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.
OK, so I'm, uh I'm in. Uh, Casey will be coming by soon to facilitate this session. Um, but yeah. So this is, uh, just a sort of a historical look at, um, the the first visit of the wave of, um, the Gay liberation movement in the late sixties and the seventies. Uh, it's not supposed to be like a comprehensive look at queer history. It's that specific, um, gay liberation movement that called itself the Gay Liberation movement. Uh, but also looking into [00:00:30] some of the context of what created that and some of the implications that might have for us. So, um, uh, the, uh, it will be focused mainly on the US with, uh, with also some New Zealand content. Uh, and we've got people here who are involved in that movement at the time. Uh, so Bill and Bill and Kay were were involved around that time so we can have some historical discussion also in the, uh afterwards. Ok, so, um, so just looking [00:01:00] at the US and the, um the initial burst of what we now know as the gay liberation movement. Um, uh, it's important to look at the context. Um, so Stonewall is kind of seen as this defining movement moment and gay liberation. And it is. But look at what actually fit into that and what created it, Uh, and what interacted with it? So you had these wider mass movements for liberation? Um uh, African American civil rights movement, the black power movement as well, uh, movements [00:01:30] against apartheid, uh, internationally and against the Vietnam War. And you, you started to see the women's liberation movement emerge as well around the time of, like, the early seventies, beginning late sixties. Um, and, uh, and also feeding into this before before the, uh, the Stonewall riots. You had a couple of, um, major demonstrations along similar lines. So the, um uh, lunch counter sit ins, which was, um, basically in Philadelphia, Uh, like a popular [00:02:00] space for LGBT youth. But it wasn't an LGBT space. It was owned by homophobes. Um, but it was used by a lot of especially African American, uh, sort of queer youth. Uh, and the the estate the management banned, um, nonconformist clothing. Uh, so that led to a series of actions you had like, uh, hundreds of people showing up wearing nonconformist clothing, deliberately people got arrested. And then there was a series of pickets and sit ins to challenge this, Um, [00:02:30] but that, uh, that was 1965. And that's not as much in the sort of the established history. Uh, and then you've also got 1966 the Compton cafeteria riots, uh, which was, uh, particularly Trans woman police harassment. So, um, in a lot of ways quite similar to what ended up happening at Stonewall. Um, and all of this is leading into 1968 and 1969. We saw a massive global upsurge in struggle. You know, there was a there was an upsurge in [00:03:00] the West, but But that was like connected to movements that were happening, like, uh, in the Third World and various places, um, against, like, oppressive systems in general. Um, so then you got the stonewall riot in 1969 which was, which was? Towards the end of June. You had, uh, the Stonewall Inn, which was one of many again sort of queer spaces that weren't necessarily owned by queer people. Uh, in this case, the Stonewall Inn, which was actually [00:03:30] a mafia backed bar. But it had a lot of, um, sort of marginal patrons. So that included, like, a lot of a lot of trans women, a lot of a lot of gay youth. Um, just a lot of people who didn't necessarily fit in kind of thing. Who who had the space among a few others in New York. Um, and this was raided by police, which is a fairly regular thing. So it's not unusual that the police raid happened. What? What's unusual is the the fight back that happened, Um, which again was partly as we'll see in the next quote by [00:04:00] Sylvia Rivera, partly because people felt this was a time where they could sort of resist this kind of a thing. Um, so there's a There's a myth that, uh, Sylvia Rivera, who is a Latino, a trans woman who, um, has a lot to say about this particular event, uh, and is worth looking into, um, that she threw the first bottle. Uh, that's not her story. That's not how she tells it, but, um, but it's sort of part of the mythology. Um uh, and here is how she says it, um, so people can read it, but I'll just read it out as [00:04:30] well. So, um, she says, um, we were let out of the bath, and they cattle us all up against the police vans. Uh, the cops pushed us up against the grates and the fences. Uh, people started throwing pennies, nickels and quarters at the cops, and then the bottle started. And then we finally had the moral moral squad barricaded in the Stonewall building because they were actually afraid of us at that time. They didn't know we were going to react that way. We were not taking any more of this shit. We had done so much more for other movements. [00:05:00] It was time. Uh, it was street gay people from the village out front, homeless people who lived in the park and Sheridan square outside the bar and then drag queens behind them and everybody behind us. Um, all of us were working for so many movements at that time. Uh, everyone was involved with the women's movement, the peace movement, the civil rights movement. We're all radicals. I believe that's what brought it around. Uh, you get tired of just being pushed around. And that was an interview in A in a US socialist paper. Um, and it's [00:05:30] Yeah, I think it's quite it's really worth looking into What Sylvia Rivera and Leslie Feinberg have to say about the US, uh, liberation movement. Um, but yeah. So a key point there is it wasn't, uh It wasn't just gay men or something. It was a lot of a lot of queer and trans people, uh, who were involved in that, Um, and it was the most generally the most dispossessed who are at the front lines of that struggle. Um, it wasn't just because of particular establishment. Enforce [00:06:00] the law. And, um, lots of states that you were at least three of the right. So that's about the Jewish lunch counter. Sit cool. Thanks for that. Um, so about, um So then you had the foundation of the the Gay Liberation Front, Uh, the the first organisation known as the Gay Liberation Front. Uh, and that was that was in New York. Uh, I think in Greenwich Village. Um, very shortly [00:06:30] after the Stonewall riot, um, and activists were returning to the Stonewall Inn over, like, a series of nights. They were distributing leaflets. Um, and they formed this gay liberation front started organising marches, and obviously they were using their skills from general sort of independent struggles against depression. All this kind of thing. Um and so you see, slogans All power to the people. Um, stuff like that. Um, uh, and you saw groups. Then take that name, take the gay liberation front name, um, outside New York, [00:07:00] Uh, and outside the US, Um, and that grew to more than 80 chapters. Uh, and so the attention kind of emerged out of out of this particular struggle. Um, where the gay liberation front. I mean, they took their name partly from the the National Liberation Front in Vietnam, so they were aligning themselves with struggles against imperialism and against capitalism. And so, you see, in this, um, gay Liberation Front publication from London, I think, um, like, they use the image [00:07:30] of Shay and that kind of thing. Um, but they were also quite isolated from the old left, the the Stalinist parties and the organised workers movement. There were new left, um, groups that supported them. So, like they had a for example, in New Zealand, the Socialist Action League they had a relationship with, um they were also links even with, um uh, the Black Panthers and other groups. Um, And so anyway, um, uh, out of these initial gay liberation front groups, uh, Sylvia Rivera, [00:08:00] um, formed specifically, uh, a specifically trans group out of the gay liberation front called, um, uh, street transaction revolutionaries. Um, but there were people who were kind of dispirited with this kind of politics and would prefer to just focus on sort of gay concerns specifically. So, um, they formed their own group, which is the gay activist alliance, and they dropped their trans demands. Um, and they did begin to win some successes. Eventually, For example, the, um uh, getting [00:08:30] rid of the, uh, the classification and the, um you know, and the the DS M. And you start to see some legal victories happening. But there was a sort of a division between, uh, the the sort of more radical wing of the movement and the, um the more single issue wing, um and so this, uh, this did have an influence here. Um, we were We were a bit late to the party in terms of specifically gay liberation groups. Um, so uh, 1972 was kind of a key [00:09:00] year in terms of those those groups forming. Um, so there was the first, uh, national gay and lesbian conference was held. Um, uh, you had the formation of, uh, groups with taking that gay liberation front name. Um, across the country, um, they all formed in in the space of that year. Um, and they lasted for round about to about 78 to 79. Uh, and a lot of what galvanised that at the time was, um, for example, when, uh, [00:09:30] who was, uh, a sort of, uh, an activist. At that time, Uh, she was denied a visa to go to the US. Um, because she was seen as a known sexual deviant. She was actually going over to see the Black Panthers. So again, it was this, um, intermingling of kind of radical movements. Uh, that was happening, uh, in the, uh, in that period, Um, and, um, the gay liberation front groups were succeeded by other groups. So some of them you know, you had more regional groups. [00:10:00] Uh, a, uh you also had, like, um, uh, other groups concurrent like, um, sisters for Home of Equality. Which is she Uh, and even there was one, campaign for homosexual equality, which was before the group of the same name in 86. Uh, so that's, um, anyway, uh, but there was also, uh, there were also groups that preceded them. So particularly the Dorian Society. Um, which originally wasn't necessarily that political is my impression that it was more of a sort of a social [00:10:30] and a support group. Uh, and it originally only included men. Um, but it sort of developed, um, particularly with the political struggles that were happening and it developed into the homosexual law Reform society eventually. Um um, evening. Um, there were where deal could be done to the women to [00:11:00] to Yeah, it developed as the as the women's liberation movement. The gay liberation movement developed it. It changed. The Dorian Society did change. Um, yeah. Um, So, uh, yeah. So you saw some law reform bills proposed during this period. So in 1974 was the young young bill, um, and also in 1979. But they had, uh, different ages of consent for same sex couples. And one of them also, uh, had an amendment. The [00:11:30] Wall amendment, which said, um, that homosexuality was legal, but it was illegal to promote it. So, um, it ended up being in 1979 that the National Gay Rights Coalition, which is kind of where obviously all these various groups met. Um uh, they actually lobbied MP S to oppose the bill. Um, and they used the slogan, uh, we're not prepared to accept anything less than full equality. Uh, so, basically, if they hadn't done that, um, I think the age of consent was 20 in that bill. We now have a different age of consent for same sex couples. [00:12:00] Unless they've been, you know, further reform. But yeah. Um, so, yeah, um, so that's, uh, well moved very briefly through the New Zealand stuff. Because, like I said, I thought it would be good to have some discussion with people who actually experienced it, um, in this country. But, uh, I thought I just run through some thoughts on the the international movement. Um, so one of the one of the points, uh, I think is good to bring out, uh, is that stonewall was an unpermitted [00:12:30] action. Uh, it wasn't like something where they, um, talked to police and agreed that this is what they were going to do. Um, and sure. I mean, things have gotten better in some ways, but, uh, but actually, what made Stonewall? What it was is that, uh, the dispossessed, the the, you know, as Sylvia Rivera puts it, The the homeless gay youth, uh, with the advance guard. Uh, but they are not the people who have benefited the most from these victories. And, uh, So Sylvia Rivera, for example, was Latino trans woman. I mean, Latino [00:13:00] Trans women in the US still have a pretty shit situation. Like, um, uh, you know, if compared and have haven't had the same improvements that, um, you know, for example, middle class white gay people have, um so, yeah, that actually a lot of those basic contradictions the policing of queer communities and particularly queer communities of colour Uh, the poverty faced by a lot of the queer community. These things, uh, are all still realities. And the the these are This is the reason that that this was such a militant struggle. Um, [00:13:30] but I mean, another thing we have to draw out of that is is I mean, the gay liberation front groups at that time. They, um they were isolated. Um, and even even as there was this bigger movement happening, they weren't connected to, like, the workers movement, all that kind of thing. Um and so that kind of it did mean that reform strategies, uh, were the that had much more of a basis. Um, so I think what that means is we can't just have the right ideas. So those [00:14:00] of us who have a more radical analysis, uh, we need to be aware of the need to build strong coalitions and be aware of, like, a long term struggle. Um, it's not just about like having the correct view of of what needs to change in society. It's about, like, doing long term work. So I think that's the question for us. Is, um how do we build, like, strong movements where people have a right to, um to put forward, um, more, more militant politics. Um, but, uh, but which have kind of [00:14:30] a unity to them. So, like, um, the Angela Davis quote, um, I often refer back to as, um uh how do we, um, how do we be together in a unity that is not simplistic and oppressive. Uh, how do we be together in a unity that is complex and emancipatory? So that's the question. I suppose I'll leave everyone with, please. Cool. Sure. Yes, yes, Cool, right? Should we do speaking round? [00:15:00] Thanks for that. It's really, really good to get that slice of a particular time and place because and and and with Stone, one of the other ones. One of the key differences to to lots of the early ones is it could be it could be pictures shared around the world. Because if you if you look back at things like the trial in England, um, some of the the, um Carpenter is as a person I love to who wrote pamphlets on homosexual [00:15:30] love who campaigned on environmental issues, who were, who funded anarchists and defences and in court when they got infiltrated by the police and sentenced. And he did that in the 18 nineties. Um and I mean, he's a great sort of, you know, one of the founders of the society and stuff, But all of that gets lost unless it's actually put into popular culture these days. And, you know, people see the images on television. So I think, you know, if we're talking about campaigns, [00:16:00] the marriage equality one is working really well because there are people getting out in the street. There are photos appearing in the paper. There's, you know, it's like it's a shared consciousness about the the area. So, you know, we could look back to the past about, you know, really great ways of of, um, raising awareness, like Oscar Wilde was a martyr to, um, you know, laws that were totally, you know, saying somebody has to go to jail because they have sex with somebody of the same gender is totally ridiculous. But because [00:16:30] of them doing that and lots of people have a sympathy, violence isn't good enough. That was part of the legal, um, way, you know, sort of way forward that people keep saying, Oh, that wasn't right. We need to change it. And there have been academics and other lawyers in New Zealand before those gay liberation activists. But they were out there in public the same way of actually getting people to know about the issues. So I think the the whole visibility side of it is just so important. [00:17:00] Anyone else have any further discussion? Yeah. I mean, just some random thoughts, Really? What about New York? I was in New York in in 1971. Um, I was OK at the time in the conscious sense. Um, but I had friends who were and they were [00:17:30] and who were politically involved. And I also knew quite a lot of random people. All sorts of books, like that job. And one of the interesting things was that huge layers of the population self described as revolutionary at that stage, all of all, blacks thought of themselves as [00:18:00] revolutionary. Now, what that meant was unclear. But it certainly meant at least huge alienation from the official kind of, uh and that is one part of the context. Um, and all around the world, as I said, there were the there. There were these actual revolutionary movements and street battles. And, um, we had the uprising in Czechoslovakia in 1968. [00:18:30] You had the in 1968 and you had huge demonstrations against the Vietnam War. So there battle against authority was very much in the air, and particularly in in my my in in New York city. And it's true that the official workers movement tried to moderate this and keep out of it as much as possible. But there were all sorts of leftist revolutionary organisations [00:19:00] coming from a working class tradition who were involved in that, and most of them were openly anti gay. Um, but because they want to be respectable and so on. But there were always a minority Who, who who who, who were trying to find some sort of way of incorporating, um, ideas of gay liberation or real liberation [00:19:30] into a Marxist or revolutionary framework. A A. And, uh So you you saw them digging back? Because at the time, the official left was very misogynist, very anti women, Um, and and and And, um, women women did the dishes and made the two, at at at at in in trade union meeting, meeting. It was really, really, really [00:20:00] backward. You might seem backward, Um, and some of these organisations start to look into into traditions of women's liberation. Uh, that had, you know, been established in the 18 nineties and before so, and some of them tried to apply this in a in A in a Marxist way. Uh, and and there was some some really interesting work that began to be done there, which [00:20:30] has never got very far, actually. But I think it's important stuff to look at, uh, and developing the way forward. New Zealand stuff we can talk about. Some people are interested. You think so? Um, let's just on your point about coalitions and also your point about visibility. Um, even if you may have seen a film or a documentary called Like The Times of Documentary behind the film. And [00:21:00] there, um, they interviewed one guy who was a union organiser and he said, Now, you know, at the time of of, you know, first turning up he was rapidly anti gay and had all that horror preconception and all the other perceptions that people had at the time, Um, right up until organised to take all beer out of all of the day clubs in New York in San Francisco. Sorry, um, because [00:21:30] the union was having an issue. The court and the only group that was able to actually really pushed what the union was doing was the gay groups and the gay clubs and the gay bars. Um and suddenly you have this massive, powerful union going. Holy crap. We need to be helping them. They're helping us. Um, and we can [00:22:00] talk about coalition that actually leads to the liberation of everybody. I. I thought that was quite a good example of 50 years ago. Now, it was great in the movie when they showed, um, someone from the Teamsters union, you know, big, blue collar, sort of guys going shaking, sort of, um, Harvey Milk's hand endorsing him and his run on the council. And, you know, it was like, Gradually, Harvey milk has been enter the team, so building coalitions each time [00:22:30] he was raped. So it sounded small, but it But eventually he got elected because he just got so many different supporters. And he wasn't just speaking for for the he was speaking for lots of groups within the community. Absolutely. Um, I just had a brief, um, thing And just about the the unions that, um uh there's another interesting one is the builders Labourers Federation, and, uh, and I think it was mainly in Melbourne. Um, sorry. [00:23:00] Uh, mainly Sydney in Australia, anyway, and yeah, they, um you know that this was again in the seventies and like there was, I think there was quite a communist involvement in the union. And they, um yeah, they had quite a link with, um, with some of the sort of gay pride groups or that kind of thing. And at the time, you know, they they conducted green bands which mean they wouldn't construct where, um where the community didn't want constructions. But yeah, they also went on fried marches and all this kind of thing. And it's quite it's quite interesting to look back at some of that stuff. Um, but yeah, I couldn't find [00:23:30] anything particular on that and the particular slice of history I was looking on looking at. But yeah, in New Zealand small, you'll get people wearing different hats and turning up in different places so that it, like, just on marriage equality, I've got three submissions and two of which you've been heard in a number of that because we wear different hats and it's the same with people in the union movement and and people and and, um, different, um, and communities and stuff. [00:24:00] So you might find one person that coalition building, but they may not be the one fronting up because it might get too targeted. Hm. Well, the reality is the union movement has liberalised some stand for it hasn't radicalised. Some stand by any means. But, um, do you want to talk a bit about New Zealand? New Zealand? The Dorian Society was purely when it was set up purely a social [00:24:30] drinking club, really for gay guys. And it never became more than that as a whole. On the other hand, it was an umbrella under which all sorts of other things were allowed to happen. And it's not accidental that to happen. No, the the the the the the the average guy going there for a drink and get laid. We really pleased that someone else [00:25:00] was worrying about the politics. And there's always been a minority that's been designated as the people who should do the politics and get things right for us so that we can drink more freely and get paid more. Really. Um and, um so so that that they they they one of the things about the this this kind of thing is that it raises a lot of money because it's sold alcohol and [00:25:30] um they were very happy to give money to and set up committees for various queer purposes. And so a homosexual law reform committee of the Dorian Society was set up and, uh, that that, uh, became the homos homosexual war for society. And they developed an incredibly respectable kind of, uh, sort of framework of our work. [00:26:00] And it it it had it had various bishops as its patron, patrons and professors of sociology as its president. And things like that, uh, and very much a gradualist. Um, the wolf programme was, uh, to only to legalise homosexual relationships between men over the [00:26:30] age of 21 in private. That was it alum of its programme. Uh, and, uh, they were to do this by careful education of opinion leaders and not cause too much trouble in society and that that was what homosexual law reform or queer politics was all about for quite some time. But of course, with this other stuff [00:27:00] going on overseas, uh, the gay liberation and so on, starting doing things that here it developed a rebellion in its ranks and actually the rebellion in the ranks of the of the homosexual law reform Society, which created these spinoffs, uh, in New Zealand of Gay Liberation and all sorts of other organisations. And then occasionally there was a completely different evolution of lesbian activity. [00:27:30] And that came mostly through women's liberation and, uh, a a AAA di divisions within women's liberation and and, uh, a taking women's liberation in in a in a direction of, uh, to be a fully woman identified woman, uh, was the the best strategy for a and and then then you got some some meeting and discussion between the the gay guys [00:28:00] and and the lesbians and and occasionally they do. But actually it wasn't until 1980 4 85 that you got much connection between the women's struggles and the struggles. At that stage. It was sort of going in parallel, so you had, like in 1975. It was a big women's conference. That was mainly there were a large [00:28:30] number of straight feminists who didn't want to have anything to do with the radical lesbians in their midst. So some of the the gatherings around that time got a bit fiery and there were a few walk outs and there was various things. So one of the things that was happening before, after or ongoing, that there was lots of women's groups of different, especially lesbian groups, of different. So there was Club 41 and 41 William Street, which is another social, you know, go to drink, play for pick up somebody. And some [00:29:00] of the women who went there were married and their husbands didn't know. And there were sort of lots of other little groups, some putting out news letters and sort of splitter ones. And some of those groups are the ones who came together, as Paul was saying, sort of to do a bit of the political. It was that again, that thing of these women wanting to meet other women, Some of them were writing feminist sort of books. There was a little liberation bookshop in street, that sort of thing. A lot of this information there that was [00:29:30] in late seventies eighties, something like that. But all around the country, when you get sort of get a group of of women, a lot of them have come through the feminist circles. But they have not felt comfortable there and had gone off the script, and that tended to be lesbians, and they've had a fairly negative view about bisexual women who are still in the mix but not openly identifying, because it tends to be, um, downplayed. In fact, Club 41 used to have a rule that only lesbian identified lesbians were Amit in. And if you were known to be bisexual, [00:30:00] then no, you were, um, over time, that changed. But it's it's it's, um, still one of these things that parallel struggles when people coming together, especially when some of the law reform would have, um, criminalised, um, women, lesbian activities. And that's sort of at that point, it was like, Oh, we got to do something about it. I mean, a lot of other women have been doing it from right spaces, but the the actual threat was no movement. Yeah, yeah, I think it was the 84 bill, which [00:30:30] would have criminalised like it would have set an age of consent for women or something, so it would have criminalised, um, and say that this context I'm talking about tend to be women, and a lot of women, especially the one who spoke about this, didn't feel respected within those circles because they'd also been government, um, groups like public health nurses. And they set up Maori ones who were telling Maori women how to parent their Children and and things that were, like, really heavy [00:31:00] handed. So there was quite a bit of I don't know where you're coming from. I don't trust you. We want to keep to our own people, um, things going on. But like, one of the reasons, Yeah, I think that, uh, thinking about the the whole coalition and some of those in relation to I think finding the tensions between the Christians and governments [00:31:30] won't so much about, um um, fighting to the and not five months. But it only said three months. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, I yeah, I just. And Angela Davis is another one, I think is really useful in that respect, But yeah, um, I [00:32:00] think history of liberation have an awful lot of power over playing out simply because we live in a world where power over playing out. So some of the stuff that you know, the fact that we're talking about a gay liberation front, which was a word for me. It's an obvious one, but I think if you look at the way that plays out around issues with women, as Kate was saying for a very, very long time by women who has been set up for the first time in the late eighties, [00:32:30] women we're not It was not OK in other places. Um, predominantly a white movement. Almost always. I don't think I've ever been in a queer, um, environment in New Zealand. Predominantly white. Um, transition has not even been part of the conversation for an awfully, awfully long time. So I guess I'm kind of interested in how we change that. How we make sure that all of the things that we are talking about is clear. We [00:33:00] are about challenging all of those, all those all the time challenging one another, the most money to make. But I think there is specific things around the demands that we are seeking as well. They are really more. Whose demands are they? Who are they for? Yeah, I think in terms of activism. Now, um, there really needs to be a multi layered approach to to the whole to the whole thing. A [00:33:30] strategic goal. Uh, and and then the lining all of those agencies, if you like to that strategic goal, Um, there's an educative level of of, um, if you like appeasement. I think that needs to be brought into any any form of activism now, because the thing I I've noticed in my experience is, um, as soon as you present [00:34:00] a change to the norm, there's the immediate reaction is, is a centre being threatened? And as soon as you are perceived as posing a threat, there's a polarisation that goes with that and people start to become entrenched and defensive in in their views. Um, I think III I think, having a soft, short approach where it softens attitudes at the same time as having perhaps had the right on the right hand the city camera, which is ready [00:34:30] to smash into any of those really hard entrenched views that are blatantly wrong and false. Um, And then through that educative process, I think you you can more readily embrace those wider issues and that, you know, when we're talking, for example, about Pacifica and and and, um, um representation in the Pacific region, it should to my mind, I anyway, be easy [00:35:00] to embrace women's rights into into that same sort of umbrella and forge an alliance in that area where, where there are obvious overlaps in the way in which in which those those can, um, can work together. And as as we've alluded to, you know, difference of strength and and if we can hold on to that kind of philosophy and bring in all of those different rights, those different issues of of humanity and human [00:35:30] rights Um, I'm not. I'm not entirely certain how to those, but I believe that there's a There's a huge strength that can be achieved in that. And, um and I think that's, um personally, I think that's sort of the goal that I would like to see at the end of This is a joke for that, the humanitarian approach. I'm going to disagree, Um, because my mother says, from age two, I was, um, which I think [00:36:00] it's really great for groups and individuals to sign up to, um, agreed actions and support campaigns. But I don't think we should, as a diverse group, be taking and don't scare the horses. Um, sort of be to, um um pulling our sort of cap down sort of to to to what is the status quo? Because the only way you can actually shift the grounds to what is accepted as so called normal is to actually have that wider diversity [00:36:30] being being shown. If you sort of have that, everybody has to into a winery couple taking a heteronormative lifestyle approach, and that's all it's wanted. And that actually is not doing justice to the full sort of depth of our humanity. Um, and like Humanitarian was well and great. But it's it's also, like, sort of saying, Why do we have to ask for it? And, um, overseas? They found that actually stressing the the the [00:37:00] right to love the the right to be who we are the the whole sort of, you know, those aspects are actually more likely to get, um, um, agreement with people and just that Oh, this is a human right, And this is a civil right, And this is a legalistic, sort of cut and dry, cold sort of thing about appealing to the human and everybody and and and that, um, I don't I present in a very respectable, conforming way, but I don't want society to be fitted into that box [00:37:30] because that's boring, you know? So, yeah, so I, I sort of. And also, if you're trying to actually enforce an agreement that nobody's going to say things that are too challenging or scary, Well, isn't that self censoring? Just as bad as when it's an authority and predicated one on the legislation? So I think I'm just agreeing with you. I don't think I'm disagreeing at at all. And we I'd like to think that perhaps complimentary in terms of this [00:38:00] when I talk about a approach and, like I say, the the the the instance that I've encountered have been where people are confused. And I think that we can, in terms of a approach, remove that confusion that you know it's not. We're not talking about a legal or of our legal communications, Um, but by presenting the fact that we are, we are about being human humans and having having the same sorts of rights, [00:38:30] and that we can bring strength through our difference to to the community without disrupting what they perceive as as as a norm. And by that I, I would imagine Well, in my view, we shift the paradigm to what is normal to something that is more embracing. Um, I mean to say that we don't have a have an extreme view. Yeah, well, I mean, I'm in favour of both, Like I mean, I think education work is really important, and I think we have to disrupt norms in order to, like, get any progress. But, um, [00:39:00] and I speak in favour of rage. I think I mean, well directed rage, obviously, which is quite hard to manage. But I feel sometimes that actually, notably in in much of this campaign, there's sort of been an approach of, you know, But love is love is love, and that's fine, which is on one hand, I agree with this. But there are material power structures here that need redistributing. And we're not going to get those [00:39:30] by kind of, you know, trying to convince people of what the right thing to do is so no balance between that Yes, right. Diversity of tactics is another frame for it. It's quite interesting to acknowledge. I think we need to take a couple of minutes to acknowledge the fact that, um, we actually do have quite a broad range of people, particularly in this campaign. I know, um, in my circle of people that I come in contact with, I can't actually think of anybody that actually wants to get married. [00:40:00] But we know that we that there are we do have people who do want to, and we should have that ability and that right to do so. So we need to just acknowledge that, Yeah, there are. Although we're talking about having different, um, groups of people working together, I think we are actually already achieving that in quite a big way. And I think because New Zealand is so small and willing to be smaller, it just sort of automatically happens. I don't think we need to get too hung up on trying to appeal to everybody because it kind of already happens anyway. It's just the way we work. [00:40:30] It's just the way that things go about around us. So, yeah, we need to acknowledge that as well. Yeah, yeah. So it's a comment about, um, political organising, I think, probably is, in fact, I. I mean, I don't think this sort of universal type coalition approach and the sort of identity based action that they're actually emotionally explosive, and sometimes it's like we talk about within the other. I think there's actually a room of debate, and and it's determining when it's appropriate to have what sort [00:41:00] of real challenge. And so I worry that we're actually setting that up as a bind, a itself so that we sort of discuss when, when? If we kept the options open about the two forms of expression, it's actually a matter of choosing which form of expression is at that time. And right now the manager quality staff has no the time. Perhaps not to say that. But, um, maybe it's the time of coalition approach, while acknowledging that each individual collectively Andre, I has actually got [00:41:30] the main issues. So it's it's for me. It's actually a judgement about how do we determine when it's appropriate to do that kind of collaborative thing? And then how do we decide that? You know, this is this is a particular you know, an issue in documentation, for example, that you might want to pursue as an individual community, but we're still looking for the support we are looking to beside us. So walking along the side as opposed to being yes, but I I'm trying to agree that we've got to have both the the the challenge [00:42:00] and the coalition. But I think and and I agree on on on that these things are compatible. But I don't think we can collapse the tension between those and that. The tension between those being very real in terms of how we organise it's not an accident, that there are two rooms here, AAA and and that is part of the way we are both [00:42:30] together and the public. And that's OK. Yeah, just brief. Um, yeah, I think I was going to say, I think one of the big things with this isn't just that different groups are working together. It's what demands are we putting forward? So, like, um, for example, demands around like youth, trans homelessness, stuff like that that, you know John Key might be less happy to vote for something like that. But it's really important, and it's it's it's affecting a lot of people kind of thing. So yeah, it's it's not just building coalitions. [00:43:00] It's what end we're building coalitions towards, I think. But yeah, I don't know it. I'm not sure that's what we talk about. I don't want us to redefine normal and then squeeze other people up at the margins. So we gay marriage into the normal category, and then we create all sorts of other exceptions at the margins. I loath normal a subscription, and I just want to put that in somewhere that that normal na is really [00:43:30] dangerous because the minute you create a new space, the exclusions are implied. Interesting. Yeah, Well, one thing I found really problematic throughout throughout this campaign is the New Zealander thing. Like, uh, you know, we all have rights as New Zealanders, and it's like So what do people who are not New Zealanders not have rights in our opinion? Like like yeah, so yeah, I agree. But, um, substituting one normal for another, always people who are going to be excluded. [00:44:00] And I think you know the people who are probably the most privileged. You should get to the side who gets into that group. But then you get a time. It always got to be people on the margins. And I think the people in this room at least want want more than that more than if you just scrap like kind of thing. I was thinking of the they want to. There was a radical aspect to it, and I thought it seemed like they shunted them off [00:44:30] to the side because they might prove to be an obstacle to getting the respectable thing that they wanted. And I was thinking, It's easy, you know, once one group has its it gathered in its advance, it abandons those sort of helped along the way and and takes the game at once. And I was just interested in that idea. Yeah, I don't think it's as simple as that either, though, because I think, um, some of that stuff around what a radical lesbian looks like is actually about challenging whether or not sex [00:45:00] was part of the attraction. So whether or not, um, to be a true feminist, you should be in relationship to war and whether you wanted to have sex with them or not. So they're not kind of talking about sexuality. Um, all right, I think we're probably going to have to break soon after we've got the Beyond Marriage Forum, with Bill and Anne talking about the, um, the marriage campaign and and that kind of thing. Uh, and if if there are any particular areas people [00:45:30] think need to be worked up a bit further, there's free space tomorrow to do that. So, um, keep that in mind, so, yeah.
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