After #IamCharlie - I declare#Imgay - The Mercury

In the wake of the US gay club shooting, we should make a greater effort to be more empathetic than sympathetic, writes Fikile-Ntsikelelo Moya.


Durban - On Monday I posted the following on my Facebook wall: “In the wake of the attack on Charlie Hebdo the world proclaimed that 'I’m Charlie' to show solidarity with the cartoonists.


“In that spirit and in the wake of the attacks on the Miami bar I declare #ImGay.


“If you spend too much time excited about this being a coming out, think carefully, you could be part of the problem.”


I had thought the last part of the post would be clear enough to not have to answer a possible obvious question. I was wrong. An inboxed message arrived asking if I was being sincere or being in sympathy with gay people.


My friend meant well, I am sure. He is that kind of person.


I had no doubt that the question was about being informed rather than to push me into a corner.


The question made me think of the many times we ask the questions, and indeed act in ways, that we think make us inclusive of others.


Then it struck me. We should work harder at not being inclusive. Yes, you read that correctly. We should be less inclusive.


For too long we have promoted the idea of being inclusive, of being more tolerant and more understanding of others who do not look like us or worship like us or dress like us - or fall in love in the same way as us.


In the process of making ourselves feel good about being as embracing as we are, we have forgotten that nobody placed our own narratives and prejudices at the pinnacle of human aspirations.


Nobody needs to see or feel the world like we do. At the heart of being inclusive is the haughty sentiment that we are the gold standard. But because we not just the lodestar, we also happen to have been blessed with hearts of gold, we are prepared to diminish ourselves to be at the levels of others who need us to make them feel that we like them despite their obvious imperfections.


Unlike the Miami bar killer, we will accept men who prefer kissing other men without them thinking they might drive us into a murderous rage.


We have given ourselves the role of the board that approves which shows of public affection are valid and which ones are not.


We see it as our role to proselytise the unbelievers and save believers from their fanciful fantasies.


If our hearts are in the right place, and I trust they are, we as individuals and as a society should try walking in the shoes of the others instead of telling them why they should be more like us. Instead of making them feel better about themselves in our presence, we should make the greater effort to be more empathetic than sympathetic.


We should take a step back and imagine how it would feel if we did not know that we are black or white, gay or straight, rich or poor, Western or global south, religious or atheist.


I sincerely believe that if we did not have that programming, we would seriously think about being the first to cast a stone at those we have defined as sinners.


But no. Ours is a narrative founded on being the good guy; the knight in shining armour saving the damsel in distress. We assume ourselves to be the biblical good Samaritan and see everyone else who does not see the world as we do as the hapless man left injured on the side of the road by bandits.


Like the Crusaders of the middle-ages and the missionaries to the new world, we have made it our business to bring light to the world; our mission to give the ungodly heathens Jesus or Muhammad or whatever religious figure we happen to believe in, as long as this saves them from their selves.


To return to my friend’s question, what does the answer do for one once they know the person’s sexual orientation? What are the chances of the question about a person’s sexual orientation being the one that clinches the prize on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?


Is not knowing me and what I stand for not enough for him to decide whether I am worthy of his friendship?


Why should my sexual orientation, whether I eat pork or where I stand on whether Eric Tinkler should continue as Orlando Pirates coach define me?


The answer is nothing. It is a pointless question meant to feed our prejudices rather than one that informs the asker in any meaningful way. It is a waste of time.


So if you are a praying person, perhaps the person who needs praying for the most is you, not the heathen you know nothing about. Pray that you are conscious of how holy hate and self-righteousness can make you the great harbinger of your neighbours’ dehumanisation.


* Fikile-Ntsikelelo Moya is the editor of The Mercury. Follow him on Twitter @fikelelom or email him: fikile.moya@inl.co.za


The Mercury