In a startling turn of events, writer David Benkof - formerly David Bianco - has closed down his blog, Gays Defend Marriage, and vowed to stay out of the fight in California. In a statement to Truth Wins Out, Benkof said the following:
“I no longer feel comfortable being allied with the people running the Prop. 8 campaign, and the same-sex marriage movement in America in general, with a few exceptions - most notably Maggie Gallagher. I have made a tentative decision not to publicize the disturbing information that caused me to end my promotion of man-woman marriage in the United States. But there is very little that I know about those subjects that a journalist, blogger, or activist cannot find out through diligent googling and asking the right questions of the Prop. 8 campaign.”
Benkof had made waves in recent weeks with a string of high-profile anti-gay op-eds in major mainstream newspapers, including the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the San Francisco Chronicle.
We are pleased that Benkof has decided to do the right thing and step aside. It is also helpful that he has raised the red flag about the people running Prop. 8.
Tags: Benkof, Bianco, Gays Defend Marriage, Prop. 8, Truth Wins Out, Wayne BesenRelated posts
65 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Wayne,
Things just get stranger and stranger with this guy. I can’t imagine what there could possibly be about the Prop 8 folks that he finds so surprisingly disturbing. Maybe they are really homophobic…. ya think?
There is something about him recently that I found extremely disturbing, and that was his “Apology” on his website for all the things that Benkof wants to hold gays and lesbians responsible for. It was one of the most vile and hateful things I have ever seen. After that particular rant, I can’t imagine anyone ever taking him seriously about anything.
My impression is that this guy is really disturbed.
Comment by John — July 14, 2008 @ 1:55 am
That’s my impression as well, John.
He either:
(a) Took Wayne’s advice, and FINALLY got on some much-needed meds.
(b) Got sick of the homosex-obsessed rhetoric of his right wing and fundie friends.
(c) He’s pulling a silly “publicity stunt”, to get attention.
Comment by Scott — July 14, 2008 @ 2:31 am
It’s not polite to gloat. I have surrendered unilaterally. What else do you want from me?
Comment by David Benkof — July 14, 2008 @ 3:08 am
Please don’t twist my words as if I’m gloating - I was being dead serious. What I said is a take on the phrase “if you lay with the dogs, expect to get fleas”. Please get a sense of humour.
In order to gloat, I would have to gain satisfaction of the situation.
Beings ‘Gays For Marriage’ didn’t really exist to me to begin with, and had only visited it once - whether or not you discontinued your efforts has no effect on me whatsoever. I don’t live in California; nor did I ever care enough about you to consider you a threat. Just nutty, that’s all. You still are.
Some “ex-gay” organization busted for some big-time fraud - now THAT would be something for me to gloat about! LOL
And please cut the victim crap - I never wanted anything from you to begin with, either - except for you to keep your pious hands to yourself.
Comment by Scott — July 14, 2008 @ 6:40 am
[…] with a few exceptions - most notably Maggie Gallagher,” the former Q-Syndicate founder/owner told Wayne Besen’s Truth Wins Out. “I have made a tentative decision not to publicize the disturbing information that caused me […]
Pingback by InterstateQ.com » Blog Archive » Anti-gay bi man gives it up — July 14, 2008 @ 8:15 am
Scott-
Please note that what I have learned about my former allies has caused me to change my public position on the man-woman marriage issue, but I have not withdrawn my other points of view on all issues relating to gays and lesbians.
If, for example, you would like me to back off from my frequently stated position that many if not most gay men are “selfish and cruel,” your current approach is unlikely to be very effective.
Comment by David Benkof — July 14, 2008 @ 8:40 am
Are most gay WOMEN selfish and cruel?
Comment by Emily K — July 14, 2008 @ 10:42 am
I’m wondering what kind of thinking is behind the fact that Benkof doesn’t recognize that people who are trying to “defend” traditional marriage aren’t being “selfish and cruel.” I’ll think of that logic the next time my partner of 27 years is in the hospital and I’m not allowed to visit him, or the fact that I can’t legally protect our assets well enough for him to get everything we have built together without paying some sort of penalty (taxes, etc.) should I pass away. Just another guy who is self-hating and guilt-ridden and trying to make everyone else pay.
Comment by Greg A — July 14, 2008 @ 11:39 am
Emily K-
Yes.
Greg A-
In the last few hours GaysDefendMarriage.com remains posted, you might go there and learn how the LGBT community has much more to do with the reason you can’t visit your partner in the hospital than any anti-gay person or group. But I really don’t want to get drawn into tit-for-tats on gay marriage, my whole point is that I’m withdrawing from the debate. People who really want to discuss it can E-mail me at DavidBenkof@aol.com.
Comment by David Benkof — July 14, 2008 @ 11:53 am
So Gay men are “selfish and cruel”? I guess it takes one to know one, doesn’t it? For the breakdown on David Benkof, read my blogpost “Is Uncle Tom A Gay Man?”
http://christthegaymartyr.blogspot.com/2008_05_01_archive.html
Comment by Stuffed Animal — July 14, 2008 @ 12:00 pm
I seriously think this guy just has some personal issues he think he can seek vengeance for by making all of these random lifestyle changes. First he was a gay writer, one that many gay people in the writing and journalism industry actually disliked for his obnoxious and self-centered attitude. Then, perhaps because he was snubbed so many times by what were supposed to be his “natural” allies, he converted to orthodox judaism and used what looks like religious piety to have a good reason to swear off gay men, other than what would be a much cattier reason. But eager for attention, he starts touting himself as a rare voice against SSM who is (gasp!) actually a self-proclaimed BISEXUAL! Talk about a human interest story. He uses his newfound celebrité to exact revenge upon the community that has snubbed him, demanding appologies from them, something he probably never got nor will ever get from them while he was a gay man supporting the gay community. THEN, when he finally loses virtually every single ally in the gay community he might have still once had, and finding that the fundie Christians that control the anti-gay and anti-equality movements are not easy to relate to as a Jew, he gives up his anti-marriage fight. That’s how I interpret this whole mess. Do I care if it’s incorrect? Nope. Do I care if Benkof contradicts it with this reason or that reason? NOPE. It’s just an interpretation. No need to feel threatened by it.
Somethings of note:
1. He is quick to call gay MEN “cruel and selfish” but only as an after thought applies this to gay women.
2. Just because someone is the member of the same minority that you are doesn’t mean they have to like you - even if they, at the time, stand for the same things you stand for.
3. Trying to get back at an entire group of people for some things that a few people may have done to you does not display a very righteous attitude. Nor does it contribute to Tikkun Olam.
Comment by Emily K — July 14, 2008 @ 12:39 pm
Wow, I just read Benkof’s Op-Ed and I have to completely agree with you Emily K — he really has issues and needs extensive therapy — although it sounds like everything that’s wrong in his life is someone else’s fault and may take years to analyze and treat his psychosis. Must have had one of those obsession relationships and then got dumped. Logic is his worst enemy. I’m just going to move on as he’s too far gone and not worth my time. If that’s selfish and cruel, he’s got only himself to blame, despite what he spouts.
Comment by Greg A — July 14, 2008 @ 1:42 pm
It is stunning how often people like Greg A and Wayne Besen use mental illness as a way to beat up on people they disagree with. Greg A, you clearly have no idea of the terrible suffering and very real pain suffered by people who actually have mental illnesses. You’re like people who say “Jew me down” or “He gypped me” or “What a retard.” Given that the LGBT community spends relatively little energy helping members of our community who are in need - including those with mental illnesses - compared to the vast sums of money spent on semantic and symbolic issues some of which I have promised not to mention any more, it’s not surprising you would use mental illness as a weapon. But it is very, very sad. I almost never call gay people immoral for the way they have sex. But gay people using mental illness as a weapon while doing virtually nothing for gay people who actually are mentally ill? That is immoral.
Comment by David Benkof — July 14, 2008 @ 4:41 pm
[…] that the individuals behind this measure are reptilian at best, and distancing himself from them. [Truth Wins Out] SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “Gay Uncle Tom backs away from hate amendment”, url: […]
Pingback by Gay Uncle Tom backs away from hate amendment | BayBigr — July 14, 2008 @ 6:48 pm
I admit I’m guilty of gloating and I won’t say I’m proud of feeling that way either . . .however, I cannot forget the lies, deceptions and misrepresentations that David has published over the past few months.
At every turn, honorable people have expended time and energy exposing his harmful and dangerous prose.
David has freely and recklessly provided fuel to anti-gay religious zealots. He’s distorted facts to create a smokescreen. The same people who were encouraging these fabrications are now using these words to promote their hate and fear-based program against decent, loving families.
The damage has been far-reaching and hurtful.
When this type of hate hits the core of ones humanity we have the choice to either take action or just take it.
I think that, perhaps David has experienced first hand the vitriol of his supposed cheerleaders.
I move forward as a skeptic of Davids intentions. . .warily move forward. I don’t think that’s unreasonable.
But I also move forward knowing that religious freedom, freedom from religion and freedom of speech are the things we all hold and defend to our core.
I posted this statement on another site, it still holds true.
But here, I also make a statement about the generosity of my peers as related to comment #13 above:
It might be wise to research before throwing out accusations about the commitment concerning mental health issues on an entire group of people that a person wishes to call “our community”. . .clearly that dance card was left empty a while ago.
The community David tries to both claim and vilify, does struggle to provide mental health services, as does every other community gay, straight, sacred and secular throughout our country. . .that struggle comes at the heels of opposition from many fronts but mostly out of fear. . . certainly not from generosity of the LGBT community.
Mental illness is not a weapon. It is a serious and tragic.
Comment by gary — July 14, 2008 @ 7:15 pm
You say generous, I say selfish and cruel. Tomayto, tomahto.
It’s difficult for me to demostrate what I mean without referring to the subject I no longer discuss. But I stand by my statements.
Comment by David Benkof — July 14, 2008 @ 7:42 pm
While one may insist that it’s ‘the love that dare not speak it’s name’, it sounds much more like the type that just won’t shut up. Really - you no longer discuss it? Then why are you responding to every comment on someone else’s blog? I smell attention whore.
As for blanket statements about the LGBT community “spending relatively little energy helping members of our community who are in need - including those with mental illnesses - compared to the vast sums of money spent on semantic and symbolic issues”. Really? Would you like to put your money where your mouth is? How many LGBT Community Centers have you visited or investigated? There are plenty of LGBTers who work every day to help their community, and millions of dollars raised to help those less fortunate within the community. If you don’t think SSM is important, then that’s your opinion. It doesn’t make it correct.
“What more do you want from me!” you cry. I’m happy to answer: Shut up already
Comment by Colette — July 14, 2008 @ 8:38 pm
Denial and childish rhetoric, followed with no truth or facts. . .another “I must have lost that email” statement.
Comment by gary — July 14, 2008 @ 8:49 pm
I ditto Colette. . .well said.
Comment by gary — July 14, 2008 @ 9:09 pm
OK Collette and Gary, I thought people liked having me respond to their comments. This will be my last comment on this thread. Have a good summer, everyone!
Comment by David Benkof — July 14, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
“It’s difficult for me to demostrate [sic] what I mean without referring to the subject I no longer discuss. But I stand by my statements.”
Spoken like a jilted lover.
No wonder he’s so bitter toward the “selfish and cruel” gay MEN. As in, the men he used to seek to have romantic relationships with.
Comment by Emily K — July 14, 2008 @ 9:51 pm
Voldemort?. . .David must have lost his email as well.
Comment by gary — July 14, 2008 @ 10:32 pm
“If, for example, you would like me to back off from my frequently stated position that many if not most gay men are “selfish and cruel,” your current approach is unlikely to be very effective.”
You try to make yourself sound like you’re some formidable person, but I continue to stand by MY position that you’re nothing more than a nut with an internet connection.
And yes, you’ve repeated your little lines enough, that even if you stopped entirely today, I still wouldn’t forgive you for your evildoings.
You’re barking up the wrong tree - I’m no hippie, unlike most gay people in the GLBT blogging community. You could get hit by a MACK truck, and I’d crack a joke about it. Your life is worth nothing to me. Most gay men aren’t cruel - but I am.
Comment by Scott — July 15, 2008 @ 4:48 pm
I resent that. I despise hippies and their “culture.” I am NOT some lesbo hippie. I’m also not a vegetarian.
Comment by Emily K — July 15, 2008 @ 6:13 pm
LOL Emily - sorry if you’re truly offended by that statement. I don’t mean the stereotypical Woodstock hippie; I’m talking “kiss the asses of your enemies, and then maybe they’ll come around” hippies. Fuck that! And fuck them!
Comment by Scott — July 15, 2008 @ 10:48 pm
Hey I know I said I’d stay away but I thought it was only fair to you guys to let you know of my new policy - Starting today, Wednesday, for every 50 needless insults supporters of “marriage equality” lob in my direction, I will write one op-ed in a major newspaper about why marriage is between a man and a woman (but not supporting Prop. 8). If it hits 250, I’ll go back to spending several hours a day disputing the “marriage equality” movements fraudulent arguments. Oh, and Scott? Death threats count as 10 needless insults. Keep going - I might write an op-ed just from Truth Wins Out alone! If so, I’ll be sure to dedicate it to you guys.
Comment by David Benkof — July 16, 2008 @ 3:46 am
Keep throwing your tantrum, see if I care.
And FYI, the statement “you could get hit by a MACK truck, and I’d crack a joke about it” isn’t a death threat - unless I was the person driving; and beings I can’t drive a stick, that’s impossible! LOL
Even if I said “if Sally Struthers magically came falling from the sky like a bomb, landed on and crushed you, I’d STILL crack a joke” - that isn’t a death threat either.
Like most “christians”, you’re good at conjuring up death threats and nonexistent physical attacks in your pea brain, and trying to pass it off as fact with no evidence, marks or bruises. Wayne has firsthand experience in that, with PFOX and those lunatics.
And like most “christians”, please stop talking like you’re all high and mighty. Everyone knows that you believe all gay people are your niggers, but you ain’t shit.
And one last thing - why would anyone want to kill you, when it’s obvious being David Benkof is a fate worse than death itself?
Comment by Scott — July 16, 2008 @ 1:19 pm
Scott, I believe David is Jewish, not Christian. However, orthodox Christians and Orthodox Jews have similar views concerning same sex marriage and so I will correct your (bigoted) statement for you to let everyone know how the original statement sounds to an orthodox Christian:
“Like most Jews, you’re good at conjuring up death threats and nonexistent physical attacks in your pea brain, and trying to pass it off as fact with no evidence, marks or bruises. Wayne has firsthand experience in that, with PFOX and those lunatics.
And like most Jews, please stop talking like you’re all high and mighty. Everyone knows that you believe all gay people are your niggers, but you ain’t shit.”
Or since Christianity cannot be blamed for your problem with David perhaps the problem is not David’s religion but his sexuality, in which case your statement should read:
“Like most homosexuals, you’re good at conjuring up death threats and nonexistent physical attacks in your pea brain, and trying to pass it off as fact with no evidence, marks or bruises. Wayne has firsthand experience in that, with PFOX and those lunatics.
And like most homosexuals, please stop talking like you’re all high and mighty. Everyone knows that you believe all gay people are your niggers, but you ain’t shit.”
Comment by Dan — July 16, 2008 @ 4:59 pm
For the record, I am a Catholic and an unapologetic supporter of Proposition 8 (which, I guess, for reasons unknown to me, makes me toxic to David). They can make same sex marriage legal in all 50 states but it won’t change the truth about the matter. In this regard, same sex marriage reminds me very much of the abortion issue — we were all told when abortion was legalized that it would become normal. However abortion has not become normal and it never will become normal because the truth of the matter is that it is intriscally evil. So it is and will be with same sex marriage. (Not insignificantly, same sex marriage and abortion are linked both analytically (both derive from modern/utilitarian philosophies that posit radical autonomy as an ultimate good) and empirically (in the sense that there is a strong corelation between the religious/pro-lifers/ssm opponents on the one hand and the not very relious/pro-choicers/ssm advocates on the other).)
Comment by Dan — July 16, 2008 @ 5:10 pm
Good thing the laws of this country aren’t based on whether someone thinks something is “intrinsically evil.”
I also think it’s hilarious that such virulently anti-equality individuals get their kicks out of visiting sites like this. Do they really think they’re going to “convert” anything?
Comment by Emily K — July 16, 2008 @ 5:18 pm
Emily K, hope springs eternal!! I have yet to bag a conversion but that is a poor excuse to stop trying! If Christ came into the life of Bob Dylan, He can come into your life too! I used to be an agnostic and dyed in the wool, hardcore liberal Democrat — I voted for Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, and Bill Clinton (twice) — but God found me, so it can happen! Usually though I quit when the cursing gets too demoralizing. (Do you all on the left ever ask yourself why your side curses and our side does not, and what this difference means and reflects? Try living as though the Gospel were true — just try it.) And one more thing: you are not a “thing” — you are a person, a thought of God, loved by Him Who created you.
Comment by Dan — July 16, 2008 @ 5:29 pm
Eh, nevermind. This guy’s just a troll.
Kinda reminds me of Anthony Falzerano, LOLZ.
Comment by Emily K — July 16, 2008 @ 8:16 pm
Posted by Dan:”you are a person, a thought of God, loved by Him Who created you.”
I agree. And I am just fine the way I am. So why do you feel this overwhelming urge and/or need to change what, by your own admission, was created by and from perfection? Playing God much? Oh, wait! I can see it coming! “God said he didn’t want anyone to live this way.” Now, did God tell you that, or did you read it in a book?
Comment by MirrorMan — July 16, 2008 @ 8:18 pm
LOL Emily, my thoughts exactly. The way he seems to yap away, I wouldn’t be surprised if “Dan” is just a Benkof sock puppet.
And for the record, I don’t “have a problem with Benkof” - that would be like saying I have a “problem” with mosquitoes.
Comment by Scott — July 16, 2008 @ 8:32 pm
“intrinsically evil”
This coming from a religion who stares down little boys as if they’re an entree.
Comment by Scott — July 16, 2008 @ 8:47 pm
Scott, that’s not at all necessary or helpful. People could easily say the same thing about homosexuals and it would be just as untrue.
Catholics are actually some of the more liberal Christians I’ve met when it comes to progressive ideas and social justice.
Comment by Emily K — July 16, 2008 @ 11:12 pm
Emily,
I have several friends who are very openly Catholic (some gay). And they’re also aware that I believe it’s fucked up that lines like “intrinsically evil” are being pointed at homosexuals, from their leaders - when they’re nothing more than ancient boy-fondling sissies, flauncing around the Vatican in disco capes.
Comment by Scott — July 17, 2008 @ 4:15 pm
I just wanted to complain about being compared to Dan, who brags about converting Jews. I went to the same Jewish summer camp as Bob Zimmerman, and he’s not Christian anymore, and if you keep bragging about converting Jews, I’m going to be tempted to tell you where you can put your mangod.
Comment by David Benkof — July 17, 2008 @ 4:48 pm
Well, Scott, if you want to stoop to the level of Fred Phelps, congratulations. I’m sure any debate team would run for their cars if they saw you coming.
Comment by Emily K — July 17, 2008 @ 6:19 pm
Fred Phelps, no.
Statler and Waldorf, YES!!! LOL ;)
Comment by Scott — July 17, 2008 @ 7:31 pm
Wow amazing David is making the rounds telling everyone about his new point system. However, (crocadile tears falling from my eyes) he wont consider my insults as insults. I did let him know if he starts publishing I would send every publisher his latest comments on our blog. Here is what he told me after I challenged his threat to Rob and his allies on our blog.
David Benkof said…
Oh, great! The “Messianic” “Jew” who declared he would never speak to me again has begun to speak to me again. It’s a shame you’re not a supporter of “marriage equality” or else your post would count as several needless insults toward my new point-system.
So, I guess even tho he hates me being a Messianic Jew my responses to him do not count toward his insult points.
This guy needs help in the worst of ways.
Comment by Justin — July 18, 2008 @ 9:32 am
LOL Justin, I’ve read “the threat” over on any blog I read regularly, which has mentioned his name in the past week or so.
I like how he tries to punish gays with his elementary school teacher tactics. Or like in Sunday School - if you’re not “fundie” enough, you don’t get the gold star sticker by your name on the posterboard - just a green star, or some other crappy color.
Comment by Scott — July 18, 2008 @ 11:55 pm
Bipolar. Party of one please.
Comment by Victor — July 19, 2008 @ 11:41 am
Victor-
It hurts my feelings to have you suggest I’m bipolar just as much as if you said I have pancreatic cancer or heart disease - not at all. Most gay people are unbelievably insensitive to the suffering of people with legitimate mental illnesses, and many actually use mental illness as a weapon. It’s like the schoolyard taunt “you’re a retard!” Anyone who is actually familiar with the pain of people suffering from mental retardation would never use it as a weapon.
I have repeatedly said the LGBT community should take just a percentage of the millions of dollars currently spent on semantic, symbolic issues, and direct it toward the needs of LGBT people suffering from real afflicitions, like mental illnesses, addictions, sexually transmitted diseases, poverty, and homelessness. I have gotten virtually no response.
So go ahead, attack me using mental illness or any of the other real ailments facing LGBT people the community thinks are far less important than what word is used to describe exactly the same thing. It only underscores what kind of person you are - and I think history will not look kindly on the seriously confused priorities of the LGBT community.
Comment by David Benkof — July 20, 2008 @ 1:07 am
I wonder how history would look on the priorities of someone like Mr. Biankopf, who spends so much time and energy promoting bigotry, hatred and discrimination against an entire class of his fellow human beings.
Comment by John — July 20, 2008 @ 10:49 am
John-
Let’s agree to meet right here in 50 years and see how history has remembered the LGBT community and its present priorities. As well as how the whole “misspell his name, that’ll get ‘im” strategy of yours has worked out.
Comment by David Benkof — July 20, 2008 @ 2:50 pm
David, as long as you keep responding to when people purposefully misspell your name, they ARE getting you. They are trying to provoke a response. And they’re getting one. Just ignore it.
Comment by Emily K — July 20, 2008 @ 3:15 pm
I continue to spell Mr. Bunkof’s name in various ways as a result of my first exposure to him at both Exgaywatch andd Box Turtle Bulletin.
While he spewed hate and made vile pronouncements about gay people, he seemed to suddenly become sensitive about something as petty as how his name was spelled. It struck me as disengenuous at best, and was probably just another of his bizarre tactics in trying to shut down others and create diversions. I also suspect that he wants to get attention and be referenced heavily on Google.
He has shown no respect to an entire class of people, yet demands that we bow and address him on his terms. I simply choose not to do so.
Comment by John — July 20, 2008 @ 4:04 pm
Oh please! Everyone has been VERY sensitive to the mental illness issue, and you should be happy that enough gay people care about you to suggest you get help.
Just like you try to coax mentally vulnerable gay people into “ex-gay therapy”, we’re trying to coax you into getting some REAL therapy. And not from some loon who got his “degree” from a Cheerio’s box top mail-in order, like pretty much every “ex-gay therapist”.
Here’s my opinion on the whole issue, which includes people like yourself, Mr. Benko. I posted this on another blog, in a post related to you:
“As much as I hate saying something mean LOL, I have to be honest and say anyone with uncontrolled mental illness should be in no place of power.
And it’s no big secret that many (if not ALL) of those people in the “pro-family movement” - at least those who claim to be “christian”, but act anything BUT Christian - are nuttier than hell. Several paranoid schizophrenics, several “former abusers” of some heavy shit, like crystal meth.
I love my friends and family members who suffer from severe mental illness - but would I want them in a position to control public policy in this country? NO!
Would I give them a podium or forum to plagiarize ‘The Eternal Jew’ to a large audience of mostly nutballs? NO!
Would I be open to somebody with Tourettes controlling anything that has to do with the well-being of citizens? I don’t think so.
It has nothing to do with discrimination, it’s just that I don’t trust their fucking brains - it’s nothing personal.”
Comment by Scott — July 20, 2008 @ 8:50 pm
Scott-
Do you even know anything about me? Like, the fact that I have denounced ex-gay therapy and I have never been Christian? If you want to criticize me for things I say or things I believe, fine, we can have a conversation. But if you just make things up, pretend I believe them, and oh-so-cleverly rebut them, I’m simply aghast at your poor argumentation skills.
Emily K-
I know that when someone on your side throws me a softball, you don’t want me to hit it out of the park. Since some people actually have arguments that require me to think, it’s fun to point out what a large percentage of the debate on your side is so mindless. If it bothers you that John exposes himself so with inane debating tactics, you should think of a way to make him go away, not me.
Comment by David Benkof — July 20, 2008 @ 9:13 pm
“Do you even know anything about me?”
Beyond your nuttery, no. And quite frankly, I don’t want to. If you weren’t so absorbed in homosex and kid-fucking, it WOULD have been possible - but you have no other interests. Yawn.
Comment by Scott — July 20, 2008 @ 9:28 pm
Biankof wrote: Like, the fact that I have denounced ex-gay therapy and I have never been Christian?
Calling him an ex-gay seems to push one of his buttons, but it is hard to read his explanation of “Sexuality and Change” at his website: http://shemayisrael.com/isjudaism/sexualityandchange.shtml
without thinking that aside from the Jewish references, it could easily have been written by any number of US ex-gay leaders.
Comment by John — July 20, 2008 @ 9:52 pm
John-
You are quoting something I wrote five years ago, when I was undecided on the ex-gay movement and thought it may work in some cases. Since then, I have learned that it does not, and that the Jewish ex-gay movement is a front for Christianity. You will find no quote of mine since 2003 praising reparative therapy or JONAH or any other such nonsense.
Now here’s the really interesting part. I assume you argue against “ex-gay” ideology because you want to change people’s ideas. But then, in a case like mine, when my ideas have actually been changed, you keep beating me up for what I believed many years ago. Why should anybody in the future change their ideas to match yours if you have a demonstrated record or attacking people who change their ideas for having had the old ideas in the first place? Doesn’t that seem a little counterproductive? Emily K, can you help me out here?
Scott-
So you admit that you’re criticizing me even without knowing anything about me. Why should anyone take you seriously? You’re contributing almost as much to the conversation as the guy who thinks he’s making a salient point by misspelling my name.
Finally, your attitudes toward people with mental illness are appalling, and would be surprising if they didn’t come from a gay activist:
1. If you know someone who may be mentally ill, you have to approach it very carefully. Certainly in private, certainly respectfully, and certainly not in an attempt to win a debate. If someone who cared about me approached me and suggested my behavior showed paranoia, or mania, or psychosis, I would be very appreciative and discuss it with a mental health professional. Those symptoms carry as much stigma with me as a nosebleed, excessive urination, or a rash on my forehead. Mental illness is just another form of illness.
2. Do you know anything about Tourette’s Syndrome? I have only known one man who suffers from that debilitating illness, and he was really a terrific guy (and cute!). Why can’t someone with Tourette’s be involved with “the well-being of citizens”? In the Middle Ages, people thought such people were possessed by demons. Is that your attitude? Are you afraid mentally ill people have cooties? Why does someone’s verbal or facial tics affect his ability to contribute to society?
3. You really should read some LGBT history - the best book on this subject is Martin Duberman’s Cures. Gay people have been pathologized throughout LGBT history using precisely the same language you are using to attack the people you disagree with. The irony is, many of the psychiatrists and others using therapy, medication, and worse (ECT) to try to make gay people straight really thought they were helping. You don’t really care about the mental health or even the arguments of the people you are pathologizing - you just want to get them/us out of the way so you can have your way on public issues. It’s really, really sad.
Comment by David Benkof — July 21, 2008 @ 12:15 am
David, the only thing I can help you with right now is suggesting that if you wrote that statement 5 years ago and no longer stand by it, perhaps even taking the OPPOSITE stance today, you should remove it from the internet, or publish a revised statement in its place. Otherwise, people like Scott will assume such statements are endorsed by you today. I’ve seen that section of your site before and I thought it was just as true today as it was when you first wrote it. I had no idea you no longer stood by it.
Also, I’d like to say that in all the years I’ve been a manic-depressive, not one time has anybody in the LGBTQ community stigmatized me or considered me a danger to society or something else uncalled for. But then again, my friends are a blend of LGBTQ and Straight - there’s no real line that I draw between my gay friends and my non-gay friends, and nobody I’ve ever engaged with who’s treated me like a friend has ever judged me for my mental illness. Additionally, the mental health community has never judged me for being gay. And since I came out as soon as I realized my sexuality, and never went through a “self-hating” phase, the two really have little to do with each other in my life. I don’t know where all this mental-illness-hating-gay-community thing comes from.
Comment by Emily K — July 21, 2008 @ 2:08 am
Emily K-
I have certainly considered finding a way to do what you suggest. But it’s complicated. First of all, that Web site is just the online version of a pamphlet that was printed five years ago, for which thousands of copies are in circulation and cannot be changed. It was work-for-hire, and my ideology at the time matched that of the person who hired me. That complicates things. Further, I would write it differently today but there is nothing I see in it that is technically false. For example, is it really false that reorientation therapy “appears to work in some cases”? I didn’t say it works, I say it appears to work. Surely even you will admit that with someone like Alan Chambers, it appears to work - whether it actually works or not. I would never say that again, because it implies hey - give it a shot. But I don’t actually say that so it’s not like I can contact the person who hired me to do the pamphlet and say “This is false.” Same thing with the following sentence “There are many people now in happy opposite-sex marriages who credit their therapy for helping them go from gay to straight living.” Well, there are many people who say that. If the sentence was “There are many people who used to be gay that are now straight because of their reparative therapy,” that would be a load of crap and I would be ashamed to have written it and I would be more eager to fix it. But on a technical level, it’s not exactly false.
You suggest I “publish a revised statement in its place.” I think that’s a good idea. I no longer have a Web site. Are my above statements here at TWO enough in your mind? Would ExGayWatch publish something I wrote explaining why I don’t agree with the implications of what I wrote in 2003, and why I think JONAH is not kosher and even a front for conversionist Christians? I’d be happy to submit something if you give me a word limit, even if you still ban me from commenting at your site.
Finally, thank you for sharing your mental health situation with the site. That’s not always easy to do. I imagine it wasn’t fun for you to read Victor attack me by alleging I’m bipolar - as if that were a bad thing. I did an Internet search and there are many famous LGBT bipolar people including Kate Millett, Sinead O’Connor, Drew Barrymore, and Stephen Fry. I’m glad you’ve never felt mistreated by the gay community for your manic-depression.
Comment by David Benkof — July 21, 2008 @ 4:51 am
The website that I referenced appears to belong to Mr. Biankof. The email address that people are referred to is still the same one he uses today. The whole thing appears to the be the product and under the control of Mr. Biankof. But he tells us here that it was a work for hire and belongs to someone else and he has no control over it. Apparently it is not what it appears to be. That certainly has a familiar ring to it.
John
Comment by John — July 21, 2008 @ 10:17 am
John-
There’s that phrase again - “appears to.” Three times. I do not own that Web site. I wrote the pamphlet in question in 2003 and do not have control over it.
Comment by David Benkof — July 21, 2008 @ 1:21 pm
I still stand on everything I said previously, and once again, it’s not an attack on the person - it’s an attack on their brain.
If America was smart (and it’s not) at this point in history, we would do a clean sweep of everyone involved in politics, and say goodbye to anyone with schizophrenia, dimentia, meth-fried brains, etc.
Beings terrorism is supposed to be our #1 concern, why add fuel to the fire by allowing unstable folks to stir up the public with their hallucinations?
I don’t think it’s endearing OR funny.
It’s shit like that, that started up the holocaust. And it’s also why that queen Roy Cohn got so many innocent people imprisoned, for absolutely no reason. Contrary to what people think, Roy Cohn was no genius - he was just allowed to uncontrollably hallucinate - much like Janet Folger, Regina Griggs from PFOX, Sally Kern, and Bill O’Reilly.
For instance, America would move forward quite a bit, if we would grant Janet Folger her wish, and lock her away. Not in prison, of course - but a straight jacket would be appropriate.
And I’m not discussing this issue any further, because I won’t change my mind. People can think what they want about my opinion - but I will add that nobody’s perfect. Not even Alan Chambers, who believes he is.
Comment by Scott — July 23, 2008 @ 4:06 pm
I have waited five days to see if any of the pro-gay commenters on this site, including the one with bipolar disorder, would respond to Scott’s horrible, unfeeling tirade against people with mental illnesses. Nobody did, not to my surprise, because LGBT activists think nothing is more important than the fight for gay equality, and if claiming that enemies of gay equality are mentally ill and thus should be excluded from decision-making roles in society works, so be it.
Sad.
I love Scott’s criticism of people with “meth-fried brains,” given that gay men are far more likely to have used crystal meth (they call it “tina”) than any other subgroup.
Among the significant people who have suffered from mental illness:
• Abraham Lincoln, who coped with occasionally crippling depression. Should America have been deprived of the leadership of the Great Emancipator because of prejudices like Scott’s?
• Winston Churchill, who was probably bipolar. Could we have even won World War II if we had purged everyone who was mentally ill from a position of power?
Many members of Congress have suffered from mental illness, including Ted Kennedy’s son Patrick (D-R. I.) and the Democratic Senator I grew up with here in Missouri, Tom Eagleton (D-Mo.). Democratic Florida Gov. Lawton Chiles (best known for having defeated Jeb Bush in 1994, which made George W. the Bush Republicans wanted to run for president in 2000 instead of Jeb) was also mentally ill.
Tipper Gore is mentally ill. And she got the most votes to be the First Lady in 2000. Had the Supreme Court ruled the other way, should she have been prevented from performing the important duties of that office?
I’m sure many readers of the above will sympathize with my point, especially since all my recent examples are Democrats. But I doubt anyone will call Scott out for his unacceptable bigotry against the mentally ill, becuase he’s using mental illness as a weapon against people who don’t agree that gays are equal in every way, and for most LGBT activists, taking down such people is a higher cause than the welfare of children, it’s more urgent than winning wars, and it’s more important than religious freedom. So why wouldn’t it be more important than treating mentally ill people with dignity and respect?
Comment by David Benkof — July 28, 2008 @ 1:42 am
David,
Your intentional misquoting of Scott is reprehensible but unsurprising.
Scott said that people with severe mental illnesses should not be permitted in politics.
He’s right.
Comment by Michael Airhart — July 28, 2008 @ 5:12 pm
Michael-
Look again. The only quote of Scott I made was “meth-fried brains.” How is that a misquote? If it is, how do you know it was intentional? I cut and pasted. How could a cut-and-paste be an intentional misquote?
And do you believe that Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, Tom Eagleton, Lawton Chiles, Patrick Kennedy, and Tipper Gore “should not be permitted in politics”? What about Emily K? What mechanism should exist to prevent such people from political service? Should we pass a law requiring all political candidates to pass a psychiatric screening? What mental illnesses are “severe” enough to disqualify someone? Anorexia? Dyslexia? Insomnia? How about Gender Identity Disorder? Many but not all transgender people have been diagnosed with a several mental illness. Should they “not be permitted in politics”?
Your comments are more proof of something I’ve long suspected: scratch an LGBT activist and you’ll often find a fascist. I believe that in a free society, people of all shapes and sizes should be allowed to vote, lobby, run for office, and serve in elected and appointed positions - and that includes people with disabilities of all kinds, including mental illnesses.
But at least we have some good news: it sounds like Michael Airhart and Scott will supporting the Republican opponent of Rep. Patrick Kennedy, the Democrat representing Rhode Island’s 1st district who is guilty of both having a severe mental illness and of suffering from various addictions, both apparently disqualifiers in their minds from political service. And I imagine you will support the recall of gay-marriage hero Gavin Newsom, who has sought treatment for alcoholsm.
Comment by David Benkof — July 28, 2008 @ 5:48 pm
Here we have more convenient misquoting re: “severe” mental illness. You’ve worn out your welcome again, David. Bye bye.
Comment by Mike Airhart — July 28, 2008 @ 6:13 pm
David, I did not respond to Scott or to you in this thread because I know how to pick my battles. You can’t just convince people that you’re right. People will believe what they want.
And I know what I’m like when manic, or when I’m not medicated.. It’s NOT pretty. I am NOT functioning member of society. The actions I take under that state fill me with shame and self-loathing because I end up burning every bridge I once worked so hard to build. When mental illness is self-evident, and it gets in the way of job and home life, that is when it’s time to pull the plug. Talk therapy and proper medication (in that order) can make a mentally ill person a healthy person in society and they should have all the same rights and benefits as anyone else. It’s very difficult to describe this without sounding like I’m advocating drugging and conformity - this is not the case. I am saying that when someone violently acts out in the workplace because they are in a manic phase - or is putting them in severe debt because of erratic behavior - it’s time to say goodbye. Just like Mike said goodbye to you.
Comment by Emily K — July 28, 2008 @ 10:46 pm
I think the discussion has gotten off track. The original comment from Mr. Benkof was that he was quitting the pro-8 camp due to disturbing information about them. I find that statement quite manipulative in that he’s hiding his motivations while attempting to influence others’ opinions with his announcement. If there’s a serious problem he has with the pro-8 camp (and I’m only surprised that he didn’t see it sooner, considering they will go to any length to indulge their hatred!) then he can come right out and say it. He’s hardly bashful about any of his other observations. Manipulation is the result of trying to gain control without actually having any. Given the societally-induced self-hatred that so many gay people have, support for the religio-fascist right wing isn’t a surprise, though it’s a sad commentary on a person’s lack of self-respect and self-worth. But as another poster pointed out, Mr. Benkof’s political behavior seems to be guided more by a desire for personal retribution than any underlying value system. Once that process is exposed, he can hardly be surprised that his pronouncements aren’t taken seriously. One’s individual authority stems from one’s integrity, it is not conferred by association with any particular religious or political group, or even by God, as much as Mr. Benkoff might like it to be.
Comment by Seer — August 6, 2008 @ 11:38 am
All the more confusing that his motivation is personal retribution is the fact that the Torah forbids revenge. Vengeance is for God alone. And he is a religious Jew, quick to declare who is and who is not Jewish. It IS personal retribution. Otherwise he wouldn’t make threats to further spite the gay community with his activism if we “insult him too many times.” SO mature.
Comment by Emily K — August 7, 2008 @ 12:06 pm