« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
06/23/2008
The most annoying post we've ever felt compelled to write
Alright, so this is probably going to be annoying for anyone who doesn't involve themselves deeply within the gay "culture war." However, since a fringe activist by the name of Stacy Harp is going to lengths to misrepresent a situation that she has shared with this writer, I feel that I have no choice but to lay bare the truth. If you want to read, continue on. If not, I SO don't blame you.
Okay, so on Friday, a friend of G-A-Y IMed me and told me that he thought a certain person who was quoted in a local newspaper article sounded like it might be Stacy Harp. Frankly, I don't really follow Stacy's antics, and cared little about whether it was her or not. But since Stacy and I have exchanged emails in the past, I said I would email and ask if it was her. So that's what I did:
Alright, cordial enough. So one would think we were done, right? I certainly did. She told me it wasn't her, and I passed on that information -- case closed.
Well on Saturday afternoon, I'm checking my RSS reader,and I notice that I have a new mention from Stacy's blog. Ya see, I have an RSS feed set up that lets me know when anyone on the Internet mentions me or Good As You. So even though I've only read Stacy's site the few times she has mentioned me, the RSS feed made aware of the fact that she was talking about me. Naturally, out of curiosity, I go check out what she's saying. What do I see? Well, Stacy, apparently wanting to turn this total non-story into something, had posted the first email I sent her, and then written a subsequent commentary reading:
Well, it made me laugh to read such a silly email for a few reasons. First, I am hardly blonde, as my hair is considered light brown even by my hairstylist. Second, how dare Jeremy imply that I’m “middle aged” - I’m not even 40 yet. Third, I wasn’t even in town when this protest took place, and Fourth, I’m not afraid to give my name to the press. And fifth, anyone can find out where anyone lives these days so whoever this middle aged blonde woman was apparently isn’t educated enough to know that anyone can buy your personal information online for a nominal fee.
But here’s the thing. Jeremy clearly lies in his email about this “so called little birdie”. Instead of asking me straight out if it was me being quoted, he simply lies and uses “a little birdie told me”.
Well, as I told him in my response, if he bothered to read this blog, then he would know that I was here in Colorado when this event took place in California.
I’ll give him this though, at least he had the nerve to ask if it was me, and the common sense to believe me when I told him I was here.
But he said he doesn’t read my blog. Now that isn’t nice is it. If you’re going to attempt to attack someone you should at least take the time to read the persons blog. :)
Alright, so normally I would have just ignored it. However, I don't take kindly to being called a liar. It doesn't matter how big or small the player, I am not going to sit idly by and have my name and character misrepresented and even defamed by anyone. So I immediately head to Stacy's comments section (surprised that unlike so many social conservatives, she actually has comments) and I try to leave a comment correction her record. But surprise, surprise -- I am unable to do so. This leads me to write Stacy again:
(excuse any typos)
But of course Stacy doesn't post THIS email. She instead writes me back, leading to a ridiculous string of accusations, lies, etc:
(please excuse all typos)
So at this point, I notice that Stacy has once against posted about me and our conversation, so I go and check it out. And again, she's misrepresenting:
A few days ago I wrote this post about Jeremy Hooper, the militant homosexuals community’s cherub of blog-based demonization, and to my shock and amazement, the next day Jeremy responded in haste to my post.
Even though he doesn’t read my blog, I thought that was a pretty quick response. He claims that another homosexual activist tipped him off because my blog isn’t that worthy of his attention.
Anyway, he was upset because I said that his little birdies were in his imagination. He claims that someone in my area saw me at this protest and tipped him off. So he called me a liar.
The only problem is that I lied about nothing. And as is pretty typical, Jeremy didn’t bother giving me a name, or blog site of this so called “little birdy”.
Regardless, this is just another example of a homosexual activist trying to dig up dirt where there isn’t any. I apologized to Jeremy for offending him.
In response, I choose to only call her out on one point:
To which she, again being less-than-truthful, replies:
One only need to go to the fourth posted email (6/21 @ 2:31) to see that I did in fact tell her about the RSS. But she does, in this email, raise one of the only accurate assessments of the entire email chain. That is: I vowed to not write her again. Let me now take that a step further: I have no intention of ever writing about her ever again either.
**UPDATE: Now Stacy has lied again. She says in a new post she has written about yours truly:
"I did email him and explained to him my comments section doesn’t work."
Only problem? She emailed me this after this post was written.
Stacy does, however, accurately reveal that I would not share personal information about myself with her. The fact that she even for a second thinks I WOULD want to share personal information or strike up a friendship is just plain bizarre. And that's coming from someone who does have many personal relationships with anti-gay activists, and who has even written an Advocate article about how such cordial relationships can be productive. It's just that Stacy, through her barrage of misrepresentation and her desire to psychoanalyze someone she does not know the first thing about, has blown the chance of any semblance of a cordial relationship
**UPDATE2: For the record, I never "accused" Stacy of being the person in the article. I ASKED her if she was, and when she said she wasn't, I accepted it at face value. Again -- I never cared whether she was or she wasn't, and never had any intention to write about it. There was no story!
Your thoughts
Ugh! Ugh! Ugh!!!
I need a shower after reading that. That "woman" obviously has some emotional problems.
G-A-Y: "The sky is blue."
Harp-ist: "See how the homosexuals always lie?! Sometimes the sky is grey and this is just another example of the radical homosexualist agenda. Defense! Children! Sanctity! Bawwwk!"
Posted by: andrew williams | Jun 23, 2008 4:46:38 PM
Wow. She's a nightmare.
Posted by: ted | Jun 23, 2008 4:51:32 PM
It is par for the course with the fundamentalist . A few years ago I had an email exchange with someone from Boundless.org ("a website of Focus on the Family" geared towards college students). I believe it was Matt Kaufman, but I can't be certain.
Anyway the last email from him said something along the lines of "and even you could not resist from accusing me of being intolerant and hate filled".
The only problem. I never once implied that nor did I use those words at all. At that point I decided to quit the exchange. No need to deal with someone who would twist my words to fit his persecution complex.
Come to think of it, every time I have had an exchange with a far-right Christian they put words in my mouth. You just can't win with them. Especially when they have conversations with you that you were not even present for. Talk about imaginations!
Posted by: Jon-Marc | Jun 23, 2008 5:00:00 PM
Thank GOD! Sheeesh! If I ever read another word about ms. harp, it'll be tooooo sooooon!
But, I do have to say, Jeremy, it sounds to me like she has a little crush on you! Just hope it doesn't turn all "fatal attraction" on you (how many times do you have to be told to keep the rabbit's cage away from the kitchen.) Her instability suggests that she may have that kind of personality disorder.
Posted by: Dick Mills | Jun 23, 2008 5:01:47 PM
Well honestly, the most annoying part for me is that I had to write this at all. I just can't sit by and let someone lie like this. And rather than do as Stacy would do, and present my own take on the matter, I just wanted to put the emails out there as is.
Mostly, I find the whole thing just sad.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 23, 2008 5:03:45 PM
She's the one who has difficulty tell the truth. Does she have some radio program or talk show? I could swear she was the one who invited some guy on a program she hosted, who made the outrageous claim that gay people rape babies.
Or am I thinking of somebody else?
Oh, and if you're "militant", then I'm seven feet tall. :)
Posted by: Bill S | Jun 23, 2008 5:06:47 PM
I wish I could swear here, but my mom reads this so I'll just say: "Malicious witch"
Posted by: Corvidae | Jun 23, 2008 5:07:12 PM
Jeremy, you must be ready to pull some hair out -- not because you care about this person, but just out of sheer frustration.
I'm an author, and I participate in many blogs on topics of homosexuality and religion. I've found that people who do not want to believe what I write don't actually read it very carefully -- they just pick out the bits that make them go "THERE! I knew I was right!" and then they proceed to tell me why I'm wrong.
Writing is very important to me, as you can imagine, since it is to you as well. So when someone so blatantly and repeatedly ignores and/or re-interprets my writing, it makes me crazy.
While I'd love to call Stacy a liar when she says you didn't tell her about the RSS feed (among other things she misrepresents), it's entirely possible that in her self-centered, narrow-minded approach to what you represent, she just didn't read it. Your approach is sensible: Ignore her.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Posted by: robin reardon | Jun 23, 2008 5:07:27 PM
That's exactly the point, Robin. It's not about Stacy. It's not about this silly situation that she chose to turn into a "story" via her initial post. It's just the brazen misrepresentation. I don't take kindly to that.
The funny thing? Of all gay activists, I am the one who DOES converse with the opposition. And I'm also the one who keeps things on a professional rather than personal level, never attacking anyone. This is one case where my willingness had led me to unnecessary annoyance.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 23, 2008 5:29:40 PM
I'm not surprised how Stacy has twisted things. She doesn't understand the word 'truth.' I've been dealing with Stacy Harp for a couple of years now. Nothing she says surprises me any more.
Posted by: kevin | Jun 23, 2008 6:55:17 PM
Seriously, I think Stacy has mental problems. There was an incident with her some time ago that was blogged about and included an audio clip of a telephone conversation. I remember thinking at the time that she had serious mental issues.
Posted by: Richard Rush | Jun 23, 2008 7:09:10 PM
Richard:
http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2008/04/audio-s-harp-an.html
Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 23, 2008 7:19:09 PM
Is this the same woman that had that disturbing phone conversation with Joe Brummer? I think it is! And it's on tape. :)
http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/2008/04/audio-anti-gay-activist-stacy-harp-reveals-her-passions/
Posted by: Jake | Jun 23, 2008 7:43:23 PM
Jeremy, way to go protecting your source. I don't know why this lady had such a hard time accepting that you were not only protecting a source, but also doing some fact checking. If someone were saying I potentially made a statement that I did not, I would hope someone would outright ask me so that the issue could be put to rest.
On another note, I followed the link to her site. I can see why someone would think she was a middle aged blond woman. I'm sorry, but if she doesn't want people to think that, she needs to put up pictures that show what she wants people to think she looks like. I think she overreacted to being called a blond. If you need your stylist to tell you what your hair color is, then you give up all rights to be miffed when someone gets it wrong.
Oh I could say so much more on the topic, but most of it has already been said. What an annoying situation.
Posted by: Miranda | Jun 23, 2008 7:59:44 PM
She needs to get laid. And then you need to not waste anymore time conversing with an idiot. Watch paint dry. It would be far more interesting.
Posted by: Musicguy | Jun 23, 2008 8:48:38 PM
Poor Stacy. I've thought for a while now that she's... well... not likely to go down in history as a great thinker. It's kinda sad, really.
Posted by: Timothy | Jun 23, 2008 9:30:40 PM
Judge me if you must, but I just finished reading up on her (wow! so much has been written on her body of work). Can we make a pact here, as rational people, that we will no longer entertain and embolden the brainless bomb-throwers among us? This one doesn't even have a coherant argument to debate. When a crazy person walks up to me in the subway and screams "Two chickens for a dollar!" I just turn around and don't think about it again. There are so many ways to get our collective goat, and this person just seems to have found a way to get some attention. Boring, really, and I'm done.
Posted by: andrew williams | Jun 23, 2008 10:28:09 PM
Not even 40!?!?! Just look at the photo she chose for her blog, wrinkles and grey hair, if she's under 40 she's certianly seen more than her share of rough miles.
Posted by: John | Jun 24, 2008 1:00:46 AM
Oh Goody,
Gotta repost using my email since the psycho is apparently now responding to posts via email and posting that along with whatever personal information she manages to dig up on that den of insanity that passes for her blog. Come one baby, I wanna mail from the psycho-bitch too!!
Oh,and Stacy, if your under 40, you must have been ridden hard and put away wet a lot, cause looking at the pic on your blog, I'd say estimating your age at 50 was being generous.
Posted by: John | Jun 24, 2008 1:07:49 AM
I am SO sorry that Stacy is now harassing some of you, going so far as to post personal information about you. Not cool.
The best thing might be to just stop this comments section right here, and to ignore Ms. Harp.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 24, 2008 8:27:30 AM
Me harassing? Never, just simply responding and sharing with my audience what some people do while they are at work. It's amazing what one can find out when you have a read receipt on the email you send...like for example, I know many of those I emailed forwarded it to you :)
Also, if someone is stupid enough to use a company email, you bet I'm going to check out the company. So no digging here, or harassment, just sharing what is obvious from posts with my audience.
Posted by: Stacy Harp | Jun 24, 2008 10:27:40 AM
Again, everyone: I'm sorry for having brought Ms. Harp into your lives. It was a momentary lapse in judgment.
**UPDATE: Stacy is apparently now calling people at their offices, threatening them for making comments here!
Posted by: G-A-Y | Jun 24, 2008 10:36:03 AM
For the record, I was the person who asked Jeremy if he thought the anonymous lady quoted in that article was Stacy Harp.
Stacy lives in Orange, CA and is very close to the Santa Ana courthouse where the marriages were taking place. The description matched Stacy's and it was an innocent question.
Now, after reading this post and then surfing over to Stacy's blog, I have decided that as a resident of CA, I must file an ethics complaint with the California Government Department of Consumer Affairs Board of Behavioral Sciences.
Stacy claims to be a Marriage and Family Therapist (MFT) and her ability to practice is governed under this agency.
Personally I think her online behavior shows some very poor judgment on her part and I want this board to investigate if she is fit to counsel people.
If anyone else would like to join me, the web site to ask for an inquiry is here:
Posted by: Scott | Jun 24, 2008 12:44:27 PM
You can always tell when someone is fighting a losing war- they result to childish, immature behavior. I almost feel sorry for Stacy. Eh, not really. She's just a psychotic fundie.
Posted by: Musicguy | Jun 24, 2008 1:36:04 PM
Jeremy-- I think she has the hots for you!! She's like uber obsessed with you and your blog right now. RUN FOR THE HILLS!! I would not want that middle-aged beast chasing me around.
Posted by: Musicguy | Jun 24, 2008 1:41:12 PM
Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars... Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.
Martin Luther King Jr.
With that said folks, I am ask kindly that you all refrain from calling Stacy names or antagonizing her any further. I would suggest the best thing is to ignore everything she does or respond in kindness as I am sure Jeremy would appreciate and history has shown to be most effective.
I offer you the story of two wolves and ask that you apply it to Stacy and her quest for attention.
An old Cherokee chief is teaching his grandson about life:
"A fight is going on inside me," he said to the boy. "It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves.
"One is evil - he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, self-doubt, and ego.
"The other is good - he is joy, peace, love, hope,
serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith.
"This same fight is going on inside you - and inside every other person, too."
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather, "Which wolf will win?"
The old chief simply replied, "The one you feed."
STOP FEEDING STACY!
Posted by: Joe Brummer | Jun 24, 2008 1:56:06 PM
Sweet fancy moses - She's a licensed counselor?! I guess she didn't read the part of the ethics code that warns against filing ethical complaints with a reckless disregard or willful ignorance of facts that would disprove the allegation. While calling people at work may not be filing a complaint, it sure does seem to me to be violating the spirit of the code. Of course, then there is that whole "do no harm" bit and it seems that Ms. Harp is really going out of her way to do harm to those who disagree with her.
Posted by: Ed | Jun 24, 2008 1:59:52 PM
G-A-Y,
Referring to Stacy Harp as "middle aged" is actually a compliment.
Posted by: Scott | Jun 24, 2008 3:03:28 PM
I have to respond to your lies Jeremy.
First of all, I didn't call the offices of "people", and threaten them. I called Andrew Williams employer and they basically stonewalled me. Pun intended.
Secondly, since they stonewalled me, I emailed the address on that company site so someone would know what Mr. Williams does on company time while giving his company a bad name.
As for Scott's comments - once again the man is misinformed. I am not a licensed therapist here in CA. I have never claimed to be a licensed therapist. And if Scott would just come to me directly instead of his rumor mongering, then maybe the man could get his facts straight. His threats are baseless.
My question Jeremy is why do you insist on lying on your blog and letting your comments use such harsh and lying language. Is this what your side is really all about?
Is this how you try to sway others to your side?
Very sad...very sad and what's even sadder is knowing that your side uses personal time and personal company email to defame the name of their good company. If the people who work with me did that, I'd sure want to know.
Posted by: Stacy Harp | Jun 24, 2008 3:54:37 PM
Stacy, the complaint has been submitted. If you don't have a license on file, then don't worry about it, it will hit the digital circular file.
It doesn't change the fact that you are completely bonkers and are going out of your way to harass people.
It is completely conceivable that somebody who lives in Orange, CA on Chapman or Fairway that fits the description of a middle aged blond woman who is protesting gay weddings in Santa Ana (less than 5 miles from your house) would be mistaken for you.
You look like a complete nut case. Go make some more phone calls to people and release them on the internet so we'll have even more evidence of your complete meltdown.
Posted by: Scott | Jun 24, 2008 4:05:58 PM
