By Jackson Hare, Campus News Editor
At Xavier, when posed with difficult conversations and divisive issues, we idolize engaging in open dialogue, welcoming these challenging discussions with respect for those who may differ in their perspective and we are told to do so in every space. But I am tired of it. I am tired of it being used as an excuse to entertain ignorant and discriminatory “opinions.”
Of course, this theme emphasizing open dialogues and respect for one another is one that is persistent across our lifetimes, drilled into our minds beginning as an anti-bullying campaign in our grade schools. I find this approach faulty and basic.
Now, I am not trying to say we shouldn’t respect each other and we shouldn’t seek to understand each other with open minds. We absolutely should. However, there are times when people’s “perspectives” do not warrant your respect, and engaging with their ideas is a dangerous game.
For instance, as a gay man, I have fought with people endlessly since coming out about social issues involving the LGBTQ+ community, and I have grown tired of being told that I need to meet people where they are at or be patient with people as they learn to accept me.
Being asked to compromise or meet someone in the middle when discussing a topic like LGBTQ+ social and political issues requires that I compromise my self worth and my identity. Not that I will ever stop, but I have become so tired of arguing about LGBTQ+ issues entirely. Opening up that discussion suggests that it’s still up for debate whether or not queer people are deserving of respect, rights and happiness. Call me radical, but I think queer people deserve respect. They deserve the same rights as anyone else and they deserve to be happy and safe.
So, no. Let’s not talk about whether gay marriage should be legal, whether transgender people deserve healthcare or if queer students should see themselves included and represented in their education. Those are a given. That’s not up for debate, and I don’t want to engage in dialogue with you about that unless we plan to talk about how to make sure those things never find themselves at the will of a small group of majority White, old men, otherwise known as Congress.
The dialogue and conversations about these issues don’t consist of a real debate, anyway. It is really just queer people and allies trying to dispel the mischaracterizations and falsities promoted by right- wing media sites and candidates taking a cheap shot at a minority community for attention.
That said, please do keep having civil political discourse about important societal issues, but choose carefully which debates you have. To open up something for a debate is to characterize the subject as uncertain. However, I am quite certain queer people deserve rights and I don’t find it worth my time to try to convince someone of that, because at that point it is not just a difference in perspective or civil disagreement. It is personal.
Hopefully, you can understand why I might respond with a heavy and disappointed sigh when someone says I need to meet people where they are at. Because I am holding an “extreme” position, somehow that means my opinion must be lacking or ignorant, but this is merely because our society operates on the fallacy that moderate perspectives suggest more nuance and maturity. We often believe it suggests an understanding informed by opposing perspectives, both sides of the story; an understanding that transcends the polarization of a complicated and controversial issue. Now of course this can be the case, but it shouldn’t be something understood so automatically.
Taking extreme or immoderate positions on an issue is not always foolhardy, rash nor immature. Of course, it can be, but we should be cautious to dismiss radical ideas under the assumption that moderate views are more nuanced.
Believe me, having taken a number of philosophy and PPP classes at Xavier, I could probably write several books offering people a nuanced line of social, cultural, legal and philosophical reasoning for why queer people deserve rights, but it would be a supreme waste of time.
No one who would want to debate that subject is deserving of my respect or time. I’d much rather spend time building a community where issues like that are not up for debate, and those who want to be a part of that community will understand that. And for those who don’t, we’ll breathe a sigh of relief when they’re gone.