WHEW! My manuscript returns

I know that it's a stupid title but that was the first word that came to mind when I opened the package sent by my copy editor.

I have tons (and that's not an exaggeration) of work to do in applying the corrections he sent. As such, I will be busy for a while. I will cotinue to post but barring something major taking place(and with people like Peter LaBarbera and Lou Sheldon around, it is possible), count on me being less loquacious than I usually am.

Meanwhile, Jim Burroway of Box Turtle Bulletin wrote an excellent piece about the hypocrisy of the anti-gay industry - New Survey: 95% Have Had Premarital Sex

Hypocrisy in the religious right? No way.

More sarcasm on my part; it's starting to look like a trend.

Dancing around the Federal Equal Access Act

In Minnesota, some folks are all upset because while a school district brought in gay groups for voluntary staff workshops, it said no when they wanted to bring a conservative organization, the Minnesota Family Institute, to present "the other point of view."

The school district claimed that it said no on the grounds that the presentation is based "on religious beliefs and that schools avoid religion."

But based on what Abby Ludvigson, coordinator of the Institute's seminar program, is quoted as saying, the school district should base its opinion on the fact that the Minnesota Family Institute is going to tell lies:

"They're putting our children at risk by affirming a lifestyle that is dangerous and unhealthy."

The issue of gay student safety in schools is one that I am very point blank on. Students should be allowed to form gay/straight support groups and legislation that would keep gay students from being bullied should be passed with the utmost fervor. Also school staff should be educated on their gay students.

I personally believe that for the most part, gay children are our responsibility. We older gays and lesbians have a responsibility to make sure they are not only proud of their orientation, but that they also make the right decisions in their lives. We should be at the forefront of pushing for these things.

So I get angry when I hear people like Abby Ludvigson turn the tolerance argument on its head.

This is yet another tactic of the anti-gay industry. In court battles regarding gay/straight clubs in high schools and the like, they have been on the losing end thanks to the Federal Equal Access Act. This act guarantees the right of students to form clubs, including gay/straight alliances. With these alliances come the knowledge that schools have to be educated on the needs of gay pupils.

Seeing that they cannot use the courts to block students from forming these groups, the anti-gay industry has engineered a new tactic. They claim that students should have the "right" to hear the other side of "homosexual argument." They claim that school districts should show "tolerance" for the supposed "ex-gay" side.

They have also banded together and started the "Day of Truth" to combat GLSEN's "Day of Silence."

The "Day of Silence" speaks to the problems that gay students face on a daily basis in schools.

The "Day of Truth" is yet another way for the anti-gay industry to spread their Paul Cameroneque lies, which serves to villify gay youth and make them at risk.

Now I believe in tolerance for people who think that homosexuality is a sin. However, I do not believe in allowing people to come into schools and, in the name of tolerance, spread the lie that homosexuality is some sort of death sentence.

This argument for tolerance has created a stalemate between us and the anti-gay industry. What we need to do is to combat it with truth.

First of all, no study has ever said that homosexuality in itself is a "dangerous lifestyle." No study has ever said that being openly gay will guarantee a short lifespan or disease.

Studies do say that negative outside influences can lead to gay youth making bad choices. These negative outside influences include being bullied by classmates or not having access to proper information regarding one's sexual orientation. Or maybe being told by a well-meaning but ignorant wannabe authority figure that being gay is some sort of death sentence.

When gay children are given proper support, they grow up to be contributing members of society. However, what the Minnesota Family Institute wants to give are lies.

What's next? Saying that gay children need a lobotomy?

Who cares if its dangerous. After all, shouldn't one show tolerance for all opinions, even if some opinions are lies?

In case you couldn' t tell, that was sarcasm.

Careening towards the new year

A couple of things are happening.

First from Massachusetts, a victory for our side.

The Massachusetts Supreme Court said that it cannot force lawmakers to vote on a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. The court rebuked the legislature for not voting, but regardless, Massachusetts is still the only state that allows gay marriage and that won't change for a while.

However, the only joy I can take from this decision is that it will drive James Dobson and company out of their minds with anger.

I really don't like this new tendency to base the success or failure of our movement on whether or not we get marriage equality. The success of the gay rights movement will not be decided on whether or not we can walk down the aisle, but whether or not many of us feel that we deserve to walk down the aisle.

Meanwhile, former President Ford passed away yesterday and it got me thinking about Oliver Sipple, the man who prevented Ford from being assassinated in 1975.

What happened to him was a negative in the history of gay America. Sipple was a closeted gay man and because of his diligence, he found himself to be a "poster child" for gay rights, even though he didn't want to be. Sipple was outed by those who claimed to be on his side and slowly his life was ruined because of it.

This is not to blame anyone for what happened. If anything, it should serve as a reminder to those of us who are leaders in this struggle for equality to never forget the individuals they are trying to help.

Behind the movement are individual people with different lives and different circumstances. Some may be able to come out quickly, but others will take time; that is an unfortunate fact of life.

If it becomes okay to sacrifice the life of one person for the greater good (i.e. visibility), then we have lost our souls.

Remember that the next time a new controversy about a "closeted" movie, television, or singing star takes place.

Holiday over, back to the battlefield

I hope that everyone had a very Merry Christmas. Mine was nice and quiet - my favorite type of holiday. And I even managed to get some work done.

Which reminds me - I want to marry my copy editor.

Okay maybe not, but over the weekend, he spoke to me about my manuscript and gave me a bunch of excellent ideas for making my prose better. Thanks to him, I took care of a problem that had plagued me since I finished my manuscript.

And speaking of problems, a while back, someone wrote in (in a not very nice way) that our friend Robert Knight of the Concerned Women for America had moved on to the Media Research Center (MRC). The MRC is yet another one of those right winged, the world sucks until everyone does what we think they should do groups.

At the time, I wasn't aware of the move because I didn't see any press release and such. Apparently though, Mr. Knight has moved on.

Robert Knight figures greatly in my book due to his lying exploits with the Concerned Women for America and the Family Research Council. It really doesn't matter where he goes because Mr. Knight has created an interesting paper trail and I have copies of almost all of it.

Lastly, I think our friend Peter LaBarbera is slipping:

Chevron scholarships are available to students in the University of Colorado's School of Engineering who are in the "gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender" community or who support its activities through volunteering. WorldNetDaily reports that CU engineering students received an e-mail recently that offered $1,000 scholarships from Chevron for meeting those qualifications, and writing about their involvement in an essay. It was a move the story quotes a school official as saying is Chevron's attempt to benefit engineering field minorities that are "under-represented." Peter LaBarbera is president of Americans for Truth, a group that monitors homosexual activity in the culture. LaBarbera thinks the scholarship symbolizes a society that increasingly rewards people for sinful behavior. "It's a shocking thing when you come to the point where America is going to have affirmative action based on affiliation with homosexual practices," says the activist. According to LaBarbera, the practice of affirming homosexuality is everywhere -- from the educational and corporate worlds to the political realm. "America is becoming a society that is rewarding people for practicing homosexual sin, essentially -- and it's incumbent upon Christians to speak up and say how wrong that is," he adds. The Americans for Truth spokesman says a society cannot be healthy when it rewards people for what he describes as "unhealthy and immoral behavior."

No claims about the "short life span of gay men" or how Chevron is rewarding "dangerous behavior?"

Why Peter, are we getting to you?

First, three items

A victory for our gay and lesbian children - Appeals court backs ruling favoring straight-gay student group.

I wonder how long it will take before Agape Press quotes the Allied Defense Fund as to how much of a shame it is to push children into "dangerous behavior."

Items 2 and 3 don't exactly look good for us. According to the Conservative Voice, a Denmark study has claimed that "provides interesting and tantalizing evidence that the less stable or traditional a child's home is, the more likely that the child will turn to homosexuality as an adult."

Here we go again. Now I don't know what the study actually says. I do know that the anti-gay industry is notorious for distorting studies from the Netherlands to claim that homosexuality is evil; one of the most infamous being a study they said claimed that gay marriage was not a good idea.

Of course they failed to mention what the study was actually about and also omitted the fact that none of the gay couples in the study were married and that lesbians were excluded.

I chronicle this study and how the anti-gay industry distorted it in my upcoming book.

No doubt before we get the actual truth about the study the Conservative Voice referred to, anti -gay industry pundits will be citing it repeatedly on television and to their followers.

In Britain, a couple has been paid monetary damages for an incident in which the police questioned them regarding their anti-gay beliefs.

I am sure that Robert Knight, our friend Peter LaBarbera, and the rest will attempt to use this unfortunate incident to push the theory of a worldwide gay conspiracy to "harm Christians."

Oh vey!

Boot camp comes to a close

Next week, I should be receiving my manuscript from my copy editor and I am anxious to see what he thought of my book.

Since I am off of work until Wednesday, I should be working on the appendix and acknowledgements, but u know the old saying - the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.

Not too weak though because I had to talk myself out of adding new chapters to my book. No sense in overwhelming anyone. Keep it simple and sweet.

So keeping that spirit, I thank everyone (even my wannabe spammers) for supporting my blog and keeping up with how my book is progressing.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

Something I forgot to mention

Democrats are also supported by homosexual advocacy groups that routinely give organizations like NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association, positions in “gay rights” parades, where they proclaim such slogans as “sex by eight or it’s too late.” - Gary Bauer, National Review, December 20, 2006

Yesterday, I neglected to mention another tirade from a right winger. An online friend of mine pointed it out to me.

The above comments about NAMBLA and gays is from wannabe "pro family" activist Gary Bauer during a column he wrote for National Review talking about the Mark Foley scandal. For the benefit of those not wanting to read it, he rehashed the "Democrats are hypocrites, blah blah blah, Gerry Studds did the same thing" nonsense that so many others in the anti-gay industry tried to spin when the controversy broke.

Mr. Bauer's comments are so late that they transcend the "who the hell is he and why does he think anyone cares what he says" point. His comments border on "Geez, is that dumbass still around" territory.

Bauer used to be a big wig in the anti-gay industry. He led the Family Research Council for a time until an ill advised move to run for president in 2000. Rumor control has it that his decision pissed off James Dobson. And rumors that Bauer was having an affair with a female co-worker didn't exactly help matters either.

Of course, Bauer was very unsuccessful in his presidential aspirations. He is now president of American Values and chairman of Campaign for Working Families, but in all honesty, Bauer is totally irrelevant; except for when Agape Press or some other right wing and/or anti-gay publication wants a comment.

Hence his very late Mark Foley tirade.

I don't know what is worse about Bauer's comments; the fact that they are extremely late and add nothing new to the situation or the fact that his lies about gays and NAMBLA is such an old headless monster that even the stubborness of a thousand anti-gay activists can't hold it up.

These two weeks have been pitiful for the anti-gay industry. First Mary Cheney becomes pregnant, then James Dobson is caught three times misrepresenting legitimate studies. And now, Gary Bauer repeats lies that have been refuted so many times till it's just sad.

Bear in mind that I am not gloating. I know that there are a few people who follow Bauer religiously and believe every word that comes from his mouth.

But still, it's nice to watch the train wreck.

So many issues going down today

I tell you, the right has gone ape crazy today. I usually make only one post regarding the anti-gay industry, but so many things have gone on, I think I will make several posts.

Dobson answers

James Dobson finally answered charges that he distorted and cherry picked the work of various researchers and professors during his Time magazine tirade last week.

Or something like that.

Another member of Focus on the Family, Bill Maier, attacks the notion that Dobson misrepresented anything.

As usual, the routine anti-gay industry standby excuse is pushed: it's a "liberal conspiracy," or in this case, a "liberal groupthink":

"These are well-respected scientists who probably feel they have no choice but to cry 'foul' because they work in a field that is so dominated by liberal groupthink," Maier explained. "But the fact they aren't happy their data was used to reach a conclusion they disagree with doesn't mean the data was not properly applied. Dr. Dobson never claimed these researchers share his view on this issue -- they clearly do not. But there is no denying that the data they compiled can be appropriately cited to show the unique contributions mothers and fathers make in the lives of their children.

Feel free to go over the past posts about the researchers complaining over Dobson's misuse of their work and see how the answer his subordinate gave is yet another lie.

While I like it when the anti-gay industry shoots itself in the foot, the desire of Dobson to continuously cut his own throat in this matter is just pitiful.

Claiming 'War on Christmas' yields profits

The People for the American Way (an excellent organization) is claiming that the so-called War on Christmas that Dobson and company claim folks like myself declare every year is a fluke that garners them much influence and money:

The conservative Christian groups declined to provide all the numbers behind their Christmas efforts, but some did disclose how many items they had sold and distributed.

Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona-based Christian legal group, has shipped 20,000 "Christmas packs" this year, said spokesman Greg Scott. The value of the "goods and services" included is $4, receipts show. The rest of the money goes into ADF's general fund, Scott said. A majority of the packs were sold for less than the suggested $29 donation, he added, though he declined to provide details.

To that, I say - no shit!

Obama fears

I will say something for Barack Obama - he may or may not become president, but he certainly has some people showing their true colors, or rather, prejudices:

In a December 18 column headlined "Barack Hussein Obama: Once a Muslim, Always A Muslim" and posted on her website, right-wing pundit Debbie Schlussel argued that because Sen. Barack Obama's (D-IL) middle name is Hussein, his late, estranged father was of Muslim descent, and he has shown interest in his father's Kenyan heritage, Obama's "loyalties" must be called into question as he emerges as a possible Democratic presidential candidate. In the column, Schlussel asked: "So, even if he identifies strongly as a Christian ... is a man who Muslims think is a Muslim, who feels some sort of psychological need to prove himself to his absent Muslim father, and who is now moving in the direction of his father's heritage, a man we want as President when we are fighting the war of our lives against Islam? Where will his loyalties be?" She ended her column by asking if Obama becoming vice president instead would be acceptable. Answering her own question, she wrote: "NO WAY, JOSE ... Or, is that, HUSSEIN?"

Where do they dig these people up and why do they give them their own shows? I was born the wrong gender, color (skin and hair). Although for a brief period in college, I was a blond and yes, they do have more fun.

Finally, penguins in North Carolina

Some people have too much time on their hands. Apparently a school district in North Carolina banned a book because it featured two male penguins who "adopted" a hatchling in order to nurture it and keep it from dying.

Now to some, it looks like a usual move by penguins to make sure baby penguins don't die from neglect.

But to the school district and Mecklenberg Commissioner Bill James, it is another example of the "gay agenda":

"I am opposed to any book that promotes a homosexual lifestyle to elementary school students as normal," he said.

Now this is the same Bill James who has gone very public on many occasions with his disagreement of the supposed "gay lifestyle," as witnessed by a letter he wrote to a constituent:

“You really think that a pool of people (homosexuals) where 45% of them eat feces from the rear end of another male is "normal"? If you do, you are frankly nuts. A lifestyle where one of their past times is buying gerbils and hamsters from the pet store and cramming them up their rears in an activity called feltching? A group of people who like to urinate on their partners and call them "golden showers"? Where one of the honored members of the Gay Alliance is an organization called the "Man-Boy Love Association" that promotes sex with underage boys? That behavior is worthy of protection? That behavior is worthy to be taught in our schools? to our children? You are one sick "Independent, white, married-heterosexual, presbyterian" if you do. . .”

Such a nice fellow. I'm personally rooting for the penguins.

Yet another headless monster!!!!

In the middle of my euphoria of Wayne Besen's consistent smackdown of James Dobson's lies, I received word of yet another lie perpetrated by the anti-gay industry.

I've always believed that citizens speaking out are powerful. If they speak out with no knowledge of what they are talking about, they can be downright dangerous.

Case in point - Bill Wilson, a "news service senior analyst" writing on what he feels are the most dangerous issues pressing America:

"Homosexuality and abortion represent as much a clear and present danger to the national security of America as does terrorism. The public immorality of the United States of America is appalling and the nation is fast heading for massive decline."

Here we go again.

Mr. Wilson goes on an ill informed tangent, specifically about the gay community, especially when he mentions this little canard:

" . . .many studies indicate that the average lifespan of the homosexual is far less than heterosexuals."

For the benefit of those who are not aware of this blog and my upcoming book, Mr. Wilson just repeated what is known as a "headless monster."

A "headless monster" is an opinion that has been refuted continuously but continues to be repeated as truth; either due to the ignorance or the stubborness of the person repeating it.

In Mr. Wilson's case, I will chalk his repeititon of the lie that gay men have shorter life spans than heterosexuals to ignorance.

So I will correct him.

There are no legitimate studies that say that gay men have shorter life spans than heterosexual men. The Centers for Disease Control does not collect statistics on the life spans of gay men:

"[The CDC] does not collect statistics on the life span of gay men. While gay men continue to be severely impacted by HIV and AIDS, AIDS-related death data cannot be used to indicate that homosexual men live shorter lives than heterosexual men overall." - Ronald Valdiserri, deputy director of the CDC’s National Center for HIV, STD, and TB Prevention, Weird anti-gay science, The Washington Blade, June 17, 2005

Now there was a 1997 Oxford study that made a hypothetical claim about the life span of gay men. But in 2001, the six researchers who conducted the study went on record saying that their work was being distorted by the religious right - http://ije.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/full/30/6/1499

The only person who has attempted to make an unadulterated claim about the life span of gay men is our friend Paul Cameron. Cameron is hardly a legitimate researcher, as referenced by this link.

Mr. Wilson's claims would be funny if not for the fact that his nonsense was published on a "Christian" web page. I have to seriously ask how many Christians already believe his lies and how many more will be taken in by his falsehoods?

Wayne Besen strikes again!
Meanwhile, James Dobson is trying to get his followers to do his dirty work for him

Wayne Besen is on the ball.

Not only did his organization, Truth Wins Out, film a video featuring Carol Gilligan rebuking James Dobson for distorting her work (see past posts) but he has also found yet another researcher who claims that Dobson is distorting her work:

JAMES DOBSON REBUKED ON VIDEO FOR DISTORTING RESEARCH OF NYU PROFESSOR CAROL GILLIGAN

Renowned Author/Researcher, England’s Angela Phillips, Condemns Focus on the Family’s Leader For ‘Seriously Misrepresenting’ Her Work'

Miami Beach, FLA. – Truth Wins Out released an exclusive video today featuring celebrated New York University educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, PhD, who upbraided Focus on the Family leader, James C. Dobson, for misrepresenting her research in a guest column he wrote in last week’s issue of Time Magazine.

Additionally, Angela Phillips, the renowned author of “The Trouble With Boys” also sent a pointed letter to Dobson today accusing him of “seriously misrepresenting” her work and asking him to publish her letter “prominently” on Focus on the Family’s website. Last week, Kyle Pruett, M.D. of the Yale School of Medicine, also expressed concerns that the Focus on the Family leader "cherry picked" his work.

“This is a revolt of serious scholars who are revolted by the way James Dobson has unethically incorporated their research to fit his political aims,” said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen.

“Three researchers have now come forward in just one week to take Dobson to task. The media should finally realize that Dobson lacks the academic integrity and moral authority to talk credibly on family issues.”

In the video, filmed for Truth Wins Out by videographer Lisa Darden, Dr. Gilligan expressed her extreme displeasure with Dobson and how she was “mortified” by his use of her work.“I was stunned to hear that James Dobson had quoted me in TIME Magazine. I had no idea. I was mortified, frankly,” Dr. Gilligan, author of several books including, In A Different Voice, said in the video.

TO WATCH VIDEO CLICK HERE

“It was a completely distorted and unfounded use of my work…it is such a simplification and caricature of my work…for someone who represents morality and the family it is disrespectful.”

Earlier today, Professor Angela Phillips, author of “The Trouble With Boys,” echoed Drs. Gilligan and Pruett in a letter to Dobson, obtained exclusively by Truth Wins Out. TWO received a tip that Phillips’ work had been misquoted by Ray Foster, a concerned citizen who wanted the truth to be told.

In her letter, Phillips, a journalist and professor at Goldsmiths College in London, asked that Dobson print the following letter “prominently” on his organization’s website.

Dear James Dobson:

It has come to my attention that my book "The Trouble with Boys" has been seriously mis-represented in writings by James Dobson. Having read his newsletter; "How Boys Learn to Become Men" on the Focus on the Family web site I was incensed to find that I have been quoted as a source for suggesting that:

" The high incidence of homosexuality occurring in Western nations is related, at least in part, to the absence of positive male influence when boys are moving through the first crisis of child development."

I certainly agree that boys suffer from a lack of positive men in their lives but I am at pains to point out that positive men are often as much lacking in two parent households as they are in lone mother (or two mother) households. I do not suggest that lack of positive male role models leads to homosexuality (or indeed that it would be problematic if it did). My concern is that boys without positive men around them are more likely to be violent, angry and lacking in self control.

I have never heard that these are characteristics that are associated with homosexuality.

Dobson goes on to say: " One of the primary objectives of parents is to help boys identify their gender assignments and understand what it means to be a man.My concern is that boys are currently learning, either from their fathers, or in the absence of fathers, from the women who rear them, and the men they encounter, that the most important thing about being a man is being: "not gay", "not gentle" and not "girlie".

While adult men are afraid to demonstrate that it’s okay to be gentle and caring how are boys to learn anything positive about what it means to be a man?I would be grateful if you could publish this letter prominently on your website.

I look forward to a swift acknowledgement.

Yours sincerely
Angela Phillips
Author of The Trouble with Boys

“The media is the great enabler that continues to offer a platform to James Dobson to tell his lies, malign gay people and mock science,” says Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen.

“It is time the media be held accountable for journalistic standards, the same way Dobson is now finally answerable for his misleading propaganda.” Truth Wins OUT is a non-profit organization that counters right wing propaganda, exposes the “ex-gay” myth and educates America about gay life. For more information, visit www.TruthWinsOut.org.

Dobson has given no comment regarding the claims that he distorted legitimate research.

Meanwhile, one of the American Family Association's new rags, Baptist Press News, has featured Dobson's column.

It half heartedly addresses the claims by Pruett and Gilligan that Dobson cherry picked and distorted their work:

"Focus on the Family sent an e-mail to supporters asking them to send a "brief, polite note" to Time editors thanking them for publishing the column. Homosexual activists, Focus said, are asking their supporters to write Time and tell the magazine Dobson's column was inaccurate."

The fact of the matter is that this is not the first time Dobson and company have distorted a legitimate researcher's or professor's work. I have nine examples in my upcoming book and in private conversations with one of my sources, there have been others.

God don't like ugly, Mr. Dobson. Especially if it is done in his name.

Boot camp starts

As of yesterday, a copy of my manuscript, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, has been sent to my copy editor.

And I am hoping that he will be as harsh as possible.

I am not one of those writers who think that I am so infalliable that my work can't stand a bit of correction. I value the opinion of a ruthless copy editor.

He should be sending me his thoughts by the end of this year.

I can't wait!

By the way, James Dobson still has not spoken out about the claims of Dr. Kyle Pruett and Carol Gilligan that he cherry picked their work in his Time magazine column.

Just thought I would mention that.

Two for Two
or
Doggone it Wayne Besen! You are making me jealous!

YALE PROFESSOR SAYS JAMES DOBSON ‘CHERRY PICKED’ HIS RESEARCH IN TIME MAGAZINE ARTICLE

Kyle Pruett, M.D., is Second Professor In Two Days To Challenge Dobson’s Use Of Research Miami Beach, FLA. – Truth Wins Out urged Time Magazine today to renounce a guest column written by James C. Dobson in this week’s magazine after a second professor, Kyle Pruett, M.D. of the Yale School of Medicine, expressed concerns that the Focus on the Family leader “cherry picked” his work.

In a letter to Time and Dobson, Dr. Pruett asked that Focus on the Family, “not quote from my research in your media campaigns, personal or corporate, without previously securing my permission.”Yesterday, New York University Professor Carol Gilligan, PhD, also wrote a letter to Time and Dobson saying that her research was distorted and twisted.

“Time Magazine should take Dobson’s article off the web and pledge that they will never again use his group as a source on family issues,” said Wayne Besen, Executive Director of Truth Wins Out. “Focus on the Family has damaged its credibility and should stop misleading Americans by misquoting respected researchers.”

TODAY, Pruett wrote the following letter:

13 December 2006

Dr. Dobson,I was startled and disappointed to see my work referenced in the current Time Magazine piece in which you opined that social science, such as mine, supports your convictions opposing lesbian and gay parenthood. I write now to insist that you not quote from my research in your media campaigns, personal or corporate, without previously securing my permission.You cherry-picked a phrase to shore up highly (in my view) discriminatory purposes. This practice is condemned in real science, common though it may be in pseudo-science circles. There is nothing in my longitudinal research or any of my writings to support such conclusions.

On page 134 of the book you cite in your piece, I wrote, “What we do know is that there is no reason for concern about the development or psychological competence of children living with gay fathers. It is love that binds relationships, not sex.”

Kyle Pruett,
M.D.Yale School of Medicine

Additionally, New York University educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, PhD, demanded an apology from Dobson yesterday and asked that Focus on the Family “cease and desist” from quoting her work in the future.

Truth Wins OUT is a non-profit organization that counters right wing propaganda, exposes the “ex-gay” myth and educates America about gay life.

For more information, visit www.TruthWinsOut.org

** TAKE ACTION **

James Dobson is a discredited political hack who has serially distorted research and twisted the truth to fit his right wing political agenda. He should never have been given a platform to discuss GLBT families in a respected major media outlet, such as Time Magazine.

The use of pseudo-science that aims to discriminate has no place in a publication like Time. Let's face it, they would never dare provide a similar platform for extremist groups to bash other minorities.

Tell Time, that it is way past time, to be giving a stage to Focus on the Family and other groups that blatantly and provably lie about gay life.

Memo to Time: "If the right can't prove it, Don't use it.

"WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR:
Time MagazinePatrick_Smith@timemagazine.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kudos to Wayne Besen for exposing another anti-gay industry attempt to use bad research in order to lie about the gay community.

This is not the first time the anti-gay industry has distorted Dr. Pruett's work for their own purposes.

An excerpt from my upcoming book:

In November 2004, Dr. Kyle Pruett, a clinical professor of psychiatry in the Yale Child Study Center and School of Nursing, complained that a local anti-same sex marriage group incorrectly used one of his studies.

He said that Oregon’s Defense of Marriage Coalition claimed that a study of his said that infants just eight weeks old could already detect the difference between male and female interaction. This, the group claimed in a flyer, says that the role of a mother and father are not interchangeable when it comes to raising children.
Dr. Pruett said that first of all, the research was not his. The citation in question was another researcher’s work he mentioned in a book he authored. However, Pruett said, secondly, there is no research in his book that can be used to criticize same sex marriage.

“They were cherry picking research,” he told The Yale Herald, “for their own purposes . . . In my book, I talk about how gay and lesbian marriage is not currently thought to place children at risk.”

According to the same article, Michael White, the executive director of the Defense of Marriage Coalition, denied Pruett’s claim. He also said he was surprised by the controversy because many organizations have been using Pruett’s research for years.
“We get a lot of stuff from the organization Focus on the Family,” he said, “and they’ve printed Pruett’s stuff for years.”

I think that there should be some clearity as to what needs to be done. Those of us who are trying to expose the lies of the anti-gay industry are not out to bash Christians or any other persons of faith. If one's faith teaches that homosexuality is an abomination, then that is okay. You should have that right to believe this.

This is not about telling people that they cannot believe what they want. This is about exposing groups who are spreading propaganda designed to reinforce negative stereotypes about the gay community.

The phony studies spread by Dobson and company are no different than the lies the Nazis spread about Jews or the Ku Klux Klan spreads about African-Americans. In the historical context of things, we need to establish this point and hammer it home time and time again.

At the end of the day, victory will not come to the gay community through pleadings for tolerance. We will win through cold hard facts. Luckily we have them on our side.

We need to start using them.

BUSTED!!!!!!!!!!!

Sometimes, certain things happen that bring a smile to my face, like the following:

JAMES DOBSON SLAMMED BY PROFESSOR FOR DISTORTING HER RESEARCH IN TIME MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON MARY CHENEY’S PREGNANCY

'I was mortified to learn that you had distorted my work,' NYU Professor Carol Gilligan Tells Focus on the Family Leader in Blistering Letter

Miami Beach, FLA. - New York University educational psychologist Carol Gilligan, PhD, today slammed Focus on the Family leader, James C. Dobson, for "twisting" and "distorting" her research in a guest column he wrote in this week's issue of Time Magazine. Dobson misrepresented her work in an effort to smear gay families while discussing Mary Cheney's pregnancy. In a pointed letter to Dobson, Gilligan demanded that he apologize and "cease and desist" from quoting her work in the future.

"Dobson's group is a fib factory that should change its name to Focus on the Fallacies," said Truth Wins Out Executive Director Wayne Besen. "This organization habitually lies and shamelessly mangles research to support its anti-gay agenda. Time Magazine should immediately withdrawal Dobson's column because it is so riddled with scientific errors that it is essentially fiction."

In a letter to Dobson, obtained exclusively by Truth Wins Out after the group contacted Gilligan and informed her of the Time article, Gilligan expressed her dismay and demanded that the right wing leader apologize. According to the letter:

Dear Dr. Dobson:

I am writing to ask that you cease and desist from quoting my research in the future. I was mortified to learn that you had distorted my work this week in a guest column you wrote in Time Magazine. Not only did you take my research out of context, you did so without my knowledge to support discriminatory goals that I do not agree with. What you wrote was not truthful and I ask that you refrain from ever quoting me again and that you apologize for twisting my work.

From what I understand, this is not the first time you have manipulated research in pursuit of your goals. This practice is not in the best interest of scientific inquiry, nor does bearing false witness serve your purpose of furthering morality and strengthening the family.

Finally, there is nothing in my research that would lead you to draw the stated conclusions you did in the Time article. My work in no way suggests same-gender families are harmful to children or can't raise these children to be as healthy and well adjusted as those brought up in traditional households.

I trust that this will be the last time my work is cited by Focus on the Family.

Sincerely,

Carol Gilligan, PhD
New York University, Professor

"No reputable media outlet should continue using Focus on the Family as a resource because they are chronically dishonest and lack credibility," said Besen. "James Dobson should start to wonder if there is something inherently wrong with his stance on gay issues if the only way he can support his positions is outright lying."

Truth Wins OUT is a non-profit organization that counters right wing propaganda, exposes the "ex-gay" myth and educates America about gay life. For more information, visit www.TruthWinsOut.org.

This is yet more proof that the anti-gay industry is lying about our community. This rebuke will go in my upcoming book as the 9th example of a professor or researcher going on record crying foul over the distortion of their work by Dobson and company.

Keeping our focus

I took a visit to Freeperland today.

From time to time I will hold my nose and read the comments on the forum having to do with the "homosexual agenda." Today was interesting.

There was a young man on one of the post who was sure that he had the right idea about what the "homosexual agenda" actually was. He kept posting links that supposedly proved all sorts of negatives things about the gay community.

I don't think that I have to tell anyone that those links encompassed "research" and "studies" done by Paul Cameron, Timothy Dailey of the Family Research Council, as well as other bits of propaganda issued by other groups such as the American Family Assocation.

Meanwhile a lot of our attention seems to be paid a ridiculous article on the World Net Daily site where some writer actually said that soy was turning America's children gay. His piece is ludicrous, so ludicrous in fact that I have seen it mentioned on several sites.

Then there is the "Wedding Wars." The "Wedding Wars" is an upcoming movie starring John Stamos that takes a comedic look at the marriage equality argument. I am sure the makers mean to entertain and take a satirical look at the issue of gay marriage.

I have not only seen many bloggers talking about the soy makes children gay articles, but I have received emails inviting me not to forget when the John Stamos movie is airing.

This mindset reveals something I don't like about my community. We tend to worry about public media events that are a lot of hot air, but don't pay attention to issues that could in the long run mean our survival or destruction. Pointing out the ridiculousness of one right-wing author or enjoying a movie with a "hot guy" with a message about gay marriage sounds like fun, but they are a waste of time.

Meanwhile, this young man on Free Republic and others who will buy into the lies of the anti-gay industry will repeat those lies. They will organize themselves on web pages, in groups, and in front of school boards. They will repeat those lies over and over again in front of legislative bodies.

How can we combat this if we are distracted by other things?

A John Stamos movie is cute but it is a waste of time unless it can refute the lies that we molest children at a high rate. Pointing out the inanity of a right wing column is momentarily empowering but unless it can refute the lie that we have a shorter life span due to promiscuity and disease, I don't want to waste my time commenting on it.

There has been an organized campaign to dehumanize the gay community and devalue our lives and we all must combat it head on, detailing and refuting every lie.

But yet we continue to lie to ourselves, thinking that our circle of friends, our distractions (i.e. the "Wedding Wars" et. al.), or our pursuit of material possessions will insulate us from the fact that the anti-gay industry is determined to devalue our lives with lies more scurrilous than those the Nazis said about the Jews or the Klan has claimed about African-Americans.

An old saying says that evil prospers when good men do nothing.

In that same spirit, propaganda does a lot of damage when those who can expose it allow themselves to be distracted by transitory things.

Another Ted Haggard

Ted Haggard lives again, nuff said - link

Dobson speaks (whoop te doo)

Mary Cheney's pregnancy seems to have brought all of the anti-gay industry leaders out of the woodwork. Last week, several of them (including our friends Peter LaBarbera and Paul Cameron) voiced their opinion on how Mary Cheney is harming her child by raising it "without a father by design."

I tell ya, you gotta love how they constantly push semantics.

Now, the grand poobah himself, James Dobson of Focus on the Family, has issued a column via Time Magazine on the situation. I guess he felt that since everyone else has something to say, why not him:

"With all due respect to Cheney and her partner, Heather Poe, the majority of more than 30 years of social-science evidence indicates that children do best on every measure of well-being when raised by their married mother and father. That is not to say Cheney and Poe will not love their child. But love alone is not enough to guarantee healthy growth and development. The two most loving women in the world cannot provide a daddy for a little boy -- any more than the two most loving men can be complete role models for a little girl."

This statement is not true, but I will let this link from Media Matters for America do the work in refuting it.

Dobson also distorts the work of Dr. Kyle Pruett of Yale Medical School. Media Matters does an excellent job in proving this point. I would just like to point out that distortion of Dr. Pruett's work is one of many times that the anti-gay industry has gotten in trouble for misusing studies.

In my book, I talk about the Pruett distortion, as well as seven others.

Dobson's comments point out one of the biggest problems with the anti-gay industry and their view of the world. They deal with aesthetics, not actualities.

Dobson and company seem to think that advocating for their view of family is the antidote for all societal ills.

This is not true. Dobson and company claim that gays raising children is an "untested social experiment," but this is also not true. According to the 2000 census, over 300,000 same sex households in the United States are raising children.

That doesn't sound like a social experiment to me.

Furthermore, what about the children who are taken away from their natural mothers and fathers because of abuse? Should they be kept in orphanages and foster homes until the "correct" type of family (not having anything to do with love and support but having two adults inlcuded) comes along?

What about single-parent families. My mother pretty much raised me alone. In the Dobson world, she is looked at in a patronizing manner; she would be tolerated but not looked upon as an actual good parent.

The fact of the matter is that this is a complex world. Man is not God, and therefore we cannot control the curves that life throws at us. All we can do is do the best we can with what we are given.

And personally, I think single parent families and same sex families are doing just that.

Dobson says "The traditional family, supported by more than 5,000 years of human experience, is still the foundation on which the well-being of future generations depends."

By this, he means a family led by a mother and a father. His claim is not necessarily true.

A good friend of mine (who I talked about before in this blog) is raising two children. He will probably adopt those two children. They refer to him as daddy. They aren't forced to do it and they aren't suffering from it. They would suffer if there was no one to give them love and support.

My friend didn't choose to be a father figure because of selfishness. He made the decision because he wanted the responsibility of supporting two children who needed it; that is the epitome of family.

My friend may not lead any nationally-known organization and may never get a column in Time Magazine, but I will tell you this:

Whenever I want to learn about family, I look at his example, not that of James Dobson.

Excellent weekend

I think I will post a short comment today because I am busy revising my book.

It has been a really good weekend for a number of reasons.

The most important and specific piece of good news is that I have finally found a copy editor.

And just in time too.

I reached a period of stagnation with this book a while ago. I wrote and said everything that I felt I could say but there was so much more to talk about when it comes to the anti-gay industry. I, like so many writers, am terrible when it comes to spotting the errors in my work.

After finding this reputable copy editor, I have been working nonstop on new information and new pages, naturally I am excited.

I think I found my muse again, so to speak.

So I am glad to say that my book is right on schedule to be completed in February and back from the publisher between the months of May-June.

I would like to thank everyone who has been reading my blog for the success I have been having so far in getting the information out.

And stay tuned.

I haven't even started to raise hell.

Paul Cameron crawls out of his hole

Mary Cheney has dominated the news and I didn't want to talk about her pregnancy any more, but something happened today that is just too good to go unnoticed.

Paul Cameron gave his opinion about Mary Cheney.

Now if you think he said, "I think this is positive and I wish her and her partner all the luck in the world, " you will also believe that Paris Hilton is a misuderstood genius.

Cameron had nothing positive to say about Cheney's pregnancy:

"Her pregnancy is further evidence that participation in homosexual activity distorts value systems, inducing practitioners to harm the commonweal. Our society already has too many children born without the benefits of marriage; Cheney's action is not only a bad example, but poor treatment of an innocent child."

Cameron's dubious history makes it so damned easy for me to rip his comments to pieces, that I am almost ashamed of my desire to do so. But it is important not to laugh Cameron off because he is a very dangerous man.

It was Cameron who provided the scientific (albeit through bad studies and distortions) framework that the anti-gay industry uses against us. Cameron's influence on anti-gay industry studies is so thorough that I devoted an entire chapter of my upcoming book solely on him.

Let's recap his history, shall we?

Paul Cameron is the author of a wide variety of studies about the gay community and all of them portray us as evil, child molesting, feces-eating, gerbil-stuffing monsters.

He has also gotten into trouble because of his questionable tactics in compiling his data:

On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists" by the APA Board of Directors. Cameron has posted an elaborate argument about his expulsion from APA on his website, claiming that he resigned from APA before he was dropped from membership. Like most organizations, however, APA does not allow a member to resign when they are being investigated. And even if Cameron's claims were accepted as true, it would be remarkable that the largest professional organization of psychologists in the United States (and other professional associations, as noted below) went to such lengths to disassociate itself from one individual.

At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it "formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality."

In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism" and noted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research."7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of "critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron."

At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee's report and passed the following resolution:
The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, "The Paul Cameron Case," is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron's frequent lecture and media appearances."

Cameron's credibility was also questioned outside of academia. In his written opinion in Baker v. Wade (1985), Judge Buchmeyer of the U.S. District Court of Dallas referred to "Cameron's sworn statement that 'homosexuals abuse children at a proportionately greater incident than do heterosexuals,'" and concluded that "Dr. Paul Cameron...has himself made misrepresentations to this Court" and that "There has been no fraud or misrepresentations except by Dr. Cameron" (p.536).

If that is not enough for you all, then check out various Cameron quotes via this link including:

"At the 1985 Conservative Political Action Conference, Cameron announced to the attendees, 'Unless we get medically lucky, in three or four years, one of the options discussed will be the extermination of homosexuals.' According to an interview with former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, Cameron was recommending the extermination option as early as 1983." - Mark E. Pietrzyk, News-Telegraph, March 10, 1995

"I think that actually AIDS is a guardian. That is I think it was sent, if you would, about forty years ago, to destroy Western civilization unless we change our sexual ways. So it's really a Godsend." - Cameron quoted by Mark E. Pietrzyk, News-Telegraph, March 10, 1995

"Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous activities"-Paul Cameron quoted at http://www.biblebelievers.com/Cameron2.html

Now despite all of these things, Cameron is still looked at as a credible source regarding the gay community by people like Peter LaBarbera, Lou Sheldon, and Robert Knight.

Groups who dare call themselves pro-family (i. e. The American Family Association, the Family Research Council, the Concerned Women for America, and a plethora of statewide organizations) continue to use his work.

And many of them know of his controversial history.

Gotta love those conservative Christians.

Mary Cheney's Baby: The Ultimate Weapon of Mass Distraction

Unless you live in a cave with your fingers in your ears, you know that Vice President Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter, Mary, is pregnant.

Needless to say, the anti-gay industry is not happy about it, as seen in this link.

And they are all up in arms in Freeperland over it.

So what exactly is the problem here? Mary Cheney chose to become pregnant because she has a maternal instinct to raise and care for a child, just like the vast majority of women worldwide.

And for that, I applaud her. A child raised by gay parents can thrive and be successful and loved. All studies point to this fact.

Also, the birth of a child is a blessing from God, so I wish all the best for the entire Cheney family as they welcome two new additions (Vice President Cheney's other daughter is also expecting) to their circle.

I just hope that my fellow gays and lesbians don't get distracted.

I enjoy seeing the anti-gay industry show its true hateful colors just as much as the next gay man, but there is still work to do. Mary Cheney's pregnancy does not eliminate the fact that there is still a war going on. Mary Cheney's pregnancy does not eliminate the fact that the anti-gay industry continues to spread lies about our community in order to shape public policy.

Yesterday, I wrote about Linda Harvey and Mission America's phony risk audit plan. This plan is yet another attempt by the anti-gay industry to censor American gay students from establishing support networks. In my zeal to point out the errors in her plan, I excluded something very crucial; something that underscores Harvey and the rest of the anti-gay industry's knowledge that what they are feeding to people are lies.

One of Harvey's sources for her "risk audit" trash is a study by Timothy Dailey from the Family Research Council entitled The Negative Effects of Homosexuality.

Check out this link and read what is on the top of the page.

Just in case the Family Research Council tries to change it, this is what it says:

Please note: this article is an archived item on Family Research Council's website; the information contained therein may be outdated.

What you are reading is what is known as a "cover your ass" disclaimer. I have one question for the Family Research Council and their leader, Mr. Tony Perkins.

If you have problems with the truthfulness of Mr. Dailey's piece, then why is it on your web page for anyone to use in order to demonize the gay community?

I am happy for Mary Cheney and her family, but I am also concerned about the lesbian teenager who will have problems receiving support because of Linda Harvey's "Risk Audit Plan," a plan that cites Mr. Dailey's piece, excluding the disclaimer.

I am concerned for the people who will go to the myriad of sites that have The Negative Effects of Homosexuality on them (excluding the disclaimer) and actually believe the study to be gospel truth.

These people are going to form groups and committees, write letters to the editor, stand up in front of legislative bodies and school boards and repeat what they have read.

And that means more hell for us, especially our lgbt children.

For that reason, we cannot allow the controversy over Mary Cheney's baby to distract us.

She has the monetary and social support to make life better for her child.

Let's concentrate on making life better for those lgbts who don't have those trappings.

Parents urged to circumvent the law? How Un-Christian

Gay/Straight support clubs and anything else that looks at homosexuality in a supportive manner in America's schools is a major sticking point for the anti-gay industry.

However there is not that much they can do about it, particularly about gay/straight support clubs. According to the Federal Equal Access Act, students can form any club they want as long as:

Attendance is voluntary,
The group is student-initiated,
The group is not sponsored by the school itself, by teachers, by other school employees, or by the government, and
The group is not disruptive. i.e. it "does not materially and substantially interfere with the orderly conduct of educational activities within the school.

No matter what they do, say, or claim, the anti-gay industry has been on the losing end in a vast majority of cases when they try to attack students' right to form a gay/straight support group.

That doesn't mean that they won't stop trying to circumvent this law. Case in point, a recent article in Agape Press - Fighting Back -- Pro-Family Groups Find Ways to Combat Homosexual Agenda in Public Schools.

The article is pretty much up front in encouraging parents to think of ways to make it difficult for students to form gay/straight support clubs, including pushing for parental permission slips and encouraging students to form "ex-gay" clubs in hopes of undermining the purpose of the gay/straight alliances.

The hypocrisy of forming "ex-gay" clubs as a way of undermining gay/straight alliances is best served in reading the following article that appeared in a November 16th issue of Agape Press - PFOX Official: Homosexual Activists Want to Censor Ex-'Gay' Message.

The most egregious thing that comes out of this week's article is the following:

Linda Harvey, founder of the Ohio-based pro-family group Mission America, has developed one common-sense tool. Harvey's "Risk Audit Project" is a comprehensive survey which measures the promotion of homosexuality in a given public school district. (The survey can be downloaded for free at the organization's website.)

The Risk Audit Project measures the extent to which public school districts are collaborating with homosexual activists by determining, among other things, whether schools have adopted pro-homosexual policies or curricula, and whether the school district is sponsoring pro-homosexual clubs, events, or activities.

Common sense tool? Bull!

First of all, Linda Harvey is not any type of expert on the gay community. Her web page clearly states that she is a former "ad executive." Harvey is like so many other phony religious right experts, hiding her prejudice behind a Jane Wyatt cum Barbara Billingsley fascade. She, like so many of them, appeal to Christians' egos and fears with lies and stereotypes backed by junk science.

For example, her claim about gays and children:

“When people have views supporting homosexuality they should not be involved with youth in any way, period. Because they:
will provide inaccurate, misleading information to kids;
may limit a student’s opportunity to hear warnings about the behavior;
may advocate or model inappropriate behavior;
may be directly involved in the molestation of kids themselves; or
may be in a position to allow others to do so” - Fairy Tales Don’t Come True, February 13, 2006

Her "Risk Audit Plan," which can be viewed here is more of the same lies.
In the section called Why Homosexual Activism in Schools Endanger Students, the organizations list
several reasons why they think homosexuality is a danger including:

"(homosexuality) reduces life expectancy at age twenty by at least 8 to 20 years; increases by at least 500% the risk of contracting AIDS; increases the risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease by nearly 900%; increases by 4,000% the risk of developing anal cancer; substantially increases the likelihood of smoking, having mental health disorders (other than same-sex attraction), being the victim of “domestic” violence, and being involved in alcohol and drug abuse; substantially increases the likelihood of contracting hepatitis and other gastrointestinal infections; substantially increases the risk of contracting bacterial vaginosis, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer; and has high levels of participation in sadomasochism, coprophilia, sadomasochism, fisting, and other dangerous, deviant sex practices involves extraordinarily high levels of promiscuity.”

Those are Paul Cameron claims, but she does not list him as a source. She lists The Negative Effects of Homosexuality by Timothy Dailey and The Health Risks of Gay Sex by John R. Diggs as her sources.

But these two studies have a multitude of problems, which I cover in my book, including:

The Negative Effects of Gay Sex:

It lists Paul Cameron as a source

Twice, John R. Diggs includes the study done by Alan Bell and Martin Weinberg in their book,
Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women, as indicative of the entire gay population. In one passage, he even refers to it as “a far ranging study of homosexual men . . .”
But Bell and Weinberg never said that their findings were indicative of all gay men. They actually said “. . . given the variety of circumstances which discourage homosexuals from participating in research studies, it is unlike that any investigator will ever be in a position to say that this or that is true of a given percentage of all homosexuals.”

Diggs cites a Canadian study twice in order to claim that gays have a shorter lifespan than heterosexuals. But his citation of the study is a mischaracterization. In 2001, the six original researchers (Robert S. Hogg, Stefan A. Strathdee, Kevin J.P. Craib, Michael V. O’Shaughnessy, Julion Montaner, and Martin T. Schechter) who conducted that study have gone on record saying that religious conservatives (like Diggs) was distorting their work.

In another section entitled Physical Health, Diggs claims that gays are victims of “gay bowel syndrome.” The term is an obsolete medical term. exist and even the CDC does not use it. In fact,if one was to look at the endnotes of Diggs’ study, he would find that two of the sources he quoted concerning “gay bowel syndrome” were from articles in published in 1976 and 1983, which is consistent with the years that the term existed. One last source was a letter to the editor printed in 1994 but Diggs does not make it clear as to what were the circumstances surrounding it.

He generalizes convenience sample studies as indicative of the gay population at large.

Diggs takes studies done in foreign countries and claims that they are indicative of the gay population at large.

Diggs claims that there are five distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual populations including levels of promiscuity, physical health, mental health, lifespan, and monogamy. However, he spends very little time comparing the two dynamics. He uses all of his time castigating gay
populations.

He uses an out of date book, The Gay Report (published in 1979) to claim that gays are engaging in deviant sexual practices. Only once does he attempt to tie the alleged deviant practices of gays in 1979 to present day; and to do so, he cites two events that took place regarding bondage workshops. However, there is a strong indication that heterosexuals took part in these events as well as gays. Diggs ignores this dynamic.

The Negative Effects of Homosexuality:

It also lists Paul Cameron as a source

Timothy Dailey use a 1985 survey of lesbians at a Michigan music festival to claim that lesbians have a high rate of domestic violence. However, according to the reviewer of the study, Suzana Rose, Ph.D., of the 1099 lesbians participants, most were white and between the ages of 20-45.
She also said:
“Questions concerning perpetrating abuse need to distinguish between actions taken in
self-defense and actions initiated by the aggressor. This point was not assessed here. Findings are limited by the selective recruiting of participants.”

Dailey also uses the Weinberg and Bell book to claim that all gay men are promiscuous despite the fact that both authors said their work was not indicative of all gay men.

Dailey uses the term “gay bowel syndrome," even though the term does not exist.

Dailey cites a study that says young gay men are in danger of catching disease at a high rate. He omits the part of the study that said they need places to build their self esteem as homosexuals.

In addition, he performs mathematical manipulation on percentages gauged in legitimate studies in order to push forth a higher percentage of gay men catching diseases.

He generalizes convenience sample studies as indicative of the gay population at large.

Harvey and the groups who endorsed this latter day Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Concerned Women for America, Family Research Council, etc.) actually want parents to use it in order to make it more difficult for gay and heterosexual students to support each other. Harvey needs to realize that believing that homosexuality is a sin does not entitle her to be an expert on the gay community. Furthermore, exploiting people's fears and stereotypes through junk science is highly un-Christian.

Lastly, inviting people to circumvent federal law through lies, innuendo, and chicanery is not only un-Christian, it is also unethical and immoral.

I may not know what Jesus would do, but I know that he would not do what the anti-gay industry is advising parents to do.

Putting it all in a diverse perspective

Recent events (i.e. Dennis Prager's very hateful screed against Congressman Ellison and Box Turtle Bulletin's report on the lies of the Family Research Council) makes it more important to me that the gay community knock down the pedestal of virtue that so-called pro family groups place themselves on when demonizing our community.

Historically, almost every group has had their problems with profiling. African-American men were lynched because it was thought that they were unintelligent brutes out to rape white women.

Jewish people were persecuted throughout history for various reasons; including the idea that they conducted sacrifices of children.

Even Christians were accused of cannibalism in the Roman Empire when some Machiavellian individuals distorted the passages in the New Testament about the Holy Communion.

And now, the gay community have been vilified as diseased, oversexed, and all around violent individuals whose "agenda" must be stopped for the good of the nation.

Things don't change and I have always been amazed at the naive notions that somehow we can get rid of ideas of superiority. As long as man exists, there will be someone pointing the finger at a group and blaming them for whatever ills of the world at that particular time.

Now, more than ever, is our turn to be blamed. And it is crucial that we have the intellect and common sense to refute the lies.

But the gay community is squandering our opportunity. Many of us like to compare our movement for equality to other pasts social movements, such as the black civil rights movement or the women's movement. There is a point to be made with the comparison.

At the same time, I can't help wondering whether or not we have the maturity of those movements. Women and African-Americans were able to unite themselves and connect their fight for rights to that of a large social movement for equality.

We haven't yet and I really wonder whether or not we really want to. So many of us want to have it both ways. We want to simultaneously unite all of the gay community and yet hold on to the things that make some of us feel as if we don't belong.

The fight over same sex marriage illustrates my point.

This fight over same sex marriage, or marriage equality, has done more to highlight the divisions in our community. It is the issue that constantly bombards us and seems to be on the front of our agendas.

And this is a huge mistake. To some of us, same sex marriage is not the most pressing issue in our lives.

African-American gay men, for example, have to constantly deal with the fact that we are a minority in the gay community. We have problems of health and self esteem. But no one seems to be listenting or respecting what we can bring to the table. There is nothing in the larger gay community that speaks to our experience.

Apparently we are supposed to be satisfied with Lance Bass, Brokeback Mountain, or whatever is the newest scuttlebutt, even though more often that not, we cannot relate to them.

And when we do attempt to celebrate ourselves as gay people (like having events such as Black Gay Pride) we are called separatists by people who cannot seem to understand that being gay means more than having a cliquish circle of white friends (and probably one or two black friends.)

How many gay black men and women are in the public eye? Can anyone reading this column name any public black gay spokespeople?

I know of several, but I bet none of them will be featured in The Advocate, Our or any other gay issues oriented magazine.

Unity in a community means respect for every aspect of the community, not whittling it down to those who should lead and those who should shut up and take whatever is given to them.

Until the gay community learns this, we will never inherit our full potential as a social movement.

Headless monsters citings courtesy of Box Turtle Bulletin

It's been a slow day that picked up when I logged onto Box Turtle Bulletin.

Box Turtle Bulletin is a site that creates reports detailing anti-gay industry deceptions. It has been very useful to me in writing my book.

The newest study is yet another excellent report. The Family Research Council (yet another so-called "pro family" group) has filed an amicus brief in a Maryland case involving same sex marriage. One guess as to who said they aren't on.

According to Box Turtle Bulletin, FRC's brief is filled with distortions, including out-of-date citations and convenience sample study manipulations such as:

As the FRC describes heterosexual married couples, they are using research that really is probability sampled and statistically representative of married couples. (Notice, too, that the data that they have presented so far excludes all cohabiting couples.)

Now the FRC is ready to contrast heterosexual marriage to gay male relationships. This is where their arguments get really dicey, as they carefully cherry-pick poorly-constructed and out-dated studies based on convenience samples and other non-representative populations.
First, the FRC turns to a 1984 book by Joseph Harry, Gay Couples to claim that 66% of gay men in relationships had sex with someone other than their partner within the first year, and that 90% had sex outside the relationship if it lasted five years. But Gay Couples is based on a casual survey that was printed in a Chicago gay newspaper, with the response rate being well below 10%. With a response rate so low, it is important to ask why so few chose to participate. No reasonable public opinion pollster would rely in a survey with such a low response rate. Response rates below 50% raise eyebrows; 10% is pathetic.

The FRC also turns to Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen’s After The Ball: How American Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s for this juicy quote: “the cheating ratio of ‘married’ gay males, given enough time, approaches 100%.”4 It’s a very pithy statement, but it’s not based on a single shred of evidence — no surveys, no samples, no studies. It’s just the authors’ own opinions offered more for amusement than enlightenment. This is hyperbole, not science.

FRC and other anti-gay industry groups just don't stop. They continue to lie about the gay community. And they are able to do this because hardly anyone calls them on it.

That has got to stop.

All hell breaks loose

What a weekend I have been having.

On Thursday night, my computer went home to Jesus, causing me to have to get another one. That one, a loaner, died also. I am finally back online after feeling like I have literally been to the other side of the mountain. (It's an old movie reference.)

Meanwhile, some people have lost their damned minds while I was away. Let's take each situation one by one.

Apparently conservative Dennis Prager has an axe to grind about newly appointed Minnesota Congressman, Keith Ellison.

Congressman Ellison pissed Prager off by wanting to use the Koran to be sworn in come January. Ellison is the first Muslim ever to be elected to Congress but Prager feels that he should be forced to use the Bible because it's tradition.

Sorry, Mr. Prager but that's bullshit. (Sorry, my computer calamities has led me not to put up with the excesses of silly behavior with sang froid like I usually do.)

Mr. Prager has laid out his points in a nasty screed, American, Not Keith Ellison decides what book a congressman takes his oath on - link

Prager's comments are rude and very unintelligent. He has been skewered by people from the left and the right, and rightfully so, for such un-American tripe. I am not even going to waste my time rehashing his comments.

Unfortunately this is not the first time Congressman Ellison has had to deal with nasty innuendos because of his religion. On November 14, CNN commentator Glenn Beck had the nerve to ask him:

" . . . I have been nervous about this interview with you, because what I feel like saying is, "Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies."
And I know you're not. I'm not accusing you of being an enemy, but that's the way I feel, and I think a lot of Americans will feel that way." - http://mediamatters.org/items/200611150004

I don't know if a lot of Americans do actually feel that way. Putting that in his comments as some sort of excuse for him asking the question is a cop-out. It was a totally uncalled-for question to ask a man who was elected by his peers to Congress and Mr. Beck should have shown some discernment.

Beck only proves that any Tom, Dick, or Doofus can be given his own show. All you have to do is be loud and say outrageous things.

Prager's comments are a bit more sinister because they reveal a mindset that too many people in this country and throughout history have.

Prager and those who agree with him (unfortunately based on the comments page on Town Hall and Free Republic, there are quite a few) seem to think they are entitled to tell others what to believe. Christianity to them is not a way that God connects with us but a caste system. It is this mindset that makes Prager and others believe that even though Congressman Ellison was born in this country, he is somehow not conforming to American culture and tradition.

Congressman Ellison is not on the outside of American culture because he is an American, and therfore his beliefs as an Islamic American counts just as much as those who consider themselves Christians or Jews. Congressman Ellison is America personified and to me, that's pretty damned cool.

And don't give me that crap about 9-11. That awful day is a tragedy that will live with this country forever, but I am so damned tired of people using 9-11 or "the terrorists" as an excuse to show their asses, phobias, and to forget what this country was founded on; liberty and freedom for everyone.

And the first rule of observing liberty and freedom for everyone should be an elimination of the mindset of entitlement. Under the root of racism, anti-Semitism, sexism, and yes homophobia is the idea by a group of people that somehow they are superior or divinely chosen to set the standard that the rest of us must follow.

Mr. Prager, America has already decided which book Congressman Ellison has a right to give his oath of office on. We have decided by the Constitution. You need to get your ass with the program.

And speaking of homophobia, I see that our friend Peter LaBarbera has banded with a group of others like him in some sort of "Legion of Doom" type group, The AIDS Truth Coalition - link

If they actually believed in truth, they would have never formed. Of course it's the same mess they always put out - blah blah blah, evil oversexed homosexuals, blah, blah, blah.

Then what makes it worse, LaBarbera posted this hot mess - link

For the benefit of those who do not wish to read it (but I advise that you do) it is the same nonsense that I have refuted, Joe Brummer has refuted, Jim Burroway has refuted, and every scholar who knows how the anti-gay industry likes to demonize our community has refuted. The piece is filled with out-of-date sources, Paul Cameron references, and made up medical terms, such as "gay bowel syndrome."

Now I cover all of these lies in my upcoming book, so rather than go step by step and demonstrate the lies, I want to do something different but that will still show the point I am trying to make.

A very intelligent man, John Aravois, created a page that compares lies told about Jewish people to lies told about the gay community. It is one of the best pages I have ever seen. It contains comparisons such as:

Jews are Diseased -

Insidious Jews spread disease like rats"In this way, they (the rats) spread disease, plague, leprosy, typhoid fever, cholera, dysentery, and so on. They are cunning, cowardly, and cruel, and are found mostly in large packs. Among the animals, they represent the rudiment of an insidious and underground destruction - just like the Jews among human beings."- Nazi propaganda film, "The Eternal Jew," http://www.holocaust-history.org/der-ewige-jude/stills.shtml

Gays are Diseased -

Disgusting gays are diseased"The disgusting details of the homosexual lifestyle explain why so many diseases are present in the homosexual community." - American Family Association, http://www.afa.net, Homosexuality in America: Exposing the Myths.
Gays disproportionately diseased"Homosexuals account for a disproportionate number of America's most serious STD's, including syphilis, gonorrhea, genital warts, and hepatitis A and B." - Family Research Council, http://www.frc.org/insight/is95d1hm.html

Many STDs linked to gays"the many sexually transmitted diseases linked to unnatural homosexual practices" -10-8-98, news release from Americans for the Truth About Homosexuality, quoting Peter LaBarbera, who is the organization's head and also an employee at the Family Research Council, http://www.americansfortruth.com/Ncod2808.html

Gays more diseased than straights"Lesbians and homosexual men are 19 times and 14 times more likely, respectively, to have had syphilis than heterosexual men and women" - NARTH's Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D. (a top psychologist of the "ex-gay" movement), the footnote reads: "P. Cameron, K. Proctor, and W. Coburn, 'Sexual Orientation and Sexually Transmitted Disease,' Nebraska Medical Journal, Vol. 70 No. 8, August 1985, pp. 292-299." - http://www.frc.org/insight/is93g2hs.html

I invite everyone to look it over - http://www.hatecrime.org/subpages/hitler/hitler.html .

Especially you, Mr. LaBarbera