2009-05-14

elainegrey: Inspired by Grypping/gripping beast styles from Nordic cultures (Default)
2009-05-14 06:57 am

A deficit

I was reading a post about privilege that [personal profile] firecat pointed out, and i was pondering the lack of racial diversity in my life. (This reminds me of how a friend has urged me to think of buying a place in East Palo Alto. That would help. The reasons that's off the table for me are not up for discussion, though.)

Then i realized that there is even less apparent racial diversity in my online life, where the barriers should be lower -- except, of course, for the economic privilege that lets me spend so much time on line, the class privilege i had growing up that encouraged reading and writing as self expression.

My early life was in the Carolinas, where race is binary. I recall with a smile that i was the "white white girl" to some of my classmates. I remember my parents pride at living on a diverse street in Chapel Hill. I still worry that when i was the only white girl invited to a birthday party and i had to go home before it was over, that my hosts might think it was due to race and not to my shyness. (It wasn't the only party i slipped out of as a youngster.)

I remember my first experience of a different view of race when living summers in New Mexico in the late '80s. There, seeing a black and white couple open and comfortable in their expression of coupleness, i was aware by the lack of reaction just how high the barriers were in the southeast. And i also listened to people from New Mexico, one Anglo, one who traced his heritage -- and land -- back to a landgrant from the King of Spain, and heard the prejudice against Native Americans in their expression.

In Philadelphia i was friends with folks who worked around the binary of race i was familiar with (and i'd like to think i grew a little in my awareness of privilege during this time), but my academic life introduced me to a different space of issues around Asia and the Indian subcontinent. There were several Indian students and a Pakistani, whom i remember for their efforts to educate a particularly parochial colleague from New Jersey (who didn't even know North Carolina had a coast line) that Pakistan and India also were in the Northern Hemisphere. (*headdesk*) I learned more about the issues of partition from the Pakistani who new the front lines. I remember the students from east Asia and another Anglo student who gave me a glance that was like a slap when i revealed my ignorance of ethnic and racial differentiation in East Asians. To be honest, i was still coping with the ethnic differentiations of Caucasians in Philadelphia.

Why am i writing this? In part to remind myself of what i am embarrassed about. My friends and colleagues who do not have racial privilege have not had any occasion to talk to me about their experience of their race. Because of that, i've found that when doing work about thinking who is, say, black, in my life, i don't "see" them. And i remember that sick feeling i had when i realized how i mentally create this boundary of Otherness, and the people who i was with on a day to day basis weren't Other, but somehow this mental gymnastic is denying some part of their identity.

Advice, introductions, welcome. Must go to work now.
elainegrey: Inspired by Grypping/gripping beast styles from Nordic cultures (Default)
2009-05-14 04:11 pm

I don't get it

NH Governor's statement
"The Legislature took an important step by clearly differentiating between civil and religious marriage, and protecting religious groups from having to participate in marriage ceremonies that violate their fundamental religious beliefs.

"But the role of marriage in many faiths extends beyond the actual marriage ceremony.

"I have examined the laws of other states, including Vermont and Connecticut, which have recently passed same-sex marriage laws. Both go further in protecting religious institutions than the current New Hampshire legislation.

"This morning, I met with House and Senate leaders, and the sponsors of this legislation, and gave them language that will provide additional protections to religious institutions.

"This new language will provide the strongest and clearest protections for religious institutions and associations, and for the individuals working with such institutions. It will make clear that they cannot be forced to act in ways that violate their deeply held religious principles.


-- http://www.necn.com/Boston/NECN-Extra/2009/05/14/Gov-Lynch-We-must-protect/1242338353.html

OK, i'm back to wondering just what the religious organizations are being protected from, beyond performing the ceremony.

Ah
I. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a religious organization, association, or society, or any individual who is managed, directed, or supervised by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges to an individual if such request for such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges is related to the solemnization of a marriage, the celebration of a marriage, or the promotion of marriage through religious counseling, programs, courses, retreats, or housing designated for married individuals, and such solemnization, celebration, or promotion of marriage is in violation of their religious beliefs and faith. Any refusal to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges in accordance with this section shall not create any civil claim or cause of action or result in any state action to penalize or withhold benefits from such religious organization, association or society, or any individual who is managed, directed, or supervised by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society.

II. The marriage laws of this state shall not be construed to affect the ability of a fraternal benefit society to determine the admission of members pursuant to RSA 418:5, and shall not require a fraternal benefit society that has been established and is operating for charitable and educational purposes and which is operated, supervised or controlled by or in connection with a religious organization to provide insurance benefits to any person if to do so would violate the fraternal benefit society's free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States and part 1, article 5 of the Constitution of New Hampshire

III. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed or construed to limit the protections and exemptions provided to religious organizations under RSA ยง 354-A:18.

IV. Repeal. RSA 457-A, relative to civil unions, is repealed effective January 1, 2011, except that no new civil unions shall be established after January 1, 2010.

--- http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/14/731454/-NH-Gov-to-sign-gay-marriage-bill-with-changes





Original Post )