What is in Kelvin's Head?

What institutional homophobia looks like

19/04/2017

Here’s a quick example to illustrate what institutional homophobia looks like.

Yesterday the report of the Theological Forum of the Church of Scotland to the General Assembly was published and it deals with a number of issues of interest to LGBT people. (It is well worth a read).

Amongst the “deliverances” ie proposals to go to the General Assembly from that Forum is this very clear call for an apology to LGBT people.

The General Assembly:

Invite the Church to take stock of its history of discrimination at different levels and in different ways against gay people and to apologise individually and corporately and seek to do better.

What could be clearer? Should the General Assembly apologise for discrimination against gay people it would be a huge and significant moment and very much to be welcomed.

However, listen to what the Principal Clerk to the General Assembly, the Very Rev John Chalmers of the Church of Scotland said on TV last night about the proposal:

“What the General Assembly is being asked to do this year is acknowledge and apologise for some of the harsh things that have been said on both sides of this debate over the last 20 to 30 years and I think the General Assembly will readily want to do that.”

This is very clearly not what the General Assembly is being asked to do.

This is a good example of institutional homophobia. In describing a call to apologise to gay people, gay people and their supporters are represented as being people making statements for 20 or 30 years which need to be apologised for.

I don’t believe that John Chalmers is a homophobe. Just the opposite. I’m quite sure that he is charming to gay people and I suspect he wants the church to accept gay people. However, put in a public position to explain a proposal to apologise for discrimination he gets it very wrong.

I have no doubt that there are huge institutional pressures on him over this issue and that is why he speaks as he does.

However, this looks to me like a very clear example of what institutional homophobia looks like. Institutional homophobia seems to come most often from people who are personally supportive of those of us who are gay.

Ironically, this is the kind of thing that needs to be apologised for.

We have it in our church too.

I find that people don’t like me pointing it out.

5 responses to “Five Thoughts On Losing Elections (and a referendum)”

Meg Rosenfeld

31/01/2020

Thank you; this was a good and helpful piece to read on a day when, in all likelihood, those of us in the USA who have been endeavoring to restore justice and truth to our Presidency are going to be informed that we’ve failed.

Reply
Helen Dean

31/01/2020

Great message. We also need people who are prepared to lose for the right reasons even if they never win.

Reply
Jackie Heatlie

31/01/2020

Truly, huge common sense in this. Never let go of ‘Radical Hope’!

Reply
Marie Craig

01/02/2020

I second that!

Reply
Rosemary Hannah

01/02/2020

Yes but. The rain, it raineth every day/upon the just and unjust fella/ but it raineth more upon the just/for the unjust hath the just’s umbrella. It is hugely much easier to win if you feel free to say what you know to be
popular. If you feel free to discount the complex for the always simple. I know this because over the years I have tried to explain, variously, that a nation’s economy does not work in the exact same way as a household budget, and that trade agreements between countries are not as simple as selling goods at a church sale of work. Or, to put it another way, the huge medical success of the last fifty (plus) years has been vaccination. A short discomfort, a huge level of success. That has not prevented the anti vaccine lobby having huge success in persuading people that an exceptionally safe procedure is seriously dangerous. And at least some of the pro vaccine propaganda has been slick and professional (witness the latest row on TicTok)

Reply