Skip to main content

Identity groups

"Straights and 'bisexuals' should never be admitted into a gay consciousness raising group; otherwise the whole procedure is a sham."
Steve Gavin, 1971


At the beginning of gay liberation, a lot of the thinking was about liberating everyone from sexual roles for sexual freedom. During the seventies this shifted into building a gay separatist identity, gay men (and even more so lesbians) wanted to define their own space, excluding 'nonhomosexuals.' The effect of this was to exclude bisexuals leaving them outside the group or forcing them to remain closeted as bisexuals.

To some extent this is still true today. I struggle with this. I can understand that there are times when 'I need to be with my people.' A lot of people don't understand this. I know some people struggled with this at the anti-racism/anti-oppression work at Opus last year. Some people couldn't understand the need for identity groups, for people of colour to go off in an identity group for people of colour. 'Aren't we all the same? Isn't that what we want?' some asked. Well yes, but belonging to a group that is a minority and/or historically oppressed is a different experience than belonging to a majority/historically powerful group. Sometimes I need to be with my people; not all the time, not because I dislike spending time with people different from me, but sometimes I just need to be with my people.

For a gay man, being in a gay nightclub is an experience of 'being with my people.' The trouble is, for me, as a bi man, it's not always an entirely safe space to be myself, it isn't fully my people. I have felt like I was 'with my people' only once in my life at a bi workshop with the BRC in Boston. Just once, in 24 years of existence. This pains me a little. Of course bisexuality is not my only identity, and I am surrounded by my people in terms of native Europeans most of the time. But what I don't have I miss.

It is good to form identity groups, but what about people on the edge of these groups, people of mixed race or bisexuals? People that fit into both/neither category? These groups we build up both existent and don't exist at the same time. There are different sub-groups of humanity, but at the same time, the diverse thronging gushing evolving nature of humanity will not be contained within them.

How does a oppressed group assert itself, grow in confidence in itself, without simultaneously excluding and oppressing others?

Just my meandering thoughts, no great conclusions this evening.

Comments

Bill Baar said…
Read Gen Colin Powell's autobiography. He responded to exactly this issue with African American Troops who found a need to get together as African Americans, in their own bars, in their own space.

It's natural, not a big deal, people should get over it.

Same goes for gays, model railroaders, anyone unique......
LaReinaCobre said…
There are no bisexual groups in your city? There are more and more multiracial and biracial groups here in the states. There will be a multiracial group at GA in St Louis this year. I do not think you are alone in having a "split" (or shall we call it "shared"?) identity, but many times folks who do are invisibilized. I am trying to be more conscious of this.
Rich said…
Hmm, yeah. Manchester has had a "gay community" for many years, but these days it is often referred to as the "LGBT community" as though bisexual (and, even more perplexingly, transgender) people belong in that minority group for what appears to be no other reason than that they don't form a significant-enough minority on their own.

I'm not really into this concept of "voluntary segregation" but then I have never really belonged to a minority group (unless you count Unitarians as a minority group!) so it's difficult to see it from that side of the coin.
Anonymous said…
Bicon

annual conference for bisexuals

13-17 july 2006
glasgow, uk


http://www.bicon2006.org.uk

Popular posts from this blog

Radical?

When I started this blog nearly 4 years and nearly 300 posts ago one of the labels I used for it/me was "radical." Perhaps I used it a little unreflectively. Recently I've been pondering what radical means. A couple of things have made me think of this. Firstly this blog series from my friend Jeremy, which explores a distinction between "radical progressives" and "rational progressives." There is also this definition of radical, liberal and conservative from Terry Eagleton quoted at Young Anabaptist Radicals : “Radicals are those who believe that things are extremely bad with us, but they could feasibly be much improved. Conservatives believe that things are pretty bad, but that’s just the way the human animal is. And liberals believe that there’s a little bit of good and bad in all of us.” What interests me is finding a way to express the tension I feel sometimes between myself and the wider Unitarian movement. One way to express this is to say I tend

What does it mean to be non-creedal?

Steve Caldwell says "The problem here isn't humanism vs. theism for theist Unitarian Universalists -- it's the non-creedal nature of Unitarian Universalism" This is a good point. We need to think much more deeply about what it means to be a non-creedal religion. The first thing I want to say is that there is more than one possible understanding of non-creedalism. The Disciples of Christ are a non-creedal church, they say here : " Freedom of belief. Disciples are called together around one essential of faith: belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Persons are free to follow their consciences guided by the Bible, the Holy Spirit study and prayer, and are expected to extend that freedom to others." Quakers are also non-creedal and say here : Quakers have no set creed or dogma - that means we do not have any declared statements which you have to believe to be a Quaker. There are, however, some commonly held views which unite us. One accepted view is that th

What is Radical Christianity?

Radical Christianity is about encountering the God of love . It is first and foremost rooted in the discovery of a universal and unconditional source of love at the heart of reality and within each person. God is the name we give to this source of love. It is possible to have a direct and real personal encounter with this God through spiritual practice. We encounter God, and are nourished by God, through the regular practice of prayer, or contemplation.  Radical Christianity is about following a man called Jesus . It is rooted in the teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish prophet living under occupation of the Roman Empire two thousand years ago. It understands that's Jesus' message was the message of liberation. His message was that when we truly encounter God, and let God's love flow through us, we begin to be liberated from the powers of empire and violence and encounter the  "realm of God" - an alternative spiritual and social reality rooted in love rather th