I attended a lecture by Professor Mark Jordan at Washington University in St. Louis yesterday entitled “How Christians learned to talk about Homosexuality.”
As I’m someone who feels a compulsion to be early I found myself sitting beside an older American gentleman named Tom. As we introduced ourselves his first question was whether I was "Orange or Green." The question demonstrated he had a familiarity with Northern Irish “issues”; but the question also revealed a pronounced lack of tack. As I belong to neither side of that tragic dysfunctional family dispute I failed to be easily labeled by his question. He moved on to explain why he attends these Wash-U lectures that he clearly disagrees with. His goal is to keep "them" (liberal professors) “intellectually honest” by being a dissenting voice in the room. Tom is obviously intelligent; well read, and passionate, but I just couldn’t take him seriously. I continually had to police my facial expression to keep from smiling at his loud rhetorical questions, podium-like pronouncements and body language. Despite his intermittent questions about what I thought, the 15 minute conversation was almost completely a monologue from his point of view. I politely disengaged myself and entered the lecture hall to ensure I had a good seat and to also escape the pre-lecture Tom had just delivered and if left unchecked it seems would have continued to deliver for only God knows how long.
In contrast to Tom’s tirade the lecture I had come to listen to was insightful, respectful and engaging.
Professor Jordan really challenged me about how we use words; rhetoric, sound bites and narrative to defend our position. It is such a tragedy that there isn’t enough time to study everything that I find interesting. I feel so under-educated and ill informed. I ache to know, to be conversant in every aspect of life, yet it is impossible to even skim the surface of every discipline, to grasp even the most simplistic principles from the multitude of academic streams. I’m a starving man invited into a banquet who knows he can only nibble on the most bland of food or risk intense intestinal disruptions.
Ok, I got sidetracked by my love for learning….. I’ve wiped the drool from my beard, taken a deep breath and can refocus on where I was going with today’s blog.
It bothered me that I found Tom so foolish. So I thought about him more than all the other interesting people I met yesterday. It wasn’t that he disagreed with Professor Jordan, it wasn’t even that he was a member of the extreme right on American political thought. It was because he so obviously disrespected everyone else at the lecture. He arrived in T-Shirt and Shorts, was loud, and accosted people with questions he didn’t want answers for. He had labeled us all before he arrived into two distinct categories. The ignorant who were victims that just swallowed what the professors had to say and the professors who were cast as the 1930’s diabolical bad guys. Big moustaches and hats for them all with a convenient train track to tie their victim to. Tom said he has been coming to these lectures for at least a year. I find it so tragic that after all of that time listening to experts in so many fields of learning he probably hasn’t been challenged by what they had to say because he came already knowing what was “true” and what was “false.”
I think Tom is perhaps a caricature of American society. From the moment he met me he was trying to stick a label on me. It frustrated him intensely that I refused to be labeled. I wasn’t Orange or Green; I was neither Conservative or Liberal, I could see both sides of the argument and felt the jury was still out on each topic he felt strongly about. Whether it was abortion or the death penalty; Immigration as a “property rights” and “civil rights” issue, or homosexuals in the military, that I could see valid arguments for both sides in all these positions seemed to confound him. Despite the fact that I have strong opinions on all of these issues I realize that those on the opposing side have genuine hearts; logical reasons and good motives for their position and I’m open to being convinced my position is morally, intellectually and socially untenable. It seems to me if we could all take the time to carefully demonstrate we respect those we oppose it might restore a level of civility to the conversation. If Tom had arrived in clothing appropriate for the event; had used tone and volume appropriate to his surroundings and if he had asked questions to discover answers rather than to create clear demarcation lines between him and everyone else I might have found him less ridiculous. I think the only response Tom elicited at yesterday’s event was sympathy.
In stark contrast to Tom the professors I spoke to after the lecture were polite, interested in who I was as a person, tolerant of the fact that I was a "Christian" College minister who was wanting to create a place for spiritual conversation with their students at their university. I think it helps that I was dressed correctly, spoke with an in-door voice, used civility in our conversations and recognized both their authority and ownership of the lecture hall and lastly was clearly interested in their view point.
I wonder if I should just wander around trying to be someone who is sans labels? The naked Irishman!
Just some thoughts on my American experience
No comments:
Post a Comment