What's with editors of queer magazines nowadays?
Just after we found out that Venus magazine editor-in-chief Charlene Cothran ex-gayed herself (not resulting in attraction to men, mind you, but a self-described celibacy), WorldNetDaily says it has the inside scoop on former GYA and XY editor Michael Glatze turning his back on what he describes the "easy" gay life and turning towards the "normal", "natural", and "non-lustful" heterosexual lifestyle.
All I can promise you is that yours truly isn't entertaining any thoughts of following in their footsteps. Well, except when I realize how much money they make on books, speaking engagements, and CD's. Let's face it, this "living honestly" thing doesn't pay in cash.
Well, anyway, both of these characters are being paraded around all the various conservative media outlets like pornography on the road. (Let's call this for what it is: the distortion of reality to fit a desired narrative consumed in volume to strengthen that desired fantasy, or pornography.) Cothran's done several magazine interviews and even appeared on The 700 Club, and now Glatze is starting his tour out on WorldNetDaily, ironically enough saying "homosexuality is lust and pornography wrapped into one."
So I fully expect to see these two making the ex-gay rounds for a few years until someone gets the exclusive photo of Glatze cruising a gay bar or Cothran with her new girlfriend (she did say that she loved several women in her life but isn't in a place now to love men), at which point they'll be cut off from the conservative media movement and we either won't hear about them again or they'll become ex-ex-gays, who for some reason outnumber the ex-gays. Either way, it's the same thing we see over and over again, lather, rinse, repeat, that's only being put out there to delegitimize sexual autonomy, all the while surrounded with the rhetoric of "this is my choice, why don't those nasty homosexual activists believe me?"
I mean, check out what Glatze says here:
God is regarded as an enemy by many in the grip of homosexuality or other lustful behavior, because He reminds them of who and what they truly are meant to be.
Besides the erasing of queer religious folk, and the implication that his heterosexuality has no "lust" (I'm guessing his word for "physical desire"), there's the same old idea again that we are going against our real nature, defined by someone who doesn't even know us, which leads all to easily into forcing queers into heterosexuality through violence, spiritual, verbal, or physical.
Just check out how attached to the idea of being "normal" Glatze is:
Lust takes us out of our bodies, "attaching" our psyche onto someone else's physical form. That's why homosexual sex - and all other lust-based sex - is never satisfactory: It's a neurotic process rather than a natural, normal one. Normal is normal - and has been called normal for a reason.
Abnormal means "that which hurts us, hurts normal." Homosexuality takes us out of our normal state, of being perfectly united in all things, and divides us, causing us to forever pine for an outside physical object that we can never possess. Homosexual people - like all people - yearn for the mythical true love, which does actually exist. The problem with homosexuality is that true love only comes when we have nothing preventing us from letting it shine forth from within.
I'm not going to make fun of his strange definitions, but it's really sounding to me like he bought into the idea that the only way to queer liberation is by imitating heterosexuals without questioning heteropatriarchy (note the fixation on being "normal" and how he's looking for something/one outside of himself to "possess") and got burned somewhere along the line. It's just too bad he hasn't found that mythical true love with a woman himself, because then he'd have something a bit more interesting to talk about.