Imagine, if you
will, a non-profit organization whose stated mission is to encourage
dialogue and reconciliation between rapists and their victims. This
group's leaders and employees are a mixed-bag of rape victims and
those who have never been raped, though the latter group is in the
topmost leadership positions. Among these leaders we find many
people who proclaim themselves to be former rapists, though they
assert that they no longer consider themselves to be rapists.
Instead, they claim to feel great compassion for rape victims, and
would love nothing more than for rapist and victim to mutually agree
to live in harmony with one another, whether or not the rapists have
actually chosen to stop raping people. They believe that, through
the power of dialogue, they can heal the rift between rapist and
victim and bring the two camps together for the betterment of
humanity. Imagine, if only for a few moments, what that might
constitute, and breathe a sigh of relief that you don't live in such
a world, where victimizers are lauded for reaching out to their
victims, and victims who have misgivings about the concept are
brushed aside, their concerns ignored and belittled, their protests
silenced.
Actually, hold onto
that sigh for the time being, because the fact is, though you aren't
living in that exact world, you're living in one that's a lot closer
to it than should be comfortable. While there are no organizations
like the one described above (as far as I know and hope) there are
similar groups operating in a slightly different sphere. They often
refer to themselves as “bridge builders,” entities which exist to
“bring together” disparate populations. The ones I speak of here
specifically operate in the middle ground between the LGBT+ and
conservative religious (particularly evangelical Christian)
communities, groups like The Marin Foundation, LoveBoldly, Gay Christian Network, and their
ilk.
I sense some raised
eyebrows now at the metaphor in my opening paragraph. Rape is
without question a sensitive subject, not one to be made light of.
It is an intensely personal violation which can have negative
repercussions across a victim's entire life. It is an unconscionable
trespass, traumatic, destructive, and inhuman. When we look at the
evangelical church's treatment of the LGBT+ community, past and
present, it is hard not to note the similarities. Though rape is
more physical in nature than anti-LGBT+ bigotry (most of the time)
they both inflict social, psychological, and spiritual scars on their
victims. Some of those victims, too many, do not survive the trauma.
Countless lives have been lost in the wake of the evangelical
church's campaign against an innocent and, until very recently,
entirely powerless subset of the population.
The church,
evangelical or otherwise has, to put it mildly, treated the LGBT+
community very poorly over the years. From their endorsement of
“ex-gay” programs, to their crusades against marriage equality,
to their current tactic of attempting to pass “religious liberty”
laws which would provide legal protection for discrimination in the
public sector, most evangelical churches and organizations go above
and beyond in their quest to oppress those who don't measure up to
their impossible and ridiculous standards for “moral” behavior.
They foment an atmosphere of ignorance and hostility toward LGBT+
people, and they do so knowingly, willingly, and enthusiastically.
Politicians court their endorsements, and prime time news programs
invite them on the air, lending their heinous ideas a veneer of
credibility even as they spout some of the most hateful rhetoric
imaginable.
The Suicide
Prevention Resource Center has estimated that between 30 and 40% of
LGBT+ youth have attempted suicide. Anywhere from 20 to 40% of
homeless youths are LGBT+. The LGBT+ community is more prone to
mental illness, poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, smoking, and a host
of other ills. Evangelicals love to point to these statistics as
proof that the LGBT+ community lives a depraved, chosen “lifestyle,”
asserting that they bring these situations on themselves by virtue of
their sexual attractions and gender expressions. They never seem to
grasp that their hateful theology and irresponsible rhetoric play the
most significant role in these factors. Or they do, and they deny
it, or they simply don't care. Indeed, many of the most
reprehensible spokespeople from the evangelical movement spread their
hateful lies with a sense of genuine, smug glee. Just listen to the
likes of Tony Perkins, Pat Robertson, or Franklin Graham as they
expound endlessly and ignorantly on the evils of non-heterosexual and
non-cisgender human beings living openly, honestly, and
authentically. They are the de facto voice and spirit, as it were,
of the evangelical church in the public sphere, rightly or wrongly.
So why on Earth
would LGBT+ people want to sit at the table with the likes of these
in the first place? There are many reasons, but I would posit that,
though some may be noble in spirit, they are all naive, misguided,
and a near-complete waste of energy that would be better spent in
more useful endeavors.
 |
| Tony Perkins, Family Research Council |
Some hope to change
individual hearts and minds through what they term “respectful”
dialogue. To an extent, this is actually a measurable positive, as
evidence has shown that the most successful method for turning a
bigot into an ex-bigot, aside from waiting for nature to weed them
out in its own highly effective manner, is their getting to know LGBT+ people personally. What is not available,
unfortunately, are statistics demonstrating the percentage of changed
hearts and minds resulting from this method. Were it to be measured
somehow, I believe it would be a safe bet that the numbers would be
depressingly low. Bigots are a hard-hearted lot, stubbornly clinging
to their chosen wickedness in the face of all logic and reason.
Many, if not most, take their favored prejudices to the grave with
them, too afraid (or proud) of the legalistic and wrathful deity they
have made for themselves to repent of this particular evil before
shedding the mortal coil.
Others hope to
change not merely individuals, but the church as a whole. They
believe that remaining active and engaged is the best way to effect
positive change within this broken and cannibalistic institution. In
the meantime, they continue to shore up these whited sepulchres with
their time, money, and energy, a steady trickle of false legitimacy
courtesy of the weak and well-meaning. Intentionally or not, they
lend credence to the most hateful of theologies with their mere
presence. Some churches would greatly improve the world by
collapsing on themselves, and these people do humanity no favors by
delaying this deserved outcome.
These are the
forgivable motives, of course. It is easy to understand why some
believe there is merit to them. Some have been in their churches for
their entire lives, born into the fold, as it were, and cannot fathom
leaving behind the congregations they have grown up in. The draw to
socialization is a strong one, after all. Others still may actually
believe the wicked theology they have been spoon-fed by their
enpulpited mouthpieces, too comfortable, oblivious, or dense to
question even one jot and tittle of the filth they wallow in. It
isn't right, never will be, but it's understandable. Humans crave
comfort, even if it hurts, particularly if it hurts someone other
than them and the people they identify with.
Another motive, the
most insidious and heinous of the lot, has nothing at all to do with
improving the lives of the LGBT+ community. Rather, some people seek
this sort of dialogue for the benefit of the churches and
denominations which have done the most harm in the name of their
chosen deity. They see a church that is woefully out of step with
the times and paying the price for that, or at least on the verge of
doing so. They see young, fair-minded people leaving in droves.
They see their public reputation tarnished in the media. They see
that these churches are becoming targets and punchlines,
simultaneously. And they want to do something to stem that.
To these people, the
LGBT+ community is not a population of individual human beings
sharing a planet with them so much as a potential source of
nourishment for the vampiric hierarchy they serve. Everyone is a
potential convert in their eyes, and every convert means more money,
more legitimacy, and more power. They are loyal to their
conservative churches, and are willing to do anything to see them
survive and thrive, including throwing oppressed minorities under the
bus. This is the ultimate motive behind most of these
“bridge-building” exercises, to get the LGBT+ community further
ensnared within the poisonous web of evangelical Christianity.
They do this by
facilitating “discussion” and “living in the tension” between
“wanting to love the LGBT+ community” while “remaining faithful
to their sincerely-held beliefs.” Lots of quotation marks there, I
know, but these organizations, like the religion which spawned them,
have their own peculiar vocabulary, where some words and phrases mean
very different things to them than they do to humanity at large.
These groups almost always refuse to take a concrete stand on any
issue, even no-brainers such as public accommodation protections,
hate crime laws, and marriage equality. They justify this by
claiming that they wish to avoid “politics” so as to not alienate
either side. It is no coincidence that most of the leaders of groups
like these come from within the evangelical church and share many of
its false beliefs about the LGBT+ people they claim to “love.”
It's akin to pulling teeth to even get most of them to state a
personal position on anything, even something so basic as whether or
not the mere state of homosexuality is sinful, as they feel that
telling the truth will somehow tarnish the work they are pretending
to do.
And rest assured,
even if the work is technically verifiable, the results most
certainly are not. Virtually every self-proclaimed “bridge-building”
group claims to have made some measure of progress. Conveniently
enough, much of this progress is often touted as the result of
“secret meetings” with bigot churches and groups which, in the
interests of preserving trust and propriety, they are forbidden from
speaking about to the general public. They want us to sit down, be
quiet, and take their word for it. They generally do not abide
question or challenge, and have been known to attempt to silence
those who criticize their efforts. I personally know a couple of
handfuls of people, at least, who have been banned from these groups'
Facebooks pages and cut off of from their Twitter feeds for having
the audacity to point out the inherent problems with their motives
and methods. I myself am among those.
And the question
they loathe more than any other is one of the most basic, and one
they should at least have a canned answer for by now: Why should the
LGBT+ community be interested in building a bridge to bigotry in the
first place?
What do the
conservative and evangelical churches have to offer us in the first
place outside of wrongheaded theology and shattered self-esteem? To
the unbiased eye, the answer must at least be “very little,” if
not “nothing.” Sermons carefully crafted to demonize vulnerable
populations, tenets which have driven countless of us to drugs,
homelessness, hospitalization, and early graves, and the sanction of
the Good Lord himself to beat, maim, torture, and kill this
particular “other.” It wasn't homosexuality that draped Matthew
Shepard's prone and lifeless body on that fence in Wyoming. It was
conservative religion and the atmosphere it engenders, as with every
other casualty in this culture war they created and foisted upon us,
a war the LGBT+ community neither requested nor initiated, but has
paid the overwhelming bulk of the price for.
Tell me,
“bridge-builders,” what have we to gain from brushing these
churches with the veneer of respectability? By coming to the table
and “agreeing to disagree” with these bigots, we make them appear
more reasonable and measured to the uneducated and blind among us.
Our credibility remains unchanged, and bigot churches reap the
benefits of increased credibility, even if it is merely illusory in
truth. They are still our devoted enemies, but we help secure the
humbug curtain which hides their true selves from the rest of society
and permits them to carry on their wickedness a while longer. We
grant them further peace of mind, permitting them to believe that
they are good, decent people because they deigned to sit down and
talk to “those people” for an hour or two, reaching no
conclusions and finding no meaningful common ground.
Because the simple
fact of the matter is that, beyond unhappy accidents of biology and
geography, there can be no important common ground between oppressed
and oppressor, so long as the latter keeps oppressing in word and
deed. Platitudes and aphorisms and hopeful anecdotes cannot sway the
truth. “Bridge-building” is safe for bigots and very dangerous
for the LGBT+ community. There is nothing of measurable value to be
gained by it, but much to be lost to it. It is my fervent wish to
see those LGBT+ people among the ranks of the “bridge-builders”
wake up, open their eyes and minds, and understand that it would be
better to see our enemies' institutions wither and die than to delay
the inevitable for the sake of comfort and complacency.
We can have a better
world, but it will not be accomplished by chit-chat and hugs with the
villains of the story. The “bridge-building” groups and their
leaders simply cannot be trusted to have our best interests at heart.
They further our oppression by their very existence. There can be
no capitulation to bigots, not if “pride” is to mean anything.
We are better than the bigots, superior to them in all the ways which
matter most. To pretend otherwise is folly. Let us choose to
embrace that, rather than fight it.
