Video instructions and help with filling out and completing Will Form 8815 Imposed

Instructions and Help about Will Form 8815 Imposed

I kind of think about marriage in relation to settler colonialism and also category indigenous category of analysis and indigenous peoples in my own kind of perspective looking at settler colonialism in Hawaii there's been work that's been done on kinship systems in the continent in terms of indigenous peoples and how governments whether it's you know early Spain eventually Mexico what became the u.s. what became Canada really imposing different colonial norms on indigenous peoples an attacking kinship distinctions and different kinds of diversity and that included different norms around gender and sexuality what's wrong with marriage being the defining issue well I'll speak to that as someone who's completely opposed to marriage as a goal and for me it all goes back to property and it is it does go back to settler colonialism and I mean I think about British common law and its import in North America I think about the missionaries who went to Hawaii from Connecticut and Massachusetts and imposed heterosexual marriage as a norm and you know interfaced with what was then a new Hawaiian Kingdom that was founded in 1810 the missionaries got there in 1820 and proceeded to try and eradicate indigenous practices of polyandry polygamy same-sex sexuality they also of course found sibling chiefly incestuous relationships in the name of producing high-ranking offspring repugnant so they attacked that as well and I see marriage bound up with trying to forcibly subordinate Hawaiian women and issues of sexual autonomy for all people but especially Hawaiian women in relation to you know missionaries trying to teach a subservience to men in the name of marriage and what what was seen as a more civilized way to be and you know I'm writing about that on something you know how they saw these different practices and ontology zazz savage sexualities and so I think of it is completely integral to property because it is about a proprietary relationship and to me that's not disconnected from the missionaries also forcing Hawaiian land privatization and then also coverture for women so that women became conflated or converged their civic status with their spouses and so to me that relationship between land and genders and sexualities with marriage sort of being a way to seal the deal is is is about American property rights being sort of the bedrock of American society in many ways and also individualized title being a marker of civilization around the globe at the time and it's not that different from thinking about what constitutes normal couples you know who's accepted and the whole issue that we see around same-sex marriage you know I know there's limits to the assimilationist critique but there is that that bid to say well we want to be married too and so you know the issue around marriage being problematic as a centerpiece marriage and militarism right military entry for LGBT s I mean to me they're they're really like siblings in u.s. Empire and I see that around property and domination and proprietary relationships to actually have an ownership model at the core of it you in the Hawaii case what I was - is the fact that in the campaign to support same-sex marriage couples they the non-hawaiian in plaintiffs in the case and the broader non-hawaiian LGBT community kept evoking traditional hawaiian culture their conception of Native Hawaiian tradition to try and bolster the claim that this was you know that Hawaiian culture is more accepting and then Hawaii's the natural place where this should be the first in the nation meanwhile you have actual Hawaii nationalists fighting for the u.s. to D occupy fighting against colonial forms of polarization that were responsible in the first place for pulverizing same-sex sexuality and so I think about marriage as a colonial imposition and that's how I understand LGBT and Maheu kanaka maoli indigenous Hawaiians were saying at the time of those same-sex marriage cases the cases in the early 90s around paying attention to the fact that queer Hawaiians which I'll just use is a quick shorthand we're really trying to intervene on this civil rights struggle that was reifying the power of the 50th state at the same time kanaka maole were challenging state authority challenging u.s. domination in hawaii because you have i know in 1893 US military backed coup and then a unilateral annexation five years later in 1898 and so really challenging the u.s. and its subsidiaries at the same time people are evoking hawaiian culture to try and gain state authority to marry them and sort of the paradoxes and contradictions there and these are LGBT q and Maheu which is a category a third gender category in hawaii you know really calling that out with the non Hawaiian advocates of same-sex marriage but also calling the Hawaiian nationalist groups to step up and say how how they weigh in on the question of sexual diversity