I can appreciate the fact that gay people will have a different perspective on the situation, but I don’t know if I would describe the situation as seriously abusive. This was, AFAIK, a two week camp. Yes, they will tell him a bunch of stuff he considers garbage, but it’s two weeks. Would you all have the same outrage if the parents of an atheist sent their child to bible camp for two weeks? For some, religion is a greater part of their identity than sexuality. I doubt many people would be calling those parents evil monsters for doing something like that. I’m not saying this camp is not a bad, and unnecessary thing, but I think you guys are making a lot of assumptions about his parents and their motives that I am not comfortable doing.
I agree with you. The only thing I would add is that you are hearing one side of this story. Even reading the blog, I get the impression that the problems between Zach and his parents probably began long before he came out. Perhaps the relationship was strained by him feeling he had to hide who he is, but to act as if everything was perfect before Zach came out is pretty naive.
I know the camps are bullshit, but to claim they don’t help anyone who attends is a lie. That was my only point on this matter. Not that these camps are effective, or even necessary, just that claiming that nobody has felt that they were helped is untrue.
Okay, first of, you’re right to call me on the “outing” comment. That was clearly inaccurate, and I retract and apologize for it.
On the other hand, you’re being remarkably disingenuous to claim that there’s a double standard at work here when you bring up a name eight pages into a debate, and complain that you’ve been saying the same thing that he is, and why haven’t we been calling him nasty names? Well, we might very well have been doing that, if you’d brought up his statements on page one. On the other hand, as much as we might disagree with his characterization of Zach’s parents, I think most people in this thread would weigh that against the fact that he’s clearly dedicating a great deal of his time and energy to helping kids like Zach and putting a stop to these camps. Whereas you have been devoting a not-insubstantial amount of energy to defending these camps, minimizing their evil, and deriding people who have genuine fears about the long term-effects of this sort of treatment, often based on first-hand experience. In other words, as much as I feel that Mr. Polotsky is being too forgiving in his description of Zach’s parents, at least he’s useful. You, on the other hand, are not, and are cut a correspongingly lesser amount of slack as a consequence.
Personally I think that if somebody says an organization like this has helped them, and means it, that means they’ve probably been deeply harmed. How can it not be harmful to be convinced that something fundamental to your self is evil and hated by God – especially if you’re a believer to begin with?
Well, I just read his comments when the article was posted. My point was that all the other people who read that same article at the same time I did did not castigate and insult Polotsky the way they did me. The person who posted the article didn’t mention it, nor did anyone else who read it. If it really is the objectionable position many of you claim it is, I would think more of you would have been more shocked and appalled that Mr. Polotsky expressed it.
Fair point. However, do you really thing most people are doing anything substantial to helping Zach? Zach didn’t ask to be a poster boy for this issue. All of this publicity has probably made his situation worse. In addition, calling his parents evil is not helping Zach. Making dubious claims that this place is abusing children is not helping Zach. While Mr. Polotsky is doing his best to ensure this doesn’t happen to other kids, the vast majority of people frothing at the mouth and responding to this thread aren’t doing anything to help Zach.
While you may think I’m misguided in my efforts to get people to approach as situation such as this with civility and objectivity, I think it’s necessary.
I missed that part. My genuine and sincere apologies.
Yes, I would absolutely decry a pair of parents raising an atheist child who sent him to a camp where:
a) all human contact was essentially denied him;
b) steps were taken to break him down, as have been posted earlier in this thread;
c) there was a c, but apparently Opal ate it.
Regardless of what his parents motives are, they are behaving in a wrongheaded way that is all about them and not about their son.
Having one’s psyche punished until one gives up one’s fundamental identity is harm in my book.
Clearly, we operate under a different definition of “help” and “harm.”
Actually, I don’t think anyone is shocked and appalled at you for not hating Zach’s parents sufficiently. I think most people are shocked and appalled that you seem to have more concern for the feelings of the parents and the fuckers running this camp than you do for the poor kids forced into it. Doesn’t exactly make you look like you’re overflowing with compassion. Coupled with your fairly comprehensive ignorance of the subject in general, it makes it pretty difficult to talk to you without resorting to obscenity. But I’m doing my best.
Yes, absolutely, the sort of rhetoric you see in this thread helps. Gay rights, like all civil rights battles, is primarily a cultural conflict. The first step in securing equal rights is to make expressions of homophobia as socially unaccpetable as expressions of racism or anti-Semitism or any other form of bigotry that is already frowned on by society. The more people who express their outrage - loudly - at camps like these and the attitudes of those who support them, the more the idea that they are unacceptable in American society becomes cemented. The law-making and legal arguments are where the work actually gets done, and I’m in no way minmizing that, but first there needs to be a widespread recognition that these ideas are evil. As evil as any other form of bigotry, and every bit as unacceptable to an ethical person. For that, civility only gets you so far. Anger and outrage are far more potent. Without that, we’ll never get equal rights, because they’ll never perceive the need for change.
>I’m not saying this camp is not a bad, and unnecessary thing, but
>I think you guys are making a lot of assumptions about his parents
>and their motives that I am not comfortable doing.
I think I can assume two things very easily about his parents from this: first, that his parents REFUSE to open their minds to any other viewpoint other than their own and two, that this viewpoint is more important to them than their son is. There is more than enough information out there that shows that queer folks are just common schlubs; it’s a few right-wing fundamentalist Christians who want to conflate a couple of historically specific comments in Paulist doctrine into an “eternity in a fiery hell.”
Granted, they think that they are doing him a favor. The Taliban thought they were doing women a favor by sticking them in burkas. Certain cultures think they’re doing their daughters a favor by extracting their clitorises-- and no, I’m not equating physical abuse with this case, but the mentality is equivalent. There is, and always has been, much harm done in the name of good intentions.
Essentially here is a 16 year old kid who is just coming to terms with his sexuality who will spend the next six weeks being brainwashed and emotionally blackmailed. I do NOT think the question in this case is whether or not these programs help; if you are an unwilling participant in the first place that is a moot point. I don’t think this is necessarily a matter of gay rights as it is adolescent’s rights-- at what point to people get to make decisions for themselves? Having everything at 18 makes a helluva lot less sense than having incremental degrees of freedom to make your own decisions, especially in terms of something as personal as sexuality.
I’ve read Zach’s blog, he was looking for support there, and thousands of people read about his plight and are now informing and agitating around his cause. From other comments I think he truly appreciates this.
Let’s just hope that poor kid comes out of this OK. Shit. You know, there are tons of queer folks & couples who could adopt and/or mentor kids like this. If you’re one of the above, seriously consider working with adolescent queer youth in some capacity. For too long we’ve neglected runaways and throwaways because of the paranoia around being called “pedophiles.” Fuck that. These kids need our help.
55% of all Americans believe that homosexuality is a sin. That’s all Americans. Not just “a few right-wing fundamentalist Christians.” Among those right-wing fundamentalist Christians, of course, the number is much higher.
Bricker, What is it about this issue that is like crack to you? Why is it that any time that a thread starts that is advocating for some kind of equal treatment for homosexuals, I can count on you coming along to either point out that whatever grotesque thing that is happening is technically legal, or that most Americans think that it is OK? What the fuck is wrong with you?
I know that you have theoretically claimed to support equality, but man your words and tone sure make that seem like a lie.
I’m not a Christian- I used to be, but I’m not anymore. A lot of Christians think that’s a sin. Should we have laws against apostasy, like Saudi Arabia?
A large number of Americans think it’s a sin against fashion to wear sandals with white socks. Should I not be allowed to do so?
My statement was offered solely to rebut the statement made by mojave66 suggesting that only a tiny fraction of people were involved in thinking it was wrong.
No, it isn’t. That’s 55% of Americans polled. You expect us to believe that every single person in America was polled and over half of them hold this opinion? And even if they did, can you tell me why “it’s a sin” is a valid opinion of why something should or should not be legal?
I couldn’t say. I have not yet had a chance to read that one. I also can’t say that I read every single thread that you post in. What I will say is that whenever I see a “gay” thread, I find myself waiting for you to post and that I can always count on that post as either explaining why whatever the nasty thing that is happening is legal or pointing out that whatever nasty thing is happening is something that the majority of Americans approve of. It really feels like you have an agenda here.
Second question first: I’m not offering this for the inference that anything should, or shouldn’t, be illegal. I offer it to rebut the idea that it’s just a few right-wing fundamentalists that hold this opinion. That’s not true.
As to the first question: the survey was of 1,515 adults, conducted by the Pew Research Center. However, when sampling is done correctly, a sample that size may be validly imputed to the country as a whole. If you have specific criticisms about the methodology of the poll, I’d be interested in hearing them.
I think it’s fair to say that more than half the country considers homosexual activity wrong or sinful. That doesn’t mean it should be illegal. I’m not saying it should be illegal. I AM SAYING THAT IT’S INACCURATE TO CLAIM THAT OPPOSITION IS LIMITED TO ONLY A FEW PEOPLE, AS THE POSTER I QUOTED DID.
Bricker’s point is entirely apt. Gay rights supporters are still very much a minority in this country. Depressing as it may be, we still live in an overwhelmingly bigoted nation, and it does not do us any good to forget this. Further, it would be a mistake to impute any motives to Bricker for pointing out this fact, other than an interest in establishing facts. He’s on record here - repeatedly - as supporting full rights for homosexuals, up to and including marriage and adoption. Let’s not get off track by jumping on our erstwhile allies in this fight. We’ve already got enemies enough as it is. More than half the nation, if Bricker’s cite is to be believed.
By the way, do you think mojave66’s comment was correct? If you don’t, why didn’t you correct it? If you do, aren’t you happy to have your inaccurate view corrected?
Or do you really think that, because the cause is Just, it’s better not to correct errors that undermine it?