Activism

What’s queer about the anti-occupation movement?

Bud Korotzer
Protester at LGBT Center in New York City at last year’s Israel Apartheid Week demonstration. (Photo: Bud Korotzer/Indybay.org)

On Saturday, March 3, 2012, Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QAIA), organized a protest at the New York City’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center, one year after the Center put a ban on any form of Israeli-Palestinian debate within its walls. The moratorium provoked responses from queer advocates in the U.S. and in Palestine. This year’s event was organized as part of Israel Apartheid Week activities in New York City. I gave a talk alongside featured speakers, including the prominent scholar/activist Judith Butler and Pauline Park, who was my co-participant in the first U.S. LGBTQ delegation to Palestine.

During our delegation’s visit to Hebron, we stood on a street separated by a 3-4 ft. partition. This barrier was seemingly designed to ensure safety…to somehow keep the peace by forcing a form of disconnection between the Israeli settlers and Palestinian people living there. We stood on the Palestinian side of the barrier and observed in horror as this guarded wall (this military apparatus of division, of mobility control, of segregation) forced many Palestinians to walk on one side as a means to allow the safety of the few settlers we observed walking on the other side. I was deeply saddened and angered by— what another delegate named—a mechanism of “apartheid”, this mini separation wall. I also felt a deep sense of shame when I was allowed access to the Israeli side of the barrier knowing that the Palestinians who live or daily travel in Hebron, could not.

This account, my standing at that wall…looking in the direction of the armed officers guarding it…feeling the force of segregation….is a troubling and perfect way to think about the question of what’s queer about the anti-occupation of Palestinian land and bodies and the Palestinian struggle for self-determination?

If we understand queerness to be a political framework—one that seeks the destabilization of state sanctioned regimes of control (of our bodies, our identities, our expressions whether sexual or otherwise), the refusal of labels that delimit and limit us, the undoing of accepted and mundane practices, laws, and ideas that diminish our humanity, the dismantling of literal and metaphorical barriers, of that 3-5 ft. wall in Hebron that actually harms both Israelis and Palestinians because it disallows the possibility of community—than the answer to the question of what’s queer about anti-occupation is: every damn thing!

We aren’t queer merely because of our varied sexualities. We are queer because we know how dehumanizing and oppressing it is to try to exist in our fullest human potential within the limited space of somebody’s, some state’s boxes, behind labels and, therefore, behind “walls”.

We are assembled here today because of, yet, another “wall” that is both ideological and material in the form of a moratorium. We stand here in the NYC LGBT Community Center in protest because The Center thinks that it is okay to build a barrier that prevents some peoples and ideas from being embraced within the community. We stand here because we know that tools of division used to somehow secure peace will only result in its absence.

What’s queer about anti-occupation? Every damn thing! What’s queer about walls, barriers, separations, division, disharmony, communal dissolution, the impossibility of solidarities, moratorium? Nothing!

47 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

“If we understand queerness to be a political framework—one that seeks the destabilization of state sanctioned regimes of control (of our bodies, our identities, our expressions whether sexual or otherwise), the refusal of labels that delimit and limit us, the undoing of accepted and mundane practices, laws, and ideas that diminish our humanity, the dismantling of literal and metaphorical barriers”
———————————————

What do you mean “refusal of labels”? You voluntarily “identify” as a label – one that seems to have an incredibly arbitrary definition. Your the one hyphenating your humanity brother.

Maybe I should just leave posts like this alone. Why can’t you just as a friggin human being be against Israel’s policies, walls etc – along with “ideas that diminish our humanity”? Ive never understood this at all.

“As I looked in the direction of the soldiers, I thought about being left-handed and what that meant here in Hebron. What is so right handed about the occupation? How can the anti-occupation movement be more left handed?”

This is just as arbitrary a statement, and makes about as much sense.

Was it queer when several dozens Jews in Hebron were murdered during the 1929 riots? Is it queer that a few hundred need protection because without it, they wouldn’t survive amongst the Palestinian population for five minutes?

RE: “we stood on a street separated by a 3-4 ft. partition. This barrier was seemingly designed to ensure safety…to somehow keep the peace by forcing a form of disconnection between the Israeli settlers and Palestinian people living there.” ~ Moore

MY COMMENT: Designed to insure safety? Perhaps not. Perhaps it is designed to maintain acquiescence of the Palestinians by inducing within them a sense of permanent temporariness (and ‘learned helplessness’) pursuant to an Israeli philosophy of “maintained uncertainty”. Somewhat akin to the Warsaw Ghetto.

FROM ALISTAIR CROOKE, London Review of Books, 03/03/11:

(excerpts)…It was [Ariel] Sharon
who pioneered the philosophy of ‘maintained uncertainty’ that repeatedly extended and then limited the space in which Palestinians could operate by means of an unpredictable combination of changing and selectively enforced regulations, and the dissection of space by settlements, roads Palestinians were not allowed to use and continually shifting borders. All of this was intended to induce in the Palestinians a sense of permanent temporariness
…It suits Israel to have a ‘state’ without borders so that it can keep negotiating about borders, and count on the resulting uncertainty to maintain acquiescence

SOURCE – http://www.lrb.co.uk/v33/n05/alastair-crooke/permanent-temporariness
ALSO SEE: Learned helplessness http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness

Dan, I’m a little surprised by your disdain for queer theory.

What brings you to this work? What political theory and instilled values drive you to stand up and say that what Israel is doing is wrong?

As Darnell shows, Queer theory allows for individuals to self-define their own sexual preferences, without having to conform to a specific identity. Furthermore, queer theory allows for sexual preference to be disconnected wholly from gender identity, and thus allows for a fluid conception of sexual preference.

You refer to this as arbitrary, but what is it that allows for individuals to self-define their sexual preferences that is so threatening to you? I only say that because you sound angry and threatened, particularly when you say ‘Why can’t you just as a friggin human being be against Israel’s policies, walls etc – along with “ideas that diminish our humanity”?’

From my understanding, Darnell is against walls and constructions based upon identity because he sees the walls in Hebron as analogous to so many of the walls constructed elsewhere in society, metaphorically and physically.

Queer theory creates a political space for equality, free from the social division created by sexism, racism, and classism. When individuals are allowed to be as they wish, without having to conform to the stereotypes and histories associated with their identity, they are free.

hop:
“I don’t loathe or fear Palestinians. But the Jews in Hebron need protection for a reason.”

How many millions per year do American tax payers spend on “protection” for Jewsh settlers in Hebron? I’d love to see a per person $ amount.