We all know it's easy to point at the hellfire and brimstone snorting rabid right wing, that spews the most vicious lies about gay people and would like to kill us all.
But then there are the ones who also consider them "not like that", yet are implacably opposed to our rights as LGBT people.
They don't hate us, heavens no. Why, they have gay friends/brothers/hairdressers whom they just LOVE! And who love them back! (yeah, I wonder). It's just they don't think that we should have civil rights because, well, it's just not RIGHT. And ICK. But it's not personal.
Well, actually, it is. yes. Very personal. And you are, functionally, no different that Charles Worley or Salvatore Cordileone or Maggie Gallagher or any of the most rabid, anti-gay opponents.
From Slacktivist:
But then there are the ones who also consider them "not like that", yet are implacably opposed to our rights as LGBT people.
They don't hate us, heavens no. Why, they have gay friends/brothers/hairdressers whom they just LOVE! And who love them back! (yeah, I wonder). It's just they don't think that we should have civil rights because, well, it's just not RIGHT. And ICK. But it's not personal.
Well, actually, it is. yes. Very personal. And you are, functionally, no different that Charles Worley or Salvatore Cordileone or Maggie Gallagher or any of the most rabid, anti-gay opponents.
From Slacktivist:
I read this self-serving attempt to be the “nice” bigot by Halee Gray Scott at Christianity Today’sher•meneutics blog, “I Am Not Charles Worley: The Plea of a Christian Who Opposes Gay Marriage.”
Scott wants you to understand that she’s not at all like the infamous homophobic preacher Worley. She’s totally different.
Worley wants to deny LGBT people their basic civil rights and legal equality because he hates them. Scott wants to deny LGBT people their basic civil rights and legal equality for other reasons.
See? See how very different they are? Same result. Same vote. Same fundamental discrimination enshrined in law. But Worley is mean. Scott is nice.
And Scott has had it up to here with people not recognizing the extreme importance of that distinction....
....
Look, here’s the deal: It doesn’t matter if you think you’re a nice person. And it doesn’t matter if your tone, attitude, sentiments and facial expressions are all very sweet, kindly and sympathetic-seeming. If you’re opposing legal equality, then you don’t get to be nice. Opposing legal equality is not nice and it cannot be done nicely. ....
Scott wants to carve out a space in which she can be unfair, but still kind. Such a space does not exist and cannot exist.
While we're at it, from my Mac's dictionary:
THE RIGHT WORD
Bias is a predisposition either for or against something; one can have a bias against police officers or a bias for French food and wines.
Partiality, on the other hand, is a favorable bias (: the partiality of parents for their own children; the partiality of Americans for fast food), while prejudice implies a preconceived and usually negative judgment or opinion (: a decision motivated by racial prejudice).
Bigotry is an even stronger term, referring to an intense dislike and often violent hatred for the members of a particular race, religion, or ethnic group.
Narrow-mindedness also points to rigidly preconceived ideas, but implies that they are the result of lack of education or understanding, rather than outright hostility (: her parents' narrow-mindedness prevented her from meeting any boys her age).
Intolerance is a broad term used to describe the inability to put up with almost anything (: parents' intolerance of their children's misbehavior).
and
phobia |ˈfōbēə|
noun
an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something : he had a phobia about being under water | a phobia of germs | a snake phobia.
3 comments:
The clueless this woman is summarized by this part of her article:
"By the time he came out as gay to his family, a whole world of damage had already been done to his soul. In the end, I watched him bullied not to the point of suicide, but to the point of another kind of death, a social death in which he alienated himself from everyone, even his closest family members.
"I don't love Brian any less because he's gay. He's kind, brilliant, and full of beautiful ideas. The world would be such a lesser place without him. But in my mind, sexuality is a one-way street. And when I see someone I love going the wrong way down a one-way street, the most loving response is to say, 'No, wait! That's the wrong way! That way only ends in pain.'"
Brian didn't "alienate[] himself from everyone, even his closest family members." All these people allientated themselves from him.
And while she says she was "heartbroken," she doesn't say that she did one thing to stop the bullying, make Brian feel accepted by family members or make him feel loved.
Moreover, accepting that he was gay was not a way that ends only in pain. He life was already one huge pain caused by bullies, family members, and this woman's refusal to do anything about it but feel "heartbroken." Accepting who he was has to be a lot less painful that what the life he already he had to put up with where no one would do anything to make it less painful.
Perhaps it's Schadenfreude, but I love calling these bigots "BIGOTS", to their (virtual) faces, in part BECAUSE it makes them crazy.
It's maybe the greatest tragedy, though, that these bigots believe they love us. Because they LITERALLY don't know what love is, or what love means.
If you don't know what love/Love is, that's the greatest suffering. Greater even, than what they put us through.
Reminds me of all the nice people I knew growing up who had nothing to do with the Klan and its violence, and yet staunchly supported segregation.
Post a Comment