Oral History with Christian Matheis, October 24, 2014 (Ms2015-007)

Interview with Christian Matheis

Date of Interview: October 24, 2014

Interviewer: Veronica Nguyen

Assistant: Ren Harmon

Place of Interview: Lane Hall, Rm 212, Virginia Tech

Length: 46:55

Transcribers: Veronica Nguyen, Ren Harmon, Claire Gogan

Veronica Nguyen: Hi, My name is Veronica Nguyen, along with Ren Harmon. We are

in Lane Hall, room 212. It is October 24th, I believe? Yes, okay. Awesome.

[Laughter] May I ask you to introduce yourself, tell us your name? And also you

position at Tech?

Christian Matheis: Sure. Christian Matheis, and I'm a doctoral candidate in the

ASPECT program. I teach in the departments of Philosophy and Political Science,

and I also voluntarily coordinate the VT Action Community Organizer Training Program.

NGUYEN: Awesome. Okay, we're going to start off a little slow. So, I'm just

going to have to ask you, can you tell us where you were born, where you were

raised, and your family life a little bit?

MATHEIS: Sure. I was born in San Antonio, Texas. I grew up back and forth

between Texas and Oregon, so my dad's family, who were immigrants in the 1950s,

immigrated to the Pacific Northwest. My mom's family are about six generations

south Texan. And so I grew up kind of back and forth between the two. I can give

additional detail if that's--

NGUYEN: Yeah totally, you can totally elaborate.

MATHEIS: 00:01:00Yeah, so, it's kind of weird to figure out where to start. The hybrid

of upbringing is really conditioned by both of those factors. Because my mom's

family has a really rooted history, actually, a well-documented history. They

have multiple generations of family records and things like that. I grew up with

lots of photographic evidence and lots of information about that side of the

family. But, my father grew up in refugee camps throughout Europe, and he and

all of his siblings except for one were born on the refugee trail coming out of

Yugoslavia through Western Europe, living anywhere from a camp to a barn. So

when they immigrated, when they crossed the Atlantic, they lost their family

records. I was actually twenty-two before I saw multiple photographic evidence

of all the story.

NGUYEN: Wow

MATHEIS: So, the upbringing around my dad's family was all oral history. There

were a few photographs here and there after they immigrated in the 1950s, but

all of the stories we heard growing up were all mental imagery. My dad and I

went to 00:02:00Germany when I was twenty-two, we met relatives who just pulled out

books of family albums and so suddenly there were these images of things we'd

never seen, but had heard about. In any case, those differences in oral history

verses documented history actually set kind of the context for a lot of things

in life, and the way that--I probably ended up studying ethics and political

philosophy, with a strong interest in liberation. And I have a whole bizarre

background in corporate life and activism and policy advocacy before that. So I

don't know what details are helpful, but, that's a bit of the family background

and it catapulted me into a weird set of interests.

NGUYEN: [Laughter] Thank you. So, when talking about sexual identity or gender

identity, how exactly do you identify yourself? Do you find yourself belonging

in the community of LGBTQ or maybe a different community you might identify

yourself with?

MATHEIS: Mmm hmm. You know, I actually avoid identification

NGUYEN: Okay

MATHEIS: As much as possible. Um, 00:03:00so, most of the ways that, if somebody asks a

question about identified, like you did, typically, I actually tell them about

partners. So I'll say, well, I'm in a relationship with Isaac, right. And I

would describe partnerships or relationships or tell that history. But, um, I

pretty consistently avoid saying "I'm queer, I'm gay" or using the identity

labels, not out of any shame or avoidance, but because I don't think they

actually do much work. They're just sort of invitations to stereotype and

profile. What matters more to me is to say, I really do take part in the broader

LGBTQ community, I have relationships with these people, and that, I think, has

a more substantive explanation. And it annoys the shit out of other people.

NGUYEN: [Laughter]

MATHEIS: Who want the easy answer, but I refuse to give it to them.

NGUYEN: Okay, I appreciate the harder answer!

MATHEIS: Yeah. So, what may help though, if I had to pick a branch of identity

that would make 00:04:00sense, I think queer identities and queer politics around those

identities probably make the most sense for me. But I just prefer to describe

the actual facts.

NGUYEN: Right.

MATHEIS: Yeah, yeah

NGUYEN: May I ask you about your, maybe your earliest memories or earliest

events in your life about you trying to, like, I don't know how to say, form

a--I don't want to say sexual identity--

MATHEIS: No, that's good

NGUYEN: I guess form you identity of you as a person now?

MATHEIS: Yeah, around, I don't know, I don't know how much you hear this in

other interviewer conversations, but let me start later in life and go backward

a bit. Like many people, I realized much later, around age 19, 20, that, had I

had some optionary language to understand sexuality or attraction much earlier

in life, it would have made sense. So, around age 13, I start to notice

different attractions, different things, the way that other people appeared, or

talking about sexuality or attractions. I noticed the difference. [clinking

noise] The building does that, by the way. 00:05:00I should mention that.

So I noticed that. But years later, so you know, out to myself, as early as age

12 or 13, maybe a little earlier, but I started to recall much later, like years

later, like all of these, all of these cues are markers that I had just

repressed or not paid attention to, so I would say as early as age, like, five

or six. I really do remember paying attention to things very differently than my

peers seemed to pay attention to. But I didn't ever think about, I didn't ever

associate myself with people who are gay, or people who are queer until I was

around 13. And then, much more openly pursuing relationships around 18, 19, 20.

NGUYEN: Right. Can I ask you about your emotions going through this kind of

journey? Because you say, like, it kinda started, you saw differences when you

were like five or six. Did you feel, I don't want to say different, but did you

feel uncomfortable where you were, or--

MATHEIS: Earlier?

NGUYEN: Earlier.

MATHEIS: Yeah, when I was 00:06:00young, not so much. There were not, so we're talking

about the mid to late 80s. There were not, you know, there were derogatory

comments or remarks about people who were gay and lesbian, and there were jokes,

right. These derogatory, weird kind of playful jokes about who does and doesn't

count, but more about getting found out. Like more about that kind of thing. So

yeah, there were negative emotions about getting found out, because you just end

up the "other," right. You end up lesser than other people and that kind of

stuff. But, I would never say--I can't remember a time when there was persistent

self-hatred. Just exhaustion, right? Just frustration or exhaustion. So yeah,

the emotions were more like, I'm really, really annoyed, frustrated with having

to explain things to other people, with having to correct people's

misconceptions, with having to describe 00:07:00things, you sort of have to sit through

while people work out their crap. But other than that, other than the drain,

there was nothing, there weren't the other side of negative emotions.

NGUYEN: Okay

MATHEIS: Yeah

NGUYEN: Thank you. And then, you were talking about how you kind of came out to

yourself when you were about 13. Did you have a coming out experience with your

family at all? Like, did you have an event?

MATHEIS: No, no big event. A range of direct and one-to-one conversations, and

then family members, who in this sort of collective way just, they just relayed

the information among one another, which was really cool.

NGUYEN: Okay.

MATHEIS: Yeah.

NGUYEN: May I ask about a couple of the reactions, were they negative, positive?

MATHEIS: Yeah. I won't, I don't want to, I won't describe which ones

NGUYEN: Won't get too personal, right-- [laughter]

MATHEIS: It's all right. You know, so some family members--actually the first

initial response was surprise. Just this utter surprise. Which baffled me.

NGUYEN: [Laughter]

MATHEIS: It absolutely baffled me that the first family member I told 00:08:00 was

surprised. Right? I was like, how! How are you surprised by this? And there were

just these like--days of the person just sort of like in a fog of having to make

sense of it. One family member just came apart, and I would say for the better

part of two years, it was like dealing with somebody in mourning, like who just

was absolutely dedicated to grieving, and if the person could have worn, like,

all black with a veil and sat at home with a candle lit

NGUYEN: [Laughter]

MATHEIS: Um, that family member was just--and it was just, call and be like, are

you still, yeah, okay you're still doing that? Alright.

NGUYEN: [Laughter]

MATHEIS: And after, and now what's funny is, you know, this is fifteen years

ago, maybe less. That person would probably seem utterly shocked that they'd

ever behaved that way. That person just, like, now actually argues with

religious members of communities, and I think the person would actually

seem--has completely forgotten they had that kind of 00:09:00reaction. And would seem

shocked is I was like, 'you know, you acted like that'. And then another family

member responded with this sort of really cool response, which was, "I actually

don't know what to do. But I'll try. Like, I don't know how to respond." And it

was just this really upfront, 'I'm not really prepared, I don't know how to

respond, I love you, that will be enough, I'll work it out.' And it was just

this cool admission of, 'I don't get what I'm supposed to do here, I love you

and we'll figure it out.' And that was actually, yeah, that was pretty cool.

NGUYEN: So more like a working relationship

MATHEIS: Yeah

NGUYEN: Wow, interesting

MATHEIS: Yeah, just like, and a request that I demonstrate some patience, which

was pretty cool. So, you know, whether or not I wanted to feel patient, it was

pretty honest. Yeah.

NGUYEN: And then--I don't even know how to phrase this

MATHEIS: Mmm hmm, feel free

NGUYEN: Your identity--not sexual identity, but just your identity, yourself.

Does sexuality, do you feel, play a role in how--

MATHEIS: Oh yeah

NGUYEN: It does

MATHEIS: Yeah definitely

NGUYEN: In what way, do you 00:10:00think? In like, your work life?

MATHEIS: Well so, what do you mean by that last part? I guess, say more.

NGUYEN: Okay. So like, when you think about sexual identity, a lot of people

feel like they have to categorize themselves in, like, LGBTQ, alphabet soup, all

that stuff

MATHEIS: Right

NGUYEN: And, when they categorize themselves, they feel like they can't be a

part of anything else

MATHEIS: Okay

NGUYEN: For example, I was interviewing another woman who is from the black

South, and she felt because she was a lesbian, she couldn't also identify as a

black woman, because she couldn't go to church

MATHEIS: Right

NGUYEN: So I guess, my question is, did you feel like you have to fight with

different identities, that you felt like you belonged to--a lot of them? Like,

different categories, I guess?

MATHEIS: So, for a period of time, religious. I mean, very religious, spiritual.

I was raised in predominantly Methodist/Lutheran environments, some

nondenominational, but a Protestant Evangelical Christian environment. I mean

that's, hey, south Texas. And that was a tension. You know, that was a real

tension. But I--I've got white 00:11:00skin, cisgender male, you know, I'm a certain

kind of masculine presentation, I get away with a lot. Right?

NGUYEN: [Laughter]

MATHEIS: A lot of stuff I didn't earn. And so, I frankly have lived exempt from

a lot of that tension. The only one that really comes to mind, I think, is to

some extent religion, and also class in a way. I'm the first person in my

immediate and somewhat extended family, not many people have Master's degrees,

not many people have Bachelor's degrees. Only a handful have a Master's degree,

and I can't think of any off the top of my head who have a PhD or ever tried.

So, the class academic stuff is a little bit of a tension, because the way I

explain things, the way I think about things, and the way that my family does is

class conditioned. But, you know, for the most part, I've been exempt.

NGUYEN: [Laughter] Talking about sexual orientation and things, were there any,

I guess, social consequences, 00:12:00or employment consequences you had to suffer?

MATHEIS: [Sneezes] excuse me.

NGUYEN: Well I guess, not suffer, but, experience?

MATHEIS: Yeah, you know, I've worked in jobs, specific jobs, private and public,

where I chose not to disclose because I didn't--I knew the risks, right? I knew,

no public protection. So no, you know, no federal or state protections, even if

there are local protections. Chose not to disclose, which I consider a

consequence. That, you know, if you don't think you can disclose. Or, where I

went out of my way to obscure certain information about even broader personal

details to, it's a countermeasure, right? To prevent somebody from following the

trail of a certain kind of questions.

There were periods of work in government relations, lobbying, political policy

advocacy, where I would avoid disclosure, carefully craft statements, to keep

topics off the radar, 00:13:00right? Just gerrymandering or moving of conversation

topics to stay off certain personal things. I actually think there are--I could

go on and on about relationships with other institutions of higher education,

where for instance, our employer had a prominent set of employees who were

publicly, publicly in major media sources, outwardly hostile, made a stated

pattern, the university was sued over their homophobic and transphobic and

racist behaviors. And I watched colleagues systematically targeted and punished

for their attempts to defend themselves. And I actually left that job without--I

feel like I was relatively protected, because I was out and I did work directly

with the LGBT community. So, it would be a bad idea for them to go after me. But

at the same time, 00:14:00I watched people really get shredded by that. And, I had to

walk a very fine line of defending them and looking after myself, and ultimately

left the institution, after making an affirmative action complaint. And

saying--it was a proactive complaint. I said, given the conditions of the

university and the situation that's well-documented in the media, and the

pending lawsuit, I want it on record that I've experienced these things, and I

told the affirmative action office, I want it on record, so that if I have to

make any other complaint in the future, you have a record of me having made

these things aware to you now. And they did nothing about it. Yeah they did

absolutely nothing. A similar pattern that's happened here at Virginia Tech.

I've been exempt, I feel like I've been pretty protected from them, but I have

met plenty of people who have not.

NGUYEN: Do you mind elaborating on people who have not, maybe within your experience?

MATHEIS: Yeah, I mean, the well-known case of a senior administrator. If you

don't know the story, a senior administrator 00:15:00who was hired and who's offer was

put into question, their offer of employment was put into question, their

partner's offer of employment was put into question, but also employees who have

been targeted by supervisors. This is what's called a "backchannel network."

Employees who have been targeted by their supervisors with termination, who have

been called derogatory names like 'dyke' and 'fag' by employees and coworkers,

and this--the overt versions actually occur most, it seems, to people in blue

collar labor positions, staff positions here. Where it's just evident that you

can be fired or dismissed on a whim, and you have no protections inside that

very close enclave. But also in knowing a few people who are in upper, senior

leadership positions, whether they're faculty or administrators, who won't come

out, and won't disclose their membership in a community, because they know that

either they will face, or had faced, direct targeting, or loss of 00:16:00credibility. I

mean, whether somebody says, you know, 'I'm going to do this now' because of

that, or you begin to get the institutional cold shoulder, I've heard multiple stories.

And these come through backchannel networks, where people who know people tell

people, and you get the message, because--at this point, there is no, and

granted, my deep respect for the people in Human Resources who have worked

incredibly hard to see things change. In fact, some of those people have worked

even harder than members of the community, some allies in Human Resources.

There's not an effective mechanism. There is not, at this institution, a way for

people to do no-fault reporting, and that has a lot to do with federal and state law.

We just collected, the university just collected a climate survey. The climate

survey was organized, designed, and hosted internally, at a public institution,

in a state with no persistent protections. That means all the data that I

disclose in that climate survey, 00:17:00I'm more or less trusting whoever happens to

serve in the administration that they're not going to screw us over. It was not

conducted by an external source, it was not held, the data was not held on a

server external to the State of Virginia, in a state with legal protections.

And, there are people who I respect who worked with it, and I think they did

their best, but make no mistake. There's now institutional access to reported

data on people who've disclosed things that can now be used to target them. I

mean, this is the kind of stuff that you mentally plan for all the time, you

have to pay close attention to, because if you don't, one false move can screw you.

NGUYEN: And is that like, what you're talking about, trying to plan all the time?

MATHEIS: Mmm hmm

NGUYEN: Is that--how does that make you--sorry, I have to ask that a lot

MATHEIS: No, no

NGUYEN: How does that make you feel? Is that another level of frustration and

just exhaustion?

MATHEIS: Yeah, yeah

NGUYEN: Always having to plan, always being scared of losing something?

MATHEIS: Yeah. If I didn't have a healthy sense of mischief and hope, I would, I

mean, I frankly, I 00:18:00admire and have a ton of respect for the people who have

stuck it out for decades. But it's frustrating. One of the things I came to

learn through getting better acquainted with queer politics and pro-trans

politics was to think of rage as a healthy reaction. That anger and rage differ,

but both of them in some way, those are healthy reactions to things that are

fucked up. And when you have to spend a massive amount of your mental energy

consciously and unconsciously planning all the time, it's exhausting. And the

feelings of rage or frustration, um, make sense.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: Yeah, so, um, the trick, though. The trick or the thing that I have to

practice, how to maintain patience and compassion, and not lose the patience and

compassion, while not subordinating the rage or the anger. Or the pain or the

hurt, because you've got to have both of 00:19:00them. You can't think clearly, because

you'll, you could easily write off the people who are frustrated and tired and

sad, or you could get so frustrated, tired, and sad that you can't demonstrate

patience and compassion when an opportunity presents itself. And keeping both of

those active is a certain kind of schizophrenia, not to get ableist or crazy

phobic, but it's a certain kind of schizoid mind.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: Um, kind of like what W.E.B. DuBois called "the double consciousness."

You have to think in multiple lives

NGUYEN: Thank you

MATHEIS: Mmm hmm

NGUYEN: And them, within, how did you come to Virginia Tech, may I ask?

Mathis: I got an invitation! I was hunting doctoral programs, I was actually

looking at doctoral programs, and felt, this is the part, or maybe no, I won't

redact this later

NGUYEN: [Laughter]

MATHEIS: I was hunting doctoral programs, seeking, you know, an option, and

had--this will bore you, but, maybe

NGUYEN: Elaborate, please! [Laughter]

MATHEIS: Had been told by multiple--I actually wanted, I was originally trained

in ethics and political philosophy, and had been told by 00:20:00philosophers in various

departments that ultimately the research project I wanted to work on wasn't a

thing, that one field or another had already closed these questions, or these

questions weren't of interest. It was just this constant pattern of dismissal.

And so, I ended up pitching this, actually Virginia Tech was the place I most

honestly, most directly, most--I had nothing to lose--said, this is the kind of

stuff I want to work on. Here's why I think the questions haven't been addressed

effectively, here's the approach I want to take. And they said, let's go for it.

And the faculty have been incredibly generous and enthusiastic and supportive.

Arguably more so than any other, nearly any other place I have been, yeah. Yeah,

it's been, for all the problems and difficulties, the faculty have been

remarkably, remarkably supportive.

NGUYEN: That's awesome. And then within the Virginia Tech community, are

you--you said that you were a part of the LGBTQ--was it the graduate program?

MATHEIS: You know I 00:21:00don't, I actually spend more of my energy contributing to

the Caucus, the LGBT caucus, which on the record still does not have an official

role in the university governance (ahemmm) and should very soon. I spend more of

my energy with the LGBT caucus and the Safe Zone Program as a trainer.

NGUYEN: Do you mind elaborating on that?

MATHEIS: Sure, both of those pieces?

NGUYEN: Yes please!

MATHEIS: Sure, with the caucus, so I, when I got here, I held previously two

jobs directly doing LGBT advocacy work on college campuses in an administrative

role and had been doing queer political organizing and that kind of stuff. The

need that I saw was to help bolster the energy of people who I think felt

incredibly defeated. I met a lot of people who were sincere, compassionate,

resilient, but tired and who I think had no, what I would call, political

program. They had no policy platform. 00:22:00And so over the last couple of years, what

I sought to contribute to the caucus was a, you know from my prior work in

government relations, was how to message and ask, right, what are the kinds of

things we need to ask for? What are the base structural changes we most need to

encourage and work with the caucus to develop a policy platform. So, the

priorities, write a list of the kinds of priorities to try and fulfill and the

action items that can get those priorities fulfilled.

So a lot of my energy has been in, you know, whenever they need somebody to go

talk to, whether it's presidents, academic council, or it's faculty/staff senate

, or to serve on some sort of panel, to try and speak to the opportunities for

change and then explain the arguments or show comparisons with peer

institutions. So most of my work has been trying to get the caucus a political

platform, that is not just a one-off deal, but a long-term political platform.

So if anything goes backwards 00:23:00we can say here is the platform, and why, you know

what I mean, like a benchmark or a reference point.

And then with the Safe Zone Program, when I got here, the first professional

employed FTE to work with LGBT issues had just been hired, and having had two of

those positions before, knowing, actually, at least in one of those jobs, how

difficult it was to be the first person at an institution to do it, at least in

that role, I went to her and said "I've done this before, I realize it's

miserable to try to do this, can I help?" And she said "We have a need here,

which is we need to do more educational work on people who are transgender and

gender identity and gender expression, I have a background doing advocacy and

education, writing, and research" and I said "yeah absolutely. Glad to do it."

And so I spent the last three and a half years with the Safe Zone Program ,

regularly teaching the Trans 101 sessions and then the hybrid there with the

caucus was to do policy advocacy for change to the 00:24:00Principles of Community, the

Non-discrimination Policy, and the on-going work to do just broad cultural

institutional integration of people who are gender variant, I don't like the

term, but people who, basically to make this place effective and better for

people, you know, inclusive of whatever gender diversity they bring.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: Yeah

NGUYEN: And are there any specific change opportunities you've been working with lately?

MATHEIS: Mhmm. So the policy, the work to change policy, the advocacy on

benefits, and those actually moved very quickly in this last year with the exit

of the president--ex-president Steger, the new governor, the new state

representatives, we've seen a big turn and political shift, the attorney

general. I will not probably in the time I'm here have the energy to really go

after the thing I want, and the thing that I want most is curricular

integration. As an undergrad and a grad student I went to a college, I went to a

University that it was a requirement, it was an academic requirement to get your

bachelors 00:25:00degree that you take what was called the Difference Empowerment

Discrimination Course, it wasn't non-western culture, it wasn't cultural

diversity, we had those requirements too, it was a course that required the

study of institutional discrimination in the United States looking at the

historical emergence of contemporary social problems and so we, part of our

education, part of our gen. ed. was to learn about institutionalized

discrimination and cultural hegemony in an academic setting and you could take

these, these courses were spread all throughout the university. There were

courses in biology, courses in forestry, in humanities and social sciences, and

this is Oregon State University, which is a land grant school and I see the deep

need for Virginia Tech to adopt a similar approach, that the institution's

historical participation, this institution has historically participated in

systematic discrimination. If a land grant institution does not work to make 00:26:00amends to redress that, I don't think it fulfills the land grant mission. If I

was here longer, the thing I'd go after--would be curricular integration, where

students are actually, as a requirement to graduate from here, they're taking

courses and faculty who are on their route to tenure are actually receiving

acknowledgement for teaching courses, so it's part of the core educational mission.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: Yeah, but um, you know, one of the other things, representation, that

we are also advocating with the caucus, the University's messages to alumni, to

potential students, imagery, brochures, the way the University represents the

image of Virginia Tech, or the story of Virginia Tech includes sexuality,

affectionality, gender identity expression, in a more comprehensive way Iowa

State has a stated policy, I don't know how well they carry it out, but if you

walked through Squires 15-20 years ago, you probably would not have seen images

of African Americans, Native Americans 00:27:00in the facility right? You may not have

seen these images, those kinds of representations and cultural cues implicitly

and explicitly communicate who belongs here, who has a part in this institution,

right. Who gets dignity. And at this time, we have a deficiency of those kinds

of images and representations of people who are LGBTQI.

NGUYEN: And in what way are you all able to get this kind of recognition or I

guess representation, especially within the caucus, is that more of like an institutional--

MATHEIS: Yeah, I actually think something, probably doing a bit better, but like

Iowa State has done, the marketing and public relations and anyone doing any

kind of messaging and outreach, anyone tasked with distributing some sort of

imagery, guidelines. That the University adapt and modify the guidelines to say

that we have to show that our publications and our outreach materials and our

,you know, websites contain broadly representative imagery. Of course, the 00:28:00 risk

is, you don't want to mis-portray the institution, right? But, also make sure

that some aspect of your imagery and representations show who's here.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: Yeah

NGUYEN: Ok, thank you. And then may I ask about your activism? You spoke about

lobbying and things, was that before, like during undergrad? Because in the 80s

there were a lot of movements, did that affect you in any way?

MATHEIS: Yeah, so I started my undergrad work in the late 90s and and, without a

doubt, you know I benefitted from.. like Act Up!, these activist organizations,

all the risks they took, you know made it possible for me in the late 90s

forward nearly to the 2000s to get involved with, it was really during the two

presidential administrations, between 2000 and 2008, the two back to back

regressive, I wouldn't even call them conservative, but regressive presidential

administrations that set back equity and access 00:29:00issues for the country broadly,

not just for sexuality but for women, for people of color, that's where I

entered the scene. I was trained by, through organizations like the United

States Student Association, the Mid-West Academy, the National Conference for

Community and Justice. Had an opportunity to get training in direct action and

grassroots organizing and then participate in local, state and federal political

campaigns intent on doing progressive work and limiting the options of

regressives to roll back civil rights legislation, to roll back public

protections and public accommodations, so you know, that's just a brief survey

of the kinds of things, I mean I can name more specific things but--

NGUYEN: Would you like to elaborate?

MATHEIS: Yeah sure, for instance in the state of Oregon there were multiple

ballot measures from the 80s through you know, 00:30:00even through 2004 and later

attempting to establish marriage as being one man and one woman, right. These

marriage amendments that were going on all over the country in the early 2000s

and did local and state organizing to fight those, to try and defeat those

ballot measures. On the state and federal level, advancing voter participation

or taking, so for instance, around the Dream Act or Immigration, the access to

education for people with status as undocumented immigrant. All across the

board, progressive social action that gives people more fair access to state and

federal institutions than less fair access. But yeah, we did everything from

lobbying in DC to state capitals. It's hard to even know here to start with all

of that, that was my--kinda my career and my life for the 00:31:004-5 years before I

came here--

NGUYEN: Okay

MATHEIS: And I've maintained some of it here, you know, like I said, I help with

organizer training and try to help people look at different resources of ways of

doing social change

NGUYEN: Are you still participating in activism-type events, like now?

MATHEIS: Yeah, although at Virginia Tech and in this region, I don't see a lot

of activism. I see more interest in organizing. And I differentiate the two,

activism having to do with direct immediate interruption, draining a certain

kind of resources, a really episodic intervention in a problem. So, stopping the

wheels, breaking the flow of business. Organizing is more long-term interest in

shifting relations of power. So, putting people who are most influenced by

decisions and processes as much in those roles as possible. And I'm much more

involved in organizing. The long, like with the caucus's platform, the long-term

shift in making sure that institutions serve those who were 00:32:00 previously

marginalized, oppressed, subjugated or excluded.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: So, that's the kind of stuff I do. Believe me, if there were more

opportunities for activism--

NGUYEN: [Laughter]

MATHEIS: You'd find me there, you'd find me interested, you'd find me engaged.

I'd welcome the opportunity to deliver very public messages and demonstrations.

When, I try to save this euphemistically, not when Trayvon Martin was killed,

but when someone murdered Trayvon Martin, there was a protest, a demonstration

here on campus. And it dismays me a lot that this campus doesn't have a history

of doing more of those things. But, you know, I try to contribute the organizer energy.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: Yeah

NGUYEN: And as, I guess as a community organizer, LGBT organizer, do you see a

huge difference between the events from maybe like the 80s and 90s compared to now?

MATHEIS: Mmm hmm. I want to figure out the pros and the cons here. As with so

many movements, radical liberatory 00:33:00organizing, right? Shifting relations of

power often turns or devolves into participating in respectability politics or

getting your share of the pie. And we have seen this in this country, where

wealthy middle and upper class gay and lesbian persons sign on to things that

get them lower tax brackets, things that get them property, things that get them

wealth, where our movements to secure funding and support for HIV treatment and

prevention, anti-poverty movements, proactive education, anti-racist work,

they've dwindled too much. I don't think my community at the national and even

the statewide level sees the most vulnerable people as the priority. And these

movements started from the interest of the most vulnerable people and then

turned toward, unfortunately, the 00:34:00interests of the already somewhat comfortable

people. So I feel like I get to critique, you know?

NGUYEN: And why do you think that changed?

MATHEIS: No difference, no difference than any other what we might call a social

justice movement. Once people accept, right, once people accept some wealth,

right? They accept some wealth. I shouldn't blame them, any of us want respite,

we want relief, we want to not have to fight it. It gets very hard to remember

that you benefitted from working for the most vulnerable once you start getting

a bigger paycheck. Once you get land, once you get wealth, once you get a better

paycheck, ultimately, it's hard to remember how powerful class conditioning is.

Gay and lesbian, bisexual persons have sold out trans people in the move for

employee 00:35:00nondiscrimination. And we have to come to terms with that, yeah. We

have to make amends for that. That if employee nondescrimination act without

trans inclusion, this really differs to me in no way from when certain womens

movements in the 60s and 70s said lesbians can participate, but we're not going

to bat for you.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: Right. Or, yeah, I could regress that all the way back to saying, you

know, we'll advance the movement, for these people just wait your turn, just

wait your turn, just wait your turn. And I think we have to get rid of the wait

your turn model.

NGUYEN: Right. And then have you--you've had personal experience with people I

guess making others wait their turn?

MATHEIS: Yes. Yeah.

NGUYEN: Is that within, I guess your activism and lobbying?

MATHEIS: Yeah. Yeah, a lot. Yeah. And again, feeling sad, frustrated or angry

about it while also trying to demonstrate compassion. In fact, just earlier this

week in a very public forum, a member of the community did what I would call

sex-negative 00:36:00behaviors. And you know, to message. To appear proper, or to

appear, to make the community palatable or acceptable to the dominant majority,

this person referred to LGBT sexuality as icky. And said, you know, I think we

have to get, actually a near direct quote is, "I think we need to get sex out of

the conversation, I think we have to try to make it more comfortable for people

who see gay sexuality as icky." And I'm thinking, that's another several

thousand people's background messaging that puts them at risk for STIs, that

puts them at risk for dangerous nonconsensual sex, that, you know, by

pathologizing healthy sexuality in order to get access to the approval of people

who already have a share, we're selling some people out.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: And I think that actually hits youth worse than anybody else. If they

already believe the social messages about their sexuality is unhealthy, and then

hear a member of the 00:37:00community get access to the institution, or make ourselves

palatable by furthering that message, nobody wins in that situation.

NGUYEN: Right

MATHEIS: Yeah.

NGUYEN: And then, thinking about social spaces, especially within the LGBTQ

community, there were a lot speakeasies and clubs in New York that were just

safe social spaces for those types of communities. Do you have a place like that

within the Virginia Tech community? Or no need for something like that?

MATHEIS: Yeah, um, yeah, no, there is a need. And I'm going to tell you a brief,

brief piece of history, in the oral history of this community. But I don't want

to tell you where the places are, I actually just don't.

NGUYEN: That's ok.

MATHEIS: Yeah, and here's why. Because I have to respect that this particular

problem has not changed. As I was told, right, the oral history of elders and

people who have been here a lot longer than me, the former organization that you

might now see as the LGBTA, as late as sometime 00:38:00in the 80s, if you wanted to

meet people, have any membership or participation, you had to call a certain

number, and then two people would meet you in public, right? They'd meet you and

then vet you. They'd figure out, are you a threat? And only if they figured out

you weren't a threat could you get introduced to the rest of the members or get

more information. Similarly, I honestly just don't want the general public to

know where my folks go and get a bit of break--you know what I mean? In all

liberatory movements there are just some secrets that we don't tell, because

it's just better that we don't tell them, yeah. But the answer is yes, there are

places and gatherings and things that we do for a bit of a break. And I actually

wish that wasn't the case. And given the present circumstances that's just how

things go.

NGUYEN: You also talked about the need for 00:39:00this--do you think there is a need

for more space?

MATHEIS: Yes.

NGUYEN: Or just not having to have to make a specific space?

MATHEIS: Yeah, as much as--as much as I see a need for a specific campus

resource center facility, right? For library, a minority and queer and

sexuality--or sorry--a minor or major in queer and sexuality studies--the entire

population here benefits. Resource centers and specific spaces is that you

know--so if the priority is this is a safe space for people who have felt

alienated elsewhere. Another priority that is really consistent with that is

that anyone who has been mis-educated or undereducated has a place to go to gain

knowledge. I've worked in campus resource centers, I've help set them up, I've

helped serve as part of the national movement, I'm a second or third generation

of the people who've done this. But, I think they're crucial, and at a land

grant school I think they're even more 00:40:00 important.

NGUYEN: Thank you. Also, do you have any advice for, I suppose like the future

activists that want to participate in the LGBTQ movement, social or political?

MATHEIS: Let me make sure that I don't get off track, because it's really easy.

NGUYEN: [Laughter]

MATHEIS: Tell me a bit more about what you're thinking about?

NGUYEN: Ok so, I guess as somebody that's been a part of the activist

movement--whether it's in the 80s, 90s, or 2000s, you've seen like the changes

that have gone through. Are there any negative aspects that you've seen like

within like the activism movement of LGBTQ individuals that you feel like were

consequential to the movement and feel like telling I guess, the younger

generations what happened and would benefit them?

MATHEIS: Sure, whatever else, whatever story people hear, so whatever story they

are told about how change happened, whatever they read, you know, whatever

version 00:41:00happens, I think they have to remember that all of the progress--and

this will harken back to something that I said earlier--all of the progress was

prefigured in antiracism and in feminism, anti-poverty work. That no such thing

as a solely LGBT movement has ever happened. This movement is a pseudo-movement;

it's a part of a broader liberatory approach. And so, you have to, you have to

think about race and women's issues and disability. You have to think about all

of those. Because if you don't--if you don't try to give yourself a clear

understanding of the people who our society has made most vulnerable, nothing

you do will really benefit us long term and I think that's core. That LGBT

movements are as much as on the backs of racial civil rights, anti-Jim Crow

work, 00:42:00anti-poverty work, pro-literacy work, they're all part of the same kind of

picture. Just don't--you cannot get fooled--you cannot get fooled into the

identity politics of thinking that some movement benefits you and then let it

not benefit someone else.

The other thing is practically--so that's the big picture about the

idea--practically, grassroots direct action organizing got it done, and it's a

skillset, it's not an ideology. Grassroots direct action is a method and anybody

who wants training or skills, there are ways to get free training and skills and

to participate, but this stuff was done through grassroots direct action.

Through people very carefully and methodically getting people to use the power

they have, they just don't know they have. So one, always understand the

multifaceted movement. Two, get the skills or lend your support to people who

have the skills and are 00:43:00doing the work. But, you know, I think, you pay

attention to those two you can get really far with the rest of it.

NGUYEN: Thank you. One last question

MATHEIS: Sure.

NGUYEN: Is there anything that you wanted to add or is there any question that

you wanted me to ask that I haven't asked yet? Open ended. [Laughs].

Matehis: Let me give you a meta question before I respond to that.

NGUYEN: Okay, go ahead.

MATHEIS: Why do the interview? What objective--like why, why ask people? So I

understand you're documenting gay in Appalachia and I understand some of that or

LGBT in Appalachia. Why do the interview? What's the objective? Do you know?

NGUYEN: I guess for our class in general, I'm in an introduction to oral history

class. So, it's this idea of like looking past--not looking past, but also

supplementing to the written documented history. Because when you do an

interview, you get to hear the anxiety, the happiness, the anger, the emotion.

Because when you go through a traumatic event and you put in on paper you don't

see the emotion of the person.

MATHEIS: I should have emoted more, fuck! I didn't say enough emotions!

NGUYEN: You 00:44:00said a lot.

MATHEIS: Sorry, don't redact that.

NGUYEN: [Laughter] I promise, I won't.

MATHEIS: Ok, good.

NGUYEN: Yeah, it's just this idea of putting more into history, I guess,

especially for people who aren't going to be around for the next 50 years or

hear this 50 years later, they aren't going to know how you felt when you were

telling me this story. They're not going to know how excited you were telling me

about activism, whereas a recording hopefully will.

MATHEIS: Right, ok, ok that makes sense. So you're adding to the archive.

NGUYEN: Yes. You're adding to the archive.

MATHEIS: Yeah, We are adding to the archive. Ok, ok that works. I don't know--at

least a statement I'll make or a question. There's a risk of giving people who

already a voice more of a voice, right? So, going and asking people who are

heterosexual and cisgender, tell us more about heterosexuality and your life as

cisgender, right? But, I think we have to. And the reason I think we have to 00:45:00goes something like this--if people who are already socially disadvantaged or

are members of historically underrepresented groups are the only ones put on the

spot to talk about what we go through, then it actually leaves the majority or

the dominant group out of having to do the work.

And I think part of what the archive has to tell is, this way of saying listen

to the--and I'm going to make a prediction--you have people in LGBTQ communities

do this. We tell this weird, bizarre, complex, comprehensive story of the

different facets and parts. When you sit down with somebody who--it doesn't

matter to me actually, or I should say, I wouldn't worry about whether they

count themselves as an ally. But, the same way that white folks have to come to

account for questions of race and ethnicity and men have to come to account for

questions of patriarch and misogyny. I think people who are heterosexual and

cisgender, have to 00:46:00come to account to tell their own story, and without it it's

an incomplete picture. It's like saying let's look at, it's like asking the

question 'what do you think made you gay or lesbian?' without asking 'what made

you think made you straight?' Or saying, what do you think (to this LGBTQ

community) 'what do you think of the problems in our society with regard to

sexuality and gender?' but never asking that same question to people who always

get to ignore it.

NGUYEN: Right.

MATHEIS: So I think it matters if you're going to add to archive, you have to

add that. I don't want to give a bigger voice, right? I don't want to overpower

the voice of people who already have an overpowered voice. But I do think it

matters to have everyone come to account for the same problem.

NGUYEN: Ok, thank you so much for your time and your willingness to participate.

MATHEIS: Gladly.

NGUYEN: Thank you so much.

MATHEIS: Sure.