Ungodly Genders: Deconstructing Ex-Gay Movement Discourses of “Transgenderism” in the US

Abstract

This research investigates a neglected topic within both transgender studies and religious studies by analyzing ex-gay movement discourses of “transgenderism” from the 1970s to the present, focusing primarily on the US-American context. The oppression of transgender people in the US and globally is fed and fueled by the religious, scientific, and political discourses of the transnational “ex-gay” movement, which provides the ideological and material foundation of Christian Right politics. Using critical discourse analysis of ex-gay texts, we analyze the implications of these discourses in the individual, interactional, and institutional dimensions of society’s gender structure. This movement is one of the most insidious—and overlooked—sources of cisgenderism and transmisogyny today, constructing gender variance as sin, mental illness, and danger—with catastrophic consequences for transgender people, and those along the transfemale/feminine spectrum in particular. Finally, we discuss the public policy implications of these discourses.

Why do we need a sociocognitive-CDA in hate speech studies? A corpus-based systematic review

“…As can be observed in Figure 3, studies of hate speech related to discrimination against gender groups can be seen in the article of Baider (2018), Robinson and Spivey (2019), Ruzaite (2018), Readyera (2019), and Trindade (2020). This topic is most prominently discussed in an article by Robinson and Spivey (2019). In this case, Robinson and Spivey examine a phenomenon of transgenderism discourse carried out by ex-gay groups or movements in America since the 1970s, which they consider dangerous because their groups are seen as a source of cisgenderism and transmisogyny, which construct gender variants as a form of sin, mental illness, and danger.…”

“…As can be observed in Figure 3, studies of hate speech related to discrimination against gender groups can be seen in the article of Baider (2018), Robinson and Spivey (2019), Ruzaite (2018), Readyera (2019), and Trindade (2020). This topic is most prominently discussed in an article by Robinson and Spivey (2019).…”

Ex‐gay activism and the reification of sexual identity in law

“…Exodus's closure signals the US public's decreasing tolerance for the homophobia associated with ex-gay theology. This position is shared by professional medical associations-the overwhelming majority of physicians agree that sexual "reorientation" is both unlikely to occur and psychologically harmful to attempt-and, increasingly, elected offi- Yet in spite of these regional restrictions, the global ex-gay movement has proved resilient (Robinson and Spivey 2019). While the US-focused Exodus International is no longer active, Exodus Global Alliance-"a worldwide outreach to people affected by homosexuality"-continues to operate (Exodus Global Alliance 2022b).…”

“…Yet in spite of these regional restrictions, the global ex‐gay movement has proved resilient (Robinson and Spivey 2019). While the US‐focused Exodus International is no longer active, Exodus Global Alliance—“a worldwide outreach to people affected by homosexuality”—continues to operate (Exodus Global Alliance 2022b).…”

“…Ex‐gay ministries encompass a range of practices, including individual counseling, residential programs, and Alcoholics Anonymous–style support‐group meetings, aimed at uncovering what practitioners see as the “cause” of participants’ sexuality. While their detractors refer to them as “conversion therapy,” advocates tend to prefer “sexual orientation change efforts” or “change‐oriented therapies.” Because they approach same‐sex attraction as a form of gender disorder (Robinson and Spivey 2007; 2019), many such ministries encourage their participants to engage in surprisingly crude “gender‐affirming” activities: the wearing of makeup for women or the playing of team sports for men. This speaks to the paradox at the heart of reorientation efforts, which posit heterosexuality as more “natural” than its alternatives, even if it must be “learned and embodied through purposeful effort” (Hackman 2016, 509).…”