(given at KICKS in Brookline, MA. With many thanks to the editors and idea-bouncers.)
In parshat Shelach Lecha, Moshe is told by God to send 12 men to scout the land of Canaan. They are asked to bring back a report of the land, the cities, the produce-- basically how liveable the land is and how difficult it will be to conquer.
When they begin reciting their report to Moshe, the text says “וַיְסַפְּרוּ-לוֹ, וַיֹּאמְרו”-- they narrated to him and said to him. Why both verbs, the narrating and the saying? Vayomru would have been sufficient on its own-- the scouts come back and tell over their report.
The root of the second verb, vay’sapru, “they narrated to him” is the same as the word sippur, story. They told him their story, beginning as follows: the land indeed is very fertile. But ten of the men famously add that the inhabitants are overwhelmingly mighty and there is no way to oust them. They end their sippur, their story, with “There we saw giants. We were like grasshoppers in our own eyes and so too we were in theirs.”
The men included both facts about the beauty and bounty of the land-- the vayomru part-- and also narrative sippur, the nuance of their terrified internal experience of these facts, colored by the fear of the unknown, the trauma of slavery, and lack of confidence in their newborn nation’s might. The power of their emotional state overtakes the more objective parts of their report and the Israelites cry out in fear, reacting to the inner experience that the men give over. God condemns the entire generation to die in the desert and the rest, as they say, is history.
This is the shabbat of Pride week. While the parties and parades may be the most well-known parts of the weekend, the real goal is to highlight, center, and celebrate LGBTQ people’s stories.
Recently with much media fanfare, Caitlyn Jenner came out as a transgender woman. With the title “Call Me Caitlyn” she told her truth to the public via Vanity Fair. In the days since, analyses and thoughts from others have been passed around online and in hardcopy. In listening to the conversations within the queer community, one point has been underscored for me: Caitlyn’s experience is anything but ordinary.
Each aspect of a person’s identity is impacted by the rest of the circumstances of their life. In identity conversations these days, this is referred to as intersectionality. The importance of intersectionality is that Caitlyn Jenner’s experience of her trans identity is different from the trans identity of a young Black woman in Chicago or an ashkenazi Jewish professor in New York City-- even though the outline of their story may be quite similar. While we can learn about common elements to trans women’s stories by reading books, watching documentaries, and staying up-to-date in the queer blogosphere, each individual’s story is uniquely theirs.
Most trans folks can only imagine a world where everyone’s transitions were showered with as much pride and positive attention as Caitlyn’s. Depending on the race, gender identity, gender presentation, wealth, ability, health status, geographic location, employment status, age, and religion of a given individual, trans people can lack basic physical safety in addition to reliable income, clothing that makes them feel confident, adequate mental and physical healthcare, and physical and financial access to said healthcare.
Taking pride in queer stories means, in my mind, coming together around commonalities that exist, and also raising up the aspects where each person’s experience differs. The details and interpretive lens specific to the individual are what gives the story meaning and complexity. Just as the scouts’ emotional content was crucial to fully understanding their view of the land of Canaan and set the Israelites on the trajectory they would travel for the next 38 years, so too the nuance of each queer person’s journey needs to be carefully listened to in order for its full depth to be appreciated.
After the spies’ report, Moshe does not turn to the men and say, “What are you talking about?! The land is great, the cities are totally manageable, you aren’t grasshoppers, get over it!” Even though their story angers God to the point of threatening to destroy the nation, and challenges the very purpose of Moshe’s exodus and desert leadership, he accepts that this is indeed what they experienced in their travels. We know from his own life story and from his relationship with God that Moshe is fully capable of questioning when it is appropriate. But had he questioned the scouts’ premise, he surely would not have changed the minds of 600,000 Israelites, only made himself obsolete and irrelevant to the leadership that they needed at that moment. Moshe’s willingness to accept their story is what allows him to remain the leader of the people through their drastic change of course.
The lesson for us from Moshe’s reaction is that, though stories might make us uncomfortable, it is upon us to accept that someone is telling us the truth about how the events unfolded for them.
Moshe did not question the scouts about their experiences after they were related. Sometimes, though, we want to know more than what has been told. It is important to check where that impulse to question is coming from, to make sure it is supporting and not interrogating. If it is from a place of curiosity and openness to learning, then questions can be productive and make people feel seen. We have to remember that the story belongs to the teller and they are gifting it to the listener. The listener is not entitled to any more information than what is freely offered.
As Moshe and the Israelites listened to the sippur of the scouts even when it was uncomfortable and caused them to reexamine their prior assumptions about what would happen next, so too may we recognize the importance of listening to and honoring the experiences of those around us in all their diversity.
