Stephen Kerry
These recommendations are the result of a study conducted as part of my studies at the University of Newcastle (SOCA 310: Postmodernity and New Social Movements. Lecturer Stephen Tomsen). It is by acknowledging these recommendations that a solution may be found to the problem of `in-fighting' within the Queer Collaborations Conferences witnessed by me over the past six years.
What follows is a summary of my research into the way that feminism and gay liberation have not been successful in achieving their goals of freedom from oppression. I see this as a trend that Queer Collaborations has unfortunately followed.
By tabling these findings it is hoped that the Queer Collaborations 2001 Organising Collective will remain mindful of the history behind, and the destructive potential that such infighting may have on the future of Queer Collaborations. I hope that this work can be utilised in the organisation of Queer Collaborations in Newcastle in 2001.
Copies of the full study can be obtained on request, please feel free to forward any concerns to me.
Study Summary
Three decades of social-identity movements have not produced the social emancipation from a hegemonic, dominant and inhibitive male or heterosexist culture. Feminism and gay liberation have not successfully achieved their goals for western individuals of freedom from oppression.
Over the past three decades feminism and gay liberation have established their own hegemonic, dominant and inhibitive cultures that prevent not only the movement toward social emancipation but prevents the inclusion of many individuals for whom these movements are suppose to represent. The exclusionary agendas of feminism and gay liberation have isolated many individuals from accessing a `voice' to express their own lived experiences as women and queers.
Queer Collaborations as an Australian social identity movement has inherited the exclusionary characteristics of social identity movements, such as feminism and gay liberation. Queer Collaborations is not a unified movement. Queer Collaborations reflects the exclusionist agendas of feminism and gay liberation, and in turn isolates many individuals from accessing a `voice' within the conference.
Queer Collaborations must acknowledge the limitations it places on its delegates, especially in regards to expression of prejudiced opinions about other queers' differences, and censorship of controversial issues, such as paedophilia, drag queens and Federal Government Party politics.
Resolutions passed at Queer Collaborations 2000, and personal narratives post-Queer Collaborations 2000 indicate that many delegates are dissatisfied with the internal machinations of the conference, and express their concern over the perceived `in-fighting' perpetuated in the conference, and hence its potential to shift the focus of the conference away from achieving its goal (and the goal of all social identity movements) of freedom from oppression.
Queer Collaborations 2001 Organising Collective can channel these narratives into a positive reflection of the real experiences of queers, and focus the conference's goal of freedom form oppression by taking seriously the concerns herein presented and expressing these views via a `practical' investment of `real' queer issues. Including a perspective that acknowledges and respects the difference inherent to queers within Queer Collaborations. By embracing an agenda that does not tolerate prejudice, censorship or infighting the Queer Collaborations 2001 Organising Collective may be able to shift the attention away from queers attacking queers to addressing the oppression faced by all queers in a heterosexist society. It is only in such an environment can an open forum be established that encourages debate and discussion, which will thus embrace the difference inherent to Queer Collaborations. When such a forum exists, and when individuals stop infighting and policing others' legitimate claim to social identities then we can collectively focus on the common oppression faced by all.
Recommendations
The recommendations of this study suggest that a practical application for the issues summarised above be found through:
- Recommendation 1.
- Acknowledging, accepting and practicing tolerance of difference of individuals.
- Recommendation 2.
- The practical prohibition of silence (censorship) of issues.
- Recommendation 3.
- The practical application of removing the policing of individuals' identification as however they wish within social-identity movements.
- Recommendation 4.
- A practical application to allow individuals an expression of their own lived experiences.
- Recommendation 5.
- A practical application to allow individuals addressing and expressing the common oppression in their own ways and voices.