"The measure of what we shall do to men cannot be our wishes about what they shall do to us.  For our wishes express not only our right but also our wrong, and our foolishness more than our wisdom.  This is the limit of the Golden Rule.  This is the limit of calculating justice.  Only for him who knows what he should wish and who actually wishes it , is the Golden Rule ultimately valid.  Only love can transform calculating justice into creative justice.  Love makes justice just.  Justice without love is always injustice because it does not do justice to the other one, nor to oneself, nor to the situation in which we meet.  For the other one and I and we together in this moment in this place are a unique, unrepeatable occasion, calling for a unique unrepeatable act of uniting love.  If this call is not heard by listening love, if it is not obeyed by the creative genius of love, injustice is done. And this is true even of oneself.  He who loves listens to the call of his own innermost center and obeys this call and does justice to his own being... But we speak for a love in which justice is the form and the structure of love.  We speak for a love which respects the claim of the other one to be acknowledged as what he is, and the claim of ourselves to be acknowledged as what we are, above all as persons.  Only distorted love, which is a cover for hostility or self-disgust, denies that which love unites.  Love makes justice just."

-Paul Tillich, The New Being, 32-33.

On "No Minor Issues"

"A gay, bisexual, or transgendered identity is the result of complex biological, social, and individual factors that are beyond conscious control.  One of the great unnamed acts of sexual abuse in our society is the cruel act of attempting to repress or change a young person's gender expression or sexual preference.  Those of us who have already been through the loneliness, self-doubt, and terror of coming out know how serious this life transition is, and how fragile we are in its midst.  Too many of us don't make it.  Too many of us settle for stunted and alienated lives in which we never reach our full potential to love others, give and receive pleasure, and contribute to our unique communities and cultures--or die.  No other area of queer activism is as important as this one, out reach to and protection of our next generation.  Queer youth deserve a safe space, maintained and defended by queer adults, so they can connect with one another and figure out what they need to building fulfilling lives."

-Pat Califia, "No Minor Issues: Age of Consent, Child Pornography, and Cross-generational Relationships", Public Sex, 82-3.

Is it any wonder that I have such high regard for Pat Califia?  I am deeply grateful for Pat's work, especially the article "No Minor Issues"--it's full of vulnerability, confession, growth, a responsible handling of sensitive topics while still pushing us to rethink accepted mores.  In this essay, Pat exposes his struggle in coming to grips with his past experience of being sexually abused and confesses that this may have influenced his more sexually libertarian view in the 80s.  While not shying away from the real dangers of sexual abuse, he begs us to rethink the vague laws and the ambiguity of trails regarding child pornography as attempts to police thoughts and emotions rather than providing support to youth and the real victims of sexual abuse (with most crimes of sexual abuse being committed by family members, rather than strangers).  Additionally, age of consent laws, while understandable, are not infallible and he recommends that "each cross-generational relationship or encounter needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis," and that disputes concerning the relationship be handled by counseling and mediation rather than the criminal justice system (86).  He contends that the societal belief in the "innocence" of children has been used to repress the real sexual awakening of youth, especially queer youth.  

Undoubtedly, these are not easy issues to face.  However, if we can stomach honest discussion about youth, sexuality, and allowing our assumptions to questioned with the sole goal of creating caring and holistic communities for the vulnerable, we might be surprised by where we end up.  Pat's essay, I believe, is an important step toward a more comprehensive vision of sexual liberation.

"He 'prays without ceasing' who joins prayer to works that are of obligation, and good works to his prayer.  For virtuous works, or the carrying out of what is enjoined, form part of prayer.  It is only in this way that we can understand the injunction, 'pray without ceasing,' as something that we can carry out; that is to say, if we regard the whole life of the saint as one great continuous prayer."

-Origen, "Prayer"

After MOBConf

MOBConf (Mobilizing and Organizing from Below Conference) was hosted this past weekend in Baltimore by Red Emma's Bookstore.  It was a joy to attending informative sessions and to meet people indefatigable for radical politics and social justice.  I gained an appreciation for the breadth of work that people of all experiences and interests are doing all over the country toward this end.  The sessions on safe spaces host a discussion on the essential questions and challenges that face creating these spaces and provided me with a new framework for understanding my work in tenant organizing.  The antiracist training workshop covered important material--from Western racial history and theory, to anti-racism as central to anarchism, to how to address subtle forms of racism one might encounter in their next activist meeting.  Despite my minimal involvement with the Occupy Movement, I still enjoyed the Tidal/Occupy Theory discussion group--an initially leaderless session which slowly emerged as a conversation about Occupy, space(s), and the possibilities and goals of Occupy.  You can see peruse the pictures and videos of the conference here.

A few friends and I led a panel discussion on Religion and Radical Politics, described as "a chance to explore the political aspects in religious traditions which offer relevant critiques and points for hope in our world."  Unfortunately, we weren't able to gather the religious diversity I had initially envisioned, but it was a great panel nonetheless.  We all prepared more than we were able to share, but we briefly touched upon subjects such as debt and economics, gender, sexuality, and the current role of churches in organizing. 

Though incomplete and vague, below are my notes for my discussion on "Sexuality and Class."  My goal in this 10 minutes presentation was to show that the Gospel texts, though by no means "pro-gay", offers a vision of sexuality which is inseparable from political and economic realities.  In many ways, in this presentation I am trying to work out my own frustrations with the dominant "gay rights" movement seems disconnect from class struggle and economic inequalities.  As such, its demands (e.g. marriage equality, adoption, participation in the military) seem little more than bourgeois concerns and the movement elitist.  Until its able to recognize and incorporate economic struggles (near and far), I have difficulty supporting much of the mainstream gay rights movement.  My presentation was an attempt to show that the Gospel texts recognize both sexuality and economics as inseparable and offers avenues for the transformation of both in the new Christian community and beyond.  My notes are below:

 

Sexuality and Class: Presentation for MOBConf

My goal is not claim that the Bible is a gay-friendly text or to try to defend its unsettling references to homosexuality. I want to argue that marriage, reproduction, and family are essential parts of heterosexism or “heteronormativity.” And as such, heteronormativity is an instrument for defining and controlling gender and sexuality as well as politics (i.e. determining who is in or out, familiar or foreigner, friend or stranger) and economics (who will help me gain wealth?, how can I make sure my wealth isn't taken by another?, who can have my wealth after I pass away?). Even though the Gospel texts have no explicit reference to gay or lesbian issues, it levels harsh critiques against marriage, reproduction, and the family unit and thereby removes any foundation for heteronormativity in the new community whose life together embody signs of the Kingdom to come. Liberated from heteronormativity, new possibilities for gender and for sexual identity are able to emerge. Simultaneously and in the same moment, new political and economic possibilities also unfold.

Focusing on the Gospel text, we find many declarations about the family—some overt and some not so explicit. Regarding the family unit, one can find:

"Jesus said, ‘Truly I tell you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the good news, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this age—houses, brothers and sisters, mothers and children, and fields, with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life." (Mark 10:29-30)

Or

"'Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26-27)

Which can be interpreted it to mean that you must hate mother, father, wife and children in so far as they are those relationships to you (along with the privileges they engender), but you must love them as members of the new, egalitarian community oriented to justice.

The last passage included children, which leads us to the issue of reproduction. Passages addressing and critiquing reproduction state,

"While he was saying this, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, ‘Blessed is the womb that bore you and the breasts that nursed you!’ But he said, ‘Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it!'" (Luke 11:27-28)

Or

"But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:12-13)

Or Jesus' declaration that those who enter the new community must be born from above, that is, in contrast to their biological birth and any privileges which might accompany it (John 3:1-8).

Even regarding marriage, Jesus takes a critical and cautious posture which is made evident in his own singlehood and when he affirms that, considering the demands of marriage, for some it is better not to marry (Matthew 19:5-12). All of this, and many other passages, are not inconsequential nor just happenstance. It is not that the Gospels hate marriage, but it is seen as dangerous for the sustainability of a new, diverse community embodying mutuality. In this egalitarian community dedicated to justice, all other social identities and roles lose their privilege and have no merit. And so, the Gospel text is explicitly critical of any valuation of marriage, reproduction, and the family unit—essential aspects of heteronormativity.

Okay, so the Gospel texts are critical of heteronormativity... so what? What does this have to do with sexuality? And what does this have to do with organizing from below? This is very important if we recognize that heteronormativity is a matrix for regulating not only gender and sexuality, but also politics and economics. The family is both the product and the conduit for socio-political realities. In particular, sexuality is regulated in the structure of the family—sexuality is restricted to between a man and a woman (ensuring that the other person is one's own property) and has reproduction as its goal (producing other economic agent to provide support to the parents in old age and to responsibly inherit the wealth of the couple after their demise). When understood in light of heteronormativity, we can see how sexuality is intimately entangled in politics and economics. In the traditional family unit, sexuality is essential to determining boundaries—who is in or out—as well as keep wealth and resources within closed, reproducing circles. And this mechanism for keeping economics in closed, familial circles is essential to creating and perpetuating class division—those with wealth are able to keep it in their closed circles and those in poverty continue to inherit poverty. And despite the illusions of social mobility, the family structure is an economic force that serves to keep out the unwanted and keep in capital. An recent article in the Guardian titled “Yourdaddy's rich … inherited wealth may date back to dawn ofagriculture” by Maev Kennedy (May 28, 2012) confirms that the economic and political dynamic of the family has ancient roots. Returning to the biblical text, we see this very problem happen in the Acts 5:1-11 account where the first husband and wife mentioned in the new community are the very ones who try to hoard money for themselves—violating the practice of sharing with those in need and communal possessions.

What does this have to do with sexuality? I find that much of the current, dominant discussions about sexuality are narrow, still subscribing to heteronormative ideals and, I propose, that's why "gay rights movements" have difficulty making any connection to class and economic issues. However, sexuality is more than what reproductive organ one enjoys. Marriage equality has become little more than seeking to participate in heteronormativity and its benefits to the exclusion of many who are of low-income. This, among many other issues, makes much of LGBT movements full of elitist aspirations. Those with unstable or non-tradtional families, those with very little wealth or social capital, those who are jobless, and those who have to rely on social services for support are often times excluded from the “gay rights” vision represented by white, muscular men who apparently are wealthy enough to go on cruises and wear Diesel.

But in its consistent critique of heteronormativity, the Gospels offer us amazing groundwork regarding sexuality, economic inequality, and becoming a community that works for justice. If we recognize a common root of LGBTQ oppression and economic inequality in heteronormativity, we'll be able 1) to forge queer movements that will be inseparable from economic justice and 2) to organize and work in solidarity with those who are low-income or marginalized because our social ties and economics will take on a new shape. Suddenly, our new family are those who seek justice, our siblings are those commitment to mutuality, our children are those who continue the work of the community after us. Rather than dividing along our bio-legal family lines, mobilizing and organizing from below demands that we are willing to enter new families. And once we undo the hold of the heteronormative ideal and dedicate ourselves to the community of radical justice, we'll find that sexual liberation and economic liberation coincide.

I've just fumbled through two internetless weeks and have come out on the other side wounded, but standing.  It was unexpected and it had varying degrees of difficulty and relief.  I'll continue to submit new posts before long.

Two Articles on Feminism and Sexuality

On Feminism and Sadomasochistic Sex by Dana Goldstein

Katie Roiphe's Perversion of Feminism by Jaclyn Friedman

I admit that I haven't seen or heard of the HBO show to which these writers are referring, however one doesn't have to be in order appreciate their advocacy of an erotic feminism.  I admire the sex-positive posture of the first article in recognizing that sex is a dynamic arena where power can be manipulated in ways that transgress gender (she mentions the fantasies of submission that's prevalent among "publicly powerful people").  In the second article, the writer is careful to hold a critique of cliche Hollywood portrayals of a weak femininity that limits women's sexual exploration.  She writes:

"As a feminist, my problem with the mass-marketing of the pale, swooning female submissive tied up for the love of her man isn't that she exists, but that no other kind of "taboo" sexual women seem to. We don't get mainstream narratives inviting us to identify with women who like to dominate in bed, or mass-marketed portrayals of women of color and queer women as sexual heroines in control of their choices – likely because that would create more "free will" for women than the media bosses are really comfortable with.

And therein lies the rub. When the media only repeats stories about one very narrow idea of "transgressive" female sexuality, it limits our sexual imaginations, and therefore the possibilities of our sexual lives. In order for women to become genuine sexual actors in the culture (as opposed to merely objects for men), we have to have access to a complex range of fantasies."

Well said!

Fascism in Deleuze and Guattari

Below is an excerpt from one of my favorite chapters in A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, the chapter entitled "1933: Micropolitics and Segementarity."  Even though I find Deleuze and Guattari's work in these volumes occasionally naive or overly confident, I cannot overstate how helpful their work has been in providing tools and a framework for thinking about our socio-political context.  In the excerpt below, D&G address the difference between totalitarian States and fascism: the former imposing order and oppression from above through force (maybe through legislative power, police action, or military regimes), the latter produces repression and order on the "molecular" levels of family, neighborhoods, schools, etc.  D&G remind us that it's easy to protest against the State (and also against corporations), but it's more difficult to recognize that we tend to reaffirm the same repressive power of the State in our intimate relationships, communities, our languages, our habits, our casual interactions and the infinitesimal negotiations of power that accompany them--in our micropolitics.  Unlike totalitarianism which oppresses from without and from above, fascism is a cancer that permeates down in our daily and mundane lives.  Totalitarian forces act from without, but fascism infects the veins and crevices of the daily lives of the people, thereby laying the foundation for death-oriented powers to find a joyful welcome among the masses.  Fascism, in shaping the micro-forces and micro-machines which produce desire (yes, desire is socially produced), gives rise to desires which desire nothing else but their own repression.  I find in this a great reminder that the political (and therefore also acts of political resistance) are not to be found merely in large aggregate bodies (courts, executive branches, voting booths, etc), but in our local communities and daily relationships--with our neighborhoods, our coworkers, our families, etc.

"The concept of the totalitarian State applies only at the macropolitical level, to a rigid segementarity and a particular mode of totalization and centralization.  But fascism is inseparable from a proliferation of molecular focuses in interaction, which skip form point to point, before beginning to resonate together in the National Socialist State...

...What makes fascism dangerous is its molecular or micropolitical power, for it is a mass movement: a cancerous body rather than a totalitarian organism.  American film has often depicted these molecular focal points; band, gang, sect, family, town, neighborhood, vehicle fascisms spare no one.  Only microfascism provides an answer to the global question: Why does desire desire its own repression, how can it desire its own repression?  The masses certainly do not passively submit to power; nor do they "want" to be repressed, in a kind of masochistic hysteria; nor are they tricked by an ideological lure.  Desire is never separable from complex assemblages that necessarily tie into molecular levels, from microformations already shaping postures, attitudes, perceptions, expectations, semiotic systems, etc.  Desire is never an undifferentiated instinctual energy, but itself results from a highly developed, engineered setup rich in interactions: a whole supple segementarity that processes molecular energies and potentially gives desire a fascist determination.  Leftist organizations will not be the last to secrete microfascisms.  It's too easy to be antifascist on the molar level, and not even see the fascist inside you, the fascist you yourself sustain and nourish and cherish with molecules both personal and collective."

-Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, 214-15.