In Retrospect

[March 31, 2014]*

One of the really interesting things about London was, for me, some of the social situations and the implications of how they played out. This sounds like a really fancy way of saying that I found everyday interactions curious, but I'm an English major; I like words; go with it.

For example, strolling around SoHo displayed some interesting things.

• "Adult bookstores" in America are simply "sex shops" in SoHo, and they aren't shy about what they contain. It's an established fact that humans are sexual creatures, and while conservative America (which is, of course, that with which I am familiar) hides it from themselves and everybody else, London seemed willing to embrace it. In the very public display window of one store were a pair of, well, let's be frank here: assless underpants. Placed on the groin (is there a word for a bust that's the opposite end of a torso...?) of a male-oriented mannequin, these were out in the open amidst a collection of vibrators, lingerie and other sex toys. The stores are unabashedly honest and open while remaining entirely serious about age restrictions.
  Why is this interesting?
  Because it says that although they are perhaps more open about sexuality and the fact that everybody loves a good orgasm, it's still kind of a sign that a person is judged on/by their sexuality. This is a really abstract concept which is somewhat difficult to explain coherently, but the very notion that they are open about it means that it's much more difficult to be unobtrusive about acquiring objects. The entrances are out in the open, so any passersby know precisely where you're going and what for. The window displays may lead people to think that the store specializes in a particular manner--or the neighborhood in which the store is located can cause the same kind of viewer extrapolation which leads to even a subconscious form of judgment upon the viewed individual(s).
• The gay bars were also relatively ostentatious. A discussion with my parents actually prompts me to make a particular distinction: the gay bars in question were designated as gay bars, not just bars which were 'taken over' (in a manner of speaking) by persons of the gay-persuasion who just happened to like the location. The one seemed to be called G-A-Y, which I'm guessing because it was plastered across the entire front of the building.
  Even though these were in SoHo, which is kind of a portion of the counter-culture scene, there were a lot of people who were in the area for dinner, or dessert, or whatever reason they happened to be there for, and this yields a lot of casual 'interaction' between hetero/cisgender** people and non-hetero people.
  Do you know what happened? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Even the overtly flamboyant were ignored as just more people on the sidewalk or in the club.  Nobody really seemed to care. There were no unhappy glances, no snide comments, no tension--nothing. Surprising? Meh; not really.

Walking around London outside of SoHo during the rest of the week was also interesting just purely for the sake of people watching. There were non-hetero couples all over the place, and some were more obvious than others. The very first day we were there, a gay couple stood in the corner of the train beside our group and it seemed like I was the only person who even noticed them. On the sidewalk one day, a couple sort of paused to kiss, and the guy behind them really only seemed annoyed because he had to move around them and they were in the way. In Regents Park, there were a couple of transvestites sitting on a bench, and a man was taking pictures of them--probably because of how absolutely fabulous they looked (and I'm not being facetious; they were seriously fabulous). But the guy was clearly a tourist. There were parents playing with their kids about fifty yards behind them and people strolling on the sidewalk and everybody did their thing around them and nobody made a fuss.

While all of this seems like they've fully incorporated their non-traditional citizens into the fold, there was a sign on a bus that made a comment to the effect of "we've still got progress to make" (a sign which I rather tried to get a picture of but never saw again after that first sighting) which tells me that the population is aware of remaining ostracism, oppression, what have you. This isn't surprising to me either, because in a place with a population as diverse as London's, you will never have 100% agreement on anything. People are too diverse, have backgrounds which are too different and belief sets which are too mutually exclusive in order to come to full agreement on a great many things, and gender/sexuality fluidity is certainly a big one. There will always be a religious population clinging to the Old Testament verses declaring homosexuality a sin; there will always be people uncomfortable with the idea for whatever reason they've determined. And whether or not that's bad is arbitrary because, like snow in North Dakota, it's inevitable. I don't know of a single issue that does not face opposition somewhere, from someone/group for some reason. 

However, I do really think that Britain is ahead of the United States on this front purely for coming to a point where (A) they've made legal allotments for transgendered people making discrimination against them illegal and (B) their civil partnership for non-traditional unions are legally identical to marriages.

*I realized tonight that although I'd written this post, it was still just a draft in my post list. So this is now backdated.
**persons whose experiences line up with the gender into which they were born. i.e. girls who are comfortable identifying with and being female.

Sans Plans

Today was a little bit of an odd day for me, although it was certainly a good day.

I spent approximately 3 hours walking and chatting with a man I met at the University of London while I was attempting to stroll back through toward the British Museum. We walked to Regent Park—which is about a 30 minute walk, by the way—and through a fair amount of it, our conversation progressing at random through a plethora of topics. I honestly don’t know what his name was. I just realized I never asked him. So yes, I did put my trust in a man I’d just met, whose name I didn’t know, and walk halfway across London with him. I even took the tube with him. Most of my family and friends are probably going to facepalm and groan when they read this, and trust me, I understand why. But honestly, it’s not like we were anywhere that wasn’t completely full of people, and he was very nice, and talkative, and we had a wonderful afternoon.

I feel like it’s important to take a step back from visiting every tourist site in a city and actually interact with the people who live there. Because what is a city but a conglomeration of people? A bunch of buildings. Certainly there’s history there—but there’s history because there were people. London’s history is wrapped up in its people, and I think that this is beautiful. Interaction with the people around me is what makes me feel most alive, connected to the world. It’s kind of difficult to explain, I suppose, but I think that, by getting to know other people, even by getting a brief glimpse of who another person is, allows us to learn more about ourselves— if even in an abstract way.

And… yeah… I’ll admit it: Part of me seriously can’t believe I did it. But I had fun, and I think that’s what matters. Right? I’ll go with that.

So I’ve wandered around literally half of London today, done some shopping, and accomplished little. The British Museum was closed by the time I finally got back there, and then I missed the Jack the Ripper tour. And then I like, pulled a muscle in my ankle or something, because now I can't even walk; I can only limp. It's particularly uncomfortable. I'm really hoping that it goes away, and soon.

Tomorrow I am going on a "Shakespeare and Dickens' London" walk at 11 a.m., and then, depending on my ankle, also the Jack the Ripper tour at 7.30 that I missed tonight. Between those two times, I'm not too certain. I might actually go wander the British Museum for a bit, but I really wanted to go to Spamalot, since it's currently playing. Which reminds me—I need to look into that.

Fare thee well, friends and family. I return to your grasp in but two days. Parting will be such sweet sorrow.

--Emily

Not Lost: Exploring

Or… you know… lost.

I got up yesterday morning with the intention of visiting the London Library, which is located adjacent to St. James Square. Upon leaving the hotel, I walked the wrong direction down the street before I realized it and turned around. I then took the tube the wrong direction and had to start over. I somehow managed to get lost after St. James Square (perhaps because the library didn’t have a large ostentatious sign announcing itself) and wandered around a 4 square block area until I got back onto the tube and went to the next station to attempt getting there from the other side.

I did eventually find the London Library. But it’s a private library and I’d have had to pay 15 ₺ to look at anything. So the librarian directed me to the British Library.

Back to the tube.

The librarian at the British Library informed me that because it was an archive, I’d have to know exactly what text I wanted so that they could pull it for me and I could look in 2 days. So she directed me to the St. Pancras public library, where I finally managed to find what I was looking for. I love librarians; such wonderful, helpful individuals.

British Parliament passed two pieces of legislature in 2004: the Civil Partnership Act and the Gender Recognition Act.

The Civil Partnership Act gave non-heterosexual couples the right to enter into a legally-recognized union that is not marriage. Marriage is defined for British law as a lifelong union between one man and one woman (plus other details). This definition is unedited, and clearly disallows for any other relationship to result in marriage. Like marriage, couples wishing to enter into a civil partnership are granted (at least as far as I can tell, judging by the materials available to me) all the same rights and benefits that married couples are granted: tax and pension benefits, medical benefits, etc. Also like marriage, couples are required to register in the area where they live, regardless of where they intend to actually hold the union. 15 days are required to pass, during which time any persons wishing to make an objection are required to come forward and do so. After that time period, the union can take place at any time within the year of registration; if a year passes, the process must be restarted.

With that, nonreligious venues which hold weddings are disallowed to refuse to hold civil partnerships. However, any religious venue can—and if I understand how the book read, they are essentially required to, because civil partnerships cannot be registered on religious premises and no religious ceremony/service is allowed to take place at the signing of the Civil Partnership schedule (akin to a marriage license). However, I could be wrong on that requirement comment, because the book stated that marriages could be registered at whatever venue it’s taking place. So I’m not certain if civil partnerships can take place in a religious venue, if said venue allows for it, but they can’t register it there, or if they just straight up can’t have it there at all.

Couples united in a civil partnership are allowed to adopt jointly and both adults can share parental rights. They can also apply for “separation orders” to separate without dissolution of their civil partnership, but the existing CP must dissolve before a new one can be entered into. However, at least one full year is required to pass before there can be a CP dissolution, and the couple must be able to prove to a court that the relationship has “irretrievably broken down”, and on a permanent basis. The same conditions are necessary for acquisition of divorce.

International non-heterosexual couples are automatically recognized in the UK and do not need to be separately registered; there are, however, certain conditions which must be met, outlined in sections 212 and 218 of the act. In 2010, at the publication of this text, Vermont was the only US state whose marriages were fully accepted. Regardless, all international couples wishing to stay here long term and have their union recognized are advised to seek legal advice just to ensure that all ducks are in the correct row.

The Gender Recognition Act enables transsexual/transgender persons to change their legal gender by obtaining a full Gender Recognition Certificate. The United Kingdom only recognizes a person by their legal gender as stated upon their birth certificate, which is why this act is important. The aforementioned Gender Recognition Certificate is required to receive a new birth certificate with the modified gender listed.

If the transgendered person in question is involved in a marriage, a divorce must take place before the certificate can be granted.

Although discrimination against persons of either gender engaged in a marriage or a civil partnership, there are no laws regarding singleness. Apparently you cannot be denied a job for being married/partnered but you certainly can for being lonely. Interesting. Also, discrimination against transgender people at any stage of their reassignment is illegal, except in certain cases, such as women’s refuges, etc.

So although British law is willing to provide all its people the legal benefits of a legal union, it’s also very set on keeping non-hetero unions out of the church. Whether or not this is positive is perhaps dependent upon perspective: is the distinction between marriage and civil partnership a detriment toward the equalization of people? Would we/they be better off under a common umbrella, or does it really matter? If both unions share the same benefits and legal status, should it matter? Is it the law’s job to protect a church? These questions are philosophical in nature and therefore infinitely arguable; I cannot answer them and I won’t attempt to.

[Update: I forgot to mention (for anybody who may not know) that England has a State-recognized religion, which is, of course, Christianity. They don't deny anybody the right to practice other religions--at least not as far as I could tell--but the national religion is one which is protected by laws. This is an important factor to note when asking the aforementioned ethical questions.]

Citizens Advice Guide to Your Rights. Penguin 2008: London

Howlett, Amanda. Knowing Your Rights and Using the Courts. 3^rd Edition. Straightforward Publishing, 2010: Brighton

Always in the Way

Now, I realize that the title seems to be a bit self-deprecating and perhaps inaccurate considering that I am currently visiting a city in which more than 10,000 people live: Everybody is in everybody else’s way pretty much all the time.

However. I was squawked at by a duck trying to cross the sidewalk today at Warwick Castle, and I do believe that you haven’t been “Excuse me!”ed until you’ve been “Excused me!”ed by a duck at a centuries-old castle.

The duck was in the yard; we were on the sidewalk; there were primary school students eating lunch at the tables on the other side of us. The duck was walking alongside our group as we were headed toward the bus, but I guess she got sick of waiting, because she stepped out and informed me that I was in her way and she’d like to cross now, thank you.

Warwick Castle was the first stop on our day trip outside of London today, which provided us jet-lagged college students a full two hours to nap! It was lovely. The castle itself was beautiful, as were the grounds and all of the paintings and various artifacts within. 

If you look at this suit of armor sitting atop the horse statue, you’ll notice that the people who wore this armor… were especially short. The one suit of armor stood barely over 5 feet tall! I’m not a particularly tall individual, but those people would make me feel enormous; I’m sure of it.

I learned quite a bit about trebuchets, something which I was heretofore entirely ignorant of. As far as I was concerned, it was a font on my computer—and I hate to admit it, but I didn’t even know it was properly pronounced [treb-yoo-shay] until quite recently. For those who are unaware, a trebuchet is like a catapult, but uses a sling instead. They are virtually silent and were put together using wooden dowels and wedges so that they could be taken apart and transported to whichever castle was desired for takeover. However, because of how destructive they were, the victims would often throw up a white flag before the trebuchets could even be built.

The second stop on our trip was at Stratford upon Avon, the birthplace (and gravesite, actually) of William Shakespeare. We toured his house, which is still intact. The accompanying picture shows me almost bonking my head on a doorway. I am 5’7”. I never bonk my head on a doorframe. It was kind of an amusing moment for me.

The third stop was at Oxford University, and we toured a few of the colleges, although mainly Christ Church. It was beautiful, and while we were walking through, I kept trying to imagine how it might feel to go to college in such a place. The history there is astounding and immeasurable, and the idea of being immersed in that while studying for a degree is—for me, anyway—unimaginable. As an English major, history is monumentally important, because culture and 'current events' (current being the operative word, of course, when discussing literature) play a huge role in the subtext, or even literal text, of a novel. Sociopolitical commentary is a huge part of much of literature, and while it isn't always clear what's being stated, knowing what was happening at the time of publication is key to fully understanding certain points of a plot--sometimes, not always. Being surrounded by more history than could ever be fathomed by one individual would be a constant reminder of the profound reaches of life and humanity.
Also, attending Oxford is unimaginable for the fact that for non-Englishmen or Europeans, there’s no tuition cap, which means that it’d cost upward 50,000₺. Considering that the current exchange rate is 1.67 US$ to the British ₺? Yeah. No.

When we got back to London, Ms. Jessica and I found a grocery store so that she could find some biscuits (read: cookies); I found fresh butter croissants… so I bought two. =D Honestly, the food here is amazing. They make fabulous sandwiches, and that’s not counting everything else. After we stopped at the hotel briefly, we strolled down to Covent Garden and SoHo so that I could do a little scouting around the area for the sake of my project. What I saw was enlightening—but I won’t share that quite yet. Perhaps tomorrow, after I’ve had a visit to the Library of London and looked into some more formal information. What was super-duper-incredibly exciting—and caused me to do a happy dance in the middle of the street before I got a hold of myself again—was the Bubble-ology shop selling bubble tea. (It’s like a tea latte with massive tapioca pearls in it. It’s one of my most favorite things on the entire planet.) So even though my feet hurt all the way up my calves and I have a blister on the underside of my right second toe… the walk to SoHo was worth every step.

As a side note: If I ever live here or visit again for a longer period of time, I am never, ever, ever getting behind the wheel of a car. Absolutely not. London drivers are absolutely insane. Walking is harrowing enough; I can’t imagine driving here! My goodness! The lines are so narrow that you seriously drive like, six inches from the car next to you, and you park even more closely together than that! AGH! NO. I refuse. I will suffer the ache and walk, thank you.

***

Last night I couldn’t figure out why I was waking up every hour and a half or so until I realized this morning that, being five hours ahead, I was basically taking a series of afternoon naps. In the middle of the night. #Timezones, man. But I seem to be doing alright, in general. I am anticipating getting myself hopelessly lost tomorrow morning when I attempt to get myself to the library on my own, but there are maps all over the place, so hopefully I manage to at least get there. The production of the Lion King musical is tomorrow evening at 7:30, I believe, at the Lyceum. I haven’t a clue where that is, though, because Ms. Jessica couldn’t remember earlier while we were walking. So… with luck I’ll find that, too!

For the record: The first small toe on my right foot (but not my left) is longer than my big toe; so when I walk, it kind of flattens out weird and it’s kind of uncomfortable. I spend a lot more time paying more attention to my feet while walking than I like to. But consequently, I have a blister awkwardly placed on the underside of my toe. But it’s the only blister that I have. And I don’t particularly know what to do with/about it. But I don’t like it. I think it’s from walking on all the super uneven cobblestone outside of London. That’s my guess, anyway.

Here We Go

We're on the plane in Detroit, still boarding passengers. The flight is set to leave in twenty minutes, and in 8 hours we shall find ourselves in London. At 11 a.m.  Funny how 8 hours equals 12 on this plane.
"Leet's dooo the tiiiiime waaarrrp agaaaaaiiiiiinn!"

It's definitely time to go. I realized awhile back that I absolutely despise traveling. But I really love arriving. ;)

Let Me Explain

Greetings, Readership!

This blog exists for the sake of a class I'm taking this spring semester 2014 titled "Global Investigations: London" in which we are charged with the task of creating a research project relating a personal interest [within our fields of study] to London--makes sense, right?

So! Thus we reach the project: I'm studying gender/sexuality fluidity in London and the dynamics of both the cultural response(s) and the laws applicable, particularly regarding marriage laws, abortion, etc.

The obvious first question is "Why on earth are you interested in that if you're an English major?"
Because I'm a human rights activist and a post-feminist/queer theorist. See elaborations/explanations here. Because I watch a vast collection of programs which feature non-hetero relationships and dynamics, have friends who are non-hetero, transgender, etc., and because I follow a number of artists (both musical and otherwise) who are distinctly non-hetero.

London is a major cultural hub for the entire world; what happens in London has a ripple effect across cultures spanning thousands of miles and changing perspectives or practices. Their programs have international reach (Doctor Who, Sherlock, Torchwood, Downton Abbey, etc) and their scientists are working alongside others from other countries to figure out causes/etc. In fact, scientists have recently discovered that homosexuality is linked to a particular gene*.

My presence in London will allow me key opportunities to do some pointed people-watching, with an aim to hopefully gauge some reactions to openly non-hetero/non-traditional persons. Not only that, but I should also be able to access some of the legal documents that I would need to view in order to get a feel for how the law handles the fluidity there. As is often the case in dynamic cultures, there is [likely] a dichotomy between what the law tolerates/allows and what is tolerated/allowed/accepted by the people themselves.

I do hope that you join me on this exciting adventure over my spring break, because I'm quite certain that I'll have at least a few noteworthy adventures. I mean, come on:

I'm going to London!

*(Sample, Ian. "Male Sexual Orientation Influenced by Genes, Study Shows." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 14 Feb. 2014. Web. Feb 2014)