Whenever a gay Mormon hits the media spotlight, I follow their story. Why? Because each story unfolds differently and reminds me that what we all want from life is a good life. (Another reason is I feel more and more relieved as I see attitudes and understanding change: Mormon families are becoming more and more accepting and the LDS church is becoming less and less harsh.) Recently, Jimmy Hales (the gay Mormon who hit the spotlight after filming himself coming out) shared this song, and the song took me down memory lane.
People who haven’t asked questions about how I got to where I am might assume I got to where I am because I fornicated and lost touch with God, or that I drank alcohol, or that I drank coffee, or that I had some secret party life I didn’t tell anyone about. Hopefully, this blog post will shed light on what actually happened. (And I’ll add a similar warning that this is the path I chose that was right for me and may not be right for everyone).
“I never thought this would be my story.”
When I took Russian courses and the topic of gay marriage came up, I never thought I’d be walking down the streets of Alexandria with a classmate and my husband.
When I back packed across Europe with a friend from the mission, I never thought I’d be walking the Freedom Trail in Boston with her and my husband.
When I walked the streets of Estonia with a mission companion, I never thought I’d attend a soccer game with him and my fiancé.
“However we go, we’ll hear ‘this is wrong’”
When I was alone with my religious beliefs, I heard it was wrong just to be me.
When I found people who were like me, they said it was wrong to be around gays.
“I’m used to being pushed away, so I’m not used to this… Sitting here we both feel this is actually real, not a fantasy.”
My religion taught me that when I fell in love, my life would be full of darkness and I’d get AIDS and die (slight exaggeration, but you get the point). What actually happened was I was full of happiness, and my family noticed. Not to be too gay about it, but this is what it was like:
That video clip is the opposite of an exaggeration (an underexageration?). I had never understood love songs. I had never understood gooshy movies. I didn’t understand what the big deal was. And that all changed in an instant and ushered in new questions, one of which was: If Mormons were wrong about love, are they wrong about other things too?
I’m not suggesting anyone question their faith in the Mormon church. I am suggesting that being a gay Mormon is a challenging and complex situation that isn’t understood well enough right now. In short, I agree with Jimmy:
“This needs to change; we need your help, even if sympathy is all you can offer.”
Gay Mormons (currently and formerly affiliated with the LDS Church) are talking up a storm on social media about Boyd K. Packer’s recent speech to LDS youth. Allies have also joined in the discussion. Believe it or not, allies reside on both sides of the affiliation fence. Despite differences of affiliation with the LDS Church, conversations reveal gay Mormons and their allies are torn. Some voiced concern over the conflict of supporting Boyd K. Packer as a prophet, seer, and revelator but not agreeing with his position (or more appropriately his tone and attitude) on gay issues. Others voiced full support of his views and vowed to stand by him. For example, (Gay) Mormon Guy blogged about Packer’s controversial speech from October of 2010; the post went viral (in Mormon communities and by Mormon standards). I saw it a bunch in my newsfeed on Facebook. Mormons were saying things like this:
See. Not all people who suffer from same-gender attraction are offended by Elder Packer’s talk. Because his words touched the life of this guy, that means Packer is a prophet, and because he’s a prophet that means everything he says is right.
I’m not being critical of Packer’s position as a leader of the LDS Church, and I don’t want it to come across as calling his position as a prophet, seer, and revelator into question either. The truth of those facts is not relevant for this discussion. I simply want to point out the conflict, talk about why it’s an important conflict, and discuss the consequences. First, it is important to understand the larger picture behind the controversy that is Boyd K. Packer.
I actually didn’t find recent talk to seminary students all that controversial. At least not the transcript. As someone in social media pointed out, his facial expression are the controversy. If you want to go to all the trouble, pull up the talk here, skip all the boring stuff and jump to about 42:00 where he starts talking in euphemisms about the gay stuff. Pat attention to his facial expression at 43:19. If you don’t want to go to all the trouble, here’s a screen shot of his face at that point.
Boyd K. Packer of the LDS Church gives a disgusted look while talking to youth about so-called gays and lesbians
Aside from looking pretty old and not so well, I didn’t find the facial expression too problematic. But it doesn’t matter what that facial expression communicates to me. What does the facial expression communicate to young, closeted gay Mormon kids? It’s hard to know, but my own experience with Packer helps me understand what effect his look of disgust might have on them.
In a pamphlet To Young Men Only, Packer shares an experience he had as a mission president in which a young missionary “floored” his companion and replied, “Well, thanks. Somebody had to do it, and it wouldn’t be well for a General Authority to solve the problem that way.” The details of the experience aren’t totally clear, but it is obvious that one missionary is gay (the one who was “floored”) and the other is not (the one who “floored” the other). When that portion of the pamphlet was read to me in a priesthood meeting as a kid (shortly after my bishop at the time learned that I am gay), I remember how I felt and what I thought:
“Is someone going to ‘floor’ me when they find out I’m gay? Am I safe at church? Will my bishop pat them on the back like Elder Packer patted this missionary on the back?”
I became a little anxious about going to church. I had a difficult time interpreting that talk, as a kid, as anything but a license (from a man who speaks with God) to hurt and harm. It scared me to think God, as dictated by one of his servants, wanted my peers to beat the gay out of me. And then what all the guys in my church group who seem gay but probably aren’t gay? Will God help them know the difference between those who are gay and those who seem gay? Or will they just beat up whoever they want and then say, “Eh, it’s okay. This is what God wants (because that’s what his servants want).”
Some pointed out the Church spoke out against bullying gay, lesbian, and bisexual youth and therefore it’s not right to say the Church condones bullying. I understand this point, and I might argue for the same point except for one detail: it says nothing about how kids will react. Just because the Church comes out and says they don’t support or condone bullying does not mean that every gay, lesbian, or bi youth in the church will automatically feel safe nor does it mean they are immune to depression and suicide.
The more I think on this topic, the more I realize LDS Church culture is rife with microaggressions against gays and lesbians. What are microaggressions? Per MicroAggressions.com, microaggressions are about the response “it’s not a big deal”. Maybe you’ve had that response as you’ve read over this. “It’s not a big deal, Ryan. No one is dying here.” Well, this is also about how your power and privilege prevent you from understanding the big deal. It’s about how you remind people in the most subtle ways that they are different and not respectable.
Consider the microaggressions from an interview Packer referenced in his speech. The interview was done by Larry King on President Gordon B. Hinckley. Here’s a small clip.
We aren’t anti-gay; we’re pro-marriage
We know they (gays and lesbians) have a problem
So-called gays and lesbians
They have to discipline themselves
It wouldn’t be right for a General Authority to solve the problem that way
If you still don’t see how this is aggressive, consider replacing “gay” with “black” or “women” or “feminist” or some other group.
We aren’t anti-black; we’re pro-white
We know women have a problem
So-called feminists
Feminists have to discipline themselves
It wouldn’t be right for a General Authority to solve the problem with an atheist that way
What are the consequences? Gay Mormons (and many of their allies) will continue to either leave the Church or be kicked out of the Church. Some would argue this is what should happen and this is what makes the world a better place: drive out everything “evil”. Drive out everyone you don’t agree with so you can be surrounded by those who think, act, and believe like you. If that doesn’t work, blame it on the devil; surely he has a hold of their souls. In other words, don’t communicate to them how awesome they are, don’t accept them, don’t tolerate them, and let them continue to be depressed. Who knows. You might get what you wished for: one fewer gay/lesbian member of your congregation and belief. You just might succeed at driving them away.
Next time Boyd K. Packer makes a controversial remark or judgmental look about so-called gays and lesbians, or someone like Gordon B. Hinckley is interviewed by Larry King, or a pamphlet similar to To Young Men Only is published, or a young man or woman weeps in church pews because he or she has no one to turn to, consider the consequences of microaggressions.
Ira Glass interviewed a gay Mormon (Benny) on This American Life about his first crush and the lengths he went to to confront the person he was crushing on. The episode (#450) is titled So Crazy it Just Might Work. You can listen to it here.
gay Mormon conversation heart
Several themes are confronted in the interview. One is acknowledging to yourself that you aren’t attracted to women but to men. This part of the episode was like a walk down memory lane and helped me recall the time of life when I was uncertain about what was going on in the attraction/orientation department. Fortunately it was a long process for me. I realized early on that my peers talked about girls the way I felt about guys. It took some time before I was able to say “I’m gay” out loud, a little more time before I could write it to another person, even more time before I could say it to another person. And it’s taken decades to get to the point where it no longer matters to me what people think. Even then, I have occasional relapses. The first person I officially came out to (after my parents) was my friend “Jewel” in 9th grade. She was the only non-Mormon friend I had at the time. I wrote it to her in a note during geography class, and our teacher quickly confiscated the note after she read it. To this day I’m not sure whether the teacher read the note or threw it away.
Another theme touched on in the interview is dealing with your first crush and figuring out what all of that means. I don’t think I developed any real crushes until after my teenage years. At least not the kind of crush Benny referred to–the type of crush that completely consumes you. And even then, that crush paled in comparison to how I felt/feel about Dan. Early on in our relationship I used every free moment to keep in contact with Dan whether via text messages, email, or sneaking away from work or school for a break. Like Benny, I was (and still am) willing to pack up and head out at the drop of the hat if it meant I could see Dan. It’s funny what love does to you.
A theme that neither Benny nor Ira Glass discuss in great detail is what it’s like to be gay, in the closet, Mormon, and in love. I have a great deal of compassion for openly gay (believing) Mormons. It’s a difficult place to be in and no one really tells you how to process the feelings associated with crushes. Often times it feels like nothing really adds up: gay feelings are supposed to be carnal and devilish and not at all the same feelings you hear straight people sing about on the radio. God would never let you feel for another man the way straight people feel for each other. The feelings must be lust and must be fabricated by the devil himself; he’s trying to catch you in one of his snares. Other times it feels like no one really understands: the real gays seem to be on guard and maybe even threatened by your presence and/or religiosity, other gay Mormons seems to be defensive about why they aren’t open with family and friends, and the regular (straight) Mormons can’t always wrap their minds around the gay.
And that’s part of the story that’s super interesting. Benny lived with a straight, believing Mormon roommate named Parker who seemed completely supportive and understanding of Benny as he figured things out. Parker was willing to go pretty great (literal) distances with Benny to help him figure out the gay crush thing. That’s not something you hear about much. You’ll understand a little better when you learn what Parker was willing to go for his gay Mormon friend Benny on This American Life–something so crazy it just might work.
Years ago I participated in an online discussion forum for members of the LDS Church who “struggle” with “same-sex” or “same-gender attraction”. A member of the discussion forum shared an epiphany with the group that went something like this (not an exact quote):
I finally understand. The reason God has asked his prophets [leaders of the LDS Church] to speak out against same-sex marriage is because if same-sex marriage is allowed then God’s children will have fewer families to be born into.
To set the stage a little, not all faithful members of the LDS Church agree with the movement to stop same-sex marriage from becoming legal, and this is particularly true among faithful members of the Church who identify as gay, lesbian, and same-sex or same-gender attracted. I was met with some hostility when I pointed out the epiphany wasn’t logical. I think I was accused of being apostate because I didn’t agree with the logic.
I understand the author was likely speaking of the possibility that if gay marriage becomes legal, then quite possibly some men (gay) and women (lesbian) who would otherwise pursue opposite-sex marriages might pursue same-sex marriages instead. But the argument isn’t really logical because whether or not same-sex marriage is legal, straight couples (at least the ones who can and choose to along with the few accidentals) will continue to have children. In other words, the number of existing straight relationships will probably not increase of decrease when already existing gay relationships are legally recognized. Maybe there’s something I’m not understanding, so please comment if you would like to add to the discussion.
While discussing this on Facebook, someone pointed out the same argument (quoted above). I really like the response a friend made to this argument (minus Katy Perry being spoken of in bad light):
[Kim Kardashian, Sinead O’Connor, and Katy Perry] each publicly married and then publicly divorced in really short time (72 days, 18ish days, and a year or something like that). Those people threaten and destroy the sanctity of marriage and the sanctity of families. I’m not sure how you and Dan’s committed relationship affect my relationship with my spouse or theoretical children or the sanctity of my marriage.
Why is this discussion relevant? Dan talked about this in a beautiful post about my family and how relationships are often challenged because of the teaching of principle of tough love. Perhaps “tough love” is destroying families more than my relationship to Dan is destroying families. An anonymous blogger shared his fear that as the Church continues to argue that gay relationships are destroying families, families with a gay member will continue to be destroyed. Perhaps lobbying against certain kinds of families is destroying families. Years ago I participated in a discussion with a family who lost a family member to suicide. The note the family member left suggested he committed suicide due to the Church’s participation in the political process and ensuing discussions that took place within the walls LDS chapels. They were brought to tears when they talked about what it was like when they learned the Church was advocating for Prop. 8 and encouraging members of the Church to get involved. They worried that more gay Mormons would commit suicide. They were also deeply conflicted: they support the leaders of the LDS Church as their spiritual leaders but they also lost a child because of the Church’s involvement.
This discussion is also relevant because Republican presidential candidates are making similar arguments. Freedom to Marry asserted that Perry, Romney, and Gingrich (respectively) “declared that committed couples wanting to marry are part of a war against religion”, adoption agencies would be shut down if they don’t adopt out to same-sex couples, and that it is not possible to comprehend gay families as families so “we want to make it possible to have those things that are most intimately human between friends”. Rick Santorum is the poster child for the Republican party claiming he will forcibly divorce gay married couples.
Maybe the real threats to religious freedom, family, and child birth are not gay couples, but the people fighting against gay couples. In other words, maybe fighting against my freedoms decreases your freedoms: you can still have babies and go to church while Dan and I go to school, pay our bills, and file our (separate-but-equal) tax returns.
Finally, this discussion is relevant because, let’s be honest, the arguments against same-sex marriage aren’t really about adoption rights, the first amendment, or even tradition, as Cary Crall posited in BYU’s Daily Universe (which, of course, was later pulled from the paper). Crall asked what it’s all about and asserted:
The real reason is that a man who most of us believe is a prophet of God told us to support the amendment. We must accept this explanation, along with all its consequences for good or ill on our own relationship with God and his children here on earth. Maybe then we will stop thoughtlessly spouting reasons that are offensive to gays and lesbians and indefensible to those not of our faith.
An argument for traditional biblical marriage?
If it is your belief that God doesn’t want same-sex marriage, come out of the closet and say so. I’m okay with that. You must also realize that even if that is your belief, we live in a pluralistic society; not everyone shares your beliefs and it is not okay to require that everyone uphold your beliefs. If same-sex marriage becomes legal, you can still have babies and go to church.
Evergreen International, a support network for Latter-day Saints (Mormons) that encourages sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) and is an unofficial auxiliary of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, published a story by “Ben Newman” about how gay men can become straight. It’s a rather succint explanation of the theory behind environmental factors that some purport cause homosexuality. Evergreen claims the author of the article is the founder of People Can Change, which hosts conversion camps for LDS men called Journey Into Manhood. Here is a link to a PDF of the article and here is a link to the article on Evergreen.
This story from the New York Times is all too familiar in the gay Mormon community: a gay man, who doesn’t understand his attractions for the same sex, marries a straight woman. (These marriages are referred to as mixed-orientation marriages.) When women are viewed as the ticket to heaven (or exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom), the situation can be quite complex. Emily Pearson, daughter of Carol Lynn Pearson, tells about her experience and the experience of her mom in her I’m an Ex-Mormon video.
In this post I would like to describe, in a little more detail, my experiences as a same-sex or same-gender attracted (gay) Mormon through the story of Steven Wilson (as interviewed by Steven Densley Junion of the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research). In short, I would like to tell the story of nearly every gay Mormon and their pursuit of happiness. In the interview (Why would a gay man with AIDS join the [LDS] Church), Wilson describes his experiences of meeting a returned missionary at a gay bar, eventually moving in with him, joining the Church, and how his association with members of the LDS faith helped him abandon “the homosexual lifestyle”.
Wilson’s story isn’t completely unfamiliar to me. I attended support groups (e.g., LDS Family Services, Evergreen) and firesides intended to fortify my relationship with the Church, its leaders, and members. At Evergreen support groups, I learned that if I want to stay in the Church I need to stay single and celibate and wait for the resurrection or marry or woman.
As I became more entangled in Evergreen and other support groups, I learned that it’s possible to pray away the gay. The solution to the gay problem is simple: keep every commandment and get plenty of (nonsexual) healthy touch from other men. Voila! You’re cured. Let me explain the concept of healthy touch (for those who aren’t familiar). The theory behind male homosexuality is gay men didn’t bond enough with their fathers and/or male peers and sexualized their need for male affection to make up for it. So, you need to bond with other men, even get in some “healthy touch” (e.g., hugs, cuddles, holding), to mitigate the sexual attractions. (Be warned: the next video clip has some vulgarity).
I was actually invited to a “holding party” once. Well, two holding parties (but the second wasn’t advertised as a holding party). I didn’t go to the first one because when others described their experiences, it freaked me out. I was informed that I would be held by an older member of the group (as a father might hold a young son in his arms) and I would talk to him about my experience: how does it feel, what am I thinking, what am I feelings, etc. The experiences of others included talking about how it aroused them and learning to “talk through it” rather than fantasize about it. The other holding party didn’t involve older men, so I went. It was an emotional roller coaster as I watched guys (some of whom were engaged to girls at the time) snuggle up with any and everyone present. The sexual tension was high. And what should I have expected? A bunch of gay Mormon guys who aren’t getting any visiting a place far away from home (what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas kind of a thing).
I learned there are a number of additional organizations to help facilitate change in orientation:
Although not all of these organizations are designed to cure same-sex attraction, many gay Mormons recommended these programs to me as helpful in resolving the underlying causes of “the gay”. The most interesting to me is Journey into Manhood (JiM). For those wanting to know exactly what happens at Journey into Manhood weekends, Ted Cox describes his experience with alarming detail. Here’s a thoughtful perspective on JiM by the Original Mohomie. And for the lazy reader, here’s a little clip about JiM:
It’s weird to watch that video clip because I know most of the guys interviewed.
At firesides, I learned that if I want to stay in the Church I need to hate everything that is or might possibly be gay and fight against it. A man at one particular fireside shared a story similar to Wilson’s experience: he lived “the homosexual lifestyle”, turned away from his life as a porn star and addict, and converted to the LDS faith. Like Wilson, he referred to “the gay lifestyle” as a lifestyle of drugs, sex, and rock ‘n’ roll. He encouraged everyone present to avoid the very appearance of evil: don’t date members of the same sex, don’t do drugs, don’t drink alcohol; in short, don’t be gay. At the time, I had already begun dating and learned enough to know that “the gay lifestyle” he spoke of was nothing more than “his lifestyle“. I didn’t think it was fair to pass judgement on an entire group’s lifestyle based on personal experiences.
But I was used to judgement being passed. In Logan, I organized social events which later took on the name “Logansides” — firesides for gay Mormons in Logan, Utah. The firesides were intended to be nothing more than a social gathering for members of the LDS faith who are gay/lesbian or know someone who is gay/lesbian. Advertising was complicated: People not of the LDS faith thought I was starting an ex-gay ministry and people of the LDS faith thought I was spreading the infamous “gay agenda”. And then there were the ultra conservative gay Mormons who were vocal about the fact that I organized firesides and dated men (and eventually married). I learned for myself that it’s next to impossible to unite liberal and conservative Mormons when it comes to this social issue.
In short, what turned me off to the Mormon solution to the gay problem is the unkindness and intolerance experienced at the hand of gay Mormons. Oh, and none of these Mormons solutions I discussed made sense to me. Ultimately, these “solutions” led to an increase of unhappiness and frustration. Thus, I began my own pursuit of happiness that steered me away from the traditional gay Mormon path and away from experiences like those of Steven Wilson.
I didn’t think it was possible to accuse BYU of being too liberal in regards to their stance on social issues like homosexuality. I was wrong. Surprisingly, it seems their efforts to fight “the gay movement” were inspired by their experiences with their son when they learned he is gay. But don’t worry, he found the box that’s gay and crushed it (so now he isn’t gay any more).
Anyway, I wonder how many out there agree with Stephen and Janice Graham of the Standard of Liberty that BYU is too liberal on gay issues (I think I know how many disagree)…
“Whatever course you decide upon, there is always someone to tell you that you are wrong. There are always difficulties arising which tempt you to believe that your critics are right. To map out a course of action and follow it to an end requires courage.”
My critics, as of late, have been pretty forceful in communicating to me that speaking up means I want them to change their core beliefs, that I am not tolerant of their beliefs, or… I don’t really know what it is they think I think. Take this guy for example:
“your [sic] not changing anything, just making yourself look petty. There are some that believe homosexuality is a sexual perversion. Your [sic] can blog all you want about it, but you aren’t going to change their minds, and everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions.”
I agree with the last statement: everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions. That includes me. And I’d like to set the record straight on my own beliefs and opinions. I’ve never asked nor have I ever believed that Christians (or any other religion) need to change their beliefs on homosexuality. I just want to exist, go to work or school, come home, put my feet up, spend my free time with Dan, and enjoy all the other benefits other couples in my country enjoy. The only thing I’ve asked in regard to your religious beliefs is that if you believe in being kind to others (because that seems to be the core belief of most religions), that can include me (without threatening your right to worship how, where, or what you want).
A friend of mine made a good observation about similarities between gays and Mormons at his blog Listening to Who I am. He says “…the story of the rise of [San Francisco] as a gay capital of the US should resonate like crazy with Mormons. It’s the story of a people who were rejected by their families and friends, who left home and gathered in one place where they felt like they could more safely be themselves. One of the reasons the Mormon pioneers were persecuted was because people were very uncomfortable with the way early Mormons tried to redefine marriage.”
Do Mormons agree that persecution of early saints is similar to persecution of gays?
I suspect, based on a previous conversation on Facebook (above) and dialogue at the Daily Universe several years back (below), that many Mormons are not too keen on the idea that the persecution early Latter-day saints faced is similar to the persecution gays faced. Austin posted this article to which a BYU professor responded:
Maybe we need a different “call for compassion.” …Let’s have compassion on those who have been denigrated, pilloried and belittled for defending traditional marriage. Let’s have compassion on those who have been persecuted for daring to express family values in public. Let’s have compassion on those whose vehicles were vandalized and whose safety was threatened because they voted for Proposition 8 in California. …Let’s have compassion on the Boy Scouts of America whose United Way funds were cut because they would not bow to the sons of Sodom and the gods of Gomorrah. Let’s have compassion for those who are mocked for promoting the Family Proclamation.
Despite earlier evidences that turn me off to what Mormons might say on the subject, I’m still curious to know what Mormons think.
**UPDATE** 12/17/2011
I just recalled a letter to the editor in my local newspaper that hits on this topic. The letter was published in the Herald Journal written by Laloni Stott. The title of the letter is Gays not like early Mormons. Stott argued that early Mormons faced more persecution than gays. To support her claim she posited that opponents of Prop 8 in California retaliated against Mormons:
They were attacked in their cars. Their kids were targeted at their schools.
I contacted her via Facebook for clarification on her points. In regard to persecution Mormons suffered at the hand of opponents of Prop 8, she said:
LDS Ward lists were distributed among antiprop 8 groups. The ward lists contained addresses and phone numbers along with the children in the families and their ages. I am assuming that is how they got the info about the kids at the schools. Many kids were confronted and taunted for their “hateful” religious beliefs by their peers at school.
Phone calls were made to LDS households with hateful diatribe, crude language, etc.
The posters that were put on the lawns of some of the LDS people had graphic sexual pics with profane language.
I had a brother-in-law peacefully gather with some supporters of prop 8 and they held signs up on a corner. They had stuff thrown at them and they were pushed around and spit on by some who got out of their cars. They were also yelled at with some of the grossest language.
As some LDS members left church they had protesters of the LDS church standing at the exits of the parking lot hitting the cars, throwing things, and there was a lot of yucky language describing what they thought of the LDS church and their members…
I have ancestors who gave every last thing up, left their homes, lost family members, lost feet, etc. as they crossed the plains. They were trying to get away from those who were murdering and raping their families. Their homes and buildings were being torched… I do not see ANY similarity.
So what do you think? Can Mormons and gays resonate with one another over the persecution they faced?