My sister attended a funeral a few weeks ago. The organist and beloved choir teacher from our childhood church had passed away. I couldn't make it, so she gave me updates on the people she saw. "Brenda has four kids, and she wants you to call her. Chris and Joanne are still together. Frank lost a lot of weight." She finished and had a sudden afterthought, "Do you remember Ben? The tall skinny guy?" I thought for a moment, "Oh yeah of course. Ellen's older brother." "He's gay," she announced.
I wasn't surprised. Although it never occurred to me that Ben was gay when we were younger, when my sister said so it made sense somehow. Ben also confessed to her that he tried for years to "pray the gay away," but he's done trying to transfigure himself now. He is openly gay and openly Christian, and that's that.
For the past fifty years or so, homosexuals have had a choice: you can be a devout Christian or you can be gay, but you cannot be both (before that, being openly gay wasn't much of an option). Some churches have overturned this ideology. Ben and I are fortunate members of the Episcopal Church, which does permit open homosexuality, even for clergy. But Catholic and Evangelical churches continue to profess that homosexuality is a choice. Believe it or not, some homosexual members of these churches feel a stronger tie to their religion than their sexual orientation and aren't willing to change to a more liberal church. (The New York Times wrote an article about this conundrum called "Living the Good Lie").
Then there are a brave few who will not give up their beliefs or their same-sex love. One of those courageous people is Spazz. Spazz, born Danielle Gaulthier, is a punk lesbian and Evangelical Christian in one determined young woman. Born and raised in North Carolina, Spazz is the subject of a documentary called Radical Love. The film chronicles Spazz's devastation when her girlfriend leaves her for a man and then goes on to join an anti-gay church. This sends Spazz on a search for a new love and an accepting spiritual home.
The documentary's director, Hillevi Loven, discusses why she chose Spazz as her subject, "When I met Spazz, she was just seventeen and I knew hers was a story that needed to be told. Her journey embodied stories of struggle and change that I had observed across the evangelical communities in the U.S. She herself was a bundle of youthful contradictions, the founder of the first Gay-Straight Alliance at her high school, and a God-loving, loyal daughter who wanted to please most everyone she met. She was also simply a great girl, with a huge heart, looking for true love, like so many teenage girls."
Part of me wants Spazz to move to New York City, where she will be welcomed with open arms, but I realize that's not the point. The point is to open the minds and arms of people in North Carolina -- amongst other places. Spazz sweetly says, "I'm a child of God, but I'm still gay."
Click here to see the film's trailer and to contribute to the cause of Radical Love.
Follow Samara O'Shea on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SamaraOShea
Josh D. Scheinert: Catholic Schools Banning Gay-Straight Alliances: The Buck Stops Here... Literally
It is, in fact, the rule.
(If you don't believe me , look up "Hijra" and how they treat people who identify as that in India, we live in a sad, sad world. )
Personally, I'm as glad I was called by other Gods, ...I dunno if you can call it 'brave' to stay with churches that abuse you and seek to drag us back to the oppression of the past, ...seems to me more like Stockholm Syndrome and why battered people stay in abusive relationships. You can see the verbal abuse right here on this very forum.
Signed,
Elektro of Houstonia
You may not approve and think it's silly, but it's punk. And since you ask why anyone would take someone seriously when they adopt a punk name, why not? If it makes them happy and doesn't hurt anyone? Since you're asking about her motivations, why are you being judgmental? Why not just accept people who are different from you?
The 'Spazz' thing is kind of being 'punk rock,' or trying to be, though it sounds kinda like damage, too.
Street names and the like are can be a lot more authentic than imposed ones, for the precise reason you're trying to deny her the dignity of naming herself.
Your wallowing in superstition is a case in point.
There is a huge difference between cultural identity (i.e. “Gay") and sexual orientation (homosexual). A difference Official Gay Culture, and heterosexual stereotypes, completely ignore.
Cultural identity is ACQUIRED. Sexual orientation is NATURAL, biologically determined.
To BE homosexual is not the same thing as to ACT “Gay”.
It might be easier to ACT Gay in New York but one IS still homosexual every place else on earth.
There are extents to which 'acting gay' is actually often a fairly natural outgrowth of actually being gay, at least among the *wider* culture, (for many people, anyway,) which doesn't mean they're a straightjacket or things which shouldn't indeed be celebrated.
For instance, a lot of how women and girls are expected to behave is rather heavily about being attractive and non-threatening to *men,* ...a lot of lesbians will in fact not bother with much of that, and pursue their own interests regardless of if they're 'supposed' to. Which leads, along with a lot of history, to elements of 'butch' in the 'culture' even if most lesbians aren't 'butches,' per se. Still, there's those stereotypes that get noticed cause that's what people expect to see, and every time they do, go, 'Yep, lesbians are like *that,*' ....Confirmation bias.
Still, it's a mistake to assume that it's just an idea some lesbian had that everyone decided to imitate over and over: it's something there's often a reality behind. Your body language and speech might change *too,* if you were surrounded by unwanted sexual advances from men, talked over all the time, not 'benefitting' from 'straight culture' of women's 'helplessness,' etc.
Whether rebelling or conforming, whether "butch" or "femme", it's still a cultural identity. That behavior does not predate or change the inherent sexual orientation of the organism (i.e. homosexual).
I'm saying that to BE homosexual but, on the other hand, ACT "Lesbian" or "Gay" are NOT the same thing.
Like race, sexual orientation is an inherent biological trait or characteristic that is completely independent from Cultural Identity -- the CONDITIONED expression of that trait.
To argue for the conflation of the two is biologically reductive. Consider this parallel: would anyone argue that the culturally specific behavior of ALL American Black people is biologically determined -- meaning those behaviors have no origin as a response to racist culture? What about Black people in Europe or Africa who do not exhibit those same behaviors?
Like sexual orientation, race is a biological trait that preceeds the origin of "culture". Both are biological traits that exist independent from and outside culturally imposed identities and behaviors in different parts of the world.
In a nutshell: A homosexual is a homosexual. Whether rebelling or conforming, whether "butch" or "femme", behavior is a choice -- a Cultural Identity constructed by adaptation to societal mores, structures and pressure.