Breaking the Spell: Rethinking queer community

[lettertodaddy]

I'm thinking that my contribution here is adding fuel to a fire, and isn't constructive. I apologize. I'll bow out. If you want to continue the conversation, I'm happy to do so via private message.

[ScandalAndy]

Originally Posted by lettertodaddy

I'm thinking that my contribution here is adding fuel to a fire, and isn't constructive. I apologize. I'll bow out. If you want to continue the conversation, I'm happy to do so via private message.

I don't see your posts as inflammatory, did I miss something? I thought there was constructive dialogue going on. If you bow out, how will I learn from the conversation?

[lettertodaddy]

Originally Posted by ScandalAndy

I don't see your posts as inflammatory, did I miss something? I thought there was constructive dialogue going on. If you bow out, how will I learn from the conversation?

I'm conscious - maybe too conscious - of causing offense where none is meant. I don't want to do that. And this particular issue is one that is deeply and intensely personal for some. I don't want to give the impression that I am not an ally.

[Slater]

A quick thought on assimilation vs. radicalization ... I don't really see it as an either/or. I think both have a role to play and they can complement each other, as long as there are at least some common goals or outcomes.

My personal frame of reference for this is my activity in Queer Nation in the early 1990s. Some people in the gay community complained that we were too radical, too marginal, but in a conversation I had with a lesbian who had just become Seattle's first openly gay city council member, she pointed out that without QN, she would be the fringe, the radical edge. But with us out there, pushing boundaries, she suddenly looked more mainstream to people. The combination helped push the center, if you will, helped reframe the concept of normal.

Actually the group doing this really effectively right now is the right wing. With the Tea Partiers out there moving the radical edge beyond the bounds of sanity, the "center" of the Republican party suddenly seems more mainstream, despite the fact that they are so conservative that many Nixon-era policies would be considered practically leftist by today's Republican standards.

[lettertodaddy]

Originally Posted by Slater

A quick thought on assimilation vs. radicalization ... I don't really see it as an either/or. I think both have a role to play and they can complement each other, as long as there are at least some common goals or outcomes.

Agreed. I'm rather more in favor of a both/and approach. It's the common goals idea that gets tricky.

[Toughy]

Urvashi Vaid is one of my heroines. If you have not read her book Virtual Equality I highly highly recommend it. She has a website if you want to read more of her thoughts.

Here is a quote from a speech given Aug 16, 2010 titled Beyond The Wedding Ring: LGBT Issues in the Age of Obama

Fifteen years ago I wrote a book that described the path we had chosen of working for civil and political rights as a path that was leading us to Virtual Equality — a state of partial and uneven equality that is very far from the full human rights that we seek. I still agree with that diagnosis. Until LGBT people confront and challenge the moral opposition to gayness, until gay activists demand and command the respect of straight families, colleagues and friends, until LGBT people come out and claim their rightful place everywhere, until we stop believing those who defame, denigrate and deny our humanity and goodness – LGBT people and the LGBT social justice movement will fall short of being the transformative force it represents.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Originally Posted by Slater

Actually the group doing this really effectively right now is the right wing. With the Tea Partiers out there moving the radical edge beyond the bounds of sanity, the "center" of the Republican party suddenly seems more mainstream, despite the fact that they are so conservative that many Nixon-era policies would be considered practically leftist by today's Republican standards.

that is a very, very important thing to point out.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Slater

A quick thought on assimilation vs. radicalization ... I don't really see it as an either/or. I think both have a role to play and they can complement each other, as long as there are at least some common goals or outcomes.

My personal frame of reference for this is my activity in Queer Nation in the early 1990s. Some people in the gay community complained that we were too radical, too marginal, but in a conversation I had with a lesbian who had just become Seattle's first openly gay city council member, she pointed out that without QN, she would be the fringe, the radical edge. But with us out there, pushing boundaries, she suddenly looked more mainstream to people. The combination helped push the center, if you will, helped reframe the concept of normal.

Actually the group doing this really effectively right now is the right wing. With the Tea Partiers out there moving the radical edge beyond the bounds of sanity, the "center" of the Republican party suddenly seems more mainstream, despite the fact that they are so conservative that many Nixon-era policies would be considered practically leftist by today's Republican standards.

I, too, was involved with QN in the 90s and, quite honestly, the me from 1993 would probably be absolutely aghast at the me from 2011. I too think that we need a radical edge. The point I was trying to make in my post is that if we should not look down our noses at those who choose to take the radical path because we should not look down our noses at people and that they do some good (and they do) we should not look down our noses at people who assimilate for much the same reasons. I believe that not only did my parents make my sister and I's life significantly easier even though that meant not being as 'authentically black' as the Black Power movement would have had them be, they made a *difference* because when we moved into the house I grew up in, no one would have sought my parents out for advice thinking that they were intelligent or wise or had anything of value to offer the neighborhood . When I left home, people were seeking my parents out because they had stopped being 'merely black' and had become pillars of the community. A resolution that probably surprised all of the long-term residents of the neighborhood.

I think I actually do some good even though I'm assimilated and even though I work for a multinational corporation and even though I live in the suburbs and drive an Audi. There I am, every day at work, this dreadlocked butch woman who is unapologetic in her love for her partner. There are some *seriously* conservative people at my workplace and I have had to learn to get along with them as they have had to learn to get along with me. I have rattled their cages by pretty much shooting all of their expectations of me as a black, butch lesbian into deep space. Whatever images they might have held of black women or butch women or lesbians generally, I defy almost all of them and that makes them think. I've already had one person--a rather conservative Christian--come to me to say that they think their daughter is a lesbian and if they are right, they would like me to talk to her because they want her to have something positive to shoot for. I think that's progress.

Cheers
Aj

[SecretAgentMa'am]

Originally Posted by Slater

A quick thought on assimilation vs. radicalization ... I don't really see it as an either/or. I think both have a role to play and they can complement each other, as long as there are at least some common goals or outcomes.

My personal frame of reference for this is my activity in Queer Nation in the early 1990s. Some people in the gay community complained that we were too radical, too marginal, but in a conversation I had with a lesbian who had just become Seattle's first openly gay city council member, she pointed out that without QN, she would be the fringe, the radical edge. But with us out there, pushing boundaries, she suddenly looked more mainstream to people. The combination helped push the center, if you will, helped reframe the concept of normal.

Actually the group doing this really effectively right now is the right wing. With the Tea Partiers out there moving the radical edge beyond the bounds of sanity, the "center" of the Republican party suddenly seems more mainstream, despite the fact that they are so conservative that many Nixon-era policies would be considered practically leftist by today's Republican standards.

This. Exactly. Neither end of the spectrum is wrong or "less than". Yes, groups like Queer Nation help make others seem more mainstream. At the same time, groups like the HRC are constantly being criticized for being too mainstream, too assimilationist, but those are the groups who can actually get in to have a conversation with a senator. Yes, we're pretty mainstream as queer couples go. And that's one of the reasons why we were able to make friends with the devout Christian couple across the street. People like us are the reason that they and a lot of people like them, all over the country, are realizing that gay people aren't a bunch of weirdos, that we're really just people, and we don't actually want anything that's unreasonable. We need both sides of that equation, the radical and the mainstream suburban, to make any real progress.

[The_Lady_Snow]

So what happens to the weirdos who are not mainstream? What exactly is mainstream? I'm trying to grasp. What makes a weirdo?

[weatherboi]

Feminism isn't mainstream and neither was Harvey Milk. He also influenced Dianne Weinstein a Senator of California. I am not a fan of mainstream politicians that live in the closet. I think our community should aim higher.

[Toughy]

Assimilation is not equality. Those of us who live in the burbs, white picket fence, either furry or non-furry kids are accepted (for the most part) ONLY because we look and act like our neighbors. As long as we look and act like our neighbors it's all good in the 'hood. They will even tolerate a suit and tie wearing butch to our faces, but inside that home they still think we are different and will do the 'why don't you get a real man' and 'she would be so pretty if she would just wear a dress and make-up' stuff. I doubt they would be so tolerant if they saw me come out in full leather, packing a big stiffy, with whips and chains attached to my chaps..........it would scare the bejesus out of them and they would clutch their children to their legs. They only tolerate us when we look and act like them on the surface.

And don't ever be fooled into thinking tolerance is a good thing. It's not. The good thing is acceptance. I'm not interested in being tolerated. I am interested in being recognized and accepted because I am a human being.

Tolerance is a false equality. Acceptance is full equality.

[Novelafemme]

Originally Posted by Toughy

Assimilation is not equality. Those of us who live in the burbs, white picket fence, either furry or non-furry kids are accepted (for the most part) ONLY because we look and act like our neighbors. As long as we look and act like our neighbors it's all good in the 'hood. They will even tolerate a suit and tie wearing butch to our faces, but inside that home they still think we are different and will do the 'why don't you get a real man' and 'she would be so pretty if she would just wear a dress and make-up' stuff. I doubt they would be so tolerant if they saw me come out in full leather, packing a big stiffy, with whips and chains attached to my chaps..........it would scare the bejesus out of them and they would clutch their children to their legs. They only tolerate us when we look and act like them on the surface.

And don't ever be fooled into thinking tolerance is a good thing. It's not. The good thing is acceptance. I'm not interested in being tolerated. I am interested in being recognized and accepted because I am a human being.

Tolerance is a false equality. Acceptance is full equality.

FUCK! YA!! AND AMEN!!!

[amiyesiam]

Originally Posted by Toughy

Assimilation is not equality. Those of us who live in the burbs, white picket fence, either furry or non-furry kids are accepted (for the most part) ONLY because we look and act like our neighbors. As long as we look and act like our neighbors it's all good in the 'hood. They will even tolerate a suit and tie wearing butch to our faces, but inside that home they still think we are different and will do the 'why don't you get a real man' and 'she would be so pretty if she would just wear a dress and make-up' stuff. I doubt they would be so tolerant if they saw me come out in full leather, packing a big stiffy, with whips and chains attached to my chaps..........it would scare the bejesus out of them and they would clutch their children to their legs. They only tolerate us when we look and act like them on the surface.

And don't ever be fooled into thinking tolerance is a good thing. It's not. The good thing is acceptance. I'm not interested in being tolerated. I am interested in being recognized and accepted because I am a human being.

Tolerance is a false equality. Acceptance is full equality.

Ya know Toughy I fully agree. Looking like you fit in is not the same as being accepted for who one really is.
But...........
reality is that if the straight couple everyone in the neighborhood adores and thinks of as "normal" were seen dressed as you described they would also be talked about, feared and people would question if it was safe to let the kids sleep over.
I guess for me, it is not about being accepted as gay, it is about being accepted as a human.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by amiyesiam

Ya know Toughy I fully agree. Looking like you fit in is not the same as being accepted for who one really is.
But...........
reality is that if the straight couple everyone in the neighborhood adores and thinks of as "normal" were seen dressed as you described they would also be talked about, feared and people would question if it was safe to let the kids sleep over.
I guess for me, it is not about being accepted as gay, it is about being accepted as a human.

I have a different take on that ami, bdsm straight couples have gatherings alllll the time their neighbors think that's adventurous, kinky, fun!!! Us... We're the weirdo perversts

[dreadgeek]

Toughy:

So what does acceptance look like? How do we know when we're equal? Since it's not a function of where we live, it can't be because we have a house in this or that neighborhood that isn't being egged, burnt to the ground or having a cross burnt on the lawn. Okay, so abode and location are no indication that we've made progress, got it. It almost certainly not where we are employed and/or where we are on the food chain. Even if the new CEO of Apple is gay (and the rumor mill is that he is) that's not enough so we can't use whether or not one can be employed as an out gay X so let's strike that. It's not whether or not people will talk to us civilly because they might be talking behind our backs. Check. Maybe we can tell by how we are treated in school? Probably not for much the same reasons as our living, employment and social situations aren't indicative.

So, since we have ruled out where one lives, what kinds of relations one has with one's neighbors, if one is treated equally in the workplace, what's left. How do we know that we are being treated equal?

I also have to say that there are generations of immigrants who might strenuously disagree with you that assimilation isn't equality. If assimilation is being able to live in the house one chooses without fear that the neighbors will make it clear that you stay in that house at your own risk, then assimilation is leads to equality. If assimilation is being to apply for a job and your only concerns about whether you will get the job is if you have the right skill set and your personality is a good match for the team, then that is a form of equality. If assimilation is being able to be in school and to have your work judged by criteria relevant to the field of study as opposed to, say, whether one is gay or black or what-have-you, then that, too, is a form of equality. We have a president who is only a shade or two darker than I am named Barack Obama because he and his wife (who is two or three shades darker than me) assimilated. Unless that black person is in entertainment every black figure you have heard of is assimilated to a greater or lesser degree. If they aren't, then you haven't heard of them.

Melissa Harris-Lacewell?Assimilated black woman. Eugene Robinson? Assimilated black man. Michael Eric Dyson? Assimilated black man. Mae Jamison? Assimilated black woman. Thurgood Marshall? Assimilated black man.

What does acceptance look like, Toughy?

Cheers
Aj

Originally Posted by Toughy

Assimilation is not equality. Those of us who live in the burbs, white picket fence, either furry or non-furry kids are accepted (for the most part) ONLY because we look and act like our neighbors. As long as we look and act like our neighbors it's all good in the 'hood. They will even tolerate a suit and tie wearing butch to our faces, but inside that home they still think we are different and will do the 'why don't you get a real man' and 'she would be so pretty if she would just wear a dress and make-up' stuff. I doubt they would be so tolerant if they saw me come out in full leather, packing a big stiffy, with whips and chains attached to my chaps..........it would scare the bejesus out of them and they would clutch their children to their legs. They only tolerate us when we look and act like them on the surface.

And don't ever be fooled into thinking tolerance is a good thing. It's not. The good thing is acceptance. I'm not interested in being tolerated. I am interested in being recognized and accepted because I am a human being.

Tolerance is a false equality. Acceptance is full equality.

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by Toughy

Assimilation is not equality. Those of us who live in the burbs, white picket fence, either furry or non-furry kids are accepted (for the most part) ONLY because we look and act like our neighbors. As long as we look and act like our neighbors it's all good in the 'hood. They will even tolerate a suit and tie wearing butch to our faces, but inside that home they still think we are different and will do the 'why don't you get a real man' and 'she would be so pretty if she would just wear a dress and make-up' stuff. I doubt they would be so tolerant if they saw me come out in full leather, packing a big stiffy, with whips and chains attached to my chaps..........it would scare the bejesus out of them and they would clutch their children to their legs. They only tolerate us when we look and act like them on the surface.

And don't ever be fooled into thinking tolerance is a good thing. It's not. The good thing is acceptance. I'm not interested in being tolerated. I am interested in being recognized and accepted because I am a human being.

Tolerance is a false equality. Acceptance is full equality.

I often agree with what you just wrote, Toughy. Sometimes I even say exactly this thing out loud. But then I think of my friends T and L. They run a track school where I instruct in exchange for free track time. T and L live in rural/suburban New Hampshire, are very devout Christians who homeschool their child, and they believe that the earth is a certain number of thousands of years old. (I'm not sure which ridiculous number that crowd settled upon.) I haven't replaced my own track bike yet, so T just supplied me with some of the most awesome machinery ever built so that I could have fun at the last two track days. He even let me ride his fire breathing Ducati 919 race bike. L wasn't there. She was busy volounteering in Uganda with an organisation that helps women that have been captured and used in all the usual ways in the war. She doesn't EVER proselytize. Neither does her husband. She does the work because she thinks it's the right thing to do. Let me repeat that. They NEVER proselytize.

When one half of the lesbian couple that always takes their track days came out to her as a transwoman, L merely squealed in astonishment and admiration, asking her how she got those amazing breasts! My late gf Caren used to drive me up to track day and hang out watching the fun. If you looked up bulldyke in the dictionary you would have found a picture of Caren, complete with flat top and plenty of tats. Caren was Ms NJ Leather, and we looked a LOT like leatherdykes to anyone who was paying attention. Plus, no Christian could miss the large Pentagram I always wear. They didn't care. No one cared. Everyone was too busy having fun riding bikes on the track. Really. T and L have always been as welcoming as if we were their fellow church members.

After Caren died everyone, including and especially T and L, were just as supportive as they would have been had we been anyone else. Later that year L asked me if she could do something that nearly made me burst into tears, and whenever I tell this story I'm in danger of misting up all over again. L asked me if she could pray for me to find a new girlfriend.

We're so sure, and with good reason, that those who fit T and L's profile would doubtless be deeply hostile to us. They homeschool their child, for Pete's sake! Those people couldn't possibly want me to find a new girlfriend, much less pray for such a thing to happen! Even though what Toughy wrote has been true in the past, and is usually still true, I think we need to make room for the idea that just as Aj's family changed her neighbours' outlook, we can do the same. And we can do it looking exactly as we look, and being ourselves even when that's not mainstream.

[imperfect_cupcake]

and, pardon me for saying, it looks like they might change some minds about how "people like T and L's Demographic" can be accepted and not just tolerated by their neighbours. It's a two way street, acceptance

that's a lovely true story, cheryl, thank you for sharing that <3

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow

So what happens to the weirdos who are not mainstream? What exactly is mainstream? I'm trying to grasp. What makes a weirdo?

Not sure. Not sure. Not sure. In that order.

Honestly, I'm not sure how to answer the first question because I'm not certain that I know what a weirdo is. I'm a nerd--as my signature and name show, I let my geek flag fly high and proud--is that mainstream? I would say no. My reading habits, my television preferences are not necessarily what I would call 'mainstream'. Even my choices of recreation--I am a player in one D&D game and I'm the DM in another, for instance--aren't mainstream. So am I a weirdo or am I mainstream?

Do people in the mainstream get all excited because there's some new book on, for instance, the ongoing battle between string theorists and proponents of loop-quantum gravity? Do people in the mainstream own *multiple* copies--in different formats--of just about every word Terry Pratchett has ever written? Do people in the mainstream have a shower curtain that is the periodic table of elements and a poster showing the entire electromagnetic spectrum in the same room as a poster of Audre Lorde and another showing the entire history of the Universe as a single year?

Are the favorite tee-shirts of someone in the mainstream ones that read:

98% Chimp
Come to the Dark Side, we have cookies.
Stand Back, I'm going to try Science!
May the Mass Times Acceleration be with you


I think mainstream and weirdo are rather nebulous terms. To the woman I was in 1991, I would probably appear horribly mainstream (I would still most likely have wanted the toys and would've thought the EMF poster insanely great and would have done just about anything for the tee shirts while feeling guilty for doing so). To most of the suits (read that as our marketing, sales and legal staff) at my employer I look so far beyond the mainstream that I am at the outer edge of what many of them consider to be human behavior!

Do *I* think I'm in the mainstream? No, for all of the reasons above. Would someone who is more radical than me think I'm mainstream? Probably not and might even put me somewhere in the neighborhood of, say, Dick Cheney on the scale of acceptability.

Cheers
Aj

[The_Lady_Snow]

Thank you Aj I'm finding my brain grabs certain words so I need to read stuff more than once.