The Sexuality of Migration

Border Crossings and Mexican Immigrant Men

Lionel Cantu, Nancy A. Naples, Salvador Vidal-Ortiz

• Publisher: NYU Press
• Year: 2009
• ISBN:
  9780814772027
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Emigration & Immigration
• Index: Social Sciences

Winner of the 2010 Distinguished Book Award from the American Sociological Association, Sociology of Sexualities Section Winner of the 2010 Distinguished Book Award in Latino Studies Honorable Mention from the Latin American Studies Association

The Sexuality of Migration provides an innovative study of the experiences of Mexican men who have same sex with men and who have migrated to the United States.

Until recently, immigration scholars have left out the experiences of gays and lesbians. In fact, the topic of sexuality has only recently been addressed in the literature on immigration. The Sexuality of Migration makes significant connections among sexuality, state institutions, and global economic relations. Cantú; situates his analysis within the history of Mexican immigration and offers a broad understanding of diverse migratory experiences ranging from recent gay asylum seekers to an assessment of gay tourism in Mexico. Cantú uses a variety of methods including archival research, interviews, and ethnographic research to explore the range of experiences of Mexican men who have sex with men and the political economy of sexuality and immigration. His primary research site is the greater Los Angeles area, where he interviewed many immigrant men and participated in organizations and community activities alongside his informants.

Sure to fill gaps in the field, The Sexuality of Migration simultaneously complicates a fixed notion of sexual identity and explores the complex factors that influence immigration and migration experiences.

1

Sexuality, Migration, and Identity

This book concerns the experiences of sexual migrants who cross the imagined physical, social, and cultural boundaries of normative sexuality, gender, and institutions of the state. It offers a queer analysis of immigration, gender, and sexuality that is informed by a queer theoretical paradigm that attempts to destabilize models based on hetero-sexuality and to make “regimes of normalization” visible, particularly as they relate to relations among sex, gender, and sexual desire.¹ In many respects my project is a queer transgression of academic boundaries. I cross what have traditionally been defined as distinct and separate subjects of inquiry—sexuality and international migration. My goal here is to queer migration studies, that is, to expose how migration research and literature is framed by heteronormative assumptions that not only deny the existence of nonheterosexual subjects but also cloak the ways in which sexuality itself influences migratory processes. This is especially challenging, for I seek to examine sexuality not as an additive component or characteristic of analysis (such as with demographic variables of sex or age) but rather as an axis of power relations.

This book also offers a new way to frame the construction of sexuality in a migratory context. I argue that sexuality, as a dimension of power, shapes and organizes processes of migration and modes of incorporation. In turn, the contextual and structural transitions that mark the migration experience impact the ways in which identities are formed. Identity is understood, therefore, as a social construct wherein the sexual identities of gay immigrants assume multiple and shifting meanings informed by structural variables, institutional policies, cultural influences, and the dynamics of migration. In my work to understand these processes I develop a “queer political economy of migration.”

It must be noted that as in most (if not all) discussions of sexuality, the issue of terminology and labels is extremely problematic. My use of the term “queer” in this text is for the most part academic; that is, “queer” is not a term commonly used by Mexicans as an identity label. “Queer,” as used in this text, is a theoretical and analytical tool. In addition, my use of the term “gay” is a matter of convenience. “Gay” does not necessarily mean the same thing in Mexico as it does in the United States but there are similarities. In this text, when I use the term “queer” in the Mexican context I am referring to sexual minorities. Terminology for sexual identities in the Mexican context (and in my research) is complex in part because of translation but also due to the diverse identity labels used by Mexicans. In addition, the social, cultural, and political changes that the gay and lesbian community is experiencing adds to the fluidity of these labels. The politics of translation is a problem of which the reader should be aware.

This chapter provides an overview and a theoretical outline of the research project. In the following pages I first address the question of relevance—i.e., why is it important to study gay immigrants? While my focus is on Mexican immigrant Men who have Sex with Men (MSM), I have also conducted research on a more general population of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) immigrants to the United States through my work with LGBT immigrant rights organizations and the individuals who work with this population (see chapter 2). In this way, I am able to provide a more informed general context of LGBT migration by which I can more closely examine the role that sexuality plays in processes of immigration and identity formation from the social locations of Mexican male immigrants to the United States who have homosexual relations. Because sexual identities are fluid and are shaped by structural and cultural influences, there is no monolithic “natural” label that can be used to categorize a group of men who engage in homosexual relations and have a variety of identities. Therefore, terms such as “gay,” “homosexual,” and even “MSM” as used within this text denote unstable categories and are adopted for ease of presentation. They do not indicate unquestioned acceptance of these terms by the men in this study who have same-sex sexual relationships.

My primary focus on men is not meant to imply that women’s sexuality is irrelevant to the study of migration. On the contrary, I believe that, like men’s, women’s sexuality constitutes a very important dimension of migration but that it does so in gendered ways. My focus on men is therefore intended as an effort to control to a certain extent these intersecting dimensions of gender and sexuality so as to enable clearer analysis of the way gender, race/ethnicity, culture, and socioeconomics intersect with “sexual migration” among one of the largest ethnic immigrant groups to the United States.

Viewing the immigrant experience from the standpoint of the gay immigrant raises critical questions regarding sexual identity formation in a transcultural setting and the linkages among human sexuality, state institutions, and global economic processes. I examine the following research questions: (1) How is Mexican migration to the United States influenced by sexuality? (2) Do gay Mexican male migrants have alternative reasons for migration and modes of incorporation (e.g., social networks and ethnic enclaves), as a result of their sexual orientation, than those posed by the current research on migration? (3) How do gay Mexican immigrants adapt to, negotiate, and resist the constraints of their marginalization (in terms of their sexual orientation, gender, race/ethnicity, class, and legal status)? (4) How is sexual identity among Mexican men shaped by sociostructural and migratory factors? (5) What is the relationship of sexual identity to gender identity and definitions of masculinity?

I employ a multimethod approach for gathering and analyzing data that was collected from January 1995 to December 1998. There are in essence four separate but related components to the research project: ethnographic research, interviews with key informants in the United States, interviews with Mexican MSMs in Guadalajara, and oral histories of gay men who migrated to the United States. In the United States, there were two main ethnographic sites where this study was conducted. The primary site was the greater Los Angeles area. Most of the research was conducted in Los Angeles and Orange Counties, but some data was also collected in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. The greater Los Angeles area is an ideal site for this research due to its large Mexican immigrant communities and the existence of various “gay neighborhoods” and commercial locations that serve gay Latino² populations. In addition, the area is home to several community organizations that serve either gay immigrants or Latino MSMs. There are also several gay community centers throughout the area, including the L.A. Lesbian and Gay Community Center, which make the area an ideal location for this research.

Although my primary research site was within the United States, I also collected ethnographic data in Guadalajara, Mexico, in the state of Jalisco, for a little over two weeks in June 1998. While this is, of course, a very short period in which to conduct an in-depth ethnographic study, I had several relative advantages that aided immensely in my data collection. First, I was able to stay with a gay male couple who lived on the outskirts of the city. I had befriended one of the pair during his visit to the United States a year earlier and as “luck” (my luck) would have it, his partner had recently quit his job and was more than happy to escort me throughout the city. The second advantage I had was that research participants and friends in the United States linked me with their contacts in the city. Guadalajara was chosen as an ethnographic site for three main reasons: (1) Guadalajara has a significant gay and lesbian population (it is sometimes referred to as the San Francisco of Mexico because it has significant social spaces for gays and lesbians, however, unlike in San Francisco, there is an overall intolerance towards gays and lesbians in Guadalajara), (2) previous research on homosexuality in Mexico has, for the most part, been conducted either in Mexico City or Guadalajara, and (3) approximately two-thirds of my U.S.–based participants were from the state of Jalisco, of which Guadalajara is the capital.

The ethnographic research techniques used throughout the research project included participant observation, field notes, and archival research. Participant observation techniques were employed during the monthly meetings of Immigration Equality, the Los Angeles chapter of the Lesbian and Gay Immigration Rights Task Force, and fieldnotes were taken during special events sponsored by the L.A. Lesbian and Gay Community Resource Center and other events attended by LGBT immigrants. These same methods were employed with other organizations with which I did research, including the Delhi Center and Bienestar. Archival resources of the L.A. Lesbian and Gay Community Resource Center, the Lesbian and Gay Immigration Rights Task Force, Inc. (New York), and other LGBT resources also informed this project.

Interviews with key informants who work with LGBT immigrants, in particular LGBT Latinos and/or LGBT HIV-positive clients, were conducted to gain a greater understanding of the characteristics and issues that are important to this segment of the LGBT immigrant population. I conducted interviews with twelve key informants who work with either the more general gay immigrant or the Latino immigrant communities. For several years I fostered relationships with Latino organizations that work with MSMs, such as the Delhi Center of Santa Ana, California, and Bienestar, which has offices throughout the greater Los Angeles area. In addition, I’ve worked with a gay immigrant rights group named Immigration Equality that meets out of the L.A. Lesbian and Gay Center in Hollywood.

In-depth interviews with ten Mexican MSMs and ethnographic research in Guadalajara allowed me to explore the experiences of men who have not emigrated to the United States. The interviews were collected through both a snowball sampling technique and direct requests for interviews of men whom I met in Guadalajara. This formal interview data is supplemented by field notes of my observations and informal conversations from the various sites in the everyday lives of Guadalajaran MSMs. In this way, I am able to provide a more informed context by which I can examine the role that sexuality plays in processes of immigration and identity formation from the social locations of Mexican male immigrants.

Oral histories of twenty Mexican immigrant MSMs were collected utilizing a snowball sampling technique through contacts made with gay Latino organizations. The interview schedule was informed by both the literature on sexuality and migration and the information gathered from the other research components of the research project, such as key informant interviews. Oral histories provide a more in-depth study of the everyday lives of a segment of the LGBT immigrant population by uncovering dimensions of sexuality, gender, and migratory processes as part of the transcultural experience and included the following themes: childhood experiences, family relations and activities, religion, education, employment history, social networks, intimate relationship histories, reasons for migration, intended purpose of migration, adaptation to the new environment, changes in self-perception, and self-perceived important life events.

Why Study Queer Immigrants?

A common reaction I first received when I expressed my interest in studying LGBT immigrants was, “Why?” To some, the subject seemed too specific and not generalizable. In essence, the LGBT immigrant population could not possibly represent a “significant” proportion of all immigrants and thus the research project itself could not bear any “significance.” I believe that the study of LGBT immigrants is indeed significant, in terms of both policy and theory, and it is in part the aim of this project to reveal why.

Although my interest in gay immigrants arose in 1992, my research with gay and lesbian immigrants actually began to take shape in January 1995 at a meeting held at the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Community Center. A legal seminar was conducted at that time to educate queer immigrants about immigration law and the effects of Proposition 187 passed less than two months prior to that meeting. Proposition 187, the ballot initiative passed by California voters on November 8, 1994,³ denied public social services, publicly funded health care, and public education to people who are suspected of being illegal immigrants. Soon after, a support and education group named Immigration Equality was formed by lesbian and gay immigrants. This group continues to meet at the center on a monthly basis. These immigrants are not a homogenous group by any definition. Differences in class, nationality, legal status, and motivations for seeking U.S. citizenship rights exist among them—and they also differ in the ways in which they identify themselves and their relationship to gay and ethnic communities.

By examining immigration from a queer perspective we can better understand how sexuality impacts migratory processes as a whole and not only those of queer immigrants. The knowledge gained from this perspective is perhaps best articulated by Dorothy Smith (1987). Smith’s formulation of everyday-world standpoint epistemology offers keen insights into understanding, from a feminist perspective, the institutional workings of power that she calls “the relations of ruling.” She explains,

“Relations of Ruling” is a concept that grasps power, organization, direction, and regulation as more pervasively structured than can be expressed in traditional concepts provided by the discourses of power. . . . When I write of “ruling” in this context I am identifying a complex of organized practices, including government, law, business and financial management, professional organization, and educational institutions as well as the discourses in texts that interpenetrate the multiple sites of power. (1987, 3)

Thus, the “queer standpoint” perspective makes visible the heteronormative power infused not only into U.S. immigration policy but also into the academic discourses of migration itself. This means that sexuality, as a dimension of power, has in fact shaped all migration in its practice, regulation, and study in profound yet “invisible” ways. The queer standpoint reveals not only how “homosexuality” as a marginal sexuality influences migration but also how “heterosexuality” as a normative regime shapes the social relations and processes of migration.

In the following section, I provide a theoretical outline for an understanding of the sexuality of migration. In order to examine the multiply constituted dimensions of identity and their relationship to the structural influences of a global political economy, it is necessary to integrate and dialogue with what are conventionally the disparate literatures of sexuality, gender, migration, geography, and feminist critiques of the state. My aim in this chapter is not to review these bodies of literature (greater emphasis on select works are discussed in other chapters) but rather to provide a skeletal framework from commonalities between them. Despite the seeming disparity of the literatures mentioned, there are some continuities that have become more apparent over the course of this project. The process of being able to “see” these continuities was aided by Edward Soja’s (1996) conceptualization of Thirdspace. As he describes it, Thirdspace is a transdisciplinary project that examines the “simultaneity and interwoven complexity of the social, the historical, and the spatial, their inseparability and interdependence” (1996, 3).

Queering the Political Economy of Migration

A queer theoretical framework by its very logic resists definition and stability (Jagose 1996). As a result, it has become both an area of growing influence and an entrenched resistance in the social sciences. These tensions and contradictions are due in part to an increased focus on issues of identity (including that of nation, race/ethnicity, gender, and sexuality) among scholars from a variety of disciplines with different theoretical perspectives and empirical concerns. Yet these tensions are rooted in Queer Theory itself, descended from the more modernist concerns of early gay and lesbian studies scholars and the postmodern influence of semiotics and the work of Michel Foucault.

Queer theorists more closely aligned with the semiotic tradition have built upon Foucault’s assertion that sexualities and identities can only be understood through discursive strategies and an “analytics of power” that examines the multiple sites where normalization occurs through discourse and knowledge production.⁴ However, an “analytics of power” restricted purely to an examination of textual discourse, void of a material context, is obviously limited. There are, of course, numerous normalizing sites, including the body (which has received particular attention as an inscribed “text”), but my concern here lies with that of the family. As I demonstrate below, the family and the home (or household) is a site where normalizing rules of gender and sexual conduct and performance are taught on a daily basis.

More recently there has been a move toward a queer materialist paradigm that asserts that “all meanings have a material base” from which cultural symbols and identities are constructed (Morton 1996).⁵ Furthermore, it is “the examination of the complex social conditions (division of labor, production, distribution, consumption, class) through which sexual preference/orientation, hierarchy, domination, and protest develop dialectically at a particular time and place” (Bennett 1996, 382). Thus, in this section I briefly outline a queer materialist paradigm for analyzing the social relations among family, migration, and sexual identity.

The link between “gay” identity and socioeconomic force...