.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

 

Reactions to the Dr. Phil show today

I watched all but the final segment on the young boy wanting to be a girl.

Overall reaction: The show didn't shed any new light, break any new ground and Dr. Phil only scratched the surface of what could have been done. Too much in too short a space. This is why I do not watch these shows. He set up the piece to make it appear that the disapproving view was outdated but more on that later.

1st segment - 30 year lesbian who wants her family to accept her. The lesbian does not just want her family's (mom and sister) acceptance. She wants them to change their beliefs about morality. She wants to be able to talk about all sorts of sexual activities that her mom and sister find to be immoral. She could have been wiccan and this family would be having the same problems as now. This conflict was not much about sexuality and a whole lot about one family member wanting the other two to applaud her every move. To his credit, Dr. Phil came close to making that point, but he was pretty much overwhelmed by the guests.

2nd segment - David Kyle Foster and a gay Christian advocate and a representative of GLSEN I think (I will correct this if wrong, later) were on to "debate" if someone who is gay can become straight. This was so stereotyped I could not believe it. No reaction came from Dr. Phil. He seemed clueless to know how to deal with the issue or how to advance any dialogue.

See previous posts: There was an effort on the part of the show and GLAAD to pack the audience. A group of ex-gay proponents got in the show by mentioning this link.

More later...

Comments:
"Any homosexual who wants to change their orientation can do so with the help of God,"

And with that sweeping statement, Foster is off and running.

When asked why the ex-ex-gay had not changed, despite all his efforts Foster replies:

"Well, it may have been an ex-gay ministry that didn’t know what they were doing. It may have been that he wasn’t willing to do all of what it takes. It may have been that they were unable to discover all of the issues that needed to be healed. and "you have to really want to change, or it’s not going to happen."

This is why that ex-gay message is dangerous to the overwhelming majority of gay men and women. They claim anyone can change -- an utterly false claim -- and blame the individual when they do not.

It is they who need to find another group. They need to try harder, be more desperate to change. It's your fault you do not change.

And let's not forget to mention the cause...

"Homosexual confusion develops usually from trauma, whether it’s abuse or neglect." and "[ex-gay groups] heal the underlying cause. Whether it is a failure to bond with your father-figure. A failure to bond with your mother, child abuse."

No response from Foster when the ex-ex-gay stated that there was no such history with him but perhaps this was but another criticism that may be blown off because those "come from gay activists".

I guess this is what you meant by "This was so stereotyped I could not believe it."

Perhaps you may like to take that up with David Kyle Foster next Exodus get-together or whenever.

(And it wasn't GLSEN. It was Williams from the GSA Network.)
 
I don't believe that most homosexuality is caused by trauma. I know far too many LGBT people who had good relationships with their parents (at least on the surface), and who don't fit the sterotypes that conservative orgs love sticking them into. Nonetheless, I have a lot of respect for David Kyle Foster, I heard him speak in North Carolina a few months ago.
 
I don't believe that most homosexuality is caused by trauma.

Interesting, but Chad perhaps we need to move away from beliefs and into the realms of science?

Regardless -- you do, however, also believe that anyone gay can become straight; just as David does. Why?

If this is your own comforting narrative, fine. But it's very harmful to others, even if you do believe they will be dead by age 42.
 
Grantdale,

Interesting, but Chad perhaps we need to move away from beliefs and into the realms of science?

I was making that statement as a matter of personal observation, not as a scientist.

About Cameron, I already told you that you have taken my position out of context but you continue to do so, and even tell people on exgaywatch that I am a liar.

I have not read all of Cameron's research, but I disagree with most of what I have read. In the CT article quote I said that "some" of these findings are true. I did not get specfic about which parts I agreed with and which parts I did not agree with becuase that was not the point of the article. CT wouldn't have even let me put that in there, they would have edited it out becuase that was not the point of the article.

I was quoting Cameron to point out how ridiculous it would be to apply his findings to every single gay and lesbian person. I know you don't believe me grantdale, you see a sinister agenda behind every word I type, and I don't really blame you either. I think if I were in your place I would be skeptical towards the ex-gay movement as well. What's important is that we continue to seek truth, and that we treat each other with kindness even where we disagree.

BTW I posted this on exgaywatch as well since that is where you initially called me a liar.

All the best,
Chad
 
Chad, I'm not getting into this on Warren's blog. Least of all because he may not appreciate it. Your reaction to this is far worse than making a goose of yourself in the first place.

People can make their own minds up: here and here. Did you lie? And what do we call people who lie?

Whatever next -- you're going to claim we "took it out of context" when you said you didn't go into schools?

Sheeesh. Sorry Warren.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?