3.18.10 Editor’s Desk

A person should be judged by their skills and abilities while at work and nothing else. Of course, everybody should be protected from harassment and discrimination.

Companies, universities and non-profits throughout the country have added non-discrimination policies to protect their workers. Most organizations and companies want to ensure that employees are not harassed for their religious beliefs, their age or their sexual orientation or gender identity. I am a very liberal person when it comes to social issues. I think everyone should be treated with respect, even if we don’t understand their way of living, their religion or their gender identity. If a person or group doesn’t pose a threat to my everyday life, then protecting that person or group from all discrimination is a no-brainer.

But a recent proposal placed before The Walt Disney Company made me take stock of that view. For the first time in my life I can honestly say I don’t see the point of protections for a specific class of people.

Earlier this month, Greg Quinlan, director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays presented a resolution at Disney’s annual shareholders meeting to add “former homosexuals” to its sexual orientation and non-discrimination policy and diversity training. Walt Disney’s shareholders declined the motion.

Adding ex-gays to a non-discrimination policy is just as crazy as adding leprechauns and centaurs. All mythical creatures might as well be included.

Obviously, I don’t buy the whole “ex-gay” thing. Despite the religious teachings of the far-right, more and more people agree with scientists that sexual orientation is an inherited trait embedded in us at conception and not a choice. Groups that try therapy to convert gays to straights, like Exodus, have been debunked repeatedly by respected psychiatrists and many survivors of ex-gay movements have shared horrifying tales of shock treatments and guilt trips.

Ex-gays simply don’t exist. But people who have convinced themselves they are no longer gay certainly do, thanks to undeserved guilt placed upon them by their families and religious leaders.

But say, for a moment, that a company does incorporate protections for “ex-gays.” Who, exactly, would that protect?

Would the woman who was dumped by her high school boyfriend and then made out with her college roommate that same evening be included in that group? Would she want to be included? What about the guy who fell victim to the “six-pack of beer rule” in high school and enjoyed a blow job from his best friend? Would he be included? Would he even want to be identified as ex-gay, much less admit to the details of the evening?

Probably not—on all counts.

Should we include “ex-Catholics” in non-discrimination policies too? Many people raised in the Catholic church have sought other denominations or other religions all together. Many jokingly say they are “recovering Catholics,” but identifying as a protected class would be ridiculous. You are Catholic, Baptist, Pagan, Jewish, Muslim, atheist—you get the picture.

It’s easy to identify with a specific religion, generation or race. It’s also easy to identify with a sexual orientation or with a specific identity.

What Quinlan obviously doesn’t understand is that truly distancing yourself from your sexual orientation makes just as much sense as distancing yourself from your race. There’s just no such thing as an “ex-Caucasian” or “formerly Asian.”

As ridiculous as the argument for ex-gay inclusion as a protected group may seem, Quinlan has vowed to continue the fight. His argument in support of the change reaches back several years ago when many Christian Disney stockholders sold their shares in retaliation to the company’s pro-LGBT policies. He says Christians ought to retain ownership so they can exercise a more powerful voice in corporate affairs.

Maybe someday Quinlan, and those who support his motion, will realize that offering protections to people who have been scared back into the closet by fundamentalists is a huge step backward—not a step toward equality.