North American LGBTQ advocacy groups, like Athlete Ally and You Can Play (YCP), exist to make the sports landscape more inclusive – and yet, this advocacy model brings its own problems. Far too often, queer advocacy in sports is actually an argument for queer assimilation, and in pro sports like hockey, the specter of queer and trans inclusion is often a boilerplate statement, draped in rainbows, that is intended to obscure a true lack of action.
“If you can play, you can play” is an appropriate slogan for You Can Play, because it illustrates the organization’s limited mandate. The slogan frames queerphobia in sports as a question of merit while limiting the discussion of inclusion to a given athlete’s talent. However, homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia in sports has never actually been an issue of ability.
YCP’s slogan promotes advocacy without challenging a discriminatory culture. Such advocacy doesn’t promote inclusion, but rather assimilation. Queer assimilation will not result in the free participation of queer athletes because assimilation leaves in place the racist, hypermasculine, homophobic, and transphobic culture of sports like hockey. This is by design.
This is such a fantastic read that really sums up the problems with YCP (and other organizations like it, and how they can and must do better.
So, the last couple years y’all may have noticed a movement taking hold on both conservative and radical exclusionist gay circles called “Drop the T.” This movement, started possits that the LGBTQ movement is only the Gay movement and everything else is “appropriation” of Gay History.
This is, of course, total horse shit for a large number of reasons, so I’m going to go in point by point deconstructing this shit:
1) These people say, “It was gay people, not BTQ, that were targeted.” This is false even on it’s face. Even if you want to say trans people weren’t there because Stonewall happened in a time when the term trans wasn’t in popular usage (more on that in point 4), there were sure as shit crossdressers there, and they were ALWAYS the first ones targeted and carted off. The night of Stonewall, Storm DeLaverie, who wasn’t trans, was “Crossdressing” and the first arrested, so we’re Marsha Johnson and Sylvia Rivera, who were trans. And guess what? Those three were the first to fight back. We owe this movement to them, and how dare you revise and erase our history for you ideology.
2) They point to Sodomy laws as proof it was gay people specifically targeted, while forgetting the existence of Crossdressing Laws, which were on the books LONGER THAN SODOMY LAWS. In New York, y’know where Stonewall happened, there were Anti Crossdressing Laws on the books until 2011 while they eliminated sodomy laws in the 1970’s! There was a federal ban on sodomy laws in 2003, Lawrence v Texas, but still none for Anti-Crossdressing laws.
3) People were arrested because they were homosexual, not bi or trans.“ No, they just didn’t care if were apart of the L, G, B, or T, we were Queers that had to be Taken Care Of. Why do you think we banded together in the first place?
4) The Nazis’ first target for book burnings was Institut für Sexualwissenschaft, which was the first medical institute to perform Sex Reassignment Surgery in the 1930s and the works of Magnus Hirchfeld, who coined the term “Transsexual.” The reason “trans people didn’t exist” in the time of Stonewall is because it took us almost half a century for us to recover. You’ll notice quite a few of Stonewall Veterans who were “crossdressers” back in the day, ID’d as translater in life when the language became available again. The Nazis were the first to try this, and they wiped us off the face of the Earth for decades.
5) Divide and Conquer. We are strong together, and weak apart. It is an attempt to weaken our movement now that it isn’t specifically focused on helping topass legislation benefit only cis gay people. We fought for your rights, and now you got yours so screw us? Fuck that. It’s ENDA, when Barney Frank and the HRC pushed to exclude trans people so they could have it for themselves, all over again.
6) It’s apart of a larger transphobic movement in which conservatives and radical exclusionists teamed up. Remember when the Reagan administration banned funding for trans healthcare? Yeah, they used writings of Janice Reymond as supporting evidence. These groups wrote to the fucking UN to have trans rights removed from International Human Rights laws. They team up for bathroom legislation, including sending cis men into women’s bathrooms to scare cis women into supporting bathroom legilsation. ENDA. What did we do that’s equivalent to that? Why do you despise us so much?
You have no basis for your movement, not histrocial, not political, not anything other than pure hatred. Go fuck yourselves. We’ll eliminate exclusionist before trans people.
‘Queer’ was reclaimed as an umbrella term for people identifying as not-heterosexual and/or not-cisgender in the early 1980s, but being queer is more than just being non-straight/non-cis; it’s a political and ideological statement, a label asserting an identity distinct from gay and/or traditional gender identities.
People identifying as queer are typically not cis gays or cis lesbians, but bi, pan, ace, trans, nonbinary, intersex, etc.: we’re the silent/ced letters. We’re the marginalised majority within the LGBTQIA+ community, and
‘queer’ is our rallying cry.
And that’s equally pissing off and terrifying terfs and cis LGs.
There’s absolutely no historical or sociolinguistic reason why ‘queer’ should be a worse slur than ‘gay.’ Remember how we had all those campaigns to make people stop using ‘gay’ as a synonym for ‘bad’?
Yet nobody is suggesting we should abolish ‘gay’ as a label. We accept that even though ‘gay’ sometimes is and historically frequently was used in a derogatory manner, mlm individuals have the right to use that word. We have ad campaigns, twitter hashtags, and viral Facebook posts defending ‘gay’ as an identity label and asking people to stop using it as a slur.
Whereas ‘queer’ is treated exactly opposite: a small but vocal group of people within feminist and LGBTQIA+ circles insists that it’s a slur and demands that others to stop using it as a personal, self-chosen identity label.
Why?
Because “queer is a slur” was invented by terfs specifically to exclude trans, nonbinary, and
intersex people from feminist and non-heterosexual discourse, and was
subsequently adopted by cis gays and cis lesbians to exclude bi/pan and ace
people.
It’s classic divide-and-conquer tactics: when our umbrella term is redefined as a slur and we’re harassed into silence for using it, we no longer have a word for what we are allowing us to organise for social/political/economic support; we are denied the opportunity to influence or shape the spaces we inhabit; we can’t challenge existing community power structures; we’re erased from our own history.
Pro tip: when you alter historical evidence to deny a marginalised group empowerment, you’re one of the bad guys.
“Queer is a slur” is used by terfs and cis gays/lesbians to silence the voices of trans/nonbinary/intersex/bi/pan/ace people in society and even within our own communities, to isolate us and shame us for existing.
“Queer is a slur” is saying “I am offended by people who do not conform to traditional gender or sexual identities because they are not sexually available to me or validate my personal identity.”
“Queer is a slur” is defending heteronormativity.
“Queer is a slur” is frankly embarrassing. It’s an admission of ignorance and prejudice. It’s an insidious discriminatory discourse parroted uncritically in support of a divisive us-vs-them mentality targeting the most vulnerable members of the LGBTQIA+ community for lack of courage to confront the white cis straight men who pose an actual danger to us as individuals and as a community.
Tl;dr:
I’m here, I’m queer, and I’m too old for this shit.
I initially reblogged this without commentary, which implies endorsement, but on further reflection, I have to point out that “queer” is still used as a slur. Yes, it was reclaimed and now has an important political and ideological legacy. Yes, it is powerful in a positive way for many people. Erasing that part of the word’s history is unacceptable and anyone taking the stance that “queer” has never been anything but an insult at the very least need to learn some history. But stating unequivocally that queer is not a slur is just … untrue. Implying that LGBTQA+ people who have had “queer” used as a pejorative against them and therefore don’t feel comfortable with “queer” are defending heterosexuality is frankly offensive to them.
Also, this is the first I’m hearing about terfs “redefining” the term “queer” as a slur, I’m not really sure what’s going on there.
(yes, I’m queer and have been for like a decade. I like the term, personally. Of course, no one ever called me that in order to wound me, so it has no negative connotations for me.)
But stating unequivocally that queer is not a slur is just … untrue.
Implying that LGBTQA+ people who have had “queer” used as a pejorative
against them and therefore don’t feel comfortable with “queer” are
defending heterosexuality is frankly offensive to them.
1.
I’m not saying ‘queer’ has never been used in a derogatory way; of course it has. Every word can be an insult if it’s used as one, and this goes double for reclaimed terminology. ‘Gay’ and ‘queer’ are two such words, but we could also mention words like ‘fat’ and how it is being reclaimed by the fat acceptance movement, or the N-word being used by PoC. Both ‘fat’ and the N-word are loaded with meanings: historical, emotional, social, and political. Everyone understands that calling someone fat or the N-word as insults is hurtful and unacceptable behaviour, just like calling someone gay or queer as insults is also hurtful and unacceptable.
However, “queer is a slur” is not a statement of fact pointing out the obvious notion that ‘queer’ can be and sometimes is used to insult people. “Queer is a slur” is a trans-exclusionary catchphrase coined to shame queer people into silence. The original post above is a textbook example: a person who does not identify as queer messages a complete stranger (me) who does identify as queer for the sole reason of telling her 1) your chosen label is offensive (= your existence is offensive to me), 2) “grow up” = change your label.
If queer had been a triggering word to the sender of the message, they
could have taken any number of steps to protect themselves from seeing triggering content on their dash: asking me to tag posts containing the word, using one of the tumblr blacklist tools I linked in my second post, or simply blocking me. But they didn’t; they told me to stop self-identifying as queer, to censor the language I use about myself and my community. That is an act of aggression.
2.
Implying that {not feeling] comfortable with “queer” [is]
defending heterosexuality
Not heterosexuality. Heteronormativity. ‘Queer’ is a self-identifier used primarily by people who reject the binary gender paradigm, traditional gender roles, genital myopia, and the understanding of sexuality which uses heterosexuality as the golden standard from which all other sexualities deviate.
There’s sadly a lot of heteronormativity in gay and lesbian groupings, especially where lesbians and terfs overlap, and it’s marginalising trans, nonbinary, genderqueer, intersex, and similar people in the LGBTQIA+ community in particular. The people saying “queer is a slur” are usually the same people saying trans women aren’t women and don’t belong in female (especially lesbian) spaces, that trans women and passing trans men have male privilege, that ace people are heterosexual, etc.
This all comes back to terfs and their branding of ‘queer’ as a slur to target trans people and prevent them from organising with other members of the community, and gays and lesbians co-opting it to marginalise and gatekeep bi/pan and ace people. There’s a movement among terfs and LGs, especially online, to prevent this:
So yes, ‘queer’ can be used as a slur. But “queer is a slur” is a very specific phrase meaning “if you’re not gay or lesbian, you don’t deserve a voice in your own community.” Be on high alert when you observe someone saying “queer a slur” to an actual queer-identified person. It’s a censorship technique.
Screenshotted this thread because you all need to see it.
(Cis LGB, I’m expecting you to reblog this.)
Little Light:
Let us assume that
our opponents are competent and have been studying our defenses for
some time, looking for vulnerabilities to exploit. They put out
little feints and test attacks, seeing who will defend who, who can
be divided off from the group, and so on. We’ve seen this. All of
these questions they need answers to: will Jews defend Muslims? Will
Asians support Black struggle? Where can the wedges be put in? The
Alt-Right 4Chan types are always talking about observing and
infiltrating online anti-oppression communities for intel and laughs.
All these little tests. What if they make up a pretend pedophilia
orientation? Will people defend it? Will they tight and divide over
it?
One vulnerability
they’ve consistently turned up is transmisogyny. Lots of groups can
be induced to vilify or wish away trans women. Useful! Remember a
little while ago when Milo put out that petition? “Remove the T
from LGBT”? They watched who signed and promoted that thing. It
was couched in anti-oppression boilerplate. And look! Cis gay men
promoted it. Some feminists and womanists promoted it. Useful intel.
They learned helpful info there: many cis LGB people were raring to
turn on trans people. They’d even say it was for their own
protection. They counted up who signed on, who elaborated on it, who
was excited about it. I’m looking at you, TERFs and enablers, in
particular. (They even discovered that some fanatical anti-trans
feminists would happily join forces with homophobic Christians, to
hurt trans women.) Nobody thought that T-out-of-LGBT petition was
going to DO anything. There’s nobody who DECIDES that. It was a
solidarity test balloon. So these laughing nihilists went
looking—along many lines–for cracks in solidarity, joints in the
armor, people who could be attacked 1st.
Why do I point this
out now? Because this week the rumor mill floated a general
anti-LGBTQ EO or bill was coming, & they gauged opposition.
Supposedly they decided that opposition to this anti-LGBTQ
legislation would be too much for now, and put it in the not-yet
column. And yet: Now the word is they’re paring down to a
specifically anti-trans EO. One focused on legal documents, probably
framed as for nat’l security. (After all, mismatched documents are
fraud, right? Terrorists could be using fake ID. And there’s all that
voter fraud to address. Right?)
Previous Intel
operations (& polls) have told them that the majority of the
country has turned to support LGB rights—but NOT trans rights. They
know from watching our intra-movement arguments online that there’s a
long history of cis LGB folks throwing trans folks under the bus.
They have tested to see if cis LGB people will readily abandon trans
people to save themselves. (Yes.) If they’ll outright attack us.
(Yes.) They’ve tested if there are blocs w/in the cis LGB community
so dedicated to hurting trans people that they’ll ally wtthe right
wing. (Yes.) They’ve watched some of these anti-trans fanatics STILL
obsessing over eradicating us, prioritizing that, even while the
country is on fire. Lo and behold: the regime floats anti-LGBTQ
legislation, withdraws it for now. Now they’re floating anti-trans
legislation. Right on time.
Their research
indicates that the general public will happily let trans people burn
first as expendable. That cis LGB people will, too. The plan? To
remove our ability to get legal ID documents. There goes voting,
travel, med. care, having an answer to “your papers, please.”
That and support for keeping us out of public bathrooms, away from
schools, away from gendered spaces, out of jobs and housing. Public
life.
I’m saying this
because they have good reason to believe they’re right that they can
come for us and no one will stop them. Their little intel operations
indicate that not only will no one stop them hurting trans people,
many will even help. Even cis LGB people. I’m saying this especially
for everyone who gave them reason to believe this. Who looked the
other way when trans lives were on the line.
When they come for
us. (They will come for us. They are about to come for us.) Prove
them wrong. Prove them wrong. Prove them wrong. Please.
Remember that the
specter of trans women was already a useful wedge issue &
get-out-the-vote driver in the 2016 campaign. There’s precedent. We
will be used as a weapon and a vulnerability against the rest of you
for as long as our opponents know we won’t be protected by the Left.
One of our lessons from fighting the anti-Muslim E0s in the last week
is this: we have to deny them every victory. Each one counts.
Whatever we teach them about who we will leave behind will be used to
hurt all of us. We have to show them we will abandon no one. not ever
Now is a time when it is clear & stark: solidarity saves us.
Together, we outnumber them. Together, we can win. Let us not be
broken apart. All of you responding with pledges to have our backs:
thank you. Bring your friends on board. As Octavia Butler said: So be
it. See to it.
Steel Phoenix Studios 