As modulações discursivas do pensamento filosófico e suas articulações com outros discursos como o religioso, médico, psicológico, psicanalítico, pedagógico, etc., transformaram-se em práticas que irão afetar a sociedade como um todo, instituindo um modelo de homem e de mulher, e de relação entre eles. Inaugurando as redes discursivas sobre a desigualdade entre os sexos, o filósofo grego Aristóteles em uma obra monumental, descreveu a diferença entre os animais machos e fêmeas, inclusive homens e mulheres. Demonstra que as mulheres tem a voz mais fina, os pelos mais ralos e que  morrem antes dos homens. Mas, o mais importante desta obra, e que será utilizado como desqualificação do feminino,  são os estudos sobre o tamanho dos cérebros. A mulher, segundo o filósofo, possui um cérebro menor do que o homem. Durante muito tempo, essa diferença foi utilizada para impedir que as mulheres estudassem, trabalhassem etc. Também foi um importante referencial na feitura dos códigos napoleônicos e do Código Civil Brasileiro para torná-las incapazes, subordinadas ao homem, tido como racional e capaz.

A historiografia acompanhou este movimento de silenciamentos e desqualificação de sujeitos Ao longo do tempo escreveu sobre os feitos das camadas dominantes e silenciou a grande parte da população. As versões históricas do passado giraram em torno do sujeito masculino, heterossexual, branco das camadas privilegiadas. A presença feminina, assim como a indígena e a negra sempre foi registrada ocasionalmente, especialmente quando fugia dos padrões de comportamento estabelecidos.

Quando acabou o sistema escravista em 1888, uma mancha vergonhosa na história do Brasil, poucos efeitos sentiram as mulheres. No ano seguinte, com o  fim do Império e o advento da República, elas não foram alçadas à categoria de cidadãs pela nova constituição e continuaram relativamente incapazes pelo Código Civil de inspiração napoleônica.

A mudança inicia no Brasil, assim como no restante do mundo, a partir do movimento feminista, demanda social e política, responsável pelas conquistas das mulheres. As universidades e as editoras agora viam com bons olhos trabalhos sobre a emancipação feminina. As universidades começaram a receber mulheres, inicialmente como alunas e depois em seus quadros profissionais, e consequentemente novas pesquisas envolvendo estas novas questões e novos sujeitos foram se multiplicando. Mas, apesar do longo caminho percorrido, do reconhecimento de novos objetos como o poder, o corpo, o cotidiano, a sexualidade, a vida privada, a situação das  mulheres e das relações de gênero ainda enfrentam desafios e impasses. Mesmo com incentivos públicos através do fomento às pesquisas, as diversas áreas do saber continuam encarando com desconforto a inserção feminina como agente histórica e sua incorporação, assim como os demais sujeitos excluídos, ao protagonismo histórico.

Novas perspectivas de pesquisa tem ocupado importantes espaços acadêmicos no Brasil. A ANPUH, Associação Nacional de História, possui Grupos  temáticos de Gênero para socializar e debater as pesquisas realizadas pelos historiadores/as brasileiros/as.  Reunidos/as a cada ano os/as pesquisadores/as apresentam temáticas  múltiplas e diversificadas, e uma preocupação é constante: como ultrapassar o gueto historiográfico e  incorporar a perspectiva de gênero na forma de pensar a história e o conhecimento histórico. Novos campos de pesquisa histórica, além de mulheres, sexualidades, feminismos, corpos, etc., são incorporados ao debate como masculinidades, maternidade/paternidade, famílias, homossexualidades, etc.

Também no Brasil ocorre a cada dois anos, desde 1994,  o Seminário Internacional Fazendo  Gênero, em Florianópolis. Sua característica é a interdisciplinaridade, reunindo intelectuais das mais variadas áreas do conhecimento.  A última edição reuniu 4.033 especialistas para discutir gênero, feminismos, mulheres, masculinidades, sexualidades, etc. As temáticas abordadas nos trabalhos apresentados  de maior incidência foram mídia, etnia/raça, memória e corpo.

No campo da educação a questão de gênero também tem assumido um caráter emergencial e urgente, entendendo que a escola é um lugar de demarcação do feminino e do masculino e o estabelecimento das desigualdades de gênero. Se ela produziu hierarquias e sujeições entre os sexos, pode agora produzir relações igualitárias e democráticas. Os novos arranjos familiares, as novas parentalidades, as novas sexualidades tem batido à porta das escolas, que muitas vezes se mostra arredia. Apesar da importância destes estudos, no mês de junho do corrente ano, foram debatidos e votados os Planos de Educação, à nível nacional, estadual e municipal. Em quase todos eles foi retirada a questão de gênero, isso a partir de argumentos baseados em preconceitos.

O estudos das masculinidades e dos movimentos LGBTTTs (lésbicas, gays, bissexuais, transexuais e transgêneros),  encontraram nos estudos de gênero um campo fértil para seus estudos. Hoje no Brasil, os eventos que discutem  gênero, recebem uma grande quantidade de  trabalhos que analisam as questões de identidade e sexualidade e das orientações sexuais  discriminadas.

Também aparecem como novas perspectivas de pesquisa a articulação dos estudos  de gênero  com a crítica pós-colonialista (análise dos efeitos não somente políticos, mas filosóficos e históricos deixados pelos países colonizadores nos países colonizados).  Estas estudiosas e estudiosos, entendem que será  a partir das margens e não do centro a construção de um novo projeto de sociedade, pois a  crítica pós-colonial tenta recuperar as vozes dos silenciados pelo colonizador.

Em contrapartida, o Brasil está vivendo uma situação paradoxal em relação às questões de gênero e das sexualidades, tanto no campo público como privado. Ao mesmo tempo em que viveu os avanços do movimento feminista, como em todo o mundo ocidental, carrega a herança colonial machista. Nos dois últimos anos tem regredido assustadoramente nas questões dos direitos das mulheres e dos homossexuais, transexuais e transgêneros.

As propostas de combate à desigualdade e discriminação, como o kit anti-homofobia, material didático produzido pelo Ministério da Educação,  com o objetivo de auxiliar as escolas na educação igualitária, são impedidas pela bancada evangélica, numerosa no Congresso Nacional. Conservadora e moralista barra todas as discussões relacionadas às questões corpo, à sexualidade, especialmente à homossexualidade. Também são barradas as propostas de  descriminalização do aborto, apesar dos abortos clandestinos serem a  causa da morte de milhares de  mulheres. Segundo dados da Pesquisa Nacional do Aborto feita em 2010 uma em cada cinco  mulheres fez aborto até os 40 anos de idade  no Brasil. Tudo que diz respeito ao corpo, à sexualidade, especialmente à homossexualidade, causa pavor  nos políticos  conservadores e moralistas.[1]

O fato de termos uma presidenta mulher, pela primeira vez na história do Brasil,  não significa que estamos salvos do pensamento machista sacralizado em nossa sociedade. Pelo contrário, tem colocado à nú a ideologia ou pensamento do que pensam brasileiros e brasileiras sobre a participação da mulher na política. Isso é comprovado em episódios como nas passeatas ocorridas  no mês de maio, organizadas pela oposição à presidenta Dilma Roussef.  Por todo o país, liam-se os cartazes denegrindo a imagem da presidenta a partir de marcação de gênero. O mais sério, baixando de vez o nível da aceitabilidade ou conivência, foi a feitura de adesivos misóginos, feitos para vender, e que foram  denunciados pela Secretaria de Polícias para Mulheres. Os adesivos com o rosto da presidenta numa montagem no corpo de uma mulher jovem e de pernas abertas, tinha como finalidade ser colado na entrada de combustível dos automóveis. Ela seria penetrada pela bomba de combustível.

Segundo as investigações, a autora dos adesivos seria uma mulher, demonstrando que os discursos machistas atuam de maneira tão efetiva que incorporam-se em homens e mulheres. Se admitirmos que a violência simbólica se exerce prioritariamente sobre as mulheres, não poderemos supor que baste ser mulher para se ter uma visão libertadora das mulheres. A visão feminina é uma visão dominada, colonizada, que não consegue ver a si mesma com autonomia. Segundo Pierre Bourdieu, “é preciso descolonizar o feminino”.

O Brasil tem apresentado ou simplesmente escancarado sua face machista e racista como nunca em sua história. Apesar de ser um país mestiço, pardo, a desigualdade entre brancos e  negros  e pardos é abissal. As cotas para afro-descendentes nas universidades brasileiras ainda são motivo de debates calorosos. A elite branca não aceita ter que dividir vagas nas universidades e empregos, e não consegue entender que para acertar o futuro precisa acertar as contas com seu passado.  A união da desigualdade de gênero, com a desigualdade de raça, ainda é muito presente na sociedade brasileira.

Um caso paragdimático de um país que não consegue apagar as marcas da escravidão, apesar do abolicionismo ter acontecido oficialmente em 1888, gerou protestos, recentemente, escancarando a hipocrisia da igualdade racial brasileira. Uma repórter negra, da mais importante emissora de televisão brasileira,  recebeu centenas de agressões nas redes sociais que diziam entre outras agressões, “onde posso comprar esta escrava?”, “não bebo café para não ter intimidade com o preto”, preta macaca”, “só conseguiu emprego pelas cotas”, etc. O caso foi amplamente noticiado e discutido por diversos segmentos. Esse episódio nos faz refletir sobre quantas mulheres negras brasileiras, especialmente pobres, escutam diariamente estes impropérios, mas, por não se tratar de uma personagem midiática não alcançam a proporção desse caso.

Soma-se a isso uma Câmara de deputados onde a maioria é extremamente conservadora, não somente no plano político, mas no plano moral e dos avanços nas questões de gênero e sexualidade. Poucas deputadas e senadoras são eleitas para o Congresso nacional e as eleitas passam muitas vezes por cenas constrangedoras e de desacato às suas pessoas. Há poucos dias um deputado torceu o braço de uma colega deputada, que ao exigir providências ao ato de agressão, ouviu de outro deputado “mulher que participa de política e bate como homem tem que apanhar como homem”. São somente 51 mulheres no total de 513 deputados e 13 em 81 senadores. Segundo dados da ONU, o Brasil ocupa o 124º lugar entre os que têm maior  número de mulheres na política.

Mas, o maior impasse entre os avanços da igualdade de gênero, é a sua radical desigualdade – a violência contra a mulher. Apesar das leis igualitárias como a Constituição de 1988, o novo Código Civil (2002) e a Lei Maria da Penha (2006), o Programa   ‘Mulher, Viver sem Violência’ (2013), a  violência, questão de saúde pública,  continua de uma forma crescente. Estas leis igualitárias são fundamentais, assim como outros dispositivos e  discursos para a mudança comportamental, mas sozinhas se transformam em letras mortas. Como mudar uma sociedade que desqualifica de todas as formas  o feminino e aqueles que não correspondem à heteronormatividade?

A história da violência contra a mulher no Brasil e a sua naturalização é longa. As constituições tratavam a mulher como uma quase nada, os códigos  que permitiam castigar a mulher e até assassiná-la ainda estão presentes no imaginário masculino e feminino devido a sua longevidade e pelos diversos discursos legitimadores reproduzidos na sociedade. Esses discursos são potentes e envolvem alguns mitos. Demonstrando essa realidade a pesquisa intitulada “Tolerância social à violência contra as mulheres”, realizada  em 2013 e publicada em março de 2014 pelo IPEA [2],   assustou o Brasil. Respondendo a questão “mulher que é agredida e continua com o parceiro gosta de apanhar” teve como respostas 42,7% que concordaram totalmente e 22,4% que concordaram parcialmente. Um alto índice de entrevistados declarou que a mulher provoca seus agressores, ou pela vestimenta, ou pelo comportamento. O alarmente  é que as mulheres consistiram no  maior número das entrevistadas, 66%.

O ano de 1979, marcou a vitória do movimento  feminista contra a impunidade destes assassinatos, tidos como crimes da paixão. Durante o julgamento de Doca Street pelo assassinato de sua companheira  Ângela Diniz, ocorrido em 1976,  surgiram pela primeira vez manifestações feministas contra  a impunidade em casos de assassinatos de mulheres por homens. De vítima, Ângela passou a ser acusada de “denegrir os bons costumes”, “ter vida desregrada”, “ser mulher de vida fácil”. Era como se o assassino tivesse livrado a sociedade inteira de um indivíduo que punha em risco a moral da família brasileira. As feministas organizadas conseguiram reverter o processo e o assassino foi condenado.  Surge deste episódio o lema “Quem ama não mata”  que acabou se transformando numa  minissérie de televisão, com altíssima audiência.

A urgência de se atuar contra todo o tipo de violência da qual a mulher é vítima, emerge como ideia no Encontro feminista de Valinhos, São Paulo, em junho de 1980, com a recomendação da criação de centros de autodefesa. O SOS Mulher traduziu-se na criação das Delegacias Especiais para Atendimento de Mulheres Vítimas de Violência. A primeira implementada em 1985 em São Paulo,  serve como modelo e a partir daí irradiam-se no restante do país.

Incrementação importantíssima na luta contra a impunidade foram estas delegacias, porque muitas vezes a polícia transformava o interrogatório das vítimas numa verdadeira tortura, desconfiando da inocência da mulher e até manifestando uma certa cumplicidade com o comportamento do agressor. As raras queixas, as dificuldades de prova e a estigmatização da vítima sempre foram componentes que transformaram o crime da violação feminina em assunto doméstico e pessoal.

Nas últimas três décadas, o número de mulheres assassinadas triplicou no país. Para coibir essa violência em 2006 foi criada a  Lei Maria da Penha. Esta Lei além de criar mecanismos para barrar a violência, dispõe sobre a criação de Juizados de violência doméstica e familiar contra a mulher, altera o Código de processo penal, o Código penal e a Lei de execução penal. A Lei Maria da Penha possibilita que os agressores sejam presos em flagrante ou tenham prisão preventiva detectada, quando ameaçam a integridade física da mulher. Prevê também medidas de proteção para a mulher que corre risco de vida, como a afastamento do agressor do domicilio e a proibição de sua proximidade física junto à mulher agredida e seus filhos. Nomeia as formas de violência, não somente física, como  psicológica, sexual, patrimonial e moral, independente de orientação sexual.

Segundo dados do Mapa da Violência de 2012,  dos 70.270 atendimentos de mulheres em 2010, em todo o país, 71,8% foram dentro da residência das vítimas, sendo o companheiro o principal agressor. Cresce o número de assassinatos de ex-mulheres, ex-namoradas, ex-amantes que após separadas,  não querem voltar para o companheiro. Entre janeiro e junho de 2013, a central de atendimento á mulher – ligue 180[3] – contabilizou 306.201 registros de mulheres que ousaram denunciar agressões sofridas, aumentando para 3.364.633 o número total de atendimentos computados desde a implantação da Lei Maria da Penha. Vemos que o aumento de registros de abusos e violências foi imenso após 2006. Sabemos que os casos não aumentaram, mas as mulheres sentiram-se encorajadas em denunciar.

No primeiro semestre de 2014, segundo balanço divulgado pela Secretaria de Políticas para as Mulheres da Presidência da República, foram registrados mais de 300 mil atendimentos. A maior parte das ligações foi sobre relatos de violência física, seguida de violência psicológica, moral, sexual, patrimonial, cárcere privado e tráfico de pessoas. Em 83,8% dos relatos de violência, o agressor era o companheiro, cônjuge, namorado ou ex-companheiro da vítima. Quase 60% das mulheres agredidas tinham 20 a 39 anos, 62% não dependiam financeiramente do agressor e 82,7% eram mães.

Segundo esta mesma Secretaria,  uma mulher sofre violência a cada 12 segundos no Brasil. A cada 2 minutos cinco mulheres são espancadas, e a cada 2 horas (em algumas estatísticas 1 hora e meia) uma mulher é assassinada no Brasil. Esses são os números apresentados pelo Ministério da Saúde que colocam o país em 12º lugar no ranking mundial de homicídios de mulheres vitimadas por parentes, maridos, namorados, ex-companheiros ou homens que se acharam no direito de agredi-las. Um dado alarmante é o envolvimento de crianças que presenciam os casos de violência, que no ano que passou de 64% dos casos. E estudos demonstram que crianças que sofrem ou presenciam violência tendem a ser violentas no futuro, pois naturalizam estes atos.

A violência contra as mulheres é historicamente naturalizada, conservando o estatuto da defesa da honra masculina estabelecido no Código Civil de 1917, que teve vida muito longa, e que transformava a mulher em um quase nada. Herança cruel do patriarcado, ainda presente no corpo social. As Constituições brasileiras, com exceção da carta cidadã de 1988, desconsideravam a mulher como sujeitos, contribuindo com a construção do discurso machista arraigado na sociedade.

Muito há para fazer no campo dos discursos e das práticas. Das práticas discursivas e não discursivas que nos falava Michel Foucault. O empoderamento feminino é tarefa urgente. Não é mero acaso ser o Brasil o país do mundo em que as mulheres mais fazem cirurgia plástica, assim como serem 75% dos consumidores de remédios psiquiátricos. Apesar das leis igualitárias, das pesquisas acadêmicas, da atuação das ONGS (Organizações Não Governamentais) o impasse continua: como transformar a cultura que aprendeu como verdade a desqualificação do feminino?

The post Os impasses das questões de gênero e sexualidade no Brasil atual appeared first on The Postcolonialist.

The history of El Paso’s queer population, in particular, has been briefly illustrated in various works, most notably by El Pasoan gay authors Arturo Islas and John Rechy, who both speak to various aspects of homosexual life in their burgeoning city.[3] This paper will place El Paso’s queer community in a larger discussion with intersectionality by exploring the chronicle of the city’s alternative nightclub – the Old Plantation (or OP) – across four decades, the 1970s to 2010s. By studying queer encounters along the border through intersectional lenses, it will uncover varying racial and sexual anxieties between the American imperial state via Fort Bliss and the surrounding Latina/o population. Due to El Paso’s bicultural history and segregated past, queer life must be examined through several academic and community–based methodologies, which cultural historians such as Hayden White and Lynn Hunt have employed in their studies of peoples and interactions, especially the use of oral testimonies.[4] Furthermore, a “people’s history” of queer life will elucidate sexual encounters (and transactions) that cannot be found easily in the traditional archive. Previous scholars like Madeline D. Davis and Elizabeth Lapovsky Kennedy have researched culturally homogeneous queer sexualities in cities before, but in locales without national borders or without multiple races like Latina/os.[5]

In order to historicize this city’s queer nightlife given the deprivation of printed sources, it employs theoretical frameworks from Latina/o scholars such as Michael Hames-Garcia, Juana María Rodríguez, Lawrence La Fountain-Stokes, and Ramón Rivera Servera, all of who have investigated queer Latina/o communities, relationships, and discourses.[6] Their scholarships retain the intersectional lenses of race, time, location, and sexuality to unravel histories of biopower and sexuality. The paper builds upon the models set forth by Hames-Garcia, contending that queer Latino identity is created in resistance to the “imposition of modern colonial manifestations,” such as white gay mainstream culture.[7] Furthermore, it adheres to the scholarship of queer Latina/o dance clubs laid out by La Fountain-Stokes, Rodríguez, and Servera, who suggest that the dance floor, rather than being a site of literal dancing, is more a location where colonized subjects, usually Anglo gay males, feast on the Latino-ness, or “latinidad” of the “othered” men present in the club.[8] Finally, it models oral testimonies upon historian Nan Alamilla Boyd, and the “historical narrative theory” proposed by Karen Halttunen.[9] In “Cultural History and the Challenge of Narrativity,” Halttunen calls for a “domestication of theoretical issues [about] narrativity” within the discipline of history to elaborate upon the relationships and connections between people in assembling histories.[10] This paper will construct a single narrative from several oral interviews to help uncover the queer past in the American Southwest, but should be used only as a starting point in further understanding the intricacies and intersectional nature of queer life and identity within contested borderlands between modern empires.

Before the OP: Cold War Gender Rights

In the early 1960s, the second wave of feminism permeated the United States with intellectuals such as Betty Freidan pushing for women and men to redefine gender roles by working in jobs and political spheres that were traditionally reserved for a single sex.[11] At the same time, Cold War era political and social sentiment transformed the nation’s civil rights positions, “as the primacy of anticommunism in postwar American politics and culture left a very narrow space for criticism of the status quo.”[12] Consequently, racial and sexual diversity were notions that were considered dangerous in a black/white, heterosexual society. Given the influence of the Feminist movement and the Cold War, 1960s El Paso homosexual life was hidden within “McKelligon Canyon or past the border into Mexico,” recalled Cristina Hernandez, a self-identified El Pasoan lesbian.[13] Hernandez, a fifty-five year old Mexican American, had spent her entire life in the borderlands region. The history of cruising, or driving slowly through city alleys and streets scouting for sex had been one of the main vehicles for El Paso gay men to find each other, but not lesbians.[14] Because of a lack of queer, in addition to heterosexual nightlife, El Pasoans negotiated the national boundary to experience the vibrant entertainment of Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua.

Ever since the 1950s, Ciudad Juárez was deemed a cultural hotspot for northern Mexico and the southwest United States, hosting famous celebrities like Marilyn Monroe and James Dean who publicized their visits to the city known for its vivacious lifestyle.[15] Scholars, such as Rachel St. John, have even proposed that most northwestern Mexican border cities experienced a golden age of vice and international nightlife during the first half of the twentieth century.[16] El Paso resident Cristina Hernandez commented that before the rise of the disco era and the year 1973, Ciudad Juárez became “the city of sexual expression that lesbians could retreat to when they were not living different lives as heterosexual women in the city of sexual repression [El Paso].”[17] For several decades, El Pasoan queers not only separated their public from private lives, but also traversed the U.S.–Mexico border to fully embrace and perform their reserved sexual lives, especially when Cold War America retaliated against the conception of sexual freedom. In 1973, the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission lowered the legal drinking age from 21 to 18, and “many lesbians who crossed the border for alcohol and partying could now remain within the U.S., consuming booze,” stated Hernandez.[18] Perhaps it was of no coincidence that the legal drinking age changed, as the American disco music movement was concurrently growing in tandem around the United States, “especially among Hispanic and Black demographics.”[19]

Hernandez alleged that the disco movement “brought mainstream gay culture into straight bars and clubs, allowing for lesbians and gays to return to El Paso and participate in a new [revitalized] gay nightlife.”[20] The Pet Shop, one of the first lesbian bars in El Paso history, opened sometime in the early 1970s. According to El Pasoans Yolanda Chávez Leyva and Irma Montelongo, the Pet Shop was located underground in a prewar building that would later become the San Antonio Mining Bar.[21] Leyva, a leading fifty-eight year old Chicana lesbian, moved back to the city after completing college at Austin in the 1980s. Montelongo, a native fifty-two year old El Pasoan, experienced the many changes in nightlife within the region. Leyva and Montelongo revealed that the social environment of the bar was distinct from established disco bars and clubs, as “working-class femme and butch lesbian couples made up most of the patrons and they listened to a mixture of rock and roll, blues and disco.”[22] Furthermore, Montelongo maintained that “many of the butch lesbians embodied masculinity and at times, exhibited that masculinity by engaging femme and other butch lesbians within the dance space of the establishment.”[23] Leyva stated that her first experience in the Pet Shop was surprising yet comforting: “I walked downstairs into a place where all kinds of women had the freedom to do what they wanted.”[24] The Pet Shop succeeded in attracting a large lesbian population, in part because of the revitalized El Pasoan nightlife, or in part because of the new drinking law. But most of all, because this space operated as separate venue from mainstream disco culture, providing a safe haven for lesbians to congregate and express their sexualities. Word of mouth about its success reached other parts of Texas, and soon, more “alternative” bars began to open up downtown.

Creation of the OP: Queer “El Chuco”[25]

In the mid-1970s, Dallas-based company Craven Entertainment dispatched businessman Bob Bonaventure to scout for possible alternative bar locations that would bring the lesbian, gay and hetero-disco communities together in West Texas. Bonaventure, according to friend and co-worker Jak Klinkowaski, was thought to “believe that the trade secret to gaining a large audience – whether gay and straight – was to position a large ‘alternative’ club away from other clubs.”[26] Klinkowaski, an Anglo American El Paso native, worked in many of the queer bars throughout the last decades of the twentieth century. The space Bonaventure purchased eventually led to a conversion in El Paso’s queer culture. In 1977, he discovered that 219 South Ochoa Street had become vacant, and founded the thirty-five year-old bar that would go down as one of the longest running gay establishments in West Texas: the Old Plantation (OP).[27] According to several lesbian and gay oral histories, the OP bar was mixed with both women and male patrons.[28] During its first year, the bar included “multiple performances” of “drag shows, foam parties, all girls nights and military nights,” as well as a diverse audience of “whites, blacks, Mexicans and Puerto Ricans, lesbians and gays and everything else in-between,” recalled Klinkowaski.[29] The minority, Montelongo and Klinkowaski recalled, “were Anglo males,” which was understandable given the large El Paso Latina/o demographic.[30]

The OP, like the Pet Shop, became a prime location for same-sex sensual expression and intimate encounters. Montelongo mentioned that the most unique part of the bar was the “female” bathroom, where “lesbians, straight women, and drag queens congregated and interacted with each other.” She recalled that the conversations that took place were illustrative of how different each “woman” viewed fashion, boys, girls and popular culture: “I remember talking about hair, dancing and music and even learned new colloquialisms.”[31] The bar brought the queer population of El Paso together on a single dance floor, and in closed, safe spaces like the bathroom. Rodríguez suggests in her work that “in multigendered queer Latino spaces, fags and dykes, both friends and strangers, will often invite each other out on the dance floor.”[32] The OP was no exception. There finally existed a fully public venue for perceived “deviant” behaviors and identities to congregate.

After homosexuality was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in 1973, it was assumed that lesbians and gays were able to express themselves with the understanding that their sexual identities were no longer classified federally as mental disorders.[33] This was not the case for the transgender community, as American psychiatrists maintained the notion that transgender identity was an illness that was synonymous with Gender-Identity Disorder (GID).[34] Susan Stryker has argued that after 1973, transgender populations throughout the U.S. felt left out of a national gay rights discourse because their identities had remained stigmatized. Stryker upheld that the transgender movement’s “politics toward the medical establishment were more like those of the reproductive freedom movement than those of the gay liberation movement.”[35] Moreover, she suggested that transgender individuals “wanted to secure access to competent, legal, respectfully provided medical services for a nonpathological need not shared equally by every member of society,” a concern that their queer sisters and brothers did not have to worry about.[36] While the political activism and awareness of lesbian and gay communities mobilized nationally and within the OP and El Paso, transgender persons still had to grapple with the reality that federal recognition and support of transsexuality would not arrive for some time.

As legal transgender legal rights idled, trans culture flourished. Klinkowaski pointed out the early 1970s were exciting due to the rise in “drag king culture and transgender participation at places like the OP.”[37] Drag kings essentially performed a gender and sexuality that was usually opposite of the drag king’s biological sex and acted gender. Thus, many drag kings were persons born with female sex organs who embodied notions of “masculinity” and contested “maleness.” Chanel, an forty-five year old Anglo American El Pasoan drag queen, or male performing femininity, stated that she “met various transgendered ‘women’ who told [Chanel] that they would perform as drag kings within the OP because other homosexuals and friends were more accepting of their lifestyles as drag queens and kings.”[38] Chanel commented that when she witnessed many transgendered females pushed to perform drag, she questioned her own desire and sexuality. Transgender persons posed a threat to the El Paso gay rights movement in that the people who represented transgender identities did not fit into the homosexual and heterosexual binary that was formed uniquely in the aftermath of the Cold War and the Civil Rights movement. While 1970s El Paso nightlife evolved to include more private spaces for lesbians and gays to interact, it reinforced the discrimination and overall national intolerance for the lifestyle and identity of transgender people living along and crossing the U.S.–Mexico Borderlands.

Even though the El Pasoan heterosexual population viewed the sexual conduct inside the OP bar as illicit, sexual behavior was not as polarized during the 1970s before the time of carnal epidemics. The exchange of oral and anal sex was “usually unprotected,” commented Chanel, as HIV had yet to enter society.[39] Chanel and Klinkowaski noted that while many individuals came to the bar to enjoy alcohol and disco music, others, “especially Anglo American males,” came there for sex. The two described that the place had become an outlet to “fast-track” sexual experiences. Chanel remarked that many of his “straight-identified” male friends “came to the OP, scouted out some Jorge or Guillermo [meaning any Latino looking boy], penetrated them and then left the club, never to speak to them again.”[40] The bar was an innovative dance space, not only due to the consumption of latinidad, which Rodríguez, La Fountain-Stokes and Servera articulate in their research, but also because the location operated as a space where two men, one identifying as “gay” and the other “straight,” executed sexual acts without personal knowledge of one another, but with complete anonymity and disclosure. In addition, the proximity to the national border bifurcated cultural and sexual understandings between Anglo, Latino, and other “foreign” men.

The reputation of the OP as an alternative bar would take a “moral blow,” after 1982, when Lawrence Altman described a disease that “attacked and killed homosexual men” called Gay-Related-Immune-Disorder, or GRID, in his controversial New York Times article.[41] In the words of Chanel, “it was as if everything they [bigots, heterosexuals, society] said was vindicated, our lifestyles were scientifically condemned.”[42] Thus, OP sexual politics for gay men, as Chanel pointed out, “were disrupted and sexual activity decreased in number for several weeks,” as the public waited to learn about the proper precautions in distancing oneself from contraction.[43] Still, unprotected sex occurred between various bar attendees. Chanel and Klinkowaski reaffirmed that “having unprotected sex up to 1984 was considered normal and there wasn’t the stigma that existed today.”[44] After GRID (Gay Related Immune Disease) was reclassified scientifically as HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) and the use of a condom was articulated as the best defense in protecting oneself from the disease, the sexual behaviors in the bar rehabilitated with the increased use of the condom.

The erotic practice of “barebacking” also arose from the HIV/AIDS stigma in response to changes in contemporary sexual behaviors during the 1980s. At the time, many in the El Pasoan queer community were both in denial and acceptance of the possible consequences and “euphoric risks” associated with anal sex without a condom. Tim Dean historicizes and explains the phenomenon of barebacking in relation to the prejudice of homosexual life as “both the premeditation and eroticization of unprotected anal sex.”[45] Thus, barebacking was the sexual act of unprotected sex in an HIV/AIDS conscious age. Before the pandemic, Chanel engaged in unprotected sex that was synonymous with barebacking, but the action lacked the associated social and moral stigma in a post-HIV/AIDS discursive environment. Now, the “gesture” of barebacking brought intimate, political, and social underpinnings. The lens of “gesture,” first used in deconstructing queer life by Rodríguez, can also serve as another intersectional unit in investigating queer behaviors. She explains gesture as “a socially legible and highly codified form of kinetic communication, and as a cultural practice that is differentially manifested through particular forms of embodiment.”[46] Hence, the gesture and practice of barebacking was politically charged.

In The Subculture of Barebacking, Dean revealed that the notion of hypermasculinity was associated with the exchange of semen during gay bareback sex as “hypermasculinity accrues to the man who assumes what used to be thought of as the female role in homosexual relations. The more men by whom one is penetrated, the more of a man he becomes.”[47] Chanel and Klinkowaski stated that barebacking held an inimitable attraction for them: “it felt good before, but now raw sex felt more intimate and deeper,” explained Chanel.[48] Sex between two participants of the same gender altered structures of power, control and masculinity. Furthermore, kinship became the ultimate result rather than the consumption of more masculinity, as the entrance of sexual risk made the act of sex more dangerous. Dean argued that bareback subculture’s hypermasculinization of bottoming, “its picturing erotic submission as a proof of manhood could be seen as a compensatory response to modern society’s feminization of male homosexuality.” Dean’s contention is corroborated by the testimonies taken from various attendees of the OP, and fits the categorization of gesture, which Rodríguez unpacks in her research.[49]

While the entrance of GRID and later HIV/AIDS reformed club attendance, sexual practices as well as understandings of sexual identities at the OP, the bar still became a landmark of El Paso queer culture. The bar featured weekends where “events were either sold out or near occupancy level,” remembered Klinkowaski. The OP, unlike other night clubs like The Pet Shop, attracted “the most diverse clientele out of all the clubs” as “Blacks, Whites, Cholos, and Drag Queens all shared the dance floor,” something various queer residents were not accustomed to seeing in El Paso.[50] Attendance was high at the bar, and popularity only increased over time. Eventually, Bonaventure realized that his bar was too small to accommodate El Paso’s queer and “straight” audience, and decided to move it to a larger venue. In 1985, he found an open lot across the street at 301 S. Ochoa Street.[51] The New Old Plantation as Bonaventure called it was advertised as “bigger, better and operated by gays and lesbians.”[52] The OP’s move added more publicity and audience to the nightclub, and its existence was now fully recognized and felt throughout El Paso. Chanel stated that “tipping,” or the process of drag queens engaging in sexual acts with white and black military men, increased as the New OP’s building had two floors where individuals could retreat to and maintain a sense of privacy. As the dance space of the New OP was split between different stories, people could choose their crowd and ambience. Chanel remembered the sexual politics, and “gestures” of the club:

Younger boys situated themselves at the focal point of the dance floor while older men circulated the periphery, scouting for any men. And if he had luck, he and his boy would go upstairs and move to a corner to either make out, or perform oral sex.[53]

Klinkowaski similarly recalled:

I remember the girls’ bathroom was where to hookup, mainly because its where all the trannies went. And it also helped that it was ‘cleaner,’ not just in hygiene but some trannies were ‘Poz’ [HIV-Positive] and therefore always used condoms.[54]

It became apparent that while the club featured the same demographics of the original OP, sexual encounters and meetings were executed in new spaces in the two-story gay discotheque. Simultaneously, the anal sex that was performed in the dark corners and bathrooms of the New OP was split between barebacking and protected sex, whether or not knowledge of HIV/AIDS was present.

The club’s dance floors allowed for multiple performativities of gender and sexuality in comparison to its original, which was styled more as a bar than a nightclub. While Klinkowaski and Chanel mentioned that “straight” men came to find young Latino males, Mexican Americans and Mexican-nationals from Ciudad Juárez also interacted with the “heterosexual” men. The space of the club had perhaps transcended nation as well as ethnicity. Adrian Gutierrez, another gay attendee during the early 80s, noted that “the only reason why the OP was different was the inclusion of Anglo straight acting men.”[55] Gutierrez, a forty-nine year old contractor for the U.S. Army Military Beaumont Medical Center, was a teenager when the OP first opened. Gutierrez revealed that many of the men he had sex with from the OP were enlisted soldiers who were usually single but mentioned that a couple of them were married to women and had children. He believed the “rush and taboo” associated with sleeping with “straight men” made the act attractive in addition to barebacking.

Gutierrez stated that “masculine” or “straight acting men” were most desirable for gays, mainly because they embodied a masculinity and sexuality that he and his friends envied and craved. The club transformed into a site of contact for consumption(s) of masculinity between distinct parties; in Gutierrez’s case, he received the thrill of being with a “straight” man, which informed his sense of manliness. More interestingly is that his Anglo sexual partners gained something particularly special in return: consumption of latinidad, or alternative masculinity, that he (the military male) had eroticized and “othered” onto Gutierrez. Historian George Chauncey has explored a similar sexual exchange of masculinity between effeminate “fairies” and more masculine “queers” in New York City; the difference in the case of the OP and Gutierrez was that ethnicity and race were also exchanged between sexual partners.[56] Using the theories set forth by Hames-Garcia, Gutierrez also desired Anglo military men because of the innate “modern colonial power dynamic” that epistemically thwarted Gutierrez into desiring kinship from colonizers.[57] But Rodríguez believes that scholars must think of consuming latinidad as a practice of reaffirming agency for the consumed Latina/o. She contends that “rather than attempt to redeem or erase our [Latina/o] experiences of violence and violation, register the possibility of recovering pleasure in the shame of abjection, a sexual pleasure that engages the sexual submission demanded of racialized subjects.”[58] In applying Rodríguez, the exchange of racial fetishization serves both parties.

It is notable that the impact of Fort Bliss and its men held a unique position in terms of the behavior of people who attended the club. The presence of Fort Bliss had long been felt before the opening of the OP in 1977. Historian Leon C. Metz writes that Fort Bliss was founded in response to the U.S. War with Mexico during 1848, citing that the U.S. Department of War felt the need to form a military post to occupy and protect the area opposite Mexico’s Paso Del Norte.[59] Fort Bliss was created at a time when Mexican-nationals and Anglo Americans fought a borderless conflict. And for over a century, the fort was steadily growing, and represented a facet of the past and presence of military history. When the original OP opened, this military presence had already existed and was over a hundred years old. According to the 1960 through 2000 censuses, the size of the Fort Bliss military population had progressively increased through time, with a total population of 8,286 persons or 1,444 households and families by 2000.[60] That figure did not include troops who arrived at the fort for deployment overseas, government contractors, or El Pasoan hired workers, which would bring the population number to over 30,000. Moreover, it did not include troops who arrived to the area for a two-week briefing before deployment to Asia.

Klinkowaski, Chanel, and Gutierrez, revealed in their oral interviews that the OP’s dance stage was filled with military personnel: “we began to see not only whites and Latinos, but also Middle Eastern men who informed us that they were employed by the U.S. military as contractors.”[61] Why did the OP environment attract so many agents of the state? In one of the interviews with an enlisted soldier who wanted to remain anonymous, it was noted that the club became the “only homosocial space where we [anonymous] could be intimate with each other and acknowledge our sexualities. Being on post [Fort Bliss] everyday takes a toll on you, as you must act straight-edged all the time in an environment that is dominated only by men.”[62] The atmosphere of the club was much like that of Fort Bliss; the difference was that one’s sexuality and behavior was not judged and embraced on the OP dance ground and in the closed spaces of the facility.

The last few oral histories that this author conducted were with servicewomen that were referred to by other club owners. Based on several testimonies from anonymous military women who moved to Fort Bliss in the early 1990s, there indeed existed a large lesbian servicewoman community. One respondent stated that “lesbian and bisexual life was easy to navigate at the OP and other alternative bars like Nua Nua, the San Antonio Mining and the Whatever Lounge because they had been distanced enough from the military base.”[63] The same female army soldier stated that she was looking for femme lesbians, and commented that the club was the best place to find mostly femme, Latina lesbians. Another female army officer regarded the Whatever Lounge as her favorite spot because she looked for both femme as well as butch lesbians. When asked if they saw or met any transgendered persons, both women replied no, suggesting that the “transgendered people they did see in the 1990s were able to transition and perform in full gender,” thus making them lesbian or gay rather than transgender in the women’s eyes.[64] Before the use of the Internet, several spaces within downtown El Paso operated as meeting points for lesbian servicewomen.

The two female military officers also knew from other female colleagues before they were stationed to Fort Bliss that the lesbian culture had grown increasingly throughout El Paso since the late 1970s.[65] The women confirmed that they felt a sense of “unanimity because they had the luxury of separating their public lives as military servicewomen from their lesbian lifestyles in downtown as their work would never leave the gates of Fort Bliss and into the larger, civilian El Paso.”[66] While lesbian life was not exposed publicly on Fort Bliss, lesbian state agents migrated downtown, in the same way that 1960s El Pasoan lesbians traveled to Ciudad Juárez. The presence of Fort Bliss had a significant influence on the demographic that attended the OP. Chanel reiterated that “because the OP featured new and exotic men who wanted men, it became even more of a popular nightclub.”[67] The original and New OP channeled sexual politics that reflected more national discourses concerning not only mainstream Anglo gay culture, but also racial and ethnic tensions and desires.

New Leadership at the OP: The Decline of Queer “El Chuco”

In 1986, Klinkowaski left the employment of the New OP and Bonaventure eventually sold his club to its current owners, Jesus Santillan and his partner Gilbert Morales. Under the leadership of Santillan and Morales, who also owned The San Antonio Mining Cluband The Whatever Lounge, the use of social media was employed, as they advertised their New OP through magazines such as El Paso 411, a local digest.[68] In the 1990s, the two men achieved more publicity by promoting the club in West Texas queer publications such as 1994’s El Paso PRIDE and 1999’s Microcosm El Paso/Juarez, which were circulated throughout El Paso, Las Cruces, and Ciudad Juárez.[69] Klinkowaski and Chanel continued to visit the OP during milestone events, such as the “Halloween costume garty,” and the New Year’s Eve party, both of which were usually heavily attended.[70] The owners contended that during the 1990s, they began to see “a decrease in attendance to the OP, as the clubs on Stanton Street were more popular and more people cruised them.”[71] During the early 1990s, newer gay clubs began opening on Stanton Street, an area located directly in the heart of downtown El Paso. Klinkowaski and Chanel believed that because of the creation of a “pride square that featured new and upcoming clubs such as 8 and ½,Chiquita’s,and The Briar Patch,” there was less of an impetus to return to the other side of downtown to visit the OP.[72]

At the time when queer individuals and interested heterosexuals had a choice in attending different alternative clubs, Santillan and Morales decided to advertise the club as a space that featured an exclusively gay male clientele by appealing to the majority-male, military community. Marketing was again spread through word of mouth, but also through El Paso 411, and queer publications like PRIDE.[73]The new owners not only had to compete with other gay and lesbian bars and clubs, however, but also had to remain knowledgeable of current trends and fads in popular culture that they could incorporate into their gay male nightclub. In one interview with a source affiliated with the New OP who wished to remain anonymous, the New OP tried hosting events, which aimed to spark the interest of younger males as well as portraying a nostalgic 1970s theme such as disco to the older crowd. Thus, themes like “July All Red White Blue Block Party,” and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Dance” were commonplace at the club.[74] The argued result was that the OP would see a return of past attendees. The actual effect, however, was a dwindling attendance rate, especially since the owners mainly appealed to gay males and interested heterosexuals.

The process of recreating a male homosocial gay club by projecting Anglo military culture as caricature is similar to the notions of Jasbir Puar’s ascendency of whiteness and larger homonational projects. As Puar writes, the “national homosexual subject,” who has historically been a white Anglo male, “seeks to dismantle any foreign homosexual culture or politic,” and impose a uniformed Anglo homonormativity that “aims to destroy any sexual-racial other that does not adhere to whiteness.”[75] The themed events that Santillan and Morales constructed illustrated how beliefs of imposing homonational sentiment in the OP would assist in attracting a larger male audience. Gutierrez notes that during the 90s, “many mid-aged men lost interest in the OP and the club was more populated with young under-21-year-olds and older, white Anglo and African American military men.”[76] The multiculturalness and diversity of the OP shifted to Hames-Garcia’s epitome of “modern colonial” systems, where military men exoticized not only the colonized, Latino-ness of the younger men, but also their gayness that did not prescribe to the hegemonic, homonationalist model of queer identity that the military men understood.[77] And so, as the military presence on Fort Bliss increased through the 1990s, so too did the Anglo male attendance at the club.

The 2000s “saw a steady interest back into the New OP, increased participation in queer events like Mr. Pride Texas, and its citywide collaboration with El Paso Sun City Pride” during June Pride Fest, revealed Klinkowaski.[78] Chanel stated that with the beginning of the Iraq war in 2003 “much more Puerto Rican and African American vets were seen in the club,” something that they recall was “new and called attention in the gay community.”[79] When asked how they knew these men were veterans, Chanel responded that “their straight edged-ness with distinct military haircuts, which were usually short fades, pinpointed them as vets.”[80] The sexual encounters in the OP throughout the 2000s were “militarized” due to the increased attendance from wartime soldiers. Santillan and Morales had succeeded in revitalizing the level of male attendance at their club vis-à-vis homonational propaganda. Puar argues that homonationalism is a byproduct and symptom of war-related sentiment and emerges in response to “terrorist assemblages and attacks upon notions of citizenship, identity and sexuality.”[81] The Iraq War and the proximity of Fort Bliss to the New OP reasserted the need for military men to escape the government land and perform their same-sex desires with Mexican-national and Mexican American males. Homonationalism and a post-9/11 Anglo gay identity, however, became difficult to completely impose in a border city, as many of the non-military attendees who entered the club “were mixed, bilingual and lived separate lives as Mexican Americans and as jotos (fags),” declared Gutierrez.[82]

Santillan and Morales began to employ new social media outlets that had never been accessed before, such as MySpace and eventually Facebook, to maintain the slowly growing interest in their decades-old club.[83] The posters the two circulated in downtown El Paso and on social media websites employed images of queer military men to attract the various demographics the OP had seen in attendance during the early 1980s. They commissioned these images and concepts from the late 1990s until the 2010s. The themes associated with these documents illustrated the appeal and fixation for Anglo military personnel. In a study of archived posters produced by the owners of the OP, one can view how these advertisements conflated traditional images such as the military uniform and colors reminiscent of national holidays, such as Labor Day, with queer themes. Moreover, veterans who revealed their military IDs at the door received free admission.[84] Santillan and Morales hoped that by appealing and commodifying the military to the OP’s diverse clientele, the club would remain busy or at least regain its historic demographic of military men and El Paso Latinos. Images of army men illustrated the masculinity Gutierrez, Klinkowaski, and Chanel desired. At the same time, these images and others like them, reminded the spectator of a fantasy: sexual activities with the colonizer, an idea that “aroused” young men like Gutierrez. The backdrop of the Iraq War persuaded Santillan and Morales to recreate homonational imagery to attract a once popular demographic back to the New OP. Gutierrez surmised that many of the soldiers he met and slept with eventually left Fort Bliss and arrived to the club to forget the duties of a serviceman during war times.

Homonational imagery, the aesthetic that Santillan and Morales tried to embed in their club, succeeded in drawing gay males from the city, Northern Mexico, and Fort Bliss. But it could no longer contain El Paso’s ever growing queer identity of lesbians and other gay men. The U.S.-Mexico border and Fort Bliss functioned as catalysts in assisting Latina/o lesbians and gays to break free from “white Anglo gay culture and identity,” and embrace a queerness that exceeded the narrow categorization that Santillan and Morales tried to incubate. Over time, the OP no longer became a club for gays, but “for allies and everything in-between.”[85] After thirty-five years of evolution, El Paso queer identity metamorphosed. The original and New OP was a bar, and later a club, that illustrated the power, gender, and sexual politics that would raise and harness the uniqueness and interchangeability of borderland sexual identities and behaviors.

The New OP officially shut down on October 27, 2012.[86] No official word has been given to why Santillan and Morales suddenly closed it doors. Online social media outlets such as Twitter and Facebook allowed El Pasoans of all generations to comment on the legacy the club left on the city.[87]

Conclusion

In the history of U.S. sexuality, scholars have contended that the lesbian, gay, and transgender past grew in tandem with the Civil Rights era, blossomed during the Stonewall Riots and took shape through the 1970s and 1980s. This paper argued that in borderland cities with predominately Latina/o populations like El Paso, scholars must examine sexuality and the story of LGBT movements through multiple intersectional lenses and academic methodologies to further elucidate the contested history of queer peoples. The original and New OP provided the first long-standing alternative public space for folks of all sexual identifications in the bordered, bicultural city of El Paso. Bonaventure built a bar that staged music and sexual trends, which were in conversation with the national sexual movements of the U.S. from the 1970s to the 2010s. Sexual behaviors and identities transformed, however, with the entrance of HIV/AIDS and war, as attendees altered sexual acts based on national stigma, homonational imagery, and wartime sentiment. The dance floor of the OP came to represent colonial, racial, and ethnic consumptions between Anglos and Latina/os, gay males, and men who have sex with men, military personnel and civilians. Even more, the themes and commercialization of the OP revealed the interconnectedness between its political assemblages and sexual norms. After thirty-five years, the old and the New Old Plantation stood as a testament to the construction of community spaces and most especially, racial and ethnic fetishisms within the U.S.–Mexico Borderlands. Queer nightlife did reside in the American Southwest, fighting local, national, and international normative discourses of gender and sexuality. The principal border for queer communities and individuals situated along the U.S.-Mexico national boundary is the borderland called their sexuality.

The post This Borderland Called My Sexuality: Excavating Queer Nightlife of the American Southwest Through the Lens of Intersectionality appeared first on The Postcolonialist.

The place that I occupied in the world made itself apparent very early. The first time I experienced direct racism was in my first year of primary school when a fellow pupil called me a “black bum”[1] and I got in trouble for pushing her. Many incidents followed that point, throughout the schooling years. Some were blatant, but others were more subtle, such as a teacher informing my mother that I must have been “drawing attention” to myself when I’d complained about being bullied. I simultaneously encountered gendered comments that would make me feel uncomfortable. I knew that I wasn’t supposed to be as strong and boisterous as the boys. I was supposed to like playing with Barbies and My Little Ponies, and enjoying the ballet classes I was enrolled in despite my other inclinations. In short, I felt continually limited and ridiculed by virtue of my race and sex and therefore considered the oppressions interconnected and to be contested together.

That’s how I continue to see it now. My responses to issues of gender are very much informed by my experience of race, and vice versa. My experience of structural forms of oppression was heightened due to these intersecting forms of oppression, and are particularly acute due to being of a working class background. Therefore, when it comes to Aboriginal feminism, I very much see our questions and tactics occupying the more “radical” end of the feminist spectrum. By radical, I am referring to streams such as socialist/marxist feminism, anarcha-feminism and radical feminism. I feel personally that the issue of race keeps me focussed on community rather than individual advancement, and therefore my feminism reflects this. Additionally, I seek self-determination as both an Aboriginal person and a woman, and therefore need to challenge the structures that negate this freedom. To borrow a quote from the Combahee River Collective Statement: “If Black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression”. In an Australian context this carries a slightly different resonance due to the experiences of colonisation, but to decolonise from both a race and gender perspective is imperative.

I strongly believe that as Aboriginal women, whilst our fights are related to ongoing feminist struggles within other racially marginalised groups, they are not the same. By virtue of the fact that we are first peoples who have suffered under the process of colonisation within our own homelands, our struggles can be quite unique. Recently, for example, I was engaged in a markedly frustrating discussion on the concept of “fair skin privilege” as someone of a migrant background took issue to how I was utilising the term “black”. Fair skin privilege of course exists to an extent in an Aboriginal context, however the “Stolen Generations”[2], for example, highlight how limited this privilege has historically been. Additionally, migrant populations, whilst suffering marginalisation in Australia, also benefit from the displacement of Aboriginal people. Therefore there is a need to tell our own stories, and expand our own theories rather than simply drawing upon the experiences of others.

When I am highlighting why I feel a specific Aboriginal feminism is necessary, I tend to point to three formative elements that structure this need: the white patriarchy, the black patriarchy and “mainstream” feminism. As a point of oppression, the white patriarchy is self explanatory given its continuing historical legacy and political privilege. Aboriginal women feeling excluded by mainstream feminism is a topic that has been covered many times, most recently in an article by Kelly Briggs, which poignantly proposed that arguments regarding the lack of racial diversity in parliament are sorely lacking from mainstream feminism. Yet how the patriarchy operates within the Aboriginal community is not something that is discussed as often. It does have impact, even if the politics of race bind us. I am seeking to define how these elements play out in our communities more and more, because through better understandings we can build better and more inclusive movements that don’t leave the most vulnerable behind.

Many Aboriginal feminists have been rightly critical of mainstream feminisms in the past, due to lack of collaboration that centralized the individual over the communal, or the imposition of privileged viewpoints as if these were a universal experience for women. In addition, an “Orientalist” understanding that misread Aboriginal culture has sometimes been applied by feminists to cultural issues and practices that are ours to challenge. This is not because we necessarily perceive these things differently but rather, we need the space to interpret and challenge these things in our own communities. One example I like to highlight is the constant questions I receive from non-Aboriginal feminists regarding whether women should be allowed to play the didgeridoo, an Aboriginal wind instrument typically played by men. Considering the multitude of pressing issues that Aboriginal women face in Australia, a question such as this is not a defining Aboriginal feminist question, and the questioning of this cultural practice by non-Aboriginal women simply comes across as another act of imperialism. There is nothing to be gained for the feminist movement as a whole by non-Aboriginal feminists challenging these cultural practices; rather it just negates our rights of self-determination and indeed cultural ownership.

Over time, Aboriginal feminists (for example, Aileen Morton-Robinson in “Talkin’ Up to the White Woman”, 2000) have continued to highlight additional hurdles that they face due to the intersection of race and gender. Aboriginal women experience the issues that non-Aboriginal women experience due to the process of colonisation, but often there are additional complexities. For example, whilst equal pay is important for all of us, for many years Aboriginal people were historically not paid for their labour at all, and this acutely affected Aboriginal women working as domestic servants. Our wages were, in a lot of cases, held in trusts by the governments and therefore our “stolen wages” claims are ongoing many years later. “Victim blame” is something we face often, and indeed, a number of the Indigenous movements’ more conservative commentators tend to replicate these viewpoints. When we experience victim blaming as women, it is compounded by race to the point where Aboriginal women dying from domestic homicide at a rate ten times that of other women in Australia barely rates a mention. We tend to be subjected to the same issues of body shame and arbitrary and commercialised notions of beauty, but we are also judged on our skin tone and whether or not we possess certain features deemed to be tellingly “Aboriginal” (eg: a wide nose, deep-set eyes, etc). We can also experience fetishisation on the basis of our skin tones despite being mainly socially excluded because of them. In short, our experiences can add layers to feminist understandings and there are many ways in which a notion of a universalised women’s experience can exclude us or only tell part of the tale.

When it comes to the notion of a “black patriarchy”, I see this being perpetuated on two fronts. The first is through the patriarchal structures that we inherit through the process of colonisation by the mainstream culture, and the second manifests itself in our own community-based forms, through our traditional practices and how we view and deploy gender roles. To start with our internal patriarchy, it is always interesting to me when members of the Indigenous community argue that traditional societies had gender equality due to our understandings of gender complementarity, which presumes that the separate and set roles of men and women had equal importance in communities. This is not necessarily the case. From one side of this vast country to the other, different practices existed in different clan groups and therefore the experiences of “equality” for women via a notion of gender complementarity would have differed. If we state otherwise, then as black people we run the risk of universalising our own experiences similar to what mainstream feminism has been accused of doing. Secondly, gender complementarity has not been known to equal gender equality in many regions of the world. We have practices such as polygynous marriage that are arranged from birth, alongside norms such as specific forms of governance and punishment for women. At times, due to the fact that we (as Aboriginal people) are protecting family and culture in the face of ongoing colonialism, we lose the ability to critically examine our own practices because we are worried that anything perceived as negative will be used to further discredit us as peoples.

The patriarchy we inherited and in some ways continue to perpetuate from the dominant culture tends to manifest itself when we adopt external cultural practices and use them in ways that may enhance pride in Aboriginality but reinforce gender disparities. Examples of this are events such as the Miss NAIDOC pageants, which are based upon the idea that we need to celebrate the “beauty” of Aboriginal women. Beauty, as a concept, may be harmful to women as it often centralises the appearance of a woman as being her most important attribute. One of the points I made back when I first examined this in the above linked article was that we actually come from a culture that values age and wisdom, assigning great value to our older women. When it comes to beauty however, older women are almost completely excluded. Additionally, our women have been achieving highly in a number of fields for a long time; we have been obtaining tertiary education qualifications at a rate nearly double that of Aboriginal men. So why do we consider it important to celebrate the “beauty” of Aboriginal women whilst barely mentioning these wonderful achievements? The idea that something becomes empowering if it is community organised and run fails to examine what it is that we are instituting from the cultures of those we have been oppressed by, and if these are indeed worthwhile things to adopt. Without such questioning, we run the risk of merely contributing to the subjugation of our own rather than enacting true positive change.

It continues to be imperative to challenge the prevailing structures of power on the dual fronts of race and gender, both internally and externally. Australia, despite the rhetoric to the contrary, continues to privilege a very white and patriarchal culture in which exclusionary legacies, rather than being a source of shame, tend to be celebrated. I would even go so far as to argue that due to our complex history and culture wars, begun in the early 1990s then reinforced by the Howard government, we have gone backwards when it comes to being a space inclusive of race and gender. During the Howard years, Aboriginal people were continually rebuked for “focussing on the negative” when telling the true stories of what we have faced under centuries of colonisation. Women were told that fights for gender equality were “political correctness gone mad,” or otherwise not essential. Australia reflects this perspective today. Australia Day, which was of little importance to most of the population only a couple of decades ago, is now a day to drape flags across your shoulders and be “proud” at the cost of any acknowledgement of the true history of this day and what it has meant to Aboriginal peoples. ANZAC Day, which was also criticised because feminists drew attention to victims of war and rape as a tactic of war in particular, is again focussing on the “brave people who served our country” in the various conflicts. There is a need to challenge Australian historical narratives on a number of fronts, and Aboriginal feminists have an incredibly important role to play in this.

I strongly feel that Aboriginal feminism is going to continue to grow and develop. We have a number of incredibly strong Aboriginal women who are moving to the forefront of public discourse. A lot of them are unapologetic about their race and their gender, are highly educated, and ensure that they use these knowledges to continue educating and inspiring others. Through social media and online platforms such as blogging, their bodies of work continue to grow and circulate. The Internet offers a wonderful opportunity for those that have been traditionally denied a voice to claim a space. And claim it, we shall!

The post Intersectionality and Indigenous Feminism: An Aboriginal Woman’s Perspective appeared first on The Postcolonialist.

El haber sido miembro del Movimiento Homosexual de Lima (Mhol), una de las organizaciones gay/lésbica más antigua de Sudamérica[1] debería producir orgullo y satisfacción, pero ¿qué ocurre cuando dicha organización pertenece al Perú? Pues, se entremezclan muchas sensaciones y emociones. Claro, existe una sensación de orgullo hacia el movimiento, pues hablamos de una organización que viene trabajando por un poco más de 30 años, manteniéndose vigente en un contexto donde el tejido de las organizaciones sociales es débil y fragmentado. Pero también existe frustración debido a que después de todos esos años no se ha logrado ningún marco de protección por parte de los diferentes gobiernos frente a la comunidad LGBT. Contrariamente, lo que ha existido, existe y se halla institucionalizado en la cultura estatal es la negación sistemática y estructural de derechos hacia a esta comunidad específica. Esta situación lleva a cuestionar las estrategias, las acciones y la postura que el movimiento ha tenido frente al Estado.

Mientras son muchos avances y conquistas que se han producido en la región como en el caso de Argentina, Uruguay y Brasil, las reformas constitucionales de Ecuador y Bolivia, en relación al reconocimiento de derechos a la comunidad LGBT; el Perú se encuentra entre los países más homofóbicos, exactamente en el puesto 113 de 138 países evaluados, el peor puesto en la región Latinoamericana^[2]. Y claro, definitivamente el contexto homofóbico trae consecuencias tangibles en la comunidad LGBT, lo cual se evidencia a nivel cotidiano, económico, social y principalmente a nivel político, lo que se traduce en la inexistencia de políticas públicas LGBT inclusivas en el país hasta la fecha.

Sin embargo, no es que no exista ninguna política pública dirigida a la comunidad LGBT, sino que se debe mencionar la existencia de una exclusión deliberada por parte del Estado. Por un lado, existe una política pública por omisión (Béjar, 2011: 36), la cual se traduce en un comportamiento sistemático de negación de toda propuesta normativa enfocada en la comunidad LGBT. ¿Qué sentido tiene que en el censo de población y vivienda del año 2013 se omita literalmente a las parejas del mismo sexo que viven bajo un mismo techo, como si se consideró en Chile? Por otro lado, en el Perú, así como en la mayoría de países de la región andina, la principal estrategia de inclusión de la comunidad LGBT ha sido las políticas de salud pública, específicamente las relacionadas a enfrentar la epidemia del VIH y focalizada en ciertos grupos considerados en situación de mayor vulneración (Jaime: 2013).

Para tener una mirada de la situación, desde el primer reporte de Sida en Perú, la epidemia del VIH se ha concentrado en las comunidades de travestis, gays, hombres bisexuales y hombres que tienen sexo con hombres, alcanzando prevalencias de 24.3% en travestis y 17.1% en gays, que constituyen el 56% de casos nuevos, según reportes de la vigilancia centinela (CONAMUSA: 2011). Según Mhol (2012: 7) los servicios de prevención, diagnóstico y atención de ITS y VIH que brinda el Estado peruano alcanzan únicamente al 9.77% de las personas TGB/HSH (teniendo en cuenta el universo de 429, 489 personas), acciones para las que solo se destina el 3.2% del gasto nacional en VIH según el estudio de Medición de Gasto en Salud MEGAS (MINSA: 2012). Además, no más del 50% de personas TGB/HSH alcanzadas por dichos servicios han tenido acceso a una prueba diagnóstica de VIH. Así, aún en tiempos de acceso supuestamente universal y gratuito al tratamiento antirretroviral, cada día mueren tres personas por sida en el Perú. Mientras tanto, el desabastecimiento de condones y antirretrovirales es constante (Mhol, 2012: 7).

En relación a la violencia, el primer informe de derechos humanos de la comunidad LGBT en el Perú (Alvarez y Bracamonte: 2006) identificó que una persona LGBT moría cada cinco días; en la actualidad se ha identificado que cada semana muere asesinada una persona LGBT entre el 2006 al 2010, como expresión más extrema de la violencia sistemática y recurrente que viven las personas por su orientación sexual o identidad de género (Romero: 2011).

Frente a esa situación, el Congreso ha claudicado en su deber de sancionar los crímenes de odio. El proyecto de Ley 3584/2009-CR que proponía la Incorporación de los Crímenes de Odio en el Código Penal fue archivado por presión de los grupos antiderechos y las principales bancadas de ese entonces. En diciembre de 2011 se presentó el proyecto de Ley multipartidario 609/2011-CR contra Acciones Criminales Originadas por Motivos de Discriminación, que fue discutido en comisión y en el pleno en julio del 2013, pero que lamentablemente no fue aprobado.

Sobre el acceso a empleo y trabajo, si bien es cierto que dentro de la comunidad LGBT existen diferencias, resultado de variables como clase, raza, etnicidad, ingreso, pobreza, educación (Sardá-Chandiramani, 2008: 196-197), es bastante claro que la situación de estos sujetos es vulnerable si la analizamos desde la perspectiva del Decent Work, propuesta por la OIT (Ghai: 2006), ya que como es discutido por Ferreyra (2010: 208), donde es posible obtener trabajo fuera de la prostitución, no hay protección frente a la discriminación, como ocurre con los gays y las lesbianas que deben ocultar su orientación en sus lugares de trabajo por temor al despido. En el caso de las travestis, la situación es más cruda, pues la visibilidad intrínseca a la construcción de la identidad y el cuerpo las coloca en una situación de exclusión laboral, donde una de las pocas opciones es el trabajo sexual y otros oficios menores como la cocina, la cosmética y la decoración (Salazar y Villayzan, 2009: 12). Incluso, en el ejercicio del trabajo sexual, ellas buscan la oportunidad de ejercerlo en el exterior, pues éste se percibe como una buena oportunidad de hacer dinero, como ocurre con muchas travestis peruanas que migran hacia Buenos Aires, Madrid y Milán.

La respuesta desde el movimiento

Cuando comencé mi trayectoria en la lucha por mis derechos y los de mis compañeros LGBT, estaba aún en la universidad y fue el llevar un curso de género con la genial luchador feminista Gina Vargas, lo que inspiró en mí una serie de ideas, compromisos y, sobre todo, ánimos y entusiasmo por querer lograr un cambio sustancial. Claro, estando en tercer año de Sociología, tenía más interés en generar cambios a través de la investigación. Sin embargo, fue ya como egresado, cuando empecé a laborar en proyectos relacionados con la salud –específicamente en la respuesta al VIH/Sida– la incidencia política y la promoción de derechos, que entendí que la pura ciencia y la academia no podían entender ni pretender resolverlo todo.

Fue cuando mi entrada al Mhol significó –utilizando las palabras de Tito Bracamonte– el empezar a “contaminarme”, a conocer de primera mano las condiciones de vida de nuestros compañeros, sus luchas cotidianas, sus resistencias personales y comunitarias; a aprender y dialogar desde una posición horizontal entre ellos, incluso a divertirme y disfrutar de sus espacios, que luego se convirtieron también en míos. Ello trajo muchos aprendizajes y recompensas, personales la gran mayoría, pero también académicas y profesionales, pues nunca renuncié a ser un investigador, sino que ello empezó a cobrar un sentido más humano y conllevó un mayor posicionamiento político, desde una voz con identidad LGBT, dejando atrás nociones abstractas, desbordadas de contenido pero no desde una cartografía específica.

Desde entonces  me permito hacer “el viaje” de un lado a otro, aunque en algunos espacios académicos he sido relegado por ello, pero a estas alturas y valgan verdades no me interesa lo que la academia tenga que decir al respecto. Fue en mi estadía en una universidad holandesa donde experimenté la clara división que existe entre el activismo y el trabajo intelectual, y cómo el ser activista implicaba que en un salón de clase, una PhD alemana me mencione: “a claro, es que tú eres activista”, donde ese “ah claro” implicaba que ni mi trayectoria ni mi reflexión era suficiente para dialogar sobre la importancia de la identidad en los sujetos insertos en actividades de economía informal.

En Perú actualmente no es que exista –o en todo caso no le he percibido con mayor claridad- una división así, pues existe un diálogo entre ambos campos. Aquí es más frecuente que los activistas se relacionen con la academia, pues es uno de los pocos canales para visibilizar la realidad, a falta de uno formal e institucional por parte del Estado. Lo que existe en el Perú es un estamento o “realeza” académica, mayormente cerrada e instaurada en universidades y que funciona a través de la monopolización de contactos, cooperantes y el acceso a fondos para publicaciones frecuentes. Ellos, donde algunos sin ser parte de la comunidad, tienen licencia para constituir las voces de los sujetos y sus comunidades, incluso de representarnos en espacios internacionales donde se discuten temas desde epidemiológicos hasta de identidad, homofobia y derechos humanos. Sin lugar a duda sus discursos ejercen poder en la construcción de los otros, los subordinados, de la posibilidad de nombrarlos. Y claro, ellos son también la puerta de invitación para procesos de colonización del lenguaje, agendas sociales y políticas, representaciones, etc. Ello me recuerda que hace algunos meses atrás tomó lugar la organización de una “reunión informal” con profesores angloparlantes para dialogar sobre la situación de los estudios sobre sexualidad en el Perú, en donde se invitaba a personas relacionadas a la academia, activistas y grupos de investigadores. El número de asistentes fue muy reducido y pensé, claro, si hacen la acotación que la reunión será en inglés, ello ya desanima la participación de los colectivos existentes. Desconozco la intención real de dicha reunión, pero ¿por qué se asume un idioma que no es el nuestro para discutir sobre la situación de los estudios en sexualidad en el Perú? ¿no es bastante colonialista tener que discutir sobre el Perú en inglés, siendo además el punto central de la discusión?

Acerca del movimiento peruano LGBT, a estos tiempos, la geografía social y política de las organizaciones ha cambiado mucho, hasta inicios del nuevo milenio no eran muchas, y no tan intensa las relaciones entre unas y otras. Recuerdo además que existía una dinámica más enfocada en temas de no discriminación, unión civil y deshomosexualización del VIH/Sida en la capital, Lima, dominada mayormente por colectivos universitarios y jóvenes. Por otro lado, existía otra realidad en el resto del país de la cual no se conocía mucho: la situación de precariedad al interior de las regiones. Cuando se inician esos primeros contactos de activistas de Lima con organizaciones al interior del país, es que se descubren prácticas solidarias y de supervivencia en las regiones, dinámicas que constituían muchas veces el fin y motivo de las organizaciones, como las colectas o actividades de venta de comidas para recaudar fondos para la compra de medicamentos paliativos de compañeros enfermos por causa del VIH o para la compra del ataúd y el nicho de los que iban falleciendo, claro está, en una época pre acceso gratuito a los medicamentos anti retrovirales.^[3]

Y es a partir del 2000, en el marco del Primer Encuentro Nacional de Líderes LGBT, que las distintas organizaciones inician un proceso de reconocimiento y diálogo, en donde a partir de las necesidades de las regiones se reincorpora en la agenda política el tema de la prevención y atención en salud.  A partir de ahí y con el intensivo apoyo de la cooperación internacional es que ahora existe un número significativo de organizaciones y algo de interrelación entre ellas. Recuerdo que hasta hubo en algún momento los esfuerzos por construir bloques regionales y que derive en la existencia de un Frente Nacional, pero que no tuvo suficiente empuje ni ánimo para lo que constituye –a mi entender– una carrera de largo aliento. Ello se podría comparar en visión al proceso que existe en Brasil a la hora de elegir representaciones federales y nacionales y la construcción de agendas integradas, democráticas y construidas desde las bases sociales.

Los actores y sus vicios de importancia

Los recursos financieros de la cooperación internacional han alentado y promovido el incremento de organizaciones, el activismo social, político y cultural, para generar cambios favorables en la normativa, acceso a mejores servicios de salud, educación, empleo, entre otros. Además se buscaba que en ese proceso se fortalecieran y sobretodo se perfilaran nuevos liderazgos, lo que era importante para un necesario proceso de renovación, y sobre todo para enfrentar lo que en un mediano futuro ya era casi evidente: la disminución o ausencia de fondos de la cooperación internacional y la eternamente ansiada autosostenibilidad de las organizaciones.

El Fondo Mundial de Lucha contra el Sida, la Tuberculosis y la Malaria es el cooperante en VIH, Sida y empoderamiento de comunidades gay y travestis que más ha invertido en el país, a través de proyectos nacionales que integraban al Estado y a la sociedad civil (principalmente a través de ONG responsables de la ejecución de las actividades en coordinación con las instancias estatales), lo que se denomina public-private partnership projects. El Fondo Mundial  entendía que el fortalecimiento organizacional era necesario para la respuesta al VIH y por ello sus acciones incluían desde financiamiento para conformar legalmente a los colectivos, cursos de capacitación hasta alquiler de espacios para su funcionamiento operativo. Sin embargo, dada las características de estos programas, cada año el cooperante reducía los fondos conforme el Estado debía de aumentar su contrapartida, situación que nunca ocurrió, pues el Estado nunca asumió ni política ni presupuestalmente la transferencia real de los programas, hecho que se refleja en que hasta la fecha existe nula inversión en programas y/o políticas dirigidas a nuestra comunidad. Además, actualmente el Perú es considerado un país de ingreso medio, por lo que ya no es  elegible para los programas del Fondo Mundial, salvo algunas convocatorias especiales dirigidas a poblaciones vulnerables específicas.

Aparte de ese contexto, se tiene un movimiento LGBT fragmentado, con pocas coordinaciones inter regionales y nula proyección de un plan político nacional. Más bien se tiene una comunidad donde algunos actores que han tenido la posibilidad de estar involucrados en las direcciones o presidencias de sus organizaciones, mandos medios de coordinación o responsables de actividades relacionadas a la administración de los centros comunitarios financiados por proyectos de Fondo Mundial, se han convertido en dueños y señores de algunas organizaciones en el país. Más aún, algunos de ellos han desarrollado un perfil ególatra, con espíritu autosuficiente, arrogante y compulsivamente mediáticos, pues desean ser la cara visible y protagonista del todo el movimiento LGBT en el país, pero que no tienen la capacidad de convocatoria e interlocución para que la gran mayoría se sume a las reivindicaciones políticas.

¿Por qué aquello último? Al interior del movimiento LGBT, las carencias económicas, políticas, organizacionales por un lado y  la fragmentación y falta de solidaridad política por otro, han debilitado su capacidad para incidir a favor de derechos. A nivel nacional, no es que exista una red articulada de organizaciones LGBT ni la promoción de la misma por parte del Estado, sino un grupo humano diverso, atravesado por la pobreza, discriminación, exclusión y marginación. La interseccionalidad de clase, raza y género, produce una “comunidad” fragmentada, donde son mayormente algunos del sector medio y pobre quienes se visibilizan, organizan y demandan, mientras que los “otros blancos, clase media-alta” desarrollan un bajo nivel de solidaridad e indignación, y más bien un alto nivel de indiferencia, debido a la no percepción de discriminación, pobreza y exclusión por sus mejores condiciones de acceso a recursos (educación, empleo, salud, etc.)

Explicando mejor, diría que una buena parte de la clase alta y media de personas LGBT -la cual enfatiza lo masculino sobre lo femenino y sus valores, se considera blanca o con matices que aspiran al blanqueamiento- no participa de las demandas, o incluso contra argumenta en la cotidianeidad frente a las reivindicaciones de la comunidad LGBT organizada, pues aquello es de indígenas, negras, mestizas, afeminadas, travestis, pobres, machonas y escandalosas: “Yo nunca he sufrido de discriminación, voy dónde quiero y si puedo pagar nadie puede discriminarme”, “eso del activismo es para los cholos escandalosos y pobres, yo nunca he sufrido de discriminación”, por mencionar algunos ejemplos. Y a la vez, otra buena parte que pertenecen a la mayoría empobrecida, indígena, travesti, afro, mestiza, no participa o no le interesa dichas reivindicaciones, pero por otras circunstancias que más bien se encuentran dentro de una racionalidad más enfocada en cubrir necesidades inmediatas y evaluar el costo-beneficio de dicho involucramiento.

No es que no exista movimiento y activistas en el Perú, sino que éste es un híbrido pequeño, que se encuentra en el medio o en la intersección de los grupos de clase baja, media y alta. Claro, compuesta por sujetos con compromiso de cambio, voluntad política y capacidad de indignación; sin embargo, este proceso no se encuentra exento de los vicios de distinción y diferenciación racial, clase y género, lo que genera tensiones al interior de los mismos. Analizando, queda claro la existencia de micro relaciones de poder, basada en categorías que funcionan como capital social y simbólico: la raza, el género y la clase. Estas relaciones pueden ser casi invisibles, se reproducen de manera tan sutil en diferentes espacios o se han asumido como cotidianas o normalizadas, que hace complicado tomar conciencia de ellas para cuestionarlas y transformarlas. O claro, algunos se logran servir de ellas para mantener su hegemonía dentro del feudo, pero que, además, no es sino el espejo del racismo, sexismo y clasismo que existe en nuestra sociedad.

¿De dónde viene la importancia? Acercamientos al enfoque interseccional

Un punto importante, clave para dar respuesta a muchas preguntas ligadas a nuestra compleja sociedad marcada por la desigualdad social; la cual ha devenido en cliché, pero más en forma que en contenido, es acerca de los rezagos de nuestra experiencia colonial, la que generó e instauró una sociedad estamental, dividida en estados con acceso diferenciado a la riqueza, la educación, el ejercicio de profesiones oficios, y que hasta estas últimas incluso eran heredadas de padres a hijos.

La comunidad LGBT no escapa de este último argumento, y es justo lo que podría explicar la configuración y distribución del poder entre las organizaciones y al interior de las mismas, atrapando algunas veces a sus liderazgos en personificaciones despóticas y líderes caudillistas.

Teniendo en cuenta aquellos argumentos, me atrevo a afirmar que las organizaciones de base comunitaria en general y las LGBT en especial, son sensibles a convertirse en pequeños feudos, en donde en vez de construir y reproducir los valores y principios que se esperan alcanzar en la sociedad, se instauran más bien relaciones de poder, las cuales se hayan instrumentalizadas desde la dieta y el refrigerio para atender el taller de capacitación hasta la membresía, y el viaje con todo pagado a la capital o al extranjero. Por ello, es que a veces en las reuniones orgánicas se cuelan ciertos susurros, pero que muchas veces están silenciados por temor a cuestionar la autoridad, “porque es siempre él (ella) es la que viaja para los talleres, congresos, encuentros”.

Definitivamente esto produce una fragmentación a interior de las organizaciones.  Cuando los liderazgos empiezan a tener conciencia de los relativos beneficios que tienen por ser el delegado, el presidente o el representante es que empieza a operar un proceso nocivo: la distancia con las bases y los principios, y más bien el matrimonio con el poder. Y aquí se desliza una pregunta curiosa, ¿es el cargo el que corrompe o la personalidad de los liderazgos? ¿O es la conjunción de ambos que detonan en liderazgos importantes pero verticales, impositivos y berrinchudos? Pues me ha tocado observar a líderes con la tarea de bloquear o aniquilar y expulsar a potenciales líderes, claro más jóvenes que ellos, que pueden hacerle sombra; y más bien incentivan y promocionan a quienes ayudan a expandir o reproducir su poder a través de una actitud servil, “sus hijas”^[4], nada más simbólico y estructural en una sociedad estamental.

En general son sólo algunos y no la gran mayoría de los activistas que reciben el privilegio de acceder a información y conocimiento técnico, pero éste al mismo tiempo se convierte en un recurso de mucho poder. Sobre todo en grupos con mayores desigualdades como la comunidad travesti. Por ejemplo, el acceso a información (epidemiológica, propuestas de proyectos de la cooperación, presupuestos de inversión pública, convocatorias para capacitaciones y talleres) puede verse hasta como un privilegio, un recurso que las puede colocar en una posición jerárquica frente a las otras.

Tampoco creo que las organizaciones LGBT deban funcionar desde una lógica partidaria ochentera ni noventera, que no es lo mismo a que las organizaciones tengan alguna adscripción partidaria o con alguna ideología en particular. Y entiendo esa lógica basada en prácticas de disciplinamiento partidario como “el cierre de filas”, el cual muchas veces sólo favorece la continuidad de relaciones serviles, jerárquicas, la defensa de intereses netamente egocentristas, y la protección de los líderes “importantes”, pero verticales y autoritarios.

Si ya la comunidad LGBT es objeto de negación de derechos, si en el Perú nuestra comunidad es excluida de las pretensiones inclusivas del gobierno actual y lo más probable es que así siga siendo en un futuro medio, ¿por qué reproducir esas mismas negaciones y jerarquías hacia el interior del movimiento? ¿Por qué se mantienen esos feudos –el cual ya no es sólo el espacio de la organización, sino todos los campos sociales y simbólicos que se vinculan con ella–, donde se asienta que una es más bonita que otra, que ésta es más blanca que aquélla, que ésa tiene más recursos que todas las demás?

Por supuesto que una configuración estamental al interior del movimiento produce sus propios “privilegiados importantes”, el político y el académico se convierten en categorías exclusivas para denominar a los otros –que repito son la gran mayoría– ignorantes, apolíticos, y hasta traidores, convirtiéndose en una actitud tendenciosa y que termina generando diálogos entre unos cuantos y no entre todos que conforma la base social y comunitaria.

Además, es cierto que entre los diferentes feudos dialogan, pero también bajo intereses que a veces son irreconciliables, lo que no ha ayudado en nada en la generación de frentes amplios y nacionales en base a objetivos comunes que enfrenten además problemas comunes como la discriminación, el reconocimiento de las uniones civiles, la falta de acceso a educación, empleo, salud integral y los crímenes de odio. Para ello se requiere una revolución primero al interior del movimiento, que quiebre dichos privilegios, que democratice los recursos y que rompa con las líneas de sucesión por nacimiento, a “mis hijas”.

La dilatación de una transformación efectiva, hace que el movimiento esté a merced de los vicios generados por la estructura estamental y también de los discursos externos que pretenden homogenizar la lucha comunitaria en todo el sur global, a partir de teorías foráneas, academicistas y desarrollistas que no han tenido ningún logro efectivo. Ello implica que haya una revitalización de las apuestas de transformación que partan de las propias racionalidades o cosmovisiones LGBT del país, basadas en sus propias voces, posicionamientos geopolíticos, sus políticas del cuerpo, sus economías emocionales, y sus tejidos afectivos, y que pueda dialogar en un contexto sur-sur y que interpelen las teorías hegemónicas del norte, en donde incluso el estado pueda brindar su apoyo en los procesos de diálogo con ellos. Solo así se podrá trazar una estrategia políticamente situada no abstracta, totalizante y homogenizadora, sino con cuerpo, rostro y nombre(s) propios(s).

Definitivamente no queremos un sumo pontífice, no necesitamos oráculos que concentren y centralicen el conocimiento y los recursos, que reproduzcan verticalidad y que conviertan el discurso de la asistencia técnica en una herramienta de asistencialismo y dependencia perversa. Tampoco necesitamos de herramientas de otros contextos ni copiar sus realidades. En la actualidad se requiere desjerarquizar y desmantelar el aparato de privilegios de aquellos liderazgos y sus vicios, así como las relaciones entre los miembros al interior de las organizaciones. Sólo renovando el diálogo entre pares de manera horizontal, se podrán involucrar a diferentes actores que tendrán el derecho de ser importantes y líderes, elegidos por la propia comunidad y respaldados principalmente por sus bases y no por las ONG’s, la cooperación o el propio Estado; pero eso sí, identificando muy bien esas micro relaciones de poder, revertiéndolas en relaciones democráticas e inclusivas.

The post Las fallidas transformaciones al interior del movimiento LGBT en el Perú: una interpretación crítica desde la perspectiva interseccional appeared first on The Postcolonialist.

Panning through the dismal space of out-of-service garbage trucks against a dreary city skyline, the opening scene of The Salt Mines (1990) introduces us to Sara, a self-identified Latina transvestite working as a prostitute in New York City. A diamond in the rough with goldilocks hair similar to Farah Fawcett of the 1970s, she is presented as both a seasoned veteran of the streets and a mentor to Gigi and Giovanna, two other transvestite prostitutes whom we also meet in the film. As an image of grace surrounded by the squalor of poverty, disease, and death, Sara is also an image of queer defiance, seemingly unfazed by her physical environment and oppressive life experiences as an exile from Cuba and a refugee of the Mariel boatlift. One year later in the follow-up film The Transformation (1995) we meet Sara again; only this time, Pastor Terry Wier is our medium to her life, or rather, death as a woman and “born again” into a man. Sara is now Ricardo, transformed by his devotion to the Christian faith and teachings of a heteronormative lifestyle.

While the Salt Mines follows the unique lives of Gigi, Giovanna, and Sara as they make a home among the salt deposits used by the New York Sanitation Department to clear away snow in the winter, The Transformation centers on Sara’s new life as Ricardo, undergoing the transition in order to be “rescued” by a conservative Christian ministry after discovering she is HIV positive. As seen in these documentary films, how is it possible that, in the space of cinematic time, what once was an image of queer defiance – Sara in The Salt Mines – becomes the epitome of queer catastrophe and Christian fundamentalist triumph, as embodied in Ricardo in The Transformation?

Figure 1. Sara in The Salt Mines (left) and Ricardo in The Transformation (right).

Viewed side-by-side, The Salt Mines and The Transformation charts a series of dynamic ambiguities and continual movements across differences of race, gender, sexuality, class, and religion. Moreover, as a genre of film intended to record and interrogate aspects of reality, the latter documentary does not offer a “picture perfect” conclusion to Ricardo’s new life as a born-again Christian who is happily married to the woman of his dreams. Rather, it ends with a brutally honest moment in which Ricardo, now physically impaired by the onslaught of the AIDS virus, reveals his desire that if he still had a choice, “I would choose to be a woman.” Concluding on a somber affect that leaves viewers stunned at Ricardo’s self-confession, The Transformation challenges the notion of fixed, visible, and transparent identities, as captured in The Salt Mines.

When making the films, directors Susana Aikin and Carlos Aparicio utilized a style of documentary that allowed viewers to deduce their own conclusions of what is seen on screen, free from stylistic choices of music, interviews, scene arrangements, or voice-over narrations. Known as the “observational mode” of documentary, this perspective helps to demonstrate the role of documentaries as instances of discourse rather than “window[s] on unscripted, undirected, unrehearsed, and unperformed realit[ies].”[1] Nevertheless, I would argue, the force of these films stems from the fact that they remain narratives grounded in some version of actuality and experience, involving social actors as opposed to stock characters. By engaging the visual texts as offered in these films, this essay explores the incongruities that exist between reality and representation.As separate texts, The Salt Mines and The Transformation also offer distinct examples of what Donna Haraway terms “situated knowledges,” where each film holds a distinct and partial point of view—rather than a disembodied objectivity—that provides a more nuanced account of information constituting a specific context or environment.[2] The questions these documentaries raise are thus linked and different: while The Salt Mines looks at an exceptional group of transvestites in order to question the precarious nature of queer kinship formations in public spaces, The Transformation follows the new Christian life of Ricardo (Sara in The Salt Mines) to demonstrate and document the forceful nature of ideological state apparatuses—to borrow Althusser’s term—in constructing and maintaining the dominant norm of cisgender heterosexuality. In using Cynthia Fuch’s description of the self-conscious representations of documentary conventions, The Salt Mines and the Transformation ultimately map “a constellation of anxieties about queer expression, verification, and representation by complicating traditional links between visibility and identity and, in particular, by insisting that race, gender, class” – and, I would add, religion – “are inextricable from sexuality in any conception of identity or reality.”[3]

Technique for Visibility: Queer Reframing in Observational Documentary

In Reframing Bodies: AIDS, Bearing Witness, and the Queer Moving Image, Roger Hallas (2009) examines a corpus of queer films and videos made between the mid-1980s and the early 2000s in response to the AIDS epidemics in North America, Europe, Australia, and South Africa. While he does not incorporate The Salt Mines or The Transformation as films within his body of “queer AIDS media,” Hallas’ use of the term reframing is particularly useful for my analysis of the two documentaries. Hallas explains how his archive of queer AIDS media radically reframes not only how viewers perceive HIV/AIDS but also the spaces in which they circulated.[4] As these films are “neither mere ideological critiques of the dominant media representation of the epidemic nor corrective attempts to produce ‘positive’ images of people living with HIV/AIDS,” their importance lies in the ability to document both the individual and collective trauma of AIDS. As he clarifies further:

This discursive act required a sustained dialectical tension between directly attesting to the medical, psychological, and political imperatives produced by AIDS and contesting the enunciative position available to people with HIV/AIDS in dominant media representations, which had consistently subjected their speech to either a shaming abjection or a universalistic humanism. Moreover, the dialectical dynamic of these works reframed not only the bodies of the witnesses seen and heard on the screen but also the relationship of such represented bodies to the diverse viewing bodies in front of the screen.[5]

In line with Hallas’ description, The Transformation highlights the specific capacity of documentary to “bear witness” to the historical trauma of AIDS, as evidenced by the circumstances that inform Sara’s decision to become Ricardo. However, unlike the films analyzed by Hallas that also document the culture of care emerging from the queer community’s response to the epidemic’s effects of illness, death, and loss, The Transformation does not incorporate AIDS activism or any type of political mobilization against queer discrimination. Rather, and more tellingly, the film attest to the ways in which dominant discursive regimes, as depicted through Pastor Terry Wier’s use of religious rhetoric, have the power to shape queer bodies into “right” subjects. In using Althusser, to what set of interpellating calls does Sara respond?

Because Aiken and Aparicio reframe the discourse on AIDS within narratives of the ordinary and everyday versus through sensationalist accounts, The Salt Mines and The Transformation must also be understood as falling within the observational mode of documentary filmmaking. In Bill Nichols’ influential study (2001) of contemporary documentary film, he identifies six types, or modes, of documentary. While his classification scheme recognizes the performative mode as particularly salient for social groups who have been historically shunned from the lens of the camera, it is the observational mode of documentary that is at play within Aiken and Aparicio’s films. Arising from technological innovations of the 1960s that made possible mobile lightweight cameras and portable sound recording equipment, observational documentary allows the viewer to get an intimate and immediate sense of individual human character in quotidian life. As Nichols elaborates further the perspective of observational documentaries:

We look in on life as it is lived. Social actors engage with one another, ignoring the filmmakers. Often the characters are caught up in pressing demands or a crisis of their own. This requires their attention and draws it away from the presence of the filmmakers. The scenes tend, like fiction, to reveal aspects of character and individuality. We make inferences and come to conclusions on the basis of behavior we observe or overhear. The filmmaker’s retirement to the position of observer calls on the viewer to take a more active role in determining the significance of what is said and done.[6]

From Nichols’ description, viewers of both The Salt Mines and The Transformation see and hear firsthand the daily struggles of Gigi, Giovanna, and Sara – ranging from material conflicts between Gigi and Giovanna over feminine articles of clothing and hormone injections to better “pass” as women, to the internal struggles of Ricardo as he questions his decision to transition for communal and social belonging outside of his former life in the streets as Sara.

The social commitment of observational documentary is wholly apparent, then, given the presence of the camera “on the scene” that records daily events and lived experiences in the historical world. However, “this also affirms a sense of fidelity to what occurs that can pass on events to us as if they simply happened when they have, in fact, been constructed [and edited] to have that very appearance.”[7] This constructed nature ultimately demonstrates the power of the queer moving image to simultaneously depict the historical world as it participates in the fabrication of the historical world itself. Given this assertion, how do we read the representations of Gigi, Giovanna, and particularly Sara: are they agents of their own reality, or is it the artistic choices of the filmmakers themselves that makes conceivable the agency (or lack thereof) we see on film?

The Salt Mines: Who Are The Salt People?

The Salt Mines is the first of two documentaries about the lives of Gigi, Giovanna, and Sara, three Latina transvestite prostitutes living among heaps of snow-melting salt, pieces of scrap metal and debris, and broken-down garbage trucks converted into makeshift homes in an area cordoned off by the Sanitation Department of New York. As the camera provides a glimpse into the everyday and internal realities of these three transvestite women – covering their distinct personal histories of family abandonment, experiences of coming out, and their decline from drugs to prostitution and vice versa – the viewer encounters images of abjection depicted through non-normative bodies, subjects who are spatially and socially confined to the lower rungs of society. While the film chronicles the relations among the three close friends as they navigate the evening streets of Manhattan to support their ongoing drug addictions, it also provides the viewer a glimpse into the varied community of homeless people they inhabit “The Salt Mines” with, affectionately known as “The Salt People.” From J.R., a male-identified crack addict, to Ruben, a black gay male whom we later learn develops AIDS through prostitution, The Salt Mines depicts a community of exiles who cling to each other for mutual aid and support. “In a culture which appears to arrange always and in every way for the annihilation of queers,”[8] as Judith Butler reminds us, The Salt Mines is depicted as a safe haven for outcasts of mainstream society. This is most evident through the statement of recently unemployed Bobby, another member of this shunned community, who emphatically declares:

[I] got laid off. [I] used to see people who stayed at The Salt Mines and decided to stay with them. Our lifestyles are different, you know? They go out, they hustle. As far as tricks, selling your body, that’s not my thing. [However] I don’t condemn them… because they’re my friends right now. As far as I’m concerned, they’re my family.

By “offering a window into understanding the ethics of association and sociality between strangers and anonymous individuals who, through recurring encounters, become familiar with each other,”[9] the use of observational documentary creates an intimacy among the viewer and the community of The Salt People projected on screen, thus making their cinematic experiences a part of historical reality.

Ranging from George Chauncey’s (1994) seminal account of “vice” districts in Manhattan that illuminated urban gay life and culture in New York City from 1890-1940, to Nayan Shah’s (2011) recent study of intimate relations among transient male laborers in the United States and Canada at the turn of the twentieth century, The Salt Mines draws attention to queer kinship formations absent in conventional accounts on poverty, homelessness, and prostitution in New York City. Moreover, despite the difference in medium from Chauncey and Shah’s written historical texts, the use of film nonetheless reveals the way “people manipulate the spatial and cultural complexity of the city to constitute neighborhoods and community despite the interference” of outside agencies and institutions.[10] Specifically, an analysis of Gigi, Giovanna, and Sara’s testimonies provides a rich picture of the cultural terrain on which they navigate, a space often intruded by people malevolent to queer identities and by born-again Christians “benevolent” to “saving” transgender people through the healing power of Jesus Christ.*

Dressed in a black leather jacket and faux denim jeans with thinly sculpted eyebrows, Gigi provides the first testimony into a day in the life of “living in the salt.” While her narrative speaks strongly to the everyday struggles for food, clean water, and protection from the elements, I want to focus on two aspects of her story that stress the precarity of transgender lives within public spaces, as well as the identification she makes of being and feeling like a woman.

First stating that “life in the street [prostitution] is miserable and it’s more so for us because we are also living in the street,” Gigi goes on to provide an example of avoiding a certain city block notorious for bodily violence, particularly the shooting of transvestite prostitutes with pellet guns. Additionally, she explains her move from the salt deposits to making a home inside the spaces of dilapidated garbage trucks because of persistent police surveillance. These two examples lend weight to the film’s importance in highlighting otherwise hidden histories of queer lives that are silenced and erased by a society dominated by heterosexual and gender normative regimes of power. The Salt People, even in their abjection, are ultimately seen as beings that threaten the greater social order and thus warrant government control and suppression.

This assertion is most poignantly demonstrated at the end of the film where the removal of salt by plows in the winter stands in as a metaphor for the destruction and disintegration of queer public spaces and culture, as described in such works as Samuel Delany’s (1999) Times Square Red, Times Square Blue. In speaking to the urban center’s redevelopment for the safety and well-being of tourists and families, “the city… instituted not only a violent reconfiguration of its own landscape but also a legal and moral revamping of its own discursive structures, changing laws about sex, health, and zoning, in the course of which it has been willing, and even anxious, to exploit everything from homophobia and AIDS to family values and fear of drugs.”[11] As Gigi acts as a tour guide to The Salt Mines, showing the viewer the barbed wire fence erected around the now-abandoned space she once called home at the conclusion of the film, the documentary functions as a piece of evidence to demonstrate the impact of state and government repression in the lives of The Salt People. Within the space of New York City, as the film alludes to, individuals like Gigi, Giovanna, and Sara are not allowed nor welcomed to exist in their difference as transvestite prostitutes of color.

In terms of Gigi’s discussion of identifying as a woman, she speaks candidly to the camera about her revelation, at the age of 13, of feeling she was “a woman encased in the body of a man.” The viewer soon learns that this identification is what leads to her exclusion and loss of support from her family, led by her mother’s lack of acceptance of what Gayle Salamon calls the “felt sense” of the body that Gigi experiences.[12] Moreover, the viewer watches as Gigi becomes teary-eyed when speaking about the admiration she holds for her father, a man who accepted his child’s identification with something other than their assigned gender at birth. We thus empathize with Gigi’s affective loss and longing for her father’s love.

What this provocative scene highlights is the way Gigi explores what it means to be embodied and the subsequent costs, consequences, and sacrifices of living out that embodiment. In discussing Gigi’s felt sense of the body versus her bodily materiality, it is useful to invoke Salamon’s summary of the connection psychoanalyst Paul Schilder makes between the two via the body image:

We only have recourse to our bodies through a body image, a psychic representation of the body that is constructed over time. The body image is multiple (any person always has more than one), it is flexible (its configuration changes over time), it arises from our relations with other people, and its contours are only rarely identical to the contours of the body as it is perceived from the outside. … Thus our sense of the body image, the postural model of the body, is a sedimented effect without a stable reference or predictable content, since it may be different in form and shape, moment to moment, through each new iteration.”[13]

As understood from this description, the (trans) body is a site that encompasses an abundance of materiality and meaning that denaturalizes gender—the presumed binary categories of male and female—as a self-evident or natural fact. Far from being a biological given, the body, according to Schilder, must always be understood as contextually situated and formed, in relation to other bodies and to the world writ large: our bodies and the genders they inhabit are malleable. This assertion is not one held by Gigi’s mother, whose lack of recognition of gender’s constructed nature causes her eventual rejection of Gigi and her subsequent alienation from the family. Despite Gigi’s fear of not being able to see her father as he aged toward death—a father who accepted her transition but was unable to sustain a paternal relationship because of his wife’s disapproval—the documentary ultimately frames Gigi’s embodiment of a female subjectivity as more than enough reason to sever immediate family ties.

As Salamon quotes Schilder to further explain how “changes in the body-image tend immediately to become changes in the body,”[14] the viewer recognizes this on screen with the use of hormone injections by Gigi and Giovanna to better “pass” as women. Conspicuously absent from this scene, however, is Sara, whom we later learn is staying at the Terminal Hotel at the end of the film. Given this conclusion to The Salt Mines, it then comes as a surprise when The Transformation presents us with Ricardo, the formerly homeless transvestite prostitute once known as Sara. As Gigi abruptly responds to this turn of events: “To hell with that man business… to me he’s always a woman!”

I now turn to a reading of the film to analyze the power of Christian rhetoric that informs Sara’s transformation to become a cisgender, heterosexual man we are confronted with on screen. Ultimately, Ricardo’s presence in the second film speaks to the shaky grounds on which observational documentary can capture “reality” as experienced in everyday life.

The Transformation: The Interpolating Calls of the Christian Church

The opening scene of The Transformation, the companion piece to The Salt Mines, resembles that of an expository film more so than an observational documentary, as narration takes precedence over the images on screen that influences viewer perception of what is taking place. Within the introductory frame we are presented with a photo album held open by two white hands: on the right side of the album we recognize a black and white photo of Sara, while on the left side we see another black and white photo of a person assumed to be male, given the cues by their gender presentation in posture, demeanor, and clothing. As the camera focuses on these two photos, we hear the voice of Pastor Terry Wier, whom the viewer learns is the one holding the album. Speaking contemptuously about Sara’s life on the street as a prostitute and transvestite, he then reveals to the viewer that the photos we are looking at are of the same person: Sara is now Ricardo – with the help of Terry’s Dallas ministry of born-again Christians – who, in his life as the former, was missing an aspect of his identity that did not make him a whole person, and thus is the reason why he ended up on the streets. As Terry states, “[Ricardo] never knew what it was to be a man.”

Terry’s opening narrative introduces a moral and ideological perspective that sets up the chronological sequence of the documentary, which chiefly follows the life of Ricardo as a churchgoing and married man in Dallas who has renounced his gender presentation as female, as well as his homosexuality, for the sake of a life espoused in biblical scriptures. The Transformation also exposes the power at work through the personhood of Terry, whose missionary goal of “saving” transvestites and drag queens through offerings of shelter and monetary assistance comes at a deep price: the renunciation of their queer identity in order to become subjects of the Christian Church and to experience the redeeming grace of Jesus Christ. By highlighting the point of view of Ricardo’s new life from two distinct yet interrelated narratives, The Transformation raises provocative questions regarding gender identity and the strive toward self-determination. Given the film’s conclusion with Ricardo’s painful disclosure of wishing he could once again become a woman, the piece ultimately questions whether authentic conversion and representation of queer subjectivities can be achieved, respectively in the life of Ricardo/Sara and within the medium of documentary film itself.

Up until the concluding five minutes of the film, the camera provides a perspective of Ricardo that presents him in what seems to be a genuinely cheerful and happy demeanor. Here the documentary records and acts as evidence of Ricardo’s transformation into a cisgender and heteronormative man by accomplishing what are considered “milestones” within American society. From tying the knot with Betty, another member of Terry’s church in Dallas, to moving into a new home to start a nuclear family, the viewer listens to Ricardo’s chilling words of appreciation and gratitude for contracting AIDS, the virus that “enabled” him to lose any semblance of Sara and that brought him within the fold of the Christian Church. As he relates in a rather charismatic tone: “I thank God that I have AIDS. If I hadn’t found out I was HIV positive, I wouldn’t have come off the street and I wouldn’t have devoted myself to God. I am not a fanatic: I just love you the way God loves me… and it doesn’t matter if you are a hooker or a crook because I’ve been there before.”

Ricardo’s chilling statement stands in direct contrast to such “AIDS as punishment” narratives espoused by prominent conservative religious leaders like the late Jerry Falwell,[15] as well as to results from a 2013 survey that revealed fourteen percent of Americans believing AIDS might be God’s punishment for “immoral sexual behavior.”[16] By reframing the narrative so that AIDS becomes the divine catalyst to a life off the street and a life free from Sara, Ricardo produces a discursive and material subjectivity aligned with the fundamentalist beliefs espoused by Terry Wier’s ministry. Here we are reminded of Schilder’s assertion that “there is no question that our own activity is insufficient to build up the image of the body.”[17]

Ricardo’s narrative and new subjectivity as a born-again Christian is further supported by the filmmakers’ inclusion of interviews with Jim and Robby, a church couple from Terry’s ministry whom the viewer learns provided shelter and mentorship to Ricardo on the “correct” ways to be a man. These interviews further support Schilder’s statement that the body image is something that is flexible and can arise out of relations with other people, considering the responsibility placed upon Jim and Robby in helping to “discipline” Ricardo with male mannerisms – for, as Jim proudly relates, “If something needs fixing, it’s generally fixed by the man. … So I started showing him how to do things, showing him how to do a little yard work, things he had never done before.” This statement automatically creates a binary model of gender in which masculinity is defined by what it is not, which is embodied in all things that are weak, submissive, and incapable – or, stereotypes of what it means to be feminine. Here Robby speaks for Ricardo by saying, “He had a heavy desire that no one would look at him and see any kind of female mannerisms or traits. He worked at it very hard.” She goes on further to state: “He never believed he could be anything ever different than a homosexual… Then all in a sudden he had a desire for women that he never had before. You know, a helpmate, a wife. He couldn’t believe that the Lord could do that for him. And when he met Betty that was it. It was history from there.”

I include this quote to highlight the gross conflation that Robby makes between gender and sexuality, in which sexuality replaces something that is really a critical issue of gender for Ricardo. In Susan Stryker’s (2004) commentary on the relationship between trans and gay and lesbian studies in “Transgender Studies: Queer Theory’s Evil Twin,” she rightly asserts that

… all too often transgender phenomena are misapprehended through a lens that privileges sexual orientation and sexual identity as the primary means of differing from heteronormativity. Most disturbingly, “transgender” increasingly functions as the site in which to contain all gender trouble, thereby helping secure both homosexuality and heterosexuality as stable and normative categories of personhood. This has damaging, isolative political corollaries. [18]

While the exploration of this question is beyond the scope of this article, are such “damaging [and] isolative political corollaries” symbolized through Ricardo’s regret and eventual death at the end of the film?

Turning now to Terry Wier’s role in the documentary, The Transformation characterizes him as the pastor Ricardo/Sara relies on for guidance (read: material and financial support) after discovering he is HIV positive. Terry, in describing the significance of his ministry for the “salvation” of transvestites and prostitutes, justifies his missionary work through constant appeals to biblical scriptures. Specifically, he invokes Bible verses that speak to the similarities that exist between transgender individuals and eunuchs in biblical narratives, who he states are people “born without the desire for the opposite sex” and who are “upheld to a higher standard within the Kingdom of Heaven.” Here he cites Matthew 19:12 to self-righteously state: “Satan says you are either a man, woman, or gay. God says you are either a man, woman, or eunuch.” This leads him to conclude that, given their privileged status in the afterlife, transvestites should rejoice in their temporal suffering – because in a theology of sanctification through suffering, earthly trials will lead to greater glory in heaven.[19]

This example is just one out of the many instances throughout the film in which Terry’s appeal to Christian fundamentalist rhetoric justifies his patrolling of queer identities. In God Hates Fags: The Rhetorics of Religious Violence, Michael Cobb (2006) describes Christian speech as a forceful entity, describing religious rhetoric as a secure form of language:

Its semantic security reveals something unique about religious rhetoric, at least in the United States: there’s something about Western religious language – mostly white Anglo Protestant Christian religious language – that makes one feel its importance for reasons well beyond the actual content the language communicates. This seemingly inherent social conservatism of religious language guards, if not creates, a nation that does not want to have its foundational social organization, the family, substantially and systematically changed or challenged.[20]

Cobb’s analysis helps to demonstrate how Terry’s use of Christian theological discourse becomes the complicit actor in some of the worst forms of social coercion and injustice seen in the documentary, evidenced by Ricardo’s regret at becoming a man at the end of the film.

Moreover, theologian Dale Martin provides the most striking critique of Christian fundamentalists (as represented by Terry, Jim, and Robby) who use theological discourse to justify oppression. Martin states that such Christians fail to understand the simple concept that the Bible does not speak:

When people talk about “what the Bible says,” they are using a metaphor that has confused them into thinking that the Bible actually exercises its own agency in “telling” people what to do. … Real knowledge of the text of scripture and the history of Christian churches shows that opposition to [LGBT] Christians and their full inclusion in the church is motivated not by loyalty to scripture and tradition but by prejudice and discrimination.[21]

Given Terry’s use of the Bible as a “rule book” to sustain a life of Christian morality for Ricardo and the transvestites he proselytizes in the streets of New York, its contemporary use as an epistemological foundation for ethics is ultimately what informs the walking away of queer individuals from any type of organized religion. Consequently, “Why does Ricardo stay?” becomes a key question for viewers at the end of the film, when it is revealed that Ricardo’s story is selfishly used for fundraising efforts by Terry’s church to build a live-in program for transvestites, drag queens, and other gender variant people to “free themselves” from sin. As the documentary concludes with a follow-up with Ricardo a year after the film’s initial recording, we hear his final words in the film:

I repented for my past life and now when I think about everything I lived, I get very emotional. [However] I remember some of it as beautiful because the real truth is that I enjoyed it… If I still had the choice, even if I could change my life right now – even now that I have my wife and everything – I would choose to be a woman.

This stunning revelation signals a moment in the documentary when viewers are left to question the “success story” of Ricardo’s transformation. While having the capacity to become a woman, he feels as if the choice is no longer an option. How come? According to Gigi, it is because the material and social sacrifices to become Sara (i.e., renouncing his chosen “family” of the Church and access to medication for AIDS) would be too heavy of a burden to bear. As she states: “Finding out he was HIV+ affected his mind: he grew afraid of dying alone in the street. The church as the only way out, the only chance he had to take care of himself because in the street, it would have been impossible.” The Transformation thus leaves its viewers with a lingering and haunting question: does Terry’s ministry really “save” Ricardo?

Conclusion: Reflexivity and Documenting Subjectivity

When questioned about Ricardo after filming The Transformation, co-filmmaker Susana Aikin reflects:

I think there are many layers in what happened to Ricardo. There was a material layer where he basically transformed from a very marginal social person to an integrated social being into our mainstream society. I think also that he went through a spiritual change in the sense that he learned to appreciate himself better as a human being. … But in terms of whether he became a straight man, I think we’re talking about very shifty things here, and I think the film speaks for itself.[22]

Presented with Aikin’s acknowledgement of the “shifty” nature of Ricardo’s identification as a born-again Christian and a newly straight man, the documentary ceases to be purely observational. Rather, it becomes one that is reflexive in nature, as Aikin and Aparicio ask the viewers themselves to see documentary for what it really is: a construction and/or representation. As Nichols explains the “reflexive mode” of documentary: “Rather than following the filmmaker in his or her engagement with other social actors, we now attend to the filmmaker’s engagement with us, speaking not only about the historical world but about the problems and issues of representing it as well.”[23] As the filmmakers provide space for the viewing audience to come to their own conclusion of Ricardo’s life, we are allowed to question how The Salt Mines and The Transformation represent the historical world, “as well as to what gets represented.”[24]

Furthermore, as both films function as politically reflexive documentaries, The Salt Mines and The Transformation permit us to engage and reframe “our assumptions and expectations about the historical world more than about film form.”[25] Such visual texts call social conventions into question; so while the former film involves most of the aspects of observational documentary, it also seeks to produce a heightened consciousness about the marginalization and policing of queer public life and sexuality in the contemporary world. It counters the prevailing tropes of transvestite prostitutes with radically different representations and displaces them with innovative forms of queer kinship relations despite the hardships of poverty, illness, and death that define homelessness in urban spaces. In terms of the latter documentary, The Transformation challenges entrenched notions of the goodwill of Christian missionary work and serves to give name and face to what was once before invisible: the oppression and destruction caused by Christian fundamentalist rhetoric. Specifically, Ricardo’s painful transformation acts to support a new way of seeing, a distinct perspective on the social order created when “the code of the penetrator”—to use Robert Goss’ term to describe people who employ a heteronormative reading of the Bible—is taken to be the literal word of God in all matters of the secular.[26]

Although this article has detailed the lives of Gigi and Sara/Ricardo as (re)presented on screen, I would like to conclude with a final comment on the transformation Giovanna undergoes between the two documentaries for the encouraging implications it has for the future. Like her two close friends, Giovanna’s presence on the streets is defined by drug use and prostitution, but with one major difference: we also learn of her dreams to escape the confines of The Salt Mines, replete with “a job and a home that [she] can go to. To be looked and be treated like a regular human being. It’s simple.” As she bluntly questions, “It’s not too much to ask for, is it?” While such dreams exist as phantasms in the first film, the second documentary demonstrates those visions becoming a reality. Here we meet Giovanna again; and while she goes through a similar transformation to Ricardo, her change is not one of becoming a man through the saving grace of Christianity. Rather, it is a transformation to live fully as herself – a woman living at home with her mother and sister, two individuals who respect and understand Giovanna’s “felt sense” of the body.

Taken together, the narratives of Gigi, Giovanna, and Sara/Ricardo, as stated by Paige Johnson, “point the way to a different understanding of how bodies mean, how representation works, and what counts as legitimate knowledge, all of which are epistemological concerns [that] have material consequences for the quality of transgender lives.”[27] Ultimately, The Salt Mines and The Transformation provoke viewers to achieve a heightened state of consciousness regarding the precarity of queer kinship formations and non-normative bodies. They stimulate the viewer to make a critical assessment of not only how trans lives are visually depicted but also how trans lives are lived, and how they can survive, in the historical world. By making visible the “stuff” of social reality that contributes to the policing of The Salt People and the disciplining of Gigi, Giovanna, and Sara/Ricardo, the documentaries give a sense of what we understand reality itself to have been, of what it is now, or of what it may become for transgender lives.

The post “To Hell with that Man Business!”: Gender Anxieties in The Salt Mines and The Transformation appeared first on The Postcolonialist.