The creative juices are flowing. This one is courtesy a commentator using ‘allegedly queer’ as an insult for Yasmin Nair after her critique of Uniting American Families Act over at Queer Cents. Now, many bi-national same-sex couples took offense to the post given their own personal struggles. Few really saw why Ms. Nair was raising such an issue with UAFA. It’s a piece of legislation that serves a privileged few, keeps marriage and family as central to citizenship, and might detract from efforts at comprehensive immigration reform.
My own views on gay immigration politics are summed up here:
The movement for immigration reform–permeated in heterosexuality–has to incorporate queer voices and politics, and not just from ‘Immigration Equality‘, which mainly advocates for gay American citizens without really questioning the problems with the conception of ‘citizenship’ — a construction imbued in routine violence. Given the experiences of a second-class queer citizenship, what should constitute gay immigration politics is an inclusive effort to recognize citizenship as a violent construct that must not be denied to those who seek it.
While we are at it, can I take a moment to say that the DREAM Act also has a myriad of problems, and at the heart of it is the fact that it favors a meritocratic privileging, perpetuating the notion of “if you work hard in America, nothing is impossible?” That American dream is fallacious and a lie for many who do face structural barriers and inequalities to achieving that dream. And without the community service option, a lot of otherwise eligible youth might be doomed. It is with a heavy-heart that I support this act and UAFA because at the end of the day, I don’t want immigration options to be limited. No borders, no binaries.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
I liked that post by Yasmin on queercents. It is the first piece written by one of our own, as opposed to a straight, anti-lgbt author, that I’ve seen that critiques the UAFA honestly. It IS about immigration and marriage. People over at IE want to pretend that it isn’t because they think it helps them gain acceptability. She makes very good points. It made a lot of sense and I’m still scratching my head as to what the gay binational couples over at Immigration Equality are so up in arms about. Isn’t it good to examine this closely and objectively? For the four years I’ve been with my undocumented partner, I naively thought that a binational couple was a binational couple; now I see that there are some of us that are more honorable, upstanding, and used as shining examples, to gain acceptance into the straight world; gay binational couples who would otherwise would like to keep the immigration system the way it is, and couldn’t care less about CIR unless UAFA was attached to it.
IE is such a joke at times; they remind me of HRC.
I think we have a major problem with division from a lot of parties. There is the Congressional Hispanic Caucus that might have a heart-attack if UAFA is attached to their ‘comprehensive’ bill, mostly due to genuine homophobia. When it comes to ‘family unity,’ I want ALL families included, not just a few. Then there are the UAFA advocates — could care less about ‘THOSE ILLEGALS’ and often try to make an example out of us — “How can you legalize 12 million ILLEGALS and not give me the chance to sponsor my partner?” I understand the frustration but I detest the binaries. Lets try to pass as many of these bills that expand immigration options. But there are few commentators like us out there.