I’m really sick and tired of colonizers forcing the binary of trans vs cis on Black and Brown ppl. not only do all of us exist outside this binary by virtue of our race, ethnicity, and culture, regardless of our personal identities, but there are many of us who consciously do not identify as either cis or trans. those who are forced into the cis role by colonizers do not identify as cis, and thus are not cis. our gender is not limited to cis or trans, and the commonly accepted definitions of both terms are exclusive of our cultures. I have said many times I was not assigned a gender, so how can I identify or not identify with a gender I was never assigned? my gender is not defined by what was or is forced on me, that’s colonial and imperial. nobody dictates my identity but myself. I’m sick of the way that trans colonizers dehumanize and degrade Black and Brown people who do not identify as trans or cis just because they want them to. Black and Brown people who inherently exist outside colonial gender constructs and terms are deemed “oppressors” for not forcefully being identified as trans. trans colonizers delude themselves into thinking they are victims and somehow oppressed by Black and Brown people. the amount of times I have been silenced and degraded for not identifying myself as the particular colonial terms demanded by trans colonizers. if we do not identify ourselves with these terms we are dehumanized and discarded and treated as worthless, our opinions are gaslit and invalidated and spoken over. the term cis is utterly useless unless you are pretending that race is not central to gender and sexuality. cis means you identify with a gender that was forced on you, which is in line with the colonialism and imperialism which has forced English and colonial genders and sexualities and terms and constructs onto Black and Brown people. how can Black and Brown people identify with genders forced on us? why are we deemed oppressors who victimize the very race that oppresses us, just because we don’t fit their gender constructs and rules? this very issue applies to non binary and non man. Black and Brown people are not binary by virtue of our race, white people ARE the binary because white gender is the binary because whiteness is the binary. white queers are the binary. they oppress Black and Brown people of all identifies yet have convinced themselves we somehow oppress them. how can we be non men when our native languages do not know the words non and man? how can we be defined by what we are not, by a language we do not speak, by a culture we do not belong to?
8 notes
·
View notes
idk why ppl ignore that women, regardless of race or class, experience police violence for being female. Both from on duty and off duty officers. That 40% cops thing is thrown around a lot but no one acknowledges that as hate, that police officers off duty will often use their power as a man and as an officer to beat/kill women. Theres also the cases of police on duty using abortion as an excuse to brutalize and stalk women, police officers raping and murdering women using their power as officers to do it and getting away with it.
and then also something no one talks about: the justice system unfairly punishes women if it can. The justice system hates women being free.
Also, “crime of passion” laws still exist, female murder victims and missing women (regardless of race, but especially native women) are rarely taken seriously. And let’s not even get into how women are treated in female prisons, male guards frequently use female prisons as his own personal brothel, and this behaviour is allowed for sometimes years. Oh, and shit let’s also not talk about how many laws are really only created to protect men and arrest girls. Let’s not talk about how many women end up in jail for minor things like drugs and property damage, compared to men.
Let’s also not talk about how poverty and drug addiction connect, and how the patriarchy keeps women in poverty by intentionally underpaying female dominated fields, reducing wages on any field when it becomes female dominated, and underpaying the female workers who happen to work in male dominated fields to keep them poorer than their male counterparts. Let’s not talk about how keeping females and female communities poor is directly contributing to the kind of crime that women are then unfairly targeted for.
let’s really not talk about how all these things connect, how the men in charge of society have set up a system that keeps women poor and trapped, then the men in charge of prison facilities setting up a system where women are locked up in places where they have no control for minor charges, then said men, who now have complete control over these women, use the women who’ve been trapped in these facilities (again, very often for things a man wouldn’t be criminally charged for) as sex slaves, even forcing them to get pregnant….yeah, let’s not talk about how all that connects.
63 notes
·
View notes
By: Malcolm Clark
Published: Jul 18, 2023
The LGBT movement is beginning to behave more like a religious cult than a human-rights lobby. It’s not just the Salem-like witch hunts it pursues against its critics. It’s also its flight from reason and its embrace of magical thinking.
This irrationalism is best illustrated by its recent embrace of the term ‘two-spirit’ (often shortened to ‘2S’), which in North America has been added to the lobby’s ever-growing acronym, meaning we are now expected to refer to – take a deep breath – the ‘2SLGBTQQIA+ community’.
The term two-spirit was first formally endorsed at a conference of Native American gay activists in 1990 in Winnipeg in Canada. It is a catch-all term to cover over 150 different words used by the various Indian tribes to describe what we think of today as gay, trans or various forms of gender-bending, such as cross-dressing. Two-spirit people, the conference declared, combine the masculine and the feminine spirits in one.
From the start, the whole exercise reeked of mystical hooey. Myra Laramee, the woman who proposed the term in 1990, said it had been given to her by ancestor spirits who appeared to her in a dream. The spirits, she said, had both male and female faces.
Incredibly, three decades on, there are now celebrities and politicians who endorse the concept or even identify as two-spirit. The term has found its way into one of Joe Biden’s presidential proclamations and is a constant feature of Canadian premier Justin Trudeau’s doe-eyed bleating about ‘2SLGBTQQIA+ rights’.
The term’s success is no doubt due in part to white guilt. There is a tendency to associate anything Native American with a lost wisdom that is beyond whitey’s comprehension. Ever since Marlon Brando sent ‘Apache’ activist Sacheen Littlefeather to collect his Oscar in 1973, nothing has signalled ethical superiority as much as someone wearing a feather headdress.
The problem is that too many will believe almost any old guff they are told about Native Americans. This is an open invitation to fakery. Ms Littlefeather, for example, may have built a career as a symbol of Native American womanhood. But after her death last year, she was exposed as a member of one of the fastest growing tribes in North America: the Pretendians. Her real name was Marie Louise Cruz. She was born to a white mother and a Mexican father, and her supposed Indian heritage had just been made up.
Much of the fashionable two-spirit shtick is just as fake. For one thing, it’s presented as an acknowledgment of the respect Indian tribes allegedly showed individuals who were gender non-conforming. Yet many of the words that two-spirit effectively replaces are derogatory terms.
In truth, there was a startling range of attitudes to the ‘two-spirited’ among the more than 500 separate indigenous Native American tribes. Certain tribes may have been relaxed about, say, effeminate men. Others were not. In his history of homosexuality, The Construction of Homosexuality (1998), David Greenberg points out that those who are now being called ‘two spirit’ were ridiculed by the Papago, held in contempt by the Choctaws, disliked by the Cocopa, treated by the Seven Nations with ‘the most sovereign contempt’ and “derided” by the Sioux. In the case of the Yuma, who lived in what is now Colorado, the two-spirited were sometimes treated as rape objects for the young men of the tribe.
The contradictions and incoherence of the two-spirit label may be explained by an uncomfortable fact. The two-spirit project was shaped from day one by complete mumbo-jumbo. The 1990 conference that adopted the term was inspired by a seminal book, Living the Spirit: A Gay Indian Anthology, published two years earlier. Its essays were compiled and edited by a young white academic called Will Roscoe. He was the historical adviser to the conference. And his work on gay people in Indian cultural history – a niche genre in the 1980s – had become the received wisdom on the subject.
Roscoe’s work had an unlikely origin story of its own. In 1979, he joined over 200 other naked gay men in the Arizona desert for an event dubbed the ‘Spiritual Conference for Radical Faeries’. It was here where he met Harry Hay, the man who would become his spiritual mentor and whose biography he would go on to write. The event was Hay’s brainchild and was driven by his conviction that gay men’s lives had become spiritually empty and dominated by shallow consumerism. For three days, Roscoe and the other men sought spiritual renewal in meditation, singing and classes in Native American dancing. There were also classes in auto-fellatio, lest anyone doubt this was a gay men’s event.
To say Hay, who died in 2002, was eccentric is to radically understate his weirdness. For one thing, he was a vocal supporter of paedophilia. As such, he once took a sandwich board to a Pride march proclaiming ‘NAMBLA walks with me’, in reference to the paedophilia-advocacy group, the North American Man / Boy Love Association. Hay also believed that gay men were a distinct third gender who had been gifted shamanic powers. According to Hay, these powers were recognised and revered by pre-Christian peoples, from Ancient Greece to, you guessed it, the indigenous tribes of North America.
For years, Hay had been experimenting with sweat lodges and dressing up in Indian garb in ways that would now be criticised as cultural appropriation. Despite this, Roscoe took Hay’s incoherent thesis – that gender-bending and spiritual enlightenment go hand in hand – and turned it into a piece of Native American history.
Unsurprisingly, given its provenance, Roscoe’s work is full of holes and lazy assumptions. To prove that two-spirit people combine the feminine and masculine spirits, Roscoe searched for evidence of gender non-conforming behaviour among the Indian tribes. The problem was that he had to mainly rely on the accounts of white settlers who had little understanding of Native cultures. And even when he didn’t rely on those sources, Roscoe still jumped to the wrong conclusions.
Take, for example, the case of Running Eagle, ‘the virgin woman warrior’ of the Blackfeet tribe, whom Roscoe was the first to label as two-spirit. As a girl, she rebelled against the usual girl chores and insisted on being taught how to hunt and fight. She became a noted warrior and declared she would never marry a man or submit to one.
Of course, none of this really means that Running Eagle was two-spirit, or that the tribe she hailed from was made up of LGBT pioneers. It merely shows that the Blackfeet were smart and adaptable enough to recognise martial talent in a girl and were able to make good use of a remarkable individual. Nevertheless, Roscoe’s description of her has become gospel and Running Eagle is now endlessly cited as an example of a two-spirit.
This is a mind-numbingly reductive approach. It’s based on the presumption that what we think of as feminine and masculine traits are fixed and stable across time and cultures. It dictates that no Native American man or woman who ever breaks a gender taboo or fails to conform to expectations can be anything but two-spirit. This is gender policing on steroids.
The two-spirit term also does Native American cultures a deep disservice. It assumes that 500 different tribes were both homogenous and static. As journalist Mary Annette Pember, herself Ojibwe, argues, it also erases ‘distinct cultural and language differences that Native peoples hold crucial to their identity’.
In some ways, it is entirely unsurprising that the wayward ‘2SLGBTQQIA+’ movement has fastened on to two-spirit, an invented term with a bogus pedigree. Far from paying tribute to Native American cultures in all their richness, it exploits them to make a cheap political point. Harry Hay and his fellow auto-fellators would be proud.
==
"Two spirit" is a great way of fabricating an interesting identity when you don't have one. And you can scream at people as "bigots," but without the guilt of lying about your great-grandparents being descendants of Sacagawea.
The fake mysticism goes along neatly with the notion of disembodied sexed thetans ("gender identity") which become trapped between worlds in the wrong meat bodies.
65 notes
·
View notes