Wait, what?
22/7/15 16:53![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
luvdovz.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsPutting a few sources for the same story, just so we get any potential "this is fake non-news from a non-mainstream media" type of derailment off the table right from the get-go:
Drag Queens Banned From Free Pride Glasgow Event Over Fears Of Offending Transgender People
Drag queens banned from Pride event 'because they may offend transgender people'
Drag queens banned from performing at Free Pride Glasgow event over fears acts will offend trans people
Pride event BANS drag queens in case they are offensive
(Vid) Drag Queens Banned At Pride Event
I know, that seems odd, stupid, and certainly very ironic. Trans-sexuals who often find themselves at the receiving end of discrimination, now make an effort to ban cross-dressers... based on what? That the latter aren't "trans enough" to be considered true members of the community? Even if they do support and celebrate the occasion and the cause that it represents? What the...
Somehow reminds me of the "you're not black enough" infighting that happened a while ago. But I digress.
While I'm aware that this one occasion of blatant double standard is not necessarily representative of the way the entire LGBTQ+ community treats entire chunks of its membership, it's evident that it's a diverse community, and cracks and internal divisions and infighting are bound to occur at some point, and the LGBTQ+ crowd would find itself at odds at one stage or another. Splitting into their own little factions is inevitable, I guess - it's just that it didn't take too long for that to happen.
The whole premise that's being cited here looks strange to me, though. A man wearing a dress and makeup and doing some sort of song and dance routine now seems to be perceived as more offensive by some than a man taking female hormones - because the trans- and non-binary caucus somehow decided so?
That said, here's another related story that you may also find interesting:
Swedish “Far-Right” Plans Gay Pride Parade Through Muslim Areas; Leftists and Gay Rights Groups Decry the Parade as Racist
"The Facebook page is absolutely filled with angry comments from leftists, attacking the “xenophobic right-wing nationalists” for organizing a gay pride parade through Muslim areas. Since Islam holds that gays should be executed, something like this is obviously an attack on Muslims and should therefore be outlawed. At least, that’s what Swedish leftists – and, indeed, Swedish gays – are saying. Leftists are organizing a counter-demonstration against this gay pride parade."
This isn't helping the argument in favor of tolerance to diversity much, is it. Let alone the free-speech argument that was so vehemently defended during the Danish Muhammad cartoons and the Charlie Hebdo episode.
Drag Queens Banned From Free Pride Glasgow Event Over Fears Of Offending Transgender People
Drag queens banned from Pride event 'because they may offend transgender people'
Drag queens banned from performing at Free Pride Glasgow event over fears acts will offend trans people
Pride event BANS drag queens in case they are offensive
(Vid) Drag Queens Banned At Pride Event
I know, that seems odd, stupid, and certainly very ironic. Trans-sexuals who often find themselves at the receiving end of discrimination, now make an effort to ban cross-dressers... based on what? That the latter aren't "trans enough" to be considered true members of the community? Even if they do support and celebrate the occasion and the cause that it represents? What the...
Somehow reminds me of the "you're not black enough" infighting that happened a while ago. But I digress.
While I'm aware that this one occasion of blatant double standard is not necessarily representative of the way the entire LGBTQ+ community treats entire chunks of its membership, it's evident that it's a diverse community, and cracks and internal divisions and infighting are bound to occur at some point, and the LGBTQ+ crowd would find itself at odds at one stage or another. Splitting into their own little factions is inevitable, I guess - it's just that it didn't take too long for that to happen.
The whole premise that's being cited here looks strange to me, though. A man wearing a dress and makeup and doing some sort of song and dance routine now seems to be perceived as more offensive by some than a man taking female hormones - because the trans- and non-binary caucus somehow decided so?
That said, here's another related story that you may also find interesting:
Swedish “Far-Right” Plans Gay Pride Parade Through Muslim Areas; Leftists and Gay Rights Groups Decry the Parade as Racist
"The Facebook page is absolutely filled with angry comments from leftists, attacking the “xenophobic right-wing nationalists” for organizing a gay pride parade through Muslim areas. Since Islam holds that gays should be executed, something like this is obviously an attack on Muslims and should therefore be outlawed. At least, that’s what Swedish leftists – and, indeed, Swedish gays – are saying. Leftists are organizing a counter-demonstration against this gay pride parade."
This isn't helping the argument in favor of tolerance to diversity much, is it. Let alone the free-speech argument that was so vehemently defended during the Danish Muhammad cartoons and the Charlie Hebdo episode.
(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 14:01 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 15:39 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 15:41 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 16:17 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 17:04 (UTC)Where-oh-where is this world going.....
(no subject)
Date: 23/7/15 16:16 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 17:51 (UTC)As for the Swedes, well, it makes me grateful to have the 1st Amendment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie
(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 19:39 (UTC)Though I must confess that the schadenfreude is particularly sweet in this case.
(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 20:38 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 20:08 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 20:37 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 18:16 (UTC)---
The real issue at play here is: "which response causes more harm?" Does being fully inclusive (and having cis drag acts perform) potentially cause harm to some trans folks? Does deciding not to have such acts perform harm them? Who is harmed more?
This is an ongoing dialogue, and working out the knotty problem of intersectionality is never easy (especially with the sometimes ugly history of how trans individuals have been treated by some cis members of the LGBT community.) I'd say that the fact that they're even bothering to ask the question of "hey... are we causing harm by just going along with this status-quo?" is a sign of progress, even if they ultimately decide to go back to it.
---
With regards to the "far-right" parade: this is no different than the "draw mohammed" people. Sure, they have every right to do what they want to do. But let's not pretend that they are actually there to do anything other than stir up trouble. To try to paint this as some "aha! Gotcha!" moment (as the article's author does) is disingenuous. It's not a matter of "I guess muslims are more important in the oppression olympics! Hurr! Take that leftists!" It's that oppression, diversity, and such questions aren't zero-sum games. The reason prior pride events didn't go through muslim areas is because it's possible to want to stand up against the oppression of gay people, while also recognizing the oppression of muslims. It's possible to stand for one thing without being completely blind to the harm one might be causing to others.
These far-right folks don't give a single shit for gay rights, or actual diversity. They're shit-stirrers, trying to sum complex issues into bumper-sticker slogans and gotcha moments. For them to point to those criticizing them as uncaring about free-speech, or diversity, or whatever, is about on the same level as racists who, when called out on their racism, dare to say: "Why do you have to make everything about race? You're the real racist!"
No one who's actually paying attention buys any of it.
(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 20:11 (UTC)Well, this solves it, then.
Wait, it doesn't?
Agreed on the shit-stirrers. Yes they're shit-stirrers. So what. Charlie Hebdo were also shit-stirrers, and everyone rallied behind them when the response to their shit-stirring was disproportionate, indiscriminate violence.
(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 21:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 22/7/15 21:37 (UTC)I'm not sure if it solves anything, but I feel that it's important to hold these various news providers accountable when their headlines are misleading (or to use the neologism: "cickbait.")
What will "solve" it is folks within those movements discussing and working out the challenges of intersectionality. As with all such messes, it probably won't be pretty, but it's a common growing pain in any struggle for equal rights.
---
"Charlie Hebdo were also shit-stirrers, and everyone rallied behind them when the response to their shit-stirring was disproportionate, indiscriminate violence."
No one deserves to be murdered, regardless of their views, or how they express them. However, not everyone deserves to be praised for simply spewing whatever poisonous opinions they hold out into the open.
There is an old adage in comedy: punch up, not down. Everyone (ideally) has free speech. Everyone (ideally) has the right to stir-shit. The question is: which direction are we punching? Are we punching "up" at oppressive structures, or "down" at oppressed people? Charlie Hebdo punched "up" at societal structures in Muslim societies that oppress their citizens. (They also sometimes punched "down" at people, and were rightly criticized for it when they did.) Most pride parades stir-shit by punching "up" at the (until recently widely held) societal insistence that there is something shameful about being gay. They punch "up" at structures that prevent gays (and other related minorities) from enjoying equal status and rights in their societies.
The "right-wing" pride parade, on the other hand, is punching "down" at two groups: the gay people whose cause they are appropriating to spread their poison, and the Muslims whose community they wish to march through - a community whose only "crime," it seems, is being Muslim.
To equate this right-wing group's racist horribleness with Charlie Hebdo is just absurd. Shit-stirring simply for the sake of shit-stirring is no virtue, and does not deserve to lauded without regard to its impact on others. (This is, unfortunately for American politics, a common misconception among many I've interacted with recently who praise Donald Trump for not being "politically correct," as if the ability to simply bleat out random populist noise, without regard to whether that noise is factual or even useful, is some great virtue.)
I will say that the "disproportionate, indiscriminate violence" committed against Charlie Hebdo likely galvanized support for them, even when many of the views they expressed and things they said were, quite frankly, racist and terrible. So I suppose we can take some small comfort in the fact that the counter protests and angry words from these liberals are a pretty far cry from storming into an office with machine guns. At least we can be saved the remote chance that these right-wingers be turned into martyrs of free-speech.
Outside agitators....
Date: 22/7/15 20:36 (UTC)Zombie Bull Conner approves.
RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 22/7/15 21:41 (UTC)RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 22/7/15 22:36 (UTC)RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 23/7/15 11:41 (UTC)And as stated in other replies down thread, context matters. We cannot equate the rhetoric of free speech and the action of protest with siccing attack dogs on children. We cannot equate a peaceful parade designed to foster acceptance with a parade specifically designed to offend people solely on the basis on their religious affiliation. An unwillingness to consider context and nuance is another hallmark of the aforementioned reactionary mindset practiced by folks such as Bull Connor, for whom everything is black and white and simplistic enough to fit on a bumper sticker. Understanding why two seemingly similar parades can be morally unequal requires a deeper examination, and a willingness to address the issue with more than a "gotcha, liberals!" attitude.
RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 23/7/15 19:06 (UTC)RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 22/7/15 23:02 (UTC)RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 23/7/15 03:17 (UTC)Check your assumptions.
RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 23/7/15 11:30 (UTC)Not all shit-stirring is laudable. Not all negative reactions to it are wrong. Context matters. Comparing these folks with Bull Connor is beyond absurd.
RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 26/7/15 13:56 (UTC)RE: Outside agitators....
Date: 26/7/15 17:06 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 23/7/15 14:24 (UTC)The second story..."this isn't helping the argument in favor of tolerance to diversity much" is certainly not the reaction I'd have to that. People staging a gay pride parade in sincerity is one thing, but people who clearly don't believe in it using it as a tool to troll Muslims is quite another.
Without sifting through the comments referenced there, what is it people are saying should be outlawed exactly? Staging a pride parade in "Muslim areas" period, no matter who's doing it?
(no subject)
Date: 23/7/15 17:58 (UTC)Being L, or G, or B, or T, or Q is not a choice - that's one of the main arguments for the movement.
Being a drag queen is a choice, so maybe that's the cutoff point. Maybe they aren't against them, they just don't believe they're fighting for the exact same cause.
(no subject)
Date: 23/7/15 20:16 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 26/7/15 14:01 (UTC)What time are you using as a starting point, the point that the the "split" follows by not "too long", and why?
(no subject)
Date: 26/7/15 17:05 (UTC)Why? Because that's *the* cornerstone of modern-time LGBTQ+ rights.
Which alternative starting point would you have used, and why?
(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 18:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 18:46 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 19:07 (UTC)From a casual google search, 2002:
http://igfculturewatch.com/2002/03/07/the-myth-of-a-transgender-stonewall/
2007:
https://endablog.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/the-gay-patriarchy-and-trans-exclusion-in-enda/
2007:
http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2007/10/why-transgender-community-hates-hrc.html
But it goes back to before I was born I expect. There were certainly riff in the Castro between lesbians and gay men in many ways, and racial divides back in the 70's. I recall our local "Dykes on Bikes" wasn't allowed at a gay pride parade, way back in the day. Stuff like that.
(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 19:11 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 19:30 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 19:42 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/7/15 03:35 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 28/7/15 05:56 (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 19:47 (UTC)And the event in Scotland WILL now allow drag performances.
(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 19:54 (UTC)The event in Scotland will NOW allow drag performances.
(no subject)
Date: 27/7/15 19:58 (UTC)