Thanks for telling us about your adventure. It looks fascinating.
I admire your handling of the icky group dynamics.
There was some discussion of fluidity vs. rigidity of sexual orientation. A few people were alarmed at the idea of fluid sexuality, because they had adopted what they thought was the "correct" position that sexual orientation is fixed at birth and cannot be changed.
Sure. For most of the time I've been politically aware, that has been the most common reason activists give for gay rights--it's wrong to discriminate against people for something they can't change. I find the argument disturbing, because of what it implies about religious discrimination, but it's too big a part of the political background to ignore.
The whole conversation got pretty frustrating. I think I assumed that all UUs - or at least most, or at least, most of those who would sign up to teach sex ed - were at the same general level of enlightenment on sexual minority issues. Nope. At one point in the discussion, Adrian said in frustration, "Look, my church probably has more gay people in it than all your churches put together..." Nods all around the room. "Our inner city churches are really in a unique position," one of the trainers said euphemistically.
I'm sorry. I don't understand that euphemism. Can you unpack it a bit, when you have time?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-23 08:54 pm (UTC)I admire your handling of the icky group dynamics.
There was some discussion of fluidity vs. rigidity of sexual orientation. A few people were alarmed at the idea of fluid sexuality, because they had adopted what they thought was the "correct" position that sexual orientation is fixed at birth and cannot be changed.
Sure. For most of the time I've been politically aware, that has been the most common reason activists give for gay rights--it's wrong to discriminate against people for something they can't change. I find the argument disturbing, because of what it implies about religious discrimination, but it's too big a part of the political background to ignore.
The whole conversation got pretty frustrating. I think I assumed that all UUs - or at least most, or at least, most of those who would sign up to teach sex ed - were at the same general level of enlightenment on sexual minority issues. Nope. At one point in the discussion, Adrian said in frustration, "Look, my church probably has more gay people in it than all your churches put together..." Nods all around the room. "Our inner city churches are really in a unique position," one of the trainers said euphemistically.
I'm sorry. I don't understand that euphemism. Can you unpack it a bit, when you have time?