Read Part I.
This chat has been edited for clarity and condensed. All views expressed are solely those of the individual blogger.
Robert: Going
back to what Jordan asked me earlier [about how it feels to intentionally get
out of the way to create space for more marginalized voices], early in my
formation – before I was named a postulant – a priest told me that
unfortunately I had two things going for me: I was male and white. And he said
this meant that I will have a much easier road as the “safe” option in nearly
every congregation over similarly or better qualified women, POC, or lgbt+
folk. That was helpful for me to hear, and it meant that I spent a lot of time
in seminary watching my classmates, and trying to step aside for those folks
who might not get a fair shake.
Jordan: I
think that’s something we haven’t really wrestled with at all as a church. We
keep focusing on the canons themselves, and opening them up to be more and more
inclusive of who we ordain, which is great, but do we do anything to encourage
congregations to employ those who are less “safe”? No!
Robert: Because
it’s one thing to say that “we welcome people” and another to say “we welcome
their gifts.” And I aim for the latter when I can, knowing that I’m still
privileged in ways that do not threaten my employment prospects.
Jordan: In
2012, we removed any barriers to the ordination of transgender persons from the canons, but how many churches will hire a transgender priest? And how many
Commissions on Ministry and bishops will advocate for those they ordain? How
many bishops will tell a congregational search committee, “I really think
hiring a queer person would challenge you in needed ways.”
Jocelynn: There
are churches that seek out women or LGBT folk, but often because they can’t pay
the straight 40-something white guy they’d rather have.
In
the 90s I would yearn for the days when I didn’t have to think of this stuff. I
can’t believe 20 years later we still are.
Jordan: I
wonder: do you think it’s worse now? It’s definitely subtler.
Jocelynn: Still
feels like we take 2 steps forward and 5 back.
Robert: I
mean, even though I’m not sure if we’re better or worse off than ten years ago,
there is still the fact that dealing with it is exhausting. And the internet
has made possible a level of strategic sustained harassment that was not
possible before.
Jordan: But
it also facilitates the finding of allies when you feel so alone.
Robert: So
even if we said “better” or “worse,” what is definitely true is that the field
has changed.
Jocelynn: I
think now there are allegedly more channels we can take, or supposedly take, to
report/deal with these incidents. That doesn’t mean anything will happen, but
there are those who think *something* will if it’s reported.
Jordan: Although,
Jocelynn, do you really think that anyone thinks anything will happen? Or are these
reporting procedures just an ass-covering measure, so that a woman’s critics
can say, “Well, if it were a real complaint she would’ve reported it.”
Jocelynn: That’s
the thing, right, there are egregious sexist examples or clear cut abuse and
then there are those that are grayer or less obviously shocking and they are so
pervasive but we shy away from making a fuss (weighing out the downsides to
reporting).
Jordan: Right.
When I was sexually harassed by my manager when I worked at a restaurant, I
spoke to a family friend who was an attorney. And this friend very gently
explained to me that the harassment wasn’t bad enough to rise to the level of a
lawsuit. And he was right – what was I going to say in court, “He would flick
my earrings and when I asked him to stop, would call all the other waitstaff
over, saying, “Hey! Watch how uncomfortable I can make Jordan! She hates how
I’m always touching her earrings!” No judge would say that qualified as sexual
harassment deserving of damages.
Jocelynn: Yeah,
in college I was stalked by a guy, but it wasn’t “sexual” harassment so he was
allowed to stay on campus. Never mind that harassment is dangerous and
threatening.
Jordan: It’s
amazing how bad the things that “aren’t bad enough” are.
Jocelynn: It’s
like some guys know which line not to cross.
Robert: Oh,
if there’s one thing I know about some men, it’s that they know how to do the
calculations. And they aren’t that difficult to do.
Jordan: YES
exactly. They know exactly how far they can go. And so it’s society’s job, not
individual women’s, to walk that line back. Like you wrote about with the Yes Means Yes law,Jocelynn.
Jocelynn: I
don’t know if you all remember Anita Hill – I was in high school and was in the camp of
thinking she was lying because who would stay in that environment? A few days
in the workforce and I knew she was telling the truth.
So
that’s story piece, right? She was telling the truth, women came out in droves
to support or discredit her, she was ultimately not believed by Congress. And
loads of HR policies later we’re still there.
Jordan: Robert,
I wonder if you could speak to your first experiences really believing women’s
lived experiences, when they were describing something you couldn’t see, like
you mentioned above.
Robert: It
was sitting with a woman in my freshman year of college who experienced sexual
assault, and I listened as she – through sobs – wondered if it was rape because
they had both been drinking. Never mind that she had been asleep. I watched men
manipulate women. That made women much more believable at a time when I was
more likely to hear “both sides.”
Jocelynn: It
seems like that insight is so crucial. Once, years ago, when we were in college, I was talking with my husband and I shared my and several
friends’ belief that “all men are assholes, some just less so than others.” To
which he strongly disagreed. He insisted he knew “good guys.” I said, “And how
many of them truly treat women well, so that if you had a sister you’d want him
to date her? He was quiet for a long time. He couldn’t name one person. Eye
opening.
It
really takes stepping outside your POV and seeing it from others' to make a
difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment
It is expected that you have read the submission guidelines and community norms, which guide our editorial decisions and comment submissions.