I apparently don't have posting rights on your site, which is understandable. I apologize in advance for intruding; I don't think I've spent enough time with the family to force my opinions like this, but I feel the need to speak out in this case. I KNOW I type alot; apparently so does the site, since it is making me break this up into several parts. Please, bear with me and read it.
This whole Jesus' sexuality argument on facebook and the more personal fighting needs to be addressed in a more level headed, religious way.
Andi and Bry. I know you have oposing views to mine, and that's fine. Everything I say here is an interpretation of facts into my opinion; I'm not stating my opinion as fact. The reason I state it at all is to help you see each other's points of view.
The issue came up, as I'm sure you figured out by now, because of a story about a university in Texas doing a play from the 90's (or so) about a modern depiction of Jesus, only gay. People were freaking out about it because they found it offensive. "How dare they protray Christ as gay!" Because, obviously, homosexuality is a deplorable thing. The orthodox Christian mindset in the States attaches to homosexuality sex itself, and all its vices; gayness in particular brings with it animalistic lust, pedophilia, moral decay/death, and many other extremely offensive images. Naturally, people who link that together automatically assume that when we ask the question if Jesus was gay, that we're attaching all these things.
Gay people themselves have a bad habit of attaching a bigger part of themselves to their sexuality than is due. An attachment to the label itself rather than their inherently human characteristics; defining their identity by being gay, rather than expressing their identity which just happens to have a romantic component preferencing same gender. Because of this, what I perceive to be, pathetically idiotic course of expression, you have these 'Manifest Destiny Queers', who feel the need to not only be advocates, but straight up obnoxious militants, who WILL say anything outlandish and extreme just to get attention to the issue, whether or not there's a basis, let alone a good one.
The first thing you two need to accept is that NONE OF YOU are these types of people! Andi, you have to understand that just because Bryan throws an idea out there doesn't mean he's doing it to make a scene or cause a fight. He's not a gay militant. He's more extreme than I'd like him to be, but it's the same part of him that randomly gives charity, in all sense of the word, to anyone without bias. He's just that kind of guy; he's passionate and unrelenting, and I love him for it. He didn't bring up this concept, and neither did the student in the story, to start feuding. The story and the concept DOES NOT offend Christian logic unless you apply gay sexual and deviant stereotypes (i.e., "Gay is bad, ergo saying Christ is gay is blasphemous).
Bryan, you need to stop taking any opposition your family gives you as a personal attack on you. Andi isn't spitting on you or any gay twelve yearolds for disagreeing. She may not word it well, but it's not an easy topic to address. Give her a break. Religion is a serious thing. You remember when you were a more devout Muslim, right? We all express our spiritual beliefs in different ways, and there isn't a simple bar contiuum on which we can judge each other. You can be devout and not go to church. You can have a passionate love for God and be a neurotic deviant. You can be an unholy, lawful evil cleric and a Forsaken priest. It's not against the rules! (D&D and WoW jokes there. "Ha ha." *Kneeslap*) I'm confident Andi and I have the same opinions of the Christ, and I very easily empathize with her concern. But I live with you, love you, and have experienced a lot of what you have gone through. I can see much more readily what you're trying to say- What the play says- and appreciate it than alot of people can.
As I've weighed in on this before, I've told you I've had a lot of religious training. I could have, and a part of me regrets verily, not going on a Mission. It wouldn't have made me straight, but that's my love for God, His word, and if nothing else, the good effects of charity. Even if I don't convert anyone to the faith (it's far from a requirement in Mormonism, no matter what they tell you), we do good things for people. That's what matters.
That's a Christ like quality, and it has nothing to do with my sexuality. That's the point of the play and the point Bry's trying to make with, "So what if he's gay?" I know it sounds outlandish. I know alot of people immediately took that stance that Andi and Nathan did- That this is some kind of attempt to reconcile anti-gay verses in the Bible (this is called 'Apologetics' by the way; I prefer to keep that word). This is not apologetics. I can see people arguing "Ruth married Naiomi!" as political apologetics. I can see Sodom&Gomorrah, Leviticus, and the eunoch stories as more legit apologetics.
Nevertheless, this story, and the question, is not apologetics. It's a point about the social stigma.
In my faith, Jesus was not a sexual being. Period. That makes him adrogynous. He was a teacher and brother to all. You could look at him and appreciate his beauty, his plainness, whatever- And there was no sexual imprinting. The Bible has verses I can't find right now that support this view. But you can always find a way around it. He was the son of God; it fits with our version. But Islam, and others, don't consider him the son of God. They revere him as a prophet, but he was still just a man, and sexuality is not off limits for him in that regard.
Keeping those points and ideas in mind, what's the point I'm getting at? That we're all getting at with asking the question, "What if Jesus was gay?" The question isn't to impose a kind of right for gay people to be gay. It's to invoke the response, and to question the RESPONSE. I was offended. But why? Because Christ, in my faith, is adrogynous. He's perfect'sh (definitions vary), and therefore didn't have a sexulity. Would I be equally offended if they tried to force the straight lable on him? In principle, yes. Because even in my subconscious, in a heterosexist world, 'gay' carries with it 'homoSEXuality', and all the disgusting stereotypes that come with it. Straight Jesus is just annoying; Gay Jesus is offensive. It makes what he represented trite, inappropriate. Blasphemous.
And thinking on that, I realize that thought process is wrong. Gayness isn't these things. I know you all more or less support that, but this question is posed to exercise that support. Because if you don't believe Jesus was adrogynous, than the question should be moot like asking if he was black. A matter of fact, "Probably not, he was Israeli, not African." The question doesn't beg violence, although it's an understandable response. It begs to think on what we define devine, and why sometimes we have an inherent detest or overt reaction to something. And to question your beliefs, and therefore strengthen them. It's something I pride on being Mormon about; we encourage these kinds of thoughts and exercise them and our faith in socratic discussion.
That's what you two, Andi and Bryan, should be doing. Not berrating each other over the offense and its implications (both the blasphemy and the hypocrisy). Calm down, make up. This is an opportunity to learn from each other how to bring up these kinds of difficult topics. And why should they get brought up? Why is gayness such a big deal in our lives if we ask questions like these just to point out how it should have no bearing on anything at all- Even so far as it should be irrelevent whether Jesus himself was gay or not?
This is a seperate issue, but I wanted to address it because the times it's been brought up, I don't think the gravity of the issue has actually hit most of the family. Five months from now, Bryan goes to Albuquerque. Six months from now, I go to Portland. In case you didn't know, Bryan and I are serious. We are VERY serious. This is going to be very difficult for us. We will say it'll be fine, and we will be.
There are some people who would like to say, "You signed up under these rules, and you knew what they meant. You can't be too upset." And to that, I say fuck you, and I apologize for the language. I joined the Marine Corps to help people better than myself. I knew I wouldn't ever be Rambo, and I didn't have the talents at war to be a war hero. But if I could help other people who were heroes, so much the better. I never intended to find a relationship, let alone with another Marine. But I did. And the idea that I should forego Bryan, who I've knit souls with for almost two years now, because the majority of people in this world can't understand something as simple, and insignificant to me, as the gender of who I'm in a relationshp with me, is so incredibly damaging to me that it weighs on me every single fucking moment of every single day. You could say, "Tough", and you can guess what I'd say back to you. Because I'm gay, Mormon, and a Marine. There are few people I would deign the consent of a higher authority on these matters. I shouldn't have to drop Bryan over something so small. So stupid. I shouldn't have to suffer at all over it; and if I could only TALK about it, I don't think there's a rational person in the Corps who'd think otherwise.
I'm not saying this to persuade you what's right and wrong. I'm trying to persuade you that when Bryan and I get upset about these things, we're not being militant or stupid about it. When I say every single moment, I'm not exagerating. When I wake up and when I go to sleep, my arms are around Bryan, with the doors locked, the blinds closed, and a spark of neurotic apprehension on my neck. I have to watch every word that comes out of my mouth; have to construct every syllable to sound as unassuming, unnoticeable, and ungay as possible. Every audit, I see spouse changes that I can't make; I see SGLI updates I can't risk implicating; I hear conversations that I can't participate in because of what if's. It's not the exclusion that bothers me. It's the reminder. Bryan is on my mind all the time, and it's a testiment for my feelings for him. Unfortunately, that also means I'm paranoid, I'm stressed, and I'm locking every door I pass through, turn off every light- Bryan can tell you, I've flipped out of bed- Literally flown up and stood poised to fight over the slightest noise.
I guess the simplest way to put it, after all that, is that being gay is small and trivial. But my love for Bryan... can't be expressed in words. Keeping the latter to myself is what's starting to break me as a human being, and when you're being broken, yes, you will lash out at every pungent bafoon who makes an issue on Fox News and every moron commentor on CNN. We chose the military. We know what it means. And we'd appreciate your support; we don't need your admonishments. I've been in for five years and I work in admin. I've known I was gay since I was twelve. I've been through three years of seminary, two courses, and been self-studying since I discovered the internetz, and Bry's had his own life lessons. We'll be fine. Please give support in the coming years, wherever they take us, and don't take us so seriously when we flip out at Glenn Beck. It's fun stress relief.
hey jordan-- I agree with just about the majority of your comments. the reason i flipped about the jesus comment is because i believe him to be androgynous. i dont agree with the "davinci code" theory either and that also bothers me. He is more than just a man or a prophet. And, yes, if you look at the geographical region of the world in which our bible stories take place, he most definitely was not the light skinned, blue eyed man in all the paintings. Or, he could have been that? it's not how he looks that makes a difference to me either. I took offense because of how i believe Him to be. and, i'm sure you can tell, i have strong beliefs, whether right or wrong. I love my baby brother... I would do anything to protect him from harm. and, when i see him making comments that could be harmful, or doing something that isn't "marine" like in nature, i will speak up and say so. Only because i know the consequences of those actions are far reaching. Not just for him, but also for you. Our sexuality is just one part of who we are--and I may never fully understand that "militant" gay need to shout it from the mountain tops. I just don't get it. I like to know an entire individual...then meet their family. Get to know who they are, what they stand for and what they believe in. Are they charitable, good natured, kind and generous with their time, talents and money? Do they love children? Do they love animals? What books do they read... and when meeting their family, once i get to know that person, then i'm positive i'll love their family as much for their family is a reflection on them as well. that being said...if a man brings another man to dinner at my house...NOT a big deal. The people are who matter to me. I want bry to stop appearing so "militant"...to stop having to label himself. this isn't the first time we've encountered our brother's need to be defined by a label--muslim, buddhist, gay, etc. Once he's comfortable in his skin, the labels won't matter. When he can see himself as Bryan Eberly...the kick ass guy he his...each mornign when he wakes up, the rest will follow. His sexuality does not define him or you. it doesnt define me either (by the way...crazy gay militant term that pisses me off to no end is the term "breeders" to define straight people---or my aunts old way of saying "go gayley forward" instead of saying, "go straight" when giving directions).... sorry...ranting.
BOTTOM LINE...i love you both and i'm happy to have you in our family. You should recieve a medal or special seat at the table for dealing with all of us with such grace and decorum. :) ...eric...can he have posting rights now?
7 comments:
I apparently don't have posting rights on your site, which is understandable. I apologize in advance for intruding; I don't think I've spent enough time with the family to force my opinions like this, but I feel the need to speak out in this case. I KNOW I type alot; apparently so does the site, since it is making me break this up into several parts. Please, bear with me and read it.
This whole Jesus' sexuality argument on facebook and the more personal fighting needs to be addressed in a more level headed, religious way.
Andi and Bry. I know you have oposing views to mine, and that's fine. Everything I say here is an interpretation of facts into my opinion; I'm not stating my opinion as fact. The reason I state it at all is to help you see each other's points of view.
The issue came up, as I'm sure you figured out by now, because of a story about a university in Texas doing a play from the 90's (or so) about a modern depiction of Jesus, only gay. People were freaking out about it because they found it offensive. "How dare they protray Christ as gay!" Because, obviously, homosexuality is a deplorable thing. The orthodox Christian mindset in the States attaches to homosexuality sex itself, and all its vices; gayness in particular brings with it animalistic lust, pedophilia, moral decay/death, and many other extremely offensive images. Naturally, people who link that together automatically assume that when we ask the question if Jesus was gay, that we're attaching all these things.
Gay people themselves have a bad habit of attaching a bigger part of themselves to their sexuality than is due. An attachment to the label itself rather than their inherently human characteristics; defining their identity by being gay, rather than expressing their identity which just happens to have a romantic component preferencing same gender. Because of this, what I perceive to be, pathetically idiotic course of expression, you have these 'Manifest Destiny Queers', who feel the need to not only be advocates, but straight up obnoxious militants, who WILL say anything outlandish and extreme just to get attention to the issue, whether or not there's a basis, let alone a good one.
The first thing you two need to accept is that NONE OF YOU are these types of people! Andi, you have to understand that just because Bryan throws an idea out there doesn't mean he's doing it to make a scene or cause a fight. He's not a gay militant. He's more extreme than I'd like him to be, but it's the same part of him that randomly gives charity, in all sense of the word, to anyone without bias. He's just that kind of guy; he's passionate and unrelenting, and I love him for it. He didn't bring up this concept, and neither did the student in the story, to start feuding. The story and the concept DOES NOT offend Christian logic unless you apply gay sexual and deviant stereotypes (i.e., "Gay is bad, ergo saying Christ is gay is blasphemous).
Bryan, you need to stop taking any opposition your family gives you as a personal attack on you. Andi isn't spitting on you or any gay twelve yearolds for disagreeing. She may not word it well, but it's not an easy topic to address. Give her a break. Religion is a serious thing. You remember when you were a more devout Muslim, right? We all express our spiritual beliefs in different ways, and there isn't a simple bar contiuum on which we can judge each other. You can be devout and not go to church. You can have a passionate love for God and be a neurotic deviant. You can be an unholy, lawful evil cleric and a Forsaken priest. It's not against the rules! (D&D and WoW jokes there. "Ha ha." *Kneeslap*) I'm confident Andi and I have the same opinions of the Christ, and I very easily empathize with her concern. But I live with you, love you, and have experienced a lot of what you have gone through. I can see much more readily what you're trying to say- What the play says- and appreciate it than alot of people can.
As I've weighed in on this before, I've told you I've had a lot of religious training. I could have, and a part of me regrets verily, not going on a Mission. It wouldn't have made me straight, but that's my love for God, His word, and if nothing else, the good effects of charity. Even if I don't convert anyone to the faith (it's far from a requirement in Mormonism, no matter what they tell you), we do good things for people. That's what matters.
That's a Christ like quality, and it has nothing to do with my sexuality. That's the point of the play and the point Bry's trying to make with, "So what if he's gay?" I know it sounds outlandish. I know alot of people immediately took that stance that Andi and Nathan did- That this is some kind of attempt to reconcile anti-gay verses in the Bible (this is called 'Apologetics' by the way; I prefer to keep that word). This is not apologetics. I can see people arguing "Ruth married Naiomi!" as political apologetics. I can see Sodom&Gomorrah, Leviticus, and the eunoch stories as more legit apologetics.
Nevertheless, this story, and the question, is not apologetics. It's a point about the social stigma.
In my faith, Jesus was not a sexual being. Period. That makes him adrogynous. He was a teacher and brother to all. You could look at him and appreciate his beauty, his plainness, whatever- And there was no sexual imprinting. The Bible has verses I can't find right now that support this view. But you can always find a way around it. He was the son of God; it fits with our version. But Islam, and others, don't consider him the son of God. They revere him as a prophet, but he was still just a man, and sexuality is not off limits for him in that regard.
Keeping those points and ideas in mind, what's the point I'm getting at? That we're all getting at with asking the question, "What if Jesus was gay?" The question isn't to impose a kind of right for gay people to be gay. It's to invoke the response, and to question the RESPONSE. I was offended. But why? Because Christ, in my faith, is adrogynous. He's perfect'sh (definitions vary), and therefore didn't have a sexulity. Would I be equally offended if they tried to force the straight lable on him? In principle, yes. Because even in my subconscious, in a heterosexist world, 'gay' carries with it 'homoSEXuality', and all the disgusting stereotypes that come with it. Straight Jesus is just annoying; Gay Jesus is offensive. It makes what he represented trite, inappropriate. Blasphemous.
And thinking on that, I realize that thought process is wrong. Gayness isn't these things. I know you all more or less support that, but this question is posed to exercise that support. Because if you don't believe Jesus was adrogynous, than the question should be moot like asking if he was black. A matter of fact, "Probably not, he was Israeli, not African." The question doesn't beg violence, although it's an understandable response. It begs to think on what we define devine, and why sometimes we have an inherent detest or overt reaction to something. And to question your beliefs, and therefore strengthen them. It's something I pride on being Mormon about; we encourage these kinds of thoughts and exercise them and our faith in socratic discussion.
That's what you two, Andi and Bryan, should be doing. Not berrating each other over the offense and its implications (both the blasphemy and the hypocrisy). Calm down, make up. This is an opportunity to learn from each other how to bring up these kinds of difficult topics. And why should they get brought up? Why is gayness such a big deal in our lives if we ask questions like these just to point out how it should have no bearing on anything at all- Even so far as it should be irrelevent whether Jesus himself was gay or not?
This is a seperate issue, but I wanted to address it because the times it's been brought up, I don't think the gravity of the issue has actually hit most of the family. Five months from now, Bryan goes to Albuquerque. Six months from now, I go to Portland. In case you didn't know, Bryan and I are serious. We are VERY serious. This is going to be very difficult for us. We will say it'll be fine, and we will be.
There are some people who would like to say, "You signed up under these rules, and you knew what they meant. You can't be too upset." And to that, I say fuck you, and I apologize for the language. I joined the Marine Corps to help people better than myself. I knew I wouldn't ever be Rambo, and I didn't have the talents at war to be a war hero. But if I could help other people who were heroes, so much the better. I never intended to find a relationship, let alone with another Marine. But I did. And the idea that I should forego Bryan, who I've knit souls with for almost two years now, because the majority of people in this world can't understand something as simple, and insignificant to me, as the gender of who I'm in a relationshp with me, is so incredibly damaging to me that it weighs on me every single fucking moment of every single day. You could say, "Tough", and you can guess what I'd say back to you. Because I'm gay, Mormon, and a Marine. There are few people I would deign the consent of a higher authority on these matters. I shouldn't have to drop Bryan over something so small. So stupid. I shouldn't have to suffer at all over it; and if I could only TALK about it, I don't think there's a rational person in the Corps who'd think otherwise.
I'm not saying this to persuade you what's right and wrong. I'm trying to persuade you that when Bryan and I get upset about these things, we're not being militant or stupid about it. When I say every single moment, I'm not exagerating. When I wake up and when I go to sleep, my arms are around Bryan, with the doors locked, the blinds closed, and a spark of neurotic apprehension on my neck. I have to watch every word that comes out of my mouth; have to construct every syllable to sound as unassuming, unnoticeable, and ungay as possible. Every audit, I see spouse changes that I can't make; I see SGLI updates I can't risk implicating; I hear conversations that I can't participate in because of what if's. It's not the exclusion that bothers me. It's the reminder. Bryan is on my mind all the time, and it's a testiment for my feelings for him. Unfortunately, that also means I'm paranoid, I'm stressed, and I'm locking every door I pass through, turn off every light- Bryan can tell you, I've flipped out of bed- Literally flown up and stood poised to fight over the slightest noise.
I guess the simplest way to put it, after all that, is that being gay is small and trivial. But my love for Bryan... can't be expressed in words. Keeping the latter to myself is what's starting to break me as a human being, and when you're being broken, yes, you will lash out at every pungent bafoon who makes an issue on Fox News and every moron commentor on CNN. We chose the military. We know what it means. And we'd appreciate your support; we don't need your admonishments. I've been in for five years and I work in admin. I've known I was gay since I was twelve. I've been through three years of seminary, two courses, and been self-studying since I discovered the internetz, and Bry's had his own life lessons. We'll be fine. Please give support in the coming years, wherever they take us, and don't take us so seriously when we flip out at Glenn Beck. It's fun stress relief.
Yes, I realize that asking you to read all that constitutes as abuse.
hey jordan--
I agree with just about the majority of your comments. the reason i flipped about the jesus comment is because i believe him to be androgynous. i dont agree with the "davinci code" theory either and that also bothers me. He is more than just a man or a prophet. And, yes, if you look at the geographical region of the world in which our bible stories take place, he most definitely was not the light skinned, blue eyed man in all the paintings. Or, he could have been that? it's not how he looks that makes a difference to me either. I took offense because of how i believe Him to be. and, i'm sure you can tell, i have strong beliefs, whether right or wrong.
I love my baby brother... I would do anything to protect him from harm. and, when i see him making comments that could be harmful, or doing something that isn't "marine" like in nature, i will speak up and say so. Only because i know the consequences of those actions are far reaching. Not just for him, but also for you.
Our sexuality is just one part of who we are--and I may never fully understand that "militant" gay need to shout it from the mountain tops. I just don't get it. I like to know an entire individual...then meet their family. Get to know who they are, what they stand for and what they believe in. Are they charitable, good natured, kind and generous with their time, talents and money? Do they love children? Do they love animals? What books do they read... and when meeting their family, once i get to know that person, then i'm positive i'll love their family as much for their family is a reflection on them as well. that being said...if a man brings another man to dinner at my house...NOT a big deal. The people are who matter to me.
I want bry to stop appearing so "militant"...to stop having to label himself. this isn't the first time we've encountered our brother's need to be defined by a label--muslim, buddhist, gay, etc. Once he's comfortable in his skin, the labels won't matter. When he can see himself as Bryan Eberly...the kick ass guy he his...each mornign when he wakes up, the rest will follow. His sexuality does not define him or you. it doesnt define me either (by the way...crazy gay militant term that pisses me off to no end is the term "breeders" to define straight people---or my aunts old way of saying "go gayley forward" instead of saying, "go straight" when giving directions).... sorry...ranting.
BOTTOM LINE...i love you both and i'm happy to have you in our family. You should recieve a medal or special seat at the table for dealing with all of us with such grace and decorum. :) ...eric...can he have posting rights now?
I invited Jordan to be an author, however I just realized the e-mail address I have for him is military.
Wondering if that has an effect on blog rights.
E
Post a Comment