How to fight back against the invasion of Hen and Stag Parties and heterosexual ‘Zoo’ visitors to Manchester’s Canal Street? We know it’s a problem from the research of Skeggs and Moran among others, and we know that the Equality Act makes discrimination impossible. Here’s a rather brilliant solution currently on the doors at Via…
Twitter followers will have seen in the last few days that I was fascinated by a story concerning the Occupy movement in London. Pink News reported that Occupy had responded to criticisms of their site on Hampstead Heath (a well known cruising site) by suggesting that their presence could ‘vaporise’ gay cruising. It was a clear example of two sub-cultures fighting over constructions, the queering, of space.
In much the same way that we see conflict between a ‘boy-racer’, ‘chav’ culture and the sub-cultural practice of dogging, once again we were apparently seeing a space in conflict. This was the all the more fascinating for the Occupy movement has sought to position itself as a leftist group, far more in line with radical queer approaches than conservative conceptions of space. It was – put simply – a bit rich for a group which appears to defecate on a public space to object to ephemeral consensual encounters with typically no lasting trace.
However, the story didn’t end there. Pink News has revised the story, now making clear that the ‘Occupy London’ comments were from one individual – Timothy Sullivan – and didn’t represent the Occupy movement.
Ronan McNern, member of the Occupy London press team and co-founder of the LGBTQI anti-cuts collective Queer Resistance, told PinkNews.co.uk this afternoon: “I was furious when I saw these comments, which are not representative of Occupy London, and against our own Safer Spaces Policy, which is very clear: ‘Racism, as well as ageism, homophobia, sexism, transphobia, ableism or prejudice based on ethnicity, nationality, class, gender, gender presentation, language ability, asylum status or religious affiliation is unacceptable and will be challenged.’ “These comments are not representative of Occupy London. Occupy is made up of individuals and these are the comments of an individual – comments that run contrary to positions decided by Occupy in its very earliest days and remain at the core of how we relate to and show respect for one another.”
Although Sullivan now appears to have been side-lined, he spoke an essential truth. His presence, and that of his fellow Occupy folks transforms the space, and their permanent presence will inevitably disrupt cruising behaviour within that space.
Although the response from Occupy is to highlight their own policies and their opposition to homophobia, it’s unclear whether opposition to cruising per se amounts to homophobia. If that were the case, then some gay men – such as the author Paul Burston – who have condemned contemporary cruising, are themselves homophobic. Moreover, it pre-supposes that men who engage in cruising are gay – a very non-queer perspective on public sex behaviour from a groups that describes itself as ‘Queer’.
I don’t however think that his comments were motivated by malice. Rather, I suspect he was trying to be a little clever and it backfired. If you assume that the same socially conservative group who object to cruising also object to Occupy, then his argument can offer something of a moral ‘short-circuiting’ – would you rather have men splashing their semen about the place or a few people rustling up vegan sausages in a morning? The alternative is that he was just an idiot. A conclusion which one can not dismiss.
The story also highlights the problems with these social stands. If you favour x, you must also favour y. Just as this story suggest (shock horror) that not all lefty anti-capitalists support public sex, public sex advocates do not always support lefty anti-capitalists. It might seem simple to suggest that these positions are not mutually exclusive and yet, we often do make these very assumptions.
Of course, whether we are discussing public sex or Occupy, we are talking about the ‘ownership’ of public sex and conflicts of legitimate use. That debate will continue to run.
Law is a vital ingredient in the construction of space, notably that space which has been defined as ‘queer’. Whether in the form of Manchester’s Canal Street or San Francisco’s Castro, these ‘communities’ within a community, these villages’, or ‘ghettos’ are a product of changing laws, offering a space defined by identity – and offering a place of inclusion whislt also excluding a class of citizen not deemed ‘desirable’. Often their mere existence is a result of legal oppression elsewhere yet increasingly these spaces fall under the gaze of city officials seeking to ‘clean up’ a space. So it is interesting to see the way that legal powers are being applied with zeal by District 8 Supervisor Scott Weiner (a surprising number of US politicians with that name – by which I mean more than one) as he launches further proposed powers.
The Bay Area Reporter notes that smoking and camping would be banned and set hours for sitting on movable benches and chairs would be imposed at the Castro’s two street plazas under new rules proposed by Weiner. The restrictions would apply to Jane Warner Plaza on 17th Street near Market and across the street at Harvey Milk Plaza above the Castro Muni station. The ordinance would specify that Jane Warner Plaza, the city’s first Pavement to Parks project, falls under the rules that apply to the city’s public parks. Wiener introduced the proposed rules on November 15 at the request of the Castro/Upper Market Community Benefit District, which oversees maintenance of the outdoor areas. The Board of Supervisors is expected to begin holding hearings on them in early 2012.
These are similar spaces to those you might see in New York – bits of the road/street that have been re-designated ‘plazas’ with chairs/tables/planted trees/palms and other street furniture. I rather like them, and in the Castro they’ve always seemed busy spaces, and important social ‘hubs’.
A legal technicality means that the plazas are still classed as ‘street’s, and so this change puts them on the same legal footing as parks. So whilst street signs are up saying ‘no smoking’ (I confess, I never noticed them), they are not enforceable. Leaving aside this remorseless attack on smoking (which in itself drives me crazy), the measures also mean that sitting on chairs or benches that are not permanent structures in either plaza would only be allowed between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m (which seems nuts). Sleeping would also be banned in both plazas any hour of the day which is not about ensuring that Castro citizens remain conscious in public at all times (elf and safety gone mad someone shouts), oh no, it’s about ensuring that there is a reason so shift on those nasty homeless people. “you can’t sleep there”, “who says?” can now be responded with some Americanisation of “it’s the law innit”.
The measures are not without opposition; queer activist Tommi Avicolli Mecca (for it is he) called the latest planned restrictions “more anti-homeless bigotry from Wiener and the folks at the CBD”, he added: “Harvey Milk Plaza has always been a symbol of the freedom of the Castro, it’s the place where Milk got up on a soap box and expressed his opinion about things,” wrote Avicolli Mecca in an email, referring to the gay former city supervisor and Castro merchant the plaza honors. “Gay men have always stood and talked or congregated at any hours of the day and night in the plaza … Now Wiener and the CBD want to impose restrictions on the plaza, such as no sitting on the benches after 9 p.m., that are intended only to stop a certain group of people from sitting or using the plaza.”
BAR noted that Mecca predicted that the police would use the seating restrictions to harass homeless people and underage queer youth who hang out at the plazas at night. “Forty years ago, this is the kind of legislation that was often used to restrict the use of public space by gay men. Now it’s used against the homeless or those perceived as homeless,” wrote Avicolli Mecca. “As we used to say in ACT UP, ‘Shame, shame, shame!'” Mecca is probably right and this is yet another curious development in the use of queer space, following Weiner’s previous attack on nudists in the area (towels now need to be put down on furniture before you sit on them). Yes, you can still be nude in the Castro, but no bare bum on the furniture thank you. I think people should put towels down, but I don’t like laws that say such a thing – it seems rather heavy handed. You can read more on that here (check out the fab photo too).
This comes amidst controversial and saddening reports of changes at the iconic Castro Theatre – reinforcing the message I keep privately getting from folks that live in the Castro – it’s an area increasingly less ‘gay’ and an area in economic trouble. Weiner’s legal reforms could (unintentionally) be part of this narrative of ‘normalising’ the Castro and reducing gay inhabitants to no more than performing monkeys for the tourists. It’s a perfect example of the importance of understanding the social, historical, political and theoretical context in which law operates and the passionate feelings it can generate when its force is felt.
I’ve noticed in recent weeks that my twitter followers divide between those who wholly support the occupy movement and those who want the grubby layabouts swept aside. There does seem truth in the presence of a significant affluent liberal minority (i.e rich people spending all day moaning about how terrible it is to be rich) which does rather spoil things. All of which harks back to Nixonian cries of “damn Hippies” but I digress. How, I hear you wonder can I link this mass protest movement with the subject of law and sexuality? Well, there have been major clashes with the police seeking to remove them – principally it seems because they are redefining space – whether that be in Oakland California, Wall Street, New York or St Paul’s London. In much the same way as the queer space of the ghetto or the cruising and dogging site can raise questions as to the way space is regulated and controlled, so too does this movement. The ownership and purpose of space is at the heart of this movement – is it for the ‘masses’, or corporate aims, can the two be divorced and so on.
It was with particular interest that a new stone was thrown into this petrifying pool of politics. It emerged last week that the US porn company DirtyBoyVideo had used the whole plot line of the occupy movement as a backdrop for a quick porn flick film din one of the Occupy Oakland tents (if only the Daily Mail had caught that on camera). Rumours are unconfirmed about a cheeky little video of a Saif al-Islam and an LSE PhD supervisor.
So, we can see some of the (safe) images below but I do find it interesting that here we have a space that is re-defined, re-owned, and then another group re-own the space, layering with additional sexual purpose. The video is called ‘Occupy My Throat’. Well, quite.
You can read a little more on LeFag here but NakedSword added another brilliant angle to this story (some NSFW images at the side of the linked page), when they reported that the company sent out an open appeal to Brandon Watts -whose bloodied face at the Occupy Wall Street protests became a key image. Here’s the letter they sent:
Dear Mr. Watts, We are vocal supporters of Occupy Wall Street and the statement it makes. Your energy, commitment and drive have directly contributed to the success of the Occupation movement. As I watched the police drag you away in handcuffs, your face covered in blood, I could only think, “Wow, he’s hot!” Later, I learned you were among the first to pitch a tent in Zuccotti Park, making the movement a literal occupation. The NY Daily News reports you even lost your virginity in that park. Congratulations! Dirty Boy Video has long encouraged young men like yourself to pitch tents in parks. I offer you the opportunity to perform on our website, an opportunity to express yourself and your politics freely and without censor. Working together we can create a sexy, fun platform that inspires you, be that with other actors, actresses or both. Whether you choose to work with us or not, I salute your dedication and your courage.
Sincerely,
Andy Fair President DirtyBoyVideo.com
Nope, you couldn’t make it up, and here’s the bloody Brandon Watts…
Off to Manchester tomorrow for our annual field trip (steady the buffers, we’re on our way). Hugely excited to be hearing from Greater Manchester Police and their approach to policing in the Village – and the priorities that they currently face (I understand sex work/prostitution to be a key ‘issue’ at the moment).
The Lesbian and Gay Foundation have also been generous enough (mad enough?) to have us back to their gorgeous HQ at the heart of the Village for a chat about their work. I will as ever be giving the students my socio-legal walkabout around the village (so if you see us, say hello), and my optional more general walkabout on history, culture and sexuality (Hacienda, raves, Marxism, Liberalism, the Suffragettes, Coronation Street). Some of us will also be off to Canal Street on Monday night but I feel far too old and fat for such escapades these day (a theme that Stephen Whittle has written about more generally). Yes, I am essentially a mildly intoxicated tour guide for two days. Fun times.
I ask my students to watch the UK series’ of Queer as Folk before the trip, because the series was so important and it offers so many strands of discussion. A scene towards the end of Queer as Folk 2 encapsulates so much about the Village, but I can’t find any video clips of it to embed (if you can find it, please add a link in a comment). Instead, I offer the quote below which makes up the key scene:
“What, come back to this? The ghetto: alleyways stinking of piss, beggars in every doorway, straights and students coming to look at the freak show, and all the idiots saving all week, saving their stupid money from their stupid idiot jobs so they can come and shoot their load with some stranger. And just you look after it, this stupid little street. It’s the middle of the world. Cos on a street like this, every single night, anyone can meet anyone. And every single night, someone meets someone.”
– Stuart Jones, Queer As Folk 2
UPDATE – located the scene…here you go (1.29 onwards is they key bit)
Via – once Via Fossa – is to become ‘Polari’. One of Manchester’s best-known Canal Street venues decries the change as a ‘nip and tuck’, with a series of tweak that sound like an attempt to shift ‘up market’. They’ve announced that there will be no dance music or pop, and instead they will have a live pianist and vocalist with a classical/jazz theme depending on the night.
I was particularly struck by their door policy description (keep in mind they have to comply with the Equality Act in the same way that a ‘straight bar’ can’t exclude ‘gay’ customers). They state:
‘We like others are investing in our Gay Village and we will still be a straight friendly GAY venue and we will be continuing with our policy of No Fancy Dress and No Bunny Ears we do not cater for Hen Parties or Stag Nights because after all we are a gay space in the gay village not Blackpool seafront.’
Poor Blackpool (although it’s an absolutely true observation). It seems Via is the latest venue to re-iterate that they are a ‘gay venue’. When they say ‘straight friendly’, it’s essentially to say they will comply with the law. They can be straight unfriendly I suppose but not down and out opposed. They can however, control dress-policy and the re-iteration of their existing policy of excluding hen and stag parties highlights that these parties remain an issue of the village – an issue that was notably highlighted in the important research of Bev Skeggs, Les Moran and others. A must read for students interested in queer space.
Back in February I blogged about the Bareback Brotherhood and inadvertently pissed some people off. Surprisingly, it was some of the barebackers who seemed to assume that an academic must be taking pot shots rather than pro-safe sex groups who were offended. Since then the #bbbh hashtag seems to have exploded on the web/Twitter. Anyone who thinks that bareback sex is the refuge of the ugly, desperate and the few should simply look online. It is an all-encompassing diverse range of people, seemingly of all ages and a heavy transatlantic bias in the membership from what I’ve seen. I’ve been surprised at the young people – under 18 – who identify with that hashtag. I don’t know why I was surprised – perhaps I shouldn’t have been – but I was.
‘We, the undersigned bareback bloggers, unify in this statement today.We believe in the First Amendment and for all people to express themselves. We have chosen to express ourselves through these blogs.The actions we take are our own and we believe, as consenting adults, we can enjoy the sexual relations in the manner which we choose.If you find what we write about as offensive, wrong or immoral, we ask you not to read our blogs. If you follow us on Twitter and you consider what we write as offensive, wrong or immoral, we ask you to block each of us. None of our communications is required reading and we do not force it upon anyone.Since each of us launched our blogs, we all have received vitriolic lies, terroristic bullying, and even death threats.Our voices will not be silenced. We shall no longer tolerate further cyber harassment. We will not give these threats or statements a voice in our forums.We thank our supporters. We thank our readers. We thank those who just ignore us and let us live our lives.’
Interesting to see that Pink News is reporting on a campaign in Leeds to create a ‘gay quarter’. The move apparently follows attempts to clearly establish a gay village in Liverpool. Followers of the Liverpool development might recall that it was in turn inspired by the Manchester gay village and proposals for development in Liverpool have been rumbling along for years. As with Liverpool, the creation of a queer space post Queer as Folk is symbolic of a progressive urban habitat. The possession of such spaces is a useful marketing technique and can hep re-position the city brand. It’s therefore interesting to see that this seems a ‘grass roots’ campaign in Leeds, and not one coming from city officials or marketing consultants.
Law and Sexuality 