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.

LGB...T?

For various reasons, some believe that Transgender movements should be separate from Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual movements.  Many of these reasons are valid and understandable.  However one reason that I've repeatedly heard is that LGB issues deal with sexuality while T issues relate to gender.  I find this reason completely unsatisfactory.  In my following reflections, I don't want to simply employ trans/gender/queer identities (I'm including Intersexed in this category) to the self-realization of LGB movements, however I do see a benefit to including discussions about gender among Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual communities.

First and foremost, as soon as the terms Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual are employed, aren't they already assuming and relying upon a gender framework?  Aren't they already making declarations--whether implicitly or explicitly--about sex and gender identities?  After all, can one really speak about lesbianism--woman to woman eroticism--without some definition or assumption about what "woman" means?  Whether one defines "woman" according to social constructions of gender performance or according to biological arrangements (sex), lesbianism loses all meaning without relying on a framework that gives definition to sex and/or gender.  Even bisexual, as it is currently understood, is built on the binary of sex/gender identity of male/female and man/woman. To speak of LGB issues at all means that statements regarding sex and gender have been made or assumed.

It's no secret that "Gay Rights" have gained much national attention to the neglect of Lesbian and Bisexual voices--a fact which reveals that much of "Gay Rights" discourses have done very little to challenge patriarchal structures.  In fact, the growing success Gay Rights can be attributed to our male-dominated society which still give men center stage.  However, trans/gender/queer identities present another challenge not only to "Gay Rights" but also to the very labels of Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual.  Terms such as trans/gender/queer remind us that the labels of Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual continue to play into binary systems that limit both gender identity and sexual idenity.

First, with regard to gender identity.  Gender identity is limited by LGB labels because it assumes that "male" and "female" are stable identities.  Trans/genderqueer expose the fact that gender identity is a construction that is always fluid and negotiated.  Gender identity is taught, learned, and performed at every moment in society--for example, when a woman shaves her legs or when a man shouts at the TV while watching a football game.  Even these performative cues and signs change depending on our changing, but particular, contexts--for example, it's effeminate for a man to cross his legs in some situations (i.e. at a sporting event), but it can communicate power in others (i.e. at a board meeting).  Despite the force of the hegemonic definitions of gender into the binary of man/woman, these definitions are not fixed--the have and continue to change.  Taking it further, even the biological stability of male/female is put into question by various factors.  It's shown to be malleable by modern medical/technological developments and ambiguous by those who are Intersexed.  Moreover, the fact that multiple biological factor are associated with sex development--not only a particular chromosome, but various other configurations such as the nuanced composition of that chromosome, testosterone/estrogen levels throughout the body, the presence/absence of certain glands--show that biological sexual identity come with many variables and variations even if they're not externally visible (see, for example, Klinefelter's syndrome).  These realities are not always taken into account by Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual movements.  These variables are overlooked by those who might be passionate about "Gay Rights" but still benefit and are comfortable with the prevailing hegemonic control of sex/gender identities.

But the trans/gender/queer movements also challenge LGB movements regarding erotic sexual identity (or "sexuality" or "sexual orientation") and this second challenge is related to the first.  Not only do Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual labels continue to accept fixed gender binaries, but they also limit sexual orientation to being object-based--that is, sexual identity is defined by the gender of the one by whom are aroused.  That is to say, in LGB movements, lesbianism is defined as Person A (a woman) being aroused by Person B who is also a woman; gay is defined because Person C (a man) is aroused by Person D who is also man.  In Sex and the Single Savior (see my entry about this text here), Dale Martin points out that sexual definitions in Greek antiquity were not merely object-based, but based on the sexual roles of penetrator and penetrated.  That is, it wasn't unusual to expect that a male would be aroused by both males and females, however it was proper that the man (if he's in good social standing and reputation) would be the pentrator.  The women and the (male) youth he sexually engaged would be penetrated--a role considered effeminate and unfit for an honorable man.  Sexuality was not simply defined by the sex/gender of one's arousal, but by the role(s) played by those engaged in sexual activities.  Don't get me wrong, this is still a sexist and oppressive framework, but it shows that erotic sexual identity does not have to be based of the sex/gender of the one who arouses us, rather it can be defined by other aspects which are part of sexual practices.  I believe trans/gender/queer identities can challenge Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual labels to recognize more aspects to sexuality or "sexual orientation" than gender identity.
 
To elaborate this further, why define erotic sexual identity based on the sex/gender of the one who arouses us?  There are many features that permeate our sexual lives and there's no reason to make one more determinative than others.  If we used a penetrator/penetrated framework, how then would we define heteroseuxal men who enjoy being fingered or being dildo-fucked by women (remember Road Trip)?  What would we say regarding homosexual men who only top and refuse to bottom or to be subjected to anal play?  What would we say of women who fingered/dildo-fucked each other, thereby constantly changing the position of penetrator/penetrated?  What if sexual identity was viewed along other lines such as those who enjoyed being dominant and those who enjoyed being submissive (after all, the categories of dominant/submissive are not synonymous with penetrator/penetrated)?  How would we think of aggressive male bottoms (power bottoms) or submissive tops?  Or supposed we made distinctions among those who were sexually monogamous and those who were polyamorous and those who are celibate (after all, celibacy can be queer, too)?  What's amazing is that these are all forms of sexual identification that do not rely on gender identity but reveal that sexuality as multifaceted--it is crisscrossed by multiple dimensions and factors.  To broaden our discussions of both gender identity and of sexuality creates space for mutually edifying contributions between Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual movements and Trans/gender/queer movements.  What's disappointing is the refusal of many "self-proclaimed progressive" "gay rights" voices to allow themselves to be challenged in their assumptions of gender and sexual identity.

A multitude of possible identities can be opened if Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual movements allow themselves to be challenged by Trans/gender/queer identities.  However, as I said earlier, I don't want to simply employ trans/gender/queer identities for the self-realization of Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual people.  Movements in sex & gender activism have their own voice and need to speak on their own terms, not simply in the service of homo/bisexual movements.  As a cisgendered male, I continue to gain a lot from trans/gender/queer movements and am in solidarity with their struggles, but it would be another form of exploitation to merely use their identities for my own self-actualization.  Trans/genderqueer movements have an agency of their own and need to be heard on their own terms, but, personally, I would like to see that happen alongside LGB communities.

Excerpts from Sex and the Single Savior

Dale Martin's book, Sex and the Single Savior is an exciting and brilliant work!  In this book, he surveys many New Testament texts which address [or are used to address questions of] sexuality, gender, and family.  Martin employs amazing arguments and careful research to expose the uncertainty of many New Testament passages.  He is clear that he does not claim that the New Testament advocates or condemns homosexuality, rather he points out the ambiguities of texts and the power ideology has played in controlling our interpretations of them.  Through his many analyses, he emerges with many motifs in the New Testament which contrast contemporary sexism with ancient sexism, critique Western individualism, and challenge modern notions of family.  And, rather than leading us through the nuances and complexities of the text to a place of firm answers, Dale Martin robs us of any recourse to a foundation but (I believe rightly) leaves us dependent upon a Kierkegaardian faith and the grace that makes it possible.  Below are a few excerpts from this work.


"There are many excellent reasons why people in general and Christians in particular should not want to give the state the power to recognize and regulate marriage.  When we give the state the right to legitimize one kind of sexual relationship or social formation, we automatically give it the right to render all other relaiotns illegitimate.  Surely, the church should never cede its own perogatives to the state--especialy a state as bloodstained and beholden to the interests of the powerful as ours is.  But all people should realize this: when you marry, you give power the state over your sexual relations, your person, the most intimate details of your life and body.  To agree to marriage is to agree that the modern, violent, bureaucratic state has the right to control your life in its most intimate realms, public and private, personal and sexual, individual and collective.  Not to put too fine a point on it, marriage cedes your genitals to the government....
...But I believe the church should also get out of the marriage business.  Marriage is an exclusive and exclusionary technology for control.  Modern churches legitimate one kind of social and intimate bonding and therefore declare illegitimate all others.  This relationship is good--in fact, "divine."  All others are bad or at best inferior."

-Dale Martin, Sex and the Single Savior, 122-3

"Bastard children are not created by the absence of marriage, but by marriage itself.  Marriage makes bastards by making the category possible."

-Dale Martin, Sex and the Single Savior, 123

"Our knowlege of Christ is entirely mediated by something that is cultural: language, images, symbols, signs.  Culture necessarily shapes all our experiences and anything we are able to say about Christ whatsoever.  Since all language is cultural, and we can say nothing about Christ without language, everything we say about Christ is culture.  Scripture is not a separate source we have access to apart from cultural experience.  It is part of experience."

-Dale Martin, Sex and the Single Savior, 158

HELEM

"You can't have a position related to LGBT rights without fighting for everyone's rights. You can't be just against homophobia; you have to be against all discrimination and link these all together."

The LGBT struggle in Lebanon


I loved reading this article when it was first published on the Socialist Worker!  There is so much that LGBT activists in the West can learn from the vision and the social consciousness expressed in this article.  This article interviews Ghassan Makarem, the Executive Director of HELEM--a Lebanese organization which struggles for LGBTIQ liberation.  Their work is varied and broad--providing services, promoting action against discrimination, and refusing to trample on other demographics for the rights of their own.  There are far too many organizations here in the U.S. which separate their causes from the struggles of others--there are struggles for black communities, for women's rights, for disability rights, gay rights, etc.  Rather than [net]working together in mutual support, they often take a market-type approach of trying to convince (almost advertize to) "the public" that their cause is the most important, most dire, and most fundamental source of our current crises.  In this way, these organizations imitate popular business practices rather than working for holistic change.  What can we, in the West, learn from HELEM?