Rules for Dealing with Bullies

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to the conversation about bullying, particularly as it relates to gay, lesbian and bi-teens.  

I suppose it won’t surprise anyone that I have a few more things to say on the subject. I’ve even formulated some “rules for dealing with bullies.” They are reflections of my personal experience, of course, but not relinquishing my role as gay activist, I have been trying to apply them to what has been called “institutional” bullying.

I’m just back from my 45th college reunion in New Hampshire. My partner Ashish went with me. I was the only person there with a same sex partner. And, as Ash was one of only two people not of European descent, and shy is a word not in his vocabulary, if I people didn’t know that I was gay then, they do now.  I am 67--about time that what others think doesn’t influence how I present myself. Oh I still do like to dwell thought of, etc., but sexual orientation, politics, my sobriety, give me a break! Not only did we not experience any hostility, but Ash helped me connect with my classmates in a way that was totally unexpected. He left with more phone numbers and invitations than I did.  And it wasn’t forced. After all New England has most of the states, and the first states, that allow same sex marriage. If the issue was ever contentious, there was no evidence of it continuing, at least among my reasonably well educated and affluent classmates. 

For many years, certainly as a teenager, then in college and my early years in the Society, I “passed” as Kenji  says. Not only could I pass, but thought I had to in order to succeed.  Even when I was coming out, I was open and talked with my superiors, close friends, spiritual counselors, but I have to say that I had the hardest time with other gay Jesuits. I  couldn’t figure it out, and still don’t really get it.  It might have been something to do with my being so open, or the underlying macho ethos, what we thought was expected. Or the fact that many gay Jesuits were very consciously in the closet for self-protection and were only “gay” when it was safe. In fact I know only one Jesuit who was openly gay, Joe Devlin, though I did know of others who were open but never got to be friends, John McNeil for example. (I just googled “Gay Jesuit” to see if I recognized any names--there were lots of references to Gene’s “Passionate Uncertainty” including Avery’s review which I couldn’t find).

So Ed, I totally agree with your reasoning that personal contact with gay people, patients, service men and women, priests, the butcher, baker and candle-stick maker, were key to the shift in the public perception of gay men and women, plus other sexual minorities. 

And that leads to the first rule of “how to deal with bullies,” “Come out, Come out wherever and whoever you are.” 

My mother said to me in the mid-70’s, “you can love whomever you want, I suppose, but why do you have to tell everyone?” My sister points to a picture on the wall of her living room and says. “Oh, that one was taken on the day our son came out to us.” 

And a sad note: AIDS outed far too many Jesuits, three in my class alone. Thom Savage, my secundi, was I guess the most high profile Jesuit AIDS death. I remember him as extremely bright and creative. I think, Ed, you have to include AIDS, and the way our community dealt and continues to deal with the epidemic as another huge reason for the shift in public acceptance of the GLBT community.

Now the second rule:  “Never, and that means NEVER, give bullies your lunch money.” I closed my account at the Bank of America when they excluded gay kids. And I’ve already said that I withhold support for any kind of Catholic institution, including Most Holy Redeemer or the Opus, and certainly Peter’s Pence. I have been trying to think of creative ways to extend this kind of protest so that it actually has an impact--perhaps distributing envelopes for the collection basket with a few words: “I am withholding my support of the parish and its activities to protest the church’s political activity opposing same sex marriage, or contraception, or protecting priests who have sexually abused children.” I wonder if the idea has any legs.

And number three: “Never allow any attack to go unanswered, even if it's the fat sissy urging a bully to kick harder so that he doesn’t become a target.”

When I read the homophobia clothed in pious morality of holy mother, I could spit bullets.  You may have also noticed that if any homophobic statements, even second hand ones, go unanswered here, it usually means that I’ve been on vacation. Ed mentions the natural law argument, and that in the tribunals where it is argued, it has to be backed up by science. This is definitely not the case in courts within curial jurisdiction. And natural law was also used in the California Supreme Court when they considered Prop. 8. Then the argument fell to the validity of  the state’s system of law by proposition. The jury if still out, though I think that we will win. However, we have to overcome the well known political principle that any statement that is repeated often enough takes on the weight of truth, even if it is just prejudice, conjecture, or religious practice: trickle-down economics, it takes a man and woman to make a real family, the family that prays together stays together. When these become attacks, do not let it go unanswered. I’m a spiritual politico and politics begins at home.

Thank god that our tradition of religious liberty has imposed some restraints on barbarian zealots, even the Vatican ones. Here we cannot justify hanging gay teenagers from cherry pickers like we see in Tehran. Here the powers that be can turn our eyes away from the suicides of young men and women who have been bullied and say, “so sorry but it ain’t my fault.”