Compassion


The greatest test of humanist compassion comes when we are confronted with our own narcissism. Sexism, racism, ageism, homophobia stem from an inability or unwillingness to place aside ego in favor of understanding and vulnerability. Fear of surrendering ego displays itself in many ways. Sometimes it is subtle. Sometimes it is violent. It is always thoughtless.

Last evening I sat in a church with 900 others and listened to the inspiring words of a humanist icon, Stephen Fry, who happens to be a gay man. The speaker was quite frank about his development into a humanist as a gay man. He also specifically referred to his view that humanism, unlike religion, does not seek to own or control people. The organizers of the event had arranged for a female, heterosexual songwriter to sing a song to Mr. Fry about bearing him a child. Her motivation, according to the lyrics, was to preserve Mr. Fry's genetics, which she sees as a benefit to the species. It was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and Mr. Fry bore up rather well. He is a professional actor, after all, and he was being honored by a prestigious university, and paid.

As young women all around me hooted and cheered, I looked around me at several gay men in the audience, who, like me, were less than amused. One young gay man near me looked like he was on the verge of tears, wooden in self-control. I knew immediately what his posture meant. He was bracing defensively against this brash public display of egocentric heterosexuality in dominance over the gay icon on stage. Perhaps this was a subconscious attempt by the organization to wash away the stain of Mr. Fry's overt homosexuality from the stage. Perhaps it is just too hard for people in the majority to understand what this could mean to gay men in the audience. Perhaps these humanists do not really care about the implications of this behavior, presented as a joke, a joke about a sexual majority and a sexual minority. If the song had been about swaying a humanist into Christianity, I believe it would not have gone over so well.

Humanism, as I see it, is not show business. Compassion is seldom found on the stage or screen. Mr. Fry is the rare example of a public performer who has opened the pain and joy of his specific life to his public. I see this as his humanist practice. I respect him for this. Last evening, he was on the job, performing for his living, as well as presenting himself as a fit example of a practicing humanist. Unfortunately, the organizers of the event, in my opinion, were unable to raise themselves to the bar of Mr. Fry's excellence. They chose instead to assert the heterosexual norm under the guise of a joke. It certainly was a big hit among the loudest and most reassured heterosexual women in the audience. The reactions of the gay men I observed went unobserved by most, I am sure.

As Mr. Fry asserted last evening, being part of the minority without any personal choice opens the eyes early in life. Sharing the vision of someone in a minority is painful for those of us in a majority, because it shines harsh light on the egocentric carelessness that comes with domination. The underside of this "anything goes" age is a certain amount of callousness. If something like the song about having Mr. Fry's baby is successful on  Youtube, it is deemed to be acceptable to everyone. When the song comes from the consciousness of the dominating majority, it is somewhat inevitable that it will achieve some popularity, but it may well offend or hurt a sizable minority, who will be ignored, it seems, even in the halls of Humanism.

Compassion is not about being politically correct. However, compassion does entail mindfulness. What may be a private joke between one heterosexual woman and one gay man ceases to be that on a public stage. It becomes a statement of the organization that presents it. It becomes part of the organizational culture. In other words, it states: "This is an OK thing to do here." A slippery slope, and one which seldom encourages a culture of inclusive compassion for all members of an organization.

Comments

  1. I find this response shocking, Paul! I don't agree AT ALL with your take on the issue. I certainly see how a demeaning and insulting show of heteronormativity could have been extremely offensive, but a funny, affectionate, satirical display of esteem from one person to another? I'm not sure why this seemed so terrible to you!

    I certainly saw no indication from Mr. Fry, either during the event or afterwards, that he resented or was upset by the song at all. None of the lyrics of the song demeaned gay people or suggested they should be second class citizens. I see this sort of thing rather as a huge step forward, indicating just how acceptable it is to be gay among young women.

    Let's not forget, too, that women still face extreme prejudice in some parts of their lives. I thought the performance was, in a way, rather feminist in its assertion of the rights of women to take reproductive choice into their own hands.

    I think it's a shame that the many positive features of the event have been obscured for you by this small part of it which, in my humble opinion, you have misjudged.

    Perhaps I would understand you better if you explained precisely why this was offensive to you?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you for your impressions, James. Perhaps we had different experiences because of our different positions, relative to the event. You were, I believe, one of the organizers or the event and actually participated in the program on stage. So, I would expect you to defend it, as you have done so well.

    I, on the other hand, was sitting at the back of the hall where I could gauge the relative reactions of various fellow audience members, as well as my own.

    Pro-feminist event, because it represented an assertion of the rights of women to take reproductive choices in their own hands? So, this means it is feminist to sexually approach an openly gay man in public on stage and try to seduce him into procreation with insinuations that her boyfriend may even participate somehow in the procreative act? Not the feminism I worked for and with in the 1960s and 1970s, so I must be behind the New Wave of Feminism. Apologies.

    I have no criticism of Mr. Fry or his presentation, which harmonized completely with my concepts of humanism. I enjoyed his part in the event thoroughly. Yes, Mr. Fry graciously assented as part of his performance to participate in Molly's song. That was his choice as a performer and guest. I would not assume that he would support the concepts I am addressing or those you are asserting.

    However, as I stated clearly, I do not believe humanism is show business. Perhaps Humanism, with a capital H, is. I am beginning to wonder. I do know that organized religion is most definitely show business in many cases.

    I believe greater care should be taken to make the entire audience feel included. That would mean, in my opinion, NOT challenging Mr. Fry's longstanding and open avoidance of heterosexual reproduction as an openly gay man and gay advocate on stage in front of gay people who may take consolation in his ability to be who he is, without participating in or even being ostensibly interested in heterosexual reproduction. This is the difference between showmanship and true humanist community-awareness, in my opinion. Yes, Molly's song got hoots and cheers from the young women around me and the apparently heterosexual couples around me. I'm am happy they felt so so included and joyous. However, I honestly did not share their exuberance, nor did I see the too few apparently gay men in my view exuberantly enjoying it either.

    But, then again, what did we matter. Once again, we were in the minority.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have been informed by James Croft in response to my above comment that he was not directly involved in the organization of this event, but that he was included as a questioner in the planning of the event's Q&A portion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Paul! Thanks for your honest comments above. As a part of the organization that sponsored the event, but not technically an "organizer" of the event, and as someone who identifies with the sexual majority, I would have agreed completely with your view if the singer had actually been "sexually approaching" Fry in order to "seduce" him into having "heterosexual" relations with her.

    But this, in fact, did not happen.
    There was no seduction involved (in my opinion) aside from merely listing off facts as to why she would be a good surrogate- should he happen to decide to use one at some point in the future. Should she not have mentioned that quick sly comment about the boyfriend, we would have never known the singers' sexuality. I also thought the fact that James DID ask that question a mere five minutes before the song, highlighted the fact that no one was there to deny or cover his sexuality. And that, in fact, one of the many reasons he was chosen this year was because of his outspokenness on that subject.

    And lastly, let us not forget that there were members of the GLBTQ population that DID organize the event and that were actively involved in the process of approving this songs' inclusion in the evening's events.

    Now, I say all this knowing that I am not a gay man- so I am here to ask you if talking (or in this case singing) about surrogacy is hetero-normicizing? Because if it is, as a Humanist, I want to know so that I can better understand and ensure the openness and acceptance that I feel towards my fellow GLBTQ humans is reflected in both my speech and action.

    I also want to underscore that although I am writing this as an individual NOT representing the organization who hosted the event, that I hope you know that we all love you dearly Paul, and would never knowingly or purposefully make you, or anyone for that matter, feel the way you have admitted to feeling above in your post.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting take on this Paul. I think perhaps the reason it did not occur to anyone that it may be difficult for gay men to listen to a tongue in cheek song about a straight woman wanting to have the baby of a gay man is because they knew Fry's answer was going to be no. He's GAY! That's why it's funny. It obviously wasn't a real attempt to convert him to a heterosexual norm because that isn't possible and everyone there knew that.

    That being said, it is super easy to understand why it would hit a raw nerve for you and the other gay men watching. And yes, in that context, it was in poor form. But heterosexual females have absolutely no clue what the issues gay men have to face are. We only know what our own subordinate position in society feels like. So have compassion with your straight female sister here. It wasn't as if she was intending to offend you. Remember, she isn't one of the religious bigots who think gay can be cured. So don't paint her with that brush just because of a joke that she had no way of knowing in advance would offend.

    My gay friends and former housemates always seem to think it is funny when a girl comes on to them and doesn't let up upon finding out they are gay. So again - if all the gay men we know think this scenario is funny, it's pretty much impossible to know a comedic song about this scenario would offend. And maybe it isn't funny. Maybe laughing it off is just an embarrased and nervous response to something that is actually pretty painful. But again, unless we are told it is painful, we have no way of knowing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jen, thanks for reading this and commenting.

    All I can say is that I think I am telling the organizers of this event that it was painful to me as a paying audience member and member of the Humanist community here. So far, I have been rewarded with some excellent feedback and discussion about it. Yours adds to my reward.

    As for your gay friends, I cannot speak for them, but I would consider it non-Humanist of myself to take any woman's (or other man's) expression of sexual attraction toward me as a joke, even if she were trying to convert me. I would see it as my responsibility to try my best to work through the issue between us respectfully, openly and compassionately. Perhaps this standard in my own practice also made me sensitive to the issue as portrayed.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts