Comments on: Voices of Protest

By: Voices of Protest « The Blog and the Bullet

Voices of Protest « The Blog and the Bullet — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 00:10:13 +0000

[...] by Jack Stephens on June 3rd, 2007 Annie, of the blog Black Looks, writes about a new book: Voices of Protest: Social Movements in Post-apartheid South Africa is a collection of essays on [...]

By: Sokari

Sokari — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 22:22:25 +0000

Annie@ just one point – you mention “poor lesbians” and “black lesbians” – In SA poor lesbians are black lesbians though not all black lesbians are poor! Follow up thoughts to come sometime one day

By: Sokari

Sokari — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 21:50:09 +0000

My own experience of the LGBTI “community” in South Africa is that it is not singular. Race and to a lesser extent class mean there are multiple communities and in terms of race often with very little meeting point. Nonetheless I do believe that the LGBTIs in Africa (the majority of whom are Black) are singular in their purpose and unity and that includes South Africa. This may appear contradictory but such is the complexity of the intersection of race, class and sexuality in an environment where the latter group face extreme hostility even where they have constitutional rights.

PS Yes I do think we can speak of and understand the African LGBTI movement as a “singular” social movement!

By: Eshuneutics

Eshuneutics — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 22:47:07 +0000

It is interesting that Steve feels that the word “community” is often used inappropriately, “when there is no community to speak of.” Yet, his own blog views itself as a community and requests that I become part of that. How? In what sense? I think, personally, that “community” still does mean something; though I also agree with Steve that people bastardize words and weaken their meaning. The gay poet Robert Duncan was quite clear when he used “community”: it is about a national commune, a mass speaking together. And yes, he argued also that sexuality was not enough to weave the warp and woof of a community. A community is made from much more complex defintions. Of interest also is the work that modern geographers have done to link community/space to community/social and psychic identities;especially when studying gender, racial and sexual fields. Community isn’t a catch all term. Interesting post and question.

By: cherynne

cherynne — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 15:26:57 +0000

Well in spain or at least in Granada the I has not yet been added to LGBT yet (I´m sure it will be soon)but as a group who have achieved a great deal in a few years(since the death of Franco in 1975) in terms of changing laws and gaining equal rights the fact is that LGBTs are still a sexual minority who are discriminated against as individuals in many walks of life, and that in itself is enough incentive for us to come together as a community to challenge the discrimination and misinformation that still prevails in the mainstream society despite all the legal advances. the existence of a community is also vital for young people struggling with their sexuality in a basically still homophobic society and world.

By: Annie

Annie — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:28:57 +0000

Steve, I agree. I think a community, like a nation, is a very constructed concept, such that people must imagine themselves to be a part of that group for it to be coherent. But you have to admit that there is more likely to be an LGBTI “community” than a left-handed one. There must be incentive for people to imagine themselves as part of a “community.” What then makes some of these incentives more potent driving forces than others? Is it possible to rank race, class, gender, sexuality as impetuses for “community” formation? I realize of course that the socio-political setting will be a large contributing factor. And should we be worried when cross-cutting cleavages make one form of identification insufficient as the basis for forming a “community?”

By: Steve Hayes

Steve Hayes — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:46:08 +0000

I think people often speak of “communities” when there is no community to speak of.

In South Africa there is a Greek community and a Serbian community, but I think talk of a “black” community or a “white” community pushes the meaning of “community” too far. It takes one characteristic of people and seeks to make that the main characteristic of a person’s identity. Most gay people that i know belong to lots of communities that don’t overlap, and they have less in common with other gay people than they do with people who are not gay.

Can one speak of “the left-handed community”? Just because people share a common characteristic doesn’t make them a commonity, unless the common characteristic is perceived by them as the (or at least a) central feature of their identity.

Does “community” mean anthing at all these days, or it is just a feel-good word that we like to tack on to things to make them sound better. As one bank talked about “lifestyle banking” so Cell C advertises “community chat” (whatever that means).