Firstly, I have to say that when I first heard about the GAYTM's existence I kinda cringed. While I am a strong advocate for gay rights and visibility in the community, and also a huge fan of Reuben Paterson's work (so much so I ballsily friend requested him on Facebook [which he accepted] when I realised you could do such things) they just felt wrong. It felt wrong because it felt representative of a small slice of the varied gay community I know*. This was just the face value, gut reaction I had - torn between 'Yay! Positive spotlight on gays!' and 'It's just a giant money lending cliche...'
So I wasn't surprised when I first read about one of the machines being vandalised.
When I read about it I assumed based on the article that the vandalism was an act by ignorant homophobes. When I discovered otherwise, I was not surprised. I was saddened that this wasn't the story initially told by the media, because the only pro of this vandalism (because I'm not pro vandalism generally) was the message behind it, which I think is important.
I don't think Queers Against Injustice went about this the right way. It seems likely to me based on the media's assumption that the poster they stuck to the machine either came off, or was taken off, before anyone of import could read it. Their message was lost and the vandalism rendered mute. A friend of mine works for the company who made the GAYTMs - those rhinestones are all glued on by hand and have to be done so again. This is painstaking work. I don't know how Pateron feels about it. If it were my artwork I'd be sad that it was defaced for no apparent reason other than what it represented to the common man.
But the message this group had, which we now have is out, and is important:
'Pinkwashing, a term we defined and outlined in the attached poster, describes the way that institutions co-opt LGBT struggles to distract from and disguise unethical behaviour.'
This was about the fact that while ANZ put on a friendly gay front they, not unlike certain political parties (cough cough National cough cough) have quite possibly done so to obscure, smoke and mirrors style recent furor around the treatment of their workers. It pisses me off to no end when the government which I DIDN'T vote in does this - I would be pissed too if I felt my community was involved in, or the beneficiaries of this sort of behavior in such a visible way.
The choice in 'venue' of the vandalism (Ponsonby) was a critique of the parade itself: 'Associating queer politics with personal banking within a gentrified area reduces the queer subject to a bourgeois, cis-gender**, white, male subject...' Why this part of the message has hit so close to home for me has nothing to do with queer politics. It's more that this is something we've seen through history, over and over again. Recently, in feminism. Early feminism was a movement pretty much for middle and upper class white women. It completely ignored women of colour and of lesser means. And in many ways, it still does.*** The perceived exclusion of certain groups represented by the Pride Parade is in some ways no different, except that, in this case, many of those feeling excluded are also those who put the bricks in place so we could have Pride, but are no longer represented by what Pride has become.
If I were in their position, I would feel very frustrated, angry and ignored. So while I don't agree with the act of vandalising the GAYTM's I understand the message, and I agree that it is important for both the LGBTQI community, and everyone else to hear. And had they not defaced the GAYTM's, less of us would have heard it. It was not by any means an 'ignorant' attack.
And this anger is obviously not something felt by just this small group of people.
Having a political voice and the freedom to express it was one of the founding ideas (I thought?) of the Hero Parades back in the day. And while I understand that for everyone's safety parades require important planning and organisation, I can understand why those who felt excluded from this process would not go through correct procedures to peacefully protest issues with the parade in the parade.
I have seldom had a negative experience with the NZ Police force. I have been to a number of protests and find them generally to be professional and friendly - often identifying personally with the cause they are marshalling. I do think the Police are a necessary presence at most big events such as the Pride Parade for the safety of the majority. I am also a white, educated, 30 something year old, not unattractive, middle class woman. I cannot know, besides via media, how those in the LGBTQI community are treated by the police because I am not one (well, not an obvious one anyway).
What I do know, however, is what it is like to walk down the street with someone who is obviously male dressed as a woman. It is honestly the scariest experience I've ever had on K Road. This person was not trans - we were leaving a cross-dressing themed dress up party. I also have family who have transitioned and have lived with someone while they were transitioning so have a small understanding of the day to day struggle these people experience. I also know that the trans community experience high rates of bullying, mental health issues, sexual assault and suicide. I do know that trans folk don't have it easy, even from their peers in the rainbow community.
I also think, that if someone is not harming anyone and wants to hold a banner and have their say about an issue I know little about, that they should be entitled to do so. Particularly if they are from the community supposedly represented by the parade regardless of the colour of their skin, their sexual orientation or their gender identity.
I cannot understand how this act necessitates the kind of force required by the parade security to break a small woman's arm. I cannot understand how this necessitates keeping this woman from medical attention for half an hour. All that these recent events have done for me is solidified the idea that exclusion of those who are 'different', or have different ideas is 'normal' within all communities - even communities initiated around diversity and freedom of expression. And that's extremely sad.
I think Robyn Keneally summed it up best:
'Because Pride is nice day, for celebrations, and absolutely no sad or bad things ever, and that’s the rule now, that’s the thing we’re all supposed to say about queerness now. We don’t admit that the movement centres cis people, and white people, and people who aren’t opposed to the way the state runs. We’re legit, we’re mainstream. The state doesn’t throw us in jail anymore, it marches with us.'
*I am not an idiot. I know you cannot easily present a coherent, sophisticated (and enjoyable) artwork which stands for a large/varied community. But the rainbow sparkles vomit that is the GAYTM (sorry Reuben) seemed a little OTT. Maybe just a rainbow (fairly universal symbol) sans sparkles (albeit Reuben's trademark) may have been less offensive?
** cis-gender basically means folk who identify with the gender they were born into. Transgender often means folk who identify with a different gender to what they were born into, but can also mean identifying with unconventional male/female gender types. Neither of these terms have anything to do with sexuality.
*** Because how is it that I have time to contemplate and write about gender issues and blog generally? Because I only work 12 - 20 hours a week. Because my partner earns enough that I don't have to and because we already have a mortgage we don't have to work our arses off to save for a deposit. Feminism is in many ways still a privilege to pursue. And in many ways feminism is still about perceived 'roles' which shift depending on a variety of factors including wealth, culture and even sexuality.
No comments:
Post a Comment