Jess Anderson wrote: It seems clear that
several people read what Richard wrote through the heavy filters of
their own longings, their own response to the general oppression,
even their own reactivity to other things about Richard, perhaps.
But Richard made no generalization of either type in what he
actually did say -- holding your newborn; later your child
tells you their love for you -- that's what he said and that's
all he said. It's preposterous to saddle him with the
charge that he was crowing, still less that he was putting anyone
down.
Bob Lodenkamper writes: For the record, these items were on a list that started out "Casual sex is usually not better than...", followed by three items (out of 6 or 7) specifically related to raising children.
Most of us write about what interests us, things we've done or been through or whatever. Surely you're not saying that 50% or 42% of a list being about children is unacceptable?
Bob: Quite apart from the apples/oranges nature of the comparison, it really is unpleasantly close to the "family values" propaganda of the far right, although that was not the intent.
I'll come back to that; it's one of the main points.
Bob: Had this list been posted by a newcomer to the group, would you have interpreted it positively or negatively? I would have assumed it was flamebait and ignored it.
Life is tricky enough, I think, without worrying about "what I would do if."
I think a major element needs to be considered in this debate. What's really wrong with the Family Values Coalition, the Christian Coalition, and that whole nidus of hatred, in my opinion, is that they've completely succeeded in devaluing family values by capturing and perverting the language itself.
There are real family values: home life, nurture, socialization, learning, togetherness, love, and many others. Even if one feels strongly that the nuclear family is inextricably, systemically bound up with much that is evil (and I do), nevertheless there is something very special about family (we use the word not by accident to indicate other LGB people) in most peoples' lives.
The idea of loving people who provide a loving environment for innocent and dependent children is a core value not just to our society but to all societies. What's disgusting about the FVC is that they've perverted the entire concept, sullying it with intolerance and power-driven contempt of otherness.
In opposing this form of hatred, many people allow themselves to be
co-opted by the opponent's values, in the process helping (perhaps
unwittingly) to drive the wedge of divisiveness yet deeper into the
flesh of our body politic. Clearly that's a losing
proposition for us. It's also a personal loss, I believe, for
unless we are especially sensitive to the young, we will be trapped
forever in the same old cycle of bigotry and thwarted potentials.
