BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Assertive Online Outreach

 
 
Ganesh
10:20 / 06.11.04
Okay, so my prevailing mood in the immediate aftermath of Bush's win was one of angry isolationism - 'go fuck yourselves, theocratic nutjob bigots' - but I've since been reconsidering that view, in the light of the various discussions of What The Left Should Do Now. This thread is, in part, an expansion of my post here. It relates mainly to online outreach/activism, but it seems to me that most, if not all, of these points might readily apply in Real Life too.

I suppose I'm coming down from post-election shock/rage, and thinking about the huge Christian Right bloc which was successfully mobilised by appealling to "moral values" - which appears to be shorthand for gays, guns, abortion and and something along the lines of "taking God out of the Constitution" - and I'm thinking specifically about my own experience of people who might fall within that group. Living in the UK, the vast majority of my own encounters with right-wing Christians have been Internet-based, typically via Christian message-boards.

I first began exploring Christian message-boards three years ago, following a rather traumatic clash with a Baptist aunt to whom I revealed my homosexuality. Finding myself completely unable, afterwards, to have a civil discussion with her, I took to the message-boards partly in an attempt to understand her mindset, partly as cathartic displacement, and partly because I am, by nature, something of a 'compromise junkie' - and I'd been unable to reach a compromise with my aunt.

In the beginning, the Christian boards were hard work; I posted about some of my early experiences here. To summarise, the first few forays into the likes of CBBS were very much trial-and-error; I made mistakes (chiefly, making the assumption that the larger boards would follow a bell-curve distribution of extremism, with more moderates than fundamentalists - this is not the case) but I learned quickly. I attracted lots of opprobrium, but I also made plenty of friends - and, pleasingly, my presence seemed to coax a fair number of more moderate posters out of the woodwork. Once I'd sussed out the ground rules (the unspoken ones as well as the explicit Terms & Conditions) and managed to get the balance right, it was possible to engage in quite impassioned debate yet remain 'friends' with even the most right-wing.

In retrospect, I think my input to these online communities - as a 'fuzzily agnostic' gay man - did change things, however slightly. My presence altered the range of views being expressed, gave some tentative moderates the confidence to be moderate, and, ultimately, shifted the equilibrium a little. There's a significant proportion of Christians who aren't themselves strongly anti-gay or anti-abortion, but come to online message-boards for the sense of shared community; often, they simply lack exposure to alternative viewpoints expressed calmly and politely (and wittily - it's easy to build up a Haus-type reputation for Wildean funmeistery) with a minimum of flamey hectoring. I don't think it's too much gradualist wishful thinking to speculate that those individuals shift their worldview slightly as a result. Calling it 'outreach' is a bit wanky and presumptious, but if enough of us can dispel at least a little ignorance (and my own specialist subject is The Homosexual Lifestyle), it'd be worthwhile.

So... what I'm proposing is that those of us who feel motivated and able to do so seriously consider registering on Christian message-boards and starting to post. There're right and wrong ways to do this, though; here's some of what I've learned (often the hard way):

- Christian message-boards are the online equivalent of gated communities; most occupy a slightly strange ground between 'safe space' and 'debating hall', typically with a plethora of rules specifying what can be talked about where. Read the Terms of Service, and stick to them; it's possible to challenge some of the more nebulous guidelines ('no promotion of homosexuality' being a particular favourite of mine) but not until one has spent a while getting to know the place. Think about how we respond to newbies' criticisms of Barbelith, and multiply that by ten.

- Think 'long haul'. As with any community, one is more likely to be listened to if one is respected, and one is more likely to be respected if one has been around for a while, actively contributing. And, fuck knows, we've got four years...

- Make friends. Not necessarily until they beg for mercy, but contribute to threads other than your favourite hot topics. You don't need to compromise your own values - on the contrary, be assiduous in correcting wrong assumptions and sweeping generalisations - but try also to find common ground. Joke, advise, sympathise, make connections. Show that you're not just there to proselytise.

- Occupy the moral high ground, at least in terms of posting. Be extra-careful to attack arguments rather than individuals, thank posters for their input (even when you disagree vehemently with what they're saying).

So... once I've got a little more bile out of my system here, I'm thinking about heading back into the fray. Is anyone else interested?
 
 
Cherielabombe
11:12 / 06.11.04
I am interested, though I'm not sure how often I'll be able to post. Though as some have said here I'm not sure how much difference it will make. I was just talking with a friend last night about abortion rights, and he rightly said, (and mind he's not against abortion), "If you honestly believe abortion is murder, why would you then say it's OK if some people murder?" I bring this up because I don't think we will be able to change people's views on EVERYTIHNG. But I think MAYBE what we can try and do is chip away at the opinion that the Republicans are the "moral" party and the Democrats are the "immoral" (party of Bill Clinton and White House blow jobs).

I think if we can SHOW Christians just how IMMORAL some Republican policies are, maybe we can make a difference.

Just some thoughts.
 
 
---
13:02 / 06.11.04
I think it's a great idea Ganesh, not sure if I'm going to join or not, but still it it's a great idea.

Have you ever seen anything like this? Either way, do you think that things like this could make some people think a little deeper and possibly change their minds?

Feel free to try it out if you want.
 
 
JOY NO WRY
13:18 / 06.11.04
So did your experiences investigating the Christian Right mindset help you to get along with your aunt, or are you still the one lurking in the corner at family reunions?

I think that this approach is one that should be encouraged, not just amongst us, but to everyone else who would like to see a reduction in fundamentalist values. Do you reckon that we would be more successful choosing a few specific, larger, boards to work on as a group? Maybe we'd be more effective concentrating our grouped efforts in a few places?

I'd like to help, but I'm not sure of the value of my contributions at the moment, I've never really used message boards before. Excepting this post, of course.
 
 
lekvar
13:43 / 06.11.04
Yeah, I've done this before in the physical world. It's not for the faint of heart- the truely evangelical buy books on how to win any theological argument. Of course, as Ganesh points out, arguing isn't necessary.
 
 
alas
14:57 / 06.11.04
This thread is, in part, an expansion of my post here.

Which I also responded to, there in the conversation thread, although I kinda wish I had done it here instead.

I'm still getting over my experience of harassment while serving as a volunteer Democratic poll monitor (outside! in the rain! for 13.5 hours! Yes this is a blatant plea for sympathy!) that I described here, as "My Day of Hell in Clark County Ohio!"

I find that I still break down periodically when I think about my experience, and I'm feeling kind of PTSDy about it all. I'm pretty much of a wimp when it comes to personal confrontation.

It is just really hard work to talk to angry evangelical christians, when one encounters them, as I do, on a fairly regular basis in real life. And, to continue stating the obvious, it can be even harder when they are family members. Normally I talk to my mom every Sunday, but I don't think I can even do that this week--I'm just too tired and still needing to lick my wounds. She's a lifelong moderate Republican, who I think may have been becoming more conservative these past few years; my reaction has kinda been: "I don't think I want to know how she's going to vote, because it's just too distressing for me." So I've mainly been avoiding the issue with her and other family members.

But I think what I'm coming to this week, after all the soul-searching that I've been doing (and that's really about all I've been able to accomplish this week--I haven't been able to work on anything else, really), is that I have to do something with my family: I'm tired of feeling like I must keep silent on so many issues, and like my views are more dismissable than, say, those of my evangelical sister. I don't want to become "evangelical" (and that's the tricky thing) but I would like to assert myself enough so I can feel a basic respect from them. Besides which, I have a daughter who identifies as a lesbian, and I want my family to feel safer for her.

So I'm starting to think that there might real value in trying to "practice" some online. The discussion takes place in writing exclusively (so there's time to craft one's statements and revise, if necessary) with people who I can afford, emotionally speaking, to alienate, since as Ganesh's thoughtful posts have made clear, it's really easy to alienate people, to miscalculate the best way to make a point, even when your rhetorical strategies are as carefully considered as his clearly are. (And they really are excellent thoughts about how to go about this kind of thing.)

The recalcitrance, anger, and, yes, stupidity (because that is really there, in all of us, yes, but I gotta say it's there in spades in the christian right) will almost certainly not feel so personal and threatening to me from a stranger as opposed to my family. ...

But I do need to think about it, because I am already kind of an overcommitted person who has a pile of postponed work that I must get back to starting this week or there really will be hell to pay. For me, personally--a personal hell. (Kinda like accepting Christ as your personal savior, maybe? I have to accept my personal hell...)

I'd like to hear others' thoughts, and, of course, am still accepting huggles...
 
 
Nobody's girl
15:05 / 06.11.04
I'm honestly not sure I could stop myself from taking certain comments and positions personally. Terrible personality flaw, I know. Initially I tend to get impassioned and incoherent and then concilliatory after the fact. As a result I'm fairly sure I wouldn't add anything particularly constructive to the discussions. Well done to all of you who can, though.

This Christmas I will be in... Ohio My partner's cousin is a hard-core, evangelical, fundamentalist Bush supporter. It'll be hard enough to be civil to her, any tips? Basically my strategy so far is that I'm not going to engange in any discussions about politics or religion with her in case I lose my self-control completely and end up in a screaming match. The worst part of it is I really want to.

Ugh.
 
 
Ganesh
17:48 / 06.11.04
I bring this up because I don't think we will be able to change people's views on EVERYTHING. But I think MAYBE what we can try and do is chip away at the opinion that the Republicans are the "moral" party and the Democrats are the "immoral" (party of Bill Clinton and White House blow jobs).

As I say, it's a long-haul strategy. Dropping in to proselytise almost always backfires (as in the Guardian's 'Operation Clark County' maildrop) but actually taking the time to integrate and become a respected member of a community does, in the end, change the nature of that community.

I think if we can SHOW Christians just how IMMORAL some Republican policies are, maybe we can make a difference.

I agree, but I think it's also about showing the positives: applying the whole 'What Would Jesus Do' thing to foreign policy, the disenfranchised, magnanimity to the weaker side, etc., etc.

I'm thinking of reregistering at CBBS as 'Ganesh v2.0' (I've been banned from there once, but it's under new management, so who knows how they'll react). There's also Christian Forums, at which I'm 'Ganapati', and Crosswalk, where I've yet to register.

Go for it!
 
 
Ganesh
17:54 / 06.11.04
From Jack Frost:

Have you ever seen anything like this? Either way, do you think that things like this could make some people think a little deeper and possibly change their minds?

I like it, but I think we need to move away from the whole idea of a single tract or article making people "think a little deeper and possibly change their minds". I think presenting people with something like that doesn't work; they're much more likely to change - slowly - in response to more prolonged contact with individuals, individuals linking to stuff like this, for sure, but also being friendly, approachable, receptive to them and their problems. It's not so much about what you show them, but about the relationship you form with them.

It's not a sudden 'conversion'; it's an ongoing thing.
 
 
Ganesh
18:31 / 06.11.04
So did your experiences investigating the Christian Right mindset help you to get along with your aunt, or are you still the one lurking in the corner at family reunions?

Sadly, it didn't help. Even sadder, it's not me lurking in the corner, but my aunt. Not that our disagreement's responsible for that; my aunt's always had a frosty relationship with the rest of the family, at least partly because she's chosen to adopt principles by which she perceives her siblings, neices and nephews as 'sinful'. She's one of those people who are profoundly fearful of the world (she's never had any sort of intimate relationship with anyone, and remains very much a maiden aunt) and, I suspect, plumped for an extreme version of Christianity at least partly because it provided justification for her avoidance (the maintenance of spiritual purity).

We get along, after a fashion, at family meetings - but the 'what you do is like murder' argument is a wall between us.

I think that this approach is one that should be encouraged, not just amoungst us, but to everyone else who would like to see a reduction in fundamentalist values. Do you reckon that we would be more successful choosing a few specific, larger, boards to work on as a group? Maybe we'd be more effective concentrating our grouped efforts in a few places?

I think the larger boards are a good place to start - I've linked to a few of them in the reply to Cherry Bomb's post. While it'd be good to register en masse, I think it'd be good to approach the boards as individuals rather than as a cohesive 'invading force'. Play to individual strengths rather than overwhelming threads.
 
 
Ganesh
19:07 / 06.11.04
Hm. Xoc asked this afternoon, "how does this 'integrate yourself with Christian communities' thing fit with you quitting Cross + Flame?" and it's a perfectly valid point. For those who don't know, Cross + Flame is the message-board that started shortly after I was banned from CBBS, a 'mixed faith' forum originated by those other individuals who'd fled the more restrictive boards. It remains a relatively free place to talk about one's beliefs, a genuinely liberal board which nonetheless welcomes those of a conservative bent - so long as they can hack the 'non-gatedness'.

Why did I leave in a hissyfit? Well, I think, over time, I'd developed higher and higher expectations of Cross + Flame in terms of the calibre of discussion - so, when crap, bigoted, apologist stuff did appear, it was all the more disappointing. Also, in the run-up to the election, I grew thoroughly sick of the US-centric spin, and it pissed me off that even the intelligent, articulate C+F liberals almost never thought outside the box - the box being America.

I do regret burning my bridges with Cross + Flame, but not that much. I think the election's changed things in terms of the priorities of left-leaning agnostics like myself: I feel it's now important for me to seek out communities which are more conservative/right-wing than C+F, and attempt to integrate myself there.
 
 
Malle Babbe
13:14 / 07.11.04
Would it be more effective to take the approach of convincing the Christian Right that we mean them no harm, rather than we're right, and they need to embrace empirical thought? I live in rural Pennsylvania (the "Alabama" that sits between Pittsburgh and Philly, even though I did see a fair number of Kerry/Edwards placards about). I get a lot of evangelical tv stations here, and there is a lively industry cranking out books and movies about the "end of days", and all of the horrible things that us naughty secularists are going to do to the faithful.

There are folks that genuinely believe that a Democrat administration will lead to everyone being forced to have their Social Security number tattooed in bar code on their forehead and left hand, and that the UN will allow Hilary Clinton to sacrifice children to Lilith.

Quite frankly, I really don't care if someone adheres to the world-hating and body-hating strain of whatever faith they belong to. If they want to make themselves miserable, fine. I just have a problem with them making me likewise.
 
 
*
14:49 / 07.11.04
What about talking to them about why letting the government have control over marriage is a bad thing for religious groups?

I mean, they've signed over control of who their church can perform rites for to the government, and that government won't always be sympathetic to their goals. It was a near thing this time, and it's only a matter of time before an atheist homosekshul gets into office, and then appoints lots of activist judges who make it so that they HAVE to marry gays right in their own church. The only way for them to keep control of marriage is to make it so that "holy matrimony" is always and forever to be defined by the individual churches, and the government can define civil union however they like (so long as it includes everyone who is in a religious marriage), because that has no effect on the sovreignty of the church in matters of spirituality. If homosexuality is wrong, it's wrong whether it's done in a civil union or not, and if two people are married in the eyes of God, they will be married in the eyes of God and the government can't prevent them from getting their rights as married people.

Of course, if you recognize the right of one religious group to perform marriages, you can't take it away from another religious group, because that would be wrong. So the UU church and the Quakers and the MCC and the ULC and even fringe groups who successfully get recognized as churches can all marry whomever they want-- but again, the church only has to recognize the marriages of those whom they consider to be married in the eyes of God. This can't have any effect on what rights they get here in the temporal world, but the only one that matters is the next one.
 
 
---
15:15 / 07.11.04
they're much more likely to change - slowly - in response to more prolonged contact with individuals, individuals linking to stuff like this, for sure, but also being friendly, approachable, receptive to them and their problems.

I can understand that, that it would be a better idea to be a genuine person and if you ever got onto the subject maybe link to it or something. Not that that one thing is going to change everything, but if some of us could maybe help them to realize over time that the Bible isn't so set in stone as it might first appear, that could help a lot.
 
 
w1rebaby
19:00 / 07.11.04
From a position of wanting to get into communities that are ideologically opposed to your beliefs, my best advice is to include a healthy slice of unassociated stuff - don't be identified as "the leftie" or "the atheist", rather, start talking about sports, computer games etc as well. Very few forums are solely devoted to discussion of one particular topic. It makes you seem more human.

I was on CBBS at about the same time as Ganesh, though not being gay I didn't get banned. I was mostly there to find out what the hell people were thinking. I was perfectly open about it - I said that I was a commie atheist, I didn't meet many Christians in day-to-day life, and I wanted to see what people were like. The majority of my posts there were on political matters, and I wasn't alone there; I challenged the automatic assumption that Christian = Conservative which seemed be a common (though certainly not universal) assumption, and argued more generally as I would with anyone else. I got into fights with one particular moderator but had enough support that it didn't cause any trouble. I also helped people out with choosing digital cameras, said what I thought the best Linux distro was etc.

I have to say though that I didn't approach it from any sort of evangelical position, and the most benefit I gained out of the experience was for myself, in learning more about a different group of people. In a board situation, with many people backing the accepted position up, anyone who doesn't want to listen to you doesn't have to. They're going to have the support of dozens of other posters and they won't feel the need to address any points you might have. Sure, some people will be interested to hear what you're saying just as you're interested to hear what they're saying, but it's not something to rely on. Any sort of internet evangelism on a community basis is likely to be doomed to failure or at least very little success - what you *can* do is convince people that "your sort" aren't monsters and perverts, which I think Ganesh definitely succeeded in. You could tell that several posters there were thinking "well, I might still think the whole gay thing is against God, but hey, that Ganesh guy is cool, I'll listen to what he's got to say, we're all sinners aren't we, why should he get special condemnation?"

Interestingly, there were a number of threads about how best to convert atheists, and I gave them the same advice - don't come in with the intention of conversion, don't have the intention of being any sort of infiltrator or fifth columnist, your best bet is simply to show people that you're a reasonable person and they might start looking at your position for themselves if they think it's worthwhile. If you can't do that, you're never going to succeed with the rhetoric.

I must admit that I am tired of arguing with US right-wingers in most cases. So many boards are ideologically tight and self-reinforcing and have no interest in anything except repeating the talking points handed down from on high through talk radio and the "family" websites. I don't want to convert anyone any more. I just want to have a decent chat, and if the participants (including me) change their positions based on what they learn, so much the better. The whole outreach thing... it can be a bit "Clark County".
 
 
ibis the being
23:35 / 07.11.04
I like this idea, and yet I'm not sure I should do it, because at this point in my emotional development I doubt I'd be able to hear Fundamentalist dogma without projecting all my family problems onto the speaker.

There's a big difference between someone like you and me and a Fundamentalist Christian in the way we receive the other's point of view. We may believe their views as faulty or offensive, and that could make us feel frustrated or angry. But they believe our views are evil - bearing in mind that even if they think we are "nice" and "funny," the bad things we say come from our vulnerability to Satan's persuasions - and that's liable to make them fearful and even violent.

Put in another way, the consequences of my being wrong about a moral question (whether thought or spoken) are things like humiliation, confrontation, ruining friendships, etc. The consequences of a Fundamentalist's erring on a moral question are rejection by the One True God and eternal damnation and suffering. I'll bet that even beneath the strong, deep bedrock of faith that is the foundation of the Christian personality, lies some form of Pascal's Wager.

In that scenario, it's fairly obvious who can afford to be open-minded and who can't. The farthest you can ever go with a Fundamentalist is that they like you a lot and enjoy your company or conversation, and they'll probably pray for you, but that's not going to change their underlying belief that you're living an evil life and headed for Hell. I personally do not think that under those circumstances they're going to really receive much of what you say.
 
 
iamus
06:22 / 08.11.04
Well that's all down to the individual, surely. Be careful not to paint all Fundamentalists with the same brush. For some, the personal connections you make with them may be enough to swing it. Jesus Fever or no, at the core they're questioning human beings just like you and me, no matter how hard it's surpressed. Group mentality may make it more likely that your opinions fall on deaf ears, but it really is surprising what can be done when you empathise with another's headspace instead of just championing your own.

Ganesh, this is by far the most sensible and potentially effective angle on this whole problem that I've heard since coming to Barbelith. Far more so than many of the other (well intentioned) strictly Anti-Bush standpoints. We shouldn't be trying to fight a war, these people have as much right to their viewpoints as we do to ours. If we see them as being intolerant then it's up to us to provide sufficient stimulus to enable them to reconsider where they stand. To try and force them into a certain way of thinking or to try and actively impose our own mindsets without first trying to engage and understand theirs would make us as intolerant and ignorant as we think believe them to be.
We're all in this together, even if sometimes we wish we weren't.
 
 
grant
14:36 / 08.11.04
As Ganesh and a few others know well, I'm on the Christian boards as well -- I sort of followed Ganesh out and, well, engaged with them. It helps that a lot of what I do for a living involves End Times lore and obscure Bible studies, but that stuff fascinates me anyway.

If you check out Christianity.com (CBBS) or even Cross+Flame, and, like, actually sniff around a little bit, you'll be amazed at what you'll learn... and not just about religion, either. I'm still on CBBS, but rather inactive.

Malle Babbe: Would it be more effective to take the approach of convincing the Christian Right that we mean them no harm, rather than we're right, and they need to embrace empirical thought?

Heheh. If I'm reading that correctly, then yes. Convincing anyone to "embrace empirical thought" is nearly impossible. We all think we already think empirically.
 
 
grant
15:00 / 08.11.04
Heh -- here, just to give a good look at the lay of the land, here's a Christianity.com discussion as to whether Bush is the antichrist.

Notice that there are not just two positions (Is/Isn't) being stated, but a wide range of beliefs.
 
 
ibis the being
16:36 / 08.11.04
I don't know, grant. I didn't see a "wide range" of beliefs, I saw four at the most -

Bush is the anti-Christ
Bush is a Christian, not the anti-Christ
Bush is not a Christian, but not the anti-Christ
Clinton is the anti-Christ

Not to mention that scrambled syntax, mutilated grammar, and the near-total lack of punctuation made the thread pretty difficult to read, never mind take seriously. I know, that's terribly snotty and elitist of me, but I'm at a loss for how to interact with a forum like that.
 
 
grant
17:26 / 08.11.04
I missed the Clinton one, but I was fond of the "Bush can't be the Antichrist because he's not part of the European Union" line of reasoning.

Admittedly, that's one of the wing-nuttier posts. That dude Jipsah ("Nostradamus is the antichrist") is one of the sharper tacks on that site, though. Worth looking at further.
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
20:25 / 08.11.04


How's this for starters?
 
 
vajramukti
20:28 / 08.11.04
dude. that is SWEET
 
 
grant
00:46 / 09.11.04
Hmm. I don't know how that'd play in Peoria....
 
 
Epop Bastart the Justified, I
17:50 / 09.11.04
In Peoria, you make it look Evangelical - different image, and the slogal says:

"Are you in danger of being deluded by Satan?"
[Picture of Bush]
"George Bush is a False Prophet, as reveled in Revelations chapter:verse"
[Bible Quote]
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
08:55 / 10.11.04
[Off-Topic but possibly for Ganesh's benefit]

the Christian hanky code.

As you were.
 
 
grant
12:40 / 10.11.04
Last time, I promise -- but this CBBS topic might be more interesting/accessible.

From the starting post:
The message spoken in this election reflects a nation less concerned with morality and compassion than past generations, and far more content to wallow in its bigotry and jingoism. We have regressed. We've regressed so much that people knowingly vote for the party who is busy outsourcing their jobs, on the grounds that they hate gays more than they desire a safe and secure future. We've regressed so much, we don't even care about the fact that our own young people are dying. The level of moral indifference in this country is deafening.

Check out the back and forth on that one, people.
 
  
Add Your Reply