lilithu
The Devil's Advocate
OK, this has been bugging me for some time now. I do understand the idea of the tyranny of the majority and the need to provide space for dissenting voices and consciences. I also understand the need for the majority, when someone says that they're being marginalized, to take a look at themselves and examine the ways in which they may be contributing to this marginalization. For me, when a person of color, or women, or GLBT, or a member of a minority faith group talks about their feeling offended by the way something is done, I try to make my first reaction be to listen and empathize. It may be that the way we do things reflect systemic bias that I'm not aware of, and the only way to be aware of it is to listen to others.
BUT, I honestly think that there are times when we UUs go overboard with this. When the whole group is so sensitive to the idea of offending even one person that we as a group become hostage to the feelings of that person or persons, particularly if they are of historically marginalized status.
ex #1) A group of twelve UUs went out to a comedy club one evening. It was a place where you eat dinner first and then watch the show. We had gotten there early and had great seats up front near the stage. Before the show actually started but after the place had filled up, one of our group became bothered by the occasional cigarette fumes that made it over to us from the smoking section. Most of us didn't even notice it until she pointed it out. We offered to have her sit at the far end of our group, as far away from the fumes as possible. But she said she couldn't stand it and went to sit on the other side of the room, towards the back. That's fine. My beef is then that others within the UU group couldn't stand the idea of this woman sitting alone, so half of us decided to move along with her. And because half of us decided to move, the rest of us had to go also. This meant that we had to settle the bill with our first waiter and then start another tab with a second waiter. It also meant that we had to order more drinks than we otherwise would have so as not to screw the second waiter, who is depending on tips from orders to make a living. Regardless, both waiters ended up having to do more work for less money, and we lost our prime seats because one person didn't like the location and we as a group bowed to the one person.
ex #2) Today at church the choir sang Amazing Grace. We've sung it many times at church. It happens to be my favorite hymn. One of my pet peeves is how UUs will often substitute the word "soul" for "wretch" because they don't like the word "wretch." I've gotten used to that. But today I noticed that the choir changed the words to another part of the song. Instead of "I once was lost but now am found; was blind but now I see" they sang "I once was lost but now am found across the stormy sea." I thought that was odd but whatever. Well it turns out that the senior minister and music director intend for our congregation to permanently change the way we sing that song, not just the choir but all of us. One member of our congregation and choir, who is blind, objected to the "was blind but now I see" part as ableist. He's offended so now the whole congregation is supposed to stop singing those words.
I'm trying to be open here. I do understand how those words might be offensive to someone who is blind. But I am also thinking of how much those words mean to me personally. And I know how heavily invested many other people are in those words. If the senior minister and music director think that the congregation is going to happily sing "across the stormy sea" the next time we sing Amazing Grace they are in for a rude awakening.
So now I'm in the uncomfortable position of asking a question that I normally hear coming from conservatives, just how far are we willing to go with our "sensitivity" and how much is too much?
BUT, I honestly think that there are times when we UUs go overboard with this. When the whole group is so sensitive to the idea of offending even one person that we as a group become hostage to the feelings of that person or persons, particularly if they are of historically marginalized status.
ex #1) A group of twelve UUs went out to a comedy club one evening. It was a place where you eat dinner first and then watch the show. We had gotten there early and had great seats up front near the stage. Before the show actually started but after the place had filled up, one of our group became bothered by the occasional cigarette fumes that made it over to us from the smoking section. Most of us didn't even notice it until she pointed it out. We offered to have her sit at the far end of our group, as far away from the fumes as possible. But she said she couldn't stand it and went to sit on the other side of the room, towards the back. That's fine. My beef is then that others within the UU group couldn't stand the idea of this woman sitting alone, so half of us decided to move along with her. And because half of us decided to move, the rest of us had to go also. This meant that we had to settle the bill with our first waiter and then start another tab with a second waiter. It also meant that we had to order more drinks than we otherwise would have so as not to screw the second waiter, who is depending on tips from orders to make a living. Regardless, both waiters ended up having to do more work for less money, and we lost our prime seats because one person didn't like the location and we as a group bowed to the one person.
ex #2) Today at church the choir sang Amazing Grace. We've sung it many times at church. It happens to be my favorite hymn. One of my pet peeves is how UUs will often substitute the word "soul" for "wretch" because they don't like the word "wretch." I've gotten used to that. But today I noticed that the choir changed the words to another part of the song. Instead of "I once was lost but now am found; was blind but now I see" they sang "I once was lost but now am found across the stormy sea." I thought that was odd but whatever. Well it turns out that the senior minister and music director intend for our congregation to permanently change the way we sing that song, not just the choir but all of us. One member of our congregation and choir, who is blind, objected to the "was blind but now I see" part as ableist. He's offended so now the whole congregation is supposed to stop singing those words.
I'm trying to be open here. I do understand how those words might be offensive to someone who is blind. But I am also thinking of how much those words mean to me personally. And I know how heavily invested many other people are in those words. If the senior minister and music director think that the congregation is going to happily sing "across the stormy sea" the next time we sing Amazing Grace they are in for a rude awakening.
So now I'm in the uncomfortable position of asking a question that I normally hear coming from conservatives, just how far are we willing to go with our "sensitivity" and how much is too much?
