It’s In The Details: Gay Reeducation Camp Scandal Shown to be a Fraud
I’ve seen this story develop and didn’t really pay attention much. It would surprise me if it were less that a kosher camp in Tennesse or it was simply another jihad from the left. From some reason I checked the NYT story above, and as usual, it isn’t the point of the story but a detail which is the most interesting. In this case:
Although Zach wrote only a handful of entries about the Refuge program, all posted before he arrived there in the Memphis suburbs on June 6, his words have been forwarded on the Internet over and over, inspiring online debates, news articles, sidewalk protests and an investigation into Love in Action by the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services in response to a child abuse allegation. The investigation was dropped when the allegation proved unfounded, a spokeswoman for the agency said. (emphasis mine)
This whole thing blew up over the comments of a kid who HASN’T EVEN BEEN THERE with everyone drawing conclusions about what is going on. DCFS made an investigation (and found nothing) based on the testimony of someone NOT EVEN THERE. Now, I’m not going to pretend that the parents of this camp are all lily white here, but it is obvious this whole scandal was started based on comments of someone not even there, albeit who was upset at what was going on.
This sounds more like an ideological-based attack by the media and certain groups than anything merited by what’s going on. It seems the attack is more because people have a problem with teaching someone not to be gay than any serious claim of abuse.
Related Posts:
um, but what about all the interviews with the kid’s dad? maybe he’s a hoax, too.
PS. your site’s typekey sign-in thing doesn’t seem to be working.
RESPONSE:
I’m not saying the kid doesn’t exist, or that his parents weren’t sending him there, but this crap about him being brainwashed or other misc. crap based on his blog posts before he got there prove nothing.
And I know about the typekey thing, havne’t figured why it’s broken yet.
Comment by mattymatt | July 17, 2005
Ok, why do you think this is a hoax? Do you think the kid didn’t go here? I’m not impressed by CPS not finding a reason to close the place down, the kids would have to be obviously physically abused for CPS to take that kind of action.
RESPONSE:
It’s a hoax because the whole scandal about all the eeebil stuff they are doing there is based on blog posts from a kid who was pissed (and who’s parents aren’t probably doing so well with the situation) BEFORE HE EVEN GOT THERE.
There is no evidence whatsoever that bad things are happening there except the word of a kid on his blog that was posted before he showed up there.
Comment by owlish | July 17, 2005
you may believe that it is a hoax,however,the rules of that camp are clearly stated.
As a Parent myself i do not tell my teenage child how to sit,stand,sleep,shower or even how to joke.
Dressing Rules:Campers,Abercrombie , Calvin Klein as well as short sleeves are doomed to be ‘too gay’ to wear too…..i mean please,does this not border on Abuse?
RESPONSE:
All of which is highly irrelevant. You may disagree with a parent sending their kids there, and I’m not going to defend that. I doubt they are doing the right thing, but investigating this camp because of the claims of someone who wasn’t even there is spurious.
And no, that isn’t abuse. Stupid, maybe… but not abuse.
Comment by Marcel | July 18, 2005
Hmm. A 16 year old comes out to his parents, their immediate response is to take him to a 2-6 week ex-gay [or reparitive therapy, or whatever you want to call it] camp. To me, that’s a bad thing. The list of rules only makes it into a worse thing [and, yeah, maybe the kid's lying about these rules, but I havn't seen anything from the camp repudiating them].
RESPONSE:
Parents have been sending their kids away to military schools and the like for as long as there has been military schools. I’m not sure where people are getting that I’m defending the parents, but there has been 2 investigations on this place based on blog posts of a kid not even there.
This is ideological-based. I’d prefer investigations to be fact-based. And on more than just someone not being allowed to were Abercrombie.
Comment by owlish | July 18, 2005
After reading the rules, I see nothing particularly abusive about them, certainly not when the parents get them in advance and agree to them. The kids thinks its boot camp, but worse. He should try boot camp before making such claims.
I’m not defending all these rules, some I think are dumb, some I think aren’t good ideas. But not everything I disagree with is a crime. A position not shared as widely as it ought to be.
Comment by John Bambenek | July 18, 2005
Isn’t it ironic that the very people who say they speak for Gay choice also seem to think that Gay people are incapable of making choices in their lives. ;~D
RESPONSE:
If that’s what it seems, you are reading it wrong.
Comment by ParaTed2k | July 18, 2005
CPS makes investigations based on allegations, not concrete evidence. They take action based on evidence, not allegations. That’s why occasionally a tabloid will have “___ Investigated by CPS,” with pictures, without telling you the reporter for the tabloid was the one who called. Something like that might be fraud; I don’t think that example and this case are the same. I also don’t think there is evidence of abuse in the rules.
From my standpoint, the Ex-Gay movement is bad science, the equivalent of someone using queen bee jelly to cure cancer. I think their main “successes” have been bisexual men who have been shamed into only having sex with women.
On the other hand, if I thought this was the only way to save my son’s soul, I can understand why some parents might want to do something like this.
On a side note [or maybe not], this program to me is the essense of brainwashing. Of course, so are a lot of other things we enter into voluntarily. I agree, taking your kid to this place isn’t a crime. On the other hand, they may be making claims, that if a doctor were making, would get the doc sued for malpractice.
RESPONSE:
Well DCFS found the allegations lacked any credibility, so it seems I’m more right than it seems.
I’m not a big believer in brainwashing, I think it’s a loaded term used to scare people, but in the end DCFS found there was no merit at all and left. But in the end, if there is anything to sue these people over, I’m sure they’ll be sued sooner or later.
Comment by owlish | July 18, 2005
Queer Ravings
Over at Ravings of John C. A. Bambenek, we have this post on the gay reeducation camp thing. Boifromtroi’s post on it is here. I’ve made 3 comments, and I think we’re getting to the point that we have to…
Trackback by Owlish Mutterings | July 18, 2005