Professional Documents
Culture Documents
professor coly
colonial and postcolonial masculinities
tuesday the 4th of june 2013
what I mean is, what about your female socialisation did you think
gave you a free pass at patriarchy?
what I mean is I understand that your bodies have not always been
yours, but they have always been beautiful. You have always had
words for them.
Fig. 1: Trigger 1
Character Description
Nina Rojas: Dartmouth College 13, Mexican, transgendered (to some
people), deaf in one ear, undocumented until a couple of years ago,
undocumented parents.
Dean Spade: lawyer, civil rights activist, writer, and Associate
Professor of Law at Seattle University School of Law founded the
Sylvia Rivera Law Project, a non- profit law collective in New York City
that provides free legal services to transgender, intersex and gender
non-conforming people who are low-income and/or people of color.
(Dean Spade: Critical Trans Politics and the Limits of Law.)
Act I
R: My parents are undocumented, and all they want is to feel safe here.
They dont really care if people in trouble with the law get kicked out.
S: Right, thats very real. Whenever we increase punishing power of a
system that discriminates against us, though, we increase the power it
has against us.
Act II
S: Then people ask, do you want us to build a trans prison? and were
like no! Because we know youll just fill it.
Fig. 2: Trigger 2
Danny Valdes: Can you be queer as fuck tomorrow dress wise?
Apparently they were being transphobic
nation, women must bear, must birth, must metaphor the nation.
Bound to patriarchy, the nation is fractal recursivity (Irvine and Gal 38);
like a door that creates the inside/outside of a building, followed by a
door that creates the inside/outside of a room, followed by a door that
creates the inside/outside of a cupboard, ideas translate across scales,
and the nation creates and requires a series of structures repeated
across and within national spaces. The family becomes a site of the
nation, a social relation to power, a historical genealogy, a
patriarchal fractal, domestic domination (McClintock 34-5). Family,
fractal of nation, is a word for private patriarchy, domestic patriarchy,
which according to Kimmel, refers to the emotional and familial
arrangements in a society, the ways in which mens power in the public
arena is reproduced at the level of private life (417). Current political
discourse shudders at the mixing of the private and public spheres
socially constructed in the nineteenth century; as Gal argues, The
belief that these values are antagonistic continues to generate heated
political argument (78). Gal provides the example that this belief
motivates the widespread fear that practices such as money
payments for intimate care will contaminate the trust and love of
private life. There is also the parallel fear that expressions of emotion
and the mobilization of intimate ties will weaken the fairness and
rationality of politics (78). The nation repeats itself privately,
constructs itself domestically; indeed, this is how it practices its power.
Indeed, reforms often have been used not only to reinforce oppressive
systems but also actually to the benefit of oppressive systems. For
example, after slavery by the name of slavery ended in the United
States, the rise of chain-gang prisons, predicting ultimately the prisonindustrial complex, led to a form of slavery that did not require the
slave-owners (the businesses that hired inmates through prisons) to
keep their slaves (the inmates, often Black men) alive, leading in many
ways to an even more brutal environment. Similarly, in her book
Feminism and Nationalism in the Third World, Jayawardena argues,
an ideology which supported the freeing of women from traditional
constraints and allowed their freedom to be exploited economically
was the one that the bourgeoisie encouraged. any decrees or
legislation intended to free women from traditional types of bondage
were generally in the interests of capitalist ideology, and particularly in
the interests of creating a potential, if not actual, labour supply. (256)
Even though feminism ought to oppose patriarchy in all ramifications,
it often can be coopted into serving patriarchal systems, such as
capitalism and nationalism. In many ways, nationalist feminisms have
emerged and developed themselves only in the directions that
capitalism allows and which benefit capitalism. Though allowing
women to enter the workforce can give them more economic power
than if they were not allowed, this investment in wage-slavery then
keeps women entrenched in capitalism, which ultimately strengthens
the patriarchal system. Jayawardena continues: Even economically
active and independent women find themselves constrained, both at
home and in the workplace, in structures that emphasize and
eternal threats. They do not fit within the framework of the nation, of
the patriarchy.
Nationalism requires group belief in a group memory. While the
national community the group memory creates certainly is an
imagined such community (not in the sense that it is unreal, but in the
sense that one understands a community operating beyond oneself
even if one does not experience it), this process of imagining does not
require, in fact quelches, radical (re)image-ination. As Freire so expertly
articulates in Pedagogy of the Oppressed,
But almost always, during the initial stage of the struggle, the
oppressed, instead of striving for liberation, tend themselves to
become oppressors, or sub-oppressors. The very structure of their
thought has been conditioned by the contradictions of the concrete,
existential situation by which they were shaped. Their ideal is to be
men; but for them, to be men is to be oppressors. This is their model of
humanity. (45)
It is easy to criticise the White-feminist nation that emerged at this
press conference primarily because it and its participants
criminalised, silenced, and discriminated against other members of the
conference on the basis of gender performance and race but perhaps
we should try looking at this as an initial stage in a radical pedagogical
movement. This movement will only become radical or pedagogical,
however, if the participants begin reflecting, as Smith suggests. And
this reflection cannot take place within the patriarchal structure of the
nation, as reflection is directly opposed to its existence. Freire
maintains that, Those who authentically commit themselves to the
roots
Ahmed, Leila. The Discourse of the Veil. Postcolonialisms: An
Anthology of Cultural Theory and Criticism. Ed. Gaurav Desai and
Supriya Nair. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University
Press, 2005. 315-338. Print.
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin
and Spread of Nationalism. London and New York: Verso, 1991.
Print.
Balasubramanian, Janani. trans/national. Youtube. Web. 4 June 2013.
Butler, Judith. Imitation and Gender Insubordination. The Critical
Tradition: Classic Texts and Contemporary Themes. Ed. David H.
Richter. Boston and New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2007. 17071720. Print.
another school whom I have not yet met tells me that people are
writing out their statements in time for the press conference. I thank
her. NS begins crying when Danny arrives. After meeting up with Nina
and confirming that we all feel uncomfortable in the space, Danny,
Nina, and I sit together. Without provocation, professors Caroline
Heldman and Danielle Dirks as well as now-famous Andrea Pino
approach us. Let me repeat that I am white, straight-passing, and cispassing while Danny and Nina both are Latino trans-men.
The three women bend down but maintain a height differential.
They then assert that the entire group has agreed that we are not be
allowed to speak because Nina had been too angry at the prior days
meeting and because we had broken a pact that we would alert no
media to the press conference, despite an email from Allred indicating
otherwise. Due to the silencing and discriminatory events of the
previous day, events that happen to them all the time at Dartmouth,
Danny and Nina quickly become upset, while Heldman, Dirks, and Pino
remain condescending. Soon, though, both sides are shouting at each
other while I stand by, baffled, trying to get people to stop shouting.
These three White cis-gendered women tell these Latino trans-men
that they dont know what it is like to be real victims, that they dont
know what real harassment is like, insinuating that sexual assault is
the only way in which one can be a victim or experience real
harassment and also that neither Danny nor Nina have experienced
sexual assault, which isnt true. Danny and Nina, meanwhile, accuse
the three cis-gendered White women of being homophobic,
transphobic, and racist. The three cis-gendered White women respond
by calling the hotel security and (threatening to?) call the police on the
two Latino trans-men for being too angry.
It is important to note here that I originally was included in the
group to be silenced, but when Danny and Nina are told to leave the
building, I, noting the transphobia and racism at play, assert that I will
stay in the building for a minute, using the privileges of my race and
gender presentation to obtain an explanation. Filming on my phone, I
ask these women what is going on. They explain to me, so
condescendingly such that I feel the need to repeat that Im asking
simply because I dont know, that many things can trigger survivors of
sexual assault and that they dont appreciate the violent words or the
stepping to. As they use this phrase, they imitate the way that Danny
and Nina stand and walk, that is, like men. These women, whether they
know it or not, demonstrate that they felt the need to expel Danny and
Nina from the space and exclude them from speaking or being present
at the conference on the basis of their female
masculinity/transmasculinity (the masculinity of the presumably cisgendered men present they do not find triggering): the way that they
stand, walk, and talk. Furthermore, the threat of calling the police,
especially on a formerly undocumented person, also served to
criminalise these Latino men, a task that the U.S. is be in the process
of legally establishing nationwide due to immigration reform.
After talking with these women for a few minutes, I assert that I
would like to speak in the conference and am allowed. Meanwhile, I am
in communication with Danny and Nina, who are outside the hotel, and
I plan to interrupt my testimony during the conference so as to allow
them to speak and acknowledge the fact that they have been silenced,
excluded, and criminalised. At one point, Allred asserts that we all need
to be together, so I text Danny and Nina telling them to come inside so
that we all can be together. At this point, NSs aunt as well as students
use their bodies to block Danny and Nina from entering the space.
Indeed, NSs aunt shoves Danny with two hands, saying she is
protecting her niece. Hotel security forces Danny and Nina to leave
again.
Eventually, the group of those to be present at the conference
move to the hotel where the conference is to take place. When we
arrive, Danny and Nina are heading upstairs towards the conference
room. Gloria Allred alerts security that they are not welcome.
Meanwhile, somehow the same three women as had cornered me,
Danny, and Nina originally corner me again, saying that they know I
am going to disrupt the conference and that thus I have to join Danny
and Nina outside, not allowed to speak or be present at the
conference. Accessing the same privileges and assumptions afforded