What Can We Afford?

[Disclaimer: Though there has recently been some interesting research circulating about the economic position of gay men this post, despite its use of economic-related allusions to affordability, does NOT specifically address queer economic issues. A post about the intersections of class and sexuality to follow.]

For a while now, I’ve been haunted by Ignatius Bau’s words that “those of us who are queers of color who are now U.S. citizens or have legal immigration status can afford to speak out about immigrant rights” (61).


In his essay, “Queer Asian American Immigrants: Opening Borders and Closets,” [which appears to the anthology Q&A: Queer in Asian American, eds. David L. Eng and Alice Y. Hom (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1998)] Bau argues that queer Asian Americans can build bridges between Asian American communities and LGBTQ communities. He seems to stress that not only is such coalition building “a personal necessity as we integrate our multiple identities in our multiple communities” (59), but also that it is the only way as queer immigrants to be acknowledged, supported, and protected by the queer liberation agenda (61).

The sentiment behind Bau’s argument speaks to the power of visibility. I know first-hand the great influence that being visible can affect, yet even knowing that does not dissipate the fear I feel in being visible. Bau does little to acknowledge the fear or risks of coming out and speaking out about immigrant rights, saying only that we “can afford” to do such things. While he does acknowledge that for many in the LGBTQ community the stakes to stay in the closet about their immigration status are high, he is clear to assert his position that it is up to us [queer Asian Americans] to take action. In part, he supports his claims by providing historical evidence of immigration laws and policies that have historically been anti-Asian (the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act), as well as contemporary immigration laws and policies that continue to negatively affect Asian American communities (California’s Proposition 187).

I have nothing but admiration and understanding for Bau’s arguments. However, I question the degree to which “those of us who are queers of color who are now U.S. citizens or have legal immigration status can afford to speak out about immigrant rights” (61). U.S. History is also rife with examples of how, even in obtaining legal U.S. citizenship, Asian Americans have not always enjoyed security, fair treatment, and other protections usually associated with citizenship (the interment of Japanese Americans during World War II is but one such instance). Perhaps is it not a question about whether we can afford to speak out, but rather, can we afford NOT to speak out?

The fears and risks are undoubtedly “real,” but so too is the predicament that change will only come about if we take action.

I pray I have the courage to change the things I can.