Creationist Ken Ham Does Unspeakable Things with a T. Rex in This Erotic Novel May 23, 2017

Creationist Ken Ham Does Unspeakable Things with a T. Rex in This Erotic Novel

Someone has written a 67-page erotic thriller — full of same-sex love scenes and bestiality — starring Creationist Ken Ham and his dinosaur-stocked Kentucky-based Noah’s Ark theme park, Ark Encounter.

Ham being the target of such a parody comes as little surprise to those of us familiar with Ham’s constant condemnation of gay marriage and the secular worldview on Twitter, caricaturing himself as a logic-inept, prudish, homophobic villain.


Ken Ham and the Seidel Man‘s author, operating under the pseudonym Justin Beavers, wouldn’t be the first to turn a conservative narrative around on the aggressor in sexual novella form. A couple of years ago, Mandy De Sandra gifted the world Kirk Cameron & The Crocoduck of Chaos Magick, a lusty tale of former-child-star-turned-evangelical-creationist Kirk Cameron.

Although they share a sense of humor, Beaver set out to make a larger point with his erotic book, as he told me in an e-mail:

… in the book I also try to humanize Ken a bit. If he were an actual homosexual man, what might he struggle with in his social context as a conservative Christian. What does he stand to lose? So part of it was for humor, another was an attempt to bring to light issues some really face in these environments.

If the title rings a bell, that’s because “Seidel” is a reference to Andrew Seidel, the Freedom From Religious Foundation constitutional lawyer who has recently been knocking down Ham’s attempts to lure public school children to his attraction, despite the legal violations that would mean for the districts. Seidel recently paid Ark Encounter a visit to shoot a commercial for FFRF, so it’s fair to say he’s been a thorn in Ham’s side. And what better way to play on that tension than to make Seidel the object of Ham’s sexual desires? I’m tempted to say Ham’s character would love to be a thorn in Seidel’s side (wink wink) except there are no sex scenes between the two men in the story.

The subject matter is a little too rich to eat breakfast over, as I personally discovered this morning. Something about peanut butter and banana toast doesn’t sit right when paired with a graphic description of lubricating a T. rex’s anus with your saliva. (As one does.)

But if you’re not eating anything, here’s an excerpt referencing Noah’s supposed ignorance over the sexes of the animals boarding the Ark:

[Ken Ham] got closer to the room the animatronic dinosaur was in to find a bizarre scenario indeed. The t-rex was in a repetitive cycle of thrusting, what would have been its waist, out and in, back and forth. As it did so, its tail would whip in between its legs, slapping itself in the chest as its tail shot upward from under his groin. While bizarre for a completely new pattern, and it was a pattern, Ken knew, he couldn’t pull his attention away from the tail each time it thrust upward. It looked as if this tiny t-rex had a monstrous cock that was just prepped, and ready, for some t-rex pussy.

Except, Ken realized, it wasn’t a female he started to imagine the t-rex had any desire for. He had heard secularists speak of homosexuality being as prevalent in other animal species as it was in humans. Maybe the tyrannosaurus rex was no different. Maybe they too felt the same desires towards tyrannosaurus’ of the same gender as Ken, in his most vulnerable days, felt towards Darryl.

Animals, dinosaurs included, have tiny brains without the means to understand right from wrong, Ken thought to himself, continuing to watch the imagined tyrannosaurus cock slap upon its own chest. The Bible never says anything about the animals eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil! I bet, dollars to donuts, that they would be more worthy of God’s mercy than any human on earth today. Righteous or otherwise.

Ken started to massage his groin.

That is if they had souls.

A vision of Ken being on the Ark, in his own imagination. Ken started wondering how Noah and his family would have been able to tell the genders of the animals. They worked in agriculture; Noah made the first vineyard, so why would they know, or think to check, the genitals of each animal that boarded the Ark? Even if he knew to do so, of the tens of thousands of species of animal that boarded the ark, would they have successfully checked every single kind of animal? Would they have known what to look for? Surely at least one species would have made it through being paired up with another of its kind and the same gender. Couldn’t it? And why couldn’t that species have been the tyrannosaurus?

Clearly, a literary masterpiece.

Although there’s a strong sexual tone throughout — what else would you expect from an erotic novel? — there’s also plenty of substance and entertainment beyond crudely primal scenarios.

The downside for me is the overwhelming ethical dilemma as I read through this. What’s fair game here? Is a public figure who spreads misinformation about science, spouts hurtful words of judgment, and campaigns against other’s civil liberties a worthy target for this kind of graphic artistic expression? Are there any evangelical Christian leaders who wouldn’t deserve something like this?

On the other hand, there’s also the eye-for-an-eye approach. Ken routinely hurts other people, so this is a way to hurt him. But why engage in that? Shouldn’t we rise above it and focus purely on his arguments instead of trying to ridicule him? (I also wouldn’t think any less of Ham if he were to engage in homosexual acts, or hell, even hump an animatronic dinosaur.) In a way, a story like this is only offensive because Ham, not us, finds gay encounters morally reprehensible.

If the goal, as the author told me, is to give Ham a vehicle to personally experience an alternative life and teach him empathy, I’m almost certain it will be met with the opposite reaction. It’ll be seen an an unfair attack on the man. How long will it be before his “research team” picks up this book out of PR-necessity and uses it to stereotype against all atheists, as if we’re all complicit in the writing and all okay with it? Will they say this was written only because we have no real arguments against Creationism? Furthermore, they’ll just say that our indifference to God’s morality means we would enjoy sex with anything and everything.

They whine enough about Christian persecution, even when it’s fake. Why give them the fodder they’re looking for?

You can be the judge. The Kindle version of the book is now available.

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
error: Content is protected !!