Charles writes:
> If in your political activism for gay liberation you ignore the impact
of your activism on other liberation movements, you will be categorized
as a rightwing, gay liberationist.
I criticize, therefore I am rightwing? LOL
> Your public criticism of Cuba on gay rights will be used to support
invasion, blockade, etc. It will be used to bolster the claim that it is
terrible, anti-democratic country.
I can hear it now:
"Mr. President. Brian that Buddhist faggot has reported that there is queer oppression in Cuba."
""Well, damn it Condi. We're going to have to do something right away. Can't let queer folk be oppressed. We are going to have to go nucklar on Castro's ass."
> Thus, your public attacks on Cuba on gay issues is likely to cause the
Cubans to group you with the rightwing and liberals AND THEREBY IGNORE
AND REJECT YOUR PROTEST.
Are you saying that Cubans automatically group with the rightwingers anyone who criticizes them, even if that person supports them in other areas? Are they that phobic?
> In other words, practically speaking you are less likely to achieve your goal
of improving gay rights in Cuba by making your protest public.
Cubans wished only to be praised in public?
> Your arguments for gay liberation will be bourgeois, and rejected on that basis.
If you think that type of attack will help gay rights in Cuba, I think you are wrong.
> Praising the Cuban revolution is very important in order to try and win
people to support it and end the U.S. blockade, retain hope among leftists
that socialism hasn't been wiped out in the world. Praise for its socialism
should not be silenced for its shortcomings with respect to gay liberation.
As I wrote before it should be praised for what it got right and criticized for what it got/gets wrong.
> No the Cubans are not killing people for being gay. This is a careless
and exaggerated assertion in this specific context and discusion.
I am not talking of just physical mortality. I am also speaking of queer spiritual and queer cultural death.
> I don't have statements from Castro individually on homosexuality.
He has gotten better over the years. A Castro sampler:
1965: "We would never come to believe that a homosexual could embody the conditions and requirements of conduct that would enable us to consider him a true Revolutionary, a true Communist. A deviation of that nature clashes with the concept we have of what a militant Communist should be."
"I do not believe anybody has a definitive answer as to what causes homosexuality. I think the problem must be considered very carefully. But I will be frank and say that homosexuals should not be allowed in positions where they are able to exert positions of influence on young people."
1992: "I'm not going to deny that, at a certain point, this machista thing, influenced the approach that was taken toward homosexuality. I personally -- you are asking me my personal opinion -- do not suffer from this type of phobia against homosexuals. Truly, in my mind, that's never been there and I have never been in favor nor have I promoted it, nor have I supported it, policies against homosexuals."
"I don't see homosexuality as a phenomenon of degeneration, but rather I see it in another way. The approach has been of another sort: a more rational approach, considering the tendencies and natural things of the human being, who simply must be respected. This is the philosophy with which I view these problems. I think that there has to be consideration shown toward the family that suffers these situations. I would hope that the families would have another mentality, that they would have another approach when something of this sort happens. I am absolutely opposed to any form of repression, disdain, contempt or discrimination with respect to homosexuals. That's what I think."
When asked about queers being militant members of the Communist Party:
"I can tell you that there have been many prejudices around this issue, that's true, that's the reality, I won't deny it; but there have been prejudices of other kinds against which we have focused our struggle.
"There was, for example, one standard for judging the personal conduct of a man and another for a woman. We had this situation for years in the party and I led fights and argued a lot about this. If there was infidelity in a marriage on behalf of the man, there was no problem, no worry, on the other hand it was a subject of discussion in the [party units] when there was infidelity on the part of the woman. There was one way of judging sexual relations of men and another of women. I had to fight hard, against deeply rooted tendencies that were not the product of any sermon or doctrine, or education, but the machista concepts and prejudices that exist at the heart of our society.
"Of course, I didn't answer your question about free love. I have absolutely no objection. I don't know what is meant by free love. Interpreting it to mean the freedom to love, I have no objection."
> Castro and Cuba have been criticized by Yankee leftists who support them
overall. To repeat, leftists _should_ blunt their public criticism because
it feeds into the gigantic, anti-communist, anti-Cuban rev discourse that
dominates Yankeedom, and threatens invasion, causes the blockade, etc.
I understand your point, but disagree. This is the same logic (or non-logic) that demands queers present a "happy face" to non-queers so we can get our rights: no trannies, no bulldaggers, no leathermen, no radical faeries. I just don't buy it. If the cost of queer rights is to "emulate" hets, then heterosexuality is reinforced as the dominant gender/sex path. Queers will have no freedom.
> What is your queer theory?
Well, I am working on a longer post, but my rough idea is that queer theory can be seen as a version of workers' enlightened consciousness. Violence is one method to struggle. To recast gender/sex roles, positions etc. is another. Maybe the force that I quoted Lenin yesterday as saying was needed to bring about this consciousness is queer theory.
Everyone in capitalist society has a gender/sex assignment. What if the struggle was to destabilize them and create a unified consciousness/collective acknowledgement of the unsteadiness of identity. Queer as a class.
Also, take a look at the pieces on Marxism and Queer Theory that Todd and I referenced in posts yesterday.
> I don't see where the revolutionary process has false consciousness
about gender. What are you referring to?
No right to gay marriage.
> Marxism started out ahead of bourgeois ideology on women's liberation and
has advanced since then.
Agreed.
> I wouldn't say it has gotten stuck. It is progressing, including making
advances on queer liberation. Focus in on the progress on gay rights a
little more, praise it.
Okay, that is reasonable. I will be sure to praise the revolution's advances since 1959 and urge that it continue to complete queer liberation.
> It would be violent self-defense.
Yup, but it would still be violent and invite an even more violent response.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister