Quote:
Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14
I'm gonna ask something, not to incite anger but because I honestly don't know. Is opposition the best answer here? Would a gentler approach of education and using historical examples of prejudice towards the gay community not be more proactive?
I believe that when you take the stance of challenging and opposing their ignorant beliefs, you reinforce their dumb positions about the gay community. I think this opposition is what leads to other dumb stances like "but the Muslims!!" or "where's the Christian pride night??".
My 2 cents
|
Personally I don't think re-hashing the "religion is bad, mmkay" does much good, and I'm not typically of the disposition to call folks like Reimer or Provorov names or dehumanize them. I do strongly disagree with their positions, however, and I get the compulsion to stand in that kind of direct opposition to what I consider a notably harmful one. Keep in mind that even going off of Reimer's statements he is affixed in the outdated and disproven notion that queerness is some kind of conscious choice a person makes at some unfortunate junction of their life.
I'm not convinced an educational approach would do much good on someone like Reimer who is deeply ensconced in his faith. That said, I definitely think there is value in remembering things like Stonewall and people like Matthew Shepard, and generally education and expanding your worldview helps to embrace and understand concepts of tolerance and, hopefully, pure love and acceptance.
I can't pretend that outrage culture doesn't exist and that it likely gives a bigoted person another excuse to sink further into their hate. My major issue is when we have members swing in with priority to remind us that people like Reimer are the real victims here and it's all because we are intolerant of his backwards thinking. It's an exhausting performance.
It's still OK to stand up to the statement Reimer made and say "that's not OK". Don't let the idea that he used the word "love" and some double-speak misdirect that what he did and said is a strong condemnation of actual human beings that likely have a much better understanding of what love actually means.