I Hate to Say I Was Right...
You may remember back in March that I posted
about the Ohio "Marriage Amendment" to protect Ohioans against the horrors of gay marriage was rumored to prevent straight, unmarried couples from receiving the protection of domestic violence laws.
Well, it looks like my fears just came true
. A lower-level appeals court in Ohio ruled that a man could not be charged with assaulting his live-in girlfriend under domestic violence laws because that charge would mean the unmarried couple would be given special rights similar to marriage. As a result of the ruling, domestic violence assaults in the county will be treated as misdemeanors rather than felonies. All I can say is WOW.
The good news is that two other lower courts have ruled the opposite way in similar cases. It looks like the Ohio Supreme Court is going to have to weigh in on this one, and lawsuits involving custody and insurance for unmarried straight couples are also soon to follow. But two things are pretty clear: 1. The creators of this amendment were so hell-bent on passing this thing they either were careless in creating it or didn't care who was harmed in order to ban gay marriage and 2. The voters are about to see why Constitutional Amendments shouldn't be taken so lightly. All this to ensure that gays, a tiny fraction of our population, can't get married.
Thanks to Shakespeare's Sister
for the link, who also takes the time to remind straight people that any time a minority group has their rights infringed upon, it infringes on the rights of everyone. Good point.
Pat Robertson- Miracles Happen
**UPDATE** Pat Robertson's spokesperson has issued a statement
claiming Robertson can in fact leg press 2,000 pounds and that Pat's doctor and strength trainer can leg press 2,700 pounds. If this is the case, I'm not sure why the Florida State record is so unbelievably low in comparison. Unfortunately, they did not offer to have a public viewing of the feat.
Ok, this is all over the blogosphere, and I'm a day late on it. I wasn't going to post this tidbit of information, but after thinking about it, it's just TOO weird to pass up.
Apparently Pat Robertson is saying on his website that he can leg press 2,000 pounds.
This is 665 pounds more
than the Florida State record (and some are saying they world record--I looked but couldn't verify that). For the machine to hold the Florida State record, it had to be modified to hold more weight than it was made to. So weird.
I'm at a loss of what to say at this point. Why would he even make such a claim? Wow.
Happy Birthday to Me...
It's my birthday today, everyone (and my twin brother's)!
I'm really starting to feel old these days. 27 is officially late 20's. I feel younger than that, though. That's a good thing, right?
Gay Monogamy, Does it Exist?
Anti-gay and ex-gay folks often talk about the "dangers" of promiscuity among gays, and it's rare to hear people in these groups speak publicly about homosexuality unless they are detailing how often gay men get around.
The reaction recently from many gays has been that these types of statements are blind stereotypes that don't take into account the myriad committed gay couples that exist across the country. The anti-gay folks out there have been directing the debate for far too long, and I'm glad to see people come out and say that committed relationships certainly exist.
Unfortunately, though, it appears that some on the ex-gay and anti-gay side don't believe that long-term, committed relationships exist at all, in spite of what the gay people actually in those relationships claim.
Mike Ensley, of Exodus, said as much in a post
on his blog a few months ago. I'm disappointed, especially since I've found many of Mike's other blog posts to be open and honest about his struggle to overcome sexuality. In the post, Mike talks about his own promiscuity from the age of 16-21 and how many older couples he went home with and extrapolates this to lead him to disbelieve any and every gay couple that claims to be monogamous.
He doesn't, though, seem to make the connection that because he was picking up guys for sex in bars, he was getting what he was looking for (and so were they), and that possibly committed couples don't go out to bars searching for hook-ups. Instead, he makes the unfortunate proclamation that, "in five years of living homosexually I never had a monogamous, long-term relationship, but that in 5 years I never met a single person who did." This sounds all too similar to the Melissa Fryrear statement where she claimed
to never have met a lesbian that was not sexualy violated or molested.
It's talking in absolutes like this that causes my huge frustration with so many ex-gay and anti-gay folks out there. How can anyone claim that an entire group of people (millions) has never had a committed relationship? Surely Mike can admit that at least one gay couple out there is monogamous. Surely he should realize that his own experience of meeting other guys in bars is not what gay every gay person goes through and that going to bars (even straight ones) is not the best way to find any committed couples.
It's interesting this claim is coming from Mike, especially coming from an organization that is constantly criticizing gay groups for claiming ex-gays don't exist. If I'm being honest, I've never personally met a successful ex-gay, nor have I met anyone that has. Then again, since I don't hang out with a bunch of ex-gays, I wouldn't really expect to. For that reason, while I am skeptical of organizations that claim high success rates without proof, I am perfectly willing to accept someone's claims that they are ex-gay, and I'm sorry to hear that Mike can't do the same.
It all comes back to my old theme. If being gay is a sin, let it be a sin, but don't continue negative stereotypes about gay people to turn people against them. This isn't just telling the real story about gay life as Mike claims, it's being disingenuous and dishonest about gays in general, and it's disappointing, to say the least.
Being gay was hard for me to deal with when I was younger. I had a lot of things to deal with, not the least of which was coming out to myself. Aside from that, though, was having to deal with my religion, my family, my friends, and even my lifelong dreams. Eventually I accepted that I was gay (you've probably figured that out by now, though), and things have been going pretty well since then (especially compared to what I was putting myself through at the time). There are still some things I am working out, but all in all things are good.
Anyway, I was thinking today about what other types of experiences people have with being gay. I met a kid once that came out when he was 14 and was completely accepted by his friends and family all along. He said being gay was never that big of a deal for him.
So, my question is this, are there any gay people out there that at some point in their lives did not try to resist being gay? At this point I'm not talking about actually seeking therapy or counseling, but just personal methods. When I was younger I prayed every night that I would no longer be gay (along with my normal nightly prayers). I never told anyone I was attracted to other guys, and I tried hard to find some sort of attraction to girls whenever I could. Sure, I never went the therapy route, but I spent years on my own trying not to be gay. I've always kind of assumed it was something that all gay people have been through at some point, but maybe not.
What about everyone else? Did you guys also try to resist being gay, or was it a less stressful situation? My guess is that the younger the people are, the easier it is because our society is becoming more accepting, but who knows.
Update on the Dad Issue
So, I mentioned a few days ago about my dad FREAKING OUT about my big fat gay wedding with my boyfriend and the ripping my mom gave him as a result.
First, let me say that I have learned my lesson about that. Mom is not to talk to dad about this anymore because she gets just a tad too emotional (I sure am lucky she's on my side), so I'll try to let the siblings chime in where necessary from here on out.
Second, I had lunch with my dad yesterday. It went well. He's still not 100% accepting of everything, but he let me know where he was coming from, asked me to work with him and be understanding and we both agreed we'd try to be open and not freak out about stuff. I told him I'd give him the time and commented that if it took me years to come out to myself and finally other people, it is unfair of me not to try to give him some time too (then again, he is going on 2 years knowing now too, so he is starting to stretch his time on this).
Ok, that's it for now. Back on to some political stuff soon.
Federal Marriage Amendment in Committee
The Federal Marriage Amendment is scheduled to go to committee in the Senate for discussion today
. It'll likely pass this stage and fail when it comes up for a full vote in June, especially considering the whole "gay hysteria" thing seems to be subsididing a bit currently. Then again, it may be subsiding because there aren't any elections on the immediate horizon, and this meeting is intended to start the craziness up all over again.
I read recently that in Mary Cheney's book she said that the Republicans will find themselves on the wrong side of history with this gay debate. Not because this is a Republican vs. Democrat or conservative vs. liberal issue, but because it is such a generational issue (probably more than any other political issue out there). She's right, I have a cousin that is 9 years younger than me, and you can even see the difference in her high school experience and mine. The issue will never go away, but at some point things will get better. Really, they already are.
In Case You Thought the Ex-Gay Movement Wasn't About Politics
Via Pam's House Blend
, the President of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania had this to say in a press release
about the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment (emphasis mine):
Homosexuals have a right to live their lives as they want, but they do no have a right to force our society to redefine marriage and family...Those involved in the homosexual lifestyle have never been forced to sit at the back of the bus nor are there water fountains labeled ‘Gay Only.’ The thousands of ex-gays in this country show that people are not born ‘gay.’
My first comment is that even by the most conservative count of gays in this country, they number in the millions, so if we take the "thousands" number at face value, we're talking about a pretty tiny number of successful ex-gays. Should we really be making public policy about a minority group because a miniscule fraction of them claim to be able to change?
My second comment is actually a question. How long are anti-gay and ex-gay people going to get to wildly throw out the number of ex-gays in this country without providing any proof or even keeping the numbers consistent between press releases?
If the ex-gay movement is actually about helping gays grow closer to Jesus, shouldn't the ex-gay leaders work harder to keep their movement from becoming the very heart of one of the most intense political debates of this generation? Just a thought.
Who Cares This Much About Gays?
I'm gay, and I started this blog to talk about politics, other blogs I read, and my life in general. Gay rights issues is one of the main reasons I started becoming interested in politics (and reading blogs), so it shouldn't be too much of a surprise that I write about gay things quite often.
I am surprised, though, that non-gay people care so much about what's going on with gays. This idea that the "homosexual agenda" is taking over the country is so absurdly over the top it makes me not be able to see straight. But, some politicians (and unfortunately some religious groups), especially those on the right, have realized that anti-gay hysteria is something they can drum up in the public to draw support for their own groups, so they continue to dwell on the issue.
A while back I looked at
a week's worth of archives at the Family News In Focus
online broadcast to see how often homosexuality was mentioned as a topic. Today I decided to do it again, and it looks like not much has changed in the last year.
Keep in mind that there hasn't been in any HUGE gay issue out recently to draw extra attention.
I looked at the week of 5/9/06-5/17/06
(the last 7 shows) and here's what I found:
Of the 7 shows, only two did not have a segment that specifically mentioned a subject about gays, and of the 28 show segments, 8 were completely gay-themed. This means that just around 30% of the segments released by Focus on the Family in the last 7 episodes were gay-oriented, and if you were just randomly listening the show one day, odds are very good that you would hear something about gays.
Do regular folks really care about gays so much that they want to hear about it every single time they listen to a FotF broadcast? Do conservative Christians even want to hear about gays that much? I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing that these guys are not focusing on gays (as some people claim). But considering these days they're just talking about it to keep it in the public eye (not because there's some huge gay story out there), I wonder how long it can last before their readers feel like they're reading The Advocate
rather than what they thought was a conservative Christian news source.
Update to Post Below
Here's a quick update about my last post. I called my mom to vent about my step-mom telling my step-brother that she and my dad would not be attending the wedding. (Oh, my twin brother also mentioned to me that the only thing my step-mom told him was that she thought "this type of thing" was illegal in the state of Texas). So, my mom could tell I was worked up, and she offered to call my dad to try to talk things out a bit.
Note to self- letting mom talk to dad when they are divorced is usually not going to go over well, especially regarding something like this.
My mom called me a little while later to say that I should probably give my dad some space. When I asked why she went through the conversation. It went something like this:
Mom: Well, I was just talking to your son, and he is pretty upset right now.
Dad: Which one? Why is he upset?
Mom: Brady. Apparently [Your wife] told his step-brother that you guys would not be going to the wedding.
Dad: (Already angry--in a raised voice) Well then he shouldn't be gay.
Mom: What? Did you really just say that? This is not some choice he made. I can't believe you are making him go through all of this all over again.
Dad: (More raised voice) I know he can't change, but he certainly doesn't have to have weddings and parties to celebrate it.
Mom: Look here you little a--hole. He is your son and you are making his life so much more difficult than it has to be. And if you're going continue to be a f---ing a--hole with your b---- wife, then he's better off not speaking to you anyway, and I'll tell him that (hangs up phone).
Now, I'm not going to say that my mom is always calm and collected about stuff, but she isn't the type of person that goes around cussing people out. I'm sad that she got into the middle of this and got all upset about it. I'd rather deal with it and take the blows myself, but I had no idea it would get out of hand like that. I told my boyfriend that maybe it was good for my dad to hear some of my anger (even if it is through my mom) because I certainly won't ever let it out. I'm way too low-key for that, but now someone has to go clean up the mess.
They Say They Aren't Coming
Well, my boyfriend and I told my ten year old sister about our wedding this weekend. It was very uneventful. I think she knows what I was trying to tell her, but it was a hard conversation for me because I didn't know what to expect. No tears, no real emotion either way. She did give my boyfriend a big hug when we left this weekend, though. I'll keep you guys updated as to how that is all going if it comes up again.
I'm also going to dinner with one of my cousins today after work to break the gay news to her. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm pretty nervous, especially because she is on my dad's side of the family.
And the big news... My dad and my step-mom got an invitation to our shower over the weekend. I think the word "wedding" might have freaked them out. I called twice yesterday to wish a happy Mother's Day to my step-mom, but she didn't answer either time. She did answer the phone when my three brothers called, though. She told my step-brother they weren't going to be attending the wedding. He tried to play it off by reminding me in a funny impersonation of my step-mom's voice that they had said they wouldn't ever invite my boyfriend and me to their house either, but that held up for all of about 3 months, so there is certainly hope. I'm also very glad I have all of my siblings in my corner on this one.
I have to call them to talk all of this through, but honestly I don't have the energy to do it right now. I know it will get better, but I can't continue to have to deal with these ups and downs in my emotions every so often. When I get down or sad I sleep. And those people that know me know more sleep is not something I need (I don't get very restful sleep and end up sleeping way more than the average person because I am constantly tired. My twin brother is the same way). But sleeping helps me get over my sadness, so it works.
I will admit that I am doing much better with the news right now than I was when I first came out. At least I know there's some hope, but at the same time, it just reiterates to me how differently I am going to be treated my whole life.
Here we go again, I guess. I'll update all of this once I get the guts to call them.
The Ex-Gay Myth, by John Stossel
Via Randy's blog
, I just read that Bill O'Reilly had John Stossel as a guest on his show promoting his new book, Myths, Lies, and Downright Stupidity : Get Out the Shovel--Why Everything You Know is Wrong.
And, wouldn't you know it, one of the myths he mentions in the book is that gay people can change.
Randy rightfully questions the personal research Stossel mentions on the show, which consisted of interviewing one ex-gay that he found to be rather unconvincing. However, I'm not sure what sort of research Stossel's book uses (perhaps policy statements from any of the major medical organizations in the country stating that they see no evidence that reparative therapy works, or the lack of any tracking by ex-gay groups to see if their clients do actually change, or even the vague definition of change given by ex-gay groups), but I hope he at least addressed some of the issues about ex-gay therapy.
While I agree with Randy on his first point, I found other parts of Randy's criticism to be a bit lacking. If Exodus is upset that people claim their efforts are ineffective, why not prove them wrong with a longitudinal study of some sort? We really could put this whole issue to rest with some sort of peer-reviewed study that follows clients before during and several years after therapy.
Randy went on to address Stossel's citation of the John Paulk incident by claiming that Paulk is not gay, and that he had one slip up several years ago that he has since repented for. Stossel could have just as easily brought up Michael Johnston (who very surely was gay when he was claiming publicly to have changed), and there are certainly many other former ex-gays out there, even if Stossel didn't use the absolute best example (but I feel his example was adequate to make his point).
It may be true to say that Paulk is not gay, if by gay Randy means he is no longer having sexual contact with men. There hasn't been any indication to the contrary on that. But it'd be a hard leap to say that Paulk was not still attracted to males when he went into Mr. P's (a gay bar), and to discount that any attraction existed after decades as ex-gay is unfair to those wanting to know what "change" really means.
So yes, Stossel could have made his argument better, and he certainly could have gone further into the issue (but then again, this was just one myth of many in the book). But, the irony is that Stossel was going off of anecdotal evidence, just like Exodus and other ex-gay groups use (although Stossel was also going off of policy statements from every major medical group in the nation, I'd assume). So while I am sure it is personally offensive for Randy to hear someone dismiss the change he has found in his life, Stossel is using the same anectdotal evidence that Exodus uses, which aims to tell the public that gays can change (meaning my dad thinks I can change), in spite of a serious lack of evidence that it actually happens.
Stossel may be being dismissive, but Exodus' PR activities cause the public (and especially conservatives) to be equally dismissive of gays like me.
Fall Out Boy's Message, A Response From Exodus
This is a follow up from my Fall Out Boy post
I posted a comment
over at the Exodus Blog because one of their latest entries linked to the MTV article about Fall Out Boy and quoted the angry mother's letter to the band. For those of you who aren't familiar with Exodus, they are an international ex-gay organization, and some of their staffers/volunteers write for their blog.
Basically, my comment was meant to ask why the folks over at Exodus felt like the band's statement was so bad. I honestly couldn't fathom that they would agree with this woman. Here's what I said (I posted as TA, rather than Brady because my TypePad account is older than this blog and is not updated):
I think there is a bit more to this Fall Out Boy story. According to the band member and one person at the concert (that posted on my blog and a couple of others), Fall Out Boy was using foul language. However, their "liberal homosexual rally" amounted to the band saying that it was ok to say the band was no good or people didn't like the band, but using homophobic remarks like calling something gay instead of stupid was unacceptable. I can't believe this mother disagrees with such a statement, and I hope you guys would agree with that statement at the very least.
Nancy Brown at Exodus responded to my post shortly thereafter (emphasis mine):
We do not condone negative comments such as using the word gay to suggest stupidity
[Ms. Brown then quotes Wentz's actual words from the MTV article]
Mr. Wentz' statement is clearly stating that homophobia is not just a difference of opinion to which all Americans are entitled. He is saying it is on the same par as sexist and racist behavior. In other words, "if you don't agree with us regarding homosexuality take off our merchandise and get out." I don't hear anything positive, constructive, or enlightening in that... In addition I noticed he didn't mention any refund of ticket or merchandise money to any who might be unhappy with the band for their take on homosexuality...bottom line Mr. Wentz' statement is a threat aimed at impressionable teenagers... conform or be ostracized!
Read carefully. Ms. Brown just said that homophobia was acceptable. Notice the Fall Out Boy bassist said nothing about whether or not he supported homosexuality (as Ms. Brown implies). The bassist merely said he did not tolerate homophobic remarks (i.e. derrogatory remarks about gay people). How there is nothing enlightening or "good" about that, I have no idea.
It's funny that she ends by claiming that the Fall Out Boy statement was telling teens to "conform or be ostracized" when that is one of the results of homophobia, which she seems to support.
I'm sorry to see that someone employed (or volunteering for, not sure which) an organization that claims to help gay people would support something like this mother's rantings. Little tip for the folks at Exodus--if you are going to claim to help gay people, don't support homophobic behavior. You can disagree with being gay without being homophobic.
It seems Ms. Brown, like the mother in question, is so caught up in the culture war, she can't see a positive message when it's right in front of her.
The Ex-Gay Dilemma
I've talked before about how disappointed I am that ex-gay groups won't get together to try to objectively study the success rates of their programs, while still trying to claim to the public that they work. The problem is that so many people out there (whether it be virulent anti-gay folks, parents that just want a straight son--like my dad, or even struggling closeted gay kids) want gays to be able to change, and it often just takes a promise (rather than hard evidence) to make them believe the claims by ex-gay groups. Unfortunately, these people become filled with largely false hope by organizations that (for whatever reason) have no interest in backing up their claims scientifically. At least once I'd like an ex-gay group to conduct or fund a study to show the success rates of their programs. After all, if they are trying to help gay people, it shouldn't be about politics or word games or advertising blitzes, it should be about actually helping gay people.
In the end what happens too often is that the people involved aren't helped. Instead, they get demonized, used as pawns in a game of politics, and hurt as a result of all of this.
The Screw Bronze blog has a great blog post
talking about the actual damage ex-gay therapies can cause to its clients--with an added note that conversion/reparative therapy is banned in Britain (which is news to me). The post links to a study by Dr Ariel Shidlo and Dr. Michael Schroeder called "Changing Sexual Orientation: a consumer's report" that was published in a peer reviewed journal in 2001.
Here are some findings from the study:
Study subjects: 202
Number that were no longer struggling and were fully heterosexual: 8
Of those 8, number that were not employees or volunteers of ex-gay groups: 1
Number that felt they had failed: 176
Number who felt conversion had done long term harm: 155
Number who attempted suicide during therapy: 23
Number who attempted suicide after therapy: 11
Number who reported spiritual harm: 100
So, according to this study, 1 person (arguably 8) of 202 were turned straight through therapy--a result I'd imagine was the goal of the people that entered the ex-gay therapies. At the same time, 100 had their faith dramatically harmed by therapy (if you're Christian, we're talking about their salvation here). And nearly 4 times the number that turned straight tried to kill themselves during therapy.
Up front I'll admit that this study surely has holes. It's a few years old now, and the Spitzer study came to very different conclusions. But, if the goal of ex-gay groups like Exodus is to help gay people, shouldn't they be very worried about these findings? If their goal is to save gay people, I'd imagine the fact that nearly half of those people entering ex-gay therapy lost their faith (and their salvation) would raise some serious concerns. Add to that that a fairly large number of people were attempting to kill themselves, and the program doesn't seem to be helping much of anybody.
So the dilemma is, how can ex-gay groups claim to be helping people when a study like this shows that they may be hurting far more than they help. Is destroying homosexuality the goal at all costs, even if lives and souls are lost in the end? I know the big groups will never answer the questions, but maybe the individual people involved in the movement (many of whom I know are honestly trying to help and save people) will somehow address the issue.
*Hat tip to Steve at A Tenable Belief
for the link.
Fall Out Boy's "Terrible Message"
**Update** A blogger for Exodus (the ex-gay group) responded to my comments about this letter on their blog, in which she supported homophobia. Here's my post
, the bassist of the pop-punk band Fall Out Boy, Pete Wentz, recently had this to say while on stage at a concert, "the only thing we consider unacceptable is for you to engage in sexist, racist or homophobic behavior. If you do, we don't want you as a fan. Return our merch and leave."
Good for him.
Apparently, though, this was too much for a mother who attended the concert. She claimed the band's "personal political message" (as she called it) turned the concert into a "liberal homosexual rally."
To be fair, I like this band and have for a while. And, given their punk rock roots, I'm not very surprised by the statement. I am surprised by the mother, who obviously has some issues to work out. I mean, what was she expecting from a punk rock band, lemonade?
But, how is asking fans not to be sexist, racist, or homophobic anti-morals? I get the foul language part, but asking people to be nice to each other is hardly anti-morals nor a homosexual rally.
This, unfortunately, is what happens when a culture war occurs. Everyone is so geared up against the "enemy" they can't see anything for what it really is. This woman has been so inundated with the idea of how terrible gays and liberals are, that any mention of them causes an explosive reaction. Is this woman really trying to defend people being racist, sexist, or homophobic? Apparently she is.
Tell me how anti-morals you think the band's bassist is. Here's his reaction
to the letter:
I try my best to be the best person I can be. I want to be a good role model for younger kids. I don't smoke, drink or do drugs. I censor myself the best I can, but at the same time, I am not going to change in order to simply make myself more lucrative," he wrote. "I encourage fans of our band to grow up to become good people and to change the world. Unfortunately, I don't believe that treating other people as inhuman is acceptable. If that is offensive to you, I apologize, but we don't want you to be part of our fanbase. [Our show] is not a liberal homosexual rally, but at the same time, it will never be a Ku Klux Klan rally. We don't need to sell tickets that
I'm Coming Out (again) and Some Other Stuff
I mentioned in another post that I still have some coming out to do with some of my extended family for my Big Fat Gay Wedding
. So, I emailed one of my cousins last week to see if she wanted to have lunch/dinner soon. The purpose of this lunch (in addition to just catching up) is for me to tell her I'm gay. Now that she has written back and is ready to have lunch, I'm freaking out--all jittery and nervous. I'm actually shaking right now. I thought I was over all of this stupidness (well really I didn't, but I thought I was handling it better than this). This coming out thing really never ends. I hate it.
On a related note, a friend of mine told me the other night that he would rather be hideously ugly and straight than cute and gay (he's a pretty good looking guy, and he's just starting to deal with being gay). I tried to console him and relate how much better my life is now than I thought it could be when I was first dealing with being gay. (It really is. My life is going better than I imagined it would this early on, and while my being gay doesn't have anything to do with that, my coming out has helped me personally and emotionally for sure).
But, judging from my reaction to my cousin, who am I to talk? I still have trouble dealing with coming out to my family, and sometimes even perfect strangers. Not all of us have an easy time being gay, that is for sure. Then again, my mom told me how proud of me she was yesterday for standing up what I believe in and being honest with myself, so it's not all bad.
On a separate issue--I added some links to my sidebar. I plan on sorting them and categorizing them soon too. If you aren't linked and want to be, send me a comment or an email
Get Your Prayer On
Today is National Day of Prayer, everybody. It's not a day that should be led by the right or the left or the middle. It's a day for everybody to pray and be thankful for all that we have. So do it, if that's your thing.
I've posted already about Paul Cameron's latest research on gay families, which is basically a summary of books he found on Amazon.com.
Well, recently I ran across the blog
of one of the authors of one of the books he used in his "research." The author, Abigail Garner, wrote a book called Families Like Mine, Children of Gay Parents Tell it Like it is,
and she (not Cameron) interviewed 50 of the 77 subjects in his "study."
Garner has a post
linking several blogs that discuss Cameron and Jim Burroway's rebuttal (including a link to me!). She also has a post here
detailing some of her issues with the Cameron "study" that uses her book extensively.
to the Journal of Biological Science expresses her view of Cameron's work pretty clearly:
I am the author of Families Like Mine, one of three books Cameron used for his supposed statistical analysis in the article in question. Cameron had absolutely no right to twist these non-scientific samples into bogus findings that he is trying to pass off as hard data. Anyone who is familiar with the sources he cites would know his results are ludicrous — no advanced degree necessary to debunk his work after just a few minutes of elementary fact-checking.
Abigail has lots more about the Cameron study, so you should really read her site. I especially like her take on having to hear AM talk show hosts who don't care that Cameron is a discredited quack who most on the far right won't even pay attention to.:
I can hear it now: “According to a report released by Cambridge University Press — now this is not some fly-by-night-publication here folks — here’s what they reported in May 2006: Children of homosexuals are more likely to become homosexual under their parents’ influence. All the more reason for you to pick up the phone, call your senator, and tell him you want him to make sure he helps pass [insert anti-gay family bill du jour here].”
My boyfriend and I are now registered for the wedding! I have to admit, I was a little apprehensive about registering because I worried what people would say. But, the registering went off without a hitch (except that I am as bad about picking out free stuff as I am about shopping with my own money--I'm cheap!).
We didn't even have to put one of our names as the bride, so that saved us some grief from friends trying to make jokes. Target let us both sign up as grooms, and the other two did not differentiate between bride and groom on the registry (although Bed Bath & Beyond does call it a "Bridal Registry").
Next up, telling my extended family that I'm gay. I'm not looking forward to it, but it needs to be done.
It's Slow Over at the Exodus Blog
The comments over at the Exodus Live Out Loud
blog have been very slow lately. Their traffic is considerably higher than the traffic I get over here, but their comments are almost non-existant. Since April 19th, there have been 3 comments over at the Exodus Blog, and 2 of those were from Exodus employees and blog contributors.
The slow comment traffic seems a bit odd to me, especially since Randy Thomas cross posted a couple of the posts on his own blog and drummed up significant conversation there with the exact same post.
As I've stated before, though, the Exodus Blog does not post any dissenting comments on it. So, what seems to be happening is that in their attempt to keep the blog clean and clear of dissenting opinions, they have inadvertantly kept it clean of any comments at all. I guess that's the price you pay when you try to restrict conversation on the internet--people will just go elsewhere.