A number of congregants have spoken or written to me about the UU WORLD article on transgender issues that I discussed in my sermon last Sunday. Some expressed thanks that we are dealing with this controversy in an open and direct way. You have heard me say, more than once, that keeping questions and conversations about our identities “on top of the table” is the path to learning.

There were also folks who told me that they had read the WORLD article and did not understand what the problem was. I am so thankful for those questions because they model the ability and the willingness to ask difficult questions about sensitive topics. I heard trust in those questions…trust that those questions would not lead to criticism. I heard in those questions the real possibility for learning.

So, what was the problem with the article?

First, the problem was not with the author, who seemed to learn from the experience and certainly had no intention to harm.

One problem was the decision to publish the article when transgender leaders had asked that a different kind of article be published, an article told in the voices of transgender individuals, an article not “centered” on the discomfort of a cis-gender person.

Imagine if the article had been about race, but had included not one voice of a person of color. Imagine that the discomfort described was discomfort of a white author, rather than the harm people of color experience every day.

When we talk about centering the voices of those on the margins, listening to those voices is literally what we mean.

There were also mistakes of fact in the article that transgender voices would not have made.

The WORLD Editor has learned from this experience and issued a sincere apology. Click here.

On Sunday, I said that transgender voices are authoritative on these issues. I encourage you to read the long post by C.B. Beal (click here)
that deal with both the specific issues and the broader questions in a direct and a loving way.

After reading these responses, I encourage you to re-read the article itself, using these different lenses. I hope you will see not only the problems with the article but also how a different article could have helped move the conversation in healthier and more respectful ways.

On Sunday, I gave my pronouns (he, him, his) before I discussed the article. This is a new habit for many of us. It is still fairly new for me. Our Intern Minister Mira Mickiewicz has written a short, clear statement about the reasons for naming our pronouns that I also want to share with you. Click here.

We have more to learn and more work to do at First Unitarian. I mentioned our restroom signs on Sunday and we certainly do need a better approach to make our restrooms safe, welcoming and comfortable for all of us.

More importantly, I hope we can make the unfortunate decision to publish that article an opportunity for us all to learn and deepen our understanding of who we all are and how we can embody our values of respect and love in deeper ways.

Blessings,

Bill