Practice What You Preach: Considering Multiple Identities in Social Movements

Practice What You Preach: Considering Multiple Identities in Social Movements
By Sarah Marlina-Anglin

A sense of belonging is an important part of human life. We long to feel included, to be a part of something we identify with. Our identity is what oftentimes guides us to groups in which we will belong. In fact, identity is so important to group formation that identity politics is the center of social movements fighting oppression. The resulting social organizations usually address one oppressed identity at a time, but by doing this, experiences of those with multiple oppressed identities are excluded. In 1984, student Susan Shea wrote an article titled, “Not just preaching to the converted” for Concordia University’s The Link highlighting this very struggle specifically for lesbian feminists. She lists out a few different political action groups that lesbian feminists can be a part of, but warns that none of them will really fully address their dual identity¹. Social movements still oppress those with multiple oppressed identities, so that lesbian feminists continue to struggle with their sense of belonging today as they have in the past. This is evidenced in both the gay/queer community and the feminist community –as presented in Shea’s article– during both the 1980s and in contemporary times. Rather than address one identity, social movements should adopt intersectionality and acceptance to be more inclusive.

In the queer community, the gendered experience of lesbian feminists is not readily addressed. Shea explains in her article that issues addressed in gay groups are often directly opposed to feminist issues. Her reasoning for this is that while gay men face sexual oppression, lesbians face oppression as women first; lesbians are visible by their gender, not their sexual orientation. By acknowledging that the oppressive experiences of lesbian feminists differ from those of gay men, Shea hints at intersectionality². Intersectionality describes the various ways that oppressive institutions (e.g. homophobia and sexism) are interconnected. Although the term “intersectionality” was only coined in 1989 by Kimberlé Crenshaw –4 years after this article was written– the idea had been floating around prior to that, as demonstrated in Shea’s article³. Shea’s intersectional approach makes her question the current state of political action groups, which usually only address one oppressed identity at a time. She pleads for inward critical reflection of these groups to ensure that they are not replicating the oppression they are fighting against in their own groups⁴. Listing out the different groups that lesbian feminists can join reflects their divided sense of belonging, with part of their identity being accepted in all these groups, but none of these groups accepting all of their identity. During the time that this article was written, there were strong links between lesbianism and feminism. Lesbian feminists desired their own community, separate from the gay male community. As a result, they created their own territories and spaces to facilitate this. In Montreal, this space was in the Plateau⁵. This is why Shea’s article is so relevant to the time: lesbian feminists wanted to find their own spaces. However, during the early 1990s, queer politics became increasingly important as a response to police repression. Lesbians and gays began building alliances so that there was a stronger identification with the common cause of the queer community⁶. To Shea, this is one positive aspect for lesbians joining gay groups, since they can stand together on queer issues⁷. The increased focus on the queer community at large influenced the opening of gay bars and clubs to a broader queer clientele. Spaces catering to a “mixed” clientele increased so that lesbian spaces became less relevant⁸. Today, women-only spaces have nearly disappeared, and many lesbians lament this loss⁹. The increase in queer spaces and decline in lesbian spaces homogenizes queer experiences. It assumes that lesbians do not need their own spaces because they can go to queer spaces, but this does not take into account their female identity as an added factor in oppression as a sexual minority; lesbians do not relate to gay men’s oppression in the same way, which is what Shea emphasizes in her article. However, within feminism, lesbian feminists’ sexual orientation is not considered.

            In feminist communities, the lesbian experience of lesbian feminists is not directly addressed. Shea, in her article, reminds readers of feminist groups that have in the recent past pushed lesbians to the margins, having them do the behind-the-scenes work so as to preserve their respectability. However, one radical reaction to this has been for lesbian feminists to create their own separate feminist group. Shea warns against these separatist groups that disguise themselves as “feminist” because they usually only address lesbian female experiences, while ignoring heterosexual female experiences. This, paradoxically, oppresses straight women the way that lesbians have been oppressed in feminist groups¹⁰. Here, her article demonstrates its call for acceptance of all types of women; one extreme of feminist groups that reject lesbian experiences should not be replaced with lesbian feminist groups that disregard straight women’s experiences. Shea is thus not only advocating for intersectionality but also for acceptance; just because lesbian women deal with the additional oppression of sexual orientation, it doesn’t mean that they should deny the oppressive experiences that straight women face. During the time Shea wrote her article, North America was in its second wave feminism. Feminism at this point was not very diverse, and the faces of feminism were mostly white, straight, middle-class women¹¹. Shea’s article is thus quite progressive for her time, as she supports the inclusion of lesbians in feminism. Feminist groups like White Western feminism do not take into account additional oppressive identities because they assume there is a homogenous experience of womanhood, just as queer groups homogenize queer experiences. Lesbianism is not considered important because women should be uniting based on their gender, not other identities¹². Unfortunately, the lack of acceptance of lesbian feminists is still present today. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, there are less and less women-only spaces. At the same time, many feminist groups at present –especially radical feminists such as TERFS (trans-exclusionary radical feminists)– do not accept queer women in their groups¹³. These types of groups also homogenize womanhood by claiming that there is only one way to be a woman, and all other forms are not true to being a woman. Lesbian feminists thus either do not have their sexual oppression addressed in the feminist groups they are in or are simply rejected from joining other types of feminist groups.

Lesbian feminists are often caught in between their gender identity and their sexual orientation when choosing a political action group suited to their needs. This is why Shea ends her article by saying that the good news for lesbian feminists is that they can be a part of more than one group at a time¹⁴. Shea’s article pushes readers to think critically about the multiplicity and intersection of identities. But while Shea does address misogyny in gay male groups and homophobia in feminist groups, she does not consider other oppressive institutions that further oppress lesbian feminists with additional oppressed identities. These oppressive institutions include racism, ableism, and classism. Shea’s list of groups that lesbian feminists can join is therefore mostly a list for lesbian feminists that are privileged in all their other identities. In hinting at intersectionality in her article, she seems progressive, but not so progressive that she takes into account intersectionality as a whole. Shea does do a good job at making aware the struggles that lesbian feminists have, which differs from gay men and from straight feminists. This was true in 1984 and is unfortunately still true today; lesbian feminists continue to feel out of place in both queer and feminist communities. Shea’s advice to join more than one political action group is only a temporary solution. In the long run, she advocates for unity within social communities. Although social movements are becoming more diverse and accepting today, there is still a long way to go. Social movements fighting against oppression must consider intersectionality, adopt acceptance and start practicing what they are preaching within their own groups.

Notes

1. Susan Shea, “Not just preaching to the converted”, The Link, March 20, 1984, 16.

2. Shea, “Not just preaching to the converted”, 16. 

3. Kimberle Crenshaw, “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics”, University of Chicago Legal Forum 1989, no. 1 (1989), 140, http://chicagounbound.
uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8.

4. Shea, “Not just preaching to the converted”, 16. 

5. Julia A. Podmore, “Gone ‘underground’? Lesbian visibility and the consolidation of queer space in Montreal”, Social & Cultural Geography 7, no. 4 (2006), 609, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649360600825737.

6. Julia A. Podmore, “Gone ‘underground’?”, 614.

7. Shea, “Not just preaching to the converted”, 16. 

8. Julia A. Podmore, “Gone ‘underground’?”, 616.

9. Julia A. Podmore, “Gone ‘underground’?”, 618.

10. Shea, “Not just preaching to the converted”, 16. 

11. Benita Roth, Separate Roads to Feminism: Black, Chicana, and White Feminist Movements in America’s Second Wave (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 6-7, http://mcgill.worldcat.org/oclc/51899009.

12. Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham, “African-American Women’s History and the Metalanguage of Race”, Chicago Journals 17, no. 2 (1992): 251.

13. Meara Bernadette Kirwin, “All Lez’d Up and Nowhere To Go”, The McGill Daily, February 26, 2018, https://www.mcgilldaily.com/2018/02/all-lezd-up-and-nowhere-to-go/.

14. Shea, “Not just preaching to the converted”, 16.