Monday, May 3, 2010

Where Have All The Gay Guys Gone?

Kinsey says 10%.

This is a generally accepted figure in connection to number of homosexuals in society. Kinsey actually categorized men into six different groups, varying degrees of hetero and homo. The "ten percent" tends to be a combination of those who consider themselves gay and those who have had a gay experience but who may have moved on to something different.

Now lets throw Mormons into the mix. How many gay Mormons are in the church? Let us turn our scriptures to D&C 121, verse...

Yeah – if only it were that easy. If I had to bet the farm I would bet on the side of more rather than less - more homosexuals in the church than in society at large. I believe that the nature of the church lends itself to sensitive and caring, thoughtful, intelligent men – in much the same way as gay men are drawn to music and art, dance, movement, design and all things creative. It is not happenstance that the percentage of homosexuals gravitate to creative walk of life.

Is the Mormon church any less creative or challenging? Mormon men are taught to be creative, accountable, loving, generous, helpful, thrifty clean brave and reverent, good fathers and husbands. Do we think that these teachings and beliefs might possibly attract those men who have, either though choosing or though genetics, developed these talents and attributes on their own?

I do. I think the church attracts those who are sensitive to issues of the spirit. Many times I sit in priesthood meeting and list those that I know of with SGA to some degree or other. Often those I can count are beyond the 10% range into the 15 to 18% range. And it has never been a surprise to me.

I state this to disarm the notion that homo guys in the church are on their own. Of course this misguided notion will continue to predominate if we don't learn to talk and trust and confide in one another and in our leaders. If we feel as a Priesthood power and an organization that there is power in twos (and we do), then how about four groups of twos? In just one ward?

There are men who do not wish to divulge their homosexuality. Many reasons they have, and most of these reasons are downright respectable and responsible. First is that with sticking a homosexual name tag on their chest they bring themselves to scrutiny in public and private. A man may wish to not act on his homosexual tendencies, choosing to minimize that behavior and it's effects on himself and his family or his family prospects. He seems to have a handle on the beast, and I am not going to incest that he come out of a closet he may not have confined himself to in the first place.

There is power in a name. Rather than label myself based on sexual attraction, I prefer to label myself based on my cherished goal - man of God, or priesthood holder. Many feel this same way.

Second, why would such a man volunteer or speak out when "well enough" seems to be doing the job. No reason to make a speech or read a blog on a behavior "problem" that hadn't reached critical mass as a behavior - and may not ever get there. These men may never feel the need to speak with their ecclesiastical leader because, as far as behavior, it was never an issue. Chances are that it won't be for him. Lets leave this brother be in relative peace with his savior and his decision. They are fine without us.

I think there are many in this boat – who may have homosexual feelings but choose not to act on them because what they feel to be true - priesthood, commandments, temple commitment's – means more to them than sex. These are unselfish righteous men.

Obviously, there are many other Mormon homosexual men in many other circumstances, and I am not trying to peg or categorize or label unduly.

There are men not as secure, who are more than wondering about and imagining a homosexual behavior or two. Maybe he hasn't engaged, but can see it coming. This man may prosper with some assistance and council. A leader/coach he can relate to and confide in or someone who is going though the same issues may help.

Some have left the church to one degree or other. There may be some living double lives. I hope not. I wish them God speed and love. I have been there myself.

So, where are the Homosexual Mormon men of the Priesthood?

Sitting alongside their straight brethren. Going to church, home teaching, leading the singing or teaching primary or leading the scouts through the woods. Leading quorums and Wards or Stakes, and giving blessings and going to the temple.

Just like a regular guy.

12 comments:

  1. I have to say, I'm offended by your stereotyping. I thought the whole point of the equality movement--whether proposing the radical notion that women, African Americans, or other groups are, in fact, people--was that we're all equal. Was that, ultimately, our sexual orientation--like our gender, like our color--doesn't determine our character. I firmly believe that. It astonishes me, in this day in age, that anyone clings to the notion that how we're born determines who we are. The idea that gay men are "more sensitive", or all like Glee, or whatever, is ridiculous, bigoted, and untrue. The fact that you're gay, and saying these things, doesn't make them any less ridiculous or any more true. It might surprise you to learn that many straight men are sensitive, creative, and loving--and many gay men are not. This is because, once again, our character--not the accident of our birth--determines our identity.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I do think stereo types are based on truth, which is why they can be offensive. Mormons have many wives, Jews are tight with money, Republicans are rich butt-heads. Gays are sensitive. Truth and truth and truth. Not very PC, or kind. Offence if all other trates and abilities are dismissed. Not very in-depth without digging much deeper. But this essay digs deep and is not used to belittle. I am in accord with its content. I know many Mormon Homos that remain anonymous due to one of the affore mentioned reasons or another. Silent, strong and honest. Mostly silent.

    You are giving them a voice. Dont let anyone shut you up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Adolf Hitler had great success with this same "logic". It's called ignorance. Actually meeting a Jew, or, indeed, anyone who might be different than you, would change your mind. The truly frightening thing is, thousands of non-conforming types are passing underneath your radar every day, simply because they fail to fit your predefined definition of what they're meant to be like.

    Oh, but I forgot, I'm supposed to be barefoot in the kitchen...

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't believe in equality, and I don't think, from what I read, that bro Thomp believes in it either except as a state of enduring or leveling. There is not great equalizer other that god. We are all separate individuals with trates and talents. Some gravitate this way and another that way. To say that men's sensitivity to things of the spirit would be justified A great number are. Not all, but Bro Thomp doesn't claim to speak for all.

    What is this “accident of our birth, Bro CJ? Freudian slip? There are no accidents. There are choices. Choosing sensitivity, or to be a Mormon, or to watch Glee are choices. Genetics is not a choice. We can choose behaviors. We do not choose our genes. Can sensitivity be passed on through lineage? I believe that yes. Therefore to say that Everything is a choice is just as wrong. There are many influences on our behaviors.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Brother" CJ is actually "Sister" CJ--hence the reference to me being barefoot in the kitchen. There are two issues: how we're born, and the choices we make. We're born a certain way (black, white, male, female, gay, straight, whatever), but as to who and what we become, that's up to choice. And, yes we *choose* to be sensitive--that's precisely my point. A person isn't sensitive, because he's gay; he's sensitive, because, gay or straight, he chooses to be sensitive.

    I didn't say everything was a choice; I said, quite specifically, that sexual orientation is *not* a choice. Perhaps you could read what I wrote, before you respond. Or, even better, you could read the response I wrote at my own blog (cjstutz.blogspot.com).

    FYI, I'm white, lame, Republican, an ardent support of GLBT rights, a Mormon, a woman, married to a wonderful man who puts up with me, and not, in fact, either rich or a butt-head. My husband, who is not gay, is sensitive, loving, thoughtful, honest, and kind--all the things I'm not :-)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Could CJ be saying that her husband is a sensitive man in the church? That's what the blog is about, right? Cj uses a sterio type too. It was sacastic and to make a point, but better comunication is the goal for some people. I thought the point of the blog is correct. Lots of homo mormon men who choose to follow the churches rules.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This is nuts! I was looking fo a nice little blog I could snuggle up to. Chill out, everybody! Good blog, By the way.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thankyou for writing this blog. I am one of those who needs to be... anonymous.

    ReplyDelete
  9. CJ is promoting her blog on yours? Are we supposed to take her seriously? She doesn't have shoes? And she's a woman? She watches Glee? Does she know she's married to a straight guy?

    Cal Thompson is Gay?

    (Follow your heart and voice CT – you go!)

    ReplyDelete
  10. She is comparing you to Hitler? Sorry, folks, her issues need to stay her issues. Obviously her husband is not sensitive as she thinks.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I appreciate what I think is support from a lot of you. Please don't resort to name calling and the like. Regardless of politics, we choose to love the Lord and we show our love by being kind. Now, go watch “Glee”.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Interesting post. For years I was one of those quietly going about my business as a gay married Mormon man, or better put son of God. Now, I still that, but more open about my sexuality to help myself and hopefully others.

    ReplyDelete