Kat @standbimode-blog - Tumblr Blog

Gay Imperialism

In “Gay Imperialism”, Haritaworn, Tauqir and Erdem talk about the integration project of civilizing “homophobic immigrants” (14). What is this project of integration? How does this affect LGBT Muslims, according to the authors?

The integration of “homophobic migrants,” consists of a special quiz one must pass to attain German citizenship test, but only if one comes from a “Muslim” country. The test asks questions about terrorism, and about gender and sexuality. According to the authors, this is part of a wider “Islamaphobia project,” which seeks to externalize homophobia and patriarchy from within Western society to Muslim countries. Integrating migrants involves assuring they have an idealized set of “German” or “British” values – or are able to lie about it. The fact that this “Muslim Test” is only given to migrants from countries labelled Muslim shows the racism inherent in it – after all, plenty of Christian Americans would fail that test. The Islamophobia project helps to move gay and feminist politics into the mainstream, by removing their enemies, Homophobia and Patriarchy, from within their own culture, to the culture of Muslim, or immigrants read as Muslim.

For queer Muslims, the “Islamophobia Project” has one of two effects: they can be rendered victims lacking any agency, or they can labelled as ‘liberated’ from their oppressive culture and held up as exceptions that prove the rule. IN the first possible outcome, they are cast into the same net as women in the ‘Muslim world’, who are oppressed and victimized by Muslim culture. For the second, individuals are touted as having ‘embraced the gender-progressive’ culture of the West, and are thus liberated. This serves to reinforce the statement that Muslim culture is the most homophobic and sexist one, and to present the West as uniquely and exceptionally liberal and civilized. Groups of LGBT Muslims are not given the attention that individuals garner, and tend to struggle to find mainstream support.

Thoughts on the Course

This was a very interesting course. I chose this course because it sounded interesting and fit my limited schedule. The readings were sometimes difficult, but I enjoyed them. It was a lot of new information to process, but I have taken a lot away from this course. One thing I’ve found is that I read articles and other media pieces about transnational/international issues, especially LBGT related ones, more critically. I have a better understanding of the opinions and perspectives that may be influencing the authors. Similarly, I have a better understanding of LGBT-geopolitics. I had, before this class, read an article about a survey that asked youth about their experiences with same-sex attraction. The same survey was first conducted in the UK, then the US, then Israel. When I first read about the survey in Israel, I felt it came way out of left field. After reading about pinkwashing and Israel’s marketing campaign, it makes a lot more sense.

I enjoyed talking about the way things are talked about. This relates to Foucault – how discourse relates and affects the subject. The language used around a topic can reveal misunderstandings or assumptions, but only if we examine the way we talk about things. An example of this was our in class discussion about the phrase “s.o. had already transitioned.” This phrase, Skylar pointed out, imprecise, and it showed a misunderstanding of what it really meant to transition. I enjoyed the in class discussion in general. I don’t think the class would work that well as a lecture only class, because what we are talking about for the most part, are the opinions and perspectives that exist, as opposed to more set-in-stone topics, like calculus or something. The in class discussion helped me understand many of the concepts, like timelessness. After reading the article, I had begun to get a grip on it, but it wasn’t until we watched the video, talked about it, and did that fun activity, that I really understood it.

Overall, I have really enjoyed this course and am glad I took it!

Tales of the Night Fairies

This week, I want to talk about the film we watched, “Tales From the Night Fairies.” The film consisted of interviews of sex workers in India, and of individuals working for sex workers rights and advocating for their health. I found it interesting that some of the people featured made the argument that most sex workers were forced into the field, either by another person or by poverty, and because of they didn’t make the choice to enter the field, they shouldn’t be punished for it socially and by having limited rights. I’ve never actually heard that argument before. Others made the opposite argument – The one woman who had left two relationships when they became abusive, to go back to ‘the line.’ She countered the argument that because no one would actually choose that life, the sex trade should be abolished (by raiding brothels and arresting prostitutes). She said, then, that many women did voluntarily join the line, including her. Because of this, they should be allowed to work in their chosen field, without being arrested, abused, and harassed by the police.

This contradiction is just a result of the fact that the people making the documentary got two different perspectives, and did not edit one perspective out. It shows that the sex workers come from varied backgrounds, and have different views and opinions. In the past, when I’ve heard the argument that sex workers should be allowed to work because they chose the sex work field, the argument was presented as though sex work was their life’s calling. As though, even if they didn’t have to work, they would do sex work. Arguing like this, however, tends to nullify or leads the arguer to ignore, the voices of those women who chose to do sex work, but out of economic necessity and lack of other options. It limits the relevant voices to the sex workers for whom that is really true. Who are middle to upper class, and actually do have other, more prestigious options – which is a miniscule portion of sex workers. I don’t think the fact that, if this woman had been given the option to be a pharmacist or something, she would take that over sex work, renders this argument void. Realistically, she doesn’t have those options. She could maybe marry or work in a factory, which may also be more dangerous and not pay as well. Very few people have their dream jobs – many poor people even hate their jobs, or feel exploited.

Week 10

According to Joseph Massad, how do US military and political interests in North Africa and the Middle East impact discussions of sexual rights?

North Africa and the Middle East are both subjects of political and military interest, and seem to have a culture that is inscrutable to the Western journalist and academic. Partly this is up to the language barrier, as Massad describes how many conflicts and misrepresentations of this area are due to mistranslations. But even academics putting serious effort into their research tend force a Western lense onto the actual situation. The media is worse, and one rarely sees an attempt to portray incredibly complex way that sexuality and life play out in the present day. Neither are serious attempts made to distinguish the differences between such varied countries as Turkey, Iran, and Egypt. We have talked earlier in the class about turning Northern Africa into a pornotopia, and Massad also talks about gay men developing the idea that muslim countries would be a sexual paradise, and even talks about Western gay men converting to Islam because of the belief that it is a religion which “practices debauchery.” Today, we more often are given a barbaric, timeless image of Middle Eastern sexuality in which the women are ruthlessly subjugated and men hold all the sexual license and power. Stories such as the one discussed in class, about the two young men who were sentenced to death allegedly for being in a same sex relationship, but in fact were being charged with rape. I can recall another story about Afghani soldiers raping children and us soldiers being disciplined for intervening. The validity of this story is equally uncertain, but it paints a very convenient picture of the soldiers. The article presents the act of raping young boys as common practice among the Afghani soldiers, labels it a matter of culture. Stories like this, framed in this way, as endemic cultural practices rather than single incidents, serve the US military and political interests because it presents a country with a barbaric culture. The collective image formed by these stories make US intervention the natural move - to bring the “modernity” to these “primitive” cultures.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zachary-zane/i-cant-help-it-i-love-bei_b_8313938.html

I came across this article recently browsing reddit, and found it kind of interesting as it relates to what we talked about in class concerning fetishizing and critiquing our desires. This article was written by an out bisexual man about his experience with discrimination and fetishization. TL;DR - when Zachary Zane came out he expected it would suddenly be super easy find sexual partners of all genders, but this was not the case. Many people rejected him because of his bisexuality. BUT - some people fetishized him for it! - a fact he was surprised about. He feels he should be squicked out by the way these people are reducing him to his sexual orientation, but in reality he likes the way he is being desired for something which is usually grounds for his rejection.

He is doing what Vaid-Menon had suggested: taking a close look at his desires. He acknowledges that the reasons he is desired for his bisexuality are problematic: they relate to homophobic beliefs about how having same sex experiences feminizes one and opposite sex experience masculinizes one. That said, he also doesn’t see the possibility of changing these desires. I recognize this article doesn’t relate to race, but I found it helpful because I could relate my own experiences to it; I’ve been on both sides of the coin. With my own experiences, I found being fetishized for my sexuality as gross. By straight men, I say bisexual and they hear “threesome” or “sexually available.” My solution is this: don’t date straight men. That leads me to the other side of the coin: desiring a person specifically for their (bi)sexuality. There’s a word for it: bi-sensible. Is it problematic, where does it come from? I’m not nervous about a person’s real feelings/beliefs about my sexuality when they share it. Also, I’m attracted to the queerness: the heteronormative is somewhat strange to me. I have literally no straight friends. I don’t like being read as straight, and I wonder: is a couple straight if neither of the people in it are? I don’t find it very problematic. Neither do I find Zachary’s affinity for being fetishized problematic; he doesn’t like the stereotypes - so I’m not sure he really likes the fetishization. I think he just likes being desired for what he is. BUT I’m not him; I don’t know.

Racialization and Desire

How do racialization and sexuality interact in the communities you inhabit? Draw on the ideas about desire and politics in Vaid-Menon’s essays to talk about this.

If I ‘inhabit’ any community, it would be the active queer community at Saint Paul College. PRISM, the college queer activist club, forms the center, and it extends through the email lists and personal networks. The results of these tendrils appear at big events like Pride and smaller ones like get togethers. This community is predominately white, with many small events like get togethers being 100% white - which is interesting because at Saint Paul College POC people hold the majority. In class, we had discussed the taboo of talking about racial preference, and I thought of a time a friend had broken it. A friend told me that he simply wasn’t attracted to black men. This friend is white, young, male, and gay. He defended himself, saying he wasn’t racist because it was simply his preference, and he couldn’t help it. He refused to consider where this preference came from. This refusal to look critically at desires is exactly what Vaid-Menon had written about. Other’s feelings surrounding this friends statement varied from “Yes, its a preference and he cannot help it.” to “That’s racist.” Personally, the statement made me feel uncomfortable because it seemed to reduce every black person to their race. Their race somehow overwrote every other facet of their being.

The second example is a friend who had a pregnancy scare. The father of her possible baby was black, but while she wanted kids, she didn’t want black kids. The encounter which led to this incident was meant to be an adventure, and experience, and a one off thing. She would not date outside her race. Others in the conversation called her on this apparent racism. I’m having trouble articulating exactly why her statement makes me uncomfortable - it has to do with the way she explained her sexual experience with a black man as something similar to trying a strange food. She did it to be able to say she had done it, for the experience. But this reduces her partner to just his race, and exoticises him, makes him an “Other.”

Personally, I think these racial preferences must be examined in the same way other racial bias’ and stereotypes we hold subconsciously must be examined and criticised, even if actually excising them is not a possibility. Sometimes, I make an assumption about a person and then see it contradicted, and I recognize that my assumptions came from a place of bias. Sometimes, I make assumptions about a person, and then stop myself because I recognized where the assumptions came from, and I know that to make them is wrong. When it comes to desire, we can not stop ourselves, recognize that our desire/lack of desire comes from a place of internalized racism and bias, and begin to desire what we had not before. But we can stop, recognize where our bias comes from, and maybe take a moment to look again for beauty where before we had only seen race. This doesn’t create desire where there was none, but it does challenge the cultural bias we may have internalized which says that only white is beautiful.

#white fetish #internalized racism

Define a term: Trafficking

The trafficking of people, as opposed to guns or drugs, entered the American consciousness in the 1800's, with the white slavery panic. It was believed that very frequently, young white women were being kidnapped or tricked into prostitution. Those who went willingly into the profession were often labeled as mentally ill, and shut away in special homes for such women. For a long time, trafficking conotated the movement of women and children for the purpose of forced prostitution. In the last decade, this definition has expanded.

Today, it is acknowledged by organizations such add the UN that people may be trafficked for reasons other than sex, such as sweatshop labour. In addition, the phrase trafficking in women and children has changed to trafficking in persons or people. The phrase women and children is still used frequently, and not without reason. The majority of trafficked persons are women, and persons under majority age are more vulnerable. The phrase isn’t without problems, though. “Women and Children” as a phrase has, historically, been used because the two were seen as near equals. Women had the similar amounts of agency, intelligence, and rights as children. In the context of trafficking, although women and children may take most of the resources put into rescue and prevention efforts, the interventions necessary for adults who likely went into the situation knowing what was going on - that is, they knew that they would be doing sex work when they arrived at their destination - are quite different from the needs of children, who may not have chosen to leave their home country in the first place. Or did they? “Children” is very ambiguous, but in legal terms it often means a person under the age of 18. The difference between a 3 year old and a 16 year old, however, is large. The 16 year old likely chose to leave their country of origin, and may have understood the type of work they would be doing upon arrival, much like an adult.

So what exactly fires trafficking mean? As it applies to the discourse we will encounter in class, trafficking means the movement of people for the purpose of coerced labour. The specifics beyond this are not to be assumed. Every individual person has their own reasons and ideas for leaving their country of origin and entering another. When we talk about trafficking the movement was likely illicit, meaning that trafficked persons are criminals before they are victims. Victimization comes only when, upon their arrival, they face debt-bondage, forced labor, or are in some other way their freedoms are restricted. That said, in the every day, the term may be used differently - such as the recent news story of two police officers ‘trafficking’ a 14 year old girl. In this case, by trafficking, the author seems to mean they assisted the girl in prostituting herself. Pop culture, then, still tends to equate trafficking with sex work.

#sex work #trafficking #I'm tired

Today I picked up Trafficking and Prostitution Reconsidered: New perspectives on migration, sex work, and human rights. This book consists of a collection of essays edited by Kamala Kempadoo, with Jyoti Sanghera, and Bandana Pattanaik. The editors each have strong connections to the NGO Global Alliance Against the Traffic in Women, and the contributors were recruited through the network of the same organization.

The introduction, written by the primary editor, considers the history and meaning of the term trafficking, from the white slavery panic in nineteenth century America, to the ways the UN has defined the term in policies. This book defines the term trafficking add the trade and exploitation of labour under conditions of coercion and force.

The introduction goes on to critique common laws and policies surrounding trafficked persons. In particular, how they are most typically arrested and deported unless they become informants for the police. Kempadoo does not specify which countries policies in particular she is criticising. Back on their countries of origins, trafficked persons are sometimes ostracized by their communities, and lack any support systems. I'm very interested in reading this book. I'll have to keep in mind that each author has similar ties to NGO's and their, possibly similar viewpoints and agendas.

#libraries are great #books are sexy

Red Azalea

This week I would like to write about Anchee Min, and her book Red Azalea. Red Azalea is an autobiographical account of Min’s childhood, growing up in China during Mao’s Cultural Revolution (1967-1977). Min was sent to a communal farm when she was 18, and there she began a sexual and romantic relationship with one of the women who shared her cabin, called Yan. As Min described in this book, all forms of sexuality were discouraged or forbidden. Even state approved marriages do not go unpunished, as she writes that the couple are given a house near a communal farm and are stuck their doing hard labor for the rest of their lives. The communist government was trying to forcefully create new social values, eliminating the family as the basic social unit, and promoting equality between the sexes.

Purity came to mean ideological purity, and the purity of one’s devotion and loyalty to the community revolution. Lu, company commander, became suspicious of Min’s relationship with Yan and warned her “I want you to be aware of your growing sophistication. You’re losing your purity.” (Red Azalea, 93). Yan and Min spoke about their relationship in ways that indicated that they could never be open about it, and it would never be approved by the state, and with the knowledge that the only way they can improve their conditions is to rise through the ranks. One can only do so alone.

Min left the farm after a few years, when she was selected to star in a model opera, the only form of entertainment allowed by the state. There, she met a man known only as “The Supervisor,” who was supervising the production of the film. They developed a secret friendship and sexual relationship. “The Supervisor” was high up in party ranks, which is why all interactions between the two were secret. When questioned about why the model operas never had a romantic component, he said “Romantic love does not exist among proletarians” (Red Azalea, 238). At one point, the Supervisor brings Min to a park in the city where people meet, masturbate, and have sex. The Supervisor explains that they do so out of desperation for connection and because the life and death scenario excites them (which it is because should they be caught they would lose everything they had).

I really enjoyed reading this book, and I think it gives some great insight to how a culture’s attitudes toward sexuality may be shown and presented to outsiders, and the public, but experienced very differently. Mao had many initiatives in his Cultural Revolution which to western ears sound very progressive and good, promoting equality between the sexes and punishing sexual violence. This book reveals that how such policies are actually experienced is much more complex.

#Red Azalea #bisexual #time/place #significant person

freebeardninja-blog

Week 4: Thinking Sex

How do the ideas and the assumptions about sexuality Gayle Rubin talks about in “Thinking Sex” compare to ideas and assumptions about sexuality now, in 2015? What new standards and assumptions about sexuality can you think of?

Some progress has been made since the 80’s! With the recent legalization of gay marriage it is now more accepted (though not by everyone) to be in a committed gay or lesbian relationship and to get married. Fetishes are also slowly making their way towards being “acceptable” as well with the advent of movies like “50 Shades of Grey” (though we all know that movie doesn’t portray a healthy BDSM relationship…). It’s become somewhat “popular” to try out and experiment with various “kinky” sexual activities. The interesting thing though, is that kinks seem to only be “acceptable” when traditionally vanilla couples experiment a little with them. Couples who regularly or exclusively engage in kink are still primarily looked down upon and their behavior is still largely regarded as “abnormal” or “deviant”. You can try out kink for fun, but not too much. The trans community is also making baby steps towards acceptance with the emergence of trans celebrities like Laverne Cox and Caitlyn Jenner. Again though, being trans is really only accepted if you undergo transition surgery and can pass as either male or female. Trans women with penises, for example, are still regarded as “abnormal”. And we’re still a long way from equality and various legal protections, but that visibility is there.

Some things never seem to change though. Just like in the Rubin article cross-generational sexual relationships are a huge no-no. Consent laws are as stringent as ever, and children are shielded from sex by any means necessary. However, once you get past childhood and off into “adult” years cross-generational relationships aren’t as frowned upon. There’s still some judgment that people may pass, but overall it isn’t as taboo for a 30 year old to be married to a 60 year old (for example). But put a 15 year old with an 18 year old and all hell breaks loose! Our society is still very much absorbed with the idea of preserving childhood “innocence”. Prostitution is also a punishable offense today just like it was in the 80’s.

My favorite quote from the reading: “One need not like or perform a particular sex act in order to recognize that someone else will, and that this difference does not indicate a lack of good taste, mental health, or intelligence in either party” (p. 283).

standbimode-blog

Totally off topic, but I’d just like to say that 50 Shades of Grey has followed a long tradition in the romance genre of coercive and consensual sex. Look at classics such as “The Sheik” (1921) or like most romcom’s in which a man stalks a woman before winning her over.

#romance films are rapey #always have been

benneedsanap-blog

Tumblr Post #3

Tumblr Prompt for Week 4: How do the ideas and the assumptions about sexuality Gayle Rubin talks about in “Thinking Sex” compare to ideas and assumptions about sexuality now, in 2015? What new standards and assumptions about sexuality can you think of?

In a sense, the ideas that Rubin presented in her paper are still just as relevant now as they were went the paper was written. However, some of the ideas/assumptions are outdated, or are not as prevalent as they were back then. One of the most obvious examples is that gay marriage got legalized a few months ago. Some people still see it as deviant behavior, but for the most part we have normalized homosexuality in our society. Also, we are in the process of normalizing transgenderism/transsexuality. Going back to gay marriage getting legalized, it is an exciting accomplishment, but it is a little problematic because in a sense the media took control of how homosexuality is presented. This means that a lot of the time the media portrayed gay people as white, and “straight” acting, and in the process completely ignoring people of color, or gender nonconforming people, and people who are bi, asexual, pan, and/or trans, and many more. Therefore, while the US has accepted homosexuality, it has only accepted a limited version of homosexuality. Another thing I would like to mention is how Cross-Generational sex is an interesting topic because, again, we are seeing parts of it being accepted but the other part we are still demonizing. The part that is being accepted is the one that involves people above the age of 18 dating people who are much older, like people in their 30s, 40s, 50s, and older. The other part that we as a nation still demonize is people who are pedophiles. Personally, I am not encouraging/promoting/for it. However, from a neutral point of view, pedophilia is very much real and cannot be ignored. I also think that it needs to be understood as a type of sexuality and not as a mental disorder (or something along those lines), because if we do then we need to view homosexuality and transsexuality as such too. Personally, I don’t think we will ever advocate and try to normalize the act of pedophilia, but there are people out there who think the sexuality aspect of it should be recognized so that people that identify with the sexuality can reach out to professionals and get guidance without having to immediately be demonized. I mean, I highly doubt anyone is choosing to be a pedophile or feeling all too happy about having such thoughts/feelings/attraction…

(This is just more of an after thought, but I just read this article about pedophilia and I think it is worth checking out. It is weird and kind of uncomfortable, but I still think it’s worth reading. http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2013/12/22/is_pedophilia_a_sexual_orientation.html )

standbimode-blog

I agree that cross-generational relationships, with the younger party of majority age, are closer to normalized, they are far from it. A colleague of mine recently married a man about twenty years her senior. None of her family are accepting of the relationship, and did not attend the wedding. And to be honest, when I saw their wedding pictures I couldn’t help but feel confused. I reminded myself a second later that its neither my business nor my place to judge, but it speaks to how our culture has informed my subconscious thoughts on what makes an appropriate relationship and what doesn’t.

#cross generational #marriage #subconscious judging

digenovanicolo

Just a reminder

Bi girls aren’t secretly straight

Bi guys aren’t secretly gay

Pansexuals aren’t attracted to everyone

Nor are they attracted to pans

Bi and pans don’t all want a threesome

Bi and pans are not more likely to cheat

Asexuality is not celibacy

Nor are asexuals plants

Aromantics don’t need to be fixed

The ‘a’ in LGBTQA stands for asexual not ally

Demisexuals and polysexuals exist

A lot has changed since the ‘80s

I very much enjoyed reading Gayle Rubin’s “Thinking Sex.” I found the history is contained very interesting, as well as learning about how different beliefs around sexuality and what makes sex good or bad have changed. First, I think the fallacies she talked about, such as the fallacy of misplaced scale which is mentioned on page 278, have not changed much. The scene from Mean Girls, in which the sex education teacher tells the students that “If you have sex, you will get pregnant and you will die” comes to mind. Clearly this is an exaggeration, but it is not far from the truth. Rubin wrote “sexual acts are burdened with an excess of significance.” I think that sex acts which exist in the “good sex” category Rubin later detailed have lost some of their excess significance. It is normal for people to have sex before marriage, and not expected that a woman is a virgin before meeting her husband. Looking at the charmed circle diagram on page 281, one thing that strikes me is that non-procreative, non-penetrative sex acts have moved into the center of the circle. Although institutions like the Catholic Church still may forbid anything but penis-in-vagina sex between monogamous heterosexual couples, I think our culture as a whole has changed a lot regarding manual, oral, and intercrural sex. In the diagram on the following page, I think it is safe to say that long-term, monogamous, and officially sanctioned same-gendered relationships have moved safely into the “good sex” camp. A third difference can be found on page 286/287. Rubin writes about the formation of the gay community, and says on 287 “At present, several other groups are trying to emulate the successes of homosexuals. Bisexuals, sadomasochists…are all in various states of community formation and identity acquisition.” I think the internet has sped this along for most of the groups she mentioned as well as many more, including groups as varied as the asexual community or the furry community. Of course, the formation of an online or physical community and identity has not necessarily also led to a more widespread societal acceptance.

#prompt #gayle rubin #thinking sex

Normality, Power, and Discourse

“I was beginning to understand something about normality. Normality wasn't normal. It couldn't be. If normality were normal, everybody could leave it alone. They could sit back and let normality manifest itself. But people-and especially doctors- had doubts about normality. They weren't sure normality was up the job. And so they felt inclined to give it a boost.” ― Jeffrey Eugenides

I thought of this quote in when reading Foucault last week, specifically the Rule of Immanence section.

#normality #Foucault #Power #Discourse

canyoutakemehome

Yes, all cis people.

I do not care who you are. I do not care how long you’ve known the person. I do not care that it’s so hard for you. If you do not use a trans person’s correct name and pronouns, you can fuck right off. I do not have time for this shit anymore.

canyoutakemehome

cis ppl i see u not reblogging this

globalcitizenmilkshakeblizz-blog

Refusing to use a Trans person’s correct name and pronouns is a dreadful abhorrent (I can’t think of anything worse at the moment) but If you do this and claim it is due to you knowing them since before their physical metamorphosis, then you clearly do not deserve to be graced by their amazing and glorious presence! Also if you do so I will never forgive you it would be like constantly using the opposite pronouns as you identify with. **End Rant**

We talked about how important it is to define terms... So this is the definition that I use for bisexual. I like it because it eliminates the supposed problem of bisexual leaving out or excluding attraction to nonbinary genders.

#bisexual day #robyn ochs #importance of defining terms

lovethewayyoubi

the anthem.

HAPPY BI VISIBILITY DAY!!

standbimode-blog

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#best holiday #I had cake

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Kat