A few saturdays ago, I attended the third meeting of the group, currently known as QUILTBAG. Like the previous two meetings, the gathered individuals represented, a broad mix of Pittsburgh’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer communities. I’ve written about QUILTBAG before, and personally, I love the name. I appreciate the way it shifts our focus and preconceived notions about sexual orientation and community. Not everyone feels that way, so the name of the group may be changing. Some are suggesting to call it QUILTGAB, since we do a lot of talking and sharing of ideas and feelings about things, and still others want to call the group, QUILT, since the group is a real patchwork of identities and communities. For me, the notion of “Quilt” is too connected to HIV/AIDS and the Names Project Quilt, although I am aware of the history of Quilt and quilting goes way back before that. Time will tell how this collective of individuals names itself. I’m not sure there is any group, more formally organized or grass roots, trying so hard to be all inclusive of everyone, and that is a great thing to witness.
The meeting started with a report about Occupy Pittsburgh, where queer people of color are very visible in the Occupy effort. Personally, I believe the Occupy movement is the single most important grassroots effort we have seen in our country since the Vietnam War protests. Unlike the 2010 Tea Party visibility, which was predominately astro-turfed, these are real individuals doing what they can to bring a prolonged and truthful spotlight on the economic inequality harming our democracy. It is no surprise that this may be a place where queer people of color are active, given the ways economic issues impact the African American community so hard. Some expressed the desire to talk about how Queers are working hand in hand with other individuals on issues not directly considered as Queer issues. For me, this demonstrates both, how some of the work around LGBTQ visibility has been successful, as well as how the Occupy movement is a return to fundamental struggles for human rights. For example it is often ignored how Dr Martin Luther King Jr was active in worker’s rights and the role economic inequality played in the growth of the Civil Rights movement.
I can’t say that I believe this gathered QUILTGAB group is of a single mind as to what we are doing or how we are going to do it. On the one hand, I’m fine with that. I’m so thankful to see such a diverse group of individuals who are wiling to be in dialogue with each other. Although I believe most present, would agree that various contingents within the rainbow coalition of communities are not well connected.This was expressed loudly by deeming the current LGBTQ community as “fractured,” and some wonder if the existing organizations meet the needs, or are capable of bringing this broken-ness to a wholeness. I think one thing however is very clear. Many in the group do not want to start a new organization, but are interested rather in being a space where individuals and members of existing organizations can, together craft a five year plan for the future of Queer Pittsburgh. I fall into that group, and while I think all of the dialogue that has been happening is useful, I’m afraid we have fallen off a path onwards that plan. I also share a fear however, that any attempt to re-align us, could seek to force a too-rigid traditional approach to strategic planning. This approach is highly focused on tasks and goals which will be impossible without full buy-in from every existing organization and stakeholder. What I believe will be manageable is to craft a narrative: a picture of Queer Pittsburgh, which is articulated clearly enough that achieving it is desirable to all, and all groups as well as many individuals commit to bringing that image into being. Our massive work is thorough dialoging, and intensive listening such that every voice has a place at the table and is heard. Not every voice has to be represented in a final plan, but the plan must be constructed such that it is clear that no voice was ignored.
And while I am 150% supportive of the ongoing process, I have great doubts that this group can succeed in re-connecting a fractured community. I have yet seen any tangible efforts that would demonstrate that these individuals are committed enough to this goal. Time will tell however. It could be that with the right facilitation, a consensus will evolve to do just that.
I had an extremely negative experience at the meeting that I want to focus on, because I believe that underneath it is a deep and genuine question about inclusivity and mutual respect. The QUILTGAB group will have to grapple with that notion of inclusivity, and demand honest commitment to inclusivity as an ideal. Prior to the meeting a survey was distributed, and this sentence comes from an individual’s response to the questionnaire:
4. look for people who arent white, rich, young and pretty. im tired of “equality” groups that are actually stockholm, im good enough for the system because of other reasons, groups. im tired of the only socially acceptable queer on TV being rich and white. it needs to end.
I think at its best, this can only be described as exclusionary, and at its worst, it may even be seen as racist. Imagine the same sentiment expressed in these ways. What would be the response if someone had said:
- look for people who aren’t black
- look for people who aren’t women
- look for people who aren’t trans
None of these sentiments would be tolerated as acceptable, and many would speak out against such statements.
I suppose I react to this comment mostly as I am one of the only people in the group who is part of an organization that has “Equality” in its name, although I don’t think it is “stockholm” in any way, and that brings me back to naming this statement as exclusionary. If QUILTGAB, by whatever name, wishes to be inclusive of all, it can not be hindered by exclusionary accusations and frustrations. Inclusivity means everyone is welcome, and everyone includes everyone. The race, color, or any other identity characteristics can not be used as filters to decide who is in and who is out. Even if one believes that traditional and conventional groups have been exclusionary, if this group wishes to be different, then, it must welcome and include everyone. If some are excluded, even in an attempt to right the disproportions of engagement of other groups, then the group is merely replicating past errors.
As I looked around the room, I could easily see gaps of inclusion: missing voices needed for any dialogue by the whole. From my perspective, this included, but wasn’t really limited to, a lack of asian participants, latino participants, and disabled participants. These were parts of our rainbow community that have been entirely missing from these QUILTGAB meetings. But these flaps are so noticeable because there were no voices present to represent these viewpoints. This issue can only be addressed by making sure that enough effort has been extended to reach out to these parts of the community, and it isn’t clear what efforts if any were made to reach these diverse communities.
A different aspect of inclusivity has to be about the demographics of the group as a whole. For instance, if there are a few trans persons present, do they add enough diversity or are other trans voices needed for the group to really represent inclusivity? This is a far more complex issue to navigate, but I believe the solution is always to add more voices to the whole. Those more voices must come from active engagement too! It won’t happen by passively waiting to see who shows up.
Another way to change the demographics of the group, is to make some members of the group feel unwelcome such that they leave, and I wasn’t the only person who felt unwelcome. Honestly, I left the meeting sure that I would not attend another meeting, but as the time has passed, and I have worked on this blog post, my feelings have changed, and I’ll be back. The story is still being written: is this a group that will rise above convention and forge new ways of being an inclusive group? Time will tell.
PS: A note about TV
The comment I have responded to also includes a comment about queer representation on TV as being white and rich. I have no real response to this sentiment, except to note that television has always be knocked as not representing everyone. I would have thought that given the large number of queer contestants on reality television programs, that this is less a problem than it used to be, but perhaps not.
What I do want to say however, is that it is unfair to a group of people gathered in a room in Pittsburgh PA to hold them, responsible for the failings of the multi-million dollar enterprise we call Hollywood. The only fair way to treat this group of real people in this space is to walk in frustration free, and let the group be what it is and offer what it has to offer.