|
|
|
#21
06-20-2008, 05:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Ditto what Alecto said. I haven't seen anybody in the thread who is 'angry'. If you're talking about me, I'm sincerely not. I asked a question that may have been uncomfortable to you, but seriously, half of my mother's family is German Baptist (just this side of Mennonite); they wear a uniform and that's what they call it. It's not a term of derision, just of acknowledgment.
As for not coming from privilege, you said upthread that you've been married for 36 years. Until four days ago, we didn't have that privilege anywhere in the US. Now we have the privilege in a whole 2% of US states. Ever held your wife's hand walking down the street, or given her a peck on the cheek in the mall, or put her picture on your desk, or just started a sentence with the words "My wife and I..."? We haven't had that privilege. When you were growing up, were you allowed to date, or to just acknowledge that you thought a girl was pretty? We weren't allowed to do that*. That's not a knock on you, it's just an acknowledgment of reality. *And girls are gross anyway. 
|
|
#22
06-20-2008, 06:55 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Fr. Albert: I have gone back over this thread and see no anger. I'm wondering whether you perceive people disagreeing with you as anger?
Have you ever disagreed with someone and not been angry? Trust me, I'm not angry. I deal with this issue 24/7, and my commitment to nonviolence holds me to respond with love. I have failed at times, but this time, was not one of them. I was not angry. I was simply trying to point out to you where you have some potential for growth. It appears to me that you are refusing to examine anything people have mentioned here, denying that you have neither white skin nor heterosexual privelege. That to me rings as has been pointed out as being highly defensive. Truthfully, I have never trusted anyone who said, for instance, "I'm not racist." Racism is institutionalized in our society and it takes a great deal of work to get rid of the racist baggage, we grow up with. This is also true of heterosexism. I spoke of Jimmy Creech who is one of my heros, because I wanted to point out his amazing capacity to examine and challenge heterosexism. I hope you won't quit. You have much to learn. Just as I had much to learn from my Afro-American friends and family. I have an Afro-American son who is now over 40. But that doesn't mean I don't respond at times in racist ways because of my upbringing. I have to challenge that on a daily basis, even after 40 years. I invite you to challenge your own racist and heterosexist understandings. It's a wonderful opportunity to learn. You'll never learn about either of these if you just take your ball and go home. All of this is said in LOVE, not anger. Please understand that. Kara
|
|
#23
06-20-2008, 08:11 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Privilege occurs when you are within the "norm" that rules, customs, laws and traditions are designed by and for.
I notice we share something in particular, Father Albert. We are both mixed ethnicity - native American and white, to be precise. Besides a foot anomaly that is common to the Shawnee, the only Indian trait that proved dominant in my gene pool was the color of my skin. I have facial features from my father's side, not my mother's, unlike my sister. She got all the good looks from my mother's side of the family tree. So, what do you suppose happens when my sister and I are out in public together (which is rare, because she now lives in Australia again)? She is perceived immediately as a Native American, and I am noticed as a white man with a nice tan. We are treated very differently in most places, with my sister usually getting the short straw. Several things can enter into that, besides the fact that she looks Indian and I don't. She's a "she", I'm not. She's quite heavy set, while I am at the top end of "normal". She wears her hair very short, as do I. But, then again, that makes me visibly gender conforming. Privilege happens - and to the privileged it is invisible, unless they take the time to understand how privilege plays out. The very fact that someone can say, "I do not have privilege", when they more closely fit the social "norm" is a privileged position. I have privilege as a male - almost all the rules were established by males and for males to maintain male hegemony. Males don't generally have to worry about "glass ceilings" because of the social class to which they belong, unless they are not - or more precisely, do not look white. Male is the norm - odd, since we are not the majority. I have privilege because, as far as anyone is concerned, I am white. Since I lost my accent (which was English/Australian because that's where I was raised), I have not been asked where I or my family is from. People of color or other visible ethnic heritage are frequently asked. Why? Because they are obviously not white, and thereore they must be identifiable. White is the norm. I have heterosexual privilege, not limited to being able to marry someone that I love. I am slightly effeminate in some ways, which raises no eyebrows when I am with my wife. But, if I am with another man, I can see the minds of other people ticking away trying to accertain if I am gay. I become "the other" as is evidenced by the inordinate number of people who have brought up "not having a problem with gays" in initial conversations with me. I have lots of other privileges, too. Privilege turns into prejudice when the "norm" carries with it the weight of institutional enforcement. As a male, no-one ever questioned my right to vote, and I do not have to wonder at the remarkable feat that someone of my gender has accomplished by running for the office of president. As a white, I never had to read the statistics about how young people of my race die from violent crimes at an lower rate or that I have a lower rate of incarceration. As a heterosexual, no-one ever questioned my right to marry, despite having been married so many times it makes a mockery of "until death do us part." You, Father Albert, walk down the street holding your wife's hand and you'll get not a second glance unless it conveys, "isn't that cute at their age." But, then again, that the opposit of the privilege of being middle-aged - being in your sixties now makes you an other in that regard. Now, try walking down the street holding another man's hand. What looks or comments would you get then. That's when privilege starts to become obvious - when you don;t look, act or seem like the wallpaper of dominant culture. And, if it's not too bold, you have the same kind of privilege I used to have - the worst kind - the unconscious kind. Once you become conscious of it, it becomes downright embarrassing how often it plays out.
__________________
www.revandylittle.com - Andy's blog Sins are always worse when they're different than mine
|
|
#24
06-20-2008, 08:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dear Kara,
I have been dealing with bias and prejudice of every king all my life. Believe me I fully understand what you mean by both heterosexual and male privilege. I have dealt with both in my life for many, many years. I have grown far beyond those perceptions and feelings that the majority of Americans possess. It was in 1984 when we were in France that standing in line at the Louvre, I observed two girls openly demonstrating their affection by kissing each other. When we attended the Opéra Comique for a performance two middle-aged men who were sitting in front of us were holding hands throughout the performance. I didn't notice anyone responding in a negative way then, and that's a few years ago. I guess maybe it is I who am very different and don't see color and don't see the big deal with sexual orientation and gender identity. I guess people missed my posting in which I mentioned that we have all kinds of people in my family, Afro-American, Asian, white liberals, white and narrow-minded conservatives, gays and transgendered. We all love each other and celebrate and affirm our differences. I am constantly berated for speaking up about God's love for all His children and that not one of us can judge the other without turning her/his back on God. I have been accused (I took it as a compliment) of being a "free radical" by a friend. I am a socialist as, I believe, Jesus was politically. Yes, I have my difficulties with judging as we all have. My judging is on a more personal level. I become very impatient (angry) with anyone who quotes the Bible about almost anything with a conviction that the Bible was written by God. I know all about slavery and isolation and feeling "queer." As I have stated previously, there will come a time when I can share in more depth my journey with y'all; however, right now some of the journey of the past is too painful for me to share. I promise that I shall not leave the conversation. I don't have answers to many questions; much of what you say I can't understand because of who I am and not because I am classified in certain categories. I was referring to anger concerning another posting from someone who doesn't know me at all. I am one of those transparent people who finds it impossible to tolerate bias of any kind and feel the need to speak out when I see or hear anything that I believe is contrary to the life and teaching of the Good Shepherd. I try never to be hurtful, but sometimes the hateful remarks are so terrible that I can't stop from speaking up. I need to process much of what has transpired over the past few days of this conversation. I'll try to be quiet and meditate on all that each of you has said. I am very much looking to change the way people treat each other. That is the mission I have been called to and I'll see it through until the end. If one person can become open and affirming of all brothers and sisters, then I'll have done a God joy and I can return to my God with joy and thanksgiving. Love and blessings to all my brothers and sisters whoever you are, wherever you are. Never forget that God loved you unconditionally before all time. He never leaves us; we turn from him when we forget to love our neighbor as we do ourselves. Albert
|
|
#25
06-20-2008, 09:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Be the change you seek
Quote:
What was Gandhi's message of nonviolence? To be the change we seek. That is a very difference stance from that of seeking to change others. And perhaps, this may be one of the reasons for the 'disconnect' on this thread. This site's premise IS all about being the change we ALL seek, not convincing others to believe or think as we do. This may sounds paradoxical, but the statement itself is very different in tone from that the one which you state, which is akin to an imposition. Let's be frank here: would you really like me to 'change' you? I rather doubt it. Would you appreciate it if I extended to you the love and care that you deserve? Isn't that a very different matter? The injunction as I see it- and as Gandhi and King saw it- and I say this as one who was classified as a Christian and now as a Buddhist: is that we can ONLY change ourselves. Now. If you meant something else by your words, by all means, please explain yourself. I welcome your response. If there is an answer to the question which titles this thread, it lies in an understanding - nay- an experience- of this principle of nonviolence.
__________________
Be the love you seek. Last edited by Daniel; 06-20-2008 at 11:15 PM. Reason: hysterical typo!
|
|
#26
06-20-2008, 10:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi, Fr. Albert.
I have visited MCC parishes over the years and most have been accepting and welcoming. One, I visited was while still an Orthodox nun. I was wearing regular clothing but my bishop introduced me as “Mother Ioan”, which made for an uncomfortable time all round. However I understood, because I know of the mistreatment LGBT people, myself included, at the hands of the various churches. I respectfully submit, Father, that you do not and cannot understand something you take for granted, i.e., heterosexual privilege. Even things you can take for granted—holding hands with your wife or publicly kissing her—can get an LGBT person a great deal of social disapproval, or worse—just because of who they are. I cannot be affectionate with my spouse in public for fear of what might happen. I have come to realise that I cannot change the world. I can only change myself, which will hopfully bring change in others, and, eventually perhaps the world. This a very interesting conversation. I hope to see more here to think about,
|
|
#27
06-21-2008, 09:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dear Daniel,
Thanks so much for your insight! Yes, I know now that to continue the dialogue is a good thing. I shall explain what I mean by changing the world. Like others who are committed to nonviolent change, I have already been changed. My change is effected through example to others. There are no exceptions to those who, I feel, should be included at the table, literally and figuratively. I understand now that this forum is useful for lots of things; however, because you don't know me as a person and my life and and faith journey, this is not the appropriate venue for me. I have long been a follower of Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Buddhist philosophy (mostly through Thomas Merton who lived the authentic life in his words and actions). I now follow many different spiritual guides, Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, and humanist. Please accept my apologies to all for any words I have written which have offended. I have been this way before in my career as an educator. I know when not to attempt to explain myself any further. After thirty-four years in my profession, I took my marbles and left the forum, knowing I had accomplished what I had set out to do. But that's another story for another day. I don't have a congregation. We have a small group of people who come together to worship. I don't seek anybody. I meet people and when asked I explain who I am and what I am about. I am a member of an ecumenical religious order composed of people from different denominations or from no denomination, people who work in the world and try to live by the Rule of Benedict. Each person has her/his own strengths and chooses to follow the Benedictine way as closely as they can. It is the same for my priesthood in the United Catholic Church. We come from different backgrounds, have different ministries, and different approaches to spirituality. We are small, but are a place where all are welcome, especially at the Lord's Table. We are cathoic because of our holding to the faith of the early Christian church up to the end of the first millennium or around the second council of Nicea. We are not a denomination intentionally, but a post-denominational fellowship, all sharing the same vision and mission. My personal relationship with Jesus is what guides me through life. I attempt to follow His journey as closely as possible even when the going gets rough. 'Nough said. With all love and blessings to all my brothers and sisters and praying that we all arrive at that place of absolute serenity which is God or whatever you name your absolute Truth. Fight the good fight within. Never raise your hand against a neighbor. There are no enemies in this life, only brothers and sisters who differ from us. I stand firm on my mentor's words in my journey through life: "Nothing we do can change the past; everything we do can change the future." Joan Chittester Albert, a seeker of the Truth P.S. I suggest that you might enjoy reading a book named "The Wounded Prophet." It might help you understand me a little bit better.
|
|
#28
06-21-2008, 09:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dear BishopIoan,
I appreciate your comments and do understand your feelings about having to refrain from public affirmation of your relationship with your spouse. I don't understand "heterosexual privilege" at all. It is a new term and new concept for me. In my relationship with my friends, we don't have anything we cannot share. I am really thinking hard about my relationships with my GLBT friends. They share everything with me: their feelings, their ideas, their spiritual journey, their open affection for each other. And they accept me for who I am. I have asked them if they consider me "a privileged heterosexual male." All reply, "Absolutely not!" I can only relate to what I know, what I have learned and experienced. Do I understand the difficulties of "coming out" and how hurtful that is for young people? I have been witness to the taunts and cruelties of adolescents toward their peers who are different. I have also been a vocal advocate for the equal treatment and consideration of all. However, even with my counsel and open acceptance of individual differences in my students, I have also witnessed the numbers who can no longer remain in this world because of the cruelty of what I guess you might call "the heterosexual world." I have suffered deeply because of what I see as cruel and abusive treatment by ignorant people. And yet I am also called to be non-judgmental because Jesus' words: Father, forgive them for they know not what they do" reverberates in my very soul. I feel blessed to have been a part of the change which is just, after all these years, at the beginning stages. I used to call this kind of unacceptable behavior "homophobia." Now I am hearing other terms. I applaud your entrance into this discussion which is long overdue. I ask only that we remain open and attempt to think "outside the box." I realize that not many people are able to do that kind of thinking with lots of help. I guess that is part of my mission: to lead by example in my quiet way, seeking to help people to understand that God loves each and every one of us unconditionally, the way He made us. In His realm there are no rich or poor, black or white, hetero- or homosexual. When we open ourselves up to love the other, we also must accept the suffering associated with doing so. We all exist in time and space and are all influenced more or less by that fact. God exists outside of those parameters and we seekers constantly strive to come close to Him by leading lives that are transparent to all. Albert, a seeker
|
|
#29
06-21-2008, 10:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
We all have something to teach one another. The problem I experience with the vast majority of priests is they have no conception that they have anything else to do but teach. Again, as Daniel pointed out Gandhi taught that "we must become the change we seek." Please step down from your throne and join the throng as we teach one another. Kara
|
|
#30
06-21-2008, 10:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dear Matt,
I wish I had the time to say all that I understand about privilege. I apologize for seeing your comment as coming from anger. That only shows that we are all subject to error and human frailty. I love your comments about equal rights for all. And yes, I am very much saddened by the treatment of the GLBT faction of our society. I do want you and all my brothers and sisters to think a little about the following: Women did not have the right to vote in this country until recently. Native Americans have been relegated to remote corners where they are forgotten by the vast majority of the rest of us. Slavery and indentured servitude exists, still strong and healthy, in the agricultural community especially. Irish Catholics in the late 1800's and the early 1900's were told on signs in factory windows: No Irish Catholic need apply! Today on this planet half of the population is invisible: THE WOMEN People of color, especially our black brothers and sisters, weren't considered fully human until after the Emancipation Proclamation. Too many of us are now looking at the world of Islam as the "enemy." What's that all about? Too few of us look to the East for direction in our spiritual lives. Western religions and philosophies dominate. Individuals have through their lifelong commitment effected dramatic change in how we treat and perceive our brothers and sisters: Dorothy Day, Oscar Romero, Martin Luther King, Jr., Ghandi, and yes, even Tim Russert who lived the authentic life and who will be sorely missed by all of us, whether consciously or unconsciously. Let's all think! Can we gather together in love to demonstrate by our action and our word that we can no longer accept exclusion of any group of people. I have a problem with the right-wing fundamentalists and some of the evangelicals. That's my problem. I thank the post that reminded me that, they too, need their space. I'm working on changing that attitude within myself. Love and blessings, Albert
|
|
#31
06-21-2008, 11:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dear Kara,
I find it difficult to comprehend that you did not feel that I absorbed what Daniel had to say. I did, and I accept his ideas and opinions. I find it offensive that you place judgment on who I am and what I do by using the term "throne." Unfortunately, you have not grasped much of what I have had to say. I am a learner always. However, I am also a teacher for those who want to listen and to change themselves as I have changed with much prayer, observation, and study. The concept of "thinking outside the box" precludes making judgments of the ideas and feelings of others. That judgmental piece of our humanity is the norm in this world. I guess that is why this forum is not meant for someone like me who is outside the norm and, as I stated before, have become a "free radical." I have found serenity and true acceptance after a long struggle. I cannot change who I am to suit the needs of others. I am a constant listener and respecter of the other. I shall continue my journey with that commitment. May you be blessed with all the good that God wants for you and all of us. My prayers are with you and the wonderful brothers and sisters who are seekers of Truth in this forum. For each of us Truth is different and our path back to the Creator is a very long, personal, and often painful journey. Albert Last edited by FatherAlbert; 06-21-2008 at 11:31 AM. Reason: spelling
|
|
#32
06-21-2008, 01:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
All are welcome
My idea of inclusion is that everyone should be welcomed to a church, regardless of who they are. I totally agree about what was mentioned about pedophiles.
I attend a non-denominational church of many races and cultures. When I served as an usher I made a habit of welcoming newcomers. One one occasion, I went out of my way to welcome a lesbian couple. In my mind, if a person cannot feel welcome in church, where else can they go? I am fascinated by the early Christian church and have done some studies on it. That must have been a very interesting place to say the least. One of the reasons it impressed many pagans was its inclusiveness. Gennee
__________________
'Be who you are.' Let no one define who you are.' blog:www.difecta.blogspot.com www.epistle.us
|
|
#33
06-21-2008, 01:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Question
Albert,
The question first posed at the beginning of this thread, was how can we begin to include everyone? I know that at God's table all should be included, no matter what! However, the first step to inclusion is acceptance. It will not be until society as a whole and faith-based religions on a whole accept the GLBT community that this will happen. I believe that this is the goal of Soulforce. Being born heterosexual in this world gives an automatic pass to that table. When was the last time you heard that little Johnny was beat up at school for being heterosexual...that little Johnny's parents kicked him out of the house and family for being heterosexual...or that little Johnny committed suicide because he could no longer accept the stigma that came with him being a heterosexual? The heterosexual privilege that is talked about here is the automatic acceptance into society at large and in many of the churches. Boys are not hung in other countries for being heterosexual. I guess what I am trying to say is the first step to inclusiveness has to be acceptance. I am happy that your worship circle has come to this place of acceptance, however, in the world at large this is not the case. When the threat of exclusion is gone then inclusion will able to take its place. We have come a long way but the journey is far from over. Bill
|
|
#34
06-21-2008, 02:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I've been examining my own responses to this thread and wondering why it was pushing some buttons for me. So here's what I've come up with, does this make any sense?
First I have to say Albert, that what I've experienced in your attitude, was very little humility and a great deal of arrogance about teaching us how to behave. And I never appreciate that. But my second, and I suspect most intense responses came from the fact that you're addressing the wrong folks. As a heterosexual white male, coming into this forum, you're talking to people who as a whole tried to include and welcome everyone, but because of our exclusion, have a need for a safe and sacred space. As a heterosexual white male, your questions should be addressed to those who exclude. We may not always welcome people as fully as we might, but we don't exclude anyone. So when you come on to a forum as a new member and immediately tell us we're not doing it right and YOU are going to teach us how, I do get defensive. I believe in most MCCs, as I have stated before, our allies are warmly and fully welcome. Occasionally you might run into a group that hasn't fully succeeded, but they are the exception. So my challenge to you Albert is two fold, stay and continue to learn from those of us who have had to walk this journey, humbly understanding that even though you've watched others walk the journey and your heart is broken by the hatefulness you've seen on the part of your heterosexual brothers and sisters, the teaching needs to be directed to those who exclude. Just as you, as a white male can't teach Afro-Americans, or women how to walk their journeys, it isn't your place as a person of privelege to tell us how to walk ours. Now I understand that you don't believe you are a person of privelege, but believe me you are. One last thought - had the same questions been raised by one of our LGBT folks, I know I would have received it in a very different place. Years ago, when I was part of a Catholic Worker that was serving a mostly black population, a black friend of mine said, very honestly. "You need to go work with your own people, because even if you come with the best of intentions, given the institutional racism, it will be received as paternalism." I didn't want to hear that, I'll acknowledge that, but ultimately, I understood what my friend was saying and followed her advice. I hope Albert you can comprehend what I'm saying. I'm not saying you should leave, I'm only saying that your work at creating change starts with yourself and then sharing that change with heterosexuals who haven't as yet experienced that transformation. Kara Last edited by kara speltz; 06-21-2008 at 04:16 PM. Reason: typo
|
|
#35
06-21-2008, 02:47 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I do not consider myself heterosexual.
I do observe that I receive heterosexual privilege every day. It's because of the man on my arm. Hardly a day goes by that I don't notice it. And I may as well admit, I enjoy not having to think twice before telling someone that that man on my arm is my partner, spouse, and husband. I enjoy having our relationship recognized and respected Every Place We Go. I like not looking over my shoulder in apprehension that there might be heterophobes lurking in the shadows ready to mess with us. So, I'm not straight, but I have heterosexual privilege. What's up with that?? The point is, this kind of security about your place in the world and society, this degree of *belonging* is what everyone should have (one of Andy's 'oughts.') How do we create that world? I've been puzzling lately over the quandary that we cannot change something outside us. I work at being who I know I am supposed to, but what I really want to see change is what's outside me, and that, I can do nothing about. So what do we do? How do we create the community of love for all?
__________________
*** Never linger too long with the ignorant, throw stones at their talk. Walk only with the lovers, the mirror of the soul gets rusty when dipped in muddy water. -Rumi
|
|
#36
06-21-2008, 04:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
To Kara
Quote:
As an organist (oh....we could have fun thinking of the men who are organist's and straight, right? Count'em on one hand we could!) he's played in African-American churches and has experienced the full brunt of what it means to represent perceived privilege. Let me tell you: it wasn't pretty. Racism goes both ways, and as a white man in a black church- so he found- can make one the focal point for what I shall call 'uncooked stuff'. And I would like to point out: we all have uncooked stuff. I really don't believe anyone who says that are totally open and accepting et al. Why? Because only Jesus Christ Himself or the Buddha or some other Enlightened Being has THAT kind of realization where something doesn't pull their chain. I've even observed for myself (a post on another thread) where the Dalai Lama really doesn't understand or 'get' gay persons in the way that some of his gay followers think he does (and really....why should he....it's totally out of context for him as a monk). And I respect and admire him very much. Follow his teachings. Does that mean he has a total understanding of others and their experience? Ah.....no! That said, does he work daily on being compassionate? Yes! But I digress! You are right. It is very hard to minister to those who have a certain view of one, a view which the person perceived did not create. I agree: our gifts are often meant for others who most need to hear the message. Otherwise, one risks preaching- or teaching- to the choir. And baby- they already know the tune. Play it again Sam! (wink)
__________________
Be the love you seek.
|
|
#37
06-21-2008, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Now I know I don't understand
Dear Kara,
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I have no clue of what you mean by changing myself. I certainly am as far from being arrogant about anyone's ideas, choices, actions, or way of being in this world. For me there is one message only: God's loves all His children equally and unconditionally. I am not attempting in any way to teach or dictate how we should be in the world. I have the same message for everyone, so that if a privileged heterosexual male should interact with me, he needs to understand what my belief system is as a member and minister in my fellowship. I will not be part of any group that discriminates at all for any reason. I guess what I need to learn is that I am identified as a privileged heterosexual male even if I am not treated as such because I am much more than just that. I am a whole person with my unique idiosyncracies and way of being in the world. In no posting (I reviewed and printed hard copies of all) is there any arrogance or attempt to change anyone or anything. My one experience was negative and I am not painting any group with a broad paintbrush. I didn't fall upon the congregation whose service I attended. I was invited and encouraged by my good friends who have been committed partners for more than thirty years and were married in Canada two years ago. They felt that I would be a welcome addition to their congregation because we all had difficulty with non-acceptance in the Episcopal Church. Please don't tell me that I don't know what it feels like to be excluded. I walked that path all my life because I refused to keep quiet when I saw any kind of injustice or inequality. Just like a good psychologist or psychotherapist, one doesn't need to have experienced the illness in order to provide support and help to those that are dealing with problems. I guess that is why I don't understand how readers can pick and choose the parts that they want to see and respond to. I've yet to hear how you can help me to create an environment of acceptance for all. I am an outsider and always have been for lots of reasons. Please don't tell me how it feels to be treated badly or uninvited to groups, or dismissed as a fool for trying to improve situations which I know aren't what they should be. I speak mostly of my experience as an educator. I embraced Howard Gardiner's theories for educating today's children and worked with the state department of education to begin a process of changing how we think of teaching and learning. My enthusiasm and excitement were soon deflated when I returned to my school district to find that the vast majority of teachers were not willing and, in some cases, unable to change for the benefit of our students. I worked for three years to provide opportunities for teachers to begin a process of change, only to be told that I was banging my head against a brick wall. However, in the classrooms in which we had experimented with "inclusion", teachers and students were happier, more productive, and better prepared to integrate in a fully included world. This was accomplished because of the evidence I provided to convince a few good teachers to try. I am humbled and privileged to have worked with and for that small group which still ten years later believes that all children can learn together in the same space without being herded or tracked on tests and assessments that are flawed. As I write this post I must tell you that I am weeping to think that I have been so poorly received because of my inability to express my sincerity at making inroads in our faith communities for full inclusion. I guess I am a dreamer and I have often been referred as "Don Quijote" because I believe that nothing is impossible except our resistance to change from within. I shall continue to listen and to learn. I know that I have not been understood in this forum and that is okay. Like I've said; I've been there, done that before. Blessings to all my brothers and sisters whoever you are, wherever you are, Albert, a seeker
|
|
#38
06-21-2008, 05:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ok, so: I'll say it. Most people here, though wary due to years of past experience, are in no way doubting your good intentions. I myself am 100% sure that you didn't intend to come here to offend a bunch of people. There's pleny of folks that I'm not so sure about (and they quickly find their way to the foyer); that's not you.
As for the original question: I think that building a true community, where we are all treated equally as individuals, and fully embraced, we need to tackle the problem of privilige. This is NOT an unrelated side tangent. I'm not asking you to solve the problem all by yourself, but I do require of my friends, and of people that I would choose to associate with, that they at least acknowledge it. I didn't start to truly react negatively to you until you said that you had no privilige. Because the fact is, having privilige doesn't mean you're a rockstar and everyone everywhere adores you and never a bad word is said to you. NO ONE here is saying that, by having privilige, you don't know what it's like to be sad. Or to be mocked. or any of that. But there is a part of the queer experience that you do seem to lack, and I subject to you that that is why you don't understand our need for safe space. If you didn't get a chance to read the links about what we mean by privilige, please do. If you read those, and then tell me with a straight face that you don't encounter ANY of them in your daily life, I guess you'll have a very interesting life story to share. Otherwise, you DO carry privilige, and the whole point of this isn't to say "that makes you evil!" The point is that it's not your fault as an individual, and that acknowledging that is the first step in making any kind of peace with those who don't have that privilige. I'll ask again, because I'm still VERY unclear: what happened at the MCC you went to that was negative? You said it was a bad experience, but then the next paragraph details some positive aspects of it. As a sidenote: I think it'd be worthwhile to note the difference between bigotry and racism or heterosexism. Bigotry is unkind. It's not a good thing, and I'm in no way defending it for ANYONE. But racism and heterosexism, as words, reflect the fact that there IS one race / sexual orientation in the over-arching social structure that carries more power. When the white guy is treated differently, unkindly, or unfairly because of his race, it's unfortunate, but it doesn't reflect a long-standing pattern in that guy's life, or the history of the rest of the white folks in his culture. All that is to say that, strictly speaking, bigotry goes both ways, but racism really doesn't. [/semantic bitchiness]
|
|
#39
06-21-2008, 05:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Why did he keep that job for five years? Because they paid him very well. And they figured out - it seems- that they weren't going to get and keep a good musician if they didn't pay for it. That's the reality of the situation I write about. Does the African-American community - in general- have the same access to or level of musical training as that which my husband does? Could they find a good black organist who could play in the very decidedly classical tradition they wanted? In a word: no. Simply put, I disagree with you. I have seen with my own eyes that racism goes both ways. And I could recount to you some peculiar ways in which it has. In my own profession for example (opera land). The company I work for hired several African-American singers (were're talking an opera company) to fill positions. I heard the auditions for those spots. In one case, the singer chosen got the postion on merit. And in another case, the singer did not. And in that case, there were a lot of angry people. Why? Because the company chose policy over people. Who did the hiring? White people. Is it a perfect system? No. Was the goal (apparently) to have greater representation? Yes. As I saw it then, there was a peculiar kind of racism involved- a reverse kind of racism- on the part of those hiring. But one is not supposed to mention this kind of matter. It is usually swept under the rug. And my husband certainly experienced what happend to him as racism. He was targeted by one member of his choir BECAUSE he was white and gay. Not so easy to divide the two perhaps. But one has to have lived through the experience to really understand it. It may be semantics to you, but the felt experience was something else entirely.
__________________
Be the love you seek.
|
|
#40
06-21-2008, 05:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
As a rule, I don't believe in reverse racism, because my definition of racism has a power component to it. I have a friend who actually was a victim of reverse racism in that he happened to hear a black professor (clearly a person in power in terms of a student) say that he automatically gave his white students lower grades. That was the first time, I was able to acknowledge that racism might be a reverse situation. But for the most part, since blacks in this country have very limited power, I don't believe it applies except in perhaps a 5-10% specific situation. Now I would call what happened to your husband bigotry. And clearly bigotry runs the gamut. I'm a bit bigoted towards rich people, coming out of a working class background. It takes a lot for me to warm up to people with a lot of money. Since I have no power, I wouldn't call it classism, but I would acknowledge it as bigotry. Can you see the fine line there? This thread gets more and more interesting as we progress. I always find these discussions around privelege fascinating. Kara
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
