Communicating online can be difficult. When we can’t see each other’s faces, or hear another’s voice, we can make mistakes. We can mistake a person’s meaning, their tone, or even their character – particularly when the lack of physical proximity brings out the worst in us. When discussions start to go wrong, they tend to spiral downwards, each comment interpreted in the worst possible way, until we’re just shouting into the ‘net.
This is not conducive to building community. When people are willing to say online things they would never say to someone’s face, relationships suffer. People begin to believe their fellow congregants are worse people than they are, and everyone is reduced to the slice of themselves they put online. Because of the unpleasant interaction on social media, people are less willing to talk through things in person. Nobody learns. Nobody grows. The community suffers.
This is why we have rules to govern what our members are allowed to post in response to articles on our Facebook page and in our Facebook group. The rules aren’t there to prevent discussion or to shut people down. They are meant to foster community, to help our online spaces meet the same standards of mutual respect and trust we expect to observe when members of the Ethical Society meet face to face.
That said, this is what is allowed on our social media pages:
- Expressing your own view. It is acceptable – even encouraged – for participants to say what they think about a particular post.
- Disagreement. It is perfectly acceptable for participants in a discussion to disagree, to say why or why not they support a particular view or perspective, as long as they do so respectfully.
- Commenting on others’ comments. Replies to another’s comments are not necessarily problematic. It is fine to respond to what someone else has written.
- Judging behavior and language. It is perfectly acceptable to talk about another’s actual behavior or the language they have used. If someone’s language is homophobic, for instance, or if they have breached the rules of the group, it is fine to talk about that behavior.
- Rejecting consensus. It is fine not to believe what others believe. We are a freethinking community, and we don’t do dogma. You have a right to express your view even if you are the only one taking your position.
This is what is not allowed on our social media pages:
- Personal attacks or insults. There is no reason ever to personally insult or attack another member of our community. This includes calling people “stupid,” insulting their character, If an issue is so drastic that it needs to be addressed directly, contact myself or Kate and we will attempt some form of mediation. Insulting someone else online doesn’t help, and undermines the relationships necessary to build a healthy community.
- Broad judgments of character. While it may be tempting to judge people based on their behavior online, we want to encourage members to get to know each other deeply and to bring out the best in each other. Therefore, we ask that people not express broad judgments of a person’s character on our social media pages.
- Jokes at the expense of others, particularly marginalized communities. We have a policy which guides our communication at the Ethical Society: we’ll laugh at ourselves, but not at other people. We ask our members to follow the same policy online.
- Statements which reinforce the marginalization of any group of people. The Ethical Society exists to uphold the worth and dignity of all people. Any statements which are racist, homophobic, transphobic, sexist etc. are inconsistent with our core values as a community and will be removed.
These rules still leave a lot of grey areas. Communication is complex, and there will always be room for disagreement as to whether a particular post violates the rules. Therefore, we have two uber-rules which override all other considerations:
- The admins’ decisions are final. When we make a decision, that decision will stand. If you disagree with a decision, speak to us in person about it, but do not argue about it in the thread.
- Relationships are paramount. The most important thing about our social media pages is that they exist to further the broader goals of the Ethical Society: the creation of a community of love and justice in which all people are honored and treated with dignity. This value overrides any of the rules – our main concern is keeping people in right relationship with each other and fostering growth and fellowship.
These rules will change and develop over time as our community changes. For now, this is how we expect our members to engage with each other on social media.
Good morning. I’m Melodee DuBois, and I’ve been an Ethical Society member for the past six months. This summer we’ve recognized some momentous 50-year Anniversaries: Stonewall in June, and The Moon Walk in July. Another major 50-year Anniversary is happening this Friday, August 15th, Woodstock. And I feel privileged to be among the few who attended this epic festival.
Over the decades, Woodstock has been eulogized and trivialized. But however you perceive it, it was a totally unpredictable larger-than-life phenomenon, the likes of which we’ve never seen again. Yes, there were problems and challenges, but now fifty years later, I still feel its enduring impact.
Woodstock was billed as a 3-day celebration of peace, love and music, and I and my brother decided we simply had to go. So we and two of his band members packed our ’57 Chevy with gallons of water and boxes of canned goods, all of which came in very handy since the festival’s concessions were fully depleted by the second day.
We took backroads into New York state, arrived early, and staked out our spot close to the stage. There were no hotels…you just had your tent or car for sleeping or shelter from the rain. And it did rain – 5 inches the first night, turning the meadow into a sea of mud! But with our water-proof tarp, rain parkas and provisions, we were fine and able to bask in the incredible music we’d come to hear.
And what music! The roster of artists read like a “Who’s Who” of late 60’s rock legends: The Grateful Dead, Jimi Hendrix, Jefferson Airplane, and SO many others. My keenest musical memories were of the ‘protest songs’, and the rallying power they had with the crowd: from Country Joe’s Viet Nam Rag to Joan Baez’s rousing We Shall Overcome. These soaring moments united us all in the anti-war sentiments we were acutely feeling.
However, as extraordinary as the music was, it was the genuine spirit of generosity and friendship that prevailed. We all shared whatever we had, sometimes trading food for wine or weed, or vice versa. Many volunteered to feed those with no food in a hastily set- up food kitchen. Thousands of sandwiches made by local women were dropped by U.S. Army helicopters, while nearby residents gave us water. This was humanism at its best.
Today Woodstock occupies an iconic place in our pop cultural history. Nearly a half-million of us made it there. We were idealistic and believed we could make a difference. Were we a little naïve? Probably. Did all the societal changes we wanted happen? No. But did some good positive effects take hold on those who attended? Yes, I believe so.
I’m not saying that Woodstock was my sole influencer at the time, but that experience was pivotal in planting some seeds that helped make me who I am today. I came away with some significant truths: 1st — The value of sharing community with like-minded people; 2nd – Social or political differences should never prevent us from helping those in need; and 3rd — Good thoughts and prayers won’t bring about change…it takes direct action to make a difference.
These tenets have remained with me over the years. They are also at the core of the Ethical Society’s humanistic mindset, which is why I found my way here and am so glad to be part of this like-minded community today. Thank you.
NOTE: The ideas and opinions in this post do not necessarily express the thoughts or opinions of the Ethical Society of St. Louis or its leadership.
Want to take an ethical action? Give blood through the American Red Cross at the Ethical Society on Monday, August 12, 2019 between 9am and 1pm.
There is a severe shortage of blood, and only volunteer donors can fulfill that need for patients in our community. Nationwide, someone needs a unit of blood every 2 to 3 seconds and most of us will need blood in our lifetime.
To schedule an appointment please call 1-800-Red-Cross (1-800-733-2767) or visit RedCrossBlood.org and enter “EthicalSociety” to schedule an appointment.
The American Ethical Union expresses its dismay at this week’s news that the federal government will resume executing prisoners on death row. Our organization has been a staunch and consistent opponent of the death penalty for decades.*
Killing people held in state custody is never acceptable, regardless of their crimes, because it violates two fundamental human rights: the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment. Capital punishment is an affront to the ideals of human worth and dignity we exist to uphold.
Our criminal justice system, while protecting society from dangerous individuals, should be humane and focused toward rehabilitation and the restoration of people into the community. Once someone is convicted of a crime and incarcerated, the restriction of their liberty is the maximum punitive element acceptable: the state may take your freedom, but it should never take your life.
Some convicted and condemned to death have later been exonerated as innocent. Certainly, some who are innocent have been killed. The state cannot restore justice after the execution of someone who is innocent, making capital punishment even more of a moral wrong.
The moral imperative to abolish the death penalty is particularly urgent given the fact that in its application it is definitively racist. The death penalty is sought more often against people who kill white victims than African American or Hispanic ones, and people of color are disproportionately sentenced to death. This compounds the inherent depravity of capital punishment, creating a system in which the lives of people of color are literally treated as less important than the lives of white people.
That the USA still applies capital punishment is an embarrassing anomaly: of the 195 nations on the globe, only 55 still execute people, including only a handful of industrialized countries. Every country in Europe has abolished the death penalty, except Belarus, “Europe’s last dictatorship.” The USA is a sad outlier among developed nations in its enthusiasm for state-sponsored killing, and we should all engage in actions to end this cruel, inhumane, and evil practice, including contacting our representatives and the administration to object to this particular action.
Good morning! July’s theme is “Bringing out the Best”, and oddly, that made me think of government bureaucracy.
For the last several years, I haven’t seen much connection between goodness and government or politics. Quite the opposite: I feel shocked daily at the monstrous inhumanity perpetrated by our government.
This affects my psyche, and maybe yours, too. If you live near Tower Grove, you may sometimes hear muffled, profane shrieking around 6:00AM. That’s me, screaming into the void as I read the news each morning. (I’m exaggerating, but just barely…) It’s worst for my poor dog, who is developing some strange Pavlovian conditioning: she’s learned that when I am swearing at my laptop, breakfast is imminent.
So, I’m frustrated about our government. The challenge is focusing on productive action and avoiding cynicism and disillusionment.
I’m lucky that a small part of my work as a professor at SLU lets me see the good that government still does. For the last few years, I’ve been going to Washington twice a year to serve as a grant reviewer for federal research funding through the Veterans Administration (VA).
I thought it might be heartening to hear about the process by which government agencies (VA, NIH, NSF, etc.) decide who gets federal research dollars. I contend that it brings out our best.
To be clear, this doesn’t counterbalance the horrible things being done in our names.
- People are still in cages.
- Systemic racism still pervades law enforcement and the legal system.
- Survivors of sexual abuse still observe that if their assailants are rich and powerful enough, justice will be slow, if it ever comes at all.
But this is a tiny piece of good news. It’s a reminder that governments are people (my friends), and that it is possible to build institutions based on ethical values.
Here goes: the process begins when research teams submit their applications. Each application represents several months of work by teams of researchers, built on decades of scholarship. Based on the topic, each application is assigned to a review section and 3-5 specific experts. My review section focuses on rehabilitation for heart disease, diabetes, stroke, osteoarthritis, amputation, etc.
As the “experts”, we pore over the applications, focusing on scientific rigor, the importance of the problem they’re trying to address, and the likelihood that the research will improve treatment outcomes or lead to new technologies.
Then, in February and August, we gather in nondescript conference rooms in DC and argue it out. We take it seriously. The end result is a set of detailed critical reviews that inform funding decisions and are also returned to the researchers. Only 10-20% of grants are funded, so the feedback helps researchers decide whether to resubmit or move on to another idea.
The whole process is built on principles of transparency, accountability, and competition, with strict guidelines to limit bias and conflicts of interest. Every session begins with a VA administrator reiterating the mission of the review process: that we are contributing to the distribution of the people’s money, and that we are gathered to act on behalf of our fellow citizens to decide how to use some of our collective wealth. It’s a reminder that we are all in this together.
I’ve heard this half a dozen times, and it still gets to me. It provides a ray of hope in this dark historical moment. As I hear it, I recognize that I will probably go back to cursing at the news, but it’s a moment of hope, and that’s valuable.
If we get through our current situation with our democracy intact, we will need to rebuild many of our institutions, and to reestablish the ethical foundations on which they’re based.
So if you also find yourself screaming at your laptop, try to remember that in tiny puddles deep within “The Swamp”, there are dedicated, talented people working to bring out the best.
NOTE: The ideas and opinions in this post do not necessarily express the thoughts or opinions of the Ethical Society of St. Louis or its leadership.
Good morning, my name is Susan Hurt, and I’m fairly new to the Ethical Society. Prior to becoming a psychiatrist, I was introduced to the theories of Erik Erikson in college, and this is what I want to talk about today.
Erik Erikson was a developmental psychologist who maintained that personality develops through eight stages of psychosocial development, beginning in infancy and lasting throughout adulthood.
Based on Erikson’s ideas, the field of psychology re-conceptualized the way that the later periods of life are viewed. They are now considered active and significant times of personal growth.
I’m going to skip over the first 6 stages of development that Erikson described and review the 2 later adult stages, as this is my area of focus today.
Generativity vs. Stagnation is the seventh stage of Erik Erikson’s theory. This stage takes place during ages 40 to 65 yrs.
Generativity refers to “making your mark” on the world through creating or nurturing things that will outlast you as an individual.
Examples include raising children, productive work, and involvement in community organizations.
Those who fail to contribute during these years may feel unproductive, disconnected, or uninvolved with their community – don’t worry, there’s hope if you have difficulty in this stage.
Ego Integrity vs. Despair is the eighth and final stage and begins at age 65.
It is during this time that people slow down, contemplate their accomplishments, and develop integrity if they believe that they have led a successful life.
If individuals see their lives as unproductive or feel guilt about their past, they may be dissatisfied with their lives and despair.
Erik Erikson’s wife Joan had much to say about stage 8 when she was in her nineties.
In particular, Joan stressed the great value of the elderly given their wisdom and the considerable contributions they can make when successfully integrated into society. She worried that the elderly today are too much cut off from others, and that this marginalization is harmful to everyone.
Now, I wanted to talk about Erik Erikson today because he addresses all ages, including adults of advancing years. And here at the Ethical Society we have this month’s theme as “Bring out your Best.” Well, I think it’s a great theme, because we don’t ever want to lose sight of the fact that we the have the best – those with wisdom and memory – right here amongst us.
It’s important also to realize that, according to Erikson, if any of his 8 life stages are not completed successfully during its specified age range, it can be completed successfully at a later time. It just takes a supportive community – which we have right here – and the inspiration that personal growth is always possible. I think this gives hope to us all.
NOTE: The ideas and opinions in this post do not necessarily express the thoughts or opinions of the Ethical Society of St. Louis or its leadership.
Women in Focus St. Louis presents “Beauty All Around” at the Ethical Society gallery, with the opening July 21 from 12:30 – 2:30 p.m. The show remains on display and available for viewing through Friday, August 30.
As the saying goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Confucius said “Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it”. Photographers can experience a state of meditation as they move through the world behind the lens of their cameras. And, photographers can share a vision of the world with the viewer by capturing a single, solitary moment in time. We always hope that vision will touch your heart and open your eyes to a different way of seeing and perceiving. Ultimately, art can make the world itself a more beautiful place. We hope you enjoy the beauty we share with you in this show.
Women in Focus is a St. Louis branch of similar organizations in Atlanta, Chicago and Las Vegas. As our founder traveled and lived in these different cities, she gathered groups of women together to share their passion for photography. We claim as our mission joining together to support and promote photography, as well as share in the camaraderie that comes from joining together as women to share our artistic visions.
There will be a reception for the photography group Women in Focus, July 21 from 12:30-2:30 p.m. in the Foyer. The Ethical Society will exhibit some of the group’s work from July 21 through August 30.
A Post-Platform Reflection by Adrien Gojko
Kate Lovelady’s Platform address of June 16, dubbed “The Challenges of Diversity,” covered quite a bit of ground.
She went over how “diversity is essential to ethical living.” Explaining in a candid yet kind manner, she discussed how we’ve “moved beyond tolerating diversity” and into “appreciating” diversity and how it makes communities more interesting, more beautiful, and healthier.
She briefly brought up cultural relativism and the differing ideas surrounding it. In all honesty, I had to look up that term. My understanding is that cultural relativism is the “cure” to ethnocentrism.
Ethnocentrism, a term I’ve learned from taking University-level anthropology classes, is when you judge other cultures based only on your own experience. Essentially, it’s assuming your experience is the “default” and all others are “incorrect.”
Cultural relativism is all about trying your best to emphasize with people of other cultures by using your imagination muscles to envision things through their lenses. It means looking into other people’s worlds through the context of their experiences.
Then, she brought up the problem of civil, human, and minority rights briefly, before she announced that she wanted to focus on the issue of diversity within the Ethical Society itself.
I, personally, have many feelings about diversity within ethical culture (or, frankly, the lack thereof), so this statement certainly piqued my interest. Kate said how ethical societies should reflect the world around us.
I definitely don’t always feel like ours does. I don’t feel I get much variety of people from our Society – especially people like me (queer, disabled). I want to see that change and to help that process.
Kate made it a point to bring up our Society’s first annual report card on diversity and inclusion was given by the Diversity and Inclusion Committee of the Ethical Society reported how “we still have a lot of work to do.”
I hate to say that I definitely agree. I’m hoping to help bring a change in our Society and in diversifying our Platform and Forum speakers and membership.
She said that we need to learn to recognize the form(s) of privilege that we have, and how ours and others’ lack thereof effects our dynamics with each other.
Kate brought up that she strongly advised looking up information about a culture before grilling someone of that culture about their opinions. If this had been at a rowdy church setting, I might have gotten up out of my seat right there and shouted, “AMEN, AMEN!!”
She went over how important and wonderful diversity is for us, and for others. How we need each other, but also to respect the dignity of others too.
A great point brought up was how a lot of the older white people tend to ask where the younger folx and diversity are – and why they aren’t bringing in their own friends of younger ages and diverse races, sexualities, genders, etc.
As much as I love the community here at the Ethical Society of St. Louis, I will be the first to admit I’ve felt hurt sometimes by some members here. I’m fully aware that the actions of a few don’t reflect the whole, but I think saying this could be a good learning opportunity for many.
I use they/them pronouns and identify as gender-fluid. I make it a point to correct most of y’all when you use the incorrect pronouns. Most of the time, it’s okay and we move on. However, some of you have approached me and turned it into an intellectual debate or asked me about the grammar.
I’m not an English major nor an on-call queer rights activist. It isn’t my job to educate every member of the Ethical Society about how gender and language are social constructs. I wouldn’t mind, except it keeps repeating and becomes tiring.
I’m not a case study. I’m a human being and want to be treated as such. The reason we’re all here is to cultivate a community. Please, I don’t want to feel like an outsider anymore. I want to be treated as human too – by EVERYONE in our community.
I’m sure there are other minorities that come into our Society and feel the same way. I want to watch our Society flourish with fresh ideas, being mentored by those of you that have been around for awhile.
My call of action to you is to ask yourself this one question before talking to someone – a guest or member – that is different from you: ‘Will what I’m about to say make this person feel subhuman?’
When in doubt, take Kate’s suggestion from the Platform and try Google.
Adrein Gojko is a social media intern for the Ethical Society of St. Louis.
These words were offered by our Outreach Director, James Croft, to close the Interfaith Service at PrideFest St. Louis 2019. Photo by Philip Dietch.
We Humanists don’t have scriptures, but we have poems. This poem, A Call to the Living, was written by Algernon Black, who was once leader of the Ethical Society in New York.
This is a call to the living,
To those who refuse to make peace with evil,
With the suffering and the waste of the world.
This is a call to the human,
Not the perfect,
To those who know their own prejudices,
Who have no intention
Of becoming prisoners of their own limitations.
This is a call to those who remember the dreams of their youth,
Who know what it means to share food and shelter,
The care of children and those who are troubled,
To reach beyond barriers of the past
Bringing people to communion.
This is a call
To the never ending spirit
Of the common person,
Our essential decency
Our integrity beyond all education and wealth,
Our unending capacity to suffer and endure,
To face death and destruction
And to rise again
And build from the ruins of life.
This is the greatest call of all
The call to a faith in people.
I don’t know about you, but my faith in people has been shaken recently. Seeing the vicious divisions within our own movement which have surfaced over the past few weeks, it certainly feels to me like we are becoming prisoners of our own limitations. This week, for the first time since I came out almost ten years ago, I considered skipping Pride. I feel disappointed in my own community, and angry, and it doesn’t make me feel very proud.
Yet I look out across this crows – and I see children dancing to the music up front, people clamoring to hear our words from outside the barriers, members of every part of our LGBTQIA+ community – I am reminded: I am still alive. I am still morally and spiritually alive, and I refuse to make peace with evil. And I think that is true of many of us here today. Is that you? Do you refuse to make peace with evil? I thought so.
We’re here at PrideFest – at this service so very early in the morning on a Pride weekend, on the 50th anniversary of Stonewall – because we understand that Pride is more than a party. Pride is more than a celebration. Pride is the assertion of our dignity in the face of a challenging world, a declaration that despite our suffering despite the prejudice, despite what the world has done to us we are still alive.
That means we have to keep on living. We must keep living into the challenges we face as a community. And I think our challenge today is to do precisely what Algernon Black’s poem calls us to do: we must remember the dreams of our movement’s youth. Because whatever the people were fighting for at Stonewall I guarantee it wasn’t the police marching in the Pride Parade and our trans community retiring from it. It wasn’t corporations who give money to PrideFest one day, and then to homophobic politicians the next. It wasn’t our community at each other’s throats because we are not listening to the most marginalized among us.
That’s not why Marsha P. Johnson, on the second day of the Stonewall riots, climb up a lamppost and dropped a handbag – filled with a brick! – onto a cop car’s windshield. That’s not why homeless street kids – kids who had nothing – risked everything in a running battle with police through the streets of New York, fighting to protect the only place that felt like home. That’s not why Harvey Milk was shot, in an office in San Francisco, for proclaiming a message of hope.
We must remember the dreams of our youth.
So my call to the LGBTQIA+ community of St. Louis is to rise again. To rise from the death and destruction of our time – young people becoming less accepting of LGBTQIA+ folks than previous generations; a surge in hate crimes across the nation; a political establishment taking away rights we fought so hard to win – and build from these ruins something new. That would be a Pride we could all be proud of.
The core value of the Ethical Society of St. Louis, as a Humanist congregation, is the worth and dignity of every person. Our community exists to help create a world in which the inherent dignity of everyone is recognized and respected. This is why the Ethical Society has supported the equal dignity of LGBTQIA+ people for decades: long before other congregations were “open and affirming,” the Ethical Movement was loudly proclaiming that lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and all other queer people should be treated with respect and afforded equal civil rights. This is why our movement has trained and hired openly queer clergy leaders and staff for decades: indeed, of the current staff of the Ethical Society of St. Louis, half are members of the LGBTQIA+ community including our two Leaders! This is why Kate Lovelady, our senior clergy person, for many years refused to perform marriage ceremonies while the law discriminated against same sex couples. This is why we have marched in the Pride Parade for many years, proudly carrying our banner and supporting our LGBTQIA+ members.
And this is why it was so difficult when we decided not to march in the Pride Parade this year, following the decision to readmit armed and uniformed police officers after they had agreed to march out of uniform instead. Since I have received many questions from our members and from the broader community about this decision, I’d like to take a moment to share some of the context, to explain why we came to the decision we made.
Over the past few years there has been increasing tension between the LGBTQIA+ community (particularly transgender people and queer people of color) in St. Louis and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department. Numerous incidents have led to a total breakdown of trust, including but not limited to:
- The fatal shooting, and subsequent misgendering, of black transgender woman Kiwi Herring by STLMPD in 2017, under contested circumstances
- The recent revelations regarding the social media posts of a number of STLMPD officers, which display deep racism and contempt for protesters, as well as a desire to inflict violence on citizens
- The arrest by police of two LGBTQIA+ activists at Pridefest last year, despite the protestations of the LGBTQIA+ community
- The breaking of an agreement by police not to march in last year’s parade (uniformed officers took the head of the parade without the permission of the Pride Board and against their explicit commitment not to march at the community’s request)
- The repeated unprofessional behavior of the St. Louis Police Officers Association, which has become increasingly political and partisan, targeting citizens and politicians in an extremely personal and aggressive manner on their social media platforms
- The ongoing tension between LGBTQIA+ people of color and the STLMPD, which erupted after the killing of Michael Brown in 2014, but which has been festering for a long time
Many local LGBTQIA+ activists feel that these incidents are demonstrative of profound problems within the STLMPD – problems which threaten the liberty and safety not only of LGBTQIA+ people, but of all residents in the city. These concerns are shared by groups such as the ACLU, which sued the city police in 2017 over its unconstitutional behavior. Jeffrey Mittman, Executive Director of the ACLU of Missouri wrote in 2018:
“Officers used vague and perplexing ordinances to demand arbitrarily that free speech activity end when they decided. They used pepper spray and tear gas to punish people they disagreed with. And they destroyed phones and cameras and deleted files to avoid being caught engaging in such nefarious acts…A large group of St. Louis police officers wielding batons provocatively chanted, “Whose streets? Our streets!” the night of the infamous kettling incident. Earlier, they made unlawful arrests and used illegal force against protesters.”
This is not, then, a problem of a “few bad apples” poisoning the reputation of an otherwise fine police force. Rather, it is indicative of a deeply broken culture of policing, in which the police see portions of the community – including members of the LGBTQIA+ community – as an enemy to be violently subdued rather than citizens to be served. This is entirely incompatible with the core values of the Ethical Society. The STLMPD is failing in its duty to recognize and respect the equal dignity of the citizens who employ them, meting out “justice” in a highly politicized manner based on their own judgment regarding who is worthy of protection and who is not. I believe it is our ethical duty, as those who seek to stand for the dignity of all people, to speak out when one of our most important and powerful social institutions so spectacularly loses its way.
This, I imagine, is part of the reason why a number of our LGBTQIA+ members expressed deep concern when the police reneged on their agreement not to march in uniform in this year’s pride parade. To be clear: the Chief of Police, the Mayor, and the Pride Board had come to an agreementthat, in recognition of the 50th anniversary of Stonewall (an uprising against police brutality which Pride Parades commemorate), police would march in the parade without uniform and without firearms. This agreement coincided with the decision by the Pride Board to make the Metro Trans Umbrella Group (a group representing the trans and gender non-conforming residents of the St. Louis Metro area) the Grand Marshal of the Parade. MTUG agreed to march on the condition that police would not be in uniform, due to the continued harassment faced by trans people at the hands of the police, and the many problems listed above. Less than two weeks before the Parade, the police, Mayor, and Pride Board broke that agreement, betraying the trans community’s trust and leaving MTUG in the lurch. This led to a number of Ethical Society members requesting that we withdraw from participation in PrideFest entirely: they feel betrayed, angry, and unsafe, and they no longer wished us to be present.
However, I was aware that likely not every LGBTQIA+ member of the Ethical Society likely shared those concerns, so instead of making a decision based only on the feelings of those who had contacted me, I decided to ask our LGBTQIA+ members to discuss our options in an open forum where they could air their views. We had that meeting on Sunday, and on the basis of this meeting, the Ethical Society decided that we will 1) not pull out of PrideFest entirely, but rather maintain an institutional presence at PrideFest, keeping our table and participating in the interfaith service; 2) invite our members to march, instead of in the parade downtown, in a separate march organized by the trans members of our community on Friday evening; and 3) encourage our members to march with other organizations in the Pride Parade if they wish.
The Ethical Society of course believes that police officers should be treated with dignity and respect as human beings. Everybody, of every profession and regardless of their actions, should be treated in accordance with their inherent worth and dignity. Police officers choose to do work which is difficult and often dangerous – I am particularly conscious of this in a week in which a North County officer was fatally shot in the line of duty. But asking police to march in a Pride Parade without their uniforms or weapons – essentially asking them to conform to a dress code – is not demeaning or a threat to their dignity. Police were still welcome to march as individuals, and were never (as was erroneously reported) banned from the parade. Community groups like Pride must be allowed to set the parameters for participation in their own events – otherwise communities lose control of the very events which are meant to celebrate them. Furthermore, the numerous deep-seated problems with the STLMPD – problems which the force has been incredibly slow to address, while resisting meaningful oversight – do not augur well for any future changes.
I feel for LGBTQIA+ police officers who may have been put in a challenging and unpleasant position. Sometimes, when we are called to make difficult moral judgments, it is not always easy to see how the dignity of all people involved can be respected – and I think this is one of those cases. But it is clear to me that the Ethical Society’s responsibility is to 1) respect the wishes of our LGBTQIA+ members and 2) to follow the lead of the people most affected by this issue. Today, the Metro Trans Umbrella Group announced that they have resigned as Grand Marshal for the parade, and instead will march only on Friday evening. The Ethical Society will be marching with them.
Good morning! My name is Krystal White, my pronouns are she/her, and I define myself as a READER! I read more than 100 books a year – I’ve read more than 80 so far in 2019 – and this should give perspective when I share that Trevor Noah’s autobiography, Born A Crime: Stories from a South African Childhood, was the best book I have read in the last three years. Will you raise your hand if you’ve read Born a Crime before? Each of these folks will tell you – the book is thought-provoking, emotionally touching, and hilarious! The End Racism Team encourages everyone to pick it up and give it a try this summer so that we all can discuss it together in August and September.
Diana A. Bose, St. Louis native, resident of University City, member of St. Louis Artists Guild, discovered painting quite by accident. Diana began with a drawing class at Forest Park Community College and now finds painting a way of life.
They say it’s not good to make generalizations about people but this morning I’m going to make an exception…
Most of us…
Most of us get plenty to eat every day.
Most of us don’t know what it’s like to have to decide between paying a utility bill and having food on the table.
Most of us don’t know what it feels like to try to fall asleep with an empty growling stomach and nothing to fill it.
Most of us…
are pretty privileged.
“The little girl needs a Mother,” my father wrote in his life story. My Mother died when I was six years old. My father, my two teen-age sisters, and the neighbors, more-or-less, took care of me. Realizing that I was growing up, my Dad began to look around for a suitable step-mother (and a suitable wife for him).
Don Beere grew up in an artistic household. His mother always had a painting in process and talked to her children about what she was doing. She worked in several mediums: oils, acrylics, watercolors and sculpting. She and six other artists ran a gallery. When he was a teenager in the early 1960s, she started the San Dieguito Art Guild in San Diego County. During those teenage years, Don accompanied her to art shows and art museums where she critiqued what they were viewing. At that time, Don had no interest in art but obviously absorbed her lessons. His sister, Susan Beere (www.susanbeere.com) also learned from their mother and has been a professional artist her whole life.
When he was in his 20s, Don unsuccessfully tried his hand at drawing and concluded he could never be an artist. However, in his 40s, Don discovered his love of photography, and, in particular, his eye for composition. Photography became a medium through which he could express his artistic bent. Other than what he learned from his mother, Don developed his skills naturalistically.
In the 1990s, while living in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan, Don’s photographs were juried into shows and were included in numerous local art shows. Don’s subject matter, then, was exclusively nature, and his love of nature comes through in those pieces. He later expanded his work to include other subject matter.
The thirty-two photographs displayed here fall into four groups: nature, abstract, “Reflections,” and other. Of note are the photographs titled “Reflections.” Don and his wife Carole were moving from Minneapolis in 2001. On an early, sunny morning in late July, she suggested he photograph the downtown area where they had lived for two years. Most of the photographs Don took that morning are reflections in the windows of the downtown skyscrapers, titled here as “Reflections.” [Commentary about these photos is linked to specific pieces.] This series, which actually includes more than forty photographs, marked a significant transition in Don’s approach to photography. He had already been moving toward abstract photography and this series solidified that change. “These photographs taught me the principles of abstract photography,” he says.
Don has a diverse academic background with bachelor’s degrees in physics and philosophy, a master’s degree in experimental psychology and a doctorate in clinical psychology. He was a psychology professor for 29 years at Central Michigan University where he trained doctoral students. As well, he had a clinical practice for 42 years, the last 13 years having a full-time solo practice. He was internationally known for his work on trauma, dissociation, and Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR). He retired in 2013, and he and his wife moved to St. Louis since their daughter lives here. Ironically, his mother, Mary-Sue (Susan) Shallcross Beere, was born in Kirkwood. In 2019, he will publish his first novel, Blue Sky, Deadly Secrets, a psychological thriller. He has been learning, practicing and teaching Tai Chi for 45 years and currently teaches at the Ethical Society. His website is www.donaldbeere.com
His artist reception will be Sunday, May 5, 12:30 to 2:30.
We all know we’re going to die…eventually. Most of us, most of the time, push the thought away. After all. we can do little about its inevitability. We try to eat healthy, exercise moderately (shrug), and sluff off stress. Besides, it seems a long way in the future…no matter how old we are.
But I was faced with an opportunity to come close.