While perhaps unwise, at least part of why I started this blog was as a mild form of self-reflection.
It is now that the need for such reflection becomes more acute. Yesterday, I was accused of wanting to create a master race because I wrote a comment pointing out the different assumptions between US Social Conservatives and the movement for Gay Marriage. It should be obvious that I never mentioned eugenics and even specifically was asked if I believed in interracial marriage (I do).
One part of my mind says the other person was just making an unfounded accusation because they couldn't contest the points made. There is still a large part of me that is reeling from the accusation, that is scanning my own thoughts for violations, that is trying to understand how such an accusation could be substantiated, and dreading interacting with the world.
Perhaps even more unwise (if I am to work in a field demanding the special trust of the people), I will mention that I have been mildly depressed recently and that the accusation has made me very depressed and agitated. I normally despise the taste of alcohol (not that I dislike those who drink it, my taste buds are very active). I have been quietly trying to drink a bottle of Jagermeister over the course of the past few hours (slowly since I still hate the taste).
In the search for answers, I have looked up many people addressing the criteria for being considered a bigot. While I only list
this post, the attitude seems pretty common.
For all practical purposes (and for such concerns, what else matters?) it is not beliefs that make a bigot. It's actions.
If
you vote against gay marriage or gay rights, you are a bigot, as surely
as anyone who voted against civil rights in the '60s was a bigot. If
you preach against gay rights, you are a bigot. If you write against gay
rights, you are a bigot. If you give your money or time to any
Christian church or ministry that you know actively works to restrict or
limit gay rights in any way, you are a bigot. If, in private, you
intimate to your dearest friend that you don't think gay people should
be allowed to get married, you are a bigot.
Since I view Gay Marriage as a policy question entailing the myriad concerns of policy changes, this is a standard I meet very quickly. Since modern society prizes tolerance and considers bigots to be contemptible and subject to efforts to exclude them from normal civic participation, the stakes are high.
High enough that the fact an accusation was made makes me feel very insecure in this society. How can I, a policy geek who has plenty of examples from history to draw upon and plenty of pessimism about radical changes, meet the standards for participation in society?
I can't.
That raises the question. What is to happen to one who cannot meet the standards of society?
Emigration?
I have only one other citizenship and I don't even speak the language. Plus, what use is a History Major in a country drowning in history?
Grow a thicker skin?
Easier said than done. Especially as penalties for ostracism increasingly involve governmental or quasi-governmental sanction. Periodically, people make proposals to adopt the Canadian model of Human Rights Commissions (most famous for prosecuting
Ezra Levant and for having an unclear legal status). Social ostracism is bad enough when a bar tender tells you (the patron) that you are a terrible person from overhearing a conversation.
Protests?
I don't have the emotional energy to fight. I don't have the unquestioning certainty to keep on doing so.
Suicide?
Again, unwise to mention but it is a thought I am considering and the value of the "writing as therapy" partially involves actually addressing it with the discipline of words.
While commonly described as "a permanent solution to a temporary problem", it is far more socially acceptable than bigotry. While I am used to the idea of suicide as desertion from the struggle to make life better. I see far more ambiguity when it comes to public shame to induce a suicide (to avoid the messiness of formal sanctions). Drastic?
So is the accusation.
I have to ask, is the alcohol affecting my judgement and should my consideration of so drastic a recourse be done in an impaired state?
When is one not in an impaired state? Sleep deprivation, grief, stress, hunger, and more all impact us virtually the whole of a normal day. Is a little terror, alcohol, and sleep deprivation such a change?
A key question, does a bigot deserve to live? Since no tears are shed for the likes of Governor Wallace or Mussolini, I will take the answer as no. Should I take the accusation of a person on the internet seriously? Probably no but the effect is still there. By a quirk of life, I do not have the social experience to determine if my actions are abnormally unacceptable or not. The doubt is still there and will likely stay there for the rest of my life (however long it is).