So I want to ask this question:
When is it okay to use the word bigot or homophobe or their derivatives?
Or are these words off limits?
Is using these words really the same thing as ‘name-calling’?
I think I will know what most LGBTI people will say. Almost all LGBTI people have suffered the effects of homophobia: rejection, humiliation, intimidation, harassment, threats of violence, and in many cases, actual violence. We also suffer micro-aggressions on a daily basis such as being made fun of, the butt of jokes, the whispered message behind the hand, the giggle after we pass by. The word 'gay' is still used as an insult and a derogatory term. Youth suicide in the LGBTI population is six times higher than in the general population for the same age-group. Further, most LGBTI people will know that the ACL believes our lives to be lives of sin, a rejection of God, against nature, decadent, self-centred, and that our relationships do not have the same existential equivalence as heterosexual relationships. They also know that the ACL and people of their ilk will do anything and everything they can to stop us from being able to legally marry our partners.
But I also wonder why it is that the ACL wants these two words to be inadmissible in the marriage equality debate. One of the things we know is that prejudiced people are supremely uncomfortable in owning up to their prejudice. They will turn mental and linguistic gymnastics to remove themselves from the idea they might be prejudiced in some way. "I'm not racist but - - - -" is the classic example. Following on from such a statement is invariably a racist statement. So with homophobia. "I'm not homophobic but - - - -". And thence follows a homophobic statement. It seems that even when people are being overtly prejudiced, they want to cover it over or hide it in some way. The last thing they want, is to be exposed. I would suggest that this is the very reason the ACL wants the words bigot and homophobe expunged from the Australian psyche while the marriage equality debate progresses its murky way up to Abbott's plebiscite. This way, they can say what they want and not have to answer the charge of bigotry and homophobia. They want total freedom to hurl insulting and offensive social comments and theological teachings at the gay community with total impunity; pure as the driven snow are they. And should we dare attempt to call them out on it, well then, aren't we a nasty and uncaring and insensitive group of irreligious people bent on wrecking society.
So, a couple of dictionary definitions suggest that this word 'bigot' is not as offensive as what the ACL would like us all to believe.
A bigot is:
“a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance” Merriam-Webster Online
“a person who has very strong, unreasonable beliefs or opinions about race, religion or politics and who will not listen to or accept the opinions of anyone who disagrees” Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary Online.
Now Western society has generally moved on from the ACL/fundamentalist view of gay sexuality. And frankly, so have many people of faith. The Christian Church in many quarters has begun the journey of re-visiting its centuries old traditional teachings on human sexuality as I urged in my book Being Gay Being Christian. This shift in society is why so many countries have already legislated against discriminating against gay and lesbian people and celebrating the wonderful binding feeling that equality brings. Marriage has been extended to gay and lesbian couples and the devastation and mayhem predicted by the opponents has not come to pass.
So for me, there is an absolute. It is not okay, and by that I mean totally unacceptable, to not ever, not anywhere, not by anyone, no exception, by priest, prelate, prince, or pauper to denigrate, put down, discriminate or derogate LGBTI people, any more than it is okay to the same to women, people with non-white skin, non-Anglo ethnicities, the disabled, the indigenous or the poor. Such prejudice is bigotry. If you hear it, you will recognise it. And you will feel its ugliness.
If you do this on the basis of skin colour or ethnicity, you are racist. Calling someone out for racism is not the same as name-calling. I care more for the victim’s sensitivities than I do for the perpetrator’s. If a racist is offended by our calling them out, then bad luck. Wear the shame.
If you do this on the basis of opposition to gay and lesbian people, you are homophobic. Calling someone out for homophobia is not the same thing as name-calling. I care more for the victim’s sensitivities than I do for the perpetrator’s. If a homophobe is offended by our calling them out, then bad luck. Wear the shame.
Now attacking gay and lesbian people the way the Australian Christian Lobby does is bigotry, plain and simple. They tell untruths, they fear-monger, they predict the destruction of society, they predict the desolation of families, they predict devastation to children. And they do all this just because we are gay. They do not do this to single mums or single dads or divorced people marrying a second time, or the older generation marrying late in life after a life-spouse has passed away and love is rediscovered, or to the disabled who marry, or even young couples who choose not to have children; no. They only do it to gay people.
Sometimes they use social rationales; all bogus. Sometimes they use theological rationales; all weak, conservative and out-dated. They are evangelical and pentecostal fundamentalists who control this group and they promulgate the platform that gay sexuality is a choice, a sin and, for many of their adherents, a psychological sickness or caused by demonic oppression. They all believe that our relationships are inferior.
So I don’t really care how many Bible verses they quote. And I don’t really care how softly spoken they are in Senate hearings and how utterly reasonable they sound when they suggest that name-calling should have no part in this debate. It is bigotry and it is homophobia. And it is not name-calling to call them out.
Name-calling is for kids. It’s juvenile behaviour. It’s to be found in the playground. The ACL’s pronouncements and the money they intend to spend on militant advocacy against marriage equality needs to be met with the same strength as they themselves put forth.
There is some resonance for me today as I listened to Anote Tong, the President of Kirabati, in answering Tony Abbott with regard to Pacific islands being inundated by the sea due to climate change and Australia’s refusal to have greater emissions targets thus effecting those same islands, where Abbott stated that Australia had to protect its economy. President Tong shaking his head said, ‘this is not our economy we are protecting; this is an existential threat, we have to protect our future’. Marriage equality is up for grabs in Australia at the moment. We are the last of the major developed countries in the world to legislate for this. We have a Prime Minister implacably opposed and who is working behind the scenes to ensure this never happens. The ACL is there right beside him, resolved to use fair means or foul, including bigoted and homophobic declarations. For gay and lesbian people, this is not about a nasty Christian fundamentalist group whom most sensible people ignore anyway, but an existential threat to our place in Australian society as equals.
Bigotry and homophobia both exist and they are equally ugly no matter whose mouth they come from.
PS. I have written three articles on homophobia in my BGBC Blog if you are interested:
No comments:
Post a Comment