I’m sorry there
are no page numbers! There are no page numbers in the document!
In her work,
Sylvia Rivera discusses her entrance into the “queen” culture on the streets of
New York in the 1960’s. She walks us
through her childhood, beginning with the suicide of her mother when Rivera was
just three, growing up “without love” in her grandmother’s house because she
was born a boy instead of a girl, how she began to experiment with make-up and
sex in elementary and middle school and how she began to turn tricks on the
street with her uncle for money at age 10.
I found it
interesting how she uses such different and sometimes conflicting rhetoric when
talking about her early life experience as a young transwoman working on the
street. She says, “my grandmother used
to come home and it smelled like a French whorehouse, but that didn’t stop
me”. But also that she found the trick
turning, which she needed to do to survive, “disgusting...I used to go home and
scrub myself clean”. She talks about her
excessive drug use incredibly casually, but also discusses STAR’s priority in
keeping kids off the street and off of drugs. I think these dual narratives speak to
Rivera’s own personal mechanisms of coping and resistance.
I was also very
moved by Rivera’s analysis suggesting that the gay movement that began to
emerge in the 60s and 70s “did a lot of good just concentrating on the gay
issue. But they left the queens behind...And after all these years, the trans
community is still at the back of the bus”. This movement was clearly not for all
individuals with non-dominant sexual and gender identities. But out of this
exclusion came a grassroots, trans-specific organization, STAR, which Rivera
considers to have been an incredible gift to her community. Out of the exclusion came solidarity and an
identity-specific coalition.
1.
How
do Rivera’s statements about the ambivalence of the gay rights movement toward
trans* individuals and rights speak to the larger nature of the movement and
how does intersectionality play into this issue?
2.
How
do Rivera’s experiences with systems and structures make her experience and
needs different from those of individuals who are gay, and not trans?
3.
Has
the environment for trans* individuals improved since the times Rivera writes
about?
4.
What
are some present day examples of the concept of the oppressed becoming the
oppressors? And how can we, as social movers, prevent that from happening?
In response to the third question, I think there has been some improvement since 2002 (when the article was written), but not enough. I am speaking from a cis perspective, but trans* individuals are still subject to greater rates of discrimination and violence that their gay/lesbian/bi peers. Trans* people can still be fired in 32 states (including New York, where Rivera is writing from) simply because of their gender identity. And while gay rights groups, like the HRC, have apologized in recent years for trans-exclusion policies, that history still exists. The movement for marriage equality has taken the forefront in LGBT activism recently, but trans* individuals are still struggling for basic rights and recognition. Transmisogyny is still a very real problem. While improvements have been made in the past decade, the priorities, and recognition, of the LGBT* community still focus much more on the LGB section rather than trans* individuals.
ReplyDeleteTo expand on this, I heard once that you can tell the progress on a particular social inequality issue but seeing how adults explain the matter to children. Adults simplify very complex ideas to children, and in many cases, the essence of the issue comes out. It sounds weird, but after working with children for many years, I tend to agree. As early as preschool, (good) teachers teach non-prejudice to POCs and women (this is NOT to say racism and sexism are fixed!!), while trans* identities and straying from the gender binary are still pretty far off. "He" and "she" divisions are one of the most basic things children are taught on a daily basis - and I think this speaks to the progress of the trans* movement in general.
DeleteQuick side note/question: I've read a fair (not huge) amount of criticism of the use of the asterisk after "trans" and how it is problematic, but wanted to know if anyone else had any feelings about it? Not that the trans community is a monolith, but if maybe someone could articulate, better than I can, why some in the community have shunned the asterisk, that'd be awesome. In response to questions #2, assuming you meant cis and not gay (since being gay and trans are not mutually exclusive), Rivera speaks frankly about the trans community's needs, and they really are NEEDS. She discusses issues of homelessness, healthcare, substance abuse, employment, harassment, and murder. While these issues do affect cis gay/lesbian people, they disproportionately affect trans people, specifically poor trans women of color (as we can see from Rivera's depiction of her own lived experiences). The needs of trans people are for things that they need to survive, whereas the "needs" presented by mainstream gay liberation are really wants or desires. Marriage equality is the clearest example of this since, as someone else on the blog said before, for marriage equality to even benefit you, you or your partner would need a job that offers partner healthcare benefits. That's not to say that trans individuals are against marriage equality or that it is an evil thing, but the fact of the matter is that marriage equality is framed as the end-all-be-all of queer liberation. Rivera's experiences and needs showcase how much the gay rights movement has diverged from its roots and become a fight for rights that benefit only the most privileged part of the queer community.
ReplyDeleteOn the asterisk; I haven't seen many people being that upset about it, but that's because it isn't really used that much in the circles of trans people I know. I think it's such a tiny change to just say trans and recognize that that umbrella contains so so many different things. I think a lot of trans people can understand wanting to be recognized as not cis and a community that contains lots of identities. The one thing I could see is perhaps truscum using the asterisk as a way to belittle trans people who do not experience dysphoria or do not meet their requirements of transness, but I have not seen that so I think there isn't really much of an issue with the asterisk removal.
DeleteTo answer question #1, it seems that within large political movements (as LGBTQ rights has become), there is often a significant push within the movement to make it as palatable as possible to those outside the group- to ensure support from the general public. This is why, I think, the mainstream LGBT rights movement has latched onto marriage equality as a focal point- I feel like its much easier to make a person who is opposed to LGBTQ people on, say, moral or religious grounds, to come around to the idea of marriage equality (which, at the end of the day, doesnt affect cisgender/heterosexual people all that much), than it would be to make those same people face the ugly issues of, say, trans people being harassed, assaulted, and murdered for their gender or gender presentation (which more directly affects these people, because they are the ones doing the harassing and assaulting). This plays into the idea of respectability politics, which in turn becomes how intersecting identities (race, class) become erased and pushed to the side, and how white, upper middle class people within the LGBTQ movement become those with the loudest voices and the most political pull.
ReplyDeleteYes I totally agree, I think the MOGII community is largely trying to cater to the standard life of white straight middle-class "Americans" by supporting marriage, kids, and middle-class American dream lifestyles, while choosing palatable ways of lobbying for support from more conservative people. Noting the physical needs of trans people who are god-forbid poor, abused, and pissed at the system really doesn't cater to conservatism. It also ruins the picture of MOGII people being "just like you" because a lot of us aren't!! like!! you!! A lot of MOGII people see the ways hierarchies are built to oppress marginalized people, and teach others to perpetuate. It's a very scary decision for many in the community to make; bend to the power structure to be more comfortable, or push for more radical change knowing that it may come slow and it may be messy. We're seeing similar situations happening in Ferguson with race in which the black community is now refusing to bend any longer, and most expect Wilson not to be convicted.
DeleteI don't think you need to look too far for contemporary examples of "the oppressed becoming the oppressor". One example of this recently is Perez Hilton tweeting "Inside every gay man is a fierce black woman!". The idea of a gay white man using black womanhood to correlate ideas of femininity is extremely problematic and connects to a larger trend I think in contemporary white gay circles. A recent article, "Dear White Gays", from the University of Mississippi made the internet rounds. The article is by a black professor telling privileged gay white men to stop appropriating female black culture. A quote from that article reads:
ReplyDelete"What I do know is that I don’t care how well you can quote Madea, who told you that your booty was getting bigger than hers, how cute you think it is to call yourself a strong black woman, who taught you to twerk, how funny you think it is to call yourself Quita or Keisha or for which black male you’ve been bottoming — you are not a black woman, and you do not get to claim either blackness or womanhood. It is not yours. It is not for you."
White men appropriating black culture and specifically using shared commonalities to try to relate to the black female experience is highly problematic. White males, inherently priveleged in society, will never understand what it means to be a black female. They will never experience exotification or systematic racism firsthand. So why do they/we think it is ok to take the "fun" parts of an identity without understanding the bad. This highlights a more nuanced hierarchy of race relations within gay communities as well as a growing tension for some women of color. I explain say that liking Beyonce isn't always bad, but calling yourself a "strong black woman" minimizes the historic struggle of black women in America.
Link to "Dear White Gays":
http://thedmonline.com/dear-white-gays/
Paul I'm really glad you pointed this out. I hate when ANYONE claims another person's culture and identity without really understanding what they are talking about, being ignorant to how this affects that circle of people, and not fully educating themselves on, as you have said, the good AND the bad. It just makes the person look like an idiot and anger everyone around him or her. Yes, white [gay] men HAVEN'T lived the struggles of black women--or women in general--so why do some of them act like they have and can relate? They need to step into a woman*'s shoes, try living with or as a woman* to really see and experience it. Until they know, they should keep things to themselves. But in the end the professor is right: "you are not a black woman, and you do not get to claim either blackness or womanhood. It is not yours. It is not for you."
Delete*I originally said "black woman" because that is the subject specifically talked about and in my head, but these ideas could also apply to ALL women.
Agree, not only are the appropriating blackness, but a distorted and hurtful idea of blackness born out of slavery and blackface minstrelsy. By appropriating these hyper masculine and hyper sexual stereotypes they are further marginalizing black people just to have a laugh.
DeleteAs far as intersectionality goes, class and gender definitely play a role in addition in the exclusion of trans people, particularly trans women from gay right activism. Many trans women are forced into difficult financial situations because they were kicked out of their homes or refused jobs. This results in the kind of attitude expressed by Ethan in the movie Stonewall -- that trans women are uneducated or unable to understand the intricacies of political struggle. There is also the matter of femininity as something not to be taken seriously; this was addressed by Serano in Bending Over Backwards and by the Radical Lesbian Manifesto. A "sissy boy" is ridiculed and met with a nauseated response while "tomboys" are almost admired in a way. All three identities work against trans women and leave them "left behind" by gay rights activism.
ReplyDeleteActually, what I got from Ethan's attitude towards his mockery on the education of a trans women was not to reinforce the lack of education provided for trans women. To me, it was more a discriminatory rejection of trans man because of their lack of masculinity, which you pointed out in your discourse about the disapproval of "femininity" within the gay community. I absolutely agree with your point about the nauseated response towards gay men who are categorized as a "sissy". This comes with internalized homophobia, because men are still bind to the socialization of gender which tells men that masculinity is the only defining characteristics of manhood. Men who are gay, therefore feels the urge to compensate their "feminine" desires for men with hyper masculinity. This is a huge objection towards the femininity within a male gender could be one of the many reasons created the attitude of trans phobia. They are seen as less "manly", and are therefore ridiculed in many other aspects such as in the case of StoneWall, education and intelligence.
DeleteI love this reading in relation to the Combahee River Collective Statement. Both readings speak to how movements that should in theory help certain people often don't. Feminism does not help black women (or other women of color), it leaves them behind and further marginalized just like the gay movement left the queens behind in this articles. I really like how rivera's STAR, much like black feminism helps to correct that.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question 4, I think the most important thing about not becoming an active oppressor yourself is not to feel too entitled to your position of oppression. Keeping a mindset that always analyzes itself and takes in new information and experiences really helps you find empathy and continue to get better as a person. Lots of people who are opressed in one or a few ways but still remain in some positions of privilege are often those who forget that they can still be harmful.
ReplyDelete