This is part of a Wednesday series on Goddess spirituality and political activism.
I have a weird, morbid fascination with the "ex-gay" movement. I’ve never had the slightest temptation to join up; I was raised in a liberal family and church (UCC) and never felt any particular angst about being bi. Yet I follow their soap-opera-like antics, and have some sympathy for the people who turn to them, looking for a change that’s never going to succeed, sort of like the Goddess Laima .
Laima is a Baltic Goddess of fate. She has a feathered cloak that turns her into a swan. One day, however, she landed by a beautiful lake, and took human form for a swim. Spying the beautiful maiden, a human prince stole the feathered cloak and hid it. Then he approached Laima and asked her to marry him. Blushing, she asked for her cloak back. The prince refused, and offered her his own cloak to wear instead. Without her feathers, Laima was unable to take her true form as a swan.
She married the prince, and he did his best to make her happy. He treated her well, and in time they had children. Yet every so often, Laima would see a swan fly past, and she would remember her true self, and long for the freedom of flight.
Sometimes Laima returned to the lake where she had met the prince. One day she stumbled across the place where he had hidden her feathered cloak. As she pulled it around her shoulders, she felt her wings begin to sprout once more. She thought of the prince, and their children. She loved them, and did not wish to leave them heartbroken. But surely, she thought, a quick flight around the lake would do no harm.
As she felt the wind beneath her powerful wings, Laima knew she could no longer live as a creature that was not herself. She flew past the castle that had been her home, and she turned toward the distant mountains. As she passed, the prince looked up in time to see a single feather fall, and it floated down to his hand.
There are variations on this myth all over the world. Some of them end in death, like the pre-Disney version of "The Little Mermaid." Most end with the Goddess resuming her true form and returning to her own people, leaving behind a devastated spouse and children. Because no amount of wishful thinking can change her into something she’s not.
The right wing loves "ex-gay" programs; they can continue to preach homophobia while claiming to "love the sinner." Most of the programs (generally under the umbrella of Exodus ) are Christian-oriented, but there’s also NARTH (National Organization for Research and Treatment of Homosexuality), which tries to lend a scientific veneer. NARTH’s founder, the late Charles Socarides, was treated as an expert on homosexuality back in the 1960’s. NARTH’s theories haven’t changed since the then; they claim that same-sex attraction stems from sexual abuse or bad relationships with the same-sex parent. (With one exception: when Socarides’s son Richard came out of the closet, Daddy was quick to blame it on Richard’s deceased mother. Apparently still not cured, Richard Socarides went on to become the Clinton administration’s liaison to the GLBT community.)
"Ex-gay" propaganda to the outside world says that they can make you heterosexual, but when pressed, their longtime leaders will admit that they still "struggle" with same-sex attraction. Of course, long-time leaders are hard to find; they keep going ex-ex-gay (like Jeremy Marks, Michael Bussee, and Gary "not the actor" Cooper), getting caught in sex scandals (like Michael Johnston and Colin Cook), or getting photographed in a gay bar after spending 45 minutes "looking for the bathroom" (that would be John Paulk). And probably nothing damaged their already-crumbling reputation like Ted Haggard.
The harm done by "ex-gay" programs is considerable. Vulnerable people are lured in (and often induced to pay a whole lot of money) with promises of change. When people in these programs find that they’re still same-sex attracted, they blame themselves. Former Exodus leader Michael Bussee noted that these "failures" drove some people to suicidal thoughts; there’s at least one documented case where a man’s suicide note blamed his failure to turn straight.
Then there’s the collateral damage. Heterosexual marriage is revered as proof of success, but spouses and children are left hurting and bewildered when a marriage built on false pretenses falls apart. And conferences for NARH and Exodus are filled with parents who are told that they are to blame for bad parenting, or that their children were sexually abused and they somehow missed it. (I’m a parent, and the thought of hearing this is beyond cruel.)
NARTH’s latest gimmick is that they’ve released a "new study" in a "peer-reviewed journal," using "100 years of research" to bolster their claims about changing orientation. Except, the journal is their own, the "peer review" consists of NARTH members agreeing on it (um, that’s not the scientific definition of peer review), and the "study" isn’t a study, it’s just a rehash of pretty much any anti-gay article they can find. As for the "100 years of research"....gee, what could be the problem with lifting some article with anti-gay theories that were cutting-edge 100 years ago?
The final damage done by "anti-gay" programs is political: they’ve managed to sell the argument that discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation is OK because GLBT people can change their orientation. But as Laima would tell you, that’s a change that only quacks believe in.