Local real-estate broker discovers just how different things are west of the Berkshires
Jim Gatos reports that a broker in another part of the country who found him via his blogging wanted to give him some potential business. But then:
... [H]e asked me a bizarre, really bizarre question. I NEVER imagined THIS question could be construed as a "qualification"...
If this type of question was asked by a potential employer to a job interviewee, I can only imagine the civil right violations and the potential for lawsuits it may have opened up.
"Are you a Christian" real estate agent? Because my friends, they asked me to find them a "Christian" real estate agent." ...
Gatos thought and then answered he didn't feel comfortable answering the question. He didn't get the referral.
- Send to a friend |
|
| 

I'm not surprised at all
Lots of people prefer to do business within their parishes, synagogues, etc. for a variety of reasons.
And when they have to do business outside of there, lots of those people find some measure of trust and/or alliance by staying within a particular religious label.
Then there are those who believe that *only* Christians can be good people. There are more than a few who believe that way, but they generally stay away from the Northern coastal cities. :)
but isn't the US over 80% Christian?
If you say you want a Jewish or Muslim broker, you're looking for someone who specializes in an ethnic niche market. If you say you want a Christian broker, what exactly are you getting other than someone who is not Jewish or Muslim or Hindu or Buddhist?
There's atheists/agnostics, too
I think that a lot of people don't need to reduce it beyond "non-Christian = bad." I've never seen anything like that among Jewish people, but certainly among some Christians.
I'm not sure what you mean by ethnic niche. Do you mean sensitivity to the ethnic-cultural needs of people in that niche? Or does this also include simply wanting to do business within one's ethnic group (due to trust, or reciprocation/networking, or wanting to further the economic strength of the whole)?
Also
I would secretly have a small preference for a broker who is observant Jewish (despite being Catholic-turned-secular-humanist myself), since I'd have a pretty good idea of his/her ethics, and they would be well-aligned with my own on most questions.
"Christian" is much more open to interpretation. As much as a *lot* of good, honest folks label themselves that way, it's a much less consistent brand.
Remids me of a very old joke
So, you would prefer to deal with an observant Jew for ethics reasons. I guess I'll pick the low-hanging fruit.......
What's one of the thinnest books ever published?
"Jewish Business Ethics"
Ba-da-bump
Reminds me of a very anti-Semitic joke
FTFY.
Besides, it's "Jewish Sports Legends" ...
Huh. I Always Thought It Was...
"Sober Irishmen"
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Nein
It's the Anthology of German Humor.
I was thinking more like...
"Great Irish Lovers"
How about ...
Low-fat Belgian Desserts
another classic
Are you folks familiar with the Compleat Anthology of Lesbian Humour?
So, a priest, a rabbi, and a lesbian walk into a bar...
After about an hour of staring awkwardly at the TV, and the occasional mumbled comment, the priest turns to the rabbi and whispers, "I'm sorry, I could've sworn that lesbians would be funny."
Wrong punchline
And say "ouch" because they were all looking at the same woman and not where they were going.
Broken joke
Unless the woman looked like a little boy, I don't think the priest would have been interested.
*zing*
Jewish Sports Legends
I've actually played volleyball in a local league called "Co-Ed Jewish Sports".
It's a league AND a punchline.
Ethnic niche
I meant some of both. I'm not an especially observant Jew, but if I were moving into a new area I'd want a real estate broker who had some sense of where Jews predominantly live, where synagogues and community centers and Jewish shops and restaurants are located, etc.
Then you'd want an Islamic broker
I keed, I keed!
Distinctions Are Easily Seen Soon Enough
As with most religious leanings, there are degrees.
A Christian, of whatever stripe, will likely soon enough see whether or not the person they are dealing with is of the same basic set of beliefs as him or herself. Language patterns, most specifically use of certain pejoratives, will be the first clue. After that? Drinking or dietary habits; an affinity for scheduling things around services and/or bible studies; actual examples of charitable work or service to others; things of that nature.
I consider myself a fairly devout Christian, but some looking to do business with a Christian would probably look askance at, for instance, the fact that I play softball on Sunday mornings and take it as proof that I'm not their type of Christian.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Not any more
Christianity only counts for 78.4% according to a 2007 Pew survey quoted on Wikipedia. The second largest group is "No Religion" at 16.1%.
12% of the nation is
12% of the nation is agnostic or atheist. "Nons", or non-religious people, are the the fastest-growing group amongst belief systems for Americans. And that's just the people who are brave enough to admit it. Many of us have been quite cowed by this erroneous "America is a Christian nation" line; a real pity,particularly since it's not even true. The US was built on the concept of freedom of religion, which must mean freedom FROM religion, for those who so choose, if it's to have any meaning at all.
So odd that the fundamentalists at home seem to be gaining momentum just as we see the logical extension of their mindset abroad: Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and other functional theocracies run on anaerobic systems of logic.
Like him or loathe him, Obama is the first American president to even acknowledge the existence of non-believers as American citizens. He routinely does just that in speeches about religion, as he goes down the list of prominent belief systems of Americans. I thank him for that.
I don't get mad when I see the Christian fish or other religious insignia on an ad for a business, or on its front door (a business owner's religion has ZERO bearing on whether he/she can bake me a great loaf of bread, fix my car, or make tailoring adjustments to my new suit.)
Instead, I just take such insignia as an exceedingly clear and simple sign to "keep walking" and take my money elsewhere.
You are free to do as you
You are free to do as you choose, of course, but why purposely avoid a merchant who happens to be religious? That makes no sense to me. Do they put a sign up saying they will use their profits to subsidize proselytization? I really don't get this attitude.
I think this is unfortunate.
Essentially, by saying he wants a Christian real estate agent, he's saying 'Jews need not apply', or 'those who don't believe in organized religion need not apply', and so on and so forth. It's discriminatory and troubling. What if the person had said, 'I prefer a real estate agent with the same color skin as mine'?
Both questions can be answered the same way
"I'm not going to let you look at my penis, if that's what you're asking."
LOLOLOL
LOLOLOL
Karen Zgoda
http://www.karenzgoda.org
http://fussyeater.blogspot.com
http://editmymanuscript.com
I Can't Say That I Think It's Troubling
The person is basically asking for belief in a core set of values, whatever those values may be. It's not discrimination based upon something a person was born with, like skin color or gender or a physical disability.
I would assume, for some, the opposite of some of those values might be found desirable. If someone finds belief in God to be a sign of mental disability or weakness, as I've certainly heard suggested in some quarters, might they not disqualify a person from certain positions based upon that? If so, as a Christian, I'd have no quarrel with that.
Personally, to the wider point here, I've never seen why anyone would want to be places that they know they're not truly wanted. It seems that some folks mileage varies widely on that, though, so I'll not belabor the point.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Srsly?
Personally, to the wider point here, I've never seen why anyone would want to be places that they know they're not truly wanted.
Should we all become separatists then? The only place I've ever worked that was pretty much free of homophobia was a GLBT organization.
I enjoy the place where I work, and they appreciate my skills, and I think I have a lot I can offer to the people who use our particular program. But our program is far from free of homophobia. The solution isn't that I should leave. They're obligated (by law in fact) to continue to do trainings and have discussions so that they can improve.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
This is a big transaction
I'm going to go along with Suldog. This person is about to engage in a very large transaction, potentially hundreds of thousands of $$$$$, so they want to feel comfortable in that process. It appears that their Christianity is a very important part of their life, and dealing with someone that shares those values would make them feel better about it. This is not the time to do something out of their comfort zone.
That's why we have secular laws
The legal structure is set up with protections, contracts, etc.
I realize that those with little contact with "kithkin" might not understand what that "Christian" question means. It isn't about comfort with a transaction that is bounded by legal stipulations. It is about exclusion and inclusion, and I think the real estate guy was spot-on in his reaction.
Not Always, Swirly
I believe you may be tarring an innocent group with the same brush you use for the smaller guilty one.
I have some level of further comfort with those who share my beliefs. We all do.
(If you believe we don't, then we'll just have to disagree. Assuming you agree, I'll go on.)
There are those with so-called Christian belief systems who would ask such a question as a way to get at some sort of greater exclusion, but there are certainly those who might ask the question solely as a means of finding out if a person shares some sort of moral value they find preferable, and not necessarily because they hate (or value less) those people who answer in the negative.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
You may be right ...
But I also have alot more experience with this subculture.
Jesus!
And I say that with all due respect :-)
How can you say, as a definite statement of fact, that you have a lot more experience with that subculture? You may, but you hardly know me and my background well enough to say that you definitely do.
(I'm not trying to get into a "mine's bigger than yours" argument here, Swirly, but your stating something that definitively, with no evidence given for the assertion, does your arguments no favor and does me a slight disservice.)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Holy Ghost, Suldog!
We all know Swirly is from a trailer of toothless snake-handlers. They still respect her because the crap she learned at MIT sounds like speaking in tongues to them.
Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!
LOL -- that's funny, and a
LOL -- that's funny, and a somewhat accurate assessment of her frequent huff and puff methods. But I've got to side with Swirly on this. I used to live in evangelical land myself, and that kind of Christianity rarely resembles the kind I see around here (and the kind I assume that Suldog would recognize as Christianity). Asking if somebody is Christian does not mean "do you go to church?" It means are you born again, do you cast out satan, etc. It is a highly loaded values term. Suldog doesn't see it, because he isn't familiar with that form of the religion (lucky for him).
Jesus Christ Almighty!
Again, said with reverence.
NEITHER of you knows me well enough to assert what you're asserting concerning my familiarity with certain aspects of religion. I don't believe you have any evil intent in what you're doing, but I'd appreciate it if you'd stop it.
As I said before, I am NOT interested in getting into the type of argument where each person shows the size of his wiener, but if you want to go there, we can have it. Let's just make sure we have a couple of days put aside, though, because it's liable to get hairy.
(Hah! I said "hairy" and "wiener" in the same paragraph!)
(Oops! Does that mean I'm not Christian enough? I don't know anymore...)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Not trying to rile you up,
Not trying to rile you up, so I won't say more on the matter after this post. But I don't need to know everything about you. Your words in this thread regarding a specific phrase indicate your lack of familiarity with what it means. Consider yourself lucky.
You Don't Seem Like A Rabblerouser...
... but you're rousing this member of the rabble, nevertheless :-)
No. My words in this thread, regarding any phrases, indicate nothing more nor less than what I intended them to indicate. If you are finding hidden meaning in my words - or you wish clarification on anything I've said, because something I've said indicates to you that I don't know what I'm talking about - I'll be happy to elucidate for purposes of clarification. If it becomes clearly demonstrable that I don't know what I'm talking about, I'll be happy to receive an education so that I don't display similar ignorance in future :-)
If we're discussing "dogwhistles" here, I find the fact that you would assume someone (me) hasn't the ability to discern one, based upon my expressed beliefs within a thread that is mostly opinion-based, somewhat obtuse (as well as slightly insulting, but I assume that's completely unintentional, so skip it.)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Well, then, let me ask...
...have you ever had the (mis-)fortune of spending a considerable portion of your life in a setting where religious fundamentalists were a fairly dominant force?
(As for me, I grew up in Oklahoma -- and spent over seven years in Georgia). ;~}
I'll Ask A Question In Reply
Which is, of course, sometimes a tactic for obfuscation, but I hope it's not, in this instance :-)
Are you able to give me a complete listing of what places you consider would count as a "yes" answer?
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Of course not
> Are you able to give me a complete listing of what places you
> consider would count as a "yes" answer?
I have no listing of every pocket of fundamentalism in these United States. ;~}
Then It's Not Necessarily Cogent To The Argument, Correct?
If I were to say that I had spent such-and-such a length of time in a certain location, and I considered it a hotbed of fundamentalism, then you wouldn't be able to contradict that assertion, and whatever else I might have to say could neither be supported or disparaged by my answer to that question, no?
Michael, I'm splitting hairs like a shit-for-brains first-year law student with his thumb piously up his ass here, and I apologize for that, but I'll try to explain where I'm coming from on this and maybe it will make things clearer. I certainly hope so, because I'm not trying to be argumentative just for the sake of having an argument, with you or anyone else here.
I have been doing my own studies, involving fundamentalism and proselytizing, for over 20 years now. I've listened to more hours of TV and radio preachers than... well, I'd hesitate to say "any of you", what with my own protestations concerning blanket assertions of other folk's knowledge, but in this case I'll gladly get into a "wiener size" argument and probably win. It is generally a minimum of 5 hours per week, sometimes as high as 40.
(And I know I've used that weiner phrase far too many times for some folk's comfort, so that will be the last.)
Anyway, I've not only been viewing and listening to the preachers and their proselytes, I've also done extensive book study - and I'm not talking about just reading The Bible. If you were to look at my bookshelves, you'd see some 40 or 45 volumes concerning religion. Some have to do with theology itself, but a goodly portion concern the spread of various religious cultures, and effect from the same. And those volumes come at the subject from a variety of viewpoints - pro, con, and basically impartial.
I can't truthfully say that I've lived in an area of the country that would be considered a "fundamentalist hotbed", but I've certainly visited some for what I would consider fairly significant lengths of time.
In any case, I find it odd that some people here would consider a particular bit of knowledge non-transferable except via experience. That's the sense I'm getting from the commentary. And while I don't deny that some knowledge is best learned that way, I don't believe that the identification of so-called "dogwhistles" is exclusively so. I understand the concept fully, and I'm not saying that the original question being discussed here cannot ever be used as such, but I know from my own personal experience and interaction that it is not exclusively used as such. And that's all I've been trying to espouse here.
However - unless I've totally been misreading some of you - I've been getting counter-argument that it is used only as a "dogwhistle" in the great majority of instances, and that I, personally, am unable to ascertain when it is and when it isn't. And I find that an insult to my intelligence.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
You can read all the books in the world....
...and it is no substitute for actually interacting with people of this sort on a daily basis. You have to realize, some of these people are perfectly nice. But they operate on principles that are (probably) foreign to your own personal experience.
And when they ask if someone is "a Christian", they are not really talking about Catholics (or probably even Episcopalians, etc.) On the other hand, a Lutheran (excluding some Missouri Synod folks, perhaps) or a Methodist simply is not going to ask that sort of question in that sort of context.
There is a very strong commitment to doing as much business as possible with other fundamentalist (or at least evangelical) Christians as possible.
So -- I see no malice in the question (about the Christian-ness of the callee) at all. Just a sort of disingenuousness in wanting to get an essential piece of information without wasting time.
Humpty Dumpty
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
Hah!
OK, so I was paraphrasing Lewis Carroll. And, upon re-reading, it does sound as though I'm a pompous a-hole. Mea Culpa (as I used to say quite often when I was a practicing Catholic, by the way.)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
We keep going like this tit
We keep going like this tit for tat and the columns are going to get very skinny. Apologies for any implied insults. I will say that to me (and evidently to Swirly), your dismissal (by the words in this thread) of the idea that the question is value loaded and packed with malice, makes it appear that you do not see the question as holding the same meaning that we see in it. That's fine. If you do see the same meaning, then I have to wonder why you aren't bothered by it. That's all. I'm off line for now, so best regards sorting through the syntax.
No Problem, HenryAlan
I do not see the question as always being value loaded and packed with malice, whereas it seems that you and Swirly do. That's my only point (aside from the one on top of my head.)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Just Henry is fine
I think we can agree on that. As Michael points out, if you haven't lived it... Which of course brings us back to the earlier point, that sometimes a single discussion can inform us a great deal about a participants prior experiences.
Henry ducks the punch heading his way
Nah, No Punch
You seem (as I hope I do) like a nice guy trying to impart some information and/or clear up a misconception. Have a nice weekend, Just Henry!
:-)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Funny is what it's all about
FWIW, I know what you're both saying. I can hear the dog whistle too. I don't want to go into it, but I've been there. Yeah, it doesn't mean "Do you go to church twice a year to please your mom?" or "Did you ever crack the spine on your Bible?" or "Do you give your kid an Advent Calendar with little chocolates in it?"
I saw my cousins last year and asked their little girl if she liked Alison Krauss. The little sweetie owned up as to how she used to but "She don't sing out to The Lord no more."
You should see my e-mail
Or, the e-mail addresses that I have largely abandoned. Stuff from various family members and associates who ascribe to the big-C Christian type of thing. How I'm going to hell, need to come back to god, etc. My education and living on the East Coast just makes it worse.
For a sampling of the type of offering, try some My Right Wing Dad - a good deal of the material is in here, absent the personal exhortations to find Jesus now or perish. The bible ones are also familiar.
I'm not overgeneralizing here (eeka - care to back me up?). This sort of question is called a "dogwhistle" for a reason - that you aren't hearing that dogwhistle tells me that you don't understand what is going on in the link. Notice that in other posts that I highlighted the difference between the devout evangelicals that my brother has nested with - people who prefer to bring people in through leading exemplary lives - and the wingnuts who ask potential business associates about how Christian they are and complain that their rights are violated because the government isn't a theocracy.
For example, when I was a kid in Real America, I was sent to Vacation Bible School where the church members were separated from the non-church members. Church members played and did all the kid camp stuff, while non church members were preached at. We were told that if we recited a certain creed and/or brought friends, we could go join the group that was visibly doing far more fun things. Based on others' contact with these systems, this was not unusual. How is this "are you a Christian" thing much different?
And, as for snake charmers, sockpuppet, no ... but I got me plenty of rural western trailer court to go around and there were times when my mom didn't have any front teeth.
Yeah Swirly, I get the thing you're talking about
I also went to schools where groups of people would pray around the flagpole before school, with huge posters and whatnot stating that they were praying there because it's illegal to pray in a school (which it most certainly is not), then every other word out of their mouth, including during class discussions, was about Jesus this and Jesus that, and then they'd bring in notes from their parents about how they weren't allowed to hear discussions where anyone claimed that there were ways of thinking about things that didn't involve Jesus. This seems very far removed from what I've read about Jesus being a accepting and caring sort of person.
I had acquaintances who for YEARS would try to invite me to Christian-fundamentalist youth groups and studies and camps and things, yet didn't ever invite me to socialize with them in any other respect. I went a couple times, because I'm interested in other people's cultures. I'd then get phone calls, from adults in their ministries, when I was 12 or 13, telling me that they really wished I would become saved. My parents found this creepy and inappropriate. Oh, and there was this time a friend invited me to A PICK-UP SOCCER GAME where there was a short period of playing soccer, then we were led in an exercise where we were asked to make a list of everyone we knew who would go to hell if they were to die today. I was then lectured by a whole group of children and adults about how I needed to accept Jesus Christ, and I could do so right now, because all these people would be heartbroken if I went to hell. Because that's really appropriate treatment of a 12-year-old. A lot of the people affiliated with the churches that these "friends" went to also ran businesses such as house-painting with a free dose of proselytizing. So yes, while most of the businesses I patronize are owned by Christians, statistically speaking, none of them have Jesus fishes or bible verses all over their advertizing. I would be unlikely to patronize such a business because of my past experiences with the must-save-everyone types.
All of this sort of fanatical and abusive behavior offends me most of all because it's led a lot of people to think of these sorts of people when they hear "Christian," which is really offensive to most of the 80-ish percent of Americans who are Christian and don't engage in this sort of crap.
(FWIW, I also had a lot of Mormon friends growing up, and Mormons tend to use Mormon-owned businesses and whatnot, but the intent seems totally different. We always had Mormon doctors and dentists, just because we started going to a dentist that a Mormon neighbor recommended, and he was great, so we trusted his recommendations for other providers. The Mormon business network makes sense to me, because it's their practice to avoid certain medications and certain activities on certain days and so forth; it seems much like hiring a house cleaner who keeps Kosher if you keep Kosher, so you know they aren't going to do anything that affects the kitchen's Kosher status. I've yet to experience any proselytizing from any Mormons or Jews who advertise their business as such.)
Yes, Srsly
No, I'm not saying we should all become separatists. I was just espousing my personal preference. I have no desire to seek inclusion into any group that doesn't want my presence. If someone says, to me, "I don't like you!", then I am perfectly content to let them go about their business with no further contact from me. And I have never understood why anyone else would feel differently in that regard.
As I said, it seems some folks mileage varies vastly from mine. And perhaps it is some sort of intellectual failing on my part. However, that's how I feel.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Yeah, I think there's a reason there...
I don't know everything about you Suldog, but based on things you've said yourself, I think that you don't belong to any largely oppressed groups. In other words, I don't think there's anything about you where during a good percentage of interactions, you'd come away from them wondering whether you were judged based on what actually happened, or whether someone's prejudices came into play.
If you DID belong to a group where you were discriminated against on a daily basis, I'm thinking you'd have a different perspective in terms of wanting to just shrug and walk away from times when people say they don't want you just because, well, they don't want you. In terms of when I've encountered people who just don't like me and who've gone far enough to explain that it's because I'm annoying or stupid or whatever, then yeah, I don't want to work for that person or be friends with that person either.
But in terms of things like when I applied for a job and then later heard through the grapevine that the director was really impressed and would have hired me except that she couldn't get past how it was really unprofessional for me to come to an interview "all dressed down like that" (in other words, I didn't have makeup or a purse or sparkly jewelry like she thinks all female-chromosomed people should wear, because I'm a butchish dyke and that just isn't who I am, but I was wearing neat well-kempt professional attire). Yes, I did actually want that job, and I know that most of the people there don't perpetuate homophobia in the same way this person does. In this instance, I at least ended up hearing from someone that I didn't get the job because of homophobia; it's even worse to just know that you don't have as easy of a time being accepted in a largely straight world, and to be surrounded by language and behavior all the time that exclude your type. You know, like, when I've worked for GLBT-focused organizations and had very few clients ask to work with someone else, and then going to work for organizations that aren't specifically GLBT programs and have plenty of people suddenly stop showing up for appointments right after the day when they asked who the picture of my family on my desk was. Or the parent who asked if I was married and had kids, then we talked a little about my family, then she's suddenly calling our director and saying she needs a new therapist for her kids because I have no idea how to treat children. And when the person hasn't come right out and said they're firing me because they're homophobic, it doesn't occur to most bosses either; they just notice that someone complained.
This job I applied for wasn't at some backwards organization whose mission was to discriminate against queers -- I obviously wouldn't want to work at such a place. But put yourself in my shoes a bit; every time I apply for a job, I'm gonna look at their mission statements and personnel policies and ask about extracurricular things and keep my eyes peeled during the tour to see how queer-friendly the place seems. Suldog, if my assumptions are right, you don't have to take the time every time you meet someone new to see what their attitudes are toward your kind of people. This is something I have to do with everyone. I listen to see if they're using inclusive or exclusive language, then once I mention who's in my family, I wait and see whether their attitudes toward me suddenly change.
Do you see why you and I might have different concepts in terms of sorting out whether people like us and how we're going to respond? I really like you and think you're a good person, and I'm hoping that my explanation helps you to see why our ideas on this subject might differ so much. When you say that your view on such things is "screw them; I wouldn't want to be a part of that anyway," there's a lot of privilege behind that attitude. Some of us can't just take that easy road out, because then where are we supposed to live or work or worship or socialize? We run into people who don't like our kind pretty much everywhere.
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
Thanks, Eeka
I certainly appreciate the detailed response, and I can see where you and I might have different perspectives on this. Still, I think, were I in your position, I'd do the same as I do now. I can't say that for sure, certainly, as I'm NOT in your position. However, I'm a stubborn enough bastard to think that I would. I may be overestimating my resolve :-)
As for people not liking you, or me, or anyone else, there are people all over the world who don't like you, or me, or anyone else. Everybody encounters those who don't like them for capricious reasons. In my line of work, they don't even need to give a reason for rejecting me. It can be my face, my voice, my ethnicity, my gender, or just because someone feels like saying "fuck you" to someone on that particular day. And I have absolutely no recourse. The entire business is subjective and no laws apply. If I didn't have the ability to just move on from such things, I'd have gone postal long ago.
Now, I'll grant you that I can leave my job behind after the day is through, while your sexuality is with you always. There is that :-)
Also, as you may be aware, I am of 25% Hispanic ancestry. It certainly doesn't show in any way, as I look as though the only Hispanic thing in me might be from the last time I ate a taco, so I haven't had to fight any big battles because of it. However, it is there and I have been in more than a few settings where my ancestors would have been cursed, spat upon, reviled, and otherwise made to feel extremely unwelcome. My reaction? If I'm feeling grumpy that day, I tell them about my racial makeup and hope they apologize for the ignorance. But it's not like I feel they owe me anything, not even civility.
(And I'm not saying that you're saying that folks owe you anything other than civility. And I wish they'd give it to you, because I think you're a nice, decent person, too, and I thank you for the compliment in that regard, and this is getting mighty mushy, eh?)
Bottom line: I understand and appreciate your concerns. Mine are different, and perhaps not comparable. But, for my part, I stand by what I believe my reactions to such situations would be even under vastly differing (and perhaps trying) personal circumstances. If it turns out that someday I find myself in a more difficult situation and what I've said here turns out to be just braggadocio on my part, mea culpa.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
"Pretty much free"?
I find it interesting that even a GLBT organization is only "pretty much free" of homophobia, according to you. The mind boggles at the amount of dogma that must be flying around the air there about open-mindedness; sounds to me that, in order to not be homophobic (according to eeka) one must be homosexual. Which is absurd, and discriminatory itself: By claiming some kind of moral or intellectual superiority, they're guilty of the same sins that they pin on the Bill O'Reilly-listening crowd; the only difference is that they don't have the strength in numbers (in most places) to act on it.
But there's also a larger point here: The contention, by groups which see themselves to be (and are, in fact) victims of discrimination, that they are the ONLY group which can be free of discrimination, and as such they self-appoint themselves as guardians and judges as to which behaviors are discriminatory and which are not, and which people are "OK" and which are not.
Which ends up being just as discriminatory, really. Now, as a straight WASP male, obviously I can't claim to have suffered from discrimination the way plenty of other people can; nor do I claim any kind of angry while male reverse-discrimination-- I can fully appreciate that my non-diverse, non-ethnic status has helped more than harmed in most of my job-seeking efforts. HOWEVER, I reject the notion that I can't possibly NOT be racist simply because of my background, or that I can't be aware of and appreciate when it happens. I don't have to be gay, or black, or Jewish, or anything to appreciate when bad things happen to people because of who they are.
A few clarifications
Yeah, I didn't mean outright holy-shit-illegal homophobia. I'm not talking about stuff like those organizations that have an official policy of not hiring GLBT folk.
I'm talking about institutionalized homophobia, like providers doing an intake and using language with a client where they assume that the person has an opposite-sex partner rather than using inclusive language. Or the agency CEO who unilaterally took away domestic partner benefits as soon as SSM was passed, not realizing that many people with DP benefits can't marry because they or a spouse is in the military, or works for a religious organization that has the legal right to fire anyone who they find out enters into a SSM, or is an international couple where the foreign citizen could be forbidden from visiting home. This CEO would have known these things had said CEO asked someone familiar with GLBT issues, or even done a quick google search and read things like GLAD's position paper explaining that many SS couples can't marry. Knowing CEO as I do, CEO surely didn't do this out of hatred, but it was an action that led to discrimination against GLBT employees. Oh, I've also had well-meaning self-professed-liberal supervisors tell me when I had clients complain about me (for being queer) that the easy way to avoid that is to be closeted (this has been while working in environments where it was considered appropriate to have pictures of your family on your desk and to chat with clients about what you did this weekend and such), and then really not GET IT when I pointed out to them that I've heard them mention their spouses and their organizational memberships and whatnot to clients, so why wouldn't I do the same?
The only places I've worked where these mistakes rarely get made are GLBT-specific organizations, where staff are all either queer or else very strongly committed to being an ally and trying really hard not to add to homophobia. I know many many straight people who are actively anti-homophobic, but I've not yet encountered a workplace aside from GLBT-specific agencies where I've not experienced any homophobia. People don't need to be GLBT themselves to be really on top of being an ally, but I've found that unless the culture at a plece is specifically targeted at being GLBT-friendly, homophobia happens.
Dogwhistle
"Are you a Christian" is a fundamentalist dogwhistle. A "dogwhistle" is language used to get the attention of a specific group of people, but that non-dogs don't necessarily identify as such. Somebody who asks this question does not have good intent in my experience, unless they are simply asking if you would like to come to church with them when you are away from your own. This question is never an attempt to find out more about you - it is an attempt to be the kind of person Jesus pilloried as unChristian in the parable of the Good Samaratan - a person whose "Christianity" is contingent on exclusion.
I don't know what denomination you are, Suldog, but if you are a devout Catholic, you would not be considered a Christian in the eyes of many fundamentalists. Nor would my husband's Albanian Orthodox family members. Mormons? No way - which is part of Mitt's GOP problem.
I grew up with this stuff, and I have family members who feed on it and are constantly trying to "bring me back to God". It is also a sign that somebody is living in geographic and cultural isolation from larger reality and is paranoid about outsiders (not that MA doesn't have this sort of person ...)
Note that not all religious folk are such rabid nutters: my brother married into a conservative group in Alberta, and they were far more interested in being Christians than prosletyzing or shaming. The minister stated during the wedding that "we believe that God made marriage for man and woman", but didn't sermonize about it. Statements of what "we blelieve" are okay with me - so long as they stay in church and private lives. It wasn't like some rabid wingnut weddings I have been to where there is much hating on women and gays as part of the minister's talk.
Similarly, I am happy to do business with Sierra Trading Post, and highly recommend it because they are wonderful to deal with. Sure, their business principles and mission statement are perfused with Christianity and values - but they live by them and don't push them on others or require you to sign on to them to complete your transaction. If there is a long processing wait for the order, they ask if you want to see a random first testament quote, but that is the extent of it unless you go digging in the website info. Their business principles apply to THEM - there is no attempt to impose them, or make them the law of the land, or exclude on the basis of background (something Jesus was pretty clear was not good, IMHO).
I think you are correct
They were not asking for any old kind of Christian, but specifically for a fundamentalist Christian. If one had answered "I'm Catholic (or Mormon, etc.), the person would probably have chatted politely for a bit more -- and then crossed one off their list.
Former Catholic, Now Generic Protestant
That's my affiliation, which is sort of a non-affiliation.
Sure, I know that many Christian groups don't consider other Christian groups to be Christian. As many Protestants don't consider Catholics actually Christian, Catholics believe they have the one true faith and Protestants are outside of it.
Anyway, I suppose see my two answers above (to you, and to Eeka) for any further bloviating from me that you may feel a need for :-)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Virtually all mainline Protestant groups....
...consider Catholics Christian -- and the Catholic Church (as documented by its current Catechism) considers Protestants Christians (despite continuing to assert that the Catholic Church is the one "true" religion). Protestants duly baptized in their own religion (with documentation to show this) are not re-baptized as Catholics.
Thanks, Michael
I think I wasn't as clear as I should have been. I didn't mean to say that most Protestants consider Catholics as non-Christian, but what I wrote could have been interpreted that way. Not my intention. Thanks for the clarification!
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Pretty much right on except for one small point
I'm totally familiar with the "are you Christian?" people. Most Catholics, mainline protestants, etc. don't ask this, because they aren't operating from a worldview where they need to divide people into "already saved" and "needs saving right now before I can possibly have any other types of interaction with them."
However, and I'm sure you know this but didn't think of it just now, it isn't entirely accurate that dogwhistles are always coming from a bad place on the part of the whistler. GLBT folk in places such as rural conservative areas, fundamentalist religious communities, the military, etc. have dogwhistle phrases they use to find one another without coming out to the community as a whole. This is a result of OTHER PEOPLE'S bad intent, not the whistler's!
http://1smootshort.blogspot.com
religious real estate agent
Anyone applying a religion test to their selection of a real estate agent is possibly cutting themselves off from a sizeable portion of the market. Real estate represents too large a transaction to apply such a test. But, hey, it's their money.
It's not just religion
Funny how the "global warming denier" who was, er, denied a recent Cambridge art appraisal job didn't get the same treatment. We Bostonians are not just different about religion. Sometimes I think the culture wars get nastier here because some people have too much time on their hands.