Reflections on Queer Collaborations 2017

C.C Paris
C.C Paris
Jul 20, 2017 · 4 min read

The University of Sydney Queer Action Collective had numerous viewpoints regarding whether we would fund attendees of Queer Collaborations (QC), this year hosted at the University of Wollongong. QC is an annual conference that invites queer students from across Australia to meet and discuss queer issues. The Queer Action Collective foremost put an offer out to completely fund accommodation for interested students. This was an amount of $380 per student, in which nobody took the offer. As a result, the collective instead decided to fund $20 day tickets to visit QC as an alternative.

Having never been to the conference, I decided to attend for a day, void of varying opinions for and against the conference. The train ride, which I took from Hurstville to North Wollongong, was a pleasant one. The workshops scheduled for the morning included Queer Foot Fetishes (in it’s own time slot), followed by Queer Fiction, Beyond the Queer Collective, and Getting It Together. Seeking some form of political engagement, I attended Beyond the Queer Collective, which was an average workshop at most, detailing the history and achievements of organizations including the Australian Queer Students Network (AQSN), The National Union of Students Queer Department (NUS), and cross-campus collaborations.

To be brutally honest, I was disappointed in the minimal efforts of AQSN, which, despite holding great potential, had only engaged itself with one effective campaign regarding Queer Homelessness since it’s inception in 2011. AQSN aims to be a representative, national body of Queer students across Australia, yet despite the co-convener being USYD’s 2016 Queer Officer, we have had zero contact from them, and find it difficult to see how they truly represent students when they refuse to contact one of the most politically active queer student networks in Sydney. As for NUS, the room came to an agreement in the failures of the NUS Queer Officers to also make contact. Fellow Queer Officers in the room from various universities made plans to unanimously condemn them on the QC conference floor to be held later in the week, which was one fruitful conclusion from the workshop. However, NUS’ failure to recognize QC formally made this action tokenistic at best. Other than that, I personally felt disillusioned in broader Queer student organizations in their failures to engage our collective — a concern voiced by numerous other Queer Officers following the workshop. I left, feeling merely determined that the only effective resolution to Queer activism is to be creating our own protests and campaigns, with the hope surrounding Queer Collectives will follow suite, and vice versa.

Following this were mostly autonomous meetings for polyamorous people, ace/aro people, rural/regional queers and bi/pan people — none of which I was able to attend. It was reported to me from an anonymous attendee however that these were mostly a chance to “brag about how great it is to be poly,” and held little political significance or organizing. The remaining workshops for the day were Non-exclusive Sexualities, Fat, Femme & Asian, and Organizing QC. I attended Fat, Femme & Asian, which was interesting and heart-wrenching to hear first-hand the experiences of people of colour. However, little resolution came from the workshop, which could’ve worked as a time to propose campaign ideas or come to meaningful conclusions and ways forward.

The reason for my reflection on QC is that I ultimately think it isn’t living up to the potential it could hold. Rather than “bragging” about identities, or using the weekly conference to get plastered and scrounge Grindr for a hook-up, QC should aim to finish the week with a definitive list of campaigns and methods to engage identities not well represented in the community. The workshops should be educational and politically motivated, and I still find it upsetting that Queer Foot Fetishes held it’s own time-slot at midday. Hearing the plight of Western Australian Queer Officers to receive some sort of communication was upsetting and disappointing, and it seems despite QC’s inception, it has failed to resolve issues it sought to.

I believe for QC to be successful, it should foremost be recognized by leading student bodies such as NUS and university student unions. National queer networks such as NUS Queer Department or AQSN should be organizing it, as opposed to the current undemocratic method currently in place. QC should provide an opportunity for queer students to elect national queer officers and elect formalized organizing committees who have proper contact with years previous. Otherwise the QC conference floor, and its motions, remains meaningless and tokenistic. Workshops should be run by people who are well-versed in their topics, and have thoughts, ideas or plans to resolve or raise awareness for particular issues — otherwise QC becomes another queer echo chamber to merely brag, or complain about the status-quo. Ultimately, QC needs to be more political and activist.

I intended on visiting QC for three days, however following a dismal day, wherein I felt I had benefited little, I made the decision to not return. Considering the USYD Queer Action Collective’s reluctance to sign up, (and I can see why) I sincerely hope our budget can be put to better use in organizing campaigns, and hosting beneficial, educational workshops.

)
C.C Paris

Written by

C.C Paris

22 / unsuccessful writer of poetry and non-fiction / long-time queer activist / studying a Master of Publishing at the University of Sydney.