(no subject)

Everyone should go read Seema's open letter to America. I'm impressed by its thoughtfulness, eloquence, and moderation.  I agree with it (well, maybe not with the "rationalization" part), but I could not have written anything like it.  I'm so devastated and hopeless and furious that I can't be rational about the the Bush election yet, if ever.  (No, Kerry would not have been a panacea; he's a rich, conservative white man himself.  But he's bright and reasonable and progressive; at least he had the potential to restore America.)

I'm in melodramatic mode, I know, but I see nothing facing us in the next four years but a fascist military-police state run by a self-righteous bigot of borderline intelligence who thinks he's been chosen by God, and I can't stand it.  Yeah, I'm being self-righteous myself, but at least I don't want to make other people live their lives the way I say they should.   I just want a country that will allow people to live as they see fit.   I used to think that's what America was about.  I feel like an idiot -- what a naive fool I've been, believing that my beloved country actually stood for religious and personal freedom, independence, tolerance, liberty and justice for all.   It terrifies me that so many of my fellow-citizens -- over 55 million of them, most of them good, well-meaning people -- apparently prefer some other America entirely.

Further Thoughts. . .

It's not just Bush and the Republicans and the "red states" who are to blame for the state of America today.  I have looked the enemy in the face, and it is us.  Middle-class Democrats, liberals, progressives, whatever we want to call ourselves.

Mea Culpa #1

First we chose and then we supported John Kerry -- a rich, white man who a) opposes gay marriage; b) is paradoxically opposed to abortion but pro-choice; c) doesn't want national health care, either ("so don't worry, big-money-insurers; you can vote for me without any threat to the status-quo and your huge paychecks"); d) doesn't really come out against guns; e) doesn't question the whole idea of the "War on Terror" ("vote for me!  I won't change anything -- I'll just be tougher on terror!  I'll fight the war harder and better!"); f) didn't vote against the war in Iraq.

Mea Culpa #2

We apparently voted in overwhelming numbers to make gay people into legal (not just social) second-class citizens.  Eleven states -- even a blue one -- voted to ban gays.  49% of the voters in Ohio (if you can believe the vote count) were for Kerry. But only 38% opposed the gay ban.  (I say "gay ban" and not "gay marriage ban" because that's what it is -- a referendum against homosexuality in general.  If you think this issue is just about marriage, don't kid yourself.  This is about a national repudiation not just of gay rights, but of gay existence.  The marriage thing is just the legal manifestation of our national attitude.  Sure, some of us think that people who are already gay deserve to be treated with dignity [well, sort of, as long as they don't "flaunt" it or demand their civil rights.]  Big of us, isn't it?  But how many of us are comfortable with the idea of creating more gay people?  If we truly believed that it was "all right" to be gay, would we have all these studies showing that children raised by gay parents are no more likely to grow up gay than the national average?  Why do people need this reassurance?  Would it be so terrible if every gay person's child did grow up gay?  If more straight people's children grew up gay?  "Oh, it's not the homosexuality that worries me; it's the problems and bullying and discrimination they'll face," people say.  Bullshit.  Does anyone suggest that African-Americans not have children because they'll face a racist world?  Do we tell people to abort their girl fetuses because sexism still reigns?  Or Muslims not to procreate because their children will find they aren't welcome in the land of the free?)  Even people who are not made uncomfortable by the very fact of homosexuality are too blame, too.  I belong to several grass-roots social justice organizations.  Sure, we're all supportive of gays; many of us are gay. But do we make this issue a major one for our groups?  No, because it's too divisive, and effective community organizing depends on choosing causes that don't polarize people.  We've got to agree if we're going to succeed, and so we put gays aside while half the country takes its hatred to the voting booths.  (I hear the objections now -- "Come on, that's unfair.  I don't hate gays, I just a) hate their sin, b) think marriage is supposed to be between a man and a woman; c) can't go against God; d) don't want homosexuality thrown in my face.  There's no hate involved."  Yeah, right.)

Mea Culpa #3

How much attention do we really pay to the issue of affordable health care for all?  Jane Bryant Quinn has an article in this week's Newsweek about how easily we've made the devil's bargain -- no health care for millions in exchange for relatively good health care for the rest of us.  She's right, and I'm as guilty as anyone.

I could go on, but I'm running out of antacid.  I'd better try something less agitating, like sticking pins in my foot.

 

Further Further Thoughts. . .

Okay, I'm calmer now. It has nothing to do with the whiskey sours, nothing at all. I'm not any happier; just calmer.

I might have been too hasty in writing "hate" in my previous comments about attitudes toward gays. Yes, some people do hate gays, and some hate without realizing it, concealing their true emotion in "love the sinner, hate the sin" rhetoric or other mental obfuscations. But many of those who voted to ban gay marriage probably don't hate. They'd never dream of being violent toward gays; many even try hard not to be judgmental. But they can't accept people like me for what we are. Some think homosexuality is morally wrong; others just think it's gross; still others pity us. Many would prefer to ignore homosexuality altogether; they resent having it "flaunted" (a term which to some people appears to mean "mentioned.") If forced to pay attention, like at the polls, they'll let their real feelings be known. But otherwise, they'll be polite and pretend that gays don't really quite exist, the way you'd behave if there was a bad smell at your hostess's party.

When I first came out to a good friend of mine, she said, "Well, I think it's weird and disgusting and just plain wrong. But I want you to know that I'll always be your friend. I just don't want to hear anything about it. I promise never to bring it up again." She thought she was being tolerant and broad-minded. But what she was saying was that she'd be my friend only as long as I wasn't myself. The only way she could deal with me was if I concealed a major part of myself.

I wonder how she would have felt if I had told her, "I'll be your friend. But I don't ever want you to mention it when you see some hunky guy you think is cute; I don't want to hear about your husband; I don't want to know anything about your relationship, good or bad. If you break up, I don't want to know. If you're seeing someone new, I don't want to know. If you fall in love, I don't want to know. If you come to my parties, you have to come alone, or if you bring your husband, you have to act as if he's just some acquaintance or a friend from work. And don't you dare ever touch him in my presence." Because these things are exactly what she was asking of me.

I know that a lot of Americans think like my friend -- and many, many more are not anywhere near as "liberal" she is. Many more see me and people like me as an abomination, as something they would obliterate if they could. And they would think of themselves as moral and righteous for doing so. I have a colleague who told me, very matter-of-factly, even pleasantly, that all gays were of course going to hell. He was sorry, because he liked me, but that's just the way things were. This is the world I live in, and I fear it will only get worse in the next four years. All those gay marriage bans. And they're just the beginning. It's not that I even care about marriage; I think it's a sexist trap; my partner and I wouldn't marry if we could. What scares me is what those bans say about how a large percentage of my fellow Americans think of me and other gays -- as people beyond the pale, people we need laws against, people who don't count as "real" Americans.

So you see why I've gone into LJ-lecture mode, even though I know I'm preaching to the converted as far as most of the people on my friends list are concerned. It's just that I'm the tiniest little bit freaked (can you tell?) about what happened Tuesday, about Bush and the gay bans and the conservative Congress and on and on. And maybe I seem just as judgmental and non-accepting of people who oppose gays as I say they are of me. But there's a major difference: I don't want to ignore or change them or vote to deny them the same rights that I enjoy. And I certainly don't think they're going to hell. I'm afraid, though, that for at least the next four years, that's where we're all going.