National Equality March was far more amazing than anybody I know had expected--I spent the whole day thinking that, when my rights as a pansexual transwoman are finally made equal with those of the straight, white, rich, able-bodied, and otherwise privileged cismen, I will look back on yesterday as the day that dream became a demand, rather than an ideal. Unlike many of the other students of my college who were lucky enough to get a seat on one of our two buses from upstate New York, I did not look at the list of speakers in advance, and I think Staceyann Chin, Kate Clinton, and all the rest of the speakers who really hit the notes, were that much better because I hadn't been expecting them.
This is not to say that my fellow students didn't talk constantly about the guest list, because they did. Unfortunately, the only member of the guest list that I was aware of because of this was Lady Gaga. This really didn't excite me--while the Bi-identified artist certainly has helped what she calls the "gay" movement, I wasn't expecting much out of her speech, since she's given misguided answers in the past to such questions as "are you a feminist."
While most of the transpeople I asked about it at the event agreed that her speech was better than they expected, we also agreed that, while every other speech at least acknowledged that there is a "T" in "LGBTIQ," and many acknowledged the "I" as well, Lady Gaga's speech completely ignored the Transgender and Intersex communities.
That certainly isn't the only thing that stung my opinion of her speech--while she may feel that "gay" should include lesbian, bisexual, and possibly queer identities as well, that's the sort of male-default language that the LGBTIQ and feminist movements have been fighting for decades. The important thing, however, is that the NEM, which was otherwise very good about all-inclusive solidarity, had many more appropriate options for a speaker from the music industry. The mood of solidarity would have been much better served if all my gay and lesbian allies had raved incessantly about Peaches.
I'm not saying that the Transgender and Intersex communities should demand the removal of Gaga from the list of LGBTIQ representatives. After all, every letter in the Queer movement needs all the help it can get. Instead, I think the sex- and gender-variant communities should call for Gaga to make a stronger attempt at all-inclusiveness than the phrase "equality for all."
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Lady Gaga's Speech Puts the "it" in "Hit," but Takes Them From "LGBTIQ".
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16540
while she may feel that "gay" should include lesbian, bisexual, and possibly queer identities as well, that's the sort of male-default language that the LGBTIQ and feminist movements have been fighting for decades.
How long has gay=male homosexual?
And whats wrong with homosexual? Or if something is wrong with it, reclaim it.
With all the goings on about hetero-normative this and hetero-privileged that it makes some sorta sense to use the pre-fix homo.
"Gay" has always been used to refer to male homosexuals. Hence such phrases as "Gay and Lesbian Fund" or "Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation."
Prefixing Queer-aligned terms with "homo" is not inclusive of bi, tri, or pansexuals.
Even if "gay" was supposed to be a synonym for "homosexual," I object to the application of it to my identity both as a pansexual who does not see sex or gender in people she's attracted to, as well as to my identity as a transwoman. I am not a homosexual, I am not gay--I am a pansexual transwoman.
There is a term which applies to non-categorized sexual orientation, to sexual orientations other than heterosexual in general, and to the LGBTIQ movement as a whole, depending on context. That word is "Queer." (Side note--I want to acknowledge that not all Intersex individuals would consider themselves "Queer." However, this statement stands because in contexts where the I is included in the acronym, "Queer" is implied to mean the movement, not orientation)
I refuse to reclaim a word which does not describe me--not to mention that I find homosexual/heterosexual to be cisnormative terms to begin with.
The issue here is not that Gaga was trying to type all LGB individuals as "gay." The particular side point you're picking at is a challenge to the language of "gay" being applied to a movement that ALREADY HAS its own terms, in which "gay" is typically applied to men. It's the same thing in my eyes as using "he" as a generic third-person pronoun. Likewise, calling the LGB movement "homosexual" would exclude a part of the movement as well. It's not wise to reclaim terms that were discarded because we found a better one, especially if the better one at least has fewer problems (my intersex friends would have a lot more problems being labeled "gay" or "homosexual" than "queer.")
Erin, I agree with a lot of your theory. However, I have some different thoughts.
I, myself, also identify with labels (gender identity: genderqueer and sexual orientation: queer) that most of the speakers at the National Equality march did not mention or acknowledge. LGBT is a problematic acronym to begin with for at least two reasons: (a) it is binary-ist. The meanings of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender all have roots in the idea of there only being two genders. (b) it inappropriately groups transgender, a gender identity, with lesbian, gay, and bisexual, which are sexual orientations, (c) it is used, usually with good intentions, to be all-encompassing of all non-straight sexual identities, when it is not nearly so.
With regard to Lady Gaga. She was a celebrity, probably brought in to raise attendance and bring attention to the event (i.e. I saw numerous march signs proclaiming "Lady Gaga accepts me", etc. Not so many romanticizing Staceyann Chin). She was most likely NOT brought in for her hyper-analytic gender theory or queer rights activism. Therefore, I did not have high hopes for her speech. And I doubt that many of your fellow students were excited for her radical philosophy nearly as much as the novelty of seeing a famous person who likes "the gays".
I agree that gay is a problematic blanket term to use for non-straight sexualities. I am irritated, in general, by the wealthy, cis-gendered, gay-identified man normativity of the march, but also the queer movement in general.
But what bothered me more was the widespread ignorance of nearly all the speakers who used the LGBT term. I, too, if I were to pick a blanket term, would use "queer" in place of that acronym. And yet, even artists and "professional queer people" like Staceyann Chin would list off numerous sexual, gender, racial, and religious identities, with the intent of including ALL yet still leaving me unacknowledged. Which seems to speak to a possibility that these speakers are either not acquainted with or understand identities outside the LGBT realm. Most of the speakers, in short, don't seem as far down the rabbit hole as we are. Which is probably why they've got the mainstream popularity.