This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It may contain errors or omissions, so always listen back to the original media to confirm content. You can search the text using Ctrl-F, and you can also play the audio by clicking on a desired timestamp.
It's my pleasure to introduce your panel today. I'm Sandra, um, a Viking Bogan. Sure, that's what mine is. See how I believe queer Paki hair woman who likes hits a lot, And me, who is part of Rainbow Wellington board member and, um, part of the newly formed QS A. Um, Merv is also more for [00:00:30] a tour de and identifies, as my name is Joe Wrigley, and I'll be your facilitator today. And Sandra will be cutting up this. Thank you very much. Oh, thanks, Joe. Thanks everyone for coming along to hear us talk and to be part of the conversation around naming, um, just to get into it straight up. My name's Sandra Dixon. I'm I'm bisexual. I'm a Bogan. I'm a woman, and I'm ridiculously privileged around being very able bodied. [00:01:00] Um, I'm going to use the word queer in this conversation to talk about sexuality and gender diversity. So I want to start with We're gonna have a bit of trouble seeing the presentation, I think. Can people see it now? People read it. No, not really. All it is at the moment is the two sentences of this talk. Um, and I want to start with the second sentence because it's kind of the bit I'm interested in. The second sentence is a facilitated discussion on the politics of naming, so I guess politics [00:01:30] and naming. What does that even mean for me? Naming is politics. Naming is all about who holds the power Always. It's the power to name the power to define the power to create and recreate meanings and boundaries, who's included and who's excluded. So if we're having this conversation here in a for me, we need to start with the fact that we're living on colonised land, right? Part of colonisation projects all over the world was a naming or rather, the renaming of [00:02:00] place of mountains, of lakes, of rivers, of islands, of seas. Part of colonisation projects all over the world was a naming or rather, the renaming of peoples of ways of living, of ways of organising social structures and families and lovers and relationships that naming that renaming was literally about taking over, assuming power, claiming, belonging, other and in the case of other. So when we talk [00:02:30] about politics and naming here on, and we're referencing that to queerness to people with diverse sexualities and gender identities. We need, I believe, to pay attention first to the disruption, the attempted destruction that colonisation created for for for mhm. If all Maori have to deal with the renaming of place that colonisation enabled and colonise colonisers enacted the attempted [00:03:00] disruption of ways of belonging to with all of that all that that means when you are. And if all Maori have to deal, too with the renaming the controls over gender and sexuality that colonisation enabled and colonisers enacted, then to leave that out of the conversation is kind of criminal, really. But I'm gonna leave discussion of that to people much more qualified than I am to deal with it. And I'm personally looking forward to hearing both the nerds speak [00:03:30] and the conversations that will come out of the Taku panel later today. If naming is politics and we see that playing out around race in terms of colonisation in all kinds of ways, we can also see it playing out in other systems, other social systems of domination and oppression. I'm going to talk now about the words the English words that we use to talk about sexuality and gender diversity and how they've developed over the last 20 or 30 years. And I want to use a local example here [00:04:00] in Wellington of the Gay and Lesbian Fair. So the gay Lesbian Fair was set up in 1986 to raise awareness about homosexuality and to build support for homosexual law reform, which was then before New Zealand Parliament for 22 years from 1986. It operated in Newtown School in Newtown. In the early days, it was tiny. I Is there anyone here who used to go in those early days? Yeah, yeah, me too. It was tiny. You used to be able to walk around and talk to all your ex lovers, pick up a couple [00:04:30] of second hand pieces of clothing and be done in five or 10 minutes. Um, and from the very beginning, stall holders included people from sexuality and gender diverse backgrounds and communities who did not identify as gay or lesbian. The Wellington Bisexual Women's Group, which is a group I'm part of, started paying to have a store very, very early on. We would sit out with our newsletters and our pamphlets and our social group information and lots of stuff that our members wanted to sell, and despite [00:05:00] the fact that we had paid to be allowed there as every store holder had, we were repeatedly asked and told that we shouldn't be there. We repeated repeatedly asked why we were there, and it was repeatedly made clear to us that we didn't really belong. We responded in a couple of ways to there. One of the ways was that we were there in numbers so that it felt a little bit safer for us. The other way was that we talked to the organisers repeatedly about the name of the fair, making it clear that we were. We [00:05:30] were not welcome. That was a conversation that started in the late eighties and continued throughout the nineties. I was talking to about this recently, and I've let Marie know that I'm going to mention this conversation here. Um, many of you will know Marie's work around gender diversity and under six people's rights, and Marie told me that trans groups were having similar experiences at the same time, sometimes choosing not to be there at all because the experience was so negative. So I went to the gay and lesbian fear for years, sometimes being [00:06:00] part of the bisexual women's group store, sometimes hanging out with friends and lovers, mostly both. Actually, um, the name rank called, and I was far from alone and raising it over and over again. But it wasn't until 2008 that the name finally changed to reflect the people holding stalls, singing, speaking, dancing hanging out. At that time, the fair moved into Civic Square and became out in the square. I've got no idea why 2008 was the year that the name changed. [00:06:30] I can't remember there being anything in particular that made it change at that point, Um, but I do remember celebrating the name change with lots and lots of friends from all kinds of sexuality and gender diverse backgrounds. But that tagline can people see the tag line so it's Still Wellington's game needs to be fair in the fine print. Last year I got a bit fed up with this. This happens quite often. I've got lots of boxes at home of, um, different things I've done over the years and [00:07:00] lots of places to talk about exclusion. But now we have Facebook, and I know how to use it. Finally, it's taken me a wee while. Um, I don't know how easy that is to read. Basically, I asked the organisers at the end of last year why the text to out in the square describes it as an event for queer people. But the logo was still calling it again. Lesbian fair, you can see may be able to see there that the response [00:07:30] was that they would put the tag line up for a vote at the next out on the square. That conversation, though, wasn't restricted to that set of comments. Basically, a whole bunch of trends by gender. Diverse people started having these conversations on Facebook on the out of the square page and elsewhere. Facebook kicked off the debate, got more and more heated by the time I got that reply at the end [00:08:00] of that post there, saying that there was going to be a vote. There'd been a number of other really problematic conversations on Facebook elsewhere. This is a, um this is a This is a comment that kind of speaks to some of how problematic some of those conversations were. This is from an ex chair of out in the square. So he's laughing about acronyms I think covers everything with a bit of humour. She swears it all in. It can never end if you try to include everybody. Apparently, this debate has gone on for many years. [00:08:30] Yep, but it's in the heads, especially in terms of the fear. Do you think it hasn't been discussed at length? So that's kind of a stop making so much noise and go away, would you? GL BT WXYZ is meant to be facetious because it really is becoming a joke How this whole queer umbrella alphabet soup thing is going. We're aiming to include everyone while excluding ourselves at the same time, identity politics is so boring and tedious. This stuff, um, this was coupled with explicitly, [00:09:00] um, telling trans people to stop raising the issue, really? And telling a bisexual woman who'd previously been involved in organising the fear that she hadn't raised it enough when she'd been on the organising committee. So why was she raising it now? You can probably imagine that it gave me a bit of a sinking feeling about how the tag on the how the voting on the tagline was gonna go, um, which made me want to blog. So I wrote something publicly about [00:09:30] the fact that naming is always about power and about the fact that holding a vote at the fair with its exclusive tagline was really unlikely to have positive outcomes. Unless we asked the people that were being excluded explicitly what their views were. And I suggested a process around how they might do that, that that blog, that suggestion that we asked people what we wanted our queer community [00:10:00] to be called got me all kinds of hate mail from lesbians. Um, I'm not unfamiliar with getting hate mail from lesbians. I have to say it's, um while I have many, many, many close friends and many, many, many ex lovers who are lesbian and who I love. Some of my best friends are lesbians. Um, it's certainly been an ongoing critique for some lesbians that, um, bisexual women muddy the picture, muddy it up. So while it wasn't surprising [00:10:30] on this particular occasion, for some reason, it really bug me. It really hurts in a way that it doesn't always, And so I took time out for about a month to, um, think about how to progress this. And I just got to the point of wanting to contact the groups that I'd identified as needing to be part of the conversation. Went out on the square, changed their name, they put that up on Facebook and they put it up on their website and this was the explanation they gave. We've changed our tagline [00:11:00] on the logo. It's more inclusive, the right thing to do and a reference to our proud history, too. The the response they got on Facebook to this was unanimously positive. They got more likes for that for this than they had done for anything else. At that point, there were comments from people saying Thank you. There were comments from people, um, noting that this was way more inclusive and there were comments from people saying it was the right thing to do. And [00:11:30] it's interesting to me that that Facebook page now has nearly four times as many likes as a year ago. And our queer fear is now explicitly for all of us, at least in terms of English words. So the moral of the story for me, I think the debates over out in the square over the last 20 years have clearly shown the power lines in the queer community. In fact, the fact that there's been some shift towards inclusion recently is interesting, and I think it's no accident that it's been led by queer people much younger than I [00:12:00] am. The committee now is a group of much younger people, Um, and it's going to be interesting to see how that naming plays out in other areas. I'm really aware and really mindful that it's still operating within a framework and without doubt through the lens of anti-racism. There's still plenty of battles to have around this around naming what we call ourselves and plenty of power shifts still to occur. The dissonance of living in a and not using the indigenous language of this place remains [00:12:30] an important site for playing out in the replaying out of power relations in the queer community. As elsewhere it is. It's done every day since 18 40 before I guess I want to finish by coming back to my original question of naming is always about politics and about power, then, for those of us that are interested in queer liberation for all of us. Well and truly beyond marriage equality, we need to keep paying attention to who we include and who we exclude and who has the power [00:13:00] to draw those lines all the time. That's me. We can get more light now. Should we open this up? Yes. Um, before I start, I just want to apologise if this talk seems a bit all over the place. I've been sick all week, so it's not quite as together as I wanted it to be. Um, my name is Kara. I'm pakeha [00:13:30] as gender. Also able bodied. I acknowledge that I stand on colonised land as well. I ID as a woman and as queer. But that hasn't always been the case. I identified as straight, perhaps more out of confusion, fear all that stuff than anything else until I was about 19 or 20. I think it's important to acknowledge that the way we choose to name ourselves is never set in stone. The amount of people I consider to be friends who came up to me when I was first in a relationship with a woman and said things [00:14:00] like, Oh, so you're a lesbian now provoked rather amusing images of me waking up one morning and realising that I've been wrong all these years. I also think quite a few of me, uh, quite a few people expected me to cut my hair off, stop wearing skirts. And I've also been told several times that I don't look like a lesbian. Despite the fact I've never identified myself as one, not to mention the other problematic connotations of that statement. That's the other thing about naming. It often comes with a set of expectations, which I don't think necessarily [00:14:30] adheres to how we feel in reality. Uh, additionally, identities are not fixed. People in circumstances change, and these changes should be respected. I also think it's important we don't name other people, their affiliations, their politics or their gender identities. This again brings in the importance of taking the time to acknowledge that not everyone identifies with binary gender and that we should not make assumptions about what pronouns people wish to be identified with. This brings me to my next point I've seen a few times [00:15:00] on Facebook and in other social spaces. Uh, people exclaim at why every woman and In fact, every person doesn't identify as a feminist. A quote that encapsulates this sort of thinking is by the oral spender who reads as follows. Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, star no enemies, practise no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions, for safety on the streets, for child care, for social welfare, for rape, crisis centres, women's refuges, reforms [00:15:30] in the law. If someone says, Oh, I'm not a feminist, I ask Why? What's your problem? End quote. So this has long seemed like a bit of a broad generalisation. To me, feminism as a movement has been very exclusionary towards a number of groups. Groups including, but not limited to women of colour, trans and gender, queer people, people with disabilities and people working in the sex industry. People often broadly associated with the feminist movement such as Germaine Greer, Caitlin Moran, Catherine McKinnon [00:16:00] and Sheila Jeffries are some of the people espousing views which openly discriminate, if not blatantly express hatred towards these groups. The endless transphobia of Germaine Grey and Sheila Jeffries in particular, is not worth repeating. Many of these feminists are also anti sex work and contribute towards, if not create, policies that make people working in the sex industry more unsafe. While this may not equate to declaring war in the traditional sense of the word, it is definitely a form of violence and cruelty that bears mentioning. [00:16:30] Additionally, the brand of feminism Spender is talking about fought for the right for white women to vote, not women. More generally, it's also worth noting that the law reforms mentioned may also be ones that benefit more privileged groups in our society. And I think marriage equality is a prime example of this, as is going to be talked about in many other panels. Queer people are fighting for survival. Yet we are told we should feel grateful that we can participate in this institution, an institution that still privileges a certain way of being about other ways. [00:17:00] African American feminist Angela Davis has written about the way in which many movements, including women's suffrage, often involve integrating people of colour to achieve their ends. This is something that also happened in New Zealand and something I think we need to keep in mind when Commemorating events such as women's suffrage and looking at more contemporary examples of, for example, LGBT movements, which should often be missing the B and the T. A similar pattern of exclusion is seen has been seen in New Zealand, uh, in the feminist movement [00:17:30] in the 19 seventies, as well as today, where Maori women were and continue to be excluded from or overlooked in mainstream feminist movements. This is not something I'm qualified to speak about, but also something I think we need to keep in mind and broad brush statements that assume all women must identify as feminist. While I do identify as feminist. Although I distance myself from all the aspects of some of the stuff I've been over, I can definitely understand why people directly affected by these exclusionary practises may want to distance themselves [00:18:00] completely. This is another key point of what? Sorry, This is another key point. I want to emphasise about naming and identifying ourselves. None of us can assume to know someone's reasons for how they identify it. It's up to people to respect others decisions. Um, I'm now just gonna move on to an example of an experience. I had earlier on this year I went to a conference held by an organisation I didn't know much about and probably should have investigated more closely before applying to speak. [00:18:30] The conference had a woman only policy. There was no expansion or clarity on this. I do know that men who tried to register were turned away. But beyond that I don't know if the policy had been inquired about or tested at all. A couple of people I know had been to previous conferences and attempted to challenge the policy. I did witness a man being ejected from Partic, a particular talk by an organiser. At one stage during the conference, I see Intersectionality as a bit of a buzzword. But if there was ever a conference that was [00:19:00] the opposite of intersectional, it was this one. I witnessed one Maori woman presenting on Maori issues. The entire time I was there, there was a lack or so of immigrant women and people from a range of communities. The conference seemed to be almost entirely made up of white women, disappointing for a conference with the title Feminist Futures. There was also a very clear age split with most women being either over 60 or under 30 There seemed to be an entire one or two generations of women almost totally missing. [00:19:30] I went to one particularly interesting talk in which a lesbian feminist said that she didn't understand why young people these days self identified with the term queer. When someone asked her why she thought this was at the end of the talk, she said that it was probably due to the fact that Queer has less stigma attached to it than lesbian kind of going back to this idea of oppression Olympics. I guess when another person in the room suggested that it could be lesbian was a more gender specific term. It seemed to be brushed off [00:20:00] throughout the conference, and myself and a scattering of other young people were approached by people who have been with the group for years. They were really happy to see more young faces coming through and told us we needed to be the ones taking over in the future. However, when myself and a handful of other people did to challenge this woman's only policy, we were told in no uncertain terms that we didn't understand feminism, Women's only spaces. We weren't grateful enough for everything second wave feminists had done for us. And there seemed to be a view that was, um, espoused by [00:20:30] a couple of people in conversations that went on afterwards, that we only wanted the policy to change so that we could bring our feminist boyfriends lovely of them to assume we were all in a relationship with me. Uh, the comments we made about gender like I was particularly not so much concerned about men being able to attend because I can understand the value of women's only spaces. But the comments we made about gender queer people being excluded as well as trans women not feeling welcome were ignored. And there was kind of a lot of discussion where [00:21:00] they said, Well, trans women can come, It's fine. We're not gonna stop trans women from coming and it's like, Yes, but you're not making people feel welcome. So I think that's a key thing to focus on. Um, while this is a particularly obvious example of the dangers of not allowing people to name themselves, I think it's something that can be broadened and thinking about social movements and events more generally slut Walk is another example of a movement that, while resonating for many women who were and are sick of being told they were to blame for their own victimisation, also excluded other people who did not feel they could reclaim [00:21:30] this term. In the same way a conference like this is the same. We are lacking in several marginalised groups, and this is something we need to work to remedy in future. So I guess the main conclusion I'm trying to come to is this People should be free to choose their identities. Um, although there are limits to this, I mean appropriating identities that don't really belong to you. As an example of that, um, we also need to avoid falling into the whole of looking at only certain identities or [00:22:00] only certain identities being recognised and kind of the mainstream LGBT movement as an example of this where they only fighting certain fights and excluding, um perhaps ones that other people things that other people struggle with. Um, my relatively limited experiences in activism and social movements have taught me that we do need a wider discussion about this, and I'm hoping that one of sorts can happen here. So, [00:22:30] um, I thought first I'd say that probably a lot of my thoughts are going to come from a social work perspective over the last decade. So it's kind of a, um, position I'll be taking not only myself, I guess what I've seen professionally, but I think from the world view of I don't like the word clients. But that's the word that's mainly used. Um, but I'd rather say the people the, um that I've worked with in the past. Um, I wanted to talk from a literal [00:23:00] point of view first, because I don't know if you remember. It was about a year or two ago, and Minister of Education brought up that. Why can't teachers, um, just pronounce Maori kids, um, names, literally their names properly? I was thinking, Well, first of all, um, so like if you haven't taken a class, you might not have an idea about the pronunciation. I think behind that people don't have an intention to necessarily butcher [00:23:30] something so personal as someone's name. But when it comes to naming, I think if people need a bit of a a bit of support to get that naming right. It won't come from them, you know, because they don't, I guess, have the tools to get the name right. So I think there's got to be a bit of give and take in the, um, arena of naming. You are getting this wrong When we think of discourse theory, you know, people aren't gonna, I guess, progress in their understanding of how important. Um, definitions [00:24:00] are un unless they're, um, helped with that. Um, the other thing I saw recently was, um and that was, um, in the news as well. And I'm thinking amongst ourselves we call call ourselves all the time. Um, I see, like if we got Pacifica friends and we teach each other, tease each other about being or fresh or whatever, but I think it's the the I've been talking about energy this morning. [00:24:30] You're saying it with and understanding. Otherwise, you're saying it in a derogatory, um, malicious fashion. And I always bring it back to What is the intent of that, or where are they coming from? Why are they saying that? Why are they using that particular word? And there's the other old saying about It's not what people say um, you know, in the domain of naming but how they say it, I think there is another important aspect to remember. And, um, [00:25:00] one of my early placements was at the global education Centre, Um, as an aspiring youth worker and what was really telling, um, when we think of peer pressure and so forth when you're trying to name yourself in those formative years and identity came out head and above every other concern that youth has Now what does that, you know, tell us how important? Um, identity naming of also, um, [00:25:30] mentioned, um, pro, um written down pronouns that I wanted to talk to because they had come up. Um, and I've always just considered myself like I'm a I'm a ho grow from levin always will be. Always want to be. I've always aspired to be like the older ones of us might remember Billy T and his black, um, T shirt and his shorts while he used to read the news. Now, that's all right for, um, I think me too. Bring about [00:26:00] how I want to be known as because I so do not identify with the term um gay. I can't stand it And the reason why each to their own if someone else wants to, um, name themselves as that. But for me, it has connotations of the scene. And there are, um, certain aspects of the scene which I feel will never, ever come close to describing. Um, who I want to be and you get into this, [00:26:30] Um, I don't mean to be too, but there's this, you know, you're either top or bottom and you must, like, name yourself one of those. Are you more macho? Are you kind of camp? And I just thought, I cannot stand it. And it's just, I think, the stereotypical superficial nature of some aspects of our community. I just worry that that has an impact on. So like, if you were just on the verge of wanting to come out or you finally plucked up the courage to want to at least have a talk about it and [00:27:00] seeing that if you're not I, I remember my early days, and it's like if you're not tall, blonde blue, I buffed enough, tanned enough then I couldn't call myself then, and in the end, I just gave up, though I don't want to be. You know, um, I. I ended up like, I guess, giving up the battle of wanting to name myself as part of that world. But then I thought, Well, I don't want to be part of that world anyway, so it was kind of a relief in the end that I didn't have to claim that name to be able [00:27:30] to be myself. Um, the other thing I've seen recently, um is and this, um Sandra and and it's like that's when it becomes political because that name, you know, before it's there, it's beautiful. It's so much more sexy and that than South Island and North Island. And it would [00:28:00] have given, I guess, a bit of, um, yeah, man to the name. And like, they keep talking about tourism and so forth that what differentiates us from every other, you know, and it's like, well, Maori being the indigenous culture that's unique to us. So why can't we name things in that fashion? But again, it became political, I guess, um also marriage equality when that was, um, going on. And I acknowledged, um, David [00:28:30] and, um and I were part of that, um, and it was like they were wanting to narrow it down. Just it was purely just gay marriage. And it was a never ending, um, war that we had going on to try and keep, um, people's mind open, I guess as to what we were really wanting to achieve, Um, I think what I'd like to end with the most important aspect of naming [00:29:00] and oh, Kelly, too, just It's as simple as Do you prefer to be called me or do you prefer to be called move? And just that respectful approach is a hell of a lot of, um, you know, when you when it comes to meeting someone and wanting to get to know someone because I'm all about our community being inclusive, that makes a world of difference as well. Just those little you know, we're not needing a revolution. I think here it's just those little games bit by bit, incremental, [00:29:30] those subtle little things that we can do differently that I think would make AAA really big difference in the big picture. I need to point out that I mispronounce three names right then and I hope you all pick that up. We are gonna open the floor to questions. I need to let you know that if you do not want to be recorded, that what you need [00:30:00] to say before you ask. The question is I do not want to be recorded, and that will and due course be eliminated from all records. So I'll, um, I'll open the floor up. Is there any questions for the panic If anyone want to contribute to the discussion or contributions are welcome as well as questions. Yes, please. So, um, I'm from Hamilton. Um, and I'm part [00:30:30] of queer youth. Um, one thing we've been talking about recently, um, we've had a lot of flak for it Is that that we use in our name? Um, we were at the A R in Auckland in February, and we had a trans woman come up to us, and basically, we were past the shreds for using the term queer. Um, and we've had a lot of trouble with funding applications. Um, for the fact that we use queer in our name. Um, we've actually got, like, a a mini tag line saying that, um, we use because it's a an umbrella term for our community because I mean, our [00:31:00] group is so diverse. It's amazing and like I don't know if because I'm I'm really I've been I've been a for a year now. Um, and I'm on the committee and like moving things forward, but I don't know if it's if it's a new thing with this. Does anyone else find like that term is is looked down on by other other people like, What's the What's the goal of it? They're like, I just I don't understand why people have such an issue. There's so many things going on with that. That little scenario, I think, you know, I think queer [00:31:30] is a contested term, I think for people my age and older, we can remember it being used in incredibly hateful words. Um, and it's contested because it's more inclusive, too, you know, And that that control that. That kind of, um that sense of opening up gay and lesbian space to people who don't identify as gay and lesbian as really contested. Yeah, I was gonna say something along those lines, too. Like it is a term that is contested on a number of really valid grounds. Um, as well as perhaps [00:32:00] Yeah, So I think it's important to think about the fact that you know, some people may not want to idea as queer, and that's you know, And I think as well, I guess for me when it actually gets and said some beautiful stuff about this at Cliff, when it's being used as a word to actively exclude gender diversity. And that's what you were talking about. Partly, Um, that's really problematic. And I guess that's why I opened by talking about the fact [00:32:30] that I'm going to use the word in this way. Um, yeah, it's all of the names we use for ourselves are boundaries. We need to keep defining them and redefining them all the time. If we want to be clear about who we mean Yeah, just briefly. And that's I mean, obviously the Queer Avengers. We called ourselves the Queer Avengers, and there was a conversation about that. But that's also why we chose to make this conference gender and sexual diversity just because, increasingly, it was coming up, that many people weren't weren't identifying with Queerness, even if even if you know, you know, even [00:33:00] if they yeah, so I mean, that's that's definitely something that's been coming up a lot. What I have issue there is not the content of this person's, um, question around the word queer, but the approach. You know, Why would you approach a kindred spirit organisation and basically them in that manner? You know, we have concerns. That's fine. Why can't we have a around those concerns and see what comes out of it? But to just, you know, attack, [00:33:30] you know? And that's why I keep saying the worst form of discrimination is amongst our own and II I still, you know, personally seeing that. And that's why I have a real issue with the approach taken there. It's all in the approach. You know, if she took another approach, you wouldn't have felt, you know, attacked and she might have gained some traction. But and yeah, um, my name's through Hyman. I think I'll start [00:34:00] with naming in the way that the did, um, I identify Spi as a lesbian feminist and as a I sometimes say I'm the only Jewish lesbian feminist economist. As far as I know, um, I also identify, as pretty luckily still say, able bodied at 70 identify as being a 17, and it's quite interesting being 70. Yeah, we used to be thought of as no [00:34:30] longer take it. Um, thanks to those of us who are lucky enough to be healthy, and I'm not, um I still not I don't feel old. Still feel able bodied. And so, um, white and sort of British, Um, and, um no. And, um, have had class and education privilege and identify all those English ethnic privilege very definitively. All those things. Um, [00:35:00] I, um I feel a bit nervous talking today, which was amusing because I talk a lot because I suppose I feel a bit defensive. Um, I want to respond to some of the things. Uh, the first two panellists have said, Oh, the first thing I want to do is name No. I think I think if I had been, I would have named that conference as a doctor. USA conference with the association. There's nothing. Uh, it was and, uh, those things did all happen. I would wouldn't put them identical way of it. [00:35:30] We all speak differently about we all have different experiences, but I don't think it was far off what you said about it? Um uh, as far as, uh, I want to say one or two things about some said first and the first I think that was very interesting about it. And, um I. I didn't know the whole day out in the square history history before, and I think it was fascinating. And I think the final resolution is great, but it's almost writing out history when it says Queer, [00:36:00] Queer Fair since 1985 because it really wasn't in those days. It's interesting that I mean, I think since 1985 was trying to speak to the existence of the fairs. But important history history illustrates, I think what's happening in, um in all sorts of circles in terms of more inclusivity and so on. I don't I identify as lesbian, but I'm perfectly happy to be thought of gay, homosexual, queer. Anything [00:36:30] else? All those names are fine as well, as far as I'm concerned, but my personal identity is lesbian. I'm involved. I get another small cash done in lesbian radio which still exists, has been going weekly for 30 years, and I been managing to do that. Um, there was a gay male programme as well, which was a gay men's only, and that only lasted a few years. And we have also got we We want to keep that name. And [00:37:00] for practical reasons, we need to keep that name because funded by the Armstrong Charitable Trust for Lesbians, which was funded by a couple called, um, Betty Armstrong on behalf of, they were out in their in their seventies and eighties. And, um, and we were We were very much in the community and actually were very much part of a broad and gay lesbian community as well. And, um and we need to. But it's not only the preference, isn't it? We are. We are [00:37:30] a lesbian programme, but we will now, whereas we used to worry about whether we played any music and what did that mean? And now we play all women's music or gay music or queer music that anybody wants to play, and we publicise a lot of stuff about the whole queer community. Even though we're predominantly a lesbian programme and mostly people who identify as lesbian, I think we probably have had bisexual and other [00:38:00] you've had many bisexual. It does have to interview, but I think we also have present you've had many voices and that you know that's fine as long as they're happy to be part of the lesbian radio programme that's labelled the lesbian programme and some of the I mean, I think that sort of trying to be more inclusive stuff because we're realising that ja is happening all the way. But I think it's important to recognise the history in both areas. Um I I can. I'm [00:38:30] part of the people who may be attacked to say and, you know, all exclusionary both in W A and in in lesbian community. I'm trying to to point out things that are more we're trying. I want things to get much more inclusive. But to also recall the history, I mean, lesbian feminism started in the we were the ones who were real outsiders and pushing boundaries. Um, both as initially feminists and lesbian feminist. And, um, we weren't perfect and I don't think we were quite as exclusionary [00:39:00] on ethnic stuff and unaware as people. Now, if I move back and remember back to discussions, there was a lot of that going of talk about that going on right from the beginning. But certainly, um, people reflect their own backgrounds, and if more of them come together, it takes a while before they are pushed into other things. But I, I sometimes think some of the writing about that period is much more condemning and unfair to the groups who [00:39:30] are actually doing great work and work I than, uh, than it reflects the total reality. But I, um I think, you know, there are some of us who still I was interested, that car, that you said that women's space, you know, WS a women's space we were. This is the point. Of course, at the beginning, in the seventies and eighties was that practically all academic and writing space academic space, and it [00:40:00] was important for that answer, and we were still having that both women journals. But it just opened up to me with a lot of people not being very happy about it, because it's more of an academic journal and you know, you can't in universities or politics or any of those institutions have exclusions. Anyway, I shouldn't talk too long, so I I'll stop. But I just wanted to just put some of that historical perspective on it. While I you know, I think we've got to be open to to change. But we've also [00:40:30] got to keep the politics going. Some of us were opposed to marriage equality because we're a lesbian feminist. We were approached to to marriage who thought marriage was lousy for women. And why the hell do we want to make it and so on? So there's there's all sorts of things and that we exclusive coupledom is not good, others putting everything on that. So there's a heck of a lot of resources everywhere. Yeah, thank you. I'm I'm gonna have to wind this session because it's running into the next session. But I'm sure that any of the panellists will be happy to discuss any further. [00:41:00] I'll take the opportunity to thank you all for your good and.
This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It may contain errors or omissions, so always listen back to the original media to confirm content.
Tags