![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kadrinIt's Pride Month! Yay! So now we have to talk about fascism. Keep talking about fascism. Still. I'm sorry, it would be nice to have a nice Pride Month where everyone is happy, but that's not the Pride Month we've got. If we ever want to see sweet water again, we've got to wade through a whole lot of bitter. The short, TLDR version of this is that post you've seen going around from clairewillett on Twitter saying "for pride month this year can straight people focus less on "love is love" and more on "queer and trans people are in danger"". The long version is now.
Did you know that from 1965 to 1969 a collection of gay rights organisations united under the name ECHO to picket Independence Hall every 4th of July, to remind US society that while they supposedly held these truths RE: life liberty and the pursuit of happiness to be self-evident, that gay people were not allowed these rights? These were called the "Annual Reminders", and I know everything about them now because I saw a Wikipedia page. I will accept that this is not what one might call a scholarly intelligence, but it certainly beats what I knew about ECHO and the Annual Reminders yesterday, which was nothing. But I did know about the Stonewall Riots, and I'd heard the names Marsha Johnson, Sylvia Rivera, and Stormé DeLarverie. The Annual Reminders focused on integration and included a strict dress code - and no hand-holding! - to show that gay people were normal and nonthreatening. The Stonewall Riots featured throwing stuff at cops. I invite you to draw your own conclusions.
Now, that said, that's unfair to ECHO and the Annual Reminders. It's entirely possible that without that consciousness-raising efforts, I would today know the Stonewall Riots as "that time some rabble-rousing sex perverts inflicted horrible violence on society", or not know them at all. I am very much in favour of using every tool in the toolbox. It is entirely probable that the respectable and within-the-lines protests of the Annual Reminders were necessary - in fact, let's say, even if only based on hunches and educated guesses, that they were necessary. But you know what comes after the word 'necessary' whenever I use it. It's 'but not sufficient'.
The 1969 Annual Reminder came after the Stonewall Riots. From what I've seen - again, a Wikipedia page, I am best scholar - one of the founding activists, Craig Rodwell, seems to have started radicalising around this time, and in November of that same year, ECHO pushed to change the event to a demonstration in late June to commemorate the Stonewall Riots. To put things very simply, those became Pride Parades, and that's where we get Pride Month. It's more complicated than that, but that's a good basis.
Now, at the time, in several states, "sex offenders" could be committed to psychiatric institutions for life. Because, you know, sex offenders. Sex criminals! That's a scary term! Of course, at the time, "sex crimes" included "consensual adult homosexual sex in private". And you can see why that would create a climate where gay people had to fight back, right? Nothing to lose, pushed to the wall, all that kind of thing. Throwing some bricks in that culture isn't just excusable, it's heroic.
In Florida, laws are being pushed to make dressing as other than your assigned gender a crime, and they're just about there when it comes to doing so in an area where children are or might be. (I'd like to get more specific, but there's a lot of misinformation about this issue, and considering how much psychic damage you take researching it, I won't be going deeper until and unless someone at least pays me.) And you know what kind of crimes those would be? They'd be sex crimes! For sex criminals! And we never really got away from "well, there's nothing too harsh for sex criminals"! For assault of children, I'm inclined to agree. But that's exactly the emotions they're interested in using. Getting the understandable and even laudable "people who assault children should be punished" urge and turning that towards the "trans people existing in public" condition. They're not the same, no matter what Ron DeSantis and his army of troglodytes believe, or want you to believe.
We're not there yet. But we're closer than most people think, and far, far closer than we should be.
In that culture, it might be a good idea to keep an eye on the nearest bricks.
Now, "LGBTQ+ people are in danger and being actively attacked" should be enough for anyone to act. But in case it isn't, let's look at what this global upswelling comes with, where it's popular. Big upswellings in Russia. Hungary. The US. And in those cases, it's coming with restricting books on the say-so of a tiny fraction of the population, dehumanising the opposition, trying to reverse any election that goes against them and delegitimise and disempower any electorate that might participate in those elections, incitement and stochastic terrorism, and in the worst cases invading Ukraine. (Let's not forget Ukraine.) This doesn't make fascism on its own, but it's like a Wheel of Fortune puzzle showing "Political Ideology" - F--C--M. Maybe there's a word you haven't heard of, but I don't think anyone would call you crazy for deciding you'd like to solve the puzzle.
They are coming for LGBTQ+ people in general and trans people in particular because they think those people lack support.
They are coming for those people because they think they will be an easy victory.
They will absolutely not stop there.
We need to support trans people because they are under constant, full court attack everywhere in the Western world, and that should be enough. (No, a few rainbowwashed Pride displays do not mitigate that, especially when, as so many firms are showing, they'll shrink away from these pallid expressions of support at the merest pushback.) But in case that's not enough, everyone should be able to agree on whether we should grant a global fascist movement a win. I think we shouldn't grant a global fascist movement a win. I think all my friends agree.
It may not be brick-throwing time, but it is long past neutrality time. Silent support isn't enough, not in the face of what we're seeing now. I don't know what we need to do in general - I'm neither trans nor a political strategist - but we definitely need to call this out when we see it, and make it clear to the people who are supporting it, no, not now, hopefully not ever. We will not let you make your authoritarian dreams an authoritarian reality. We could probably go for "no pasaran", it's got a good history and you can dance to it. But here's a last minute take, one that I'm going to ask everyone to follow: they're going to make you think that trans people in specific and LGBTQ+ people in general are monstrous criminals who want to hurt others. They're going to do every little Ship of Theseus trick of rhetorical redirection to make you think that. I ask that you shut them down before they start. "No" is good. "Shame on you" is better.
Did you know that from 1965 to 1969 a collection of gay rights organisations united under the name ECHO to picket Independence Hall every 4th of July, to remind US society that while they supposedly held these truths RE: life liberty and the pursuit of happiness to be self-evident, that gay people were not allowed these rights? These were called the "Annual Reminders", and I know everything about them now because I saw a Wikipedia page. I will accept that this is not what one might call a scholarly intelligence, but it certainly beats what I knew about ECHO and the Annual Reminders yesterday, which was nothing. But I did know about the Stonewall Riots, and I'd heard the names Marsha Johnson, Sylvia Rivera, and Stormé DeLarverie. The Annual Reminders focused on integration and included a strict dress code - and no hand-holding! - to show that gay people were normal and nonthreatening. The Stonewall Riots featured throwing stuff at cops. I invite you to draw your own conclusions.
Now, that said, that's unfair to ECHO and the Annual Reminders. It's entirely possible that without that consciousness-raising efforts, I would today know the Stonewall Riots as "that time some rabble-rousing sex perverts inflicted horrible violence on society", or not know them at all. I am very much in favour of using every tool in the toolbox. It is entirely probable that the respectable and within-the-lines protests of the Annual Reminders were necessary - in fact, let's say, even if only based on hunches and educated guesses, that they were necessary. But you know what comes after the word 'necessary' whenever I use it. It's 'but not sufficient'.
The 1969 Annual Reminder came after the Stonewall Riots. From what I've seen - again, a Wikipedia page, I am best scholar - one of the founding activists, Craig Rodwell, seems to have started radicalising around this time, and in November of that same year, ECHO pushed to change the event to a demonstration in late June to commemorate the Stonewall Riots. To put things very simply, those became Pride Parades, and that's where we get Pride Month. It's more complicated than that, but that's a good basis.
Now, at the time, in several states, "sex offenders" could be committed to psychiatric institutions for life. Because, you know, sex offenders. Sex criminals! That's a scary term! Of course, at the time, "sex crimes" included "consensual adult homosexual sex in private". And you can see why that would create a climate where gay people had to fight back, right? Nothing to lose, pushed to the wall, all that kind of thing. Throwing some bricks in that culture isn't just excusable, it's heroic.
In Florida, laws are being pushed to make dressing as other than your assigned gender a crime, and they're just about there when it comes to doing so in an area where children are or might be. (I'd like to get more specific, but there's a lot of misinformation about this issue, and considering how much psychic damage you take researching it, I won't be going deeper until and unless someone at least pays me.) And you know what kind of crimes those would be? They'd be sex crimes! For sex criminals! And we never really got away from "well, there's nothing too harsh for sex criminals"! For assault of children, I'm inclined to agree. But that's exactly the emotions they're interested in using. Getting the understandable and even laudable "people who assault children should be punished" urge and turning that towards the "trans people existing in public" condition. They're not the same, no matter what Ron DeSantis and his army of troglodytes believe, or want you to believe.
We're not there yet. But we're closer than most people think, and far, far closer than we should be.
In that culture, it might be a good idea to keep an eye on the nearest bricks.
Now, "LGBTQ+ people are in danger and being actively attacked" should be enough for anyone to act. But in case it isn't, let's look at what this global upswelling comes with, where it's popular. Big upswellings in Russia. Hungary. The US. And in those cases, it's coming with restricting books on the say-so of a tiny fraction of the population, dehumanising the opposition, trying to reverse any election that goes against them and delegitimise and disempower any electorate that might participate in those elections, incitement and stochastic terrorism, and in the worst cases invading Ukraine. (Let's not forget Ukraine.) This doesn't make fascism on its own, but it's like a Wheel of Fortune puzzle showing "Political Ideology" - F--C--M. Maybe there's a word you haven't heard of, but I don't think anyone would call you crazy for deciding you'd like to solve the puzzle.
They are coming for LGBTQ+ people in general and trans people in particular because they think those people lack support.
They are coming for those people because they think they will be an easy victory.
They will absolutely not stop there.
We need to support trans people because they are under constant, full court attack everywhere in the Western world, and that should be enough. (No, a few rainbowwashed Pride displays do not mitigate that, especially when, as so many firms are showing, they'll shrink away from these pallid expressions of support at the merest pushback.) But in case that's not enough, everyone should be able to agree on whether we should grant a global fascist movement a win. I think we shouldn't grant a global fascist movement a win. I think all my friends agree.
It may not be brick-throwing time, but it is long past neutrality time. Silent support isn't enough, not in the face of what we're seeing now. I don't know what we need to do in general - I'm neither trans nor a political strategist - but we definitely need to call this out when we see it, and make it clear to the people who are supporting it, no, not now, hopefully not ever. We will not let you make your authoritarian dreams an authoritarian reality. We could probably go for "no pasaran", it's got a good history and you can dance to it. But here's a last minute take, one that I'm going to ask everyone to follow: they're going to make you think that trans people in specific and LGBTQ+ people in general are monstrous criminals who want to hurt others. They're going to do every little Ship of Theseus trick of rhetorical redirection to make you think that. I ask that you shut them down before they start. "No" is good. "Shame on you" is better.
