• Five Questions about Pride, Gender, Drag Queens and Religion

    UPDATE

    Free Pride has now updated its policy and welcomes Drag Performers.
    See here for details: https://freeprideglasgow.wordpress.com/2015/07/22/free-pride-to-welcome-drag-performers/
    I’m leaving the post below up here as the discussions it has started seem to me to have value in themselves.

    IMG_3922 with the sisters small

     

    “Can I walk with you a bit? I’ve got some questions.”

    “Hi there, of course you can. Where are you from?”

    “Well, from Australia actually. This is my first Pride.”

    “Oh right, are you enjoying it?”

    “Oh yes, but I wanted to ask you something. The thing is, I was wondering if you are real. Are you real?”

    “Oh yes, I’m real.”

    “But the nuns…they’re not real, right?”

    The picture at the top is one of my favourite pictures from Pride and the conversation I’ve just related is one of my favourite pride encounters.

    This week there’s a bit of a stooshie going on in the LGBT+ world because of plans for a Pride event in Glasgow in a couple of weeks time.

    First of all, you need to know that there’s been a schism. Pride Glasgow is the main event and will be organising the Pride March through Glasgow, starting and ending at the dear green place – Glasgow Green. Secondly you need to know that once the march is over there will be a day long event on the Green. And thirdly you need to know that there’s a charge being imposed on those who want to get into the event. And therein lies the schism. There is a body of opinion, with which I have some sympathy, which finds gates and barriers around Pride a nonsense. And thus there has evolved a split, a schism, a divergence. There will be a new event this year called Free Pride which does what it says on the tin – it will be a free event that you don’t have to pay to attend. Yes, that’s right, it is a bit like the Church of Scotland and the Free Church of Scotland. Close your eyes and make a wish and you’ll find out that there will be Wee Free Pride before we get to August too.

    Furthermore, Free Pride has issued an edict saying that it won’t book any cis drag acts (in other words, men who were born as men presenting themselves as female characters (caricatures?) for the entertainment of the company, out of sensitivity to those in the Free Pride movement who are trans people and those who don’t identify as one gender or another.

    This has led to headlines going all around the world suggesting that drag has been banned at Pride in Glasgow. Now, that’s not true. There will be drag acts at the main Pride.  And at Free Pride, people of any gender (however one defines that) will be able to attend wearing anything they like and presenting themselves as any gender(s) they choose.

    Nonetheless there has been searing condemnation of the Free Pride movement from some quarters and the whole thing gives me much to think about. What’s more, what I think about it changes whenever I think about it, which may be entirely appropriate when considering those who live out the fluidity of gender more than I do most of the time.

    So anyway here’s a five questions that I’m trying to think through about pride, gender, drag and religion.

    How are religious people going to begin a conversation about trans and non-binary issues?

    The truth is, I’ve been engaged in LGBT+ conversations with LGBT+ people for a very long time. The reality is that the church conversation has focussed on G a huge amount, L not so much, B hardly at all, T almost never and the + just makes people say “What?”

    And yet in every congregation I’ve worked in there have been people making huge decisions about themselves in terms of gender.

    I’ve yet to hear from an anti-gay, anti-divorce evangelical as to what a straight married couple should do if one of them transitions and begins to live life from within a different gender identity.

    Now, I know that all couples are different and need to make their own decisions for themselves, all people’s experience is different and all that, but to someone who holds anti-gay, anti-divorce views, which trumps which? Should such a couple stay together if they want to? Are they then in a same-sex marriage or are they not? Might either of them be refused ordination or ministry on the grounds of their situation?

    And believe me, these are not hypothetical questions. Not at all.

    When I was a university chaplain, I sometimes worked with people who were one gender when they came to university and who had a different gender identity when they left. For people of faith who are living with such a situation, there’s all kinds of questions that have no answer and no-where even to ask the questions.

    I don’t incidentally think that the difference between a drag act and a trans person is always the difference between apples and pears. Usually it is. Sometimes it just isn’t. I’ve known people who did drag because for one reason or another they couldn’t transition and didn’t feel able to come out as anything other than an act. This identity stuff is hugely complex.

    There’s a suggestion currently in the Episcopal Church based in the USA that a naming ceremony might be devised which might enable people in a new identity to have that marked in a religious way. My own view is that here in Scotland we’ve already got quite a useful liturgy in the form of the Affirmation liturgy which might well be used for such a situation. However, I’ve never heard of any bishop’s guidelines on how to use it. If I asked for such guidelines, I have to say I’d be surprised if they were useful.

    How can the LGBT+ communities combat transphobia and sexism?

    But if there’s a silence about trans issues in religious communities, there’s not always silence in LGBT+ communities and yet what we hear isn’t always good. Now, in my view, gay men have more of a problem being respectful of others who might find themselves identifying under the LGBT+ umbrella than others do. I don’t know why that should be but I do know that in my world those who are closeted are very often less respectful of women than those who are not and I suspect that reaches out across the rainbow.

    As people come out more and more, I think we can have more of an open conversation about these issues but I suspect that it won’t always be easy.

    I’ve been surprised by the Free Pride decision about drag acts and I don’t entirely agree with it. However, I can understand how some people might think that some drag is less than affirming. Of course it is. Sometimes it is downright offensive. But is it offensive intrinsically or isn’t it? I’m not convinced that it is though I’m also not sure I’ll always hold that view. Notwithstanding the fact that I don’t entirely agree with the Free Pride position, I can’t say I entirely disagree with it either.

    Can we speak of ethical drag?

    So, can we speak of drag acts that are ethically better than other drag acts? Heavens!

    I think my position on this begins by remembering the heritage of those in drag who have fought for my freedoms. It was drag queens who were at the front of the action at the Stonewall Riots in 1969. There’s a long heritage of people speaking truth from under a cross-dressing wig.

    This has perhaps been exemplified most brilliantly recently by some of the speeches of Panti Bliss in Ireland.

    I can’t speak against someone who can do this. I want to add my own standing ovation:


    Indeed, I’m in awe of such a powerful political speech. You can hear the passion, the frustration, the fury – and it is fury that took its own place in helping to change the law in Ireland recently.

    What about clerical drag?

    People who have silk robes in their vestry closets should not cast aspersions. The truth is, clerics have been dragging up for years though not entirely for the same reasons as drag acts at Pride.

    I was recently doing one of my Sacristy Safari tours and reached into a cupboard for some robes. As soon as I put them on, someone gasped, “Oh, you look different in those; no, you are different in those!” And I think that’s true.

    Generally speaking, I think that clerical drag is used to de-emphasise sexuality and gender identity. I can understand female colleagues wanting good fitting clerical shirts but I’ve never been able to understand how anyone would want feminine vestments. When we put on our drag it is to take (drag?) attention away from ourselves rather than towards it. At least, I think that’s what is going on. But then I’m not (contrary to what most people think) a vestment queen.

    How will the the future will judge us?

    One of the reasons that I’ve hesitated before commenting on the situation with Pride and Free Pride in Glasgow is that I’ve found myself unable to work out how the future will judge us.

    I can imagine that in 50 years, drag acts might well be seen as being as uncomfortable to watch as the Black and White Minstrel Show is today – an anachronism of history that people simply will struggle to believe was ever acceptable.

    However, I can also imagine and alternative to that too in that in 50 years our attitude to gender might be completely different to the way it is today. I can imagine a future where all gender is regarded as performative, where gender-play is taught in nursery school and where the drag queens of old are hailed as the vanguard in a movement that has freed the world from expectation and conformity.

    I have no idea which future is the more likely.

    The truth is, it isn’t just gender that is fluid. Mores and morals are fluid too and we don’t know how our own times are going to be judged.

    I happen to think that I’ve seen drag acts that have made me laugh and I’ve certainly known drag artist(e)s who have brought about the liberation of others, built community and done lots of good. I also know people who are offended by drag itself and who find themselves silenced as they try to express why.

    Glasgow’s going to have a pretty good Pride offering this year, in amongst all this. We’re going to have a Pride event as of old where anyone living in any gender identity can come and enjoy a range of acts including cis drag acts. We’re also going to have a Free Pride event where anyone living in any gender identity can come and enjoy themselves in a place where there won’t be such performers.

    I’m not sure whether it is because I’m a good Anglican trying to find a via media or whether it is because I’m trying to be a good catholic embracing all that God has made or whether it is just that I can’t make my mind up, but I find that I have a foot in both camps. (So to speak).

    Let there be Pride – lots of it. Let there be love, joy and peace.

    And let us, inside and outside closets, churches, LGBT+ communities and yes, both within and far outside our comfort zones talk about these things. For they are not settled, not clear-cut and downright interesting.

    Amen

11 responses to “Providence and Vocation for Liberals in Public Life”

  1. David Evans Avatar
    David Evans

    I was one of the Lib Dems who did foresee the calamity in 2015 and actively campaigned to get the party to change leader – after 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 it wasn’t difficult for anyone to see, but it was difficult for many nice Lib Dems to own up to the fact that they had allowed it to happen. I failed, but I don’t think it was part of anyone’s plan that I did (except possibly Ryan Coetzee and a few other true believers).

    There’s a lot in your points I can agree with, particularly regarding the naivety of referring to God’s plan, when many Christian’s have a view that his/hers/its plan is to let us get on with it and find our own way to salvation. However, the most interesting question is when you say “The trouble is, these are not side issues, these are my rights.” Do you really mean that you have the right to force someone else to marry you who doesn’t want to and believes it is wrong, even though you have the right to and can get someone else to do the same job for you? Do individuals have the right to insist on being married by the registrar of their choice, or just the right to get married? Are you not perhaps just a bit assuming that your tree is that bit taller than the other guy’s?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      I think that people should be able to expect individual people who represent the state not to discriminate against them in any of the protected categories. I think that the equal rights tree is bigger than my tree and the registrar’s tree.

      I don’t claim that individuals should be able to force registrars of their choice to marry them, not least because I don’t think it is a very real question – few people want to be married by someone who doesn’t want them to be married. I do think that local authorities have not simply the right but the duty to remove public officials who can’t serve every member of the public due to their personal prejudices.

      1. David Evans Avatar
        David Evans

        I think you are rather changing your ground here from your original piece. You started with “The trouble is, these are not side issues, these are my rights.”

        You have now moved onto “I think that people should be able to expect individual people who represent the state not to discriminate against them in any of the protected categories.” So we now have a right to expect, but only against a person who works in the public sector, and even if it is against that person’s conscience and only if you are in a specially protected category.

        It gets even more tenuous then as you accept when you then say “I don’t claim that individuals should be able to force registrars of their choice to marry them.” So the right is not to a person wanting to be married at all.

        Finally we get “I do think that local authorities have not simply the right but the duty to remove public officials who can’t serve every member of the public due to their personal prejudices.” So the right is not to an individual at all, so definitely not “your rights” but to a public sector organisation. Hardly a human right, more of an employer’s right by your own statements.

        I rather think that your equal rights tree, however high you think it is, has decidedly peculiar roots.

        1. Graham Evans Avatar
          Graham Evans

          David, I thought most liberals accepted the view that in the provision of services to the general public, whether provided by the public sector or private sector, a policy of non-discrimination was an essential ingredient of a progressive society. I accept that there is a notable exception to this rule in terms of the provision of abortion, but this arises from the broad range of medical procedures undertaken by one type of doctor or another. Surgeons are specialised medical practitioners, as are nurses who assist them, so it is most unlikely then anyone who opposed abortion on conscience grounds would actually be faced with having to refuse to conduct an abortion. The provision of most services to the general public is also a specialist activity, and no-one forces people to engage in any particular activity. The idea that a registrar should be able to opt out of undertaking a civil gay marriage represents the thin edge of a dangerous wedge. If such people wish to opt out of doing so, then they should act as part of a religious community, such as a deacon in Anglican Church, which has the legal power to conduct religious marriages, are still recognised by the State.

          1. David Evans Avatar
            David Evans

            Quite simply Graham I disagree with your view that this is a level of discrimination in the provision of a public service of anything like the scale you imply makes it essential that every individual has to comply with it. The “go with it or get out” philosophy demanded of the state by so many in pursuit of their personal view of their rights is to my mind a greater threat to liberty than the fact that Fred or Freda don’t agree with something and don’t want to do it but George, Georgina, Harry, Harriette etc etc etc etc can do it instead. Ultimately you aren’t stopping someone from exercising their right; you are preventing someone from imposing their requirement on someone else.

            However, I note Kelvin hasn’t responded to my substantive point and I await that with interest.

  2. Iain Brodie Browne Avatar
    Iain Brodie Browne

    Firstly thank you for your posting.
    I have been expressing my concern elsewhere that the main voices we have heard in the debate about Tim’s faith have been firstly from those who think that it wholly a private matter and because his opinions are sincerely held and are derived from his faith the rest of us should back off and secondly those who seem to imply that having a religious faith at all is a negative factor. Until your contribution I am not aware that anyone has directly addressed the issue from different Christian understanding.
    I cut my political teeth at the end of the 1960s opposing the all ‘white’ rugby and cricket tours from South Africa. The dominant voices from the churches were from Trevor Huddleston and David Sheppard. They effectively contested the assertions of those who told us (and they did) that apartheid was part of God’s plan.
    Earlier in that decade Michael Ramsey spoke up clearly in support of what was then called homosexual law reform. David Steel, who pushed through the 1967 Act did so at a time when he was regularly introducing Songs of Praise.
    I regret that equal marriage and the removal of other discriminations against gay people –including the issue you raise about Registrars- have not been as effectively championed by Christians as those earlier reforms. It is fair to say that in the minds of those who you describe as ‘decent people in society’ Christians are seen as opposing these reforms. The priority for the churches appears to be to gain protection for those who oppose such reforms. Imagine if that had been the approach to apartheid.
    My own experience gives me hope that things are changing. Our local church got a new vicar who immediately began to pray for the defeat of the Equal Marriage legislation, got up petitions and lobbied. His views on women priests were no more in tune with ‘decent society’. In common with many churches these matters had not really been properly discussed. It was heartening how many members did openly contest his views and a significant portion of the congregation felt so strongly the eventually relocated to other churches. There is a good deal more support for liberal values amongst church goers than is popularly conceived.

    My view is much the same as expressed in the Independent’s editorial this morning which endorsed Tim but added the rider that : ‘It will be for Mr Farron to make clear to party members, the public at large, and this newspaper, that his faith can indeed be reconciled with a liberal view on matters of birth, marriage and death.’ If faith is the opposite of certainty then I have enough to believe that can be achieved but if would be of assistance not only to Tim but to others struggling to reconcile their faith with liberal views if more church leaders provide a Christian narrative as effectively as did Michael Ramsey and Trevor Huddleston did in their day.

    http://birkdalefocus.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/influencial-divine-former-libdem-ppc.html

  3. Andy Avatar
    Andy

    Personally, as a non-Christian, I find the attack on Tim Farron’s Christian faith distasteful, even disturbing. With the issue of gay marriage, something I wholly support, it is clear to me that Farron was trying to protect freedom of religious thought whilst also legislating for LGBT equality. There is nothing illiberal about that. Freedom of religion is one of the most fundamental human rights, and something liberals should defend. Any definition of liberalism which does not include freedom of conscience, is one I have no interest in supporting.

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Thanks for commenting, Andy.

      I’m not aware of people attacking Tim Farron’s faith. I am aware of people questioning whether someone who apparently has anti-gay views is an appropriate person to represent the Lib Dems as leader.

      When it comes to the vote about the registrars, that can either be interpreted as defending religious thought or as defending discrimination. I come to the latter view because if I substitute a couple who are gay for a couple being say mixed race (something many people would once have objected to on religious grounds) then I see clear discrimination at work.

      It is a strange day when people are arguing (as some are) that the leader of the Liberal Democrats has the right to hold distasteful views about gay people in private so long as he defends their rights in public. He does have that right but not the right to be taken seriously as well.

      1. David Evans Avatar
        David Evans

        Sadly there have been many who have been attacking Tim’s faith, some directly and some more with disdain. Comments such as listening to his sky fairy are not uncommon. Also portraying his views as apparently anti-gay are without doubt over egging it massively as opposed to the simple fact that as a liberals we should all have views which take into account the “balance of fundamental values of liberty, equality and community” and that this inevitably leads to differences of judgement on lots of individual issues, but do not undermine the fundamental decency and liberalism of many people like Tim, who have proved it over a great many years.

  4. David Evans Avatar
    David Evans

    Kelvin,

    It is a great disappointment to me that you have not come back to me with any further reasoning in response to my post on 30 June 02:19. Have you changed your views, reinforced them with new vigour or simply moved on?

    1. Graham Evans Avatar
      Graham Evans

      David, perhaps you could clarify what your substantive point is. Having reread the whole thread it’s certainly not clear to me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Motion 3 – proposed and passed.

    allowing people elected to Standing Committee to remain on Committee even if their synod membership lapses. It is passed nem con.

  • Synod Papers available online

    Synod papers can be downloaded here: http://www.scotland.anglican.org/index.php/news/entry/2011_general_synod/

  • Motion 2 is proposed

    Synod is asked to accept the Annual Report of Accounts. David Palmer thanks the Boards and Committees for continuing to work within very constrained budgets. Standing Committee will be focusing on Whole Church Mission and Ministry policy (presumably, if we agree it).

  • General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church 2011

    The synod was inaugurated with a splendid Eucharist for St Columba’s Day. Fabulous music. The Primus spoke of Iona as being at both the edges and the margins as offering a model for the SEC. He also said, rather interestingly that as the SEC begins to consider the Anglican Covenant he could see that there…