SA:
I think that the way forward has two parts. One part is public--spaces being open to people. The other part is personal--people holding themselves accountable. As a community (and here I'm talking about the queer community) I think we've focused on the former at the detriment to the latter. What I would LIKE to see is that we put some emphasis on the former but that is going to require breaking the spell that we cast on ourselves perhaps a quarter century ago--one manifestation of that spell is this idea that if you are a member of an oppressed group, your moral slate is not just wiped clean but remains forever a tabula rosa. This cannot continue because *until* we break that spell there can be no accountability.
Regardless of one's gender identity one should not be given a free pass. I would go further than that, though--much further. One cannot use one's gender identity (or kink or sexual orientation or race or ethnicity or religion, etc.) as an excuse to abandon feminist ideas. This means that if, for instance, a trans-woman claims that she could never have had male privilege because she never identified as a boy, we call bullshit on it. Because, in fact, OTHER people identified her as a boy and treated her as such. She might have felt survivor's guilt (which is how I experienced it) but she still had the male privilege. It is her task, as a woman *becoming* a woman--and Simone Beauvoir wisely said "one is not born a woman one becomes one--to be vigilant about male privilege. In the same way, trans-men don't get a free pass either. If a trans-man behaves in a way that is sexist, that does not take women seriously or acts in a manner consistent with throwing his male privilege around it simply should not matter whether that person lived everyday before that very day as a woman. What matters is how that person behaves.
Does that mean we cannot understand context? No. It means that in this minefield, there are costs. If we are going to have a community that errs on the side of openness (and I think we should strive for that) then we as individuals are going to have to err on the side of accountability, self-reflection and taking the hard path when called for. What does that look like? It looks like trying to have consistent standards of what is and is not considered racist, sexist, homophobic, or any other form of bigotry we might care to mention. That means that we abandon this idea that when a trans-man behaves in a sexist manner it isn't really sexism because he's a transman. It means taking the words that the individual in question may have just uttered and putting it in the mouth of some heterosexual white male and then asking the question of how we would take it. IF, as I suspect we would in most cases, we would call that man out on his sexism then we call ALL men out for the same behavior. All men. All men includes trans-men.
Is that fair? Yes, as a matter of fact, it is fair. Is it respectful? Actually, yes, it is in fact MORE respectful than what we've been doing. It is taking trans-men at their word that they are men. When my son was growing up, I tried to explain to him what I meant by 'when you grow up, I want you to be a good man'. One of the components of that was self-reflection and being accountable. I look at my trans-brothers and if I love and support them, I will think that they should be accountable. Why? Because they are men and part of how we designate a man from a boy--at least in the black community--is whether or not he is accountable. The same applies to our trans-sisters and for the same reasons.
I am talking about a very different kind of community than what we've built so far. I don't think we need tear it all down and start from scratch but what we have been bequeathed by our foremothers and forefathers is kind of a fixer-upper of a community. It's pretty, the lawn could use some work, definitely needs some new paint, some roofing, electrical work and it probably wouldn't hurt if we stripped and redid the hardwood floors while we're at it. Heart mentioned a community based less on identity and more on shared values and goals. I think that is a stronger basis upon which to build community and while I'm sure it has pitfalls of its own, it will certainly avoid the pitfalls that have brought us to this place.
What are those values? What are those goals? That is the question we have to ask ourselves. Back when I first came out, I recognized a weakness in the queer community. At the time I thought I might either be wrong or I might not have understood. As an older woman now, I realize that my instinct was right. What is that weakness? We lack generational transmission of our values and goals. Growing up as a black child, I was immersed in a set of values, goals and expectations that were handed down to me by my parents who received them from their parents who received them from their parents before them. It was automatic and just happened in a very organic fashion. The queer community, because the vast majority of us come to it in or near adulthood, has not yet developed a mechanism for transmitting those values, goals, expectations and lessons from one generation to another. If we are a community--as opposed to merely a temporary conglomeration of identity groups--then part of what a community does is transmit that which has been learned and that which is necessary.
We have the potential to do this, but first we're going to have to unlearn much that we thought we knew. We will have to break the spell and in doing so, move forward.
Cheers
Aj
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScandalAndy
I think I have a lot to learn from all of you here, there are plenty of people who have been fighting these battles long before me.
I still have trouble figuring out how to have a safe space for women while respecting everyone's gender identity. There MUST be a way to do it, but I'll be danged if I can figure it out. I think at the end of the day it will come down to sticking to your guns and repeating that it isn't about excluding, it's about making a safe space, and that the boundaries are there for protection. There will be other events that will not have as stringent of boundaries, but those that are strict should be respected instead of vilified.
Does that sound like othering? Is there a better way to go about delineating what is acceptable in a safe space without being exclusionary? Is there a good way to enforce rules about safe spaces without being vilified as a phobic person?
I think proud lesbians can coexist with proud transpeople. I am proud of my lesbian identity, but I am also proud to be a trans lover and trans ally. All of these things live together in me, so I cannot understand why I am struggling so much to find a way for them to coexist in our community as a whole.
|