Love The Sin: Sexual Regulation and the Limits of Religious Tolerance by Jakobsen and Pellegrini (Grade: 85%)

In their book, Love the Sin: Sexual Regulation and the Limits of Religious Tolerance, Jakobsen and Pellegrini present five chapters which move from critiques of modern day religious thought to constructive suggestions for activism and changing the political and social landscape of the United States. In the first chapter “Getting Religion”, the authors discuss two separate Supreme Court cases which illustrate the overreaching influence of Christianity in American society. Chapter two “What’s Wrong with Tolerance” discusses the difference between tolerance, in which the majority dominates the minority and freedom, in which everyone has true freedom without one group being privileged over another. Chapter three “Not Born This Way” marries the two previous concepts to suggest that sexuality is a way in which people express their personal identities. The authors believe that religious influence has allowed for personal identity expressions in the past. The fourth chapter “The Free Exercise of Sex” proposes that public space itself should be redefined to not only allow for heterosexual expresses of sexuality but homosexual expressions as well. Lastly, chapter five “Valuing Sex” goes deeper into the very idea of morality and what it means to be moral, suggesting that homosexual sex can be moral and ethical.

            While Jakobsen and Pellegrini make some compelling arguments, there are limitations to their research. Most importantly, they seem to quickly move over not only historical discussions of homosexuality but also tenets of social psychology and sociology. While much of their research comes from rhetorical and critical analysis of artifacts in the social sphere, they seem not to go deep enough. Rather than discuss the history in depth of Scalia’s comments about Judeo-Christian values, they scratch the surface. One would think that other cases, outside of the realm of homosexuality, could provide more insight. If there were numerous cases in which this parameter was applied, then one might be able to see a pattern that could be approached from a different angle for change. Jakobsen and Pellegrini’s major argument seems to be that we must change the iron grip that Christianity, and more specifically Protestantism, has over the United States. One has to wonder that since homosexuality is not as widely accepted in the social sphere and public places, why the authors did not suggest to expose the bias in acts against free speech or religion. They do try to urge activists to see homosexuality as a First Amendment Right, a way to gather in public spaces and express identities freely, but this does nothing to expose the overall impact and dominance of Christianity. I feel that this is a root problem which is heavily influenced by social psychology and sociology.

            Most are familiar with the quote that nothing unites people faster than a common enemy. Jakobsen and Pellegrini touch on this briefly in their discussion on what it means to be white, that some immigrant groups were not considered white until recently. Deviance from the majority creates differing values and interests. This deviance also creates an us versus them mentality that the authors discuss. The problem is that they do not go far enough with this idea. Religion has been used to persecute, ostracize, and murder “deviant” groups for millennia. It is a basic part of human nature. The authors miss the mark when they neglect to discuss ideas of assimilation and acceptance. While they discuss the civil rights movement, they fail to draw parallels effectively between interracial marriage and sex to homosexuality.

            That is not to say that homosexuals should be forced to assimilate to the dominant Christian culture of the United States. It just seems that Jakobsen and Pellegrini fail to realize that assimilation has been such a large part of the acceptance of minority groups in the past and when one is accepted, another other emerges to be ridiculed and denied basic human rights. Their work is a good jumping off point but it does not go far enough to get to the root of the discrimination of minority groups in the United States.

Introduction in Reading Chican@ Like a Queer by Sandra K. Soto and Chicana Lesbians: The Girls Our Mothers Warned Us About edited by Carla Trujillo (Grade: 95%)

In both the texts, Soto and Trujillo look to define and expand upon the unique experience of being a Chicana and a Lesbian. In Soto, the main issue seems to be the call for the need of this type of scholarship. Soto states that “too often queer theory continues to render race, ethnicity, and nation as niches within a broader, and unremarked white erotics” (2010, p. 4). Trujillo chooses to provide this scholarship through showcasing essays, prose, and poetry within four categories: The Life, The Desire, The Color, and The Struggle. The section entitled “The Life” focuses on what it means to be a Chicana lesbian, both in terms of history and in every day living. “The Desire” expresses the sexuality, so often repressed, of not only Chicana lesbians but also of Chicana women. “The Color” contains pieces about loving white women and the assimilation and loss of culture that comes with joining white society. “The Struggle” ties these all together, speaking to the violence that comes from “The Life” and “The Desire”  and the loss of identity that can come from “The Color”. The Struggle also suggests what Chicana lesbians and feminists as a whole can do to change the climate and attitudes towards Chicana lesbians and women.

One important point made by both the Soto and Trujillo books is the idea of assimilation of Chicanos into white culture. Soto quotes a passage from Perèz in which Perèz describes the problems between the “conquest triangle” of “the white/Oedipal/colonizer, la india (the Indian woman) and the castrated mestizo/Chicano son” (2010, p. 7). Perèz’s goes into detail, describing this struggle in the following way:

Chicanos…practice male prerogative and marry white women to defy, and collaborate with, the white father, and in having half-white children move their sons a step closer to the relations of power –the white-colonizer father. For the Chicana who marries the white male, she embraces the white Oedipal-colonizer ambivalently, because no she has access to power theoretically, but practically she is perceived as la india once again. …The daughter of a white male and Chicana has the father’s white name to carry her through racist institutions, placing her closer to power relations in society (p. 7).

The section on “The Color” echoes these same ideas. In “Beyond El Camino Real” by Terri de la Peña, Monica discusses the disorientation she feels at being the only non-white person in New England and the struggles of loving a white woman who just does not understand these feelings because she has power. “Gulf Dreams” by Emma Perèz also echoes these same struggles and the assimilation of Chicanos into white culture through the school system. The difference with “Gulf Dreams” is that while “Beyond” takes place in New England, “Gulf” takes place in Texas, a state with many Chicanos.

The issue with seeing Chicanos as the “other”, forcing them to assimilate into white society by giving up their language and culture, is that those who do not are ostracized and seen as less worthy than whites. This leads to the idea of some people being “illegal”, an idea that is so prevalent in the United States currently. While immigrants of all cultures have entered this country without proper paperwork, because Chicanos can not, and often do not want to pass as white, they are segregated from other immigrants who are willing to pass. This leads to not only violence against Chicanos but also a very real physical separation between the United States and Mexico in the form of a wall and border guards. Chicanos can become “legal” through doing just as Perèz suggests, in marrying a white person and taking on the white privilege that comes from marrying a person in power. They gain legitimacy through a green card or citizenship, which is much easier after marrying a white person.

This, however, leaves lesbians (and gay Chicano males) without access to power, without a way to become legitimate in the eyes of both state and society. This is the issue with people assimilating into a culture ruled by the minority of white straight males. It casts groups into the shadows, into the corners, and does not give them a way to become “legal”. Thus, these attitudes allow people to deny rights to gay Chicanos not only because they are gay but also because their skin is not white. It also breeds a culture of violence, one that is especially harmful to Chicanas.

Chicanas have historically been seen as the spoils of war and property. In South America as indigenous tribes warred, women of the losing side were seen as slaves and objects to be raped and impregnated. When the colonists came from Spain, the tradition continued as they tried to “whiten” the indigenous people by not only impregnating the women to create a lighter mixed race but also by stripping them of their language and culture. Chicana women were indoctrinated to believe that their pleasure and desire was wrong, that they were merely a vessel to carry the seed of the conquering race and to serve their male betters. This has lead to a rape culture, almost encouraging and endorsing rape and violence against Chicana women.  This also leads to where, even within the confines of marriage, Chicana women are seen as “whores” for expressing any desire.

Since Chicana lesbians express their desire and take pleasure from sex, they are cast out from the only place they have in the world. Since they have abandoned the pursuit of males and sometimes the “traditional” role of motherhood and procreation, they are seen as aberrations within their own culture. Clearly they are unable to gain power in the white society as a whole but now they find themselves isolated from their own culture, their own family. The amazing thing, though, is that rather than remain quiet, there are Chicana lesbians who are shedding light on their lives, taking a small measure of the power back to regain their voices. It is a small step but one that is necessary. As Perèz suggests, they are creating a new kind of scholarship that uncovers not only the violence against Chicana women but also illustrates the struggles of being forced out of two worlds.