22 January 2019

New York Magazine: The Gay Church

Most of the gay priests I spoke with have never experienced abuse in the church. Many had already come to terms with their sexual orientation before they entered the priesthood, but some wrestled with it in the seminary, and others later in life. “There is no typical experience,” Father Joe, as I’ll call him, told me. “At first I wondered if I were a fraud, because I thought, Well, am I just trying to escape into a life in which I don’t have to deal with my sexuality? But I had people in charge of me who challenged me to ask myself if this were authentic, and I felt that this was the life and work that God was calling me to. It’s an ongoing discernment.” Then there was a moment of grace. “I was working in a hospital at the height of the AIDS crisis. A nun said to me, ‘What do you want to tell these people? They’re active homosexuals, drug users.’ I said, ‘I would talk about God’s mercy and be with them as they are.’ It helped me understand how God could use me even though the church didn’t accept me.” [...]

The preponderance of gay men in the priesthood is, in fact, nothing new in the history of the church. For well over a millennium, it was commonplace, and though there were occasional denunciations of it, these were usually followed by papal inaction or indifference. For example, as the late historian John Boswell demonstrated in his groundbreaking, controversial book Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, a fourth-century Christian writer, John Chrysostom, attacked the leaders of the church for being too accepting of same-sex love and even sex: “Those very people who have been nourished by godly doctrine, who instruct others in what they ought and ought not to do … these do not consort with prostitutes as fearlessly as they do with young men … None is ashamed, no one blushes … the chaste seem to be the odd ones, and the disapproving the ones in error.” There was considerable Christian concern about sex in general — following the teaching of saints Paul and Augustine — but no consensus that homosexuality, if kept to intense mutual love and celibate friendship, was specifically problematic. [...]

Another pattern was externalized homophobia: What you hate in yourself but cannot face, you police and punish in others. It remains a fact that many of the most homophobic bishops and cardinals have been — and are — gay. Take the most powerful American cardinal of the 20th century, Cardinal Francis Spellman of New York, who died in 1967. He had an active gay sex life for years while being one of the most rigid upholders of orthodoxy. Monsignor Tony Anatrella, an advocate for conversion therapy consulted by the Vatican, was recently suspended for sexual abuse of other men. One of Europe’s senior cardinals, Keith O’Brien of Scotland, described homosexuality as a “moral degradation” and marriage equality as “madness.” Sure enough, he was eventually forced to resign and leave the country after being accused of abusive sexual relationships with four other priests. [...]

At some point you realize that this is, in the end, the bottom line. There is a deep and un-Christian cruelty at the heart of the church’s teaching, a bigotry profoundly at odds with the church’s own commitment to seeing every person as worthy of respect, deserving of protection, and made in the image of God. It’s based on a lie — a lie that the hierarchy knows is untrue, and a lie proven untrue by science and history and the church’s own experience. “The hierarchy is tying itself in knots in public over something it has already conceded in private,” Father Leo explained to me. The task, it seems to me, is not to rid the church of homosexuality, which is an integral part of the human mystery, but of hypocrisy, dishonesty, and dysfunction. Impossible? I admit to, at times, a crushing fatalism. But I also believe, as a Catholic, that nothing is impossible with God.

Aeon: Why symmetry gets really interesting when it is broken

It’s no coincidence that our Universe is naturally full of symmetry. The mirror symmetry of a stately home reflects the external form of many creatures, from butterflies to humans. At a deeper level, the very laws of the Universe are a consequence of its symmetries. An easy-to-state but profound example in the groundbreaking work of the German mathematician Emmy Noether is that the conservation laws that are ubiquitous in physics are in fact manifestations of the symmetries of the Universe. Energy is conserved, for instance, because the laws of physics are the same now as they were a millennium ago; momentum is conserved because they are the same here as they are on Pluto. Symmetry thus has the unusual distinction that it is fundamental both to the way the world works and to the extent to which we are capable of understanding it. [...]

If, by contrast, we want to represent or store new information, it follows that we need to find ways to break the symmetry in order to encode our data. If successive palings in the picket fence differed in some way – say, if each were painted either white or blue at random – then the symmetry (and your ability to draw the whole fence) would be lost. Replace white palings with zeroes and blue palings with ones, and we have a binary representation of a number, the basis of digital data storage and manipulation. [...]

Like materials design, the act of telling stories is about breaking patterns. In fairy tales, we’re likely to come across three bears, three pigs or three sons; in modern times, an enduring joke-pattern involves three protagonists (think ‘an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman walk into a bar’) while comedians, improvisers and scriptwriters speak of the ‘rule of three’. Why this obsession with the number three? The answer is simple: the first time, something happens; the second time, something similar happens, establishing a pattern; but the third time, something different happens, breaking the pattern. The first two of the king’s sons come to a sticky end, while the third slays the dragon, marries the princess, and lives happily ever after. There is nothing magical about the number three, but since a pattern has to have at least two elements, a series of three is the most efficient way of establishing a kind of symmetry in order to disrupt it.

CityLab: Alabama Can’t Make Birmingham Display Confederate Monument

Long before Donald Trump proclaimed that there were some “very fine people, on both sides” of the alt-racist eruption in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017, Alabama Lieutenant Governor R.M. Cunningham gave similar equivocations at the 1905 dedication ceremony for the Confederate Soldiers and Sailors Monument that was being installed in Birmingham’s Linn Park. Cunningham told the gathering that “the characterization of either side [of the Civil War] as rebels is false” because “both parties were loyalists and patriots.” The then-mayor of Birmingham Mel Drennen cosigned and said that his city’s new Confederate monument “memorialized … a cause that will ever remain fresh in the memories of our Southern people.” [...]

In 2017, Birmingham would join a wave of cities that decided Confederate monuments were no longer welcome, largely in response to the Charlottesville debacle. Birmingham’s solution was to wall off the monument with large planks of plywood, obscuring it from public view. However, also that year Alabama lawmakers passed the Alabama Heritage Preservation Act, which forbade Birmingham or any city in the state from removing or altering Confederate monuments that had stood for more than 40 years.[...]

Birmingham first began exploring taking down the monument in 2015, when then-Mayor William Bell asked the city’s attorneys and its parks and recreation board to investigate a legal path towards removal. It seemed like a safe time to do this given that Alabama’s then-Governor Robert Bentley had taken down Confederate flags from the state’s capitol grounds. However, the state legislature immediately began crafting legislation to ensure that other Confederate symbols would not meet the same fate. In May 2017, Bentley’s successor as governor, Kay Ivey, signed the Heritage Preservation Act into law. The act’s supporters intended it to obstruct Birmingham’s plans to obstruct the view of the Confederate monument in one of the city’s public parks. The city built the wall around it anyway, triggering the state’s lawsuit against the city. [...]

The judge affirmed Birmingham’s right to craft its own city narrative, something that has lately proved challenging for the “cradle of civil rights” that currently has one of the highest poverty rates in the nation. In 2016, when the city of Birmingham passed an ordinance to raise the minimum wage to $10.10, the Alabama legislature voted the following day to pre-empt and reverse the wage ordinance. (The city’s lawsuit against the state’s preemption is still pending). Meanwhile, Birmingham has been trying to futurize, or at least modernize its woeful public transit system in one of the few states that historically has not funded public transport. The state seems unwilling to allow the city to help its most oppressed residents, but a court has ruled that it must at least get out of the way of the city’s efforts to erase the symbols of that oppression.

Messy Nessy: Oh, just an Utterly Insane Ghost City of Fake French Chateaux

This is not Photoshop. I repeat, this is not Photohop. Ever heard of “duplitecture”? It’s the term that’s been coined to describe replica architecture which has been popping up all over China since the 1990s (and let’s not forget Las Vegas either), where iconic landmarks and entire towns are constructed using lower-quality building materials to clone centuries of European history in a matter of months. Except this isn’t China. The latest “Sim City” to join the duplitecture hall of insanity is courtesy of a developer in Turkey. This recent AFP photograph from December 2018 shows hundreds of faux Loire mini-castles which are part of the Sarot Group’s “Burj Al Babas” project, close to the town centre of Mudurnu in Turkey’s northwestern region. But you might also have noticed that it’s all looking eerily deserted…

Nestled deep in the picturesque mountain province of Bolu, midway between Ankara and Istanbul, seven-hundred and thirty near-identical turreted chateaux line the empty dirt tracks of Burj Al Babas, a surreal Sim City that’s been quietly sprouting here as early as 2011. The project is marketed to the super-rich, promising health & beauty centres, shopping malls, aqua parks, fast-food areas and game parks (ya know, to really stay authentic to the old French way).

A total of 350 “villas”, each built on 324 m2 plots, were snapped up by buyers from Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, who paid between $370,000 to $530,000 per property, intended to be kept as a second/ third or fourth homes. Presented in a similar style to Dubai’s “The World” or “Palm Islands”, it was all going well for this Disneylandish city of cloned castles until the developer went bankrupt late last year.

read the article and see the photos

FiveThirtyEight: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Wants To Raise Taxes On The Rich — And Americans Agree

A new poll from The Hill and Harris X found that 59 percent of registered voters supported imposing a 70 percent tax rate on every dollar over the 10 millionth a person earns in a year. (Tax rates that apply only to income over a certain threshold are called marginal tax rates.) The idea even received bipartisan support: 71 percent of Democrats, 60 percent of independents and 45 percent of Republicans said they were in favor. In contrast, the Republican overhaul of the tax law that President Trump signed in 2017 — which decreased the marginal tax rate from 39.6 percent to 37 percent on married couples earning over $600,000 — has far less public support. A September Gallup poll found that only 39 percent of Americans approved of it.

It’s perhaps not surprising that Americans would support higher taxes on top earners given that tax rates on high income brackets were once much higher than they are today. The top marginal tax rate was as high as 94 percent in the 1940s, and throughout the 1970s, Americans in the top income bracket (which in 1970 was $200,000 and above, or about $1.3 million in today’s money) were taxed at a 70 percent rate, according to the Tax Policy Center. It wasn’t until 1981, when Congress and President Ronald Reagan implemented one of the largest tax cuts since World War II, that the top marginal tax rate fell to 50 percent. Over the course of Reagan’s term, tax reforms eventually cut the top marginal tax rate down to 28 percent.

Wanting the wealthy to pay more in taxes isn’t a new idea to American politics either. According to a Gallup poll from 2016, since 1992, Americans have largely felt that upper-income earners don’t pay enough in taxes. For the last quarter century, a majority of Americans — between 55 percent and 77 percent — have believed that top earners pay too little. And a 2017 Ipsos/Reuters poll found that 3 in 4 Americans said that wealthier Americans should pay more in taxes.

IFLScience: Ancient Persians Recognized At Least Three Genders

A study of graves from a 3000-year-old Persian civilization suggests the people buried there did not hold to the rigid gender binary that is only just starting to break down. Indeed, the author argues, archaeological studies have been influenced by viewing both sex and gender through a western lens.[...]

Cifarelli analyzed their reports and found two clusters, buried with items that were probably considered male and female. However, some 20 percent of graves contained a mixture of male and female objects, implying either the people of Hasanlu believed in a third gender, or saw gender as more of a spectrum than a rigid dichotomy. Her theory is backed up by a golden bowl depicting a bearded person performing what is thought of as female roles. [...]

Cifarelli is not just challenging the idea that other cultures saw gender as a binary, but the way archaeologists categorize the sex of bodies. Incomplete bones have traditionally been identified as male or female based on whether the grave included a weapon or some more domestic item.