Blogging Desires

Seeing a man in a bra was a turn on. It was a very sexy top, and not your conventional bra. Why was it such a turn on, even if his little top didn’t hold full rounded breasts that are usually an automatic turn-on, at least for me? Mmmmmmmm… yes, it was his body, I do have to admit that shamelessly, and the fact that he was wearing a bra. If he had been bare-naked, I probably wouldn’t have been as turned on. But where were these conversations happening? Did they happen at all during Films of Desire? Or were we watching films of desire, and hushing issues of desire among ourselves? Did we talk at all about how we managed these desires within the larger society we live in. It seemed as if we were outsiders looking in, stripped of our own sexual desires, and forced to not think aloud about issues so intimate. It was easier to think about the issue of pedophiles, and to interrogate if we really can condemn them all as “equally bad”, “those evil people” boxed in by our self-righteous judgments. For example, I think a number of people in the feminist movement might have raised an eyebrow or two, and even more likely raise their voices, at the six-men rape scene in Bugis Street, the “dream come true” for a transsexual. But does that mean that some feminists are as bad as the “balding old men” on censorship boards? Don’t we often speak of “the dangers” when such scenes in films might be misread (after all I learnt we cannot assume that adult-to-adult is an esteemed noble approach that one should take in film-making), with rape seen as the woman’s secret fantasy, contributing to men’s ideas that women secretly want to be sexually coerced and abused. And what if it were true? What if women did fantasise about being raped? It’s true, there are no fixed truths, only complicated ones. I think I will need to learn how to complicate the truth, but how does one do this pointedly when we advocate on issues of sexuality? What challenges will we face if we fail to complicate the truths sufficiently enough? Will our message go across as we’d like it to be received? Or will our complicated truths be labelled as falsehoods, immorality, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

Until now I’m still reminiscing my four glorious days at the enchanting palace up in Rajasthan, watching film after film, most of which were nicely done while others needed improvement, with matching hot and spicy indian food to go. As a development worker cum film enthusiast (though a “dummy” in filmmaking) cum “budding” social scientist, I am simply amazed at the power of films to depict the interconnection between sexuality and socio-cultural issues affecting the southeast asia region. Thus, I hope the FOD community will find ways and means of sharing most of the films shown during the event to the larger communities of researchers, social scientists, filmmakers, development policymakers and others whose academic scholarships and professional pursuits are geared towards increasing people’s awareness and raising their consciousness about pressing issues and problems that have impeded people’s development and societal transformation.

here. http://www.sheblogs.net/users/mienly

attn: prerna, barbara and prebeen to drop by as you are mentioned, with love.

cheekay, i have no answers to the question i asked, either, but i am thinking within the arbitrary frames of cyberspace as an effective medium that blurs the borders of the categories that we almost take as natural in the physical world. donna haraway (cyborg manifesto) explained this well, but i would like to add to the discourse something that can be useful for the feminist emancipatory project, especially the male contribution to it. if we view cyberspace as a medium that shifts our focus from color, race, sexual orientation, affectional preference or genital morphology, if u will, to the self-ascribed characteristics of virtual representations, then isn’t cyberspace a promising emancipatory space for identity representations? when we approach representations this way, the very concept of representation can possibly take an additional stance apart from posing as a symbol of the bodied person. in fact, representations can also take a political stance, which is as useful for the personal as it is for the marginalized and for all the others who support the political causes of the marginalized. phew! just thinking out loud.

It was a one of a kind experience. The place was pretty awesome. The people were fabulous. And the films! And the discussions that were going on — both in the formal panels and in more ad hoc configurations.

I must admit though that the tech-related panels seemed to be a little bit off. And after the first panel, I became very nervous about the tech panels — mostly because I had to be in them and my understanding of queer issues and film was (still is but not as much) pretty thin. But it worked out in the end.  The ones who did go to the panels rocked — and asked so many compelling questions.

I am still thinking about Alvin’s follow-up question on the assumption that women re-presented in digital spaces were attached to women’s bodies — and what if they weren’t? What does that mean for women’s re-presentations in the Internet.

And Namita’s aha! comment about the idea of representation of women, as has been understood in other media like film or tv, may no longer be relevant to digital spaces. Perhaps it’s not so much “representation” as it is “participation”? Will have to think about that some more.

And the conversation on the bus ride from Neemrana to Delhi on the balancing act one needs to do on anonymity, identities (online and real ones) and accountability in digital spaces.  I still have no clear answer though my practical bent tells me to just encourage everyone to experiment with these Web 2.0 tools (like blogging) and find their comfortable fulcrums to balance their identities, anonymity and accountabilities for what they say / how they behave in digital spaces. Though I understand that that response hardly helps… So no answers there.

Many, many questions still. Like where do I find versions 1 - 3 of Iron Pussy? How do I get more Rahul Bose films?  Just how normative is heteronormativity? What does being a “queer asian” really mean? Does censorship really just curtail creativity or does it provide an impetus for more creativity to circumvent them? Can queer communities and creative expressions flourish just beneath the radar of fundamentalism?

Questions that have been on replay in my head — accompanied by snippets of the visual feast that some of the films shown have provided. Questions I’m pretty sure that will continue to niggle. Questions that beg more discussion.

So yeah, I am still reeling and waiting to catch my breath from the event. I’m glad we have this space to explore issues and topics further.

After 5 days of hard work (remember we reached there on 6th!) we took a moment to capture our tired faces in a camera. This is the TEAM FILMS OF DESIRE!

back in malaysia, and after several failed attempts at blogging while in delhi, giving it another go at the comforts of my home.

it’s a little hard to blog about an event after it has happened. one lesson i suppose, is to ensure that there is connectivity that can support multiple logins for participants who would like to blog as they go along. but eitherway, i’ll give it a go.

one of the sessions that really struck me during the event was the plenary on interrogating heterosexuality. i got quite excited when one of the speakers mentioned at the introduction that “heterosexuality is not let off the hook” brilliant! a lot of times, sexuality seems synonymous with (straight) female (lack/lascivious) sexual agency, or lgbtiq and the rest of the/us ‘queers’. it seems promising to start looking at heterosexuality with lots of questions.

so different ‘models’ of heterosexualities was presented. i wish i can remember all of them. but primarily, it offered a glimpse of heterosexual arrangements that didn’t confirm to patriarchal power relations, or even monogamy. in this way, heterosexuality is seen as a little more unstable than the usual fairytale of one and only happily ever after. that there are multiple lived experiences that are not just about one husband one wife and 2.2 kids (preferably male) . but i suppose what disturbed me also, was that they were not normative.

for example, the Musuo community in China was given as a demonstration of how women headed families, and men remained as replaceable companions. in the second presentation, a matrilineal society in Kerala was presented, and how it became legislated out of existence as a kind of prostituion. i’m oversimplifying this, but i was hoping for a discussion around how this became ‘queered’ in imagination and reality of matrimony.

as in, there is a value in examining heterosexual marriage through diachronic lenses. but if the re-telling does not shift the albeit real, but marginalised experiences as part of the normative, but instead, through the representation, becomes a ‘curiosity’, a ‘dead/missing/mysterious’ past, then how does this interrogate heterosexuality?

i’m thinking out loud, so maybe i have missed the point. but at the end of the session, i was a little dissatisfied. feeling that there is a crack somewhere that i’ve not plonked a question mark in. why should heterosexuality mean monogamy mean marriage? there are ample examples in reality that shows this is not the case. legalised polygymy in Malaysia for example. and acceptable ‘adultery’ and visits to sex workers. in both of the very real, and very ‘now’ instances, it’s really about the assumption of the passivity and lack of female sexual agency leaning on the active and penetrative male sexual agency. i wonder where we managed to trouble sexuality and its adherence to gender in this session.

i’ve been watching queer as folk (bad tv, i know), but even in pop representations of gay culture, it kinda shouts the same things about what it means to be a man, and sexually active. and though the last season attempts to disrupt things like straights = marriage; gay = lots of sleeping around and different ideas of commitment, but at the end of the day, the anxiety and propulsion of desire for the audience is toward a neat closure of romantic couplehood.

and then what?

Knowledge & Rights with Young People through Safer Spaces (KRYSS) did a workshop with young/emerging artists on sexuality. at one of the sessions, when participants were making bodies and markers of sexual and gender identities, the group that made the straight woman ended up marking her through her gendered roles instead. she strangely became an asexual being wearing an apron, make-up and reading self-help books on how to get a man.

is it ever possible to interrogate heterosexuality without interrogating the gendered binary they lean on to become legible? and at what points does it start to become incomprehensible, nonsensical and hilarious, while at the same time, rupturing the fairytale of heterosexuality?

I was at the Films of Desire as a volunteer. I am pleased to know of this blog. I hope to be able to share my experience and thoughts, mostly on the event, but not necessarily limited to that.

I have volunteered in various capacities and at various events but that has mostly been in religious /spiritual spaces. From there, I have learnt the spirit of volunteering. Little things we do may go unnoticed, like arrangement of tables and chairs, room lights, and this and that; but all of it is very important and adds to something big. It turns a shared idea into reality. It is important therefore to give every small bit our personal best.

Not just physically, even spiritually. It is important to connect with the spirit of the event, with the spirit of hospitality, with the spirit of speakers, audience, technical support and everyone around.

There were moments though of exasperation, irritation, frustration and arrogance even. That surely I can do better than this. Surely there is more to me that circulating mikes! That this audience is a bit silly.. The points they’re making are stupid and irrelevant.. I could do better. Why do I have to take care of this lot? I could be in a better place doing something better – elsewhere!

And that’s the time to run a check on my own spirit. To respect unconditionally. To be grateful for a new experience. To appreciate meeting people. To appreciate differences of views. To take what adds value, and to be generous in giving that what is needed - without begrudging the whole world!

This is to express my gratitude for being able to serve as a volunteer. It was an enriching experience for me. And I hope I was able to give more that I got.

Sumit

————
Sumit Baudh
Senior Programme Associate
The South and Southeast Asia Resource Centre on Sexuality
11, Mathura Road (First Floor), Jangpura B, New Delhi 110014, INDIA
tel: +91 (0) 11 2437 9070, +91 (0) 11 2437 9071
fax: +91 (0) 11 2437 4022
eml: sumit@tarshi.net, s.baudh-alumni@lse.ac.uk
web: www.asiasrc.org