Log in

View Full Version : Queer liberation confuses me



aziraphale
3rd May 2010, 19:26
I get animal liberation. We have not only enslaved them but we eat them, test on them and torture them all the while. Obviously it makes sense to call the radical animal rights movement the animal liberation movement. Direct action in the case of animal liberation makes sense because it will most likely be centuries before they are given freedom and we need to help the suffering of the ones right now. However, at least in the United States, gay people are not enslaved anymore than heterosexuals. We are not eaten, we are not tested on and we are not institutionally tortured. We are simply discriminated against. That's horrible and it needs to change but I fail to see how illegal actions will do anything in this case nor do I see how this fight could possibly be called a liberation fight. Can someone explain to me the point of view of queer liberationists?

Buddha Samurai Cadre
3rd May 2010, 19:35
well, black people no longer suffer segregation, or slavery, yet you can damn well bet i support black liberation, as oppression and rcism are still prevelent.

You cant be imprisoned for being gay now, but you can be discriminated in housing, jobs, and other thing, gays are the most oppressed in our society along with women and black people.

Gay liberation is needed and is something we should support and partake in .

Solidarity with the gay bi trans and trans community.

Aesop
3rd May 2010, 19:52
In many regions around the world homosexuals face discrimination and ridicule; this may not always take place institutionally but sometimes informally. In many places in the world homosexuals are sentenced to death, such as Sudan and Saudi Arabia.

Now regarding direct action that this ‘queer liberation’ movement takes, I am not up to date with it myself. However, if it was in the form of protecting homosexuals for example who are targeted when leaving a gay club because they are gay. Then I don’t really see too much of problem with it

Proletarian Ultra
3rd May 2010, 19:55
I get animal liberation.

There's your first problem.

Os Cangaceiros
3rd May 2010, 20:06
Queer liberation concerns liberating LGBT people from their current (discriminated) place in society.

I don't see what's hard to understand about this.

bailey_187
3rd May 2010, 20:16
LGBT Liberation = giving them rights non-LGBT have, and ending discrimination against them. What is not to get? It makes a hell of a lot more sense than "liberating" animals.

danyboy27
3rd May 2010, 20:49
LGBT Liberation = giving them rights non-LGBT have, and ending discrimination against them. What is not to get? It makes a hell of a lot more sense than "liberating" animals.

i liberated an animal a fews hours ago, it was so damn tasty, with a bit of origano and some couscous.

bricolage
3rd May 2010, 21:22
LGBT Liberation = giving them rights non-LGBT have, and ending discrimination against them. What is not to get? It makes a hell of a lot more sense than "liberating" animals.

I'm not sure that is the best way to put it as most of the right heterosexuals have are determined by their priveliged position in society, thus necessitating the exclusion of the LGBT/Queer population. So as opposed to wanting to give LGBT/Queer people what heterosexuals have it is more about destroying the rights/privilege that heterosexuals have.
I think the same stands for issues regarding white privilege and male privilege.

bricolage
3rd May 2010, 21:34
However, at least in the United States, gay people are not enslaved anymore than heterosexuals. We are not eaten, we are not tested on and we are not institutionally tortured. We are simply discriminated against.

I think the problem here is that you conflate oppression solely with overt physical force, what we have to see is that it it more multi-faceted than this operating on a number of a levels. While LGBT/Queer people may not be enslaved there are denied the ability to freely live their lives in the way the heterosexuals are. It is not just about breaking cages it is about created a world where, for example, two men can kiss in the street without fear of attack or where. In this respect it is both misleading and counter-productive to reduce oppression to a solely physical phenomenon.


That's horrible and it needs to change but I fail to see how illegal actions will do anything in this case nor do I see how this fight could possibly be called a liberation fight.

Well I suppose this is an issue of tactics more than principle but I would say I don't really think the illegality or something should determine the validity of it, after all I'd imagine revolution is illegal in every country in the world.

AK
4th May 2010, 08:24
Animals deserve the right to vote and not be discriminated against :lol:

this is an invasion
4th May 2010, 08:30
It's about destroying a system that pidgeon-holes sexuality and gender roles. True queer liberation can only happen in an anti-capitalist context.

The Inquisitor
4th May 2010, 08:37
Animals deserve the right to vote and not be discriminated against :lol:
"An animal's right to privacy?
Posted: April 30, 2010, 2:19 PM by Mitch Kowalski
Legal News, Mitch Kowalski, Media, Technology, news, Trends, U.K., legislation

While lawmakers in North America wrestle with privacy issues surrounding Facebook and other social media, a UK academic has raised the issue of animal privacy in connection with documentary filmmaking. According to news.com.au, Dr. Brett Mills of the University of East Anglia claims that "animals, like humans, have a basic right to privacy that the documentary filmmakers ignored by filming their most intimate moments.""

:thumbup1:

AK
4th May 2010, 08:49
"An animal's right to privacy?
Posted: April 30, 2010, 2:19 PM by Mitch Kowalski
Legal News, Mitch Kowalski, Media, Technology, news, Trends, U.K., legislation

While lawmakers in North America wrestle with privacy issues surrounding Facebook and other social media, a UK academic has raised the issue of animal privacy in connection with documentary filmmaking. According to news.com.au, Dr. Brett Mills of the University of East Anglia claims that "animals, like humans, have a basic right to privacy that the documentary filmmakers ignored by filming their most intimate moments.""

:thumbup1:
You've got to be kidding.
Although, beastiality is disgusting.

The Inquisitor
4th May 2010, 08:51
You've got to be kidding.
Although, beastiality is disgusting.

"Stay inside your home folks; animals are outside and need their privacy."

The Vegan Marxist
4th May 2010, 14:38
There's your first problem.

wtf's that suppose to mean?

Tifosi
4th May 2010, 18:18
wtf's that suppose to mean?

The fact we as humans are top of the food chain and there for can enjoy the fruits of the Earth and in the future outer space. He is just forcing himself to miss out on all the benifits life brings to humans, E.G medicine, food etc

this is an invasion
4th May 2010, 18:25
wtf's that suppose to mean?
There's this thing called the natural order, and this idea of "apex predators." You should look into them.

The Vegan Marxist
4th May 2010, 18:34
There's this thing called the natural order, and this idea of "apex predators." You should look into them.

Yeah, the natural order is bullshit. People & animals operate based on environmental conditions. A good number of animals are ruthless because they are put into a state of survival where they have no other choice but to be such. The human race would be the same if put under the same conditions. The reason that animals mate so much is because they're being hunted & being used as consumption in a alarming rate. This is how evolution works. When put under survival mode, in which animals are unable to protect themselves, they mate in order to try & evolve themselves to acquire such protection. This is why I simply laugh at the very notion that hunters like to give off that they're killing so much deer because they have a deer overpopulation problem. If only they knew that they were making it worse by trying to kill them off.

this is an invasion
4th May 2010, 18:36
Yeah, the natural order is bullshit. People & animals operate based on environmental conditions. A good number of animals are ruthless because they are put into a state of survival where they have no other choice but to be such. The human race would be the same if put under the same conditions. The reason that animals mate so much is because they're being hunted & being used as consumption in a alarming rate. This is how evolution works. When put under survival mode, in which animals are unable to protect themselves, they mate in order to try & evolve themselves to acquire such protection. This is why I simply laugh at the very notion that hunters like to give off that they're killing so much deer because they have a deer overpopulation problem. If only they knew that they were making it worse by trying to kill them off.
No fool. I'm talking about the fact that there are predators and prey. That's how it is. We are predators. We don't have sick teeth or claws, but we are capable of extremely complex thought.

bricolage
4th May 2010, 19:30
I found a dead rabit in a park and poked its eye with a stick lol, me and this girl just mauled it for like 20 minutes, it was so fun, i eventually took it home for my dog lol

Dude, you are hardcore :rolleyes:

khad
4th May 2010, 19:44
SalfordSocialist,

Do not troll the Learning forum. This is a verbal warning.

Buddha Samurai Cadre
4th May 2010, 19:55
sorry , my bad.

But i did post the first and some would say, most profound post in the thread at the begining.


And how can someone not get gay liberation, but get animal liberation??

Ravachol
4th May 2010, 20:00
While i'm not a vegan nor even a vegetarian, the disdainfull attitude towards animals displayed here by many people who are supposedly 'communists' is disgusting. It seems that many here have no problem commodifying animals, disregarding the small step it then takes to commodify labor.

I suggest reading this (http://www.insurgentdesire.org.uk/beast.htm).

I'm not advocating a dietary choice, I'm advocating getting of your high horses and studying the attitude of commodification which is displayed here towards animals.

Buddha Samurai Cadre
4th May 2010, 20:05
i do believe in making animal commodities, so we humans can survive, and function with protein, not like my vegetarian sister in law, she can hardly muster the energy to smile at christmass, we all sneak her potatos roasted in duck fat without her knowing.

If it was natural to just eat greens, why do vegetarians always seem like pale ill and malnurished people?

khad
4th May 2010, 20:11
SalfordSocialist, I would have let this go if you just let it stand, but here you are again derailing this topic with more inflammatory bullshit. You got a PM warning now.

This entire thread gets a verbal warning to keep it on topic.

Stranger Than Paradise
4th May 2010, 20:17
However, at least in the United States, gay people are not enslaved anymore than heterosexuals.

Right....
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_seoBbajEnPA/SL1MfOAwyOI/AAAAAAAAEYY/Qc4wpcWRNoE/s400/Anti-gay_Protest.JPG

you sure as hell don't get people protesting heterosexuality.

The Gallant Gallstone
4th May 2010, 20:18
Queer liberation makes sense to me.

It's a legitimate struggle and, what's more, people who are drawn into action based on LGBT issues often find how the tangled mass of oppression invariably leads to the maintenance of class privileges.

aziraphale
5th May 2010, 03:52
I am pretty well aware of the fact that as a gay transsexual man, I am denied civil liberties. I mean, for one, in most states I can't get married and even in Massachusetts I still have to be concerned about my safety every time I use a public bathroom. As far as I know, queer liberation is distinct from gay rights somehow because people who call themselves queer liberationists seem to have quite a distaste for mainstream gay rights. I also don't get the word "liberation." We don't need to be liberated in my opinion, we just need civil rights. I think that this issue is one that reform would actually work for. Not to mention I don't understand the whole storming churches and making death threats tactic. It really just provide propaganda material for the conservatives and it doesn't do anything for the cause of gay rights.

syndicat
5th May 2010, 05:29
yeah, I don't "get" animal liberation either. "Liberation" applies only to beings capable of rational communication and collective coordination through language and thus social self-management. A trait that only applies to humans on this planet. I'm not saying that animals should be brutally exploited or wantonly harmed. I'd be royally fucking pissed if anyone harmed my cats. But my cats are, in reality, vicious predators. Any small animal that comes in my backyard is doomed. My moniker here "syndicat" has a double meaning. Partly it means "syndicalist cat" where "cat" is American slang for guy, but also it's because I happen to like cats.

Queers on the other hand are my brothers and sisters. I grew up in an area of the USA where there was a significant gay working class subculture...a "queer" subculture, as, in the USA, radical working class gay men seem to prefer the "queer" designation, in my experience. I'm hetero but I'm totally on their side. In one company I worked at where gay men were threatened with violence when they tried to organize a gay worker group, I overtly supported and defended them...the same as I would have done if there'd been racist threats. It's a question of opposing forms of oppression. For one thing, in workplaces it's yet another way in which divide and conquer occurs, as it does in sexual harassment of women or racist threats against blacks. Even the AFL-CIO has recognized this, as they've now officially accepted Pride at Work (the main gay worker organization in USA) as an official part of the labor family.

Buddha Samurai Cadre
5th May 2010, 05:33
If you dont support gay liberation your a bad person

If you dont understand it you are mentally challenged

Most gay people suffer very deep and hatefull oppresion

I for one, would say gays are the most repressed part of the working class, huey p said the same

Crusade
5th May 2010, 05:42
If you dont support gay liberation your a bad person

If you dont understand it you are mentally challenged

Most gay people suffer very deep and hatefull oppresion

I for one, would say gays are the most repressed part of the working class, huey p said the same

What do you mean by repressed?

Buddha Samurai Cadre
5th May 2010, 05:50
I mean they have to repress their sexuality in public or risk beatings ridicule and even death by homophobes who commit hate crimes

son of man
5th May 2010, 05:58
I think he mean't oppressed.

Repressed being a different word with a different meaning.

I'm a heterosexual that eats meat on occasion - I'm not sure if these two things have anything to do with each other.

I'm all for 'queer liberation' or whatever you want to call it. I think that people shouldn't have their freedoms limited by their sexual preference, gender, age, race, etc.

I disagree with the commodification of animals if it leads to factory farming. A cynic is one that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Buddha Samurai Cadre
5th May 2010, 06:04
I have always wondered if we could hook animals up to a system that keeps their organs going but leaves them in a braindead state, we could pack them into wharehouses and produce tonnes of meat for people all over the world, kind of likethe human wharehouse in blade trinity

son of man
5th May 2010, 06:17
That seems completely ethical and not trollish or absurd at all.

I can't believe you got a warning for posting nonsensical bs earlier - whatever were they thinking.

AK
5th May 2010, 08:58
you sure as hell don't get people protesting heterosexuality.
Actually, IIRC, someone made a thread on this board about how someone complained that straights were being discriminated against by not having the right to a civil union which homosexuals somehow get the "privilege" to...

aziraphale
5th May 2010, 14:46
If you dont support gay liberation your a bad person

If you dont understand it you are mentally challenged

Most gay people suffer very deep and hatefull oppresion

I for one, would say gays are the most repressed part of the working class, huey p said the same

Good lord...
I AM GAY AND TRANSSEXUAL MYSELF!
Anyway, my point is I don't understand why it is called "liberation" or why there are violent tactics when there clearly don't need to be in this case and it is actually very counterproductive in this case. I disagree that gays are the most oppressed part. I would have to say that transgender people have it much harder, and gender queer people even more so. Being gay in Massachusetts means I get the occasional rude comment. Being transsexual in Massachusetts means that I risk my life every time I use a public bathroom, get called the wrong pronoun constantly, get rude comments, was not allowed to call myself a guy in the 9th grade and was forced to use the wrong bath room. This is as a female-to-male transsexual. A male-to-female transsexual friend of mine has to pretend to be a guy for work, otherwise she would be fired, really has to be scared when she uses the bathroom, and was beaten up really badly by her parents when she lived with them whenever they caught her acting feminine. This is in the most liberal state in the United States. Don't even get me started on how gender queer people are treated.

Buddha Samurai Cadre
5th May 2010, 15:12
The cannanites were black, they didnt get black liberation, just because your gay, dosent mean you have a clue, maybe you think when you hold hands and kiss with a same sex partner people dont judge, snd that some pricks would snap a bat over you for it.

Gay liberation just seeks to make gay people equal, for example, its much harder for gays to get housing over openly straight people, its hard to become a teacher etc, and if you do, you suffer ridicule from the kids.

If you are gay but dont understand gay liberation, why do you understand your position as working class, but not as oppressed for your sexual orientation

Buddha Samurai Cadre
5th May 2010, 15:17
I am going to be totally honest mate, i have reactionary parts of me that feel uncomfortable around trans, i am trying to correct this about myself, but societal conditioning runs deep.

What i do not understand is why did you want to change, is it like gender confusion from an early age or was it something to do with a turning point in your life?

I think alot of folks judge trans, because they dont understand.

aziraphale
5th May 2010, 16:46
I understand that gays definitely need equal rights. I know that in most areas in the United States there is serious discrimination. I live in Massachusetts, where really no one cares. Queer liberation appears to be somehow different from gay rights. In fact, judging from what they have said, they are against gay marriage because they think it would be assimilation.

It's good that you are trying to be less uncomfortable with transgender people. I prefer to live as a guy because every time I used my birth name I felt like I was telling a lie and when I let someone refer to me as female I felt like I was lying by omission. I want to change my body to fit male closely as I can because I feel sick every time I look at it.

Ever since I was young, I knew something was vaguely off but I didn't know quite what it was. I didn't fit in with girls at all, but I didn't fit in with boys either. I mainly spent recess reading inside. I had a few friends, but they were mainly the outcasts and varied by gender. I have very mild autism so my mind was rather black and white (still is a bit, but I'm trying to correct that) and the concept of boy in a girl's body was just not possible to a mind that took things literally and saw no grey areas.

My mom, a very liberal feminist, did teach me about how gender expression is different from gender but she never told me about transsexuality. What I got from her was that acting boyish is okay. Still, I acted more like a geek than a tomboy for my entire childhood. However, puberty hit when I was 9 and the world felt horrible. I started becoming very depressed. It was a living nightmare. It felt like my body was morphing into something horrible that I didn't want it to be. I started engaging in self injury. When my period came, I wanted to die and that was my first suicide attempt. When I was ten, I found from reading my mother's books that there were some people who identified as neither male nor female.

I told my mom I was that and she dismissed it as a childhood phase. When I was 13 I finally came out again, as a guy, but my parents still thought it was a phase but my psychiatrist thought it was a good idea to get me a gender therapist. When I was 14, I started living as a guy and my moods became significantly better. I still would self injure whenever my period came around. Once I was 15, they finally gave me hormone blockers and my period was stopped and I stopped engaging in cutting completely.
I'm 16 years old and now trying to get hormones, and I'll probably get them in a few months, and after six months of hormones I can get chest surgery.

Transitioning never was about the gender roles. While I certainly don't fit the female gender role, I really don't act stereotypically masculine. I am vain about my hair, I don't want a ton of facial or body hair, I occasionally wear bronzer, I prefer writing poetry to playing sports, and I dress rather flamboyantly. I never was upset about dressing like a girl. It was just clothing. I didn't see any logic in putting gender on cloth, and I still don't. The only real reason why I dress male (albeit it rather gayly) is because I wish for people to see me as male. If I was transitioning to fit a gender role, I would probably be calling myself gender queer, but that's not how I feel. I feel like a guy. I want a male body as much as medically possible, though I will probably never be able to afford lower surgery. It was about honesty mostly to myself and others. Not to mention the very severe depression due to my biological body.

I hope that answered your question

Buddha Samurai Cadre
5th May 2010, 16:59
Btw when i said i was uncomfortable around trans, its not because i think its wrong or unnatural, infact i read this thing showing how someone can be born male, but have the gender of a male and vice versa, the thing i get nervous about is i feel like i change and am not my normal.

I dont say anything like calling a trans a puff if they act flamboyant, but if one of the lads did i would throw a pretend insult at him as mates do.

I just feel like i am being intolerant to them by being extra carefullabout what i say, thus treating them differently.

And its good to hear your getting to become the person you want to be, i know how depresion can get, especially when you drink while your depressed.

Do you like like girls or ar you only attracted to men?

If im being nosey just tell me to fuck off.

Cheers

Buddha Samurai Cadre
5th May 2010, 17:02
though I will probably never be able to afford lower surgery.

Get a loving bf and do a dog day alpacino bank job to fund it:)

I cant believe you dont get it free, i think trans get their surgery free on the NHS, not sure though, if so, move to britain get citizenship then have the op for free.

aziraphale
5th May 2010, 20:47
I only am attracted to men, as far as I know. I'm not going to rule out the possibility that I might one day be attracted to a female but it's unlikely. Your extra-careful response is actually not that bad. I mean, it just means that you probably don't know the proper etiquette for dealing with a transgender person (hardly anyone does) and wish not to offend them. Pretty much, use the pronoun they prefer, don't ask what their birth name is, don't say stuff along the lines of "well, you're really your birth gender" or "you're not really your gender identity until you have surgery," and don't make assumptions about what surgical options they want, whether they want hormones or what their behavior is like.

In the US, we hardly ever get anything free. xD Even insurance generally requires you to pay part of the cost. With anything involving transsexuals, the insurance will refuse to pay it unless you trick them. I got the hormone blockers when the endocrinologist pretended it was for polycystic ovarian syndrome. If I didn't have that, my family would have had to pay for the hormone blockers in full. Additionally, lower surgery just is horribly done now. I have a choice between a very small penis which doesn't look realistic and is so small it can't be used to penetrate and you will not be able to pee standing up, and a penis that is large, but you can't feel anything with and you have to lose part of your arm to get it, which may make you lose use of it. THe first surgery costs about $18,000 and the second costs about $70,000. That's not including aftercare or revisions. So, until the methods improve and it gets covered in full, or at least in part enough for it to be affordable, I will have to go without it. :(

Buddha Samurai Cadre
7th May 2010, 18:40
Fuck thats so fucked up.

If it makes you feel any better you can do me with a strapon :)

I took a shot, if offened sorry

AK
8th May 2010, 00:18
If it makes you feel any better you can do me with a strapon :)
^ Quote of the day.

Buddha Samurai Cadre
8th May 2010, 00:27
lol you got a problem Alpha?

AK
8th May 2010, 01:21
lol you got a problem Alpha?
No. It's just a strange and random thing to say.

Buddha Samurai Cadre
8th May 2010, 02:04
hey im down for the brown anytime haha

Crux
8th May 2010, 02:39
I understand that gays definitely need equal rights. I know that in most areas in the United States there is serious discrimination. I live in Massachusetts, where really no one cares. Queer liberation appears to be somehow different from gay rights. In fact, judging from what they have said, they are against gay marriage because they think it would be assimilation.
Well, that's more of a discussion of tactics than queer liberation itself. Well the way I understand the concept anyhow. I think that the confrontational tactics used by the queer liberation movement can sometimes be productive, even necessary but they have to be applied in a way that actually helps the cause. I can appreciate the argument against assimilation, actually I would agree with it, but winning the right to marry would still be an important victory. What is important is to build a movement that can set it's own terms, being a marxist I think such a movement can not be built in isolation from the working class movement, through symbolic direct action or pleading to bourgeois politicians. One of my favorite examples of such an alliance would be the Pride demonstration in 07 in Warsaw, i believe, where a union alliance, where the CWI in poland holds several key positions, co-arranged the demonstration and the miners union took the front, defending the demo against the fascists and the police. The miners also had a banner that said "A Miner can be Gay too". :)

As for trans issues, with having to pay for gender correction operations and the additional costs accompanying it, this is also very much a socialist issue and a issue about public health care. We have recently started to produce some material on that in my own organisation here in sweden. Trans issues are far too often forgotten.

Best of luck to you, dude, and stay strong.

The Red Next Door
8th May 2010, 05:21
Man, you're not yet free or liberated until all your fellow gay comrades are liberated around the world from the hand of homophobia.