Peterson Toscano's Open Salon Blog

Rumors of my blogging demise are greatly exaggerated

Mon, 21 May 2012 18:05:28 -0400

Seems I am no longer a blogger. Ah, crap, I just blogged that, so I guess technically I am still blogging. Bother!

I have not written in this blog for many months. In part it is because I experienced a significant shift in the focus of my work. Since 2003, I worked primarily around ex-gay related issues. By 2007 I began to take on concerns and topics beyond my own sordid ex-gay past and the Homo No Mo Halfway House. With Christine Bakke I co-founded Beyond Ex-Gay, and raised awareness about the needs of ex-gay survivors. I also researched gender non-conforming Bible characters and took on political topics like sexism . Still I talked a lot about ex-gay stuff.

But by August of last year, things changed. Morgan Jon Fox premiered his film about the protests of Love in Action and the subsequent closing of this notorious anti-gay youth program. The film, This is What Love in Action Looks Like, is now available on DVD through Amazon and can be viewed on Hulu, Netflix, or purchased for download through iTunes. (Available in the UK on May 28)

By early fall I announced that the Love in Action adult residency program also shut down followed by a complete rebranding of the program. The former director of the program, John Smid, began to offer a series of apologies, and in awkward Obama-like evolving fashion is coming around to standing up for LGBTQ equality while renouncing his former anti-LGBTQ oppression. In essence Love in Action is no more, and, as a result, my story at last had become historical.

And the implosion of the ex-gay movement in North America continues at a deliciously rapid pace. The efforts of so many activists, bloggers, community organizers, and ex-gay survivors have paid off.

In the interim since I last blogged, I have really taken to Twitter, and now do micro-theology (Jesus Loves You! Mary’s Mother warned her about leaving her bedroom window open at night) and snarky tweets about the Radical Hetersexual Agenda. PLEASE follow my @p2son Twitter feed. This year I premiered a new play, Jesus Had Two Daddies, which is a ridiculously serious look at the Bible and faith. It is semi-autobiographical, but much less about my ex-gay experiences and much more about my faith and five year marriage to a woman. I also take on the Bible, and somehow end up only telling stories about bloody genitals (turns out there are a lot of those in the Good Book.)

I have begun to post YouTube videos again and have three new ones: Revealed! Why Some Christians are Stuck on the Gay Thing, Not Your Grandma’s Bible Lesson–Flying Bits, and Revealed: The Sin of Sodom!! Warning GROSS You can these and more over at my p2son YouTube page.

In regards to the ex-gay movement, I am pretty much done talking about it here in the USA, at least in English. I recognize that there is a huge need to address gay reparative therapy and ex-gay ministries in Latin America. While they diminish here in the US, many of the disgraced leaders, like Richard Cohen, have picked up their tents and pitched them in Mexico and beyond. Next week I will appear on the Cristina P’lante Spanish-language TV program on Telemundo, and will talk about the harm of anti-LGBTQ treatments. I have also started a Spanish language Twitter feed–@UnSantoRareza and continue to blog in Spanish at Dos Equis.

Finally, I have resumed podcasting with Zack Ford. Through Queer and Queerer, Zack a vocal queer atheist, and I, a humble quiet Quaker talk about LGBTQ issues, religion, and pop culture. We try to keep the programs lively and around 30 minutes. Oh and some of my characters, like Marvin Bloom, show up. Wait until you hear about the new Ex-Straight Movement!

After the seismic shift of last summer and early fall with all the changes in my former ex-gay world, I sort of crashed and dropped off the radar a bit. I needed to regroup, and needed to assess my post-ex-gay life. I also snuggled in deeper with my partner and soon-to-be-husband, Glen Retief. There is a time to fight for a cause. There is a time to shift focus. There is a time to live one’s life. There is a time to seek new direction. I feel grateful for these important recent shifts in my life.

Ex-Gay Survivor? New Survey to log in your experiences

Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:10:16 -0400

Back in 2007 when Christine Bakke and I founded Beyond Ex-Gay we discussed how those of us who have been through reparative therapies and ex-gay ministries need an opportunity to put on the record what we did, why we did it, what were the outcomes. So many other people have told our stories for us, but in the act of sharing it for ourselves, we can get more clarity and get a little bit more beyond our often harmful experiences to alter our orientation or gender differences.

Over at the Beyond Ex-Gay site, you can now take a quick survey about your experiences. You can take it anonymously if you wish. I just took the survey myself last night, and found it easy to navigate and refreshingly freeing. Below is a description of the survey.

We’ve all heard the declarations that “thousands and thousands of people have been healed of their homosexuality.” Where do those numbers come from? At Beyond Ex-Gay (bXg) we know firsthand that the thousands who have attended ex-gay groups never “changed.” Worse yet, our ex-gay experiences caused us tremendous
harm. So to counter the rhetoric, we have created a new survey specifically for ex-gay survivors.

It’s short, and you can stay as anonymous as you’d like. If you can’t find answers that fit your experience, we provide plenty of empty boxes for you to express yourself as accurately as possible. Your willingness to be counted will ultimately stand in stark contrast to the misinformation that ex-gay promoters use to convince people that “change is possible” and harmless to pursue.

Did you try to suppress or change your sexual orientation or gender differences through an ex-gay ministry, reparative therapy, or on your own? Please take the survey.

Some Thoughts on Forgiveness

Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:10:29 -0400

Lately I have been faced with the opportunity to extend forgiveness to someone responsible for harming me, some of my loved ones, and many other people–some I know–most I do not. One thing I have concluded is I can offer private, personal forgiveness for someone who directly harmed me (particularly if I wish to continue in relationship with that person.) But sometimes, as a community, we are confronted with the issue of public forgiveness for someone who has injured many in very public ways.

In the case of the personal offense, I can, if I choose, extend forgiveness. It will likely serve as an essential step in rebuilding a broken relationship. It is most effective if the offender communicates regret over their actions, can articulate what they have done, and actually requests forgiveness. My forgiveness does not mean I can (or should) trust the person again immediately or ever. Forgiveness does not give me permission to overlook reality. Also, personal forgiveness is often a private matter.

The public forgiveness is complicated mainly because I cannot forgive someone on the behalf of others. I can personally let go of my resentment towards an individual or a group, but it is not my place to forgive them for all that they have done. Nor do I think it does anyone any good when we immediately offer forgiveness in reaction to an announcement by someone who has begun to consider his previous harmful actions.

Restorative justice requires more than a quickie public exchange–

“I am sorry.”

“You are forgiven.”

Immediate forgiveness and absolution distracts from the necessary cathartic process for both the offender and those harmed. This is not a matter about being too hard on someone like John Smid, who has publicly apologized for his work promoting and providing ex-gay treatment and has begun to unpack his former beliefs. Rather it is a validation of the harm people suffered and the need for an honest and often painful process. While many of us rejoice in happy endings and prefer to skip over the conflict to the resolution, usually its the complicated, messy process that results in a satisfying ending.

When someone, like John Smid, announces a change of heart and seeks to make amends, (after overseeing a residential program that brought misery and confusion to hundreds if not thousands,) I believe that reconciliation with the community he harmed is a process that needs to be conducted thoughtfully and sensitively. If a family member has abused others and then repents, it is complex and difficult work to bring that person back into family life and gatherings. Not impossible, but I believe we must not overlook history or the gravity of offenses committed.

Also, when someone, who regrets their harmful and abusive behaviors, requests entry into groups inhabited by former victims or wishes to be a spokesperson on behalf of those harmed, he has work to do–much to learn and unlearn. In the case of John Smid, it makes much more sense that he speak to his former ex-gay peers still working to undermine the health, well-being, and rights of LGBTQ people, than to present at gay Christian events.

Perhaps as the dust settles from his recent announcements, he is beginning to see what his role can be in the public discourse and in bringing about justice. Yesterday he appeared on MSNBC’s Hard Ball with Chris Matthew and advocated extending equal rights to LGBTQ people. I find that more valuable to me than a written apology. In insisting on rights for the people he formerly oppressed, John Smid pursues restorative justice.

As Sally, a Facebook friend, concluded:

Seems to me that forgiveness is a process of the heart. Reconciliation is a commitment to a relational process.

Finally, I do not believe anyone should ever feel obligated to forgive. If an ex-gay leader approaches me directly and says, “I am sorry,” I am free to respond, “Yes, and you have good reason to be. Now do something about it.” This may sound harsh, but in pursuing restorative justice, peace does not come about by overlooking wrongs. It requires action–amends–a necessary step that not only acknowledges those who have been oppressed, but may also lead to the liberation of oppressors weighed down by their cruel and misguided beliefs and actions.

Tagged: Apology, ex-gay, Forgiveness, John Smid, Love in Action

This is What an Apology Looks Like

Thu, 13 Oct 2011 06:10:35 -0400

Darlene Bogle, Michael Bussee, Jeremy Marks

Back in June 2007 I had the privilege to work with three former ex-gay leaders as they prepared to issue public apologies concerning their roles in providing and promoting reparative therapy. At the LGBT community center in LA, I witnessed this historic public offering of regret. As co-founder of Beyond Ex-Gay and working in partnership with Soulforce, I believed the apologies would provide ex-gay survivors with meaningful words from some of the very people responsible for causing the harm.

Writing an apology often proves challenging. How difficult to admit wrong and particularly to name that wrong without justification or minimizing. As someone who spent 17 years immersed in various treatments designed to alter my sexual orientation (gay) and gender difference (fem), I felt relieved and released in part by the group apology and the individual statements of regret offered by Jeremy Marks, Darlene Bogle, and Michael Bussee. What struck me was the detail in which they described their wrongs as well as their genuine remorse. Previously all three had been working for years to undo the damage while contributing positively to LGBT lives, so their words were grounded in action.

This summer I received a remarkable e-mail from John Smid, the former director of Love in Action (LIA.) I attended this residential ex-gay program in Memphis, TN for two years at great cost to me and my family, both financially and psychologically. I had heard that John was reaching out to former clients, so I was not surprised he contacted me.

John said he would like to take a stab at making amends, and I agreed to read what he had learned since we last spoke in 2008. The apology he sent me, sounded sincere to me but incomplete. It lacked detail. It was written in the passive voice and repeated over and over the phrase, “I am sorry.” While I did not feel I could outright ignore John’s apology, I also could not honestly accept it as it was. So as an exercise for myself, I printed out John’s apology to me, read it closely, crossed out anything that sounded extraneous, wrote details in the margin, and began to play with language. (For instance, instead of the phrase, “I am sorry for…” I replaced it with “I acknowledge that…”)

I found the exercise useful to me, satisfying to consider words meaningful to me. Then I decided to take the unprecedented step of sending to John my version of his apology. I acknowledged to him how it must be difficult to question 22 years of work and conclude that it may have caused harm. I explained how I took the liberty to edit his original version and said, “This is an apology I believe I can accept. I do not know if it is one you are willing and able to give, but if nothing else, it served as a helpful exercise to me and you may find it useful as well.”

Below is the apology I fashioned from John’s first draft. I do not feel comfortable sharing his original, but it is similar to the public apology he issued in March of this year.

I understand that John is on a personal journey that includes questioning his beliefs, former work, and even his own identity. He also has had a very public role in providing and promoting ex-gay ministry. The program he oversaw was notorious for its shocking and abusive practices. Separating the personal from the public is important. I wish John the best in his life. I also recognize that history cannot be erased, and it does nothing to the strength of LGBTQ communities to overlook or minimize the wrongs against us. It also does not aid in the liberation of our oppressors to overlook or minimize painful past actions. In other words, writing an apology can prove challenging both to those giving and those hearing.

Using John Smid’s personal message to me, I composed an apology that is meaningful to me:

Peterson, I regret that through the teaching I offered at Love in Action (LIA,) through private conversations, in public forums, and in the media, I communicated directly and indirectly that lesbians and gays are sinful, dysfunctional, flawed, and inferior to heterosexuals.

At LIA my staff and I designed a program that used a drug and alcohol “addiction” model. Applying this addiction model to men and women who are gay, lesbian, bisexual,or transgender caused confusion, shame, and guilt. The model suggested that you and others were damaged goods and deceived. I now realize that the model I implemented focused on behavior modification. This focus was woefully ill-informed and unhelpful regarding gays. This model has caused harm to many people who came to us for help. In retrospect, I now see that the model was flawed. It relied on shame tactics and guilt-producing practices. I continued to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to the things I heard from those, like yourself, wounded by this model.

I regret designing, overseeing, and maintaining a program that brought confusion and pain, not only to you, but to many people through the years. I did not take the time to listen to you and others. I devalued your life experience and personal perspective.

I regret the flawed theology I taught and practiced. In suggesting that transformation would mean a change in sexual orientation, I brought further confusion into your life while you were at LIA. I taught that gays had wicked hearts. My theology and thinking
were wrong and negatively affected you and others under my care. I acknowledge the potential harm in teaching topics like “child development” to a hastily assembled group of people looking for informed answers. I have learned that this “one size fits all” approach caused confusion and guilt to participants at the Family and Friends Weekend.

Peterson, I harmed your parents through what my staff and I taught and communicated. I see now how much of what I said increased fear, shame, and guilt for parents who arrived to our program concerned for their children. As I look back today, I am grieved that I did not relieve the guilt and shame, rather I helped produce more through the meetings my staff and I facilitated. I now acknowledge that there is nothing that a parent does or does not do that creates a gay child. I regret that I taught or inferred this message and coerced parents into taking on inappropriate responsibility for their child’s orientation and gender differences and for insisting that there was something wrong with a gay orientation and in gender differences. I renounce these views and have ceased teaching this material to groups.

I now understand and acknowledge that my sexuality is unique to me. I have chosen to partner with Vileen, my wife, a partnership that works for me and for her. But for the vast majority of LIA participants, such a relationship would be unrealistic, and would likely cause pain and heartache for all parties involved. In my work, I never acknowledge the differences in people’s orientations and personalities. I never acknowledged the existence of bisexuals, who may successfully partner with someone of either sex. In my teaching and testimony, I insisted that a heterosexual marriage was superior to a union between two men or two women. I elevated heterosexuality and devalued the lives, relationships, and spirituality of lesbians gays.

Through the LIA program, my teaching, and program activities, I insisted that clients must adhere to traditional gender roles and society’s assumptions regarding how men and women express themselves through their appearance, dress, hobbies, jobs, and relationships. My teaching stifled individuality and authenticity. I was arrogant and assumed that I had all of the right answers. I acted as though I had a special line to God and somehow felt that I knew what God would or would not do. I wrongly defended myself when someone called me or my ministry legalistic. In arrogance, I responded to people who criticized me, my teaching, or LIA program practices.

While I cannot say that the 22 years as program director of LIA were a waste or that it was not productive to some in part, I am now aware, and I continue to grow in awareness, that much of my teachings, beliefs, and practices at LIA were wrong. As a result, I confused and wounded many people. Many, perhaps most, left LIA hopeless as a result of the services we provided under my supervision. I now understand and see that I was often more consumed with what I believed you had done that was wrong and sinful, and likely communicated that I was not interested in YOU as a person, or how you were feeling.

I regret my actions. I acknowledge my mistakes and harmful work.
Peterson, what can I do further to address the wrongs I have done? How can I demonstrate just how much I regret my actions and the consequences they brought to you and to others?

Love in Action shuts down residential program

Fri, 2 Sep 2011 10:09:00 -0400

According to the Love in Action Website the Memphis-based ex-gay group no longer operates it residential program:

Love In Action’s Residential program has been suspended indefinitely. Simply put, there is a significant need to bring all of LIA under one location for it to be more cost effective. We continue to counsel and grow through our 4-Day Intensives, Hourly Counseling, Conferences, Support Groups, and Church Assistance Program.

I am thrilled that the sun has finally set on this part of the program–one that housed and harassed many of us these past 30 years. While they will continue to offer some limited services, it appears that they have begun to dismantle operations.

What better way to celebrate than you see the new documentary by LIA protester and filmmaker Morgan Jon Fox. This is What Love in Action Looks Like chronicles what happened when a 16 year old boy was forced to attend Love in Action and how his friends responded and ultimately help shut down the youth program back in 2007. Or pop in your DVD of Doin’ Time in the Homo No Mo Halfway Housse, now a HISTORICAL satire of the Love in Action program. =D