http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/06/5640/#_edn7
For me, the problem is not only the fact that my gay parents molested and raped and abused me. That problem is compounded by the cultural taboo on me talking about that or to blaming their conduct on their sexual inclinations.
Over time, I have talked to a lot of people whose lives have been touched by homosexuality. I became friends with former gay people, as well as former trans people. I was surprised because according to what I had been taught, they are not supposed to exist. Joseph Sciambra, who was a gay porn star in the Eighties, gave up the gay lifestyle and now ministers to homosexual men. He endures daily hate mail sent to him by angry gays, which are balanced by the grateful letters he receives from other formerly gay men whom he has inspired to leave the lifestyle.
You can read Joseph’s story at http://josephsciambra.com/
The first time I met a former transsexual was a man I’ll call Frank, whom I had known since my teens. I met him again at a convention and he was talking about having left Scientology. He was extremely heavy, and riding in an electric wheelchair. We stayed in touch for some time after the con, and eventually he told me he was making preparations for transgender surgery. I was a bit surprised, but we continued to stay in touch.
Eventually he told me he had become a Mormon, which I vehemently opposed, and we often argued about Scripture. I was wrong to object, though, and fortunately, he took it in stride. He ended up losing over 100 pounds and finally managed to ditch the wheelchair. He also abandoned the idea that he was a woman, decided against surgery, took up ballroom dancing, and married a nice Mormon girl.
If I had been a proper Berkeley girl, I would have chided him for trying to go against “who he really was,” but I am certain he would not give up his new life for anything! I did not become a Mormon, but I do think that he found something he absolutely needed in that church. It is possible that after the overwhelming control found in Scientology, he could only have found an appropriately rigid and all-encompassing framework among the Mormons. God bless them too!
A woman I will only call Sandy spent many years convinced she was really born a boy. She had gender-reassignment surgery but subsequently changed her mind, as many do. Now she is having a terrible time trying to change her sexual identification back because while doctors are supposed to be endlessly supportive of people transitioning away from their birth sex, they are not supposed to help those wanting to return to it.
More information about former trans people can be found here: www.sexchangeregret.com
And here: http://www.help4families.com/
I was brought up to be completely tolerant of every possible sexual variation, and the wish to be loving and accepting of all people has stayed with me. Meeting former gay people and former trans people and hearing how furious their friends are about them leaving the lifestyle opened my eyes. They find themselves in a new closet because they are not supposed to be able to reject the lifestyle. What all former gays and former trans have in common is the reality of hate mail and fury from former friends who cannot stand the fact that they were able to leave.
It is, after all, supposed to be impossible to leave.
The underlying idea is this: “Homosexuality is normal. Heterosexuality is stultifying. If anyone enters it, they are growing. If anyone goes back to heterosexuality, they are hung-up and ridiculous, and they must be corrected until they stop trying to leave.”
Tolerance only goes one way. It means that anyone who leaves the gay or trans lifestyle or dares to speak out against homosexuality and gay marriage is a fair target for persecution.
This is wrong.
People who have left the gay and trans lifestyle also deserve love and support because our humanity is more important than the ideology their silence is meant to maintain. That is the bottom line. Do we value people, or do we value ideology? If an ideology is good, that does not justify destroying or silencing people in order to support the ideology. Freedom of speech means that we all get a say, even if what we say is not universally accepted.
Now that I have left the closet and I am speaking out, I will be criticized, but I nevertheless hope to give strength to other people who need to speak out. If we are to take the one worthwhile thing from the gay community—something that is also common to the Christian community—which is the command to love and accept everyone, then that means ex-gays, ex-trans, and even the disaffected children of gays deserve to be heard as well.
And I want you all to be able to tell your stories.
God bless you all,
Moira Greyland.
Appendix A: The Breendoggle and the Loyal Opposition
I have included the text of the Breendoggle in its entirety to spare you the trouble of looking it up online. This is a tough read, no doubt, but worth it, not only to see how committed and blatant my father was in his pursuit of sex with minors, even toddlers, but also to see just how impotent the response to him was. There was both a sense of “somebody has to do SOMETHING” and a sense of “we can’t be mean to a fan, we’re all outcasts and we have to stick together.
Here you can see the frog being boiled: in this case the frog is the horrified onlookers and the victims, who are arguably being boiled to this day. Please note that this was written in 1964, and my father was not stopped from his ongoing offenses until I turned him into the cops on July 5, 1989; 25 years later!
Breendoggle
Welcome to the Breendoggle Wiki
Annotated text of THE GREAT BREEN BOONDOGGLE OR ALL BERKELEY IS PLUNGED INTO WAR, circa 1963, with children’s names redacted. It was written by Bill Donaho. Here is a PDF of the first page of the mimeographed newsletter. (also with the names of children redacted). Full zine in TIFF format at: https://www.sendspace.com/file/er3rdg (22MB)
TRIGGER WARNING. This newsletter discusses child sexual abuse in graphic detail.
Summary
A conference organizer analyzes the situation and what people are arguing about in Berkeley sf fan groups and communities. He questions what should be done and why, settling on the idea that Walter Breen should be banned from local fandom and from the upcoming Worldcon (Pacificon II) because he is harming children. He asks a wide group of friends also in fandom for advice on how to achieve this. Breen then married Marion Zimmer Bradley.
List of children affected
It seems worth pointing out that according to this newsletter, it was public knowledge by 1964 or before that since Breen moved to Berkeley in the late 50s, several children were affected. I would like to keep their names out of this.
Children listed here who were allegedly molested by Breen:
P—, a 3 year old girl.
S—’s son, a 13 year old boy.
G—, 10 years old. (And onwards for several years.) (“Glenn Frendel”)
G2, 7 years old.
Several unnamed teenage minors, boys and girls.
To ban or not to ban
Also of note, the basic idea that sf cons could ban people at all was so fraught that representatives from several cons across the United States signed a statement of support for banning, including several people who received this newsletter or were mentioned in it. http://fancyclopedia.org/moskowitz-pacificon-ii-reminiscence
THE GREAT BREEN BOONDOGGLE OR ALL BERKELEY IS PLUNGED INTO WAR
This article is most emphatically a Do Not Print, Do Not Quote and Most Especially Do No Blab My Name When You Mention This Letter Substitute. It is written for two different purposes: (1) To put together the facts in some coherent manner to send to Jack Speer for advice (2) To put together an account of recent stirring events in Berkeley to send to my friends for information purposes and/or to ask for advice. The account is long enough to make the writing of individual letters burdensome, particularly as I want to send it to a fair number of people.
As most stories do, this one has its roots in the past. It goes back to the very day when Walter Breen first arrived in Berkeley—almost four years
ago. At first sight—even before Walter’s statements and behavior largely confirmed this to most fans—Walter was assumed to be a homosexual. But no one cared. It was assumed that Walter had this facet under control and besides his sex life was felt to be no one else’s business—consenting adults and all that.
In the beginning the only anti-Walter people were the Gibsons and Danny Curran. Joe let it be known that he kept a loaded revolver on his mantel and that if Walter ever showed up at the Gibsons, he would use it. And of course Walter was one of the main people Joe had in mind when he wrote that SHAGGY article. Danny also lost no opportunity of putting Walter down. I once accused him of being Square. Danny said, “Hell, it’s not that. You know I have homosexual friends. But I think Walter is a shit. And this is a handy club to hit him with.”
So, at first Berkeley was indifferent to Walter’s sex life. This gradually began to change. There were two main causes for this. At a GGFS meeting at the ——’s, S— walked into her son’s bedroom—age 13—to find him in bed with Walter with Walter’s arm around him. They were watching TV. (Walter is incredible.) S— wasn’t about to take this. She didn’t make a scene at the time, but from then on, someone else was anti-Walter. Thenceforth the —— kids were under instructions to retire into their room and barricade the door with furniture whenever Walter was in the house. They did too. S— wanted to ban Walter from the house entirely but Alva felt great reluctance to reject any fan.
Most people were rather amused by this incident, feeling that the kid could say “No” and even if he said “Yes” the experience probably wouldn’t hurt him any. After all, Walter is so child-like himself that it would be just as if the kid were playing around with another kid. And quite apart from the sexual connotations some people were outraged that an adult could prefer the society of children to that of adults, as Walter does.
The second cause was Walter’s sex play with 3-year old P— ——. He had her trained up to the point where she would take off her clothes the minute she saw him. He would then “rub her down” and all that. I recall one occasion—a fairly large gathering at the Nelsons—in which he also used a pencil, rubbing the eraser back and forth in the general area of the vagina, not quite masturbating her. (Walter is incredible.) Many people were somewhat displeased by this—most particularly her parents. No one thought he was actually psychologically damaging P— (she being so young)—obviously —— and —— would have interfered if they thought he had been—but the spectacle was not thought to be aesthetically pleasing. Years later Walter found out about the reaction and said, "But why didn’t somebody say something! I wouldn’t have dreamed of doing it if I’d thought someone objected."
There was of course more than one incident of sex-play with P—. That was just the most spectacular one. I thought "Walter obviously isn’t going to stop this as P— grows older and more appealing. Sooner or later D— is going to think she’s being hurt. Now D— as do most bohemians—may think it’s approaching immorality to reject anyone for any reason, and particularly any fan, but killing in certain circumstances is perfectly moral. Now I wonder…" However, it didn’t come to that. D— let it be known that Walter was to stop this forthwith.
After this there were quite a few anti-Breen embers in Berkeley. But things jogged along for awhile. There were more and more Walter Breen stories (some of them screamingly funny) but no one’s attitude changed. Then came the G— episode. G— was ten years old and Walter was seeing a hell of a lot of him. (And still does; he recently gave G— a 10-gear bike; the standard quip is “One gear for each position.”). Rumors kept growing that Walter was having an affair with G—. One fan said that he had surprised them engaging in sex. Upon being closely questioned, however, it developed that G— and Walter were seated side by side on the couch in an unlocked, open room (Walter is incredible) and the guy came into the room suddenly. Walter leaped up and ran into the bathroom, clutching his open fly. The guy didn’t actually see what they were doing, but drew his own conclusions.
At least three different fans have reported glowing descriptions of sex with G— given them by Walter. (Walter is incredible.) One account: “G— and I began with mutual masturbation and worked up to 69. Then G— wanted to try buggering me, so I let him. Then I buggered him.”
This is all very vivid and on the whole people were more shocked than amused. However, almost all Berkeley fans dislike G— so no one cared much. “Who cares what happens to the little bastard?” But some felt that G— was a little bastard because he is troubled and going through a most difficult time at home and that particularly under these circumstances Walter wasn’t at all good for him.
Also about this time Walter was seeing another kid, 7-year old G2—. G2 is the son of the girl Danny was living with at the time and Danny told Walter to keep the hell away. This wasn’t too effective as the kid would still sneak off to see Walter, but Walter got all excited about it. He said that Danny had “betrayed” him. It is difficult to see how this could be a betrayal since from the beginning Danny and Walter have made no bones about intensely disliking each other. Danny’s attitude was more or less: “If anyone who has a kid lets Walter even speak to it, he should have his head examined.” Most people in Berkeley seem to think this is a reasonable attitude.
Walter was also upset about Danny’s trying to deprive him of G2 because “The kid’s too young! All I can do is to *cuddle* him for Christ’s sake.” The parental idea though seems to be—quite apart from the possible damage of the “cuddling”—that although as a general rule Walter isn’t interested in pre-puberty kids of either sex, if he’s “cuddling” one and no one else is around, a sudden temptation or aberration may seize him.
But Walter has further said, “I never even *seduce* a teen-ager. The kids *always* seduce me!” That is as may be. But one teen-ager, leaving Walter’s place after the first day of a proposed week’s stay said, “Walter *may* always be the one who’s seduced, but he makes it goddamn clear he’s available.”
However, Walter got quite upset about the whole G2 matter. He seemed to think that Danny’s action was somehow connected with G— (Danny would have done the same if G— had never been heard of), that Danny was actively spreading his “rumors” about Walter and G— (Danny didn’t have to, everyone else was) and that the story was causing not only Berkeley fandom, but all of West Coast fandom to reject Walter. (At that time Walter’s status was the same as it had been for years; fans objected much more to his previous dealings with P— than to his supposed affair with G—).
So, for months Walter was going around saying that Danny was responsible for his “rejection”. Now he’s changed his mind and is say[ing] that Al Halevy and Sid Rogers are responsible for his “persecution”; he’s even promoted Sid so that according to him she is one of the Three Big Bitches of Fandom, the others being G. M. Carr andChristine Moskowitz. Ho hum. Perhaps all this is connected with Subbud. (An East Indian Cult that is quite the thing now a days.) I understand that when Walter was “opened” in Subbud he gained two primary insights: (1) His Way of Life is absolutely correct and that he on no account should change it and (2) He is far too tolerant of other people and subservient to their wishes, but nevertheless he is always being betrayed. (Walter is incredible.)
But now at last to our main story. Perhaps due to Subbud’s reassurance, Walter’s recent behavior has been getting many Berkeley parents not just alarmed, but semi-hysterical. If Walter is in the same room with a young boy, he never takes his eyes off the kid. He’ll be semi-abstractedly talking to someone else, but his eyes will be on the boy. And if the kid goes to the bathroom, Walter gets up and follows him in. (Walter is incredible.)
Again when people complained about this, Walter said that if he had the least idea that anyone objected…. Knowing Walter I can readily believe that he was completely oblivious to the obvious signs of strong objection. Those who say Walter is a child are right and as a child he is completely oblivious to other people’s desires and wishes unless hit
on the head with them.
By now there were three main attitudes in Berkeley:
(1) Walter is evil and should be locked up.
(2) Walter is sick and should be helped—against his will if necessary.
(3) Walter is an intelligent and nice guy. None of this is important. He loves and understands children.
About this point Al Halevy decided that whether Walter is evil or sick is irrelevant; there is no reason why we have to put up with him and we should excrete him. As is Al’s wont, he waxed very enthusiastic about this project. He encountered stout opposition, but he also fanned the Anti-Breen embers into full flame.
The proposed excretion of Walter was discussed all around Berkeley. The suggestion was also made that we expel Walter from the Pacificon II as well, since we were expecting a large number of young teen-agers and shouldn’t let Walter make the convention his Happy Hunting Ground—that after all we owed some protection to the kids we were gathering in. However, in the first place Walter had attended four previous Worldcons without untoward incident and was in fact usually sharing a room with several other fans. In the second place while we could of course cancel Walter’s membership, if we did so without telling fandom why, there would be a big row. And if we told why, Walter would sue for slander and libel and we didn’t have $75,000.00.
It was pointed out that truth is a defense in a case like this. So it is, but Walter would probably sue anyway. And even though we have all sorts of evidence establishing the main facts, if not each individual instance, we’d still be out several hundred dollars in lawyer’s fees even after we’d won the case.
The Last Closet_The Dark Side of Avalon Page 40