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: Yeah, so, it's kind of weird to figure out where to start. The hybrid 1:00of 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 Germany when I was twenty-two, we met relatives who just pulled out 2:00books 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, so, most of the ways that, if somebody asks a 3:00question 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 sense, I think queer identities and queer politics around those 4:00identities 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. I 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 young, not so much. There were not, so we're talking 6:00about 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 things, you sort of have to sit through 7:00while 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 was 8:00surprised. 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 reaction. And would seem 9:00shocked 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 think? 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 skin, cisgender male, you know, I'm a certain 11:00kind 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, or 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, right? Just gerrymandering or moving of conversation 13:00topics 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, I watched people really get shredded by that. And, I had to 14:00walk 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 who was hired and who's offer was 15:00put 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 credibility. I 16:00mean, 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, I'm more or less trusting whoever happens to 17:00serve 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 admire and have a ton of respect for the people who have 18:00stuck 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 them. You can't think clearly, because 19:00you'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 philosophers in various 20:00departments 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 don't, I actually spend more of my energy contributing to 21:00the 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. And so over the last couple of years, what 22:00I 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 we can say here is the platform, and why, you know 23:00what 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 Principles of Community, the 24:00Non-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 degree that you take what was called the Difference Empowerment 25:00Discrimination 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 amends to redress that, I don't think it fulfills the land grant mission. If I 26:00was 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 in the facility right? You may not have 27:00seen 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 risk 28:00is, 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 issues for the country broadly, 29:00not 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, even through 2004 and later 30:00attempting 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 4-5 years before I 31:00came 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 previously 32:00marginalized, 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 organizing, right? Shifting relations of 33:00power 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 interests of the already somewhat comfortable 34:00people. 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 nondiscrimination. And we have to come to terms with that, yeah. We 35:00have 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 behaviors. And you know, to message. To appear proper, or to 36:00appear, 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 community get access to the institution, or make ourselves 37:00palatable 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 in the 80s, if you wanted to 38:00meet 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 this--do you think there is a need 39:00for 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 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 happens, I think they have to remember that all of the progress--and 41:00this 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, anti-poverty work, pro-literacy work, they're all part of the same kind of 42:00picture. 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 doing the work. But, you know, I think, you pay 43:00attention 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 said 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 goes something like this--if people who are already socially disadvantaged or 45:00are 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 come to account to tell their own story, and without it it's 46:00an 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.