The Politics of Sexuality in Latin America: A Reader on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Rights

“The Gay Pride March? They’re Not Talking About Me”: The Politicization of Differences in the Argentine GLTTTB Movement

“The Gay Pride March? They’re Not Talking About Me” The Politicization of Differences in the Argentine GLTTTB Movement Aluminé Moreno Translated by Sarah Harper [. . .] W  the subjects of sexual diversity that constitute the  movement of the city of Buenos Aires?₁ Differentiation among participants is based on disputes over the definitions of identity posited by this social movement (based on gender, on sexuality, on social class), and on diverse understandings of the state’s role in the perpetuation of and the fight against the oppression of these subjects. [. . .] Existing literature about social movements associates the  movement with identity politics (Adam, Duyvendak, and Krouwel , –). This notion refers to a series of struggles during the twentieth century whose protagonists have mobilized in the name of race, gender, ethnicity, sexuality, nationality, and religion. This type of mobilization contrasts conceptually with other types, in which political intervention is tied to the common interests of a group relative to its position in the social relations of production, or in which the principal differences are considered a question of political postures, the “politics of ideas” according to the definition given by Phillips (, –). [. . .] In interviews I conducted,² the protagonists of the BuenosAires  movement discuss the concept of identity politics, question its effectiveness, and resist including their practices under this umbrella category. However, for the majority of those inter387 viewed,³ this label serves as a starting point for a criticism of political identities constructed around experiences connected with sexuality and gender, for a consideration of the consequences of the differences derived from social class,and for the formulation of diverse political programs associated with the sexual-diversity movement. The Politicization of the Body, of Gender, and of Desire I can’t go out and fight for an identity that I don’t have. In the name of what? Patricia, lesbian activist, Desalambrando The problem with identities is a very serious one, you see, identity is a thing. . . . It’s just a thing. So, it has a static nature. Laura, lesbian activist, Izquierda  Political strategies that resort to sexuality- and gender-based identities have been criticized in different contexts, because identities that are invoked for the mobilization of sexual diversity are founded on “the dichotomies produced by society (homosexual/ heterosexual, man/woman) [that] are the base of oppression; the fluid and unstable experiences of the self are fixed to serve as mechanisms of social control” (Gamson , ). Identity politics are questioned because they simply resort to the same perspective on social relations that produces the subordination of nonheterosexual subjects: that is, to the idea that marginal social groups exist in accordance with their sexual orientations, sexual practices, or gender identities that are far from heteronormative . From this point of view, identity politics is an example of symbolic violence (Bourdieu , , –), because it reinforces the same classifications that produce the subordination of subjects of sexual diversity. [. . .] Although the aforementioned analysis is based on a sociohistorical context different from that of contemporary Argentina, some of its elements prove useful for understanding the disputes about identities articulated by the local  movement. To begin with, lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities are often grounds for controversy among participants in the sexual-diversity movement.A large portion of those interviewed question the very idea of identity, and emphasize the restrictive effects that this label can have with regard to experiences and subjectivities. Contention arises from the consequences (intentional or not) of the definitions of sexual identities and gender understood by the  movement that ultimately regulate experiences , and exclude those who do not subscribe to these characterizations: Sometimes it was bad to be too feminine, sometimes to be too macho . . . Sometimes it was bad to be too much of anything, but, having an identity like that, so cut and dry, there’s a very clear limit, and that is really messed up because there are a lot of people 388 / Aluminé Moreno that get left out, because they’re not part of the dominant society but they’re also excluded from those other spaces, you know? (Laura, lesbian activist, Izquierda ) One finding that emerged was that many interviewees expressed a general criticism of the supremacy of gay identity in the social movement. Within the  movement, gay middle-class men seem to occupy a position of privilege to which others are subordinate. Even interviewees who presented themselves as gays attempted to draw limits within their identity...