We Don't Say, "I am Cancer"Ben over at Scattered Words has an interesting post up currently. In the post, he compares the acceptance of being gay to the acceptance of having cancer. He says that even though many cancers are not treatable, people still try to fight the disease. He says that people that suffer from same sex attraction should do the same.
I'll admit, for a while in life, this type of analogy did cause to do a lot of self-evaluation. Let's not forget, for most of my life I tried everything I could think of not to be gay (short of "treatment"). However, these days I think the analogy misses the point.
The big difference is that one is a disease and the other simply isn't (no matter what some "conservatives" may have you believe. People do not die of homosexuality, but those who fail to overcome homosexuality very obviously die.
So, maybe a better analogy would have been to depression, schizophrenia, or something like that. I still think the analogy would have missed the point, but at least we wouldn't be comparing homosexuality to something that actually physically kills someone.
The problem with these analogies is that they start with the priori assumption that same sex attraction is a bad thing. But, as we can see from many successful, open gay people, homosexuality is not inherently something that leads to destruction, failure, etc.
Do some gay people suffer from problems? Sure, but if you look closely at the other factors involved, these problems don't stem from homosexuality itself, but from other actions, motivations, issues, etc.
It really angers me when I see the "well-meaning" Christians that protest with signs that say desparaging things about gays. They will quote AIDS statistics, some "studies" will quote promiscuity statistics, others will turn to their own testimony of lives of drug use and promiscuity turned around wants they left their same sex attractions behind. As for the testimonies, it is always great to hear about a life turned around, but it is too much of a leap for me to blame homosexuality for the destruction and not look individually at the other issues involved at the same time. Lots of gay people go from being drug-addicted sex fiends to responsible, monogamous members of society. Their lives turn around too, even though they are still gay. Maybe the gay community should highlight these people more often.
In our world, different communities have different problems. For whatever reason, black people have a higher incident of poverty than whites. Native Americans have a higher incidence of alcohol abuse. White kids have a higher incidence of suicide. Gays have a higher rate of HIV infection. The problem here is that with all of the categories above except for homosexuality, we look further to try to find out what the root cause of these issues are.
We realize that being Native American does not cause alcoholism, for example. But, our society and many "conservatives" are hell-bent on creating a cause and effect relationship with homosexuality that does not exist, for the sole purpose of claiming homosexuality itself is detrimental. God forbid they ever recognize that a gay person can live fulfilled, happy lives.
I have made several posts about how often Ben at Scattered Words and the crew at Ex-Gay Watch talk about each other. I find it odd, not because they talk about each other, but because their blogs purport to be something different. Ben's blog claims to be the journey of a guy trying to turn away from homosexuality, but lately it has become more political and anti-XGW than the journal-type format it used to be. XGW purports to be offering critical analysis of the ex-gay world, but publishing so frequently about one pretty obscure ex-gay blogger seems to be over kill.
Ben recently vaguely criticized me for being hypocritical. He said that as often as I talk about his battle with XGW, I sure do talk about him a lot.
I agree, I do talk about him a lot. But, as I say in my profile, my blog is mainly about other blogs I read. I started this, after all, because I didn't want to comment on blogs such as his anymore (he was very obvioubsly tired of the dissent I occasionally posted there). So, I think it is fine for these guys to talk about each other, but shouldn't they be more open about their newly found blog purpose?
Then again, I feel that my comments about SW, XGW, and the other blogs and news I talk about is more of commentary on what I read there, not just yelling names and insults at others. At least, that is what I am trying to do.