Privilege

A few weeks ago I wrote another post about privilege (in Bulgarian) which focused on the "privilege pyramid" in this world - men>women, white>black, hetero>homo, cis>trans. I sort of concluded that even though I'm gay, I'm still a white cis male and as such I'm more privileged than a whole lot of people in the world.

But that was a simplistic who's more privileged than who. A few nights ago, during a short chat with a Facebook friend, it hit me how society treats women, even if they are white, cis and straight. In this particular case, my friend is in her late 30's and lives in Bulgaria, but I know that these attitudes are pervasive in the whole world, to a lesser or larger degree. Yes, I'm sure even in Sweden women have to endure certain patriarchal rants from their parents.. 

So here are some of the things my friend said: 
- "I've heard so many times, even from other women, how it's better to have a boy than a girl".. I've heard this too.. In rural patriarchal Bulgaria boys are supposedly stronger and can do more and heavier work on the field (of corn, wheat, sunflower, potatoes, herding, etc) than girls and, when they grow up, boys stay in the family home and bring their wives and everyone helps with the field work. Girls grow up, get married and move in with their husbands and their families and help on someone else's field. What a waste of time, money and food it is to have a girl, when 20 years later she won't help you in the field anymore. Besides, "you're always worried about girls" - that they'll get raped or knocked up and bring shame to the whole family because who will want to marry a woman with a bastard child? But how does a girl grow up hearing that her parents and everyone else prefers having a boy? 
- "I've had enough of being told that no man will marry me if I can't cook". Yes, a terrible quality in a woman - to not be able to cook (or rather, not be able to cook like her mother and even more so - like the future husband's mother!). As a comparison - I started "experimenting" with cooking when I was around 16 and I was often told that any woman would be lucky to have me for a husband because I like cooking. So a man doesn't *have to* be able to cook but if he does - he's a most eligible bachelor. On the other hand, if a woman doesn't like cooking, no one will take her and what kind of life is that? 
- "I've even heard that it's fine if a man beats his wife when she 'makes mistakes' - to teach her". Yes, I've heard this one too. The important thing for a woman is not to have a happy life but to get married.. at any cost.. to anyone.. do what her husband tells her.. and endure it no matter what.. And if necessary, she can go and cry on her mother's shoulder.. 

Of course I've had my share of gender stereotypes too. I was a shy, quiet, and fragile child, who hated getting his hands dirty with field work, hated the smell of sheep, cows or pigs, couldn't raise his voice to anyone or hurt a fly. Instead, I preferred to play quietly with dolls, to help the women in the kitchen, to sing and dance, study my lessons, chat with friends on the telephone and read books. I often heard "what kind of a man will you grow up to be?!?" (suggesting that apparently - the wrong kind) or "you're so lazy and good-for-nothing" but in a way this also came with a silver lining - there would be endless intellectual possibilities before me, everyone would envy my curly hair and long eyelashes and any woman would be lucky to have me - so sweet, kind, smart and loves cooking. When I grow old I'll just look mature, when I get a beer belly it will be sexy, when I go bald it will be a sign of manhood, if I get violent - it will be because a man knows what he wants... 

And what can a girl "do right"? If she's pretty or sweet - you'll be worried that she'll get raped, if she's not - that she won't get married; if she's smart and ambitious and "feisty" - that men will be intimidated and... she won't get married... In a patriarchal society the girl's future is prescribed for her - she needs to be able to cook, get married and give birth and what happens in the meantime or how she feels is not important. A woman is only judged by the attitudes of men towards her. 

Luckily many girls (like my sister and perhaps my Facebook friend) grow up to be their own women regardless of what their parents or society or other women tell them. But they have to live all their lives with these deep-rooted notions of pre-determination, expectations and the constant reminders that they need to be pleasing to men. On the other hand boys - whatever they are and do - "will be boys" and that's normal, accepted and encouraged. 

Кой е по- по- най-

Преди няколко месеца Twitter ми беше избухнал с историята на Моника Джоунс - студентка по Социални дейности в Университета на Аризона, активист за транс права и права на проституиращите и "a trans woman of colour". Моника е била спирана от полицията или арестувана в подозрения за проституция, в общи линии само заради профилирането на черните транс жени. Точно това определение "trans woman of colour" ме замисли и накара да пиша този пост. Замислих се, че аз дори и да "трябва" да се определя като гей, не трябва да определям расата, половата идентичност и пола си. Т.е. "бял", "cis" (cis е, най-накратко казано, обратното на транс - когато се идентифицираш с пола, с който си роден) и "мъж" някакси се подразбират. Замислих се и за "привилегията" - отново покрай туитове и блогове - че макар и гей аз, като бял цис мъж, съм много по-привилегирован от ... на практика мнозинството хора в света (жени, не-бели хора и транс хора). "Привилегията" се изразява в отношението на обществото (като цяло, колкото и абстрактно да звучи това) към теб, и задоволяването на базисните нужди от подслон, работа, връзки с хора, принадлежност към групи и т.н.

Разбира се, като цяло можем да приемем, че белият хетеросексуален (цис) мъж християнин е най-привилегированият екземпляр на света. С условието, че цветът и религията са локализирани, т.е. в арабската, китайската, индийската и т.н. култури се има предвид доминантните религия и цвят на кожата. Та се зачудих, по един малко детински начин, ако премахнем религията, кой е по- по- най-привилегирован и кой е по- по- най-ощетен/дискриминиран? Или какво стои в "хранителната верига" между дъното (черна транс жена) и върха (бял хетеро цис мъж)? 

От дуалистична гледан точка нещата са ясни - мъж надцаква жена, бял надцаква черен, цис надцаква транс и хетеро надцаква хомо. Но какво става когато са смесени? 

Та с условието, че въпросите са глупави и безмислени, че цис се подразбира, а цветът на кожата е условен, как се степенува привилегията? 

- Бяла хетеро жена по-добре ли е от черен (гей или хетеро) мъж? - според мен не - пол бие цвят
- Бяла хетеро жена по-добре ли е от (бял или черен) гей мъж?  - може би в Източна Европа да, но в Западна и САЩ - хм, може би не - мъж идва преди жена
- Бял транс мъж по-добре ли е от черна лесбийка? - според мен не - цис бие бял

и така нататък... 

Затова следващия път когато се почувстваме дискриминирани, можем да си спомним, че ние белите цис мъже, дори и гей, пак сме доста нагоре в хранителната верига. За разлика от нас, някои хора не могат да скрият чертите си и наистина имат ограничен достъп до ресурси и възможности, биват профилирани и тормозени от полицията, гонени от общностите и домовете си и т.н. 

И когато се борим за равни права трябва да чуем и по-непривилегированите от нас. 

IDAHO - Ай-да-го....

IDAHO - ай-да-го...

I've been planning to write this post for a long time and decided to post it today, on the International Day against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO), because of what happened a year ago. The Bulgarian part of the title is supposed to be a word play - it sounds like IDAHO but means something like "screw it" - to express my annoyance better... 

So on IDAHO 2013, the EU Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) presented the findings of the largest EU LGBT survey. More than 93 000 LGBT people from all over the EU responded to the survey, whose aim was to study their experiences with discrimination, hate crimes, hate speech, access to justice, etc. The results of the survey showed that violence, discrimination and hate speech are still wide spread in the EU, while the majority are not reported to the authorities. You can see the results in different graphs here  and here or just some of the main findings in this three-minute video.

 But just to mention some main points: around 50% of respondents felt discriminated on the basis of their sexual orientation and 90% of them did not report this to the authorities; around 66% avoided holding hands in public; 80% had heard jokes about LGBT people and felt insulted; 20% had felt discriminated at work or when looking for work; around 25% had been attacked because of their sexual orientation. And so on. When it comes to trans* people all these numbers are even higher. 

Now you're probably wondering what exactly annoyed me so much... Well, it was the "surprise" with which these results were met. I watched live the conference where the survey results were presented - here in The Hague, at the closing of a two-day conference organised by the Dutch government and attended by, among others, (then) Princess Maxima, Members of the European Parliament, ILGA Europe and EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding. Unfortunately I can't find now a recording of this part of the event but I got really annoyed by the reactions to the survey findings. The MEPs and Reding were acting all surprised, shocked, flabbergasted and what not by the results. They had no idea that homophobia, discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes were so widespread in the EU. They expressed their direst concerns about the position of LGBT people, their strongest condemnation of discrimination and their continued commitment to the improvement of LGBT rights in the EU... I thought that even ILGA Europe's participation was in the same weak "oh this is so terrible, we had no idea" style, even though they publish an annual review of LGBT rights in Europe, called Rainbow Europe, which pretty much confirms the same findings every year. 

I think if you ask any random 20 LGBT people on the street you'll get exactly the same responses about their experiences. Of course I know that official data, based on almost 100 000 responses, is important and necessary and more reliable, but if you live in this world, don't pretend that you don't know how wide spread homophobia is! 

The most reasonable and honest comment I heard at the conference came from Michael Cashman, a British MEP, chair of the Intergroup on LGBT rights in the EP. Cashman said that we need to address the elephant in the room - that there was "political cowardice" among many of his fellow MEPs to work for the improvement of the situation of LGBT people because, even if they support our rights, they still want to be re-elected... And, as we know, LGBT rights is a controversial and unpopular issue in many countries and among many people. Of course this little outburst of honesty was pacified by Reding with some more bla bla about a roadmap, strategy and all sorts of future tenses.. So I tweeted 

#euLGBTsurvey indeed the commission is all about bla bla rights, bla bla concerns, bla bla roadmap... TIME TO ACT and not just BLA BLA!
— Bobby Gerasimov (@BobbyGerasimov) May 17, 2013

Whether in response to my tweet or not, Reding went on to explain what the Commission is doing to further LGBT rights (sorry for not remembering the important details): "Now we're doing ... and this is NOT BLA BLA; then we'll do ... and this is NOT BLA BLA"... However, I remain unconvinced... This survey, whose results were, like I said, obvious and predictable to anyone who cares to ask, was commissioned in 2011, carried out in 2012 and presented in 2013. The EU roadmap against homophobia and discrimination was voted by the Parliament in 2014 but it still has no legislative value. To move forward, the Commission needs to come up with a binding directive, which will then need to be transposed by the member states within, let's say 3 years... At this pace, I wonder if the EU will actually do anything on this matter in my lifetime. Even something as simple (in my opinion) as Member States recognising the civil status of same-sex couples from other Member States, regardless of their domestic marriage legislation. I mean, isn't it ridiculous that if I'm married to a man in the Netherlands, this man will be my no-one in Bulgaria and most other EU countries? Whether we decide to move and live there or just go on holidays and I have to visit him in a hospital? If you have a car, a property, a spouse of the opposite sex, a child or a bank account in one member state you have them in all of the EU but a spouse of the same sex you can have in only certain countries? I mean, even the US went further in this direction and I always thought we in the EU were a bit more ahead when it comes to human rights and civil liberties...

But, the fight continues and let's hope that one day...