In the June issue of Sicilia libertaria I was interested in the presence
of homosexuals within the Catholic Church, both in the Vatican and inthe various dioceses and congregations scattered around the world,
taking advantage of the Pope's supposed "slip" in defining the
phenomenon as "faggotness", worried about the massive presence of these
people in his church. In fact, it is a historical phenomenon that
involves the majority of prelates, priests and seminarians, so much so
that an internal struggle is identifiable between those who would like
recognition of their gender diversity, and those who would like to
remain hidden (all sexually more or less active). Regardless of what
will happen with this controversy within the church, I wanted to
underline the historical function that this religious institution has
played since the Middle Ages as the only institutionalized space in the
West where sexual "deviants" could take refuge, thus escaping
persecution and finding a social space between equals where one can
experience one's sexuality or, at least, have emotional friendships with
people of similar gender status. In this sense, little space has been
given to the study of so-called "manly friendships" even in other
non-religious contexts, as is the case with prisons or armies, even if
in the latter the burden of concealment has been and is much greater.
(let's remember the US Army's don't tell don't ask). The transformation
of the representation of homosexuality from a sin to a disease in the
nineteenth century and then, a century later, the non-criminalizing
openings of the youth movements around 1968, especially after the
Stonewall uprising in New York, produced a progressive acceptance on the
part of individuals of one's sexuality as greater social sensitivity
towards these people, with periodic alternations depending on whether
public opinion was influenced by progressive or reactionary governments
(see the Italian case of recent days). In any case, there is no doubt
that the subversive force of the LGBT movements of the seventies and
eighties of the last century has been weakening, in favor of a "desire
for normality": to get married and have children, in short to be
accepted as citizens who pay taxes.
Thus, having largely lost the subversive energy of the first gay and
lesbian movement, we settled down to demand "civil rights", without
realizing that in the meantime the right was advancing almost everywhere
in the West, putting the hope of homologation into crisis, while
repression and direct violence are increasing again and discrimination
is strong again (for example, refusals to rent houses to gay couples are
increasing every day), forcing a return to semi-clandestine status and
the closet, especially in the world of work . A solution is therefore
proposed, partly produced mechanically, which has had some success over
the last fifty years: agglomeration in urban spaces as a form of
self-defense, what North American sociologists define as Neighborhoods
of Affinity. This is the same phenomenon that occurs when, for example,
groups of emigrants in Italian cities, or of color in the case of the
United States, with the same ethnic or national origin end up living in
the same neighborhood on the outskirts thanks to kinship networks or of
association of origins, where shops selling ethnic products grow
rhizomatically, the same with restaurants, etc. This concentration
allows the production of solidarity relationships, including marital and
comparison relationships, as well as criminal associations, of course!
In some way, this logic also applies to interpreting what happened
historically with the Catholic church that we mentioned at the beginning
and what happened for the LGBT+ world with Castro in San Francisco, the
most famous case, Chueca in Madrid, The Village in Toronto or Le Marais
in Paris, known precisely as gayborhoods.
In the cases cited, to which others can be added, even in the form of
buildings that reproduce the same characteristics, these are groups
characterized by gender discrimination, generally without prior
organisation, attracted by a perceived freer environment, built
progressively, where one feels more protected, also due to the
solidarity that develops among the inhabitants, which produces groups of
social and legal support, to the point of forming a "subculture"
oriented towards respect for others (being able to go for a walk where a
couple of men or women can shake hands without being looked at badly or,
worse, being pursued by some young man, it is no small achievement!).
Certainly, unlike other types of "affinity neighborhoods" based on
migrant or color status, in the cases cited, as in others of the same
type, it is a variant of the gentrification phenomenon, since the people
who make this decision have in general some characteristics that
distinguish them: average working level, professionals, progressive
political choices and active political practices, even going so far as
to organize themselves with civic lists to elect their municipal
representatives, etc. Furthermore, it must be taken into account that
the cultural and leisure life, particularly at night, is very intense,
characterized by a gay friendly environment, attracts tourists and
therefore increases the circulation of money. It is interesting to note
that this attraction ends up also involving hetero individuals and
couples, causing the spatial and cultural borders of these spaces to
become more porous, especially where the national context has become
less discriminatory and oppressive, as in the case of Chueca in Madrid.
In fact, in the historical cases of gayborhoods, this porosity has
allowed the expansion of the territory or the creation of other similar
spaces, ending up constituting real urban archipelagos, composed of
islands that tend to have gender freedom.
Without denying the fact that, in the majority of cases, going to live
in these "affinity neighborhoods" has allowed many people to lead a
dignified existence without many dangers, even if the risk of turning
into ghettos is always just around the corner. (and we know what
happened during Nazism), it should be noted that it is a class
phenomenon that does not involve other social groups and even less LGBT+
individuals of socially subordinate origin, with precarious jobs and in
general with the problem of publicly assuming a 'anti-current gender
identity. And it is in the face of these class realities that the
phenomenon of "free islands" shows its limits, since it ignores other
social discriminations, especially economic ones, and fails to become a
project of liberation. And this is how an important deterrent to create
a more just society for all is defused in favor of a pseudo integration
that the state promises, the inconsistency of which is evident if we
consider what is happening in Italy, with the black sisters in power.
Emanuele Amodio
https://www.sicilialibertaria.it/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten