Openly-gay model in 'Nobody is born gay' billboard reacts


A group who call themselves Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gay (PFOX), put up billboard in Richmond, Virginia, featuring the image of twin white men and text reading: “Identical twins: One Gay. One Not. We believe twins research studies show NOBODY IS BORN GAY.”

It turns out their billboard models are actually just one man, Kyle Roux, who is not a twin and who also is openly gay.


Roux hasn’t thought about that photo shoot in nearly a decade. He says the pictures used on the billboard were part of a stock photo shoot he did. Roux signed away the rights and was told the pictures would be used in commercial and corporate ads and brochures.

Thursday morning, friends, family and even Roux’s trainer asked if he was featured in the ad, which claimed to show identical twins and the statement, “Nobody is born gay.”

It’s ironic, says Roux, given that he’s not a twin and openly gay.

“It just seems like there no place in today’s world for an organization that is promoting this as being some kind of deviant or distasteful lifestyle, because I’ve lived my life openly gay and happy for my entire life,” he said.

“It’s actually quite a big thing that there is this kind of discrimination and borderline hate speech going on, you know,” he said.

Roux says he’s worried about teens struggling with their sexuality, and he hopes to empower others.


I have a friend who is a model and I’ve seen her photos on several ads that she didn’t know about. Thankfully they weren’t embarrassing or morally repugnant to her, just a national spa chain and an eyeglasses company. Still, I can’t imagine taking that risk of selling stock photos. You have little idea where your likeness may end up.


Why is this a problem? He sold his photos a company used them. That’s the way is supposed to work.


The twin thing doesn’t disprove that prople are born gay anyway. There could be environmental factors in the womb that contribute so even without a fully genetic explanation, someone can still be “born gay”. Either way it’s not a choice and seems to be unchangeable in most cases.

I don’t think anybody really belives it’s 100% genetic now anyway so who is the billboards audience? I suspect the audience is those who already agree with the group that put it up, I’m just not clear on the point of it.

That aside, It’s pretty funny how badly this fell through for them…


You mean what’s the problem other than the fact that the ad claims that a non-twin openly gay man is really twins, one of whom is gay?


Well, it does make you wonder about the veracity of the company that paid for the billboard.


That’s how stock photos work.

I worked for a smallish CPA firm and on one of our brochures were a bunch of random models. None of them worked at our firm, let alone were they probably even remotely involved in accounting.



:popcorn: Brussels sprouts are delicious. :popcorn:


Sounds immoral, the ends don’t justify the means. Not in accord with doctrine. :o


The billboards audience are people who believe homosexuality is genetic.


Why? Do you think, for instance , that Flo is really a Progressive agent?


Stock photos are used in that way all the time.


We found that same stock photos we used for my firm on several other sites.


You mean, she’s not…:eek:


So you think I am going to do extra hard time in purgatory for using stock photos in my web site?:wink:


Not this time of the year-she moonlights working for Santa Claus…


I think the billboard isn’t saying if homosexuality is good or bad; just a question of whether or not it is genetic. So, I don’t know why the model would be upset unless he thinks it is genetic. There are some that think that environmental factors play a more significant role than genetic factors.

For example, the Family Research Council summarizes some of the findings (with a definite bias, but it is a good overview). It suggests that environmental issues like the relationship between child and parents are key factors.

You can read it here:


I think you’re jumping ahead. There’s no “ends justify the means” issue if it’s not yet even established that the means are wrong.

People in print ads are usually just meant to represent a role, just like actors in commercials. That sort of acting is not immoral. If the guy in the Crestor ad says “I’m John Smith from Kalamazoo, MI, and I’m a real Crestor user”, and it’s false, well then it’s immorally deceptive, because you’re being lead to believe it’s not just an actor or model representing a role.


The problem is, they lied. That’s a sin. Yes, they’re stock photos, but that doesn’t mean he can’t express an opinion on how his image is used. He exposed their lie…

And if they couldn’t find a gay/straight set of identical twins to actually back up their assertion, to the point that they had to use a non-twin gay man, it also calls into question the effectiveness of ex-gay “therapy”.


I saw “A Charlie Brown Christmas” the other night. Found out it was all a lie. Those people don’t really exist. If they couldn’t find a real beagle and real children to play the parts it calls into the question all this “peace on earth, good will to men” stuff they were peddling.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit