Date: Wed, 16 Aug 1995 12:13:27 -0400
From: <ksumner-AT-bosshog.arts.uwo.ca>
Subject: Re: posting


Hello Fran,

Thanks for your response, which I found thoughtful.  But... I don't think I
made myself very clear when speaking about the civil rights mvmt.  What I
meant was that in the mvmt itself -- its political organization,
leadership, demands, etc -- black women and black gays/lesbians were
relegated secondary and lower priorities.  I didn't mean within the entire
US community, just within the black power mvmt.  So my point was that this
dangerous lack of recognition of different needs is what partly contributed
to the falling away of the black movement, as women and others began to
band together in the 70s in womens groups, gay rights groups, and so on.
This was and is entirely necessary, but there is now and has been for
awhile some concern in the black community about how to effect the kind of
large-scale change now that was happening in the 60s (effective black
leadership in the US?  Who is there?).  My point was that there needs to be
some renegotiating in the area of differences so that disparate groups that
share, say, a certain kind of economic/political/cultural oppression can
band together again.  In parts of England, the "black" identity has been
adopted by East Indians for a number of reasons, one being that it
signifies a social and economic status within the country and also enlarges
the black polity.  East Indians have not given up their own distinct
identities, but there has been some shifting in the idea of what
constitutes difference and similarity.

The idea of suppressing difference doesn't give me the chills at all, but
what I have to say about all this certainly need not go for all (and
perhaps I have less to lose then some, though I'm not sure how to measure
that).  I believe that under some circumstances (like, say, in a march
for/against something, or as mentioned before during an election) I don't
need to assert my "identity" and have it recognized.  I totally believe
that the tension you refer to between lesbians and str8s in a feminist
movement can be productive ("talking back" as a model of dialogue is
relevant here too), but what I'm trying to suggest is that at some point,
for political efficacy, some of those individual differences needs to be
put aside.  In this province, there has currently been a welfare "reform"
(25%-30% reduction in benefits) carried out by our new and disgusting
premier.  This has hit single mothers who can't afford to put their
children in daycare particularly hard.  A lesbian friend of mine, who is
not a single mom, has no desire for kids (actually hates them) and is
deeply critical of the pervasive and oppressive hetero culture, went out to
protest this change in welfare.  I guess my point is that she kept to
herself her usual thoughts on all things hetero and gave her support
because the more people there -- and especially women -- the better.  This
is what I call empathy.  It's also a kind of suppression, since my friend
did not feel that this was the time or place to present her version of
things and challenge others to respond.  That's not why she was there.  It
didn't bother her that under these circumstances her difference
disappeared.  At other times, she challenges anyone who assumes she's str8
and engages in quite stimulating dialogues.

Sorry to go so long again.  Just wanted to clarify, but I don't expect
agreement among everyone here.  I might have to pull a "gruffydd" here soon
because I'm supposed to be working on my thesis this month, but I'll try to
keep up a dialogue for as long as I can as long as anyone's interested.

Karen




     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------