Have you ever seen those really tragic and depressing movies or TV shows which depict how life was a century ago? The ones where a girl is sexuality abused by a man with prestige, and because she is a woman, her accusations are met only with violence by the girl's parents. Back when women didn't have rights and people weren't treated equal because of who they were. Well, Ms. Battles' article reminds me of those movies. To know that there are parents like the Savareses out there makes me very sad for the children of tomorrow.
The first paragraph of the article (right after the quote) sets up the story as if Bert's son was dead or part of some kind of cult or something (Near the bottom of the story, Bert actually says: "It’s exactly like...a cult that has taken your child away"). It's disgusting! You may also have noticed that Ms. Battles avoids using Bert's son's name during the ENTIRE article. Quite a cleaver way of de-humanizing him, don't you think? He ceases being a person and simply becomes a "gay". As if he is now some kind of sexual deviant who has no hopes, or dreams, or interests, or relationships. The article conveniently never mentions what his goals are or what hobbies he has. Ms. Battles never even bothered trying to get Bert's son's opinion or views on the situation. He is viewed simply as some kind of victim who has no power to act on his own. To give him a name would force readers to view him as a person who is exactly like the rest of us, only with different sexual preferences. Well, for this review, I don't want Bert's son to be nameless. Since we have no way of knowing what his name is, let's just call him Michael.
The first section of the article, The Hurricane Hits, tells how Mr. and Mrs. Savarese found out that Michael was in fact gay. It all happened when Michael's parents went to pick up a book for him while he was out of town. This might have been a nice gesture had Michael ASKED them to pick up his book. Since he did not however, then all this demonstrates is that Mr. & Mrs. Savarese have a complete lack of respect for Michael and for his privacy. In fact, had they waited, I'm sure their actions would have been illegal. Why else would Ms. Battles' have mentioned that this took place RIGHT before Michael's 18th birthday? At the age of 18, it becomes illegal for someone else to open your mail. The mentioning of Michael's age at this point really has no other bearing on the story. Once the Savareses picked up Michael's book, Bert and her husband found that the book was actually a homosexual romance novel. It wasn't until after they left the store however, that Bert claims the "hurricane" hit.
This "hurricane" was a wave of rage and hate that overcame Bert. Bert claims that this was a "perfectly bad example of how to act when you find out.” Bert is absolutely right. Especially since she has no reason to be mad in the first place! When Michael came back from his trip, Bert and her husband decided to talk to him about the book. They asked Michael if he was Gay, to which he at first replied "no". In response to this, "Bert assured [Michael] that they loved him completely and his answer would not change that." Michael then admitted that he was in fact gay. So, did Bert accept this and did she love him completely despite his answer? Not quite! The VERY next day, Bert went looking for information on homosexuality in bookstores and libraries, discarding all the 'pro-homosexuality' books. Had Bert truly meant what she had said about loving Michael no matter what, she would have tried to understand him, not "fix" him.
In the second part of the article, Damage and Reconstruction, Battles tells us how Bert became a born-again Christian, and how she learned that there were ways to turn homosexual back into heterosexuals which would "bring [them] back to what is true". The section starts by letting us know how the Savarese family was affected by time. Bert got a divorce, Michael moved away, and Bert became a total religious fanatic. I truly hope I'm not the only one who finds this section of the article to be particularly sickening. It is a perfect example of how this kind of hatred is inspired completely by selfishness and ignorance however. Bert's reasons for hating homosexuality are (and I quote): "...even though she was looking at it from a humanistic perspective at this time, she did not think it was the type of life her son could be happy with. She knew it shattered everything for them. Thoughts of no wedding, no daughter-in-law dominated her perspective." This is just stupidity. Since BERT can't imagine how her son could be happy, then there is no conceivable way that her son could ACTUALLY be happy? So, if Bert couldn't imagine what oxygen was like, does that mean we would all suffocate? What if she couldn't image how math worked? Would math just stop working? Why doesn't Bert ASK Michael instead of assuming that he could never be happy? I suppose TALKING to homosexuals is out of the question for these people. As for the second part of Bert's statement, even she admits that these desires are merely selfishness. She tries to defend them however by saying “it was like a death. Very, very much like a death. [I] had to deal with losing everything that [I] thought could possibly happen in [my] child’s life that was going to be happy.” So, again we are brought back to the fact that because SHE can't imagine homosexuals as happy, they therefore couldn't be. And if you'll notice, she isn't sad because Michael will never have a wife, she sad because SHE won't get a daughter in-law. I wonder whose happiness she is concerned for, her son's or her own? The problem with Homosexuality for Bert is that SHE won't get a wedding and a daughter-in-law. I guess her son's happiness comes second only to her own.
Some of Bert's "well-meaning friends told her some people just turn out that way and to get used to it". Unfortunately for world, Bert proves that religious fundamentalists are against any and all things that involve acceptance of others. She rejected the advice of her friends. Battles claims that it was during this time that Bert rediscovered her faith, and that God spoke to her and told her that there are ways to "help" homosexuals. And to think, back in the old days, we needed prophets to tell us the will of God! Now a days, we just need Bert! Needless to say, Bert's fall into fundamentalism didn't help her relationship with Michael, who was now living with a homosexual partner. More specifically, "Bert feels in many ways she drove her son away because she was trying to bring him back to what is true." I applaud Michael for being able to resist the bigoted views of his mother. Michael shows that he is not willing to change who he is simply because someone doesn't want to take the time to understand him. The last part of this section says how Michael and Bert have started talking to each other again, and have begun mending their relationship. Hopefully Michael will be able to teach his mother a thing or two about tolerance.
The third section of the article, God: A Breakwater of Hope, is really just three short paragraphs of religious propaganda. In the first paragraph, Bert tells us that she can never accept Michael as a homosexual because that would be giving up hope. She also says that God is hope, and that by believing in God, she will always have hope. I guess that's her way of saying: Don't love your children for who they are, love them for who you want them to be. The second paragraph of this section is nothing but trash. I feel I should quote the entire paragraph and examine it to understand why. Let's take a look, shall we?
Based on the word of God, she cannot
justify her son’s homosexuality. She stated; “ We can’t
pick and choose what we want out of the Bible. It’s all or
nothing.” Bert has told her son she will
not lie to him just to make him feel good. She will not hold back
from the truth because “I
have to stand before God and I don’t want to tell God ‘Well
I didn’t tell [my son] the truth because
it would have made him uncomfortable. Or it would make me
uncomfortable or it would have
impacted our relationship.’”
First, it is an INTERPRETATION of the Bible that leads fundamentalists to think that homosexuality is wrong. The Bible never says "those who conduct homosexual acts are evil." Fundamentalists like Bert use their religion as a justification for their hate. She CHOOSES to interpret the Bible this way. Second, the claim that fundamentalists don't pick and choose what they want out of the Bible is a complete and total lie. EVERY SINGLE fundamentalist picks and chooses what they want out of the Bible and simply ignores the rest. Her claim that "it's all or nothing" is nothing but a lie. Would you like proof?
According to the Bible, the penalty for insulting a parent is death (Exodus 20:17 - And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death). Would Bert have killed Michael if he swore at her during one of their arguments? I can promise you that at one point in his life, Michael did SOMETHING that Bert found insulting. The fact that Bert did not kill him then and there shows that she is clearly picking and choosing what she wants from the Bible and discarding the rest. I wonder, does Bert put on Tephillin? After all, the Bible says clear as day in Deuteronomy 6:8 - "And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes." Does Bert bind any kind of fabric upon her hand and forehead? If she doesn't, then she is picking and choosing from the Bible. Has Bert put a Mezuzzah beside all the doors in her house (or made some other kind of religious mark)? After all, Deuteronomy 6:9 says "And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates." If she hasn't marked all the posts in her house, then she is ignoring parts of the Bible! Again, when fundamentalists claims that they can't "pick and choose what they want out of the Bible", it's their way of justifying their hatred for others. They don't ACTUALLY follow everything in the Bible. Bert's claim is clearly a lie. Since lying is a violation of one of the 10 commandments, it means it is a much more serious sin than the act of homosexuality. That means Bert is more sinful than anyone who simply practices homosexuality.
The fourth and final section of the article is called Rescuing Other Storm Victims. This last sections shows us that Bert is closer to hate and prejudice than ever before. Bert has decided to open a chapter of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays in her home town. Bert says "I wish [Michael] had not gone into homosexuality but I wish we could let people know there is a way out of it. That they literally do not have to take that first step [into homosexuality] - many people can be saved." The quote would be touching if it wasn't so evil. Why is Bert so passionately against tolerance and understanding? Bert goes on to once again make a similarity between homosexuality and death. She says "what it [feels] like psychologically to lose your child. Your child is still alive but they are not there. It’s exactly like...a cult that has taken your child away.” Well, maybe if you didn't hate your child simply for who he was, he might still be there! It's time Bert took a long look in the mirror. She might see that it isn't Michael who has been taken away by a cult.
Check out some previous AFA articles and reviews
<----- Back to my homepage