To be Black? or Queer Diabetics exist?

wow. the Cohen chapters really resonated with me this week. i keep finding more and more examples in my community work and interactions that i want to bring up in this response, so i think i will focus there.

I want to touch on something that Cohen discusses regarding when health issues become legitimate. On page 5 she writes that one church pastor describes that the church response to AIDS was either non-existent or negative because the disease was seen as a "disease of homosexuals" and goes on to say, "However, after women, children, and hemophiliacs--those who have no control over this disease--were found to be infected, church leaders began to realize that a more compassionate response was called for." This idea of fault/blame/guilt/immorality/legitimacy seems to be everywhere when dealing with disease. I run an online group for queer diabetics that came out of my identity as, ahem, a queer diabetic. The idea of the group is to make connections between multiple types of oppression in real terms (ie lesbophobia and ableism) and also to bring basic visibility to this double identity. Many people don't understand why its necessary to make space for queer diabetics or don't see the two pieces as connected. Yet, NONE of the mainstream diabetes advocacy groups have any information geared to queer folks about the healthcare disparities and dealing with a chronic illness. I believe that this does not just come from the ignorance of dominant groups to whom it "never occurs" that these are issues (a form of homophobia in itself--presumed heterosexuality and/or lack of knowledge about issues affecting queer communities). I think that these mainstream providers/advocates do not want to risk delegitimating their issue by talking about diabetes as a "queer issue." Particularly type 1 (sometimes called juvenile on-set) groups frame their subjects as innocent children that didn't do anything wrong, victims to whom this disease happened. since they are seen as wholesome and innocent, people feel bad when they get sick and they give money. Many of the events that these orgs put on have a large "family" focus, meaning cis-man + cis-women married with a couple (straight& cis) kids. They want to preserve this image. They do not want queers hanging around and threatening their funding (or poor people of color, or undocumented folks, etc. for that matter). Diabetes is seen as a worthy cause because white middle class kids get it; HIV contraction finally deserved compassion when "innocent" hemophiliacs & children were infected. Similar to what Cohen is explaining about membership in black communities and owning of issues, the dominant members within the diabetes community get to decide what the issues are for that community, where the research money goes, who will receive support and services and who is allowed in. Even though queer diabetics face greater health disparities than hetero diabetics, they are less likely to be able to access diabetes-specific services due to homophobia and to a lesser extent, LGBT-specific services due to ableism & disease-stigma.

Examples of dominant groups within marginalized communities deciding that group's agenda & focus issues abound in my life this week. Three others that I am dealing with today include: substance abuse prevention groups ignoring/avoiding LGBT inclusion in surveys, mainstream nyc LGBT groups focusing on gay men's health almost exclusively, and trans/queer mobilization of support against police brutality without community accountability for sexual assault.

I would like to finish with a comment about the discussion happening here around centering deviance. I firmly believe that the folks on the margins absolutely need to be the center of and leaders of movements. Yet we consistently witness the selling out of deviants once they become popular or in the center. I think that this often happens because the frameworks of these movements have not actually shifted in the ways they needed to. I have often thought that business women really aren't that liberated, they are just (sometimes) allowed to be a part of discussions/negotiations/decision-making if they are willing to take on the characteristics of the dominant group. If we were actually able to put deviant-created, deviant-led frameworks in place maybe it would be possible to make change. That's what I'm hoping for at least.

****
other notes:
-issue of "black community really exist?" reminds me of conversations about ageism and what is "culturally appropriate" programming for seniors being prescriptive instead of wide-ranging and self-determined

"consist mostly of people with economic and educational privilege is MORE concerned with presenting a “respectable” face to the dominant culture and reaping the rewards of proximity with white folks than with being accountable for the lived experience of the majority of black folks."