Interview with Cadu Oliveira on LGBTQIA+ organizing in São Paulo #LPW2020

LTIH: You have been involved with LGBT and HIV activism for some time now. How long have you been doing this in São Paulo?

CO: My trajectory with activism began from 1996 to 2007, in Jundiaí, with people who have lost their homes. At this point, matters such as HIV/Aids and drug abuse were already present in my life. It was in this scenario that I began to act in intersectional militancy, although it was still less centralized on LGBTs and, instead, oriented towards this population’s more structural conditions. However, I had already done research for LGBT news outlets, notedly for SuiGeneris Magazine.

Around 2002, I got closer to the LGBT Community, still only as a participant, not as a militant. In this movement towards belonging, I began to observe the inequalities and asymmetries found in gender, race, class, and the performance of gender and sexuality.

After spending some time away from these issues, in 2012, I began to participate in a reflexive group of people living with HIV/Aids (PLWHA), in a discussion that was focused on HIV/Aids Sexuality. It was the group Somos at Vila Mariana in São Paulo. At this point, I took a more political position on HIV/Aids and sexualities, which matured through my participation in Revolta da Lâmpada between 2014 and 2019, when I began to consider political intersections present in my own body, what it means to be a positHIVe black fag in Brazil, as well as in the context of a masculine, white, heteronormative, and very colonized movement. It is a movement that claims to have been influenced by StoneWall in 1969, although we were, during that same time, going through the worst moment of the Brazilian Military Dictatorship, and little of this Revolt reached the Movement until the beginning of the 80s. Currently there is Queer Theory, which is very academic and centered around Spanish authors (while one should mention how they were responsible for the colonization of a great portion of our Latin America), as well as from the United States (responsible for the current ideologic, economic, and cultural colonization).

It was in the spirit of this moment in 2014, after the 2013 manifestations and a rise in identity movements, that I began to think about the impacts of these intersectionalities inherent to my body, in my access to the city, in my militancy, and in my full right.

Minha trajetória com ativismos começa em 1996 até 2007 em Jundiaí com as pessoas em situação de rua, ocorre que já nesse momento já estavam presentes questões como HIV/Aids e uso abusivo de drogas. Então nesse cenário começo a atuar numa militância interseccional, ainda que menos centralizada em LGBTs e mais voltadas para essas condições mais estruturais nessa população. Embora já fizesse uma pesquisa na imprensa LGBT, notadamente a revista SuiGeneris.

Por volta de 2002 me aproximo à Comunidade LGBT, ainda como participante, não como militante. Nesse movimento de pertença começo a observar as desigualdades e assimetria de gênero, raça, classe, performance de gênero e sexual.

Por um tempo passo afastado dessas questões e em 2012 passo a participar de um um grupo reflexivo de pessoas vivendo com HIV/Aids (PVHA). A discussão era pautada em Sexualidade HIV/AIDS, era o grupo Somos na Vila Mariana em São Paulo. Nesse momento tomo uma posição mais política em HIV/Aids e sexualidades, que amadurece na minha participação nA Revolta Da Lâmpada entre 2014 e 2019, quando comecei a considerar as intersecções políticas presentes em meu corpo, o que significa ser uma bixa preta positHIVa no Brasil e no contexto de um movimento masculino, branco e heteronormativo, muito colonizado, que se declara influenciado por StoneWall em 1969, ainda que por estarmos na ocasião no pior momento da Ditadura Militar Brasileira, pouco se chegou dessa Revolta para o Movimento até o inicio dos anos 80, e contemporaneamente pela Teoria Queer , muito acadêmica e centrada em autores espanhóis (cabe salientar que eles foram responsáveis pela colonização de boa parte da nossa América Latina) e estadunidenses (responsáveis pelo colonização ideológica, econômica e cultura atual).

Foi nesse espirito do momento em 2014, após as manifestações de 2013 e num crescente dos movimentos identitários, que começo a pensar nos impactos dessas interseccionalidades inerentes ao meu corpo nos meus acessos a cidade, na minha militância e no meu pleno direito.

LTIH: We are now in a specific context, under Bolsonaro’s government, with new urgencies and intensities rising in the work that you do. Could you tell us a little bit about your activist work in this current scenario?

CO: In my reading, there was a great change in the growth of the conservative section of society, and its approximation with an ideology of extreme right, that is conservative, retrograde, and reactionary.

When we spoke of 2013, it was a political mark both for the left as well as for the right. Now, as we have had progressive governments in the last few years, from a left-wing party, the right spectrum began to feel neglected in their values, and drifted towards an extreme position as a response.

There already existed some discontent in this group, that is conservative in its moral agenda, retrograde with regards to access to rights, and reactionary in the maintenance of class privileges due to the growth of social and identity movements. The federal and state elections in 2018 were the materialization of this feeling, which makes it more difficult to promote debates that involve male-hegemonic experiences, and demands a change in strategies of mobilization. It was a direct attack on everything that we had been developing, and disrupted the fortification that movements had been going through since the Redemocratization.

There is a repositioning in the discussion due to the reclaiming of womanhood, blackness, dissident masculinities and femininities, and the acronym LGBTQIA+, which obviously interferes in the militancy and in the work that I have been developing.

However it is not a battle won for the fascist social forces, since we are still in the dispute of narratives and, our resistance (I don’t mean in it in every detail, because we have daily fake news and smoke screens) is fundamental, in the agenda of movements that are considered relevant and that involve partner movements for potential.

Denouncing things is also important as it marks the historic moment in which we live. I participated with Eduardo Santos in the chapter “Digressions on a Queer Experience” in the book “Sexual Metaphysics. Cannibalism and the devouring of Paul B. Preciado in Latin America”, in which I made exactly this analysis of the current juncture of intersectional militancy.

Na minha leitura, houve uma grande mudança com o crescimento de uma parcela conservadora da sociedade e sua aproximação de um ideario de extrema direita, conservador, retrógrado e reacionário. 

Quando falamos em  2013, foi um marco político tanto para o campo da esquerda quanto da direita, ocorre que por estarmos num momento de governos progressistas e nos últimos anos de um partido de esquerda, o espectro de direita ficou se sentindo negligenciado em seus valores e parte para uma posição extrema como uma resposta.

Já existia um descontentamento desse grupo que é conservador em pautas morais, retrógrado nos acessos aos direitos e reacionário na manutenção de privilégios de classe por causa do crescimento dos movimentos sociais e identitários. As eleições federais e estaduais de 2018 são a materialização desse sentimento, o que torna mais difícil promover alguns debates  que envolvem vivências não hegemônicas e exige mudança nas estratégias de mobilização. O que foi um ataque direto a tudo o que estávamos desenvolvendo e que desestrutura o fortalecimento que os movimentos tiveram a partir da Redemocratização.

Há um reposicionamento na discussão das reinvindicações das mulheridades, negritudes, masculinidades dissidentes, femininos e do acrônimo LGBTQIA+, o que, por óbvio, interfere na militância e no trabalho que eu estou desenvolvendo.

Porém não é um jogo ganho para as forças sociais fascistas, já que ainda estamos em disputa de narrativas e nossa resistência (não digo em cada detalhe, porque diariamente vemos fake news e cortinas de fumaça), nas pautas que os movimentos considerarem relevantes e que envolvam movimentos parceiros em potencial é fundamental.

A denuncia também é importante na medida que marca o momento histórico em que vivemos. Participei com Eduardo Santos do capitulo “Digressões sobre uma experiência queer” no livro” Metafísicas sexuais. Canibalismo e devoração de Paul B. Preciado na América Latina” fazendo exatamente essa análise da conjuntura atual para a militância interseccional.

LTIH: An important work in São Paulo involves access to medication. Do you know who or what activist groups are working with this? Could you tell us a little bit about groups with whom you work or have worked?

CO: Indeed, access to medication is fundamental, as it involves the maintenance of lives living with HIV/Aids.

In the beginning of the epidemics, the distance between the diagnostics of HIV and falling ill with Aids was much smaller and the number of deaths was very high. During that time, medicine was too expensive and their variety too little, so even if you had enough acquisitive power to buy them, you could have problems with reverse or counter-productive collateral effects, if you were not able to adapt to them.

The gratuity represented a mark in the confrontation with HIV/Aids in Brazil, as it gave treatment to people who have been historically excluded in the health system, and who therefore have a greater risk of death. What happens today with the scrapping of the SUS (Sistema Único de Saúde) and of Public Health, is that it is more probable that more places will be out of medications, because in some regions they are already out, and even in large centers, complementary treatments such as psychiatric medication, are already being neglected. Some groups have done this confrontation, and they are, in their different characteristics: Coletivo AMEM, Loka de Efavirenz, Pela Vida, GIV, and Rede de Jovens SP+. Although this confrontation is urgent, in my understanding, it is not enough, because we need public policies that guarantee universal access to treatment. You can have a wonderful NGO supporting the cause, which means immensely for the movement, but its work has to be backed up in the municipality’s, the state’s, and the nation’s public policies.

In my experience in collectives and in social movements, I have noticed that they are subject to the changes in society, to its participants, interests, and even to being extinct. When these changes occur, there can be an alteration in the activist goals of the group, and this is legitimate and necessary, while public policies remain relatively perennial, regardless of whether we have less social organization. Evidently, the larger the organization, the greater is the insurance of rights, but these cannot depend only on social events. My militant process also contains the seasonality of my immediate interests. I have already worked in acts with ArtsEverywhere, the Platform Explode!, in Jundiaí with Cume, more recently in Akuenda, in Homens Que Sentem, and I was also a participant in Revolta da Lâmpada. All of these experiences have framed my militancy, but as I said, we stay in a collective according to the interest we have in our own claims. A collective forms out of people with various characteristics, with new people who join and who leave the group, and on its interests and activities.

My role in militancy departs from a reflection of my own experiences, which is why it is natural that it may change. For example, my interest in talking about my blackness and homosexuality is different, even because these identities are already present in my body and are influencing how I speak and how I am heard. I feel more motivated to talk about politics, masculinities, HIV/Aids. Departing from this personal experience, I understand that collectives go through processes of change, and that this is fundamental for them, to be aware of their own contemporaneity. Permanence in them takes place through transits, which are favorable to the oxygenation of militancies. Because the tighter the group is, the more it can read the society that it represents.

Realmente, o acesso às medicações é fundamental pois envolve a manutenção das vidas vivendo com HIV/Aids.

No princípio da epidemia a distância entre o diagnóstico para HIV e o adoecimento pela Aids era muito menor e o número de mortes era muito grande. Naquela ocasião as medicações eram muito caras e sua variedade muito pequena, portanto, mesmo que você tivesse poder aquisitivo suficiente para comprá-las, ainda poderia ter problemas de efeitos colaterais reversos ou contraproducentes se não se adaptasse a elas. 

A gratuidade representou um marco para o enfrentamento ao HIV/Aids no Brasil, à medida que deu tratamento para pessoas historicamente excluídas do sistema de saúde, e portanto em maior risco de morte. O que acontece hoje com o sucateamento do SUS e da Saúde Pública é que há uma possibilidade grande de que as medicações comecem a faltar em mais lugares, porque em algumas regiões já está faltando, e mesmo nos grandes centros os tratamentos complementares como a medicação psiquiatra está sendo negligenciada. Alguns grupos que têm feito esse enfrentamento, com suas diferentes características, são: Coletivo AMEM, Loka de Efavirenz, Pela Vida, GIV e Rede de jovens SP+. Ainda que seja urgente esse enfrentamento, no meu entendimento, não é suficiente, pois precisamos de Políticas Públicas que garantam o acesso universal ao tratamento. Pode-se ter uma grande ONG apoiando a causa, o que significa imensamente para o movimento, mas o trabalho dela tem que ter respaldo nas políticas públicas do município, estado e do país.

Na minha experiência em coletivos e no movimento social, percebo que eles estão sujeitos às mudanças da sociedade, de seus participantes, de interesses, e podem mesmo ser extintos. Quando ocorrem essas mudanças pode acontecer uma alternância do objeto ativista do grupo, e isso é legitimo e necessário, enquanto as políticas públicas se mantêm relativamente perenes independente de termos menos organização social. Por evidente quanto maior a organização, maior a garantia de direitos, mas estes não podem depender apenas de um acontecimento social.

O meu processo militante também tem essa sazonalidade dos meus interesses imediatos. Já trabalhei em ações com ArtsEverywere, com a Plataforma Explode!, em Jundiaí com Cume, mais recentemente no Akuenda, no Homens que sentem e fui participante dA Revolta Da Lâmpada. Todas estas experiências moldam minha militância, mas como eu disse, ficamos num coletivo conforme o interesse que temos nas suas reinvindicações. O coletivo se forma de pessoas com diversas características e conforme as entradas de novas e as saídas que acontecem, dos interesses e da atuação.

 O meu lugar na militância parte da reflexão das minhas experiências, por isso é natural que mude. Por exemplo meu interesse sobre falar sobre minha negritude e homossexualidade é diferente, até porque essas identidades já estão presentes no meu corpo influenciando como falo e sou ouvido. Me sinto mais motivado a falar sobre política, masculinidades, HIV/Aids.

Partindo dessa experiência pessoal, entendo que os coletivos passam por processos de mudanças e isso é fundamental para que deem conta de sua contemporaneidade, e a permanência neles acontece em trânsitos, que são favoráveis para oxigenar as militâncias. Porque quanto mais estanque estiver um grupo, mais ele consegue ler a sociedade que ele representa.

Emanuel Brauna-Lechat interviews Momô de Oliveira #LPW2020

EBL: Momô, qual a sua avaliação sobre o cenário cinematográfico de um modo geral no Brasil?

MO: Vejo o cenário cinematográfico no Brasil com muitas incertezas, apesar de sabermos recentemente que para o ano de 2020 grandes nomes do STREAM irão injetar alguns milhões no setor, o que é muito positivo, não teremos, por outros lado, políticas públicas neste sentido e, naturalmente, a comunidade mais carente não será tocada por essas ações do setor privado. Ao meu ver, faltam mais projetos que envolvam a parcela menos favorecida da população.

EBL: Você é uma atriz de 63 anos, como você vê, dentro deste cenário do audiovisual que você desenhou, a questão da absorção de atrizes negras e com mais de 50 anos?

MO: Participo de muitas campanhas para TV e as vezes alguns trabalhos no cinema, percebo que atrizes negras e idosas, quando aparecem, são como uma participação de obrigatoriedade, para cumprimento de etapas. Temos aqui 3 problemas, a IDADE, o GÊNERO e a RAÇA. A atriz negra está geralmente em desvantagem, seja ela jovem ou madura.

EBL: Na sua opinião, o fato de eu, o autor e diretor da obra DORA NÃO CANSOU DE VIVER… ser negro, foi determinante para escolha de um elenco também negro? Em outras palavras, você acredita que seria menos provável que um diretor branco fizesse tal escolha?

MO: Honestamente, eu acredito que você, o autor e diretor, ser negro, foi sim determinante para a escolha de um elenco afro, uma vez que o roteiro em si não deixa evidente esta especificidade em nenhum momento e eu infelizmente tenho dificuldade em admitir que um diretor branco pudesse fugir dos padrões que conhecemos, não digo que seria impossível, apenas improvável.

EBL: O que te chamou atenção no roteiro de DORA NÃO CANSOU DE VIVER…?

MO: O roteiro me causou um impacto muito grande pela sensibilidade e delicadeza com as quais ele foi escrito, você foi muito habilidoso, cada cena é como um desenho, uma pintura, e o fato de não ter diálogo no texto me cativou ainda mais, pois como atriz, esse tipo de trabalho além de ser raro é sempre muito desafiador e gratificante, pois nos faz descobrir algumas ferramentas que nós nem sequer sabíamos que tínhamos. E por fim a personagem em si, DORA, uma verdadeira guerreira que representa mulheres e mães no mundo inteiro, é uma personagem universal, de fácil identificação, mas com muita particularidade, muito bem atribuídas pelo autor. 

EBL: Como atriz madura e mulher, o que você espera com esta obra audiovisual?

MO: Meu desejo é passar uma mensagem de amor e solidariedade, espero que ela chegue às escolas, que os jovens debatam sobre a importância das questões sociais e que levem esses questionamentos para seus lares, precisamos olhar mais ao nosso redor e não apenas esperar das autoridades, devemos cobrar sim, mas também fazer a nossa parte.

_____________________________

EBL: Momô, what is your analysis of the general cinematographic scene in Brazil?

MO: I see the cinematographic scene in Brazil as having a lot of uncertainties, although we have found out recently that in the year of 2020, many big names from the STREAM will inject some millions into the sector, which is something very positive, but on another hand, we won’t have public policy in this sense, and, naturally, the more needy community will not be touched by these actions going on in the private sector. In my opinion, we lack more projects that involve the less favored portion of the population. 

EBL: You are a 63 year-old actress. How do you see, within this audiovisual scene that you described, the matter of the absorption of black actresses over the age of 50?

MO: I participate in many TV campaigns, and sometimes some works for cinema, and I notice that elderly black actresses, when they appear, it’s like a participation out of obligation, to comply with requirements. Here we have 3 problems, AGE, GENDER, and RACE. The black actress is generally in a disadvantage, whether she is young or older.

EBL: In your opinion, the fact that the I, the author and director of DORA NÃO CANSOU DE VIVER… am black, was decisive in the choice of having a cast that is also black? In other words, do you believe it would be less probable that a white director would have made such a decision?

MO: Honestly, I believe that the fact that you, the author and director, are black, was indeed decisive in the choice of an afro cast, as the script itself does not make this specificity evident at any moment. I, unfortunately, have difficulty admitting that a white director would have been capable of escaping the standards we know, I’m not saying that it would have been impossible, just improbable.

EBL: What caught your attention in the script of DORA NÃO CANSOU DE VIVER…?

MO: The script caused a big impact on me for the great sensibility and delicacy in which it was written. You were very skilled, each scene is like a drawing, a painting, and the fact that there is no dialogue in the text captivated me even more, since, as an actress, this kind of work is not only rare, it is also challenging and rewarding, because it makes us discover some tools that we didn’t even know we had. And finally, the character herself, DORA, is a true warrior who represents women and mothers all over the world, she is a universal character, easy to identify with, but with many particularities, which were all very well attributed by the author.

EBL: As a senior actress and woman, what do you expect from this audiovisual work?

MO: My desire is to pass on a message of love and solidarity, and I hope that it arrives at schools, that young people debate the importance of social matters, and that they take these questionings back into their own homes. We need to look around us more, and not only at the authorities, we do need to  demand things from them, but we also need to do our part.

Help finance Emanuel Brauna-Lechat’s film, ‘DORA NÃO CANSOU DE VIVER…’ here: https://www.catarse.me/doranaocansoudeviver

See also: interview with Emanuel Brauna-Lechat

Bobó for Yemanjá #LPW2020

[*When I asked Thiago if he’d like to make a meal in NYC–something we’ve done together a few times in São Paulo and once in Bamako–he said yes and immediately suggested making an offering to Iemanjá. We’ve worked together since 2012 (usu. on Lanchonete.org projects), and I imagined that the idea would be good. When I heard Iemanjá and given the date of our NYC performance (Feb 9), I immediately thought of making it a Love Positive Women 2020 event. It’s gonna be really cool. George saw the NYC design around the time that both esponja and Tapera Taperá (cultural spaces here in São Paulo) agreed to be styled for Amem Mulheres Positivas/Love Positive Women 2020. So then came Portuguese and Spanish versions of the same poster, pared down. If in São Paulo, drop by esponja or Tapera Taperá, and in NYC, let us know if you’re free on the 9th. xo todd et al]

Feasting with Panthers (and Palestine): Edmund White’s Jean Genet #LPW2020

If writing is a committed utopian action, then the Jean Genet of Edmund White’s engaging, impressive, transformative Genet: A Biography was the epitome of  manic depression. Genet wrote his five novels in five years, from 1942-47. After seven years of sadness and silence, he wrote his three best known plays in two years. The subsequent 1960’s were filled with death as his lover, Abdallah (a high wire performer) committed suicide, his agent and English translator Bernard Fruchtman committed suicide, and Genet himself tried to commit suicide. Then he entered into the other utopian endeavor: activism. From 1970 until his death in 1986, Genet was aligned with oppressed people and supported them in energetic ways, on their terms and on his own.  White calls him “an apostle of the wretched of the earth.”

White’s use of the word  “apostle” is, of course, an open invitation to question it.  Apostles believe that the mortals they adore are not mortal. And, in that way, they err.   Sartre, who, White points out, was an atheist, called his homage Saint Genet, so there was an ironic anti-religiosity to the book.  But Genet was a man for whom adoration was deification; he described lovers as Gods. Genet’s love was possible, encompassing, invigorating – and annihilating.  And since many people can only love in one way, one could assume that he might emotionally connect with oppressed people in the same manner that he loved his Nazi soldier lover/apparition turned underdog when left behind in liberated Paris in the novel Pompes Funebres.

Edmund White, if his life’s works are an indication, has loved far more rationally than Genet.  He has been torn open, sure, and been impulsive and been destructive-  i.e. human – but he has also been sensible, reasonable and accepting. His books are often a process of coming to terms.  I would not use the world “apostle” to describe Edmund White as a lover, yet the concept of the “wretched of the earth” does unite the two. When White co-founded Gay Men’s Health Crisis in 1982, he got up from the typewriter on behalf of a despised group of people with no rights who were abandoned by their families and societies.  They were living in illegality and were facing a terminal disease for which there was no epidemiological information, no treatment, and no cure.  White – who has himself been openly HIV positive for decades – was one of them. Genet, on the other hand, died in 1986 at the beginning of the AIDS crisis. Although he had been poor, outcast and incarcerated, he was never, for example, Palestinian. There are universes of difference between the conditions of people with AIDS and Palestinians –  though when I began to become a conscious and active worker for Palestine, I did notice some resonances. In both cases these were categories of people who were profoundly oppressed, who were treated with brutal abandonment and indifference, who were falsely cast as dangerous when they were in fact endangered, and who were treated like predators when they were the ones being attacked.  In my carefully considered estimation, both people with AIDS and Palestinians have been lied about, pathologized,  and inhumanely discarded. If a despised gay man, who had spent his life unjustly blamed when he hadn’t done anything wrong, truly understood his own condition he could – perhaps should – relate to Palestinians.  That would, to me,  be a rational response to oppression. Unfortunately, history shows that oppressed people often identity more strongly with the element of their demographic that still connects to domination. Many white gay people aspire to the unjustified powers of whiteness. Many male homosexuals rue any obstacle to male supremacy. When we are debased by ruthless ambition, we look up longingly towards the corruption of domination as we wish better for ourselves.

Born in 1910, Genet had already been arrested 8 times by the age of 17 for running away, for taking trains for free, for embezzling money to go to a carnival, and for stealing pens and notebooks.  He was sentenced to two years at an agricultural prison for juveniles. White tells us that in order to get out of Mettray (a place that looms large in his work), Genet joined the army and was promoted to corporal.  He then  “volunteers” specifically for duty in the eastern part of the Mediterranean known as the Levant. In other words, at the age 19, he chose to be in an Arab place – in this case Syria. So the Arab world offered him an escape from the pain of France.  The Arab world is to the young and French Jean Genet what France becomes to the young and American Edmund White: a place of permission.  And permission is a kind of romance.  It’s a rhapsody of relief, indulgence, and light-headed elevation. Of course, Genet’s arriving as a French soldier gave him a different source to his permission than Edmund White who not only loves men, but also graceful stylish beautiful things, sophisticated ways, and elevated traditions.  Genet also found in the Levant male beauty, ancient cultures and intoxicating aesthetics, but his permission to do so came with the power of the French state. He had a uniform, a gun, a rank, and an historically imposed social role. The marginalized, despised, punished and alienated Genet came to his place of peace as a colonial. White had only the willingness to be reconstructed as a Francophile.

White describes Genet’s commitments to Palestine and to the Black Panthers as support for the “homeless,” and, it could be argued, both African Americans and Palestinians are living in exile, diasporic displacement, and elaborate fantasies of resolution and repair.  Even Edward Said understood Genet’s pro-Palestinian position as the identification of one oppressed person with another. “Genet made the step, crossed the legal borders, that very few white men or women even attempted,” Said has written.  “He traversed the space from the metropolitan center to the colony; his unquestioned solidarity was with the very same oppressed identified and so passionately analyzed, by [Frantz]Fanon,” Said continued, referring to the Afro-Caribbean psychiatrist, philosopher and revolutionary concerned with the psychopathology of colonization. And while it is easy and truthful to say that Genet also was homeless, in the most intimate sense of the word, unlike Palestinians, he did have a nation state, a passport and la langue natale which allowed him to be a writer with readers who also have passports, nation states and their own indigenous language. 

White writes of Genet’s perspective of himself as an exception in the eyes of the various Arab communities he was sent to occupy.  Of course, we don’t know what the Syrians actually thought of him, but we do learn that he felt they saw his difference in a positive light. Like Genet, I also see myself as a “friend of Palestine” and yet I do understand that that has nothing to do with whether or not individual Palestinians like me.  Political relationships of solidarity are rife with the problem of supremacy, no matter how alienated or excluded the dominant party feels from their own societies. And it is easy to project one’s own enthusiasm of connection onto the less powerful partner.  White wisely acknowledges this by pointing out that one of Genet’s favorite fantasy tropes is that of the benevolent/enamored cop, or complicit soldier, transgressing the rules of punishment because he is so moved by a vulnerable – and fictionalized – Genet.

At the age of 21,  Genet re-enlisted, this time volunteering to go to Morocco.  In 1934, at 23 and out of the army for only six months, he signed up for a third tour of duty, this time volunteering for Algeria.   In 1936, for reasons I do not understand, he did not show up for roll call and deserted. He falsified his passport with the name Gejietti, was arrested in Albania. Then arrested in Yugoslavia.  Then arrested in Vienna.  Then arrested in Czechoslovakia, where he asked for political asylum.  Despite some kind of asylum, he fled again and was arrested in Poland before crossing over into Nazi Germany. (Nazis were never a problem for Genet.) He got to Paris and was yet again arrested, this time in a department store for stealing twelve handkerchiefs. Over the next two years, he was arrested and incarcerated for desertion, expelled from the army, arrested for more free train riding, for stealing bottles of aperitifs, for carrying a gun, for stealing a shirt, for vagrancy, and for stealing a piece of silk. At the age of 30, he spent ten months in prison for stealing a suitcase and wallet, then anotehr four months for stealing history and philosophy books.  He worked as a book-seller on the Seine, where he met readers, writers and intellectuals. Then he was arrested in front of Notre Dame and sentenced to three months for stealing a volume of Proust. In prison, at the age of 31, he started writing his first novel. Notre Dames des Fleurs.   Two former customers, one of whom was a right-wing editor, introduced him to Jean Cocteau, who helped him immeasurably. Arrested again for stealing a rare edition of Verlaine, he was then eligible for life imprisonment but Cocteau argued in court that Genet was “the greatest writer of the modern era” and thus he was sentenced instead to 3 months, during which he wrote Miracle de la Rose.  Three weeks after being freed, he stole more books and was jailed for four more months.

It’s a manic cycle, and most obviously filled with repetition and pervasive disregard for the obvious consequences of actions that might have alternatives.  In this place and this time, Genet was a man who could not solve problems, unless his goal was to remain in prison. Certainly the meeting with Cocteau was lucky, but even luckier was the fact that Cocteau helped him at all – and to the extent that he did.  I have to disclaim here that Edmund White himself helped me by reviewing my lesbian erotic, formally complex, 1994 novel  Rat Bohemia in The New York Times and, thereb, elevating me with his accomplishments in the tradition of Cocteau’s helping Genet.  But, I assure you, that most people with real power in literature do not help people who cannot help them back.  That Cocteau, himself the homosexual author of Les Enfants Terribles  (about a love affair between a brother and sister), understood Genet’s talents and bothered to make the effort is just a fluke of literary history. Lucky, lucky Saint Genet.

It was now 1943 and France was in the midst of its Nazi occupation.  French people – especially Jews among them – were being deported to concentration camps in Poland and exterminated. Genet found himself held in Camp des Tourelles, a deportation cite.  He was visited by Marc Barbezat, the powerful publisher of the magazine L’Arbalete who, with other powerful people, got Genet released. n I have no idea what role this publisher or Cocteau or any of Genet’s other powerful supporters played in interfering with the deportation of Jews.  Cocteau did flirt with the German power elite, and other artists like Max Jacobs and Robert Desnos were deported and exterminated for being anti-Nazi or Jewish. Genet’s friends were not deported and continued to publish during the occupation.  So, despite his homosexuality, his desertion, his endless incarcerations for crimes petty and pathetic, this homeless man’s life was saved in a period in which thousands of citizens of far greater social standing were sent off to be murdered because they were Jews, communists and Nazi resisters. I would like to know more about this and to understand more about Genet’s feelings about Jews, French anti-Semitism and the European Holocaust. Sartre claimed Genet to be an anti-semite, but understood it as a revulsion of other oppressed people. White quotes Sartre: “Since Genet wants his lovers to be executioners, he should never be sodomized by a victim.  What repels Genet about Israelites is that he finds himself in their situations.” But actually, no, he was excused from their situation.  So, given that he had more power than Jews, just as he had more power than Arabs, there is a contradiction in the theory of Genet as pro-Palestinian because he identified with the oppressed.

In 1944, still under Nazi occupation, Genet’s first novel, Notre Dame des Fleurs appeared in except in L’Arbalete.  He met Sartre, also still in France, at Café Flore, which was still open despite the Nazi seizure of resources and severe rationing. And Genet’s lover, Jean DeCarnin died on the Communist barricades fighting to liberate Paris. Strange juxtaposition of events: one dies, the other drinks coffee.  From then on, most of Genet’s important love relationships were to be with Arab men. The Nazis were defeated in 1945 and three years later Sartre and Cocteau petition for amnesty for Genet.  In 1951, Gallimard published the complete works of Genet.  All his books were banned in America until Grove Press broke the ban in 1963. This was another good reason for Edmund White, future author of explicitly gay literature, to have been enamored with France. It offered him a legacy of freedom.

But there is such a strange imbalance of values in all of this.  A France brutally colonizing the Arab and African world – and deeply complicit with the deportation of Jews –  listens to its own intellectuals and frees, publishes and awards its own homosexual experimental writer ex-convict. Then again, perhaps the things that made white homosexual men intolerable to American culture – principally the refusal to build families and reproduce – didn’t really matter that much to the French. Overt empires reproduce in their own brutal ways, and histories such as  Adam Hochschild’s King Leopold’s Ghost, which is about the colonization of the Congo by Belgium, depict colonial culture as a homoerotic, homosocial and, in many cases, homosexual refuge. It is similar perhaps to our own genocidal westward expansion and cowboy culture.

In 1970, Genet was arrested with Marguerite Duras at a demonstration protesting the death of four African immigrant workers. As a Frenchman, he had often traveled in Africa, especially in French colonized countries. Yet he had little contact with African Americans outside of James Baldwin who was in sexual and racial exile in France. But once he surfaced as an activist, Genet was contacted by  Black Panthers Connie Mathews and Michael Persitz  to speak out on the jailing and government murders of much of their leadership. How the Panthers made the decision to ask him for help is unclear. A lot has been written about the macho nature of the Panther party, and much of that has also been softened, retrospectively. Huey P Newton, party chairman, famously said, “The homosexual may be the most revolutionary,” which is certainly very far from the white left, busy yelling “Pull her off the stage and fuck her,” when Marilyn Webb of Women’s Liberation tried to talk feminism at an anti-war rally that same year. Certainly the handsome Panther, Chairman Huey P Newton, and the stylish rank and file were a lot sexier than white leftists whose torn, baggy jeans and flannel shirts de-sexualized working class clothing, which would soon be tightened and re-masculinized by gay clone culture.  Wanting to help the Panthers, Genet was denied a visa by the US because of his homosexuality, and so crossed the border illegally from Canada. For two months, he traveled the country, giving many public talks at universities and to the press on behalf of the Panthers. His many American adventures included a cocktail party at Stanford’s French department where he compared the Panthers to the Marquis de Sade due to their shared authenticity. He had a crush on Panther leader David Hilliard.  Jane Fonda proposed doing a film with Genet.  And one night he danced for some Panthers in a pink negligee. He may have been a Marxist, but he was still camp. The Panthers gave him a black leather jacket.  He met 26-year-old UCLA Philosophy professor Angela Davis, who was a fluent French speaker from a family of learned French speakers. On May 1, he spoke to 25,000 people in New Haven and his speech was published by the Black Panther Party.  He then hastily departed America when contacted by the Office of Immigration. Back in Europe, he published a defense of Angela Davis, who was now on FBI Wanted posters, named “Public Enemy Number One.” When she was arrested, he agreed for the first time to go on television where he delivered a talk “Angela Davis Is At Your Mercy.”  In Prisoner of Love Genet reflected that “The Panthers symbolism was too easily deciphered to last. It was accepted quickly, but rejected because it was too easily understood.”

As the Panthers fractured, Genet became friends back in France with Mahmoud El Hamchari,  the Paris representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization.  His wife told Edmund White that Genet would come to their house unannounced and have long talks with El Hamchari about the divisions and corruption within the Panthers. So, as one political partner crumbled, another was born. White writes, “After following events in Jordan that proved disastrous for Palestinians, known as ‘Black September,’” Genet “accepted an invitation” to visit Palestinian refugee camps for one week. He stayed for six months and returned four times over the next two years.  In November, 1970, he met Yasser Arafat for less than thirty minutes.  But Arafat did give Genet a pass permitting free travel in any PLO territory and asked him to write a book about Palestinians, which Genet completed fifteen years later.  White writes that Genet “preferred to think that the Arab world should be Palestinized rather than the Palestinian revolution should be Arabized.  To Genet the only positive vision of the future should be socialist, not theological: his analysis of the failure of Zionism was that it had begun as a socialist experiment but had degenerated quickly into a theological state.”

Just as in Syria, there is not much information about how the Palestinians experienced Genet, most of the information coming from Genet’s version of the relationship. As in Syria, he described himself as well-liked. Genet says that he shocked Palestinians by telling them he was homosexual and an atheist, “an avowal that made them burst out laughing,” he claimed.  But who knows what really happened.  I am fascinated by Genet’s “invitations.” As an openly lesbian woman who is a “friend of Palestine,” I wonder if Genet was the first out queer in political solidarity with Palestinians,  as opposed to colonials whose only investments were a sexual interest in Arab men.

The visit took place after the 1967 Six-Day War, and much of the world was troubled by the Israeli occupation of more territory and the creation of yet more refugees on top of the people still in exile from their expulsion by the founding of the Israeli state in 1948.  Although Palestine is and was a “place”, the specific geographical boundaries of this “home” were different in people’s minds than in legal realities. In fact, “Palestine” was now The West Bank, Gaza, the Golan Heights, refugee camps in Jordan and in Lebanon and in Syria, as well as a global diaspora of refugees from Kuwait to London to Detroit. “Palestine” was also the memories, the still-standing houses now lived in by Israelis, and the land, sea and hills that many Palestinians would never see again.  His visits stimulated a series of articles and  petitions and participations with Michel Foucault on anti-prison work and with Gilles Deleuze in support of Arab workers in France, as well as the rights of North African immigrants.

At the age of 64, Genet  met his last lover, Mohammed El Katranai, in Tangiers.  They lived  together in a small apartment in the Saint Denis suburb of Paris. At the age of 72, suffering from throat cancer, Genet moved to Morocco. From this base, he traveled to Lebanon with Leila Shahid, a young Palestinian activist.  In September, 1982, Genet was in Beirut when Israelis invaded. This assault enabled Christian militias to massacre Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps where Palestinians are still living in 2017.. Jim Hubbard and I visited Sabra with Lebanese queer activist Lynne Darwich in 2013.  Genet was one of the first outsiders to enter Shatila on September 19, 1982,  and found the place strewn with corpses. He wrote “Four Hours at Shatila,” which was published in The Journal of Palestinian Studies. I don’t know if he chose this venue to support the journal, or if the piece had been rejected by more widely-read and mainstream publications. Returning to Morocco, he started to write Prisoner of Love, based in fifteen years of notes about the Black Panther and Palestinian experiences. On April 15, 1986 he died of cancer at the age of 76.  He was buried in Larache, Morocco. Prisoner of Love was published one month later.

 If Genet ever had a “home,”  it was in the Arab world, a world he first entered as a colonial soldier. It was as a colonial soldier that Genet had his first experience of authority, group belonging, sway.  It was in the Arab world that he found lovers, often younger, poorer, with less social currency. It was Palestine that “invited” him, while America refused his request for a visa.  American homosexuals now have, what Rutgers Professor Jasbir Puar has named “Homonationalism,” i.e. those of us who are white and male, who marry and reproduce, who are documented, who are not incarcerated, who have homes and who support the military and US imperial wars, are now invited to identify with the American, Canadian, British, German, French, Dutch, and Israeli state apparatus of punishment and enforcement. Despite being a homosexual convict, Genet experienced this same elevation by being a French soldier.  But the status of Palestinians has not changed since Genet walked into Shatila and witnessed murdered civilians lying on its grounds in 1982. Palestinians are still mass murdered; they are still denied a “home.”   There are still questions for us to grapple with regarding Jean Genet.  Was his support for Palestine – which was unusual, energetic, sincere, effortful and significant – rooted in the identification of one homeless person with another, one marginalized, unjustly punished person with another?  Was it, simultaneously, a relationship of a French person to an Arab one, a Frenchman whose only place of supremacy in his own cultural framework was in relationship to the Arabs he could love and to whom he could make a difference?  Or was he attracted to the Palestinians and the Black Panthers who needed “Jean Genet”?

Love Positive Women in AR/PT/ES

[*It is very exciting (and an honor) to get to imagine and implement ideas for Love Positive Women 2020 in Khartoum (Sudan), New York City (US), São Paulo (Brasil) and other places in South America. Designer Adham Bakry (Port Said/Cairo) came up with a version of the Love Positive Women insignia in Arabic and Gustavo Marcasse in both Portuguese and Spanish. Love Positive Women is a project by Jessica Whitbread. xo Todd]

A series for LovePositiveWomen2020; #LPW2020, pre-C

Image: $oropositiva, by Micaela Cyrino for LovePositiveWomen2019
Collage on greaseproof paper and serigraphy
30 x 40cm

In some ways the whole LUV experience has geared us up for Love Positive Women 2020. In March 2019 I visited Egypt and afterwards, Paris where I met the Ankh (Arab Network for Knowledge on Human Rights) Association. The Ankh guys moved to Paris after a long period of activism on access to HIV meds in Cairo. From Paris they made the Points of Life exhibit that featured artists and activists from Egypt and the Middle East living with HIV. ‘Behind the Curtain’ is an image and text by Iman, an artist living in Egypt. Daniel Santiago Salguero’s project, Luciérnagas began with the idea to consider the changing situation–HIV info, support and medication access–in Bogotá with new arrivals of Venezuelans in the wake of that country’s financial crisis. It ended as an experimental performance in Bogotá’s Botanical Gardens. I met Jackie during the project’s conclusion in October 2019. Daniel interviews her for LovePositiveWomen2020 and further reflects on the Luciérnagas process. 

On a previous project I met the Nhimbe Trust based in Bulawayo (Zimbabwe), and its founder, Joshua Nyapimbi. Originally there was meant to be an event there at their offices during LPW2020, but due to a roof collapse this is not possible. A women’s HIV support group, CHOOSE LIFE meets at Nhimbe Trust and developed a play, MAIDEI to highlight local issues pertaining to HIV care and treatment. CHOOSE LIFE recognizes that there are resources already available in Gokwe South (District where  Bulawayo is located), but positive women do not have full access to these yet. The Nhimbe Trust and CHOOSE LIFE offered the script of MAIDEI to be serialized throughout LPW2020 in six installments. I interviewed Joshua on the history of the piece, and he explained that “the play has been used extensively, initially created with a rural-based support group for HIV positive women who acted in the play. Now it is done by professional actors [trained to] create links with support groups for positive women wherever we tour.” Old African connections yielded a good bit of activity on LPW2020. I met Oma Elzubair when we both worked for the ‘mother of forced migration studies’, Barbara Harrell-Bond in Cairo; Oma is now back in Khartoum (Sudan). She will blog about a range of local activities in Khartoum she’s conducting for LPW2020. And graphic designer, Adham Bakry (Cairo/Port Said, Egypt) made two Arabic versions of the LPW logo in conversation with Oma in Sudan.

Our goal for the next 14 days is to feature mostly articles by women, but also work by others in honor and support of women. On February 2nd, the day Yemanjá (goddess saint for fishers) is celebrated in his home region of Bahia, artist Thiago Correia Gonçalves shares three specially-designed posters (EN, PT, ES) for LPW2020. 

Making an HIV-related project brought me back in touch with an old friend, Emanuel Brauna-Lechat who is making a film on access to healthcare for people of color in Brazil entitled, Dora Não Cansou de Viver… In his second piece for LUV he interviews its lead actress, Momô de Oliveira. We start the series with ‘Feasting with Panthers (and Palestine): Edmund White’s Jean Genet’ by Sarah Schulman. Sarah wrote this piece on the occasion of Edmund White’s 80th birthday. This is her third piece on LUV, including What Does a Queer Urban Future Look Like? and more recently, ‘People in Trouble’ at Thirty: On Realism, Trump, and the AIDS Cataclysm. In the same direction, we invited Cadu Oliveira to comment on LGBTI / HIV activism in the present political climate of Bolsonaro’s Brasil. Our LPW2020 series ends with a Field Note from Paula Nishijima for the Think Twice Collective based in Leiden (Netherlands). 

Here’s a table of contents. We invite you to follow along and join us in celebrating LovePosivitveWomen2020!

*Pre-teaser: New versions of LPW logo in Arabic, Portuguese & Spanish by Adham Bakry & Gustavo Marcasse (Jan 31)

(1) ‘Feasting with Panthers (and Palestine): Edmund White’s Jean Genet’ by Sarah Schulman
(2) ‘Bobó for Yemanjá’ by Thiago Correia Gonçalves
(3) ‘Maidei’, Synopsis + Scene 1: Choose Life Women’s Group (Bulawayo)
(4) Emanuel Brauna-Lechat interviews Momô de Oliveira
(5) ‘Maidei’, Scene 2: Choose Life Women’s Group (Bulawayo)
(6) Interview with Cadu Oliveira on LGBTQIA+ organizing in São Paulo
(7) ‘Maidei’, Scene 3: Choose Life Women’s Group (Bulawayo)
(8) ‘Behind the Curtain’ by Iman (with Ankh Association)
(9) ‘Maidei’, Scenes 4 & 5: Choose Life Women’s Group (Bulawayo)
(10) Blog from Khartoum by Oma Elzubair
(11) ‘Maidei’, Scenes 6, 7, 8: Choose Life Women’s Group (Bulawayo)(12) Daniel Santiago Salguero interviews Jacqueline Sanchez for Luciérnagas
(13) ‘Maidei’, Scenes 9, 10: Choose Life Women’s Group (Bulawayo)
(14) Field Note from Paula Nishijima

*Post-teaser: A special surprise from one of my favorite graphic novelists, Power Paola at the end of LPW2020 

What I’m learning about participatory art; #LPW2020, pre-B & Elpenor method, #2

This year Love Positive Women is so big for us it constitutes an ACT … Act 1.5 to be exact. The acts are dramaturgically useful for steering Luv ’til it Hurts toward its endpoint in mid-2020, and in that way reveal various ‘assemblages’ (or intense clusters) along the two-year course. While the ‘business plan’ of ACT II is about to be revealed (around Feb 14) with a graphic poster by Brasilian illustrator, chef, Umbandista and cat lover, PogoLand (who says artists don’t make worlds?), the co-making of activities in São Paulo, Khartoum and NYC for Love Positive Women 2020 and sequencing 14 days of women-authored and -focused online content took on a life (or ‘act’ as it were) of its own. Working with Canadian artist, Jessica Whitbread and using her ‘open source’ model for the Love Positive Women fourteen-day holiday has been a labor of LUV. And as such, we’ve learned some things. When we first started talking about her work in 2018, Jessica sent me the 2018 Love Positive Women holiday implementation guide (please download and use). I have written before on the LUV site about making (or why making) an ‘open work’, which is a reference to Umberto Eco’s writing at length on the prospect. Whether duration is called out by name or not, an open or open source work must consider duration and endurance. And, I think, whether it is growing in the intended direction over time. I’ve made three durational, rights-themed, multi-stakeholder projects for 10, 5 and 2 years respectively. So, I am familiar with the vernacular and semantics–and a new phrase, ‘articulation curve’–involved in the creation of a long-term project, and in this case a new 14-day holiday to celebrate positive women. 

There has been a ‘turn’ within participatory art toward generosity. I imagine that generosity in terms of activism predates the art terms, so I won’t attempt to historicize the nuances of gesture, participation and generosity–e.g. giving away something at the museum and/or the less tangible offering of hospitality–at this point. Even if I find it extremely interesting. The other day at MASP, George and I picked up blank white posters with black trim from a Felix Gonzalez-Torres piece and we found ourselves talking about gestures and offerings. I was already working on LPW2020 at the time and I considered Gonzalez-Torres’ offerings to the public: a poster, candy, etc. The audience or public go away with something, and it’s supposed to create a reaction. It doesn’t quite tell one what to do though, or instruct (require) a return (reciprocal) gesture.

Love Positive Women is a more direct question or prompt: Will you consider poz women in these fourteen days running up to the North American Valentine’s Day (Feb 14). As a North American (gringo) living in Brasil, I realize that this big place doesn’t use the same date for romance; Dia dos Namorados is celebrated on June 12 because of its proximity to  Saint Anthony’s Day on June 13. It basically uses another catholic marker than North America and Europe, but thankfully the days, 1-14 February fall just before carnival, and there is nice warm weather and a festive atmosphere. 

Over the course of making Luv ’til it Hurts, I’ve been able to witness the works of other artists in different parts of the world. In Bogotá I got to be a part of the final act or performance for Luciérnagas, a project led by Daniel Santiago Salguero that includes a majority of poz folks who are not artists. In this and other contexts the introduction of art concepts can be lost. Like getting together in solidarity to raise awareness on HIV is central, and that it is an art project for one person takes a backseat. Art becomes a minor subject within a bigger deal. While through an art lens, Luciérnagas contains elements of visual/conceptual art, performance and theatre, it stands as a transferrable, flexible mode of community organizing that was created using art terms and art funding. Because I make interpretable (enter-able) projects, I understand the intentions of Love Positive Women (or rather actively synthesize what I learn from Jessica’s work into broader considerations on participatory art). Given that LUV works with poets and others for whom visual/conceptual art terms can be foreign, we ran into some confusion. For example it was not entirely clear to an HIV+ poet how one conceptual ‘group’ project (Luv ’til it Hurts) could participate in another conceptual ‘group’ project. In this instance (and as a man), it would have been more beneficial to put the two HIV+ women artists in direct contact. However, that was not something I had time to do before the implementation of LUV’s workplan for LPW2020. In this instance, I felt that part of the confusion was my gender (somehow). Like why would a male artist with another project be pushing a female’s art project that focuses on women? I felt that perhaps my own intention of generosity was not understood. In the end, a planned event with the poet was scrapped, but the conversations gave way to a new idea, which was a focus on spaces that anyone can use. We decided to ‘outfit’ (or style) a couple cultural spaces in São Paulo’s Center with language-appropriate materials and design on the Love Positive Women (Amem Mulheres Positivas) movement. This plan reaches the publics of the spaces during multiple events (in each) from February 1-14, 2020, and encourages women to use the spaces year-round for support groups and cultural activities. 

There were a few other ‘slow downs’ in our LPW2020 planning as well. For example, a trans woman asked me if I felt that she and I (poz folks) could make an event for poz women. Her question is great because it points to some issues (like vertical transmission) that had not affected either of us. But my answer is yes, I do. Still. In that conversation as well as another one just yesterday, the issue of payment came up. On one hand, I have a quick reaction that ‘no one is paying me’ but on the other–and in relation to how scarce cultural funding is today in Brasil–I understand. Funding is an issue that pervades HIV culture work. It is one that the LUV project is concentrated on. LUV plans for Amem Mulheres Positivas 2020 is all in place and with this moment to reflect, I think of a few other participatory projects I’ve had the chance to be a part of over the years–Human HotelHomeBase Project and Publication Studio–and how they might have clued me in to Jessica Whitbread’s work on Love Positive Women. 


INGABIRE “Gift” (2005); #LPW2020, pre-A

Watch: INGABIRE “Gift” (2005), by Jesse Hawkes.

For its first Rwandan Film Festival in 2005, the Rwanda Cinema Centre helped several young directors and groups of actors to make films on important issues in Rwanda. The film “Ingabire” was based on an original musical theatre piece that was created by a group of high school students at an HIV Prevention conference earlier in the year. It was based on true stories from their lives and lives of their friends. The film still resonates today. During a recent Global Youth Connect workshop, I showed this film and the participants insisted that “stigma against people living with HIV does not exist in Rwanda today.” Little did they know that there was a GYC delegate from Rwanda standing in that room who didn’t disclose their status among these peers for fear of stigma. Apologies for the subtitles, but we created it in two days, and English was not one of the key languages of the staff at that time. Rwanda has since shifted from French to English as its official second language of instruction in schools after Kinyarwanda, which is the language you hear in the film.  

[*When I wrote the piece, remembering my first AIDS work, which proceeded to ‘remember’ all my HIV/AIDS work, I actually forgot an important episode, which is when I first met Jesse Hawkes in Kigali (Rwanda). Jesse was there working on a project he founded called Rwandans & Americans in Partnership Contre SIDA /RAPSIDA, and I was helping to start a film festival. I studied film and remembering first meeting Jesse in Rwanda, I can easily remember the excitement and momentum that took me all over the African continent researching 3rd Cinema when I was in my twenties. I helped make a young filmmakers workshop (in which INGABIRE featured) during the inaugural Rwanda Film Festival, an idea I co-created with Rwandan filmmaker and founder of the Rwandan Film Center, Eric Kabera after meeting at the Zanzibar film festival in 2003. Ahhhh … nostalgia. Fast forward to September 2016, I am reminded of the documentation of the last month of a year-long process, Cidade Queer in São Paulo, and the eponymous film it generated at the hands of filmmaker Danila Bustamante. Jesse Hawkes is helping to make an event for Love Positive Women in NYC on Feb. 9 called ‘Bobó for [LUV] Iemanjá’, which is a part of Luv ’til it Hurts celebration of Love Positive Women 2020. xo todd]

Facebook
Instagram