I am having some trouble understanding a couple of the questions for the final and was hoping that someone could help me to understand them better. First, question #2 in the short answer section is about the different ways Butch Mystique and Boi Hair image Butch desire; what is butch desire? Also, #3 in the same section is asking to compare Max Wolf Valerio's discussion of his Tranzman identity with those of the butch mystique and boi hair. I don't know if I'm missing something but I just don't understand these questions.

Umbrella Country: Disfunctional relationships

There are so many aspects of this book that are worthy of discussion. One aspect in particular that intrigued me was Estrella's disfunctional relationships with Daddy Groovie, Pipo and Gringo. Halfway through the book, we learn that Estrella was essentially forced into getting together with Groovie, at the hands of Ninang Rola. She ends up getting raped by him, resulting in a pregnancy. When Estrella wants to terminate the pregnancy, Ninang Rola again influences her and has a hand in getting Estrella and Groovie married. When all this surfaces, it confirmed my suspicion that Estrella never really wanted to be with him, nor have kids with him. Later, she even tells Ninang Rola how she tried to love him, but just never could. By the end, of course, we know that she ends up staying behind while Pipo and Gringo go to NuYork to live with their ***hole father. Now, I'm not defending her choice, but in a way, I kind of understand it. For one, perhaps she felt that she could not really be a mother to them, being all screwed up and all (and since she could not be with Daddy Groovie again, figured that the boys would be better off in NuYork with their dad than with her). Towards the end, she was successful at bonding with them (and Pipo and her actually held each other), but ended up not going after all.

Disfunctional relationships really effect entire families. When reading this book, I was reminded of my own Grandma and Grandpa (from my dad's side). Needless to say, their relationship was totally disfunctional and it affected their kids greatly. From what I've been told, my grandpa was a pretty bad dude (he didn't drink, and I don't think he beat up anyone, but from all accounts, nobody liked him. In fact, at his funeral, only one person paid tribute!) Anyway, years after my grandpa died, my grandma revealed that she, like Estrella, never loved him. She married him thinking that she would never get proposed to again, ever. So imagine, getting married to someone you don't love, having kids with them, and perhaps, resenting the kids? I am certainly not encouraging this, just shedding a personal note to illuminate how Estrella might have been thinking.

Umbrella Country

I really wish we had spent more time on this book, there was so much more in the little things about the characters that was really remarkable. I would've said more in the class when we did talk about it, but actually had started crying again thinking about Gringo saying goodbye to Fernando (Boy Spit - I just re-read that passage so got his real name, the only time it is mentioned) so just sat in the back wiping my tears. About the ending, in many way it was both the happiest and saddest ending to a book I've ever read. There was so much hope and chance for a good life for everybody finally. Even Daddy Groovy could get a chance to be a real father to his sons. This book made me think seriously about the things that bring people to USA, and when I meet immigrants sometimes their foreign customs annoy me, and I think "if they want to come here why don't they want to be American?" but stuff like this reminds me that not everyone wants to come here, some people have no choice. Like the kids, but also Daddy Groovy, who had nothing for him in PI either, his only chance for a real life was to come here where we get all the product of the rest of the world for our wealth and have all the space to spread out. Also, almost everything we've read or watched this semester has had the theme of 'memory' or 'identity' from our past heritages, I guess by keeping some part of their past it keeps people sane and grounded in ways that a native-born can't see, being already in the place the memories are from.

Discussion of Her: Ethnic identity, white privelege and political correctness

As we were discussing the book Her: A Novel in class, the topic of ethnic identity came up - a topic in which I am very interested in. I thought it was interesting that the topic of "political correctness" came up - and wanted to respond, first, with a story. I was listening to a morning radio show on my way to school the other day, when the DJS were talking about Mexicans (I can't remember the exact framing of the discussion). A person called in to state that she was from Nicauragua and hates it when people constantly call her a "Mexican". After she hung up, one DJ (who happens to be both male and White) didn't understand why the caller was so frustrated and upset. He said that, if he was travelling and someone mistook him for being Canadian, or British or Australian, he would not care (a subtle example of his white privelege). My point in telling this story is to promote the idea that ethnic identity (or however we choose to identify ourselves) is something we must choose for ourselves, not something that should be defined by others. In the example given, the caller was trying to tell the DJ that she identifies as being Nicauraguan, and when others just assume or press upon her another identity, they are simply being ignorant. In my eyes, addressing someone by their "correct" identity is not a matter of being "politically correct", but a matter of respectablity. If you don't know how someoneone identifies themselves, please ask before impressing upon them an identity. Something to think about.

daughters of the dust

After watching the film, Daugthers of the Dust, I was disappointed that the film was so simplistic on the surface, yet filled with complexity underneath the simplicity. In order to make any sense of the film, it was pivital to thoroughly read the screenplay. I had a hard time understanding the movie in any way until I had gone back and read the screennplay and heard Dr. Esquibel's synopsis and explanation of the characters. I just felt like the film had many critical issues within and would have been better conveyed through a less confusing script with some actual background and detail.

Good reading (DotD) and bad blogging!!!

Looking again at the 'Daughters of the Dust' makes more sense knowing that the character Toady is probably female. The scene of the club they run at first reading sounded like just a party place, and didn't know why none of the people from there would not go to church also; seeing it as a queer space makes the marginalization of the people and the interactions a lot better. I do wonder why there was the constant gender mixing going on, and wonder about the whole scene being based on some real place. What struck me the first time was the focus on memory and the way it was sort of 'taken for granted' and yet an integral part of the people. Also, in a way it was dissapointing to see the stories of Haagar and Yellow Mary because in my mind had created an entire history for them that didn't match what was told!!! In the movie my favorite characters were Haagar and Nana, so to find Haagar later described as "equal parts rage and censure" was actually confusing. Haagar had seemed pretty bitter and unillusioned but not that bad, she actually reminded me of my eldest sister (the one I don't speak with anymore) and reading that has made me look again at that sister to see what I saw mirrored in the character! It was also strange to me to think of how isolated that 'queer community' would be, the people have their own customs and dialect and since they are thought of as 'backwards and ignorant' by the mainlanders, would pretty much be stuck on the island. Must be pretty strange, and wonder how welcome strangers (tourists, etc) would be, compared to how welcome they would be on the mainland? Oh, speaking of memory, the speech Nana gave in the graveyard was great, about the power and strength of having memories to grow from. Guess that is what a lot of the search for 'history' in many stories we've read is about. Also Eula's comments on the difference between Yellow Mary and the so-called respectable women were pretty powerful, along the lines of 'let her that is without sin cast the first stone' but in the context of ex-slaves, saying that none can be considered 'pure' is depressing! It made me wonder also about how people ignoring their past or pretending to be other than they are can easily turn to attacking others for not being as good as they. Anyone who looks at their own history will find a lot of bad stuff, when the issue of slavery in the USA is added, the reality is scary! Oh, a few years ago I read a book written by an ex-slave, and the main bad guy's family name was 'Cheney' so guess some people should be more careful than others to look at the past!

About the bad blogging, this is the third time I reset my password! After each logoff it resets my info, and for some reason keeps sending my password info to a mac.com account that I don't have! Technology is scary!!!

David Eng and the Wedding Banquet.

I think it's important not to be misled into binary thinking. old model=bad, new model=good; the concept of "oppression" is too "old school," identity politics are essentialist and thus may be easily dismissed, blah, blah, blah.

"Transnational capitol" and "third world labor" are much more than "silly old tropes."

In ethnic studies it's important to interrogate issues like oppression, power, citizenship, and male privilege. Yet, they are complex and deserving of more than a knee-jerk reaction

David Eng is drawing from Mark Chiang here, but he's saying that he finds Chiang's argument disturbingly convincing. That on the one hand, it's very easy to embrace the "queer multicultural millenial family" posed at the end of The Wedding Banquet, but that it would be a mistake to see Wai-Tung, Wei-Wei, and Simon as having equal access to choices, to power, et cetera.

The "marriage of convenience" that ends in love is prob'ly one of the top five romantic plots of all time. So the film is working within a [compulsory heterosexual] expectation that Wai-Tung and Wei-Wei will fall in love. That they come to another arrangement, that Wai-Tung and Simon are able to recommit to their relationship, and that they'll be forming a different kind of family is one of the great things about this film.

However, it's important to recognize what goes on on the other side of the "marriage of convenience" in the US nation-state. There are real people, like my friend Y, a lesbian of color who entered a green-card marriage. When she was raped by her legal "husband," she couldn't do anything about it. Yes she was "playing the system" but in that system she was especially vulnerable.

Wei-Wei, we may frankly and happily say, does not get raped by anyone. She initiates sex when she wants it. Additionally, the film goes out of its way to show Wai-Tung and Simon respecting her "right to choose."

Far from being perceived as daring for its time, The Wedding Banquet was widely criticized in the queer communities for being so "mainstream." For one thing, it's a story about gay men, but the only on-screen "sex" is between Wai-Tung and Wei-Wei. Simon and Wai-Tung try to have sex but are frustrated by the appearance of the family patriarch.

In terms of transnational capital: this does end up being relevant to the story. When we first meet Wai-Tung, we see him as financial successful. When his parents (Mama Gao and Baba Gao[the general[]) appear on the scene the father makes it clear that Wai-Tung's money for the building is HIS, money, his investment in his son, implying that there may be economic as well as personal consequences to Wai-Tung coming out.

An important argument that Eng is making has to do with Queer Diaspora. This is a whole field within Queer studies, American studies, and Ethnic studies. What role do queer identities play in decisions to emigrate? How do US immigration's amnesty laws exclude people persecuted on the basis of gender and sexuality?

One of the things about reading the whole article by David Eng is that he maps out the history of Asian American studies, why it developed the way it did, and how much who makes up "Asian America" has changed in the past forty years. He even takes Queer Nation seriously: although he criticizes its reliance on "nation" (which is how most scholars completely dismiss QN), he also recognizes that there were people of color who were extremely active in that organization, that it was neither all-white nor hegemonic, that it was an important site of contestation about queer identities.

All of the films that we're watching are "messy," and it's important to take criticisms such as Eng's seriously, instead of getting seduced into the "finally a happy ending" positioning. I remember arguing with a friend about The Amazing True-Life Adventures of Two Girls in Love and all the criticism about race and class that film. One thing question was raised was "why do lesbian films get held to a higher standard than mainstream films?"

The Wedding Banquet is a lot more complex than the American Express ad showing two white lesbians adopting an Asian baby, but that doesn't mean we should ignore what they have in common.

I didn't mean for this to turn into a lecture: I just think it's important that we not take off our "critical glasses" just because a film is fun or has a happy ending. I'm now going to avoid a long diatribe now about Ugly Betty and stereotypical portrayals of women of color, because I've already gone on longer than I intended to.

Wedding Banquet!!!

Just finished reading the article for this, and was very disturbed by its conclusion! I think it was Amy Richelin who wrote how history can be read from a feminist view in two ways; with women as repressed victims of patriarchy or with women as an active and intelligent constructor/director of their own (sub)culture. This article with its silly old tropes of 'third world labor' transnational capital' and 'subordinated third-world woman' is obviously on the victim reading.

Wei-Wei seems to be pretty actively pursuing her own agenda and taking advantage for her own ends, to paint her as a victim of international patriarchy/capital etc does her a great disservice. Taking the arguement that Wai-Tung wants to control her 'product' as first her landlord and later as her husband: he doesn't want, like, or care about her artworks and takes it only to justify letting her control him by not paying rent because she was in charge and he needed to feel some control. Later she is the one who coerces (with what can almost be considered date-rape) him and controls the outcome of her pregnancy but gives him the choice of 'becoming a man' by taking care of the baby and giving them a place to live. She is an active and powerful director of her own life and interjects herself into his life to get what she wants, and when she realizes that isn't going to happen she adapts and comes up with a new plan for a life she wants, a second choice but one more realistic to what she has come to find out is possible. All that under a traditional culture (both the Taiwan and USA cultures) that is seeking to deny her everything she wants.

Interestingly, the concept of 'space' is used a lot in the movie, and it occured to me later that SR Joshel's article 'The Body Female and The Body Politic: Livy's Lucretia and Verginia' speaks directly on this by saying that in most histories women are used to describe the territory in which men establish their social identity. (as Claude Levi-Strauss sez, "Women are good to think with.") That is, a woman will be 'penetrated' by a man and the outcome is his property and future, in history and myth that takes place in almost all 'founding' stories of people or civilizations, a woman or group of women are procured somehow and by the loss of their virginity the founding fathers acquire new honor and identity and a new city/race/people/nation come into being. In this movie, Wai-Tung penetrates Simon's space (living in his house) and Wei-Wei penetrates Wai-Tung's space (as non-rent paying tenant) and later Simon's space also (at Simon's request in his hopes of getting more control over Wai-Tung). So with that consideration, again Wei-Wei is the dominant and the one in ultimate control, using the patriarchal system to her benefit. So basically, the 'third-world woman' is strong, dominant, and in control of her destiny within the framework of a patriarchal system seeking to deny her all that control. Wei-Wei is the boss, she rocks!!!

Hahaha! I am so opinionated! That's what comes from studying classics and history from feministic teachers.

p.s. I just found the article mentioning the importance of 'reading resistance' and power into feminist history, it is by P.K. Joplin titled 'The Voice of The Shuttle is Ours' and is great to show the history of feminist voice from ancient Greece and Rome to Virginia Woolf! This article doesn't consider race/ethnicity or 'third-world' politics but the message and consideration is still relevant.

Porn?

One topic I didn't really get to was the language of porn in The Law of Remains.

What did you think of the "porn scenes" in the play?

Why are they there?

Notice that they're narrated differently: what's the effect of this?

I mean, if you were watching the play, and there were these explicit sex scenes acted out** it would be different than listening to them described in this way.

**When I gave the example from the other Abdoh play where two guys "simulated tender fucking" "very realistically" I only realized after-the-fact that what that meant was that they were actually fucking. I can be naive that way some times.

Her

I love that you all are talking about Her

One of the things I really like about the book is that it gives a broad spectrum of Black women's sexualities in an earlier Detroit.

A lot of the texts from the 1990s stigmatize bisexual characters for not being 100% gay/lesbian.

Her is really showing a range of black female sexuality, and Charlotte is a character who challenges any sort of "good=lesbian, bad=bisexual/straigth". She's not leaving King at the end of the novel to "become a real lesbian." She's a complicated woman with a complicated life, and she's holding on to all the parts of her.

I love Lizzie and Laphonya, and their complicated histories. And Laphonya all butched up for Girls Night In, singing down and dirty blues.

I love how on Girls Night In, all kindsa women get out and have themselves a good time.

Ricky/Wintergreen with her shadows and her ruined feet.

The irony of Charlotte and Ricky being right across the street from one another.

On the other side, of course, there's Monkey Dee, a bisexual-but-mostly-gay pimp who has a deep hatred for women. I don't really know what to do with him, but let Muhanji paint her whole picture, without it necessarily fitting anything I want it to do.

Reza Abdoh's The Law of Remains

Although our discussion on Friday helped me understand the play a tiny fraction, I am still somewhat lost. I do, however, appreciate Abdoh's endeavor to create a constructive, meaningful and expressive piece of work - regardless if I fully understand it or not. One aspect that intrigues me is his several references to popular culture at the time...giving those who are tuned in to the times a sort of "shorthand" or "secret insight" to what Abdoh is expressing, without actual explanations. Unfortunatly, those who might have been tuned out during this period or those whom are reading it now, those references might be lost (as it was with me), leading to a breakdown of that understanding. Yes, there are people out there disconnected with popular culture.

Her: A Novel

After reading the post on Her: A Novel, I figured I'd start a new section for us to discuss it.
I found the book mildly difficult to read, but I went with the flow of it and in the end, I did end up enjoying the read. Some thoughts:
1) It wasn't until about halfway through that I saw the book's relevence to the class; in other words, it was unclear to me up until then if there were any Queer characters. And it is subtly revealed at that. Charlotte relives the affair she had with Ricky in her mind...and it is only addressed a few more times by the end (the reconciliation between the two, in my understanding, is the central part of the book with them being the main actors in the story, whereas Sunshine/Kali serves as the catalyst). In one sense, this reminds me of the subtlty in My Beautiful Laundrette, where sexuality is not emphasised to the point where it overrides the storyline. And regards to Kali's makeover to "boy", I am not so sure she self-identified as a "boy" and therefore, I am not so sure she should be considered to be Queer (as suggested in the afterword).
2) Just to address the Sunshine/Kali confusion, Kali, in my mind, is an alter-ego or sub personality of the person known to us in the beginning as Sunshine. It is simply a mechanism for self-identification, away from the labels of "wife" or "girl" or "daughter-in-law", etc. Reclaimation of identity.

Butch Mystique!

Wow, great movie! This showed there IS some history out there; not a very complete, ancient, or well-documented history but a history. I really liked the showing of lesbian sexuality as women-women as opposed to the stereotype of penis envy!!! Testosterone Files was great to show that side of sexuality, but this movie and 'Watermelon Woman' together showed better the problems of race and gender and sexuality without adding bio-sex into the mix. Actually, the blend of masculine and feminine was intriguing and seemed more personal and real compared to other movies (like 'Some Reasons for Living' which was sort of bad), and an interesting observation was that what I find attractive made for either a cute girl or goofy-looking guy. Hmm, that can be a problem but might be best saved for a different class. Well I can honestly say I am not a femme, though I am beautiful and witty my underwear doesn't match.

Great, now I find the NEW blog icon

I posted this under the Gwen Araujo blog, but I just wanted to ask if anyone else was a bit confused by the play we are reading? I know about Jeffrey Dahmer, but it's a bit hard to follow as we read in class, despite how interesting and entertaining it was yesterday. Was this a movie as well, because the title sounds familiar, but maybe it was unrelated.

I was also wondering what is going on as far as the reading of "HER". Anyone? Anyone?

Community Award

Every year, the National Association of Chicana and Chicano Studies honors local community activists at each annual convention, to acknowledge the importance of social change to our academic endeavors, and to recommit ourselves to our communities.

At this year's conference in San Jose, California, NACCS gave an award to Sylvia Guerrero and (in memoriam) to her transgender daughter, the late Gwen Araujo.



Since the murder of Gwen Araujo in 2002, Sylvia Guerrero has done tremendous outreach, especially to bay area high schools, about the challenges faced and the rights owing to transgendered teens. Guerrero is being honored for her advocacy and for her work to pass AB 1160, which eliminated the "gay panic" defense
for assault and murder.

During the awards ceremony, Sylvia Guerrero noted that, although she has received many awards, this was the first time she has been acknowledged by a Latina/o organization. She spoke movingly of the need for Latinos, who value tradition and familia, to truly love, accept, and honor all of our children.

Guerrero's brother mentioned that his father had marched with César Chávez and instilled in his children a sense of pride in being Latino. He spoke about the long struggle of Latinos in the US, and the eagerness to work hard if it could make life better for our children. "We struggled for our lives then," he said, "We didn't think she would have to struggle for her life now." He told the audience that his niece Gwen was a proud Latina. And old-school Latinos need to learn to deal with it.

Sylvia Guerrero and her family received two standing ovations.

A new move for our class

OK, I'm moving class discussions out of iLearn and into the Blogosphere.

Why, you may ask?

Is it because you are all so exciting that I want to share you with the world.

Yes, of course.

Also, there's some limitations to working in iLearn. The main one is that everyone is limited in their self-presentation to the name that appears in the registrar records. I tried to get the techfolk to let us be more flexible and they were not that interested, so I figured rather than wringing my hands about it, we should liberate ourselves.

Second is that the forums have been okay for occasional postings, but they're disconnected. I thought a blog format would put all of our conversations together.

Finally, I want your input: should we open this blog to the world (so that anyone can read it) or keep it closed (so that only we can read it). Either way, I'm going to limit comments to our group only.