Gay Boy Scouts, Social Dramaturgy, and Name Calling

I don’t frequent the Mormon blog scene, but its probably having some sort of Renaissance. As I've mentioned, Mormonism has a weird track record for institutionalizing divisiveness. It’s been a bigoted organization for most of it’s history. Nowadays, there are tons of thoughtful, highly educated Mormons that are working to change that from the inside. And they’re succeeding, which is pretty cool.

So when a link got posted on Reddit and I started to skim it, I almost spit out the cheap red wine I was drinking. It’s about a Boy Scout that probably isn't going to get his Eagle Scout award because he’s gay. Surely Mormons are a little uptight, but uncaring and cold? This needs investigating.

Thomas Montgomery is an active, believing Mormon who has a gay teenage son. Even the most liberal of men can feel lost in a situation like that, because sexuality is complicated and growing up sucks in any case. Now, Thomas’ son is at the age where he can see institutionalized discrimination, and he’s also in the awkward position where it affects him. This is the part where good dads have have the duty to shuffle the deck a little bit, and Thomas does his due to shuffle ‘em.

The Boy Scouts of America doesn't allow openly gay scouts or openly gay leaders. No, they don’t test you, or double-dog dare you to make out with Molly Mormon under the bleachers, this is an entirely symbolic form of discrimination. You can stay in the club as long as you stay in the closet. I don’t have a problem with closets, I have a problem with forcing kids into them.

But that’s how the Boy Scouts and most Mormons prefer it. You can hang around us, but not the “you” you...the “you” that this environment has made for you. Just be that person we talked about earlier, and everyone will be happy. Anything else upsets the flow we've got going. Being your genuine self brings meaningful discussion, requires me to think critically and empathize with my peers, and tests my openness to experience.

Isn't that what “scouting” is about?

Well, if the BSA discriminates against people because of their sexuality, how could it be about that? I could rag on the BSA all day for this very reason. It’s styled to look like it’s about individual growth, community citizenship and service. Their highest award? You and your parents do some work to earn it, but the real requirement is to pretend to respect god and act like you’re only going to love vagina, eventually, when you’re older.

What really spells success in scouting (or school, or life in general) are more important things, like parenting. My parents encouraged me in scouting or I would have never even showed up. The Montgomerys must encourage their son, or he wouldn't even be even close to the Eagle award. Good parenting, check. But, their son just happens to be both gay and honest. Honesty is only encouraged for straight boys, apparently.

For example, Jordan will have all his qualifications for Eagle within the year.  I have brought up the issue with Boy Scout leaders, our Bishop and our Stake President.  We are met with cool tolerance.  Everyone acknowledges that Jordan has earned and deserves his Eagle and that it would be a tragedy if he were refused (acceptance), but no one is advocating for him (support).

These parents are just trying to raise their kid right, and of course are taking advantage of the built-in community and leadership that Mormon communities put into scouting. That’s just common sense. They also don't want their son to grow up feeling threatened or pigeonholed. And they’re getting a lot of lukewarm responses from Mormons, a people who claim to be the most well-behaved people on earth.

When we link national articles via Facebook and email to family and friends about an issue directly relevant to Jordan, there are no replies of support.  Here and there, some of our “supporters” have asked to not be contacted with such information or at least to be blind copied so as to not be associated with a group that could possibly support such things.

Which brings me to the real issue, which is not Mormonism or Scouting: social dramaturgy. Life is a theatrical production, and you have to act a certain way on-stage or the drama just doesn’t work. On-stage is where most of the action happens, so imagine it to be any conversation where other people are around. Luckily, you also have a backstage area you can decompress, and even invite other actors to hang out or commiserate.That’s sort of like sitting in your room and listening to ABBA. There is a lot more to it than that, but I’m not sure how much is applicable so I’ll get to the point.

If your life’s playwright is Joseph Smith, discussing certain topics is going to anger and confuse the other actors. Asking them to care about something that isn’t in the script is going to raise eyebrows. There just isn’t a part for gay teens in this script. They don’t feel comfortable on stage, so they’re kind of on the fringe, where nobody wants to be. Even though most people don’t have any animosity for outsiders, they aren’t main characters, and they probably never will be.

I’m going to repeat this part, because it really stings:

...some of our “supporters” have asked to not be contacted with such information or at least to be blind copied so as to not be associated with a group that could possibly support such things.

Translation: Some people aren’t just scared of empathizing, they’re scared of other people thinking they empathize with something unpopular. So yeah, send your spam emails about your son as long as my peers can’t see that I’m involved.

Denying yourself sexual enjoyment in life is fine, go for it. I've already talked more shit about Mormons and sexuality than anyone is comfortable with. But scouting isn't about sex: there is nothing in scouting that involves sex. This is about an organization that treats kids badly for how they feel. If I had a gay son, I wouldn't want him to be around other people that systematically exclude him.

So here’s the name-calling. People who are unwilling to step outside the usual dramaturgical everyday existence? Those people are lame. People who do that, but also pretend to follow Jesus Christ, and also distance themselves from an adolescent boy in need of support? Yeah, those people are fucking pussies. Avoid them at all cost.

Do the Girl Scouts have a Boy’s Auxiliary or something? Raising kids is hard enough these days.

Sexual Morality and Why I Love Black Chicks

My parents raised me Mormon, so my introduction to sexual morality was a list of commandments, handed down from on high to racist old white men in the mid-1800s. It was basic conservative bullshit: nothing even remotely sexual before marriage, and after that, live a life of frustrating sexual dysfunction with your equally frustrated spouse. Since sex was only for purposes of reproduction and birth control was discouraged, Mormons traditionally have big families. And if you’re older than 8 and you masturbate, even just once, you have to go into a room with your bishop (usually a nearby middle-aged neighbor, sometimes the father of a peer) and tell him all about it or Jesus wouldn’t forgive you.

It sounds pretty uptight, but the founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, had an interesting approach to marriage. Brigham Young, the prophet the most Mormons followed after Joe Smith was murdered, was a bit of a megalomaniac and ended up with 55 wives and 57 kids. (His 19th wife even wrote a book about the experience.) He also had plenty of time to lead his church with godly revelation such as this:

"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so."

Clearly, Ol’ Brigham wasn’t a fan of interracial marriage. Modern Mormons claim that this (thunderously racist, morally indefensible) quote was only the opinion of one man, not a prophet speaking through a trickster god. Brigham himself claimed otherwise. Obviously this wasn’t what I learned growing up, but I did get the watered-down version (look here and ctrl-F “racial background”), while straight up hate-mongering was hidden in deeper scripture. Mormons fear their own history so much, I wonder how long until they start burning their own books.

I left Mormonism the same year I joined the military. Since I was assigned to an all-male infantry unit, no holds were barred in sexual discussions. Just like religion, it disintegrated into a comically long list of don’ts. Don’t fuck anyone else’s wife. Don’t fuck near the trail in a national forest. Don’t use two condoms at once, they weren’t designed for that. Of course, we were not expressly prohibited from doing anything legal except talk about it: back then we had DADT.

Here’s where the [citation needed] tag starts to get sprinkled around. The sexual rules in religion may have started out as good advice in a world where an STD would kill you. They’ve evolved into a way for those in authority to play your god-given sexuality off your social insecurity, foster guilt that only religious leaders can assuage, and guarantee a new generation of tithe-payers. My military orders not to fuck in a movie theater were situation-dependant, practical, and based on legality: as long as we weren’t in jail or facing charges, we’d be free to participate in training and get our balls blown off overseas.

Where does this fit into morality? It doesn’t. Sex is never wrong. Before you accuse me of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, I didn’t say “nothing sexual is ever wrong”. This point can be illustrated by my army of straw-men:

Isn’t rape wrong? Yes. Sex is consensual, rape may involve sex or not, but it’s considered a violent act, not a sex act.
Isn’t infidelity wrong? Yes. It’s a breach of trust and sometimes legal arrangements like marriage. Some people enter romantic arrangements where even masturbation is infidelity, because it is part of the terms of the relationship. Those people are either whipped or Mormons. In either case, they're foolish.
Isn’t bestiality wrong? Yes. Animals cannot consent. Treating them cruelly, even slaughtering them cruelly, is also wrong. Not marinating them long enough is insulting, but at that point I don’t think they’d protest.
Isn’t sex in public wrong? Yes, it makes non-consenting people party to your sex act by observation. If your parents walk in on you having sex, the fault lies with whomever didn’t establish expectations of privacy. If the FBI watches you have sex on a stakeout, they’re in the wrong.
Isn’t incest wrong? Well, only when it involve children or produces offspring, because it creates a potential victim and a public health problem. Fuck your dad or grandmother all you want, I don’t give a shit. "Wrong" isn't synonymous with "taboo" or "makes me uncomfortable”.

Unless you’re religious, the only moral absolutes are invented and enforced by humanity, and in this non-utopian world, they differ among cultures. I’m a moral absolutist, because I think right and wrong are more than cultural constructions or god-graffiti on stone tablets. People like me sometimes try to find clues to an inherent morality in medicine, neurochemistry, history, or skin flicks. These are dynamic fields, and as such, morality can be a bit dynamic. It sounds scary, but I promise it makes more sense than feeling guilty about bondage fantasies.

Reciprocity is inherent to morality. Treat people as you would like to be treated. Ideally, you should try to be a little objective and treat people as you know almost all people like to be treated, unless you ask. This is the only kind of sexual morality I put any stock in: it’s simple, it closes up most of the loopholes that piss me off, and yet it allows adult humans to do what adult humans generally like to do.

I like black women. Why? I say, why not? Black women can be gorgeous, eloquent, classy and sassy just like anybody else. But, when I was growing up, I was encouraged to (1) not have sex outside of marriage and (2) marry within my race. Rules that prevent a white man from having sex with a black woman are racist. It poisons the well of all the other outdated rules you’d like me to follow. So I’ll say it publicly and sincerely: if you think fornication, sodomy or orgies are inherently wrong, please check your Flavor Aid for adulterants before you imbibe.

And if you think I shouldn’t have sex with black women, go fuck yourself.