What was the LGBT movement? For me and for what may be my direct knowledge of militancy in about 10 years more or less evident and obvious, the LGBT movement has been a good idea ', even pursued with a certain strength and will. It was the idea of \u200b\u200ba movement that would gather and synthesize the body and give strength to the assertion of claims and rights that belong to people of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and, therefore, of all those people that are not configured and does not recognize dual cultural schema of gender and sexuality.
E 'was a good idea and it was great effort of many people to give substance to this idea really. How can we deny the commitment and good faith of many people who worked there and spent resources, energy, part of their existence? There is no denying this, I would say that it must be recognized and addressed in all these our thanks and our respect, and this regardless of whether or not we have shared the political choices and practices.
The question is, however, that idea has been an "idea" that has failed even before it was superseded by a new idea "pangender" and "pansexual." And 'failed because no clear on its assumption, not clear that he wanted to put together two completely different concepts of law that arise from two completely different situations. It 'was an ideological operation the belief that "gender identity" and "sexual orientation" were two issues that could find a summary in the vindication of rights, and could perhaps be fine if there was a clear determination of what was the' scope of rights that was to put as the focus of our actions and thoughts. But this was not, and this has determined that the LGBT movement is nothing but a poster that has never been implemented and has only caused frustration and discontent.
is not the fault of this or that organization, but the fact that we have considered the question of "rights" as a matter already clear itself. But it is not. There are rights that relate to the person as a subjective and individual, there are rights that affect people in their living or associated together. There is the question of individual rights and the issue of collective rights.
I was "accused" to produce a hierarchy of rights! Maybe it's true if you compare the subjective and collective rights. In fact, I believe that the foundations of any collective right is given by the acknowledgment and the achievement of individual rights. In other words I can not think of the right to a community if not by birth right belonging to every single person that makes up that community, so perhaps the accusation put to me to have in mind a hierarchy of rights appears as real. But precisely because this accusation is true also true that those who accused me of this (and Patané Scalfarotto) did not take into view that there are two distinct areas of law and, therefore, they have forgotten the personal right thinking only of what collective.
No charges against them, but acknowledging that we are located on two floors, very different and, therefore, the question is really whether there are minimum requirements before they will consider a motion "unitary."
On the basis of what happened Wednesday August 25, 2010 and August 27, 2010, I came to these conclusions
a) The community carry you forward - and can not do so - the struggles and demands that they move from a subjective right, in which it can not find a common platform with chi (LG) continues and supports the struggles and demands that are based on the collective right. The community will support or IT support make us the LGB, but always seeing them as "second", as an expression of collective right, when they have not been established and obtained the rights of individuals (Work, Culture, Health, Law, Freedom to move , Freedom of expression and thought, self-determination of a person etc.).
b) The Community IT is now the subject of a division that focuses primarily on the Protocols (WPAT - Oniga), a division that could easily be composed on the basis of a comparison which is free of "personalism" and that focuses on what really needs. But this division has its reasoning on an "assumption", which first must be addressed and discussed, or if the person has the need for protection or not and to what extent such protection by third parties should be exercised.
c) I believe that in this period would be less than completely healthy that you stop carrying on a dead idea, and instead begin to build in an appropriate manner the conditions for it to be arrive "tomorrow" to a real movement Pangender and pansexual.
a kiss
Darianne
0 comments:
Post a Comment