and gays, including me, feel our sexual orientation is something we can’t change any more than heterosexuals could change their sexual orientation. So why should the vast majority of lesbians and gays be denied equality because some people are bisexual — note the entirely different noun for the entirely different group of people? No reason!

      Regarding bisexuals, I am skeptical that bisexuality is a sexual orientation since it is a trait of some sexual predators to ignore the sex of their prey and select them for their vulnerability. HillBuzz says Obama frequented a gay bar in Chicago called Man’s Country for gay sex — because of Obama’s sociopathy, I expect he is more of a sexual predator than authentically gay.

      Another thing to consider is that there’s really no such thing as privacy about one’s sexual orientation since it comes up in daily life in thousands of ways that heterosexuals never think of since they never have to hide their heterosexuality. So — talking about celebrities you find attractive, dates you’ve had, introducing the person you want to marry to your family, talking about your spouse: all of these reveal your sexual orientation. Straight people get to use chit-chat based on their sexual orientation to create a sense of connection with friends, dates, clients, voters, you name it. When I was a Realtor I had to stop wearing a wedding ring to indicate my commitment to Margaret because everyone would look at it and and me about my husband. So you know what? Because of all those occasions where your sexual orientation comes up in ordinary conversation and daily interactions, it takes an ENORMOUS amount of courage, self-knowledge, self-confidence and self-assertion to come out. Women, in particular, tend to come out in their thirties because of this — Cynthia Nixon, the actress, is an example. So I think some people who go back and forth between straight and gay in truth just lack the courage and energy to be gay, or they are settling for the perks on the straight side. In addition, it’s my perception that the lesbian community is very hostile to feminine lesbians who prefer feminine partners — a group I think comprises half of all lesbians, including me. I think a lot of these women settle for a straight relationship — and may even say they decided they really were straight when really the lesbian community was so hostile to them they couldn’t find a suitable partner and stay.

      I think it may take a couple of generations of equality to help heal the lesbian and gay communities — and it is equality that will do the job, not religious condemnation and civil inequality.

      Also, the examples you cite: they made their choices without being tortured in any “ex-gay” program. The “ex-gay” programs really are about tormenting and bullying people to conform to an ideology. Spiritually, they are adharma — forcing someone out of their path — which I believe is the worst spiritual crime possible.

      The bottom line is that even if there is such a thing as bisexuality, that’s a separate group of people and they should not be used to deny homosexuals equality. In addition, when bisexuals do commit to a homosexual relationship, they become second-class citizens along with their homosexual spouse. There’s no reason for that.

      However, I still maintain that most people feel their sexual orientation is innate and something they can’t change. There is no good reason to deny us equality based on our sexual orientation, or our prospects for having children (especially since we can adopt or raise children from a previous marriage or raise our spouse’s children — 20 percent of homosexual couples have children and those kids can only benefit from knowing they have another parent legally committed to them for life).

      Regarding the “ex-gay” movement, now that I think about it, I believe the main reason it was created is that the argument that homosexuals are forced into second-class citizenship over a trait we can’t change and that this is an unacceptable injustice makes sense to people and they agree and are willing to support legislation that would give us equal rights. So the “ex-gay” movement exists as a propaganda tool in an effort to destroy our central, and correct, argument for equality. At the very least it manages to confuse people so their ardent support dwindles to stagnation. But you should consider carefully that the coalition of religions running “ex-gay” organizations are evangelical — let’s consider the slippery slope here. Because converting people to add to their religion’s power and wealth is a fundamental principle of their religions — and democratic republics like our richly reward this behavior because numbers are power in a democracy — if they already are doing everything in their power to invalidate, bully and manipulate people on something so innate and personal as their sexual orientation, if you let them win THAT battle, how long do you think it will be before they cook up a rationale for a re-education camp for YOU? Not long, is what I’m thinkin’.

      I remain puzzled by the number of heterosexuals who believe you can change your sexual orientation because seriously, the only way you can really believe that is if you yourself chose to be straight not due to your own real experiences of sexual attraction and love, but because of external pressures and incentives. WTF, straight people, WTF?

      Cynthia

  • I have to agree with Stinky here. Some folks DO have “experimentation phases” where their feelings are confused. Other’s know they are hetero or homosexual long before they ever hit puberty. All of which would be irrelevant to society at large if people would just keep their damn noses out of other people’s lives…

    Yeah, I know: may as well wish for a unicorn that craps diamonds 🙂

Previous post:

Next post: