# Any pro-gay ex-gays? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 28, 2007, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360 "2007-10-28T19:12:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2007, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/1 "2007-10-28T19:12:10Z")
I often see testimonials from individuals who say that they had earlier embraced the “gay lifestyle” but who are now in successful heterosexual relationships and are speaking on behalf of the conservative anti-gay movement. But are there any actual ex-gays who have remained liberal and supportive toward their former co-orientationists and their issues? After all, not every Jew who has converted to Christianity is an anti-Semite. We can debate the full range of “ex-gay” issues here. For one thing, isn’t this a manifestation of bisexuality rather than true homosexuality? Also, here’s an essay on gay issues that I wrote a while ago and which could due with some criticism: [http://www.squeakywheelsblog.com/gays](http://www.squeakywheelsblog.com/gays) ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2007, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/2 "2007-10-28T20:16:41Z")
[Julie Burchill](http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/article8436.ece), British newspaper columnist, who describes herself as “a gay person who went wrong” yet despite (now) being straight, can be quite anti-hetero. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2007, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/3 "2007-10-28T20:29:58Z")
BTW I had a look at your blog entry - generally, you need to back up your arguments. E.g.: > [@](#): > > Everyone has the right to expect–or at least seek–sexual fulfillment during the prime of his or her life. Says who? > [@](#): > > immorality is not defined as behavior that violates cultural taboos or superstitions, it is defined as behavior which causes harm to other people (or the environment) By whom? I’m sure an Islamic fundamentalist would disagree with you there. > [@](#): > > God may be behind of our instincts, but gays have different instincts in this one area. Is He? Who is your audience: I don’t believe in God, so this statement immediately weakens your essay for me (and you’ve got a grammatical error there). IMO you need to qualify statements like this. Generally you’re making dozens of sweeping statements without backing a single one of them up. If it’s just an opinion piece, then say so at the outset, otherwise you sound like you’re trying to impose your worldview before you even start constructing your arguments, without considering the differing opinions of your necessarily diverse audience. And just for readability, because this is a Web publication, please use more paragraph breaks. ---
**Author:** ![Martha\_Medea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/43a26b/32.png) [@Martha\_Medea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martha_Medea)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2007, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/4 "2007-10-28T20:38:22Z")
Although Wikipedia doesn’t have a category for ex-gay people (and in any case that does not quite apply in Daldry’s case) both [Tom Robinson](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Robinson) of ‘Glad to be Gay’ fame and [Stephen Daldry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Daldry) came to mind. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/5 "2007-10-29T00:01:16Z")
Susie Bright? ---
**Author:** ![essell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/34f0e0/32.png) [@essell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/essell)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/6 "2007-10-29T00:08:33Z")
[QUOTE=sqweels] For one thing, isn’t this a manifestation of bisexuality rather than true homosexuality? [/QUOTE] It’s a great example that, for some people, the _labels_ just don’t work. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/7 "2007-10-29T00:17:48Z")
[QUOTE=sqweels] I often see testimonials from individuals who say that they had earlier embraced the “gay lifestyle” but who are now in successful heterosexual relationships and are speaking on behalf of the conservative anti-gay movement. [/QUOTE] I often see testimonials from people who say they used to be Democrats, but are now speaking against Democrats to the conservative anti-liberal audience. Supposedly this lends their arguments more weight, somehow. Nobody’s ever quite explained why this is. And curiously, nobody expects them to _prove_ they used to be Democrats. The audience — mostly Republicans — accepts at face value the assertion that the speaker is an ex-Democrat, because they agree with the anti-Democrat message. People are funny that way. If they agree with your answer, they don’t want to look to closely at how you arrived at it. If I were a suspicious bastard, and I am, I’d be inclined to wonder if any or all of these “ex-gays” are really just anti-gays who are cleverly deceiving their audience to spread their anti-gay message to a broader audience. So my question is, _are there ex-gays?_ If so, demonstrate it. Then we can debate. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/8 "2007-10-29T00:23:19Z")
Thanks for reading my essay, **jjimm**. That’s just the kind of criticism I need to help me shore up weak passages. > [@](#): > > Says who? Well, if I’m the first person making that assertion, then I get credit for it. That line can definitely use some qualification and elaboration, tho. > [@](#): > > By whom? I’m sure an Islamic fundamentalist would disagree with you there. And they’re probably wrong because my assertion makes more sense. Theirs is the product of logical fallacies and the inherent bias of a religious-style belief system. Beliefs that certain otherwise innocuous acts will incur punishment from supernatural forces is superstition, which religions tend to confuse with morality. > [@](#): > > Is He? Who is your audience: I don’t believe in God, so this statement immediately weakens your essay for me (and you’ve got a grammatical error there). IMO you need to qualify statements like this. I did say “may”. But yes, I need to qualify more. Most of my target audience likely to believe in God and I want to head off any anti-atheist backlash. > [@](#): > > Generally you’re making dozens of sweeping statements without backing a single one of them up. I’m making a lot more than mere dozens! > [@](#): > > If it’s just an opinion piece, then say so at the outset, otherwise you sound like you’re trying to impose your worldview before you even start constructing your arguments, without considering the differing opinions of your necessarily diverse audience. Of course it’s an opinion peace. You see, in my 1st chapter, “Creation”, I start with an analysis of the O.J. Simpson case, which is an example of the truth of a situation laid bare in such a way that any reasonable person would accept it. I then proceed to impose my world view. And along the way I construct some arguments. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/9 "2007-10-29T00:47:33Z")
Well, there must be, mustn’t there? Given the wide variety of human sexual experience and the even wider variety of people, out of 6 billion of us over-sexed monkeys there must be someone who matches that description. Whether that is an accurate self-assessment, a sham or a delusion is probably forever beyond any certainty. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/10 "2007-10-29T01:30:56Z")
[QUOTE=Fish] So my question is, _are there ex-gays?_ If so, demonstrate it. Then we can debate. [/QUOTE] That’s the pre-debate that I want to see unfold. I’ll take your post as one vote for “No, there is no such ex-gays. They’re full of it in one way or another”. Fine with me. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/11 "2007-10-29T01:53:56Z")
Seems to me that such sexuality is more fixed in men than women, there is more flexibility in women. Painting with a very broad brush, in the widest possible terms and without the slightest pretense to authority: many women are entirely comfortable with a shifting sexuality, men are not, when a woman says she’s “bi-sexual”, she means she is bi-sexual, when a man says it, he means he’s “queer as a blue horse”. So, right there you got a split. If a woman says she was once gay and now isn’t, nothing particularly unlikely about that. When a man does, he’s proposing a much less likely scenario. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/12 "2007-10-29T04:52:57Z")
Anne Heche? ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/13 "2007-10-29T06:20:45Z")
[QUOTE=sqweels] That’s the pre-debate that I want to see unfold. I’ll take your post as one vote for “No, there is no such ex-gays. They’re full of it in one way or another”. Fine with me. [/QUOTE] I’d prefer it if you took my post as one vote for “mu.” That is to say, mine is the Zen answer to a meaningless question. If you asked me if any unicorns voted Libertarian, I’d give you the same answer. I, personally, have never seen any evidence of anybody claiming to be an ex-gay _except_ as a prelude to gay-bashing. I am therefore understandably skeptical of their sincerity. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/14 "2007-10-29T06:34:54Z")
[QUOTE=sqweels] …And they’re probably wrong because my assertion makes more sense. Theirs is the product of logical fallacies and the inherent bias of a religious-style belief system. Beliefs that certain otherwise innocuous acts will incur punishment from supernatural forces is superstition, which religions tend to confuse with morality. [/QUOTE] We dedicated a whole month of my Philosophy class to what is “morality”… “Moral” comes from the latin “more”: custom. Literally, moral means “that which is customary”. By this ethimological definition, morals change with time and location; by this definition, “moral” and “good” are not necessarily the same things (and in case you weren’t paying attention, “legal” is in yet another category). I find it very funny that you discard milennia of philosophers, theologians and ethicists, then call up to God. Make up your mind, please. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/15 "2007-10-29T06:40:59Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Well, there must be, mustn’t there? Given the wide variety of human sexual experience and the even wider variety of people, out of 6 billion of us over-sexed monkeys there must be someone who matches that description. Whether that is an accurate self-assessment, a sham or a delusion is probably forever beyond any certainty. [/QUOTE] No, there needn’t be. That’s not how probabilities (especially numberless, ‘there must be’ probabilities) work, I’m afraid. Maybe all those people are either not pro-gay, or not ex-gays, with no intersection whatsoever within the qualifying groups. Theoretically speaking, that is. (Which is how you were speaking too, so fair’s fair.) ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 6:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/16 "2007-10-29T06:45:34Z")
You’re talking math, I’m talking monkeys. I very much doubt that you can think of any sexual perversion, inversion, or diversion that has not been tried, or even practiced on a consistent basis. ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/17 "2007-10-29T06:46:04Z")
[QUOTE=Fish] If I were a suspicious bastard, and I am, I’d be inclined to wonder if any or all of these “ex-gays” are really just anti-gays who are cleverly deceiving their audience to spread their anti-gay message to a broader audience. So my question is, _are there ex-gays?_ If so, demonstrate it. Then we can debate. [/QUOTE] Of course there are. I’ve met two in my life and as someone else pointed out, there’s Anne Heche. But as others have said, it’s probably just good old bisexuality rearing it’s head. Some people just have a block about considering themselves bisexual so if they’re dating someone of the same sex they’re gay, but if they’re dating someone of the opposite sex they’re straight. There’s no in-between. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/18 "2007-10-29T07:10:15Z")
[QUOTE=Justin\_Bailey] Of course there are. I’ve met two in my life and as someone else pointed out, there’s Anne Heche. But as others have said, it’s probably just good old bisexuality rearing it’s head. Some people just have a block about considering themselves bisexual so if they’re dating someone of the same sex they’re gay, but if they’re dating someone of the opposite sex they’re straight. There’s no in-between. [/QUOTE] I’ve never met Anne Heche and I don’t feel qualified to discuss her sexual behavior. The problem is one of labels: how many homosexual encounters does it take before one is gay? How many hairs may a bald man have on his head? How many trees does it take to make a forest? I find it hard to accept, from what I know of human biology, that sexual attraction can flip back and forth as if on a switch, that one day a person can be attracted to women, and the next day, boom, attracted to men. It is _easy_ to see, on the other hand, how a person can one day label himself “straight” and the next day “gay.” Labels are imposed by humans; sexuality is not. If we’re going to discuss people who self-label as “ex-gay,” then we have to decide what that means, and why that self-imposed label grants the lable-ee’s opinion any particular weight. I don’t see why it should. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/19 "2007-10-29T07:20:23Z")
I think we should be clear on something. There’s a difference between having once identified as gay and no longer identifying so for whatever reason and being ex-gay, i.e. having gone through some sort of “therapy,” usually religious, to supposedly intentionally alter your sexual orientation. If at some point I were to find that I were sufficiently attracted to women that “gay” was no longer an appropriate label for myself and adopt some other description for my sexual orientation, such as queer or bisexual, by no means would I consider myself ex-gay. For one thing, I don’t believe that that would mean my sexual orientation had _changed_ – only my understanding of it, just as when I came out as gay it didn’t make me an ex-straight, but a gay man who now understood himself better. Incidentally, I don’t believe that ex-gays are truly heterosexual, any more than sleeping in a garage would make me a car. In fact, a lot of ex-gay programs advertise nothing more earthshaking than that they will browbeat you into pursuing heterosexual relationships, without claiming (or while disclaiming) that they can actually change your underlying sexual orientation. They won’t make you straight, they’ll just help you repress yourself. Needless to say, this isn’t actually effective at doing anything other than making you more hurt and screwed up than you already were. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2007, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360/20 "2007-10-29T13:05:56Z")
[QUOTE=matt\_mcl] Needless to say, this isn’t actually effective at doing anything other than making you more hurt and screwed up than you already were. [/QUOTE] Which makes it completely consistent with most other right-wing Christian pursuits… [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-pro-gay-ex-gays/424360.md?page=2)