Viewing entries in
Blog

Trans is not the "New Struggle"

This whole “Trans rights is the new priority” fiasco needs to stop. This framing of the trans struggle as a “new” priority absolves Gay INC of its complicity in literally stealing from us, pathologizing us, harming us and erasing us. Trans people have been here lying under your bus forever. We were actually the old struggle of this movement — we just got kicked out of it.

Let’s get a few things straight:

1. The separation of “gay” from “trans” and “sexuality” from “gender identity” has a political history. This distinction was a conscious strategy to make the gay movement more palatable to straight cis white middle class society.

2. “Love” became separated from “Gender” because Gay INC knew that a politics of love would be much more palatable than a politics of gender. “Love” allowed gay activists to say, “We’re just like you!” instead of “We look different from you.” Trans become the repository for difference, for otherness, for transgression.

3. In order for “homosexuality” to become de-pathologized, gender nonconformity had to become re-pathologized. Gayness had to distinguish itself from trans: “We are not freaks like them.” The modern gay subject only emerged in distinguishing him/herself from gender nonconformity.

4. The history of the gay movement is a history of (re)producing the gender binary and gender conformity. It is a history of institutionalized transphobia. The gay movement is foundationally trans violence. It would not exist without trans violence.

5. Now transphobia is discussed with no history or origin story. It’s only discussed as individual episodes of harm and not a structure of violence. This de-historicization of trans violence means that individual trans people are blamed for both their violence and their outrage. People ask, “Why are you so angry?” instead of, “How am I complicit in your oppression?”

6. There is no gay celebration without trans violence. Love won because gender didn’t.

Please support the author
 

Transmisogyny Looks Like

Transmisogyny looks like knowing you have to be *fabulous* otherwise you will be misgendered (or worse). Transmisogyny looks like having to always be impeccable, happy, witty, and positive (otherwise you are just taking up too much space). Transmisogyny means being street harassed dozens of time on the way to your poetry shows. Means being called a freak, an it, an object. Means being gawked at and photographed without your consent. Means constant fear from men, women, and children. Transmisogyny looks like not being able to talk about it. You are only invited to entertain. Transmisogyny looks like your gender being entertainment. It looks like people applauding you on a stage and looking past you when you're being harassed on the street. It looks like always being complimented for your aesthetics and never your politics or your intellect (read: how could one of those 'things' look better than me). Transmisogyny looks like your audience and the people who book you calling you a man and using "he" pronouns after your show (still). Transmisogyny means never being believed because your gender is always already performative. Transmisogyny looks like the only people you can talk to about any of this is other trans femmes because no one else believes you. Transmisogyny looks like posting a photo of your cute outfit (read: armor) and not telling the story of the body behind it: the rapid heart beat, the dysphoria, the panic, the fear, the perpetual inadequacy. 

Transmisogyny looks like: 

smile, 
rinse, 
repeat.

Not Every Trans Person Can Afford To Be Visible

This #TDOV (trans day of visibility) let’s not forget that visibility can actually be lethal for many. Indeed, visibility for some is often contingent on erasure for others.

Many Black, indigenous, and other people of color who are trans and gender non-conforming may not have access to the resources and safety to “visibly” express our genders. When we do we often put our bodies on the line for even more familial, state, and interpersonal violence. Folks who are in detention centers, prisons, and /or living under occupation are often unable to be “visible” in their genders. Folks who are working class, surviving on the streets, navigating the foster care system, the shelter system, houselessness, may not be able to be visible in their genders. People with disabilities who rely on caretakers and families may not be able to be visible in their genders. Young people who are confined to their homes and are constantly regulated by their families may not be able to be visible in their genders.

We should never create hierarchies where we celebrate “visible” trans people over others. Instead of blaming people for not being visible, let’s dismantle the systems that prevent the majority of the world from accessing gender self-determination. Instead of shaming people for not being “out,” let’s trust people that they know what they need to do to keep safe. Instead of valorizing one type of trans visibility, let’s challenge the standards of visibility themselves (which are defined by white supremacy, capitalism, ableism, and colonialism). Let’s respect each person’s self-identification, regardless of what they look like to us. Let’s uplift the folks whose visibility does not align with conventional cis and white binary beauty norms. Let’s uplift the gender non-conforming folks who are constantly erased not just by cis people, but also by trans movements themselves.

You do not have to be “visible,” to be trans. All genders are valid, whether they are conventionally “visible” or not. 

support the author

trans/national

repeat after me:
1. our immigrant families are not just ‘homophobic’ they are also ‘colonized.’
2. our parents have histories, genders, and sexualities, too.
3. they are just as broken as we are (but we have the words — i mean the english — to say it)
4. the diaspora responds to racism with heteronormativity
5. trauma seeps through generations

support the author

How Bleak it Is

Thinking about how it requires a kernel of illusion to do activism. Thinking about how impossible words like ‘happiness’ and ‘hope’ feel when we begin to do the work of remembering how violent the world is. Thinking about how resistance is continually swallowed by our oppressors and repackaged as liberalism. Thinking about just how bleak the times we are in are: not because the world is crumbling beneath our feet, but rather simply because the television screens would have you believe it’s not. Thinking about how violence is no longer just about the episode or the casualty, it’s about the story they tell us about it: like, “prisons make justice” like “multicultural society” like “it gets better.” Thinking about how each one of us finds our own intimate flavors of delusion that help us justify waking up in the morning, sucking his cock, marching on a street. Thinking about how I wish we could name that more. Thinking about the labor of resistance: how we no longer can have a vision of a better world, we must have the right analysis; how we no longer can admit that we don’t know what we’re doing, we must shout confidently in the night ; how we cannot show our battle wounds, we must pretend that ‘hurt’ is a ritual we experience outside of the struggle. Thinking about how my politics do not actually come from a place of strength (and that is okay). Thinking about how my vision of the world is contradictory and limited and misguided (and that is okay). Thinking about what it would mean to rid ourselves of the impulse to be perfect, the need to be justifiable, the expectation to have our shit together. Thinking about what it would mean to be inspired by the chaos, the messiness of it all. Thinking about how much more sustainable than a dream that feels like: what is more consistent than chaos, anyways? Thinking about the constellation of questions that we ask ourselves every day and call it a ‘body’ or an ‘argument’ and sometimes an ‘apology.’ Thinking about how to reside in those questions, how to unlearn the desire to find answers, how to share the most intimate fissions, how to hold the tension, how to name the deep and profound sadness, how to trust in our own inadequacy.

Support the author

We Shouldn't Have to Pass In Order to be Safe

Today was a hard day. I was street harassed and ridiculed by people just for simply existing in public. And I’m sitting at home feeling awful and doing what I always do when I feel disposable: writing.

I think we’re in this really terrible moment right now where the alleged “trans tipping point” only allows us to share our narratives of triumph, of victory, of strength, of resilience as if we are supposed to endure all of the hardship we go through and emerge with a smile on our face. Never forget: the only space that trans femmes have in our culture is to entertain the very people who will turn away the minute we step off their stage.

This is what transmisogyny looks like: to not only have to go to hell and back for doing something so simple as living as who we are, but to also have to shut up about the rage and hurt and be grateful that anyone would have the audacity to believe us. We’re in a moment where your gender is understood only by what you look like and not who you are. Where people fixate on our clothing, our genitalia, our makeup but never our politics, our stories, our art, our ideas. We’re in a moment where we are required to be models or fabulous, sexy, and “strong” in order to have people take us seriously (aka until we can become inspirational models of “authenticity” and “perseverance” for others even though they never actually lent a helping hand while we were struggling in the first place).

We’re in a moment where we are must describe explicit accounts of the ways we have been harmed in order to garner enough sympathy to be recognized for who we are. Our self-identification requires the empathy of others because we are not allowed to own our experiences. They belong to the anxieties, the fears, the projections, the fantasies of the very people who taunt us. And you learn early on that not only do they control your body, they control the language. So when we try to defend ourselves our screams are read as silence (and therefore consent). How are you supposed to experience pain when you do not have a body? How are you supposed to be hurt when you do not exist? How are you supposed to heal when they don’t even acknowledge your pain?

And when we do talk about how hard it is they tell us that we are “strong,” and “powerful,” and they throw us adjective after adjective but we learn from a young age that there is a difference between a “word” and “shield” (and it feels like a fist). We learn from a young age that loving ourselves does not keep us safe – that in fact it ends up hurting us more. I am most terrified on the days I feel most beautiful. I am terrified most on the days I feel most beautiful. So sometimes you wear men’s clothes just so you don’t have to look behind your back but then they call you a man again and you think to yourself that it’s almost as if they want you to be harassed so that they can just erase you again – that there is some sort of perverse pleasure in simultaneously witnessing and erasing your pain.

Misgendering is not a moment, it’s a structure. It’s a condition. It’s a worldview. It’s having to wake up and not only be erased out of language, out of history, out of family, out of queer community, out of trans community, of media, of movements, of public space. It’s to experience constant and relentless denial of our humanity. It’s about men, women, and children saying “What the fuck is that?” It’s about that man at the restaurant who came up to you and asked if you were wearing a Halloween costume that day you decided to wear a beard and a skirt. It’s about all of the cis women who gawk at you and touch you without your consent and refuse to acknowledge that you designed their dresses, you made their makeup, you built femininity with your back (and are still bruised from it). It’s about all of the trans women who tell you to shave and take hormones to look more real. But what is reality in a world that tells you that you do not exist?

Why is the onus always on the individual and never the system? We cannot love ourselves out of structural oppression. Why are we expected to be brave for being ourselves? We cannot live our truth in a world that regards us as science fiction.

We should not have to approximate cis and white and binary standards of gender and beauty to be safe. We should not have to “pass” in order to get home without being followed, or spat on, or worse. What if we are never going to look like women or men? That means that the harassment doesn’t stop. There is no before or after there is just the terror. There is no before or after there is just the terror.

please consider supporting the artist

affirm femme rage

 just want to take a moment to affirm FEMME RAGE. Not only are women and femmes (cis and trans) expected to endure relentless violence, we are expected to remain silent about it. If we dare even name our pain we are demonized, punished, and ridiculed. Misogyny -- and especially transmisogyny -- looks like expecting women and femmes to consistently be peaceful and accommodating and stay in our place even when our bodies are under attack. It looks like our constant and routinized infantalization as if we are always having a temper tantrum and not expressing legitimate critique.  We are required to defer to the establishment -- as if objectivity is not patriarchal, as if leadership is not patriarchal, as if the status quo is not patriarchal.

Under cispatriarchy, naming a fact as simple as "I am hurt," becomes weaponized as if we are the ones with malevolent intent. This cycle of punishing women and femmes for speaking out continues because we so often participate in one another's oppression. Men and masculine people are too lazy to do the labor of patriarchy so they expect us to do it for them by silencing one another.

No longer! Shout to all of the women and femmes who are out here speaking truth to power and claiming space and being called ungrateful because of it! Your rage is beautiful, necessary, immediate, and transformative. Your rage is ancestral, healing, and a site of profound knowledge. Your rage is what has and continues to propel any actual movement for social justice. Thank you <3

support the author

Coming Home: Queer South Asians & The Politics of Family

The first time I went to a gay club the only other South Asian in the room came up to me and asked, “Do your parents know?” I didn’t need to ask, “About what?” I knew the answer — the way I know people. The way I knew who I was but didn’t know the language to explain it to my family. The way I know that there are so many of us who find ourselves lost in translation.

We proceeded to have a skill share right there at the bar about the best ways to explain our queerness to our parents.

This is not an isolated instance.

When queer South Asians together chances are we’re going to start speaking about our families of origin. We will talk about that disconnect: the queer communities we have built on our own and the…well…complete opposite we experience when we go back home. As activists we find ourselves in an even thornier place: navigating how to have conversations about our life work with families who would rather we just be making money. It’s really quite funny actually: how those known as a loud and unwavering voice at the rally fall back into the passive recipient of food and unsolicited advice when we are back home.

The more that I’ve built community with other queer (South) Asians, the more I’ve begin to think about how these conversations about blood family are actually part of our movement work. That impromptu skillshare at the bar, that discussion potluck (I mean crying session), and those daily phone calls with extended blood family are campaign strategies that we are engaging in. What we are trying to do is create new language and framework that actually make sense for our experiences.

The fixation on blood family in queer (South) Asian politics is not about us romanticizing heteronormative kinship and glossing over the routine violence we experience in these settings. Nor is it about us being duped by a conservative rhetoric of family values and suggesting that our families of origin should be the only site of our political work — for to do so would actively harm the broader based movements for racial and economic justice that we are a part of. This is about resisting a white queer logic of disposability and creating a possibility to develop alternative ways build relationships with our families of origin on our own terms. 

I want to suggest that our attachments to our blood families are not only sentimental, they are political. This sentimentality, this angst, this emotional labor is legitimate political work. Our turn toward our families of origin is part of a strategy of intimate organizing – a type of political work that often gets erased or dismissed by dominant white and masculine standards of queer visibility. In a political climate where radicalism is increasingly being attributed to individual activists developing individual political theory and finding individual liberation, our turn back to the blood family is a form of critique. It suggests a commitment to a type of collective liberation and a practice of solidarity where we refuse to allow our people to be disposable in our movement work.

* * *
It has taken me years for me to name the depths to which I subscribed to a white narrative of queer liberation. In one sense ‘coming out’ could signify the expression of my queerness. But on whose terms? Visibility for whom?

For me coming out was more about a physical act of departure – leaving South Asian spaces that I found to be too ‘traditional’ or too ‘conservative’ and becoming one of the only South Asians in queer community. Coming out meant judging my family of origin for just not understanding me. So, I sought validation from non-South Asians and found my political ‘home’ elsewhere.

In one telling of the story I ‘found’ my queerness and became an activist outside of my people. However, to subscribe to this story would be to relegate my family – and by extension, my people – into a space chiefly defined by its apathy and conservatism. White supremacy has long relied on such a trope: that immigrants and people of color are too ‘conservative’ and ‘too traditional.’

I bought into the story and defined my queerness and my politics always in contrast to my family of origin.

But what I soon learned is that as queer South Asians we navigate a complicated cultural landscape where we often are not afforded control of our own narratives. Our telling of personal violence often gets swallowed by white supremacy in the service of its racist and imperialist agenda. This is because the cultural logics that help maintain structural racism are stronger than our individual stories.

When my white peers would hear about the queerphobia I experienced from my people it would give power to a larger imperialist narrative that immigrants and people of color are traditional and conservative and therefore need to be educated or saved (read: occupied and exploited). My white peers would ask irrelevant questions like when my parents immigrated to this country and what access to education they had as if Western education and citizenship are necessary for queer politics. My white peers would ask me how fluent in English they were – as if access to English is at all correlated with queer violence. They would ask me why I was still in contact with them, why I didn’t just cut my connections.

What became evident is that my individual narratives could not pierce through the logics of orientalism which continue to find ways to position brown folks as ess developed than the Western world. What white queers don’t understand is that the entire mandate of racist assimilation in this country is about us being forced to give up our culture, tradition, and families. Assimilation has always been about us hating ourselves and feeling insecure in our bodies, families, and cultures. White folks do not understand how so many of us are not willing to leave our cultures for our queerness – how so many of us carry more complex identities than just our genders and sexualities.

It was only through building community with other queers South Asians and other queer communities of color that I began to find ways to narrate trauma in a way that felt more safe and authentic. In these communities we can name the intricacies of familial violence and not be judged for deciding to return. In these spaces I began to learn knowledge about diaspora and the history of South Asia. Collectively we began to recognize that our immigrant families are not just transphobic, they are also ‘colonized.’ I learned the ways in which colonialism in South Asia and white supremacy in the United States has always relied on regulating the genders and sexualities of my people. I learned the ways in which racism operates by enforcing and policing the gender binary and compulsory heterosexuality on communities of color. I recognized that my family is just as broken as I am but they never had the time and space to really process and heal from the violence of colonialism, the terror of Partition, the trauma of diaspora – let alone the English to articulate it to me.

Rather than blaming my own communities for our lack of queer South Asian visibility I began to realize that our diaspora responds to racism with heteronormativity. External threat engenders intimate violence. In the white telling of the story my family is just prejudiced. But in my telling of the story my people have been so forcibly disconnected from their culture and tradition that they cling desperately onto heteronormativity to maintain some semblance of self. In the white telling of the story my people are acting from a place of power and violence. In my telling of the story my people are acting from a place of hurt.

Trauma seeps through generations.

My experiences returning to South Asian spaces have allowed me to understand the ways in which white queer politics relies on the expression of liberation as an individual and not collective process. The narrative goes that we are supposed to ‘come out’ (read: leave our blood families) and participate in the ‘movement’ (read: public visibility) and join ‘alternative kinships’ (which are necessarily supposed to be more radical and more supportive than our families of origin). Both understandings of ‘queerness’ and ‘activism’ often rely on us leaving our cultural homes in order to participate in the ‘movement.’ We often witness a hierarchy of political work – with those who are doing the most ‘public’ (defined by standards of white supremacy) being upheld as leaders, while those of us  doing the slow and deliberate work of building within our own immigrant communities have our labor erased. What white queer politics neglect is that many of us have more complicated relationships with our blood families that make this ‘separation’ not only more difficult, but also contradictory to our anti-racism.

It’s not just that our families are prejudiced, it is that our families are powerful. It is that our families carry long histories of both trauma and resistance in their bones and that we refuse to dispose of them like this racist country.

For those of us who still have access to our families or communities of origin and can interact with them without fear of significant harm, I believe that it is important that we do this slow and intimate work of finding ways to translate our queerness. This work of coming to terms with our ‘queer’ and ‘(South) Asian’ identities cannot be the only site of our movement work (as is often the case). We must continue to mobilize in solidarity with other oppressed peoples and address prejudice within our own. Certainly we are all still trying to figure out the best strategies to do this work and to still remain safe and secure. Certainly we are going to fuck up. Certainly it’s some of the hardest work that we can do because often our validation relies on approval from the very people who may deny and abuse us. But this type of work feels important nonetheless to so many of us. And there is power and politics in that feeling. Like the same way so many of us know that we will invite our mothers to live with us when they get too old to care for themselves (regardless of what our queer communities might think).

Because when I think about the future, when I think about the world that I am fighting for…I know that I am not interested in being part of the revolution unless my mother will be right there beside me.

support the author

When Representation Isn’t Enough: Why All of Us Aren’t Proud

This month President Obama released a proclamation recognizing June as LGBT Pride Month. Just a couple of days earlier the Anti-Violence Project released its annual report documenting the violence experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people. According to this report, this past year we witnessed a 21 percent increase in physical violence against LGBTQ people. The proximity of these events is not coincidental; they highlight a dilemma we face as queer activists (of color) where our representation is regarded more than our reality.

In 1995, my aunt Urvashi Vaid, a lesbian activist, coined the term “Virtual Equality” to describe a political moment in the United States where the gay movement had achieved visibility without actually obtaining substantive access to power. Virtual equality was offered as a critique of a type of politics invested in representation––but not actually shifts in livelihood. While gays and lesbians had achieved unprecedented attention, they were still vulnerable to harm. Almost two decades later, as another queer brown activist, I find myself confronting the same curse of virtual equality––inheriting a movement that seems more invested in superlatives than statistics.

When Obama decided to recognize LGBT Pride, I wonder if he did his research. Pride, as we celebrate it today, was established to commemorate the first anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, an event that is often attributed as the beginning of the LGBT movement in the United States. Stonewall was not a corporate parade; it was a riot against police brutality that was initiated by trans and gender non-conforming people of color like Marsha P. Johnson. The same people who started our movement are still fighting for their lives today.

Despite recent media attention of transgender people of color––like Orange is the New Black star Laverne Cox––these communities are experiencing increased violence. According to the AVP report, almost 90 percent of the LGBTQ homicides this past year were people of color. Almost three-quarters (72 percent) of homicide victims were transgender women. Of the survivors of violence, 32 percent expressed experiencing hostile attitudes from the police.

Not much has actually changed since 1969: the police are still profiling and harassing trans people of color. Representation does not trickle down to justice.

This June, I want us to take a moment to revisit Vaid’s idea of virtual equality and be more critical of how the lip service given to LGBT rights has not really translated to much on the ground. If we really commit ourselves to justice for all LGBT people, we must recognize the ways in which Pride has failed trans and gender non-conforming people of color. Obama’s words ring hollow when we recognize that it’s not actually getting better for our communities, it’s getting worse.

In this light Pride isn’t a cause for celebration; Pride is lethal. Pride is lwarping the truth: rainbows make us forget that the storm is still happening. Equality isn’t cause for celebration. Equality is a mirage: it is more about representation than reality. Our government wants to pretend that we are equal by giving us words, not giving us safety or housing.

As LGBTQ activists not only must we resist violence against our communities, we must also resist distorted media representation. Despite what Obama and your favorite Netflix series might suggest, violence against LGBT people is still the norm. It often feels like the bulk of the work we have to do as grassroots queer and trans activists is combat the (mis)representation of our stories. How are we supposed to actually build collective power to end violence when we spend most of our time doing damage control? How are we supposed to build a movement when we are forced into always having to be reactive rather than proactive?

This June I want us to think about the disconnect between a television screen and a back alley. I want us to stop only glorifying the success stories without also naming the prevalence of violence. I want us to recognize how representation does not mean rectification. Representation has and continues to distract us from the reality on the ground. The progressive narrative that it’s somehow getting better for LGBTQ people prevents us from recognizing that this narrative is just that: a story, a fiction, a fairy tale. How are we supposed to be proud when the very government that proclaims this month LGBT Pride month is routinely harassing and criminalizing LGBT people of color?

If there is one thing to celebrate this month, it is the legacy of resilience of trans and gender non-conforming people of color. It is the fact that despite staggering and chronic conditions of violence, our communities continue to find ways to support one another, and resist. So this June for the 45th Anniversary of Stonewall, I invite you to dissent and reclaim our representation. Instead of participating in Pride festivities that distract us from reality, I invite you to join me on the streets to continue the work of the Stonewall Riots for the 10th Annual Trans Day of Action coordinated by the Audre Lorde Project – a march for the rights of trans and gender non-conforming people of color.

Our communities do not need lip service. We need safety and security. We need jobs and affordable housing. The LGBTQ community is not a political concept, theory, or abstraction. We are bodies facing routine and systematic attack. This Pride, I’m not interested in virtual equality, I’m interested in liberation. Join me?