Chasing the Devil: Inside the Ex-Gay Movement is a new documentary available for download via IndiePixFilms.com for $14.95.
Here’s a preview:
According to film co-directors Bill Hussung & Mishara Canino-Hussung:
More than four years ago we set out to document the journeys of people belonging to the most politically incorrect subculture in America. The result is Chasing the Devil: Inside the Ex-Gay Movement. Spending time with those who claim to have changed their sexual orientation from gay to straight can be a bit of a paradigm rattling experience. We accept that identity is largely self-defined and acknowledge that sexuality can be fluid. Mick Jagger switches back and forth between men and women for much of the 1970s and defines jet setting chic. Self-defined identity and fluid sexuality are both left of center beliefs long associated with urban elites and secular progressives. Folks like most of those in the documentary film business.
But there’s a disconnect when this paradigm butts up agains the ex-gay movement. If we really believe identity is self-defined and sexuality fluid, then there’s nothing surprising, or offensive, about the x-gay ministries and reparative therapists claiming to ‘heal’ homosexuals of their unwanted desires. But we are surprised. And often offended. The central underpinning of gay identity is the belief that people are born gay and can’t change. The ex-gays challenge this belief. Their claims of having changed from gay to straight challenge our understanding of identity and tolerance. But are they living a lie?
I dispute the contention that ex-gays are politically incorrect. Quite the contrary: Thanks to Exodus, NARTH, and Focus on the Family, they have become a new epitome of political correctness. They are:
- successful in commandeering conservative faith communities’ discussions of sexual orientation
- closed to dialogue, to the point of banning all comments from their conventions and blogs that do not support their ideology
- determined (via PFOX and Focus on the Family) to silence and discriminate against sexual minorities in schools, churches, and workplaces
- committed to a cult-like language of sexual denial, evasive responses to simple questions, and self-deception. That language of evasion, half-truth, and double negatives serves to justify their public claims of “change” and “freedom from” sexual honesty.
I also dispute the contention that sexuality can be fluid for anyone. The bisexual Mick Jagger is in no way representative of most persons whose sexual and romantic orientation is exclusively same-sex.
And I dispute the directors’ failure above to make any distinction between sexual identity and sexual orientation.
I have yet to watch the documentary, and the film includes the voices of former and dissatisfied ex-gays, so I reserve judgment on the documentary itself. But I’m less-than-thrilled with promotional literature that merely reinforces memes that require critical analysis.
Tags: documentary, ex-gay, film, survivor, video4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL






i think most ex-gays are lying and in denial. How do you account for sexual fluidity when ie: a woman has been straight for 35 years and suddenly becomes attracted to men. Or a gay man who has spent his life gay and suddenly finds himself only desiring women? Separate from the whole ex-gay because of religion thing and bisexual fluidity. How do you account from gay to straight or vice versa?
Comment by queerunity — November 8, 2008 @ 8:47 pm
In many of those cases, it’s their way of trying to piss off an ex (a fucked up method, if you ask me), or “getting even” with the gay community after one too many rejections from the objects of their affection.
Or in Randy Thomas’s case, it’s just for the attention. I’ve never seen a person so excited to see a camera turned towards him, in my entire life.
I actually feel sorry for the camera.
Comment by Scott — November 8, 2008 @ 10:48 pm
I absolutely agree with you, Mike, about this talk of sexuality being “fluid”. A well-known lesbian activist in England recently dogmatized: “Our sexuality is more fluid than we think it is.” Not “MY sexuality” or “SOME WOMEN’S sexuality” or even “SOME PEOPLE’S sexuality”, but “OUR sexuality”.
The evidence indicates that sexual orientation is indeed fluid for quite a few women – although certainly not for all or even most – and for exceedingly few men. Blanket statements regarding the general fluidity of sexuality should therefore be avoided, because they are simply untrue.
Comment by William — November 9, 2008 @ 1:43 pm
Well that was effortlessly damning.
First of all, I didn’t even know my computer was capable of burning DVD’. Thank goodness I had some DVD-R’ lying around. It took a couple of hours, but the end quality was stellar. (It’ got the chapters and special features menu and everything.)
As far as content goes, it was well worth the $14.95 download. Too many points to touch on though without minimizing others. However, I found the Arthur Goldberg and Richard Cohen interviews to be especially interesting.
Comment by Emproph — November 11, 2008 @ 3:20 am