Freedom to Differ. Diane Helene Miller
Читать онлайн книгу.
of clarity and convenience. At the same time, it obscures the vital contributions of numerous bisexual, transsexual, and transgender men and women to the movement. I use this distortion consciously, although reluctantly, because of the danger of portraying the movement as monolithic and obscuring the rich diversity that is one of its greatest strengths. I hesitate, moreover, to represent our movement as a straw person that is easily attacked, wishing instead to provide a thoughtful and nuanced critique of the movement in all its complexity.7
Finally, I acknowledge the limitations of choosing to focus on these particular case studies. Both Roberta Achtenberg and Grethe Cammermeyer are white, professional lesbians, privileged by race and class (although Achtenberg is Jewish, another marginalizing factor). Because they are members of the dominant race and class, these features of their identities go unmarked, and unremarked upon, in the context of these debates. As a result, within their struggles “questions of discrimination based on race or class, and the interconnectedness of these forms of oppression with homophobia, are bracketed” (Phelan 1994, 117). The hiddenness of race and class in these discussions may tempt us to neglect or discount their impact. Nevertheless, such factors are always implicitly present, interwoven throughout these debates with conceptions of gender and sexual orientation.
Even the movement’s focus on silencing as a hallmark of lesbian oppression is deficient when it fails to account for the varying configurations of silence and voice available to women in different ethnic communities. Thus, whereas lesbians are silenced in the wider societal context “as lesbians,” this silencing may vary in form and intensity among different groups of lesbians. For example, in contrast to the historical division of public and private spheres that has denied white, middle-class women a public voice, “the distinct division between male and female spheres of activity … has never been prevalent in black speech communities.” Perhaps as a result, “black women have been described as generally outspoken and self-assertive speakers. … There is a fundamental tendency toward male-female communicative parity in black culture which starkly contrasts to the tendency toward communicative asymmetry which scholars emphasize for white women and men” (Stanback 1985, 181, 182; see also Collins 1991). The constraints on African American women’s speech must therefore be distinguished from those that affect white women. “In black communities (and diverse ethnic communities), women have not been silent. Their voices can be heard. Certainly for black women, our struggle has not been to emerge from silence into speech but to change the nature and direction of our speech, to make a speech that compels listeners, one that is heard” (hooks 1989, 6).
In light of such differences, I am mindful of the ways in which choosing to focus on the cases of two white, professional women risks homogenizing gays and lesbians by portraying “a false unity among what is in fact a tremendously diverse collectivity” (Phelan 1994, 117). Examining the stories of such women is an indispensable part of assessing the overall consequences of civil rights-based approaches. However, these women should not be viewed as representative of gays or lesbians as a group, nor should the importance of their relative privilege be overlooked. Their stories are significant, provocative, and inspiring. Yet they must also serve as a constant reminder of the vast number and endless variety of stories we have yet to hear. This book is only a beginning.
BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BOOK
On June 28, 1969, in an event that had become commonplace in New York’s Greenwich Village, police raided a popular gay bar known as the Stonewall Inn. What distinguished this raid from hundreds of other raids of gay bars was that on this night the patrons responded not only with resistance but with confrontation, turning a routine police action into a two-day riot. Gay men, lesbians, and transvestites, some patrons of the bar and others who came to support their fight, battled physically and psychologically with police to defend their right to the same freedom of assembly enjoyed by heterosexuals. While these men and women were not the first to argue for their right to fair and equal treatment, what has come to be known as the Stonewall Rebellion remains a landmark event in the fight for lesbian and gay liberation. This event is often identified as the official beginning of the social movement for gay and lesbian rights.8
The Stonewall Rebellion marked a new kind of visibility for gays and lesbians, whose everyday lives were otherwise defined by a careful monitoring of self-expression. What erupted during the riots at Stoewall was, certainly, a claim for equal rights. However, it was also something more: the beginning of a movement not just for equality but also for liberation and social change. The participants in this movement aimed to intervene not only in police procedure and the legal system but also in the public and private discourses that regulated their identities and circumscribed their lives. On that night, and through the days and nights that followed, many gays and lesbians refused to remain hidden any longer in deference to these constraints, insisting on being seen and heard in ways they had not previously demanded. Rather than disguise who they were to avoid social ostracism and police persecution, they “came out”—out of their individual and collective “closets” as well as literally out of the bar and into the streets—to demand acknowledgment of their existence and humanity. In their move from private to public space, this small group stood up for itself and, in the process, spoke out for many others who had lived for too long behind shrouds of invisibility, silence, and shame.
The contemporary lesbian and gay rights movement has come a long way in the nearly thirty years since Stonewall, bringing about political change and social acceptance for gays and lesbians that was unimagined, and unimaginable, just a short time ago. Gay men and lesbians are, as both our supporters and opponents are eager to note, more visible than ever before. “Out” gays and lesbians occupy positions of power in a variety of fields, including the entertainment industry, journalism, sports, politics, and even religion. Debates over gay and lesbian rights consume many pages of local and national publications, appearing on the covers of magazines with widespread circulation and popular appeal, such as Time, Newsweek, U.S. News and World Report, and the New Republic. In addition, a burgeoning industry of gay- and lesbian-produced mass media has emerged, with a proliferation of local and national newsletters, newspapers, magazines, journals, films, and television programs produced specifically by and for gay and lesbian audiences.
Within the legal realm, domestic partner benefits for cohabiting gay and lesbian couples have become available in some cities. Such benefits are also offered by an increasing number of businesses, including universities such as Emory and Northwestern and major corporations such as IBM, Apple Computer, Microsoft, Bank of America, Walt Disney, and the San Francisco 49ers. The legalization of same-sex marriage is being pursued in Hawaii’s courts, with some signs of success. The Supreme Court overturned Colorado’s Amendment 2, an anti-gay rights initiative passed by state voters, stemming the tide of anti-gay initiatives on ballots across the country. The Clinton presidency, though fraught with disappointments for lesbian and gay rights activists, has nonetheless brought questions of gay and lesbian rights to the forefront of American consciousness, as the hotly debated “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy forced military personnel and civilians of all sexual orientations to examine their views on a formerly taboo subject.
Yet, while the gains of the lesbian and gay rights movement have been substantial, a right-wing backlash has emerged, predictably, to swing the pendulum back. In response to efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in Hawaii, state legislatures across the country have rushed to outlaw same-sex marriage in their states. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which limits the definition of marriage to a union between a man and a woman, was easily passed by Congress in 1996. In the midst of what has been nicknamed the “lesbian baby boom,” legislatures have taken steps to prevent gays and lesbians from becoming foster parents or adopting children, while gay and lesbian parents are being denied custody of their biological children at an alarming rate. The military has stepped up its dismissal of gays and lesbians despite the implementation of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), a federal bill that would have prohibited discrimination against lesbians and gays in the workplace, was narrowly defeated by Congress in 1996. In addition, violence against gay men and lesbians continues at an alarming rate, in incidents ranging from the fatal beating of naval officer Allen Schindler by his shipmates in 1992, to attacks on lesbian and gay high school students by their peers,