Reclaiming the Privilege of Carrying Each Other
Some of you, I can confidently predict, don't like Bono or U2. In this you are wrong, but I acknowledge that this is a reality of the world we live in. Some people think that U2 and Bono are faux-deep and sappy, but that's because we live in a world where too many people are afraid of things that are actually deep and meaningful, and so armor themselves against the world by constantly taking an edgelord ironic stance. I love U2, and I love the song "One," as I have discussed before.
On last week's episode of the Inglorious Pasterds, the guys mentioned "One" in the context of the shootings in Las Vegas. In particular, they quoted the final chorus:
One love, one blood
One life, you have to do what you should
One life with each other
Sisters, brothers
One life, but we're not the same
We get to carry each other, carry each other
One
One
After hearing the Pasterds' podcast, I've been thinking about these lines for the last couple of weeks, and the word that jumps out at me is "get." We "get" to carry each other. Not "must" carry each other, not "should" carry each other--we "get" to carry each other. It is our privilege in our one life to help and support others as they go through their one life.
This week, the news here in the United States has been focused on movie producer and kingmaker Harvey Weinstein. He's is, from all accounts, a serial sexual abuser and harasser of women, and has been doing so for a very long time. In this, he joins a long line of remarkably similar people and similar stories--the current President of the United States for one, Bill Cosby for another. But, while the sexual abuse of women by men is the most common scenario, it is important to recognize that it is not the only scenario. Yesterday, Terry Crews, a 6'3" tall African-American former football player and actor discussed the time when he was groped by an unnamed Hollywood executive, in a story that is essentially identical to the ones told by women about Weinstein and all the rest. And if we expand the camera out, we have the stories of the sexual abuse of children, in the Catholic Church and by Penn State football, and by a host of unknown scenarios of the same type.
In each of those cases, the victims felt that if they spoke up, they would be ignored, or even punished, by the broader world. Or, in some cases, they did in fact speak up and were in fact ignored or punished by the broader world. Lots of people knew about Weinstein's behavior. Crews was molested at a public event. Joe Paterno knew what his defensive coordinator was doing. And no one did anything to stop the victimization.
And even in the cases where others don't know, they really do know. In the context of sexual assault allegations, there is a great deal of discussion about the importance of believing people, especially women, when they make accusations. That's definitely true so far as it goes, but my own sense is that most of the time when the people that say they don't believe the victim, they say that because that's the easy out. Deep down, especially if they are really pressed and forced to tell the truth, they know the accusations are true, or at least are probably true. They think those accusations are probably true, and they don't really care.
And that, to me, is the real question here--why? Some, surely, do so because they are cut from the same cloth--they are abusers of others, if not sexually then in some other manner, and they want to protect the shield and not throw stones in glass houses. But most, I think, ignore the abuse of others because they think it is not their problem. It's a product of a kind of lifestyle libertarianism--I take care of my problems, you take care of your problems, and never the twain shall meet. Sure, some people are explicitly within the ambit of your concern notwithstanding this lifestyle libertarianism--witness the performative statements that "you know, I have a daughter" and other invocations of family bonds. But, generally speaking, the baseline is that the abuse of other people is not our problem, and thus can be safely ignored.
That's right in one sense. It is not in fact our problem when people are abused. It may be our duty to act--it might be part and parcel of "doing what you should," as Bono says. But I don't even think that gets to the heart of the matter. No, it's not our problem and its not our duty--it's our privilege. It is our privilege to stand up for the people who are in a position in which they can't stand up for themselves. It is a privilege to be able to carry someone, especially someone we don't know, at a moment when they most need to be carried. That's a privilege, and maybe the greatest privilege that we have.
If you have ever been in that place, if you have ever had the opportunity to carry someone when they needed to be carried, you know what a privilege it really is. The process may not be easy; it may even be extremely hard and painful. But I have never regretted carrying someone when they needed to be carried.
The problem, though, is that we get seduced into looking at it as a problem and a burden as opposed to a privilege. Once you frame it that way, the cost-benefit analysis becomes completely skewed. Standing up for someone, stepping out in a circumstance where it might be uncomfortable or personally challenging, becomes a sacrifice with no appreciable corresponding benefit. If standing up for those who are abused, those who are marginalized, those who need help, is a problem, then by definition it is not a problem worth solving. At least by you. And so you won't do anything, you will keep quiet, you will not make waves. You will be a lifestyle libertarian, and it will make perfect sense for you to be so.
Like so much else, the solution to lifestyle libertarianism is to change one's paradigm, one's point of view. We--all of us--need to reclaim the privilege of carrying each other. If we believe that, if we embrace that down to our core, when we find ourselves in the circumstance where we have an opportunity to carry someone, we will do it, and we will do it with joy. Because Bono is right--it is a privilege, and it will bring us joy, even if the process of getting there might be tough. We will be happier, better, more fulfilled people if we step out and carry someone who finds themselves in a terrible situation and needs to be carried.
But we need to see it first. We need to reclaim the privilege. Otherwise, it is too easy to stay silent.
On last week's episode of the Inglorious Pasterds, the guys mentioned "One" in the context of the shootings in Las Vegas. In particular, they quoted the final chorus:
One love, one blood
One life, you have to do what you should
One life with each other
Sisters, brothers
One life, but we're not the same
We get to carry each other, carry each other
One
One
After hearing the Pasterds' podcast, I've been thinking about these lines for the last couple of weeks, and the word that jumps out at me is "get." We "get" to carry each other. Not "must" carry each other, not "should" carry each other--we "get" to carry each other. It is our privilege in our one life to help and support others as they go through their one life.
*******
This week, the news here in the United States has been focused on movie producer and kingmaker Harvey Weinstein. He's is, from all accounts, a serial sexual abuser and harasser of women, and has been doing so for a very long time. In this, he joins a long line of remarkably similar people and similar stories--the current President of the United States for one, Bill Cosby for another. But, while the sexual abuse of women by men is the most common scenario, it is important to recognize that it is not the only scenario. Yesterday, Terry Crews, a 6'3" tall African-American former football player and actor discussed the time when he was groped by an unnamed Hollywood executive, in a story that is essentially identical to the ones told by women about Weinstein and all the rest. And if we expand the camera out, we have the stories of the sexual abuse of children, in the Catholic Church and by Penn State football, and by a host of unknown scenarios of the same type.
In each of those cases, the victims felt that if they spoke up, they would be ignored, or even punished, by the broader world. Or, in some cases, they did in fact speak up and were in fact ignored or punished by the broader world. Lots of people knew about Weinstein's behavior. Crews was molested at a public event. Joe Paterno knew what his defensive coordinator was doing. And no one did anything to stop the victimization.
And even in the cases where others don't know, they really do know. In the context of sexual assault allegations, there is a great deal of discussion about the importance of believing people, especially women, when they make accusations. That's definitely true so far as it goes, but my own sense is that most of the time when the people that say they don't believe the victim, they say that because that's the easy out. Deep down, especially if they are really pressed and forced to tell the truth, they know the accusations are true, or at least are probably true. They think those accusations are probably true, and they don't really care.
And that, to me, is the real question here--why? Some, surely, do so because they are cut from the same cloth--they are abusers of others, if not sexually then in some other manner, and they want to protect the shield and not throw stones in glass houses. But most, I think, ignore the abuse of others because they think it is not their problem. It's a product of a kind of lifestyle libertarianism--I take care of my problems, you take care of your problems, and never the twain shall meet. Sure, some people are explicitly within the ambit of your concern notwithstanding this lifestyle libertarianism--witness the performative statements that "you know, I have a daughter" and other invocations of family bonds. But, generally speaking, the baseline is that the abuse of other people is not our problem, and thus can be safely ignored.
That's right in one sense. It is not in fact our problem when people are abused. It may be our duty to act--it might be part and parcel of "doing what you should," as Bono says. But I don't even think that gets to the heart of the matter. No, it's not our problem and its not our duty--it's our privilege. It is our privilege to stand up for the people who are in a position in which they can't stand up for themselves. It is a privilege to be able to carry someone, especially someone we don't know, at a moment when they most need to be carried. That's a privilege, and maybe the greatest privilege that we have.
If you have ever been in that place, if you have ever had the opportunity to carry someone when they needed to be carried, you know what a privilege it really is. The process may not be easy; it may even be extremely hard and painful. But I have never regretted carrying someone when they needed to be carried.
The problem, though, is that we get seduced into looking at it as a problem and a burden as opposed to a privilege. Once you frame it that way, the cost-benefit analysis becomes completely skewed. Standing up for someone, stepping out in a circumstance where it might be uncomfortable or personally challenging, becomes a sacrifice with no appreciable corresponding benefit. If standing up for those who are abused, those who are marginalized, those who need help, is a problem, then by definition it is not a problem worth solving. At least by you. And so you won't do anything, you will keep quiet, you will not make waves. You will be a lifestyle libertarian, and it will make perfect sense for you to be so.
Like so much else, the solution to lifestyle libertarianism is to change one's paradigm, one's point of view. We--all of us--need to reclaim the privilege of carrying each other. If we believe that, if we embrace that down to our core, when we find ourselves in the circumstance where we have an opportunity to carry someone, we will do it, and we will do it with joy. Because Bono is right--it is a privilege, and it will bring us joy, even if the process of getting there might be tough. We will be happier, better, more fulfilled people if we step out and carry someone who finds themselves in a terrible situation and needs to be carried.
But we need to see it first. We need to reclaim the privilege. Otherwise, it is too easy to stay silent.
Comments