Politics of Love

This past weekend friend and I drove up to Massachusetts for the wedding of two friends, a lesbian wedding in a castle to be exact. At the wedding I was filled with joyous bewilderment – sort of like when you see something so amazing that you can’t even believe you’re seeing it. That’s what its like when I look at the bridal couple because they are both such good people. It also made me think of something I don’t think about much; romantic love. It made me wonder what are the fucking chances that this ‘love’ this ‘partnering’ can even happen, what are the odds? This was reinforced by the mood of the wedding which was more than just a happy wedding. It was clear we were celebrating a victory, the victory of these two people overcoming a society that did not want them together and be just that; together.

I don’t pay much attention to ‘gay marriage’ politics, and often feel aggravated how the “gay” movement has a one track mind on it, ignoring other important issues. But there are strong benefits to obtaining marriage rights. The USA has an unusually high amount of civil rights attached to a marriage license, who knows why. Maybe its our puritan roots. The fact that my two friends were able to get legally married will enable them to get everything from tax breaks to insurance to visitation rights, practical things for life. Partnering is so complicated, queer or not, when someone finds a good partner there is often that “good for you” mentality thought there, which can be really patronizing but it highlights how communally understood the difficulties of partnering are – and that’s without thinking of legal issues and shortcomings. In queer communities, on top of it being hard to find someone there is the extra stress of cultural, familial, and societal disapproval. When a couple makes it through all that, and still has more hardships to come against, you can’t help but celebrate. Like, way to kick society in the face and say “I love this person so fuck you!” I still think there are more significant needs of the communities as far as civil rights, but I’m gonna try to keep in mind that marriage is also important.

Laura Bush: Pro Choice AND Pro-Gay Marriage?!

That’s right, in her new book Laura talks about how she not only thinks that queer people have every right to get married, but that abortion is a viable need for society, both for medical and “other reasons.”

Just imagine if she had been more outspoken during the actual presidency of G.W.Bush. What would that have looked like? I seems like she didn’t speak up out of some sort of respect for her husband, but what did it cost the nation? Imagine all those anti-choice, homophobia Bush supporters being shown that a lady like Laura, the wife of their favorite president, supported the issues they hated. It would of been an amazing educational opportunity, and they couldn’t just write her off like they can now. “She isn’t 1st lady anymore, who cares if she’s gone off  the deep end of SATAN!”
Still, I think it is great that she came out with it. I’ll admit, I’m a little obsessed with this right now, I mean can you imagine the implications? This is significant because of her visibility. She never was quite as insane or evil as Sarah Palin, but back in my baby radical days, Laura was a force to be reckoned with.  I hope that people will pay attention and see her as a model of where you can be a conservative, religious old white lady, and still not be crazy oppressive. Now I wanna know more about her politics… maybe we can make her a poster girl for our issues and throw her at our opposition, she speaks their language, she can be our interpreter…. or maybe I’m getting a little carried away. Laura, you probably won’t be doing much else for us, but maybe you will…. I will keep an eye out.

x-posted AmplifyYourVoice.com

Dear Census; Nunuh’yuh Beeswax

Before I got the census I wasn’t really sure how I felt about the “count the queers” argument that is being pumped up by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) and HRC among others. If you aren’t familiar, though I’m sure you’ve at least heard of it, the general “Queer the Census” campaign is intended to alert the government that they need to count queers on the census. To do this the NGLTF and to do this you put a sticker (seen below) on your census envelope.

QC

Oddly enough, the “Queer the Census” sticker does not list Queer as an identity option… the reason being the good o’l “one step at a time” statement. Its a fuckin’ bright pink sticker with the word GAY all over it.  You really think that the word “queer” is gonna make it any more or less shocking to the bureaucracy? Some of your folks don’t like the word queer? Well, fuck some people don’t like the phrase “straight ally” and that is on there. And it’s not just queer. There are several identities missing in the sticker’s list, conveniently the more radical ones. One of my pet peeves is the overarching “TRANSGENDER” category, which dose serve a ton of purpose in many spaces, but not when you are trying to “accurately represent” communities. If one could argue that all lesbians share some commonality of being attracted to women in some way, you could not apply that argument to transfolk, either in identity, gender spectrum, or sexuality.  In response to the un-inclusiveness of the the NGLTF sticker, more radical communities created the “REALLY Queer the Census” campaign that is, in addition to being political, quite amusing.

RQC

The pro-gay (it doesn’t seem queer to me) census count arguments include that we need to be  “accurately counted” in order to correctly “reflect diversity” of the USA. Newsweek.com reported mixed stories of queers who have mixed feelings about being counted, mainly fearing the repercussions of what could happen if someone found out their census data. My initial reaction was “hell yeah, count me!” but then I started to think about it. If I was counted, who would know I was trans? Would it possibly come back to haunt me in my scheming for non-GID med records or keeping under the government radar? Would it somehow group me somewhere? Misrepresent me? The HRC assures us that census data is confidential, and punishable by jail time if you divulge information. But I’m not afraid of some renegade census worker, I’m afraid of the government that is housing the data. In 1942 the US government used census data to identify Japanese Americans, and we all know how that turned out. Who is to say that at some point it won’t be us put into camps?

Another statement of the NGLTF is that knowing a count of queers will help in allocating funding and resource to queer initiatives because people will know there are more of us… But what about the mass of people who don’t use the words in the white-western gay vernacular to describe themselves? There are loads of queers who don’t self identify as queers, either because of politics, practice, community, or language. Would they become even more invisible because they don’t use the language the census does? One good point that has been made is that adding queers to the census will squash the stereotype that all queers are white and wealthy. I donno how useful the info will be to the movement since the government probably won’t notice. That said, still the majority of the argument surrounds “head of household” identification issues for queer couples and marriage… surprise, surprise.  I can’t help but think this just might be another arm of the queer gentrification movement in the interest of the money-Mos? Is this about “reflecting diversity” or gaining another pointless symbol of ‘equality’ by doing something cause everyone else does it? Are we really that more empowered if we get to check off a little box of our very own? Are we any more or less human by being labeled as one thing or another? On one hand, I guess it is nice to know who is who for historical purposes, but in the big picture why does race matter on the census? Why does sexuality or gender identity? Maybe what we need to be looking at isn’t whether or not queers are listed, but why groups are listed as they are in the first place and what system is being used to allocate resources. If it is based off of numbers is that the right way to do it?  If there is a mix of races in a class room with more white kids than anything else, we still understand (or should understand) that all kids need and deserve the same level and quality of education regardless. We all need the same resources whether there is 40 of us or 40,000.

The spin being put out is that without the census, we queers “don’t exist.” Now I can’t speak for everyone, but I have been around for a while with or without the census. I need resources whether I am queer or not, and exist whether people know it or not. So, shouldn’t shit just be available to everyone? And I am ok with the government not knowing – or at least pretending not to know- that I’m a big o’l queer. I feel like it serves my purposes better for them not to know what I’m up to. They may need to know I am in Ohio to count population, they sure as hell need to know I’m poor so they will fund some resources for myself and my community, but they don’t need to know my race, they don’t need to know my identity. I get asked “What are you?” enough in my every day life, I don’t need a governmental classification. So fuck you, census. What I am is nunuh’yuh Beeswax! FACE!

Sorry Maine, I don’t give a fuck

So Maine didn’t get marriage, yeah sucks to be Maine. As for me, I don’t give a flying fuck.

I understand that marriage is an important issue because of all the legal and civil benefits attached to it. Though my personal feelings are wholly disinterested, even disgusted, by the “LGBT” movement’s preoccupation with marriage, I am not outside recognizing the benefits of legalizing queer marriage. What I want to know is, if this “marriage issue” is so important why are people more interested in fixing it for others but not themselves? Ohio has TWO DOMA amendments, TWO, because one wasn’t enough. But no, yeah, you take care of Maine. They need more help than we do.

I agree that these rallies on behalf of California and Maine could be part of a bigger movement to promote visibility. But I don’t know how folks in Ohio are going to prove anything by stating they won’t stand for marriage inequality in Maine when they must not mind marriage inequality in Ohio.  I think the main reason is this: Everyone else is doing it. People love to be part of something bigger, so why not get on board to support other states and have no idea what is going on in your own. Its not like you live there or anything. It’s easier to complain about what’s going on in someone else’s yard than to take a long hard look at what your own place. Every day I see listserv and blog posts by people who live in Ohio or the Midwest but all they talk about is the east or west coast and what we can do to “help them.” Fuck that shit, bitches are blue states with high-income non-profits and god-damn celebrities. Fuckers can help themselves. Better yet, fuckers can help me. I have a vet bill to pay and radical activism doesn’t cut me any checks.

I’ve had people tell me that we need to focus on the easy parts first, keep in line so we don’t scare folks off. Well, I’m not gonna get any less scary after you pass your legislation that doesn’t have me in it and Ohio isn’t gonna get any easier once your state is in it.  I try not hate on folks who are good hearted and want to work for change, even if its not how I would do it. However, I can’t help being opinionated about people who tell me I’m not a “team player” and they themselves do absolutely nothing.

NEWS FLASH: Posting a facebook event is not the end all be all of change. Shocking, I know.

Don’t judge me and my work when all you have is a motherfucking facebook account. If you want to complain, that is not my problem. Go update your status about it. Your HRC fan page friends will love it.

x-posted AmplifyYourVoice.org