By word and deed you are far from elitist all though you do fall into the traditional category as a more empowered member of socierty via your white male status. I also hold a marker as a citizen who was able to receive higher education.

I very much sympathise with your stance on this. It does sound as though there is a bias in evidence which goes against the ethos of liberal Friends. I see it as an all too typical and depressing trend, as Friends of a particular theological viewpoint seek to impose that on the rest of us, and to exclude those who hold a differing one. There seems little respect for diversity, or for the primacy of experience over dogma.

The “guidelines” seem unnecessarily presumptive, proscriptive and doctrinaire, and are not reflective of the practice of Friends gatherings, in my own experience. Reading them, if they did not contain the word Friends, then it would be hard to recognise them as referring to a Friend’s gathering, and not to a conservative, evangelical denomination. It causes me some concern, even distress, to see American Friends going down this road.

Young Quaker, What I am doing is learning about my own internalized classism, about social class differences, and about how those differences impact our institutions as well as the different social class groups.

Blessings,
Liz Opp, The Good Raised Up

I remember WGYF had some similar type of guidelines and I thought they were great for creating healthy community.

Again, just my insights, from the viewpoint of a YAF who wishes she could be at this conference!

Different cultures have different things that get under their craw. To avoid them for a few days in order to have a cross-Quaker conversation that wouldn’t happen otherwise seems like a small concession. Is getting upset about dress silly? Maybe. But so is boycotting events because one can’t be gracious enough to respect the foibles of those who also want to attend. The FGC kids will get plenty of chances to push the boundaries of nakedness and public sexuality a few weeks later at Gathering.

I assume the no-sex guideline is partly a way to dodge the same-sex question for four days. This is simply a compromise to get everyone to the table. I’m also over the age line, but I’d be willing to do that for a few days for a chance at a conference like this (said as straight white male w/all the civil & religious privileges of married status).

I went to Great Plains Yearly Meeting a few years ago (they’re a co-sponsor of this) and was touched by how they found ways to compromise around the serious issues which divided them. It would have been easy for any one of them to don their righteous mantle, demand purity and leave–some meetings and individuals apparently did. But there was a core than genuinely wanted to come together into this yearly meeting community. Some of the compromises were incredibly silly. They didn’t really make logical sense. No one was entirely happy. But by insisting on some things and conceding on others they were able to show they were able to work together. I saw love in that room–real love, that kind of noble christian love that’s always talked about but too rarely in evidence.

ps: I think I can speak for Friends across the theological spectrum when I say I hope you don’t post any pictures of you wearing speedos at Bowling Green this year. But then maybe you could have a fundraiser: FGC Friends have to donate a set amount of dollars or you will spend the week walking around campus in a tank top, speedos and flip-flops.

Chuckfager replies: Yeah, there’s always compromises to be made. But there are also barriers and lines. I’ve walked out of some gatherings rather than continue giving passive-approval-by-presence of stuff that was just too much, while hundreds of others lapped it up. And like the Good Book says, (Ecclesiastes 3:5), there’s a “time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together.” The YAFs have made their call about it, and it’s their event. Still makes me queasy; looks more like a time to cast away those stones.

As for the rest — I thought wearing a speedo was usually done in the singular? And if I thought anybody at Bowling Green would give a hoot, or a buck, I’d go for the speedo/flip-flops/tank top getup in a minute, to raise money for Haitian relief and antiwar work. (Actually, for the sake of truth, I believe I have traipsed around a few gatherings in flip-flops; hasn’t earned a dime for any cause yet . . . .)

But maybe it could be done less expensively, if we didn’t (as a group) share the monetary/status values of The World so completely & unquestioningly.

Back before G Fox there was this Jewish guy who said, “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” As I read it, you seem to be saying: “Our heart has always leaned toward Mammon; but we’ve been good enough to skim off some of our treasure for the care of the Poor, so that’s okay. This is just the way we are; get used to it!”

It reminds me of a movie line Anne Curo liked: “Honey, Jesus loves you just the way you are. He loves you too much to let you stay that way.” We do love the Friends, just the way we are– but if we could stay this way, the world would certainly rot and take us with it.

Money is addictive and causes brain damage; it doesn’t even take much of it to have that effect. It can work that way even with an unselfish desire like wanting to make sure one’s Meeting won’t run out of funds. It isn’t just a question of wanting security; it’s a question of “Where does security come from?” We’ve rejected, overall, the notion that security comes from having more, bigger guns than other people… but have we caught on, yet, that the only true security lies in Whom we know?

Or, as a well-known meetinghouse painter once said: “Criticize by creating.”