Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Bail out PEOPLE not disgusting corporations...


The third G20 summit is going to be in Pittsburgh, Pa., on September 24 and 25, 2009. The challenge before the movements for economic and social justice, as well as the antiwar movement, is that the next meeting of the powers that govern the world economy be met with a powerful mass mobilization demanding that jobs and social needs, and not war and greed, prevail--here in the U.S., and across the world.

The G20 summits are taking place in response to the greatest worldwide economic crisis since the 1930s. However, the purpose of these high-level meetings of governments and bankers is not to rescue the people of the world from depression-level unemployment, evictions, homelessness, poverty, social and economic inequality, and war. These summits are about fixing the economic and financial order that puts profits before people--and fixing that system by creating more poverty, misery and suffering.

The last G20 summit, held in London in early April, was met with massive protests both in London and throughout Europe. Now that the G20 is coming to the U.S., it is up to activists and organizations in the U.S. to take up the challenge of uniting and working together to organize a mobilization to Pittsburgh during the summit.

Many had expected New York City to be the location of next G20. Yet once it was confirmed that Pittsburgh would be the summit location, organizers immediately began preliminary logistical planning for a mass mobilization there in September.

Organizing for the G20 summit in Pittsburgh was the central theme of a People’s Economic Summit meeting in New York City on May 31. Consistent with the theme of that summit, “A New World is Urgently Needed–But we must Fight for it,” the more than 200 activists and 35 organizations in attendance agreed to work tirelessly over the summer to expand the network of grassroots activists and organizations to bring thousands of protestors to Pittsburgh.

Activists at the People's Economic Summit also agreed that the response to the next G20 should not be confined to the U.S., and that there should be a global response to the summit. Accordingly, activists and organizations across the world will be urged to endorse this call for protest against the G20 summit meeting in Pittsburgh, and to organize globally coordinated protests during the summit in September.

The potential for massive global mobilization in September is truly infinite. Together, let’s begin the work required to realize that powerful potential.

Another world is possible, but we must fight for it.

The Bail Out The People Movement

What you can do:

  1. Endorse: http://www.bailoutpeople.org/septg20endorse.shtml

  2. Spread the word - forward this message to friends, fellow activists, community organizers, trade unionists, and student organizations.� Ask them to endorse and participate.

  3. Donate to help with organizing expenses: http://bailoutpeople.org/donate.shtml

  4. Volunteer: http://www.bailoutpeople.org/septg20volorgcents.shtml

  5. Become a local organizer or organizing center: http://www.bailoutpeople.org/septg20volorgcents.shtml

Bail Out the People Movement
Solidarity Center
55 W. 17th St. #5C
New York, NY 10011
Email: bailoutpeople.org/cmnt.shtml

Monday, June 29, 2009

Subway ride...

So on the weekend we were traveling between Pride and Pedestrian Sundays which is where we can count on space to let the toddler run free without having to hold his hand and keep him really close.

We're on the subway and the train is just pulling into our station. Around us are a group of international homestay students. The city is overrun with them. Japanese students who are really cool come year round. The summers mostly bring a lot of european students.

Funny how europeans always complain about boorish amerikkkans who visit their ancestral lands on vacation. Really ironic. I've never met such rude, entitled, boorish, cliquish, narrow, undereducated children as the children of affluent europeans sent abroad to do homestay.

We've had a few of them stay with us. Continental spanish and german mostly. They don't stay long. We sort of don't get along...water and oil. And we're not the hired help. They always seem to have difficulty assimilating that information.

We much prefer the japanese students who do not assume that everything will be as per their specifications. They are the absolute antithesis of obnoxious. I always love it when they come to visit. I make wild foods for them, teach them cuss words and just generally attempt to bend their english study into a more fascinating form.

I remember our one friend who stayed with us for six weeks and then continued to stay connected after that. I told her about stolen land and explained to her what exactly north amerikkka is...a settler state built on theft and murder. When she had to do a project on kkkanadian foods, we researched first nations foods because those are the only foods that are actually native to this part of the world. French fries, hamburgers, macaroni and cheese, steak and potatoes, roast beef...none of those, I explained are actually native to this continent.

Then there was the time she asked me to explain "kick...ass..." :) That was fun. :)

But I digress...

This particular group on the subway were spanish speaking. It was of course easy to identify them linguistically. Who doesn't recognize spanish when it's spoken?

Papi and I move to get off with Shmolee in his stroller. I should explain that I'm wearing a corset, jeans, sleeveless blouse unbuttoned to expose cleavage yum. :) Tall kinky yellow 'do specifically envisioned for the weekend is probably part of what attracted their attention.

Two of the boys, they look like maybe late teens glance up at me as I stand with Shmolee's in his stroller.

Me. Spanish study from grade nine to second year university.

A giggling, clearly discernable conversation ensues between them. They don't gesticulate much in my direction. But it's clear they're discussing what/who they're seeing.

I don't get to use my spanish at all. But I really like languages. And I can still recognize individual words even if the train is full. Still I don't bother to try and follow what they're saying at all. Nonetheless, a word anyone with even half a brain would be able to understand, jumps out at me clearly. One of them uses it with confidence.



I turn and look at him making a loud tsk, tsk, tsk sound with my tongue. Loud enough for him and his friend to hear. Loud enough to attract their attention. Loud enough for them to know I'm going to engage with them.

They glance up and I look him in the eye smiling indulgently: "You called me a puta."

They both look flabbergasted. I smile at them in a way that lets them know they're silly little morons of no consequence.

Then, to let them know that in a city as large and heterogenous as Toronto, they might want to think about what they say even in their own language, I say: "You should be careful. You should be really careful."

They're lucky that they encountered me who was only passingly interested in humiliating them rather than someone else who might seriously physically harm them for being little pissant asshole tourists. :)

The subway doors open and I walk away with my family leaving them to hopefully adjust the ways they choose to move through my city. :)

How does sexual orientation work...not so sure anymore...

So Pride weekend was amazing.

It was better than amazing. It was the best Pride I've ever had I'd have to say.

No girlfriends...not even any dyke friends to hang out with.
I spent time with another woman I've known off and on for almost twenty years. We met when I was a young Black lesbian who wore men's clothes, shoes and underwear instead of an older queer femme mama with two children and a man...whose membership card has long lapsed.

Friend and I strolled and had conversation.

I told her that I've been thinking of "coming out" (probably a misnomer) as heterosexual. I think my relationship to these communities, even to this event, definitely to my own sexuality has morphed to the point where I had to admit I was wondering if a name change was necessary.

As I strolled through the neighbourhood, I spoke almost entirely with men who were responding positively, adoringly, interactively to the way I had chosen to present.

I appreciated their appreciation so forthrightly voiced, their come hither glances, their ready smiles.

The wimmin, my "sisters"...
Some of them flat out looked and then attempted to ignore me.
Some looked on scandalized.
Some watched energetically cowering, uncertain, needing to stay at a distance.

The wimmin who did respond favourably, interactively, with fascination and voice and positive energy, I interacted with responding in kind, talking with them, thanking them for being loving, smiling with them, laughing with them.

But they were such a small minority.

I was part of the problem.
You see...
I had come dressed as a massive amazonian physically and aesthetically projecting fierceness and alien/ness, utilizing their assimilationist and sanitized beliefs against them. To be safe for so many of them is to not present as too strange, too odd, too queer. If you insist on presenting as openly, happily, powerfully strange, odd, queer they are taught and they teach the young that others will be fearful, intimidated and threatened. Life experience, mine and theirs shows this to be true in most cases.

But still...
when you come "home" still passing, still woefully full of internalized isms forcing you to function completely on the down-low, still banking your fierce flames, presenting as nonthreatening, I have to wonder, why even bother to come at all? Why bother to come in from the cold if you bring the chill in with you?

Knowing how many of my former allies and friends move, knowing how not comfortable with overtly expressed female power unbridled they are, I've made a habit of using their own internalized fears and discomfort against them in order to create safe passage for myself as I've walked among them.

In all these years out, in, passing or not, presenting full throttle hasn't failed me yet. :)

On the weekend it worked like a charm. Mostly any folks I've had unh...interactions with in the past stayed away and I was free to roam as I wanted.

Come to think of it only two Old Ones, ones who were here before I came out, caribbean wimmin, came up to remind me that I am now primarily not amazon, clearly not of the queer nation, but instead Patriarchal possession and "Mother".

one of them: "How's the baby?"
me looking down on them from fairly high up: "How are you?"

They mouthed some other words that had no power over me. I remembered that brief period in my youth when I had understood them and their clique as possessing more knowledge than I did, as being more comfortable with their Black lesbianness.

As I watched these two wimmin who are understood as powerhouses in certain circles be so small and petty while standing before me, I realized that although they've managed to accrue much power, money, respect and status, they were in some ways more lost and confused than the Black dykes who came directly after them.

They had less supports. They had less books to draw from. They wrote books and I read them but found precious little in them that spoke to me.

They were really good at organizing, though. That was their special scooby power. They could and still can bring people together...what folks do after they bring them together is a whole other story.

I am thankful that they were here writing the little bits they did understand and struggling to make links even if those links never actually crossed over into how they lived as out Black lesbians in certain crucial ways.

I'm glad they were present, treacherous, insecure, hierarchical, mean spirited, insulting, pompous, classist (some of it with me, the vast majority of that shit with others while I watched and made mental notes) and out about all of it so that they could serve as an example of what not to do when attempting to be out and live proudly.

I am glad their lives lived without much safety or acknowledgement of the tons of coalition work they attempted to do in such close proximity to oppressive Black heterosexually and patriarchally dominated, classed communities showed me clearly that it would make no sense for me to waste my energies there. I would only be ignored, spat upon, generally disrespected, work and writings erased and downplayed as has been the case with many of them, in ways that would never be openly talked about...until after they were dead and people were gathered at the steelworkers union hall to try and make them having been left dead for days in their apartments by themselves during the holiday season, look less...disgusting.

I didn't feel sad seeing those two wimmin. I only felt on red alert for about two seconds, though. But now that I sit and type I think about what it means to live so close to such intimately expressed community based domination and about how it can suck the very marrow out of a person's bones.

So sad. They are not my sisters. In fact, they were never my sisters.

That interaction went as well as could be expected.

Another caribbean woman heterosexual, aged before her time who I thought tried to be a friend at one point but who then bowed to Black supposedly artsy intelligensia community pressures that had already demanded my blood in the form of shunning. She, like many others I've know over the years, is much more interested in external validation and group acceptance. I understand that in communities filled with networking freelancers, it's important to follow the herd or you won't get paid. I understand. :) Well, she said "hi, t.j." in passing as I was adjusting my boots. I did not turn to greet her but simply threw a quick hullo over my shoulder and went back to what I was interested in doing.

There were other semi interactions. But nothing that upset or threw off my equilibrium. So the weekend went well.

Suffice it to say I did not spend my time wrapped in woman energy. Did not crave it. Did not miss it, as I have my own direct line via mySELF.

I think that was why I started wondering what exactly I am clinging to at this point in terms of membership and belonging. I ran into a few individual entities, people who I could spend some time with and talk. I described the world I presently inhabit. I talked about spending most of my time outside queer spaces. I talked about developing a modicum of comfort dealing with the denizens of the outside world and about learning to move cloaked yet still conscious.

I said that I didn't feel much in the way of kinship to the old queer community center now turned into a sterling beacon of corporatized, sanitized architectural renovation. In fact I howled in disgust when I saw it and afterwards when I spoke about it I screamed in horror.

I think I blacked out when Papi told me that the Executive Director of Pride this year was a straight woman. Maybe he got his facts wrong. If he didn't. Hip, hip, hooray! How far we've come! I'm so pleased!

As I strolled and smiled broadly for the cameras...of people who asked politely, who addressed me in a way that showed they understood me as human and therefore worthy of respect, I looked around and realized I didn't need this place anymore. I didn't need to make community here in order to ground.

With all the community organizers and really small independent queer business owners sort of faded into the background in ways that highlighted the presence of big business, I realize Pride was more emptied fun than anything else.

Pride wasn't a defiant experience for me.

I don't need to gather in numbers in order to feel powerful or to fight the power. I can do that all by myself...and I do.

So yeah...I can't say I had some wonderful community based, grassroots dykely experience. In fact, I came there to that place and time and found myself being mySELF, way more wrapped up in male energy, vibesin' off testosterone as I usually do, as I always have, really.

Sexually and socially I prefer men. :)

The male energy I like best is queered, bent, odd, unrepentantly sexual, playful...

I've been having crushes on gay men and bisexual men for years. I don't think I ever got the hang of successfully cruising them or getting them into bed with me. I think I lost patience
and hope in my twenties when it was clear that a lovely queer male lover would not suddenly materialize out of thin air and present himself to me. In hindsight I really think I should have stuck to it. But I did not even understand that there were wimmin like me.

The closest relation as far as most people understand would be the fag hag. And I was that for a while. Pretty, pleasing, flitting, flirtatious, decorative flower. Yeah, I was that for a while.

But that wasn't me. It wasn't quite what I was after. I have a better idea now. Of course I'm still no closer to actually having what I want. I'd have to say that one brief fling with an absolutely pretty and energetic yet conflicted bisexual boy has put a lot of things into perspective for me in some ways, though.

I'm clearer.

It was sweet. I danced in the streets and in parks at Pride and at Pedestrian Sundays to Samba beats. I felt power course through my body. I felt graceful and sexy and filled with laughter and hope and promise and horniness and irreverence. :)
I have...
So many pretty pictures of lovely men and boys flashing in my mind's eye.
And all the while...
I'm trying to reconfigure my relationship to my queer nations.
To again articulate this existence, these desires in ways that offer me more conscientized life journey space.
I think I'll be happier and have a better understanding of my place when I do.

This a notification I got via a facebook group I'm a member of...

Ashley Nikki Baker sent a message to the members of We Will Never Forget Gwen Araujo. <3


Subject: This is important.. I just received a message regarding Teish Green.

If you don't know her story, here it is.

"I just wanted to call your attention to the murder of Lateisha Green, a 22-year old African American transwoman who, last November, was shot with a rifle at close range while sitting in her car with her younger gay brother, Mark. They had attended a party, some guests started yelling at them, and Dwight DeLee is accused of shooting them with a rifle. The trial starts 7/13 in Syracuse, NY and will be tried as a hate crime. This is an especially important trial (apart the obvious tragedy of losing Teish and trauma to her family and friends) because there are a large number of African-American transwomen murdered each year. This one was a classic hate crime... it had nothing whatsoever to do with sexwork, and the accused murderer didn't even know Teish or her brother... he shot them because he was uncomfortable around them."



Sunday, June 28, 2009

Michael Jackson...he was a nasty little pedophile...contextualized...

I wrote this note to someone who had written a journal post on the dating site about Michael Jackson being a pedophile...

I read what you wrote. It was truthful...in a limited context.

What I wrote about him in my journal was tinged by a lot of things that incorporate what you understand as well as some things that you couldn't possibly understand.

He was a pedophile. That's clear. That's true. He touched and probably fucked or at least attempted to fuck people's children.

There is no getting around that. It's disgusting. It's awful. That is true.

Because I look at things in layered ways I can acknowledge that he was other things, too.

He was still a nasty little pedophile.

In a country like yours where much of the culture is informed by hollywood and the music industry, the pop music industry...where much money is made by popular music and where popular music has been so defined by Black people's unwitting contribution to that form via blues, jazz and the early roots of rock 'n roll, as a Black dance innovator and singer, his contribution was/is significant.

He was still a nasty little pedophile.

As the roots of the musics your people like to listen to and play, the roots of even metal and punk, are obscured by a virulent ahistoricism that seems to run rampant, it make perfect sense that it would be necessary to obliterate consciousness of where those musics were born.

He was still a nasty little pedophile.

But y'know what, bucky? :)

Jerry Lee Lewis was clearly a pedophile and a perpetrator of incest and he is hailed as a musical genius. People usually mention him marrying his (I think fourteen year old) cousin. But they when he dies (or is he already dead?) I doubt they will be foaming at the mouth calling for his blood.

Michael Jackson was a nasty little pedophile and I wouldn't have trusted him around my children.

There is a way that people hold Black folks to particularly rigorous lines of conduct, lines of conduct that they tend to waffle over when it comes to white people, especially those who are considered powerful or famous.

Michael Jackson was a nasty little pedophile and if he had touched my children I would have killed him with my bare hands.

I just thought about OJ Simpson. Did you know that just after OJ was publicly humiliated and tried in the media for killing his (white) wife, William Shatner's wife who was just about to divorce him and take probably a good portion of the wealth he had accrued, was found suspiciously dead in a pool?

William, who she was trying to divorce was of course, completely distraught, but never suspected of killing her so he could keep all his money. I saw that. It was...fascinating. :)

Michael Jackson...
was still a nasty little pedophiliac musical genius who was horribly abused as a child, who comes from an entire peopling who were verbally, physically, sexually, emotionally abused for a few hundred years.

The perpetrators were never charged or held responsible.

Their descendants remember that Africans were enslaved, but do not understand exactly what that brutal and inhuman enslavement entailed in excruciating detail:

"here fuck your fucking sister/aunt/cousin/mother, I think the two of you will make good babies for my plantation. when you're done the two of you had better get back to work."

"here, suck my white cock if you want to have any breakfast today. as a matter of fact, suck all our white cocks and then get back to work."

"i don't care if you're pregnant, put your belly in that hole in the ground so my foreman can whip you senseless for not working hard enough. i think he might like to stick it in you when he's done the hundred lashes. then you'll be needing to get back to work"

"oh, your daughter is ten? perfect, she's fertile. i will fuck her first and then my men will take turns with her. get back to work. when i'm finished with her for today, she'll be ready to get back to work"

I am the descendant of that fucking disgusting, abusive mess.
My parents are the descendants of that fucking disgusting, abusive mess.
As are their parents and their parents before them right on back to when...?

Michael Jackson is a descendant of that fucking disgusting, abusive mess.
He was clearly fucking insane and dangerous.
He was raised by people who were clearly fucking insane and dangerous who managed to mask how insane and dangerous they were so well that amerikkka showered love and respect down on them and their dancing puppies...unh...children for decades...the children they raised in the finest abusive style, as they were no doubt raised, as their parents were no doubt raised, as their parents were no doubt raised...
as I trace the nasty fucking mess right back to...
Michael Jackson was a fucking disgusting, messed up, abusive little perpetrator.
I appreciate all the white people who are willing to describe and speak to and cry out against the abuses he perpetrated.

I firmly believe we should get all up in exactly what happened. I do believe that any given day is a fine time to discuss in excruciating detail what actually went on with him/me/us.

Are you prepared for that? I think it would be a good way to get acquainted. :)

Michael Jackson was still a nasty little pedophile. It's just that there is context for everything in our world. Context is so crucial. :)

She asked...

Last night as Papi and I walked with Shmolee through the late night Pride crowds a south asian woman came up to us and asked if Shmolee was alright.

I looked at her quizzically.

She said that she was worried about him and wondered if he was getting enough air and whether he was hot.

It seemed that the fitted, aerated plastic dome that comes with Shmolee's stroller which we had put on so that there would be a barrier between him and the night air and the smoking crowd was causing her some upset.

It makes him feel secure. Last night he also asked for his blankie. So he had himself wrapped up in that.

I knew that some single queer person with very little experience with children would say something. Later on that night, in fact, I heard some people commenting. Clearly their own lack of child friendliness, combined with a belief that queer spaces are adult spaces, combined with their internalized homophobia led them to believe that queer'd nighttime spaces are inherently not suitable for children.

Who knows what a child might catch?...queerness, AIDS, a cold...

Funny, whenever Papi and I go to nighttime, outdoor events in the city, there are middle class heterosexual patriarchal families with children roaming with babes in strollers, stumbling toddlers just learning how to walk, older children.

Enfolded in power and privilege, these families do tend to roam the night without anyone saying "boo" to them.

Papi and I actually don't bring out children out at night as much as other families we've seen, do. I wish we did more. But two children and two adults, with one child not in a stroller, but who could easily get tired and expect to be carried as she sleeps, is a lot to manage.

So often we'll take turns. One of us goes out and the other stays home with the kids.

Last night Stinkapee was at Ophelia's. So we only had Shmolee who still likes to snuggle in his stroller. Two of us and one toddler out in the night air at Pride was definitely workable.

I wonder what that brown woman saw.

Or rather...
I wonder what the little cunting assumed she was seeing when she encountered me and Papi dressed as we were, in matching black kilts, Papi with his fauxhawk and beard, looking every inch the young'un he is not, me with very diva, bright yellow kinky extensions done in a crazy ass take on a geisha inspired chignon wearing my corset and cleavage looking every inch the tramp I aspire to be.

I wonder who she told herself she saw.

I spoke to her, my annoyance kept in check, voice and words clipped and to the point.

me: How old are you?
her: I'm 30.
me: I'm 41.
she looks surprised.
me: this is my second child.
she stutters and falters.
me: we don't live in a tenement slum. we live off the (name of our extremely trendy, middle-class, very white neighbourhood)
me: have you thought about the racist implications of your brown self trying to talk to my oppressed black self about how well i take care of my child?
her, looking sobered: unh, no, not really, I hadn't.
me, holding her faltering, embarrassed, STOOpid, deflated gaze: well, maybe you should.

Papi and I walk away at a relaxed pace with Shmolee sitting in his stroller still amazed by all the activity he sees around him.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack of Sexual Conservatism...the pride edition...

Today, as I think listen to radio announcers describe Pride as a fun party time for all who dare to revel and strut their stuff and as I think about the queers who insist on prioritizing a conservative, gentrified community agenda that foregrounds the right to participate legally in the institution of marriage as something of extreme importance...

I'm thinking about fucking and about what it means that queer people all over the planet have profoundly challenged the very foundations of social organization just...by...fucking...who they want...in the ways they want.

Fucking is fucking powerful shit. It's much more powerful than getting married because it's completely uncontrollable no matter how the state tries to define, limit, block, utilize it.

People who choose to fuck in ways that counter what they have been taught by their parents, by the society and by any kind of organized religion are dangerous.

I appreciate people who fuck intelligently and rebelliously against the grain. I appreciate people who are out about their desires. I appreciate people who can clearly articulate their desires. I appreciate people who do not hide their desires.

This is Pride weekend. It doesn't look like I will be able to engage in any no holds barred bacchanal style fucking in tha flesh. Nonetheless, I understand Pride to be as much about asserting the right to fuck against the grain as it is about the dour conservative middle classing marriage folks so eager to settle down into governmentally sanctioned lives of porridge like sexless mundanity. :)

Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack of Sexual Conservatism...I should probably copyright this as it took me a while to write it. In any case, I wrote in 2006 while I was pregnant with Shmolee....

I wrote this piece this afternoon while my daughter was at the library attending a reading group and taking her afternoon nap. I edited this while she slept and later, after she woke up, with her snoozing in my lap, as I've written many pieces since she was born.


Peggy McIntosh's "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack" has been an invaluable reference and a guide for so many white folks interested in dealing with their white privilege since she wrote it I think in the late '80s.

Entering the blogosphere, I realized that McIntosh's writing had spawned a whole genre of privileged invisible knapsack writings about all sorts of things from social class privilege to the invisibility of class privilege, to non poor privilege, to fat phobia, to able-bodied privilege and others.

Joining the ranks...

Since her template is/was so complete, I've decided to follow the lead of a good few other folks on the internet and write a Privileged knapsack piece a la Peggy McIntosh about sexual conservatism.

This is something that has come up really powerfully for me upon entering the blogosphere and registering who will link to my site, who will define the work I do as feminist, who will make polite sideways remarks about my use of nude imagery in my template and warn others to think twice before opening my page.

I thought I would do something useful with my annoyance, amusement, impatience at the limited analysis i'm encountering around the politicized erotic in the blogosphere.

I'm a writer.

I write.
I think and write.
I think and write and speak and write.
I think and write and speak and write and resist through words.
So here I am doing my thing...

As I indicated earlier, this whole piece is predicated on the seminal work "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack of White Privilege" which I first read about 15 years ago, i think.

Dear reader, This piece is riddled with McIntoshisms which as a white woman, she responsibly linked back to the work of feminists of color like The Combahee River Collective and that I link back to the work of wimmin warriors like Audre Lorde and sex radicals like Patrick Califia-Rice and writings in anthologies like Home Girls.

Any quotes you encounter in this piece below means that I've fully crossed over from utilizing McIntosh's piece as a base line for this work and moved right on over into direct quoting. Even when you don't see quotes it's best to just keep in mind that I transplanted a lot of her ideas over into a critique of sexual oppression and that the basic sentence structure of the points on my list of privileges is completely hers.

Also, please note, I'm referring to "he" and "she" and know that these pronouns are completely inaccurate and that they actually hint at the ease with which I can linguistically exclude a whole segment of the earth's population. Unmaking my gender binary stuff is another facet of the work I've chosen to take on and to pursue. Bear with me. Pronoun corrections to this piece are inadequate, but coming nonetheless.

Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack of Sexual Conservatism

Daily effects of conservative sexual privilege:

Sexual conservatives are not taught to recognize erotophobia, only individual acts of extreme persecution. The majority of them do not acknowledge invisible systems conferring dominance on people who share their views as oppression.

Through my work to expand my horizons and to develop a comfort level with my own desires, I am often confronted with a general unwillingness on the part of many people to acknowledge that there is such a thing as erotophobia - fear of sexualness - that confers privilege on some even as it puts others at a disadvantage.

Some may speak about being "open" or about believing in free speech. They may want to wave flags to show their solidarity with the most conservative of gay agendas - marriage - while completely ignoring the fact that one of the main reasons queer people are oppressed in society is because of the uncontrollable nature of our desires and because of the threat we pose, not as people who get married :), but as openly sexual beings who fuck against the grain.

Folks may point out how many queer people they have on their blogrolls, how many queer friends or acquaintances or colleagues they have, but at the end of the day, they mostly reserve the right to make a great show of their discomfort should anything sexually queered rear its head in their vicinity.

They will not support the work of lessening the dominance of those who downplay sexual expression.

They will not incorporate or develop a feminist, lefty, radical or otherwise politicized view that questions societally acceptable visions of sex as inherently conservative and/or monogamous if not marriage linked.

They will not acknowledge the fact that oppression can also be based precisely on what happens in the bedroom...or outside it between sexual beings, for that matter.

Liberal denial reigns supreme. An unspoken injunction to "cover up", defines even self-defined feminist/liberal/lefty/radical spaces. Casual verbal abuse and stigmatisation of sex workers and sexual wimmin is an acceptable political norm even in spaces (online and real time) that are considered politically feminist/radical/liberal/lefty.

As a polyamorous, queer woman who has sat on the outskirts of various sexually radical communities for quite a few years, who has consensually played out rituals of pleasure and pain, bondage, submission and humiliation, who can't truthfully define as a sex worker but who has done one trick (body workship), who writes queer porn (when I'm in a good mood), who has engaged willingly and willfully in public nudity and public sex...

I understand that I walk with relative privilege as a mama in a society that dominates women who birth and rear children by attempting to empty them of any evidence of sexualness not related to procreation and the marriage bed...

I understand that the sexualized racism I encounter as a Black woman and the shadeism I encounter as a dark(er) skinned woman of African descent contradicts and undermines the imposed "purity" of motherhood and reinforces my status as sexually accessible...

I understand that the simple act of walking with a man seen as my owner, my husband, my impregnator, walking with the small human being, my daughter, seen as his, offers me back some sexual conservative privilege especially in the eyes of other Black people so starved for Cosby-like images of nuclear, patriarchal, heterosexual, monogamous family, who falsely define this construction as THE most effective way to fight white people's racism and their understanding of us as lesser...

I understand that because of myths attached to who is smart and what it means to be educated (especially for Black wimmin and wimmin of color climbing career ladders in academic hierarchies), my intelligence and articulateness could buy me some more sexual conservative credits in Black, feminist, lefty, activist circles if I did not insist on messing that up by incorporating a critique of sexual oppression and expressions of sexualness into my writings and lived experience...

I understand that influential vestiges of Victorian era England and colonialism in general in the Caribbean mean that as an openly sexual daughta of those islands, a bajan by birth, I am considered "common class", "low class" for daring to speak and write about my sexualness in any sort of detail...

I understand that my existence as working class trash is closely linked to notions of sexual accessibility...people who are well off have more power and support to control their daughters' thoughts, dress, sexual education and sexual expression...look at the Bush daughters...

I realize that despite the contradictions of my social positioning I still have privileged space to manouever as presently able-bodied, primarily partnered to a man, as bio gendered female, as english speaking, as north american-raised, as university educated.

I claim a responsiblity to question and to holler loudly at the sexual assumptions so prevalent in political spaces. And so, I do...

Since power-based hierarchies in society form a matrix of domination, I understand that erotophobia occupies a supportive space adjacent to isms and phobias like classism, racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia.

Erotophobia when situated as part of the matrix of power and domination adds clarity to a lot of struggles being fought by the oppressed, the other, the colonized, adds clarity in ways that offers us a possibility to realize more of our visions for change.

As a woman, as a Black, Diasporic African person, as a queer, as an aging adult, as a mama, as an intellect, I understand the many ways my identities are considered sullied by those who do not critique sexual oppression as part of what the dominated experience regardless of whether they understand themselves to be sexually conservative or not.

There are many who will not critique the ways that the sexual conservatism they were taught as children, teenagers and supported to perpetuate as adults, puts them at an advantage even in communities of resistance.

Sometimes this sexual conservatism is the only advantage some of the oppressed can call on and make their own. I think that most people in most cultures are taught to not recognize the sexually conservative teachings they encountered as children growing to adulthood, as damaging and limiting social indoctrination. They are taught to normalize it as a way to have it continue unfettered from mother to daughter, from father to son.

As a resistance fighter with multiple identities that include being feminist and lefty, I have had no choice but to put my lived experience where my politics are. I have had no choice but to make mad links all over myself, making my political personal and understanding my personal as political.

This has included understanding the ways a societally based fear/fascination, attraction/repulsion with sex has been an intimate bed partner with all aspects of the oppression I have encountered and internalized over the course of my life.

Sensing discomfort in various areas of my life as a young dyke, I began to ask my own self questions about sex and sexualness that have led me to gain a better understanding of (my own) sexual conservative privilege and erotophobia.

From there, I began to mount carefully thought out acts of sabotage and subversion specifically designed to embody questions volleyed into the society at large.

Utilizing the phraseology Peggy McIntosh coined, I have come to see sexual conservative "privilege as an invisible package of unearned assets" that some people can count on more than others cashing in on safety, validation and a general sense of acceptability each and every day, in private and public space.

This is privilege they can deny even as they participate in making the lives of those who don't have quite as much cachet, who can't access quite as much sexual conservative privilege, hell on earth.

This privilege is an "invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools , and blank checks" that even the most sexually conservative can out-and-out deny being in possession of.

This is convenient because claiming this privilege means being accountable, which then leads to the question: "Having described it, what will I do to lessen or end it?"

Much sexual conservatism is learned, taught by rote, reinforced by the media, the family and various institutions including schools and child services. This sexual oppression is learned and so it can be unlearned. Although it can take years to break down and jettison what it took a life time to insert into the consciousnesses of those who benefit from it.

Those with sexual conservative privilege who may also define as on the left, as liberal, as feminist, as progressive, as politically radical are taught to think of sexualness as a private choice, "morally neutral, normative, average, and also ideal".

When they create spaces either online or in real time, they create spaces that perpetuate the sex negative ideologies they were raised with and/or have not fully critiqued. They define these same spaces as for the benefit of all who are political.

They utilize their privilege to define away, erase, render insignificant or not part of "the cause" any sexual "differences" they might see in those who come, in effect utilizing the unearned power they gain from their positioning as sexually conservative to define, dominate and control.

Their "neutral" and open spaces are actually experienced as problematic and troublesome by people who believe in the political significance of sexual radicality.

Attempting to work on the host of sexual conservative issues in my own life has proven insufficient as no matter how aware I become, I never fail to encounter people who bring their ignorance of the daily effects of their own sexual conservative beliefs and the attendant willingness to nonetheless maintain all associated privileges, aggressively or subtly to my door.

I have, therefore, decided to make challenging the oppression perpetuated by others a crucial part of my chosen work done simultaneously as I continue to unpack my own sexual conservative privilege and beliefs. Here's what I have so far...

1. Sexual Conservatives (from now on referred to as S.C.s) can if they wish arrange to be in the company of many people who outwardly demonstrate or speak about, feel uncomfortable with or hide away similar sexual habits most of the time.

2. S.C.s can avoid spending time with people whom they have defined as sexual deviants, people who they have learned to mistrust and fear.

3. If an S.C. should need to move, he or she can be pretty sure that renting or purchasing housing and his or her ability to find housing in a suitable area will not be predicated on whether his or her idea of appropriate clothing falls within acceptable social sexual norms, how many lovers he or she brings to see the house or whether he or she talks openly about what activities he or she will be using the the space for.

4. An S.C. can be pretty sure that his or her neighbors in such a location will be neutral or pleasant to him or her and that if his neighbours are unpleasant or standoffish, an S.C. can be certain that it's not because of the way the he or she has chosen to define his or her erotic identity, the sort of career choice he or she has made or whether the neighbours have seen a "dubious" individual entering or leaving his or her abode.

5. An S.C. can go shopping alone most of the time, pretty well assured that he or she will not be followed, harassed or looked down on as they enter or leave their favorite S.C. store, because of who he or she is, what he or she is wearing or what the store sells.

6. An S.C. can turn on the television or open to the front page of the paper and see other S.C.s represented and not constructed as the sewage of society.

7. When S.C.s are told about society, about what makes society safe and good and worth carrying on, they are not told that them and their kind are deteriorating social mores and ethics, spreading disease and making it unsafe to raise children.

8. An S.C. can be sure that his or her children will not be kidnapped from their schools, daycares or from other caregivers by government/social services workers/officials who doubt the safety of their homes without any proof or substance to back up those claims.

9. An S.C. will not have to worry about having his or her children verbally abused, shunned or physically attacked because the teachers and/or other children find out what mama does for a living or what daddy's playtime looks like.

10. If an S.C. wants to, he or she can be pretty sure of finding a publisher for a piece about the joys of being an S.C., about monogamy, marriage or decrying sexual deviance.

11. An S.C. can be pretty sure of having his or her voice heard in a group in which he or she is the only S.C. present.

12. An S.C. can be casual, indifferent or completely unwilling about whether or not to listen to another person's voice in a group in which she or he is the only S.C. present and not have this defined as a deviant trait, a not nice way of being or something that he or she should suffer for.

13. An S.C. can go shopping in his or her clothing of choice without being given attitude or ignored by store clerks because of what he or she is wearing.

14. Whether an S.C. uses cheques, credit cards or cash, he or she can count on his or her favourite clothing and accessory choices to not work against the appearance of financial reliability and fiscal responsibility.

15. An S.C. can arrange to protect his or her children most of the time from people who might not like or BE like S.C.s and expect to be supported by the state, its laws and programs.

16. An S.C. does not have to educate his or her children about sex and sexuality as a way to protect them from people who are not S.C.s their own emotional, psychological and phsyical safety so as to defend against intense social stigma directed against their own family.

17. An S.C. can be pretty sure that her or his children's teachers and employers will tolerate them because their family's appearance, hobby's and interests fit societal norms; An S.C.'s chief worries about her or his children do not concern others' attitudes toward their the sexual identities of their parents.

18. An S.C. can be friendly, physically affectionate even slightly flirtatious and not have people around them make assumptions about their desires, morals or sexual health.

19. An S.C. can talk openly about his or her monogamous, vanilla sex life, buy interesting devices and gadgets for use in the home or invite people to their home without having people attribute these choices to moral decrepitude, disease mongering, pedophilia or violence against wimmin.

20. An S.C. can speak in public to any powerful group without putting other S.C.s on trial or exposing them to social judgement or ridicule.

21. An S.C. can do well in a challenging situation without being seen as a more acceptable and pleasant S.C.. He or she doesn't have to worry about being unfavourably contrasted and compared to other S.C.s.

22. Though he or she may choose to in order to uphold understands of good morality and conduct and to reinforce denial of privilege, an S.C. is never actually expected or requested to speak or come out specifically for the good of all S.C.s.

23. An S.C. can construct the existence of sexually radical people as extreme, uncalled for, shameful, diseased, immoral and apolitical while continuing to not see themselves and their ideas as part of any societal problem.

24. An S.C. can remain completely oblivious to the vernacular, beliefs, relationship constellations and rituals of sexually radical people and remain oblivious to the constructed superiority of their own vernacular, beliefs, relationship constellation, and rituals without facing any penalty for moving through the world in such a high level of ignorance.

25. An S.C. can criticize the government and the society as a whole and openly articulate in detail the different ways its policies and ideologies impact on his or her life and liberty without then being seen as a cultural outsider or a freak, without having the people he or she knows think about not being his or her friends anymore or having friends and family consider stopping their children from playing with his or her children for reasons of "safety".

26. An S.C. can be pretty sure that if he or she identifies his or herself and his or her partners by their chosen ritual/play names/roles/titles to the "person in charge", they will not be facing a hostile entity who feels it's okay to be disrespectful, condescendingly amused, "down", overly intimate, self-congratulatory or to walk away.

27. If a traffic cop pulls over an S.C., they don't have to lie or be vague about the party they came from or their relationships to the person/people they're travelling with. An S.C. doesn't have to worry that he or she will be imprisoned and/or have his or her children taken away if he or she is truthful.

28. If taxation audits the return of an S.C. he or she can be sure that documents won't be scrutinized because of expenses associated with the sexual nature of their work or recreation. If they work for a business that is explicitly S.C. they can be sure not worry about whether their records will be considered applicable or allowable by taxation or whether their records can be used as evidence against them in a court case related to them being S.C..

29. An S.C. can easily buy posters, post-cards, picture books, greeting cards, miscellaneous decorative items and magazines and openly display them to anyone who enters his or her home or workplace without worry about being fired, ostracised, attacked, or seen as disgusting.

30. An S.C. can go home from most meetings of mainstreamed organizations he or she belongs to feeling somewhat accepted, validated and understood, rather than isolated, out-of-place, outnumbered, unheard, held at a distance or feared.

31. An S.C. can be pretty sure that an argument with an acquaintance, new friend or fellow blogger who is not an S.C. is more likely to jeopardize her/his chances for advancement, friendship, alliance, safety, employment than to jeopardize the S.C.'s. (I really like this one)

32. An S.C. can be pretty sure that if he or she argues for the inclusion or understanding of another S.C. that he or she will not be looked upon as asking for too much or as changing the tone or mandate of the space.

33. If an S.C. declares there is an issue of erotophobia at hand, or that there isn't an erotophobia linked issue at hand, his or her status as S.C. will lend him or her more credibility, more weight for either position than an actual sexually radical person will have. An S.C. can count on not being seen as hysterical, aggressive, freakish, immature, apolitical, judgemental, mean, too out there, if he or she should decide to speak solidly from a place of their being an S.C..

34. An S.C. can choose to ignore developments in sexual politics, sex radical writing, scholarship and activism, or disparage them, or learn from them, or surrepticiously incorporate them into his or her knowledge base, but in any case, an S.C. can find ways to be more or less protected from the negative consequences of any of these choices.

35. An S.C.'s culture and social positioning gives him or her little fear about ignoring the perspectives and powers of people from other sexual communities and belief systems.

36. An S.C. is not made acutely aware that their desires, curiosities, childrearing, childbearing, dress, decor or manner of speaking/writing will be taken as a reflection on other S.C.s, that what they do or choose not to do will make life more difficult or easier for other S.C.s.

37. An S.C. can talk or write about being an S.C., about their life, loves, beliefs, actions, ideas without being seen as overly self-centered, immature, attention seeking, apolitical or flagrantly self-promoting.

38. An S.C. can take a job without having to worry about being fired if his or her coworkers see what's on his or her computer desktop, see who comes to pick him or her up after work and how that person is dressed or behaves, find out what he or she reads on his or her lunch break or invites coworkers over to his or her home or to family/community functions.

39. If an S.C.'s day, week or year is going badly, he or she doesn't need to check each negative episode or situation to ascertain whether it was because he or she was too uncompromising, too open, too critical or too clear about his or her desires and sexual beliefs.

40. An S.C. can usually find people (biological family, friends, acquaintances, co-workers) who would be willing to talk with him or her about professional or personal concerns as related to sex, love, relationships, personal interests and family.

41. An S.C. can think over many options, social, political, imaginative or professional, without asking whether a person who is out as an S.C. would be accepted, included or allowed to do what he or she wants to do. He or she wouldn't automatically have to start figuring out which parts of his or her everyday reality as an S.C. would need to be toned down in order to succeed or be accepted.

42. An S.C. can choose public accommodation for an overnight stay, a date or for a community gathering without fearing that people of his or her community who share his or her values and aesthetics, if they come as who they are, will be turned back or will be mistreated in the places he or she has chosen or that the other patrons will feel free to demonstrate their discomfort or that the police or security will be called.

43. An S.C. can be sure that if he or she needs legal or medical help, he or she will not have to tell a variation of the truth in order to protect self, family, lovers, partners, friends or community.

44. An S.C. can arrange his or her activities and those of his or her children and family so that he or she will never have to experience feelings of rejection or ridicule owing to his or her social positioning as an S.C..

45. If an S.C. has leadership ambitions he or she can be sure that being open about his or her sexual beliefs and choices will not have a negative impact on their career possibilities.

46. An S.C. can easily find academic courses and institutions which give positive and respectful attention to S.C.s and that these courses will always outnumber the ones that don't.

47. An S.C. can expect the majority of fiction and nonfiction, widely displayed visual art, media imagery, historical artifacts, government pamphlets and educational materials to attest to the superiority of his or her belief system.

48. If an S.C. should have an accident while engaging in sexual play with a monogamous partner, he or she will not have to worry about whether the play he or she was involved in will open him or her to not being treated with care, respect, dignity and understanding should he or she have to go to a hospital's emergency room. An S.C. does not have to carefully consider whether the accident and the damage it caused warrants a visit to the hospital out of fear of being charged with a crime or receiving shoddy treatment because of being an S.C..

49. An S.C. can travel and openly identify as who he or she is without expecting embarrassment or hostility in those who deal with him or her.

50. An S.C. has no difficulty finding neighborhoods where people do not utilize his or her household configuration, recreational interests or career choices as a reason to avoid or gossip about him or her.

51. An S.C.'s children are given texts and classes which implicitly support his or her kind of family unit, kind of community, kind of relationship structure and do not turn his or her children against his or her sexual beliefs or relationship choices.

52. An S.C. will feel welcomed and "normal" in the usual walks of public life, institutional and social and if he or she does not, it is not because of how he or she has chosen to construct his or her sexually identify, or how he or she chooses to dress or behave.

53. An S.C. does not have to worry about being laughed at, infantilized, attacked, verbally abused, disowned, institutionalized or kept away from the children in his or her family of origin should he or she choose to speak clearly and openly to parents and/or other family members about his or her life as an S.C..

Denial and Avoidance:

Chances are, the things I've listed up above are so normalized, so much a part of the cultures we live in and replicate that these privileges go unnoticed or are not even seen as privileges.

Having brought them to your attention, I realize there is a high probability that you, my dear reader, unless you're actually on the receiving end of this form of systemic oppression, will immediately feel enraged or indifferent and go from there to misunderstanding or forgetting my words. Because they don't interest you and don't have a direct impact on your life, you will sink back into privileged denial.

Erotophia exists best in a climate of denial and avoidance. As Peggy McIntosh wrote: "If these things are true, this is not such a free country; one's life is not what one makes it; many doors open for certain people through no virtues of their own."

And she was right.

Unpacking this particular invisible knapsack of unearned privilege is not at an end in and of itself.

This is the first time I've bothered to actually sit with what worries me about the oppression I face.

This is the first time I've bothered to catalogue what I face and what the people in my life face on a daily basis.

I have listed conditions of daily experience that most people take for granted and that they understand as the right way of things. These are privileges they simultaneously expect and take for granted.

Denial affords many the space to be completely clueless about the oppressive beliefs they perpetuate. They have the right, the privilege to be "ignorant, oblivious, arrogant, and destructive" at the expense of others who suffer and live in fear.

Fixed understandings of morality, healthy sexual behaviour, sexual health and normal relationships are enforced not natural.

The privileges I listed up above form the support mechanisms for sexually conservative people who understand only their ways and customs as normal, right, ethical and true. From this place of constructed superiority they can cause damage, fear, pain, general oppression, without taking responsiblity for the environments and social climates they contribute to creating both inside and outside of politicized circles.

Ironically, armed with the privilege they access on a daily basis, buffered safely in some ways, they actually have a better chance of critiquing the privileges I listed up above than do the people experiencing the oppressive flipside of sexual conservatism.

S.C.s have the space to deconstruct the moral and social "confidence, comfort, and denial they experience as sexual conservatives in sexually conservative cultures at the expense of other communities where people are likely to be faced with daily feelings of fear, discomfort, lack of confidence, lack of self-esteem and alienation.

They could choose to critique the ways that they're understood, constructed and received as sexually conservative and how this affords them much protection from the hostility, distress, and violence faced by people who are out or outed about being sexually radical or deviant.

The playing field isn't level. Everything in society works to disempower, negate and invalidate people who do not construct their desires, relationships, families and communities along sexually conservative lines. Everything in society incorporates erotophobia as a control mechanism to keep the many in their proper sexual places.

"Unearned dominance and power":

In her work deconstructing white privilege, Peggy McIntosh went on to draw lines of distinction between "earned strength and unearned power". She wrote that "conferred privilege can look like strength when it is in fact permission to escape, harm or to dominate".

She wrote that "not all of the privileges on my list are inevitably damaging. Some, like the expectation that neighbors will be decent to you...should be the norm in a just society".

In other words, the forms of oppression faced by people who make the choice to go against society's sexual norms are about taking away their very basic rights to fair and good treatment.

So, some of the privileges experienced or defined by people who are sexually conservative are actually things they could share as positive life enhancements everyone/anyone could enjoy.

There are artificial hierarchies for even the most minute of pleasures and access that form sexual hierarchies that could be broken down.

A general feeling of belonging and acceptance of who a person is shouldn't be a privilege experienced by a few who work really hard to guard it. It should be something everyone is born with and is allowed to maintain through the course of life's journey.

As a sexual deviant, as chosen family to other proud sexually radical folk, I'd like to feel completely welcome and supported in all spaces, but especially in feminist, lefty, liberal, progressive, radically politicized circles online (in the blogosphere) and in real time.

I'm not that far to the left of center on continuums of sexualness and deviance and I'm getting a taste of the exclusion, erasure, invalidation and ridicule faced by others who are more well developed as fully actualized and grounded sexual beings.

I am still waiting to encounter any sexual conservatives who believe in freedom of speech for sexually radical people.

I have yet to meet any sexual conservatives who seem visibly/morally outraged at the oppression of sexually radical people in society and who are willing to question and to undermine their own systemically conferred privileges in order to fight that power.

I’m not meeting anyone who is sexually conservative who seems to really give a fuck about anything except blocking what can only be described as an inexorable flow of change, moving not just through the larger monogamous, heterosexual vanilla sexing world but also in communities of resistance where theoreticians, visionaries and front line workers are being asked to redefine and to broaden their understandings of struggle so as to not participate in the crushing oppression of those they understand themselves to be allied with.

Allies in all sorts of struggles are being asked to actually mark the ways that sexual conservatism as a dogma wreaks havoc not just in the lives of people who define as in some way sexually radical, but also in the lives of those who don’t and (seem to) like it that way.

Much as with white privilege, male privilege, heterosexual privilege and the rest of the matrix of power and domination, where these can be understood as double-edged swords cutting both dominated and those who dominate, the narrowness of a sexually conservative existence actually chafes those who willingly occupy those identities in some really disturbing and saddening ways, too.

Peggy McIntosh points out that privilege takes “both active forms, which we can see, and embedded forms, which as a member of the dominant groups one is taught not to see”.

I’d like to point out that anything exerting influence on someone’s life and consciousness, that they’re taught not to recognize but to perform/think/say by reflex is dangerous and therefore probably damaging to their psyche.

Red pill or blue pill, babe?

Sexual conservatism as a mostly embedded form of privilege is dangerous not just to those on the receiving end, but also to those who blindly follow its tenets.

As a woman and a feminist, I recognize silencing when I see it. I’m sensitive to it. The silence around sex, sexualness and desire that permeates most people’s lives can be understood in terms of oppression that can be actively combated through speaking and sharing of lived experiences and desires.

This is necessary as passively clucking one’s tongue at one’s own sexual conservatism will not be enough to change systems of sexual domination. To pull down social systems will mean acknowledging their extensive presence functioning as a massive underpinning holding up our societies and cultures.

This is a challenge directed specifically at the feminists, lefties, liberals, progressives and self-styled radicals I'm encountering in the blogosphere and in real time. I've communicated with a precious handful of bloggers who understand the connections between forms of oppression including sexual oppression. I'm seeking to pervert some new ones over to the political dark side.

Can I say that? :)

And as we celebrate queered settler Pride on stolen lands...


MNN. June 25, 2009. The neo-nazi Caledonia Militia was formed in Cayuga Ontario on June 23rd with insignias on their uniforms such as Northern Alliance and Rahowa [Racial Holy War]. Another was formed in Picton. Civilians carrying out military actions against a designated race is a criminal offence.

Akwesasne has been isolated since June 1, 2009. The US and Canada have blocked both bridges to Kawenoke, Cornwall Island. We demanded no guns in our community. This took the steam out of the fake propaganda designating us as militants to justify armed aggression against us.

To take away our civil rights, Canada’s Department of National Defense manual designated us as insurgents. International Global Risk lists us as terrorists, along with Al Qaida, Tamil Tigers and the Taliban. These are unfounded slurs against our valiant people. During WW II we declared war against the Nazis on the steps of the Capitol. Many of our men died defending democracy and Great Turtle Island.

Predator drones that prey on and attack enemy combatants are flying over us and our neighbors. They are being launched from the Fort Drum US military base. They fly three miles up under the civilian US Customs and Border Protection Agency. These civilian and military agencies are under one command.

A major political agenda is being advanced, taking over northern Great Turtle Island to set up a dictatorship.

These two fascist civilian militias openly profess racism and violence against us. They appear to have legal protection. They are financed with lots of money, maybe by the multinationals. They are well equipped with radios, high tech supplies and maybe weapons like pepper spray, tasers or other gadgets.
Half of the US presence In Iraq are private armies or mercenaries under no scrutiny like militias. Former military or private security or independent mercenaries train them to attack unarmed civilians.

Storm troops play a key role in setting up totalitarian power. The regular military is sent out of the country. Mercenaries take over the homeland. Small squads with subordinate groups are organized throughout the country. They come together in large formations. They test experimental tactics and weapons. Incognito mercenaries stand at the back of meetings to protect the militias.

Gary McHale and Doug Fleming, well-known neo-nazis, are setting up these militias in Ontario. www.marchforfreedom.com Politician, Randy Hillier, has a longtime connection with these Red Necks. While aspiring to head the Ontario Conservatives, Hillier constantly calls for launching the army against the Indigenous and taking the law into his own hands. No habeas corpus. No civil rights for us.

US and Canada do not want to make it look like the cops are going after us. Vigilantes do the dirty work. They operate outside the law and create their own. McHale and Fleming plan direct confrontations with us, to shut down our trade and commerce and use force to carry out illegal arrests. Weapons, tasers and threats will be used. We will be held until the cops or military arrive to take us to jail or holding units. They will be trained to go to court to testify against us and get convictions.

Fascist moles seem to have wormed their way into the government, policing, military and the court and prison system.

Fascist right wing hit squads recruit from the unemployed, working class, local agitators, drunks, drug addicts, deadbeat dads, brawlers, KKK, skinheads, ex-police and ex-soldiers. The court and prison systems provide them with gangsters and criminals. They are especially interested in those who hate us and want to physically hurt us. They’re losers who want to be winners. To get around any bans, 14 to 18 year olds can attack people without being charged as adults.
Militias see themselves as the ground forces that create and attack scapegoats. These goons hope to grow to thousands and maybe more. They could outnumber the regular army and police forces. They hope to become big shots in the big new order that will rule the world for a thousand years! The politicians think they can control the militia and the mobs. Eventually the psychopaths will step in like the SS that surrounded their messianic leader, Adolph Hitler.

To continue their bogus war on terror, the international war thugs have to destroy democracy where everyone is equal and has a voice. Our constitution, the Great Law of Peace, is the model for the US Constitution. The Two Row Wampum international relationship comes from our constitution. We were the first nation to take the Great Law and we intend to uphold constitutional law.

We condemn these uprisings by these foreign interests who are violating the harmonious relationships we developed through treaties, agreements and negotiated covenants. We refuse to be anyone’s victims. We Indigenous People are one and we stand together!

Persons against militias: 905... 3903fnswg@gmail.com; and Lee Arden Lewis 613... c 613....

Kahentinetha MNN Mohawk Nation News, www.mohawknationnews.com kahentinetha2@yahoo.com Note: Your financial help is needed and appreciated. Please send your donations by check or money order to “MNN Mohawk Nation News”, Box 991, Kahnawake [Quebec, Canada] J0L 1B0. Or go to PayPal on website. Nia:wen thank you very much. Go to MNN “BORDER” category for more stories; New MNN Books Available now! Purchase t-shirts, mugs and more at our CafePressStore http://www.cafepress.com/mohawknews; Subscribe to MNN for breaking news updates http://.mohawknationnews.com/news/subscription.php; Sign Women Title Holders petition! http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/Iroquois

Supporters may send comments to: Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Buckingham Palace, London, SQ1A UK; President Barack Obama, The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC 20500, http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/ Comments: 202..., Switchboard: 202... FAX: 202-456-2461; The Governor General of Canada, M. Michaelle Jean, 1 Rideau Drive, Ottawa info@gg.ca; Alain Jolicoeur, President, CBSA, Ottawa, ON K1A 0L8, 613-952-3200, 613-957-0612; General inquiries CBSA-ASFC@canada.gc.ca; Lance Markell, District Director, Northern Office – Customs, St. Laurent Blvd., Ottawa Ont. K1G 4K3, CBSA 613-930-3234, 613-991-1214, General inquiries CBSA-ASFC@canada.gc.ca; Secretary Janet Napolitano, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528, Operator Number: 202-282-8000, Comment Line: 202-282-8495, Jayson P. Ahern, A/Commissioner, U.S. Customs, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20229 Chief Counsel (202) 344-2990; Marco A. Lopez, Jr., Chief of Staff, U.S. Customs, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20229; Prime Minister Stephen Harper; House of Commons, Ottawa, harper.s@parl.gc.ca; Hon. Stockwell Day, Minister of Public Safety, House of Commons, Ottawa; Hon. Robert Douglas Nicholson, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, 284 Wellington St., Ottawa, ON K1A 0H8; Attorney General of Ontario, 720 Bay St., 4th Floor, Toronto, ON M5G 2K1; Hon. Yvon Marcoux, Minister of Justice and A.G.O., Louis-Phillipe-Pigeon Bldg., 1200 Rue d l'Eglise, 9th Floor, St. Foy G1V 4M1; Hon. Chuck Strahl, Minister of Indian Affairs, 10 Wellington St., Hull, Que. K1A 0H4 Strahl.c@parl.gc.ca; Premier Dalton McGuinty, Province of Ontario, Queens Park, Toronto ON; Premier Charest, Province of Quebec, Legislature, Quebec City; British High Commission, 80 Elgin St., Ottawa, ON K1P 5K7; Canadian Human Rights Commission, 344 Slater St., 8th Floor Ottawa, ON K1A 1E1; United Nations, 405 E 42nd Street, New York, NY 10017; The Hague, Anna Paulownastraat, 103, 251 BBC, The Netherlands; Coalition for the International Criminal Court, c/o WFM, 708 3rd Ave., 24th Floor, New York, NY 10017
Supporters of Mohawks: MPs Jean Crowder, Indian Affairs critic crowdj@parl.gc.ca ; Anita Neville nevila@parl.gc.ca ; Marc Lemay lemaym@parl.gc.ca ; Sen. Gerry St. Germain;