Popagandhi

From an entirely unscientific estimate, I would venture to say that most of the readers here are straight, non-religious, and more or less apathetic about “the gay issue”. Even if this site does indeed attract a particularly large and vocal group of people who are gay, or gay sympathizers, you most likely don’t have a view about it and skip the entries whenever an issue like this comes up.

This is not an issue about gay rights. It is not an issue of your personal views towards homosexual sexual activity, and whether or not it puts you off. It is not an issue of morals. It is not about us wanting to marry and have children, or anything like that which you may not particularly care for. It is an issue which may just concern the person who sits next to you in class, the colleague you work with, the strange aunt who never married, the girls in the bars who amusedly fob off all male advances and REALLY mean it, it may even concern your brother. Or sister. Who has slept in the same bedroom as you have for the last 20 years.

You need to care this time.

You see, there is bigotry or ambivalence arising from personal experience, uninformed opinions, the lack of exposure, all of which is not necessarily homophobia. Then there is bigotry, hatred, and NO ambivalence, arising from organized groups with a religiously guided, moralistic, didactic, and deliberately misleading founding principle and resulting modus operandi. This is dangerous because it doesn’t have to be about homosexuals at all. You could swap out homosexuals for anything else which collides with their world view (wait, divine view), and the end result is the same: discrimination of the highest order. Think of it as the more organized and sophisticated equivalent of the street evangelist who runs after you, and instead of telling you to accept Jesus (even if you’re Catholic), he tells you: everything about you is flawed. Come to Jesus and drink.

Granted, these people do seem to hold the view that everything about everyone is flawed. But what if there is an element of insidious organization, and a completely erroneous approach to ‘healing’? The street evangelist now comes up, not just running after you this time, but saying: you are wrong on sexuality. You are broken. You are the lost sheep. You need salvation or forever be damned. Everything about you is flawed â�� and no, it isn’t Jesus who is the answer to cure these flaws â�� it is reparative therapy of the scientifically suspect sorts. Upsize for a ticket to eternal salvation and everlasting goodness.

You don’t need to agree with any of us on WHY homosexuals are the way they are, whether it is because of gay genes or environment. You don’t even have to find the thought of homosexual sexual intercourse inviting. You only have to be repulsed at the thought of having someone else completely unrelated to you thinking he is in the best position to lift you from the miserable pit only he has the third eye to see, with skills divinely ordained, with a calling he made up for himself, to lead you towards the land of milk, honey, and interactive penises and vaginas (only with each other, and only married ones, of course).

The organization under discussion now is Liberty League, a” group which [wishes to] promote gender and sexual health for the individual, family and society”, with thinly veiled religious affiliations. It received $100 000 from the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre, with money which comes from the Ministry of Community Development and Sports (story here). Even as a self actualization program (and most self actualization schemes are complete shams), it does not appear to have much going for it, for its four core modules are, with special focus on gays and lesbians:

Explorer Take off on your maiden flight to understand human sexuality. Explores core values with a biological, psychological, sociological and spiritual perspective.

Challenger
Develops grit and tenacity to overcome difficulties when the going gets tough. Gets down to deeper issues of hurt, bitterness, dependency, addiction and abuse.

Achiever
Scaling new heights to achieve goals for both short- and long-term. Becoming secure and moving beyond brokenness to love others, growth and restoration are well in sight.

Liberator
Focuses on the concerns of care-givers, friends and family who wish to reach out to those who struggle with sexual brokenness. Liberation of others begin with your own.

Its leader was a former transsexual man who, just before his sex change, received the (religious) epiphany, and went on to pen the book “Freedom of Choice”, in which “in which every essay preached self-hate. It even railed against masturbation. Its basic premise was that gays and lesbians had the freedom to be become ex-gay” (citing Alex). Now he is the leader of Liberty League, and it is known his point of reference is an American Protestant minister who was transsexual as well, “came out of it” to marry and minister. He compares the group’s mission to be somewhat akin to counselling alcoholics, or anyone with an addiction â�� in itself, worrying for all the right reasons. What addiction is he talking about? What ailment is he trying to treat?

For a group which seems so intimately interested in developing (straight) potential and helping to overcome our “problems” (addiction and abuse, BROKENNESS), what qualified direction will it take? Qualified practitioners of psychiatry or psychology? Well, these fields have already long established their stand: that this is NOT a condition which needs such treatment, it is not a disease, AND, they make clear, that reparative therapy poses an immeasurable harm. The ‘experts’ who disagree are currently in the employ of the Bush government, which no doubt shares sentiments with ours, concocting fabulous studies and statistics which demonstrate how right they are and how wrong everyone else is. Does it then seem to be, as all evidence points towards, that Liberty League and any other equivalent movements here, are thus left to be staffed with those people concerned enough about the gay threat â�� family counsellors? Church workers? A Reverend as a Spiritual Advisor? A celebration at the inauguration of the movement as one which helps broken people move from mourning into dancing?

The secrecy and shadiness with which the League has launched cannot be looked over. In being disingenuous over their internal structure, religious motivations, and suspect programs, and for its numerous contradictions in claiming to be for “human rights” and “freedom of choice”, they are not doing themselves any favours. Let it be said I have no quarrel with professed homosexuals “choosing” to “renounce” the “way of life”. It is not within my domain of influence or interest. I can’t help but cry “conspiracy” and “vested interests” when a group wanting to aid in the quest for sexual enlightenment and self knowledge has religious roots, more so when it hides it. But, you protest, it is good to have an avenue for the ‘confused’ to have a neutral party to turn to! Firstly â�� I won’t cede any neutrality credits to LL. Secondly, “confused” is not accepted terminology but a broad stroke of the same brush for anyone who doesn’t fit your idea of “normal”, so never ever use the words “confused” and “normal” in conjunction with the concept of sexuality ever again. Thirdly, if anyone really needs help, the existing infrastructure of self help gay run groups â�� some of which are perfectly religious, there being even one church led by a former Bishop â�� appears to be the more appropriate channel. So why is it that while People Like Us have campaigned for years to even be recognized and have registered society status, a group which suddenly comes along with the clear aim to “convert” the lost sheep, is welcomed and given a pile of cash to do their job?

To witness the view of homosexuality as something “somewhat strange”, in public eyes, escalate into an organized force, is the nightmare we are well worth to avoid, if Ex Gay movements in the United States are anything to go by. That there are definite though unclear for now links between the religious fundamentalist groups in the United States and the equivalent groups here, is cause for further worry. I’m not likely to believe that people who cannot accept the separation of self from another being, are able to grasp the concept of separation of church and state â�� as American society is currently experiencing.

This episode further demonstrates that to the public eye there is neither room for, nor interest in, variations outside the accepted sphere of compulsory heterosexuality. While this is no secret, what is new here is the official recognition as such, in form of the formation of such an organization with such aims, aided by public money. What position is a former transsexual man in to preach to gays and lesbians â�� who, contrary to popular belief, are not separated at birth from transsexuals or transgenders or transvestites (between which there is also a significant distinction)? Our points of reference, and our experiences, are worlds apart. I can’t even give proper dating advice to my gay male friends, and my gay male friends can’t even give me proper pointers on room decoration. With this one sweep, it is now more clear than ever to me: anything outside compulsory heterosexuality is viewed to be part of the same blob, while I would protest our blobs are infinitely different, and not simply in consistency.

Institutionalized discrimination of this sort has long existed. I’ve made a fuss out of similar issues before, but I’m convinced this step â�� of granting money to a group premised so loosely (no pun intended) upon.. nothing of note, through a government body, for the public good of the society â�� takes us one step further down the slippery slope. One step away for those of us who, already penalized by this society for what is not within our control and which forms a fundamental part of our existence â�� that step away, of course, is that step towards another society which we must plan to adopt, as so many of the older gays and lesbians have chosen. When it isn’t even a stayer/quitter dilemma, because they make it so easy by taking the dilemma out of it.

With this, I conclude:

Take my freedom, and I’ll shove it up your ass, FOC. Choice is a luxury we don’t have. What you perceive to be our bondage is not more serious than yours, the bondage of conflict and suppression.

P.S. I’ll say this one last time: I don’t care for my gayness. I care only for that I happen to love only women, and ‘gay’ is simply what everyone else calls us, since obviously my other traits like writer, photographer, geek, student, observant Christian, volunteer, awful cook, someone with a tidiness dysfunction, are not adequate points of reference, and there is nothing more important about me than what kind of hands I happen to hold.