While trans1 topics are gaining more visibility in Croatia as well as globally, trans identities, experiences, and needs remain marginalised within the larger context of the LGBTIQ2 movement. Often, trans movements struggle for their place in the more established, mainstream gender justice movements based on the discourse constrained and addressed from within the binary concept of gender/sex (Van der Ros & Motmans, 2015). Such positioning presents obstacles for trans activists who have to, in addition to countering negative social attitudes, invest energy into making space for gender freedoms within the human rights movement itself.
This chapter provides an account of the development of trans activism in Croatia during the 2004–2014 period, as it both faced significant challenges and drew its strength from other Croatian and regional LGBTIQ and related initiatives. The first two authors’ position stems from their active participation in feminist and queer movements since the beginning of the 2000s, exploration of exchange between theory and practice, and grassroots organising. The third author’s contribution is based on their direct involvement in leading a trans self-organised initiative since the 2010s. Hence, we examine the role of previous and recent initiatives in the development of trans activism, from the invisible T inside the LGBTIQ movement, through trans-related projects and activities implemented by feminist, lesbian, and queer non-governmental organisations (NGOs), to self-organised T through independent, trans-led organisations and networks.
In the first section, covering the 2004–2010 period, we begin by addressing the lack of trans activism prior to 2004, then reflect on the inclusion/exclusion of trans issues and how they were framed as a part of the Croatian LGBTIQ movement’s development. This phase, as we will show, is characterised by diverse activities and events, and a gradual opening of non-governmental initiatives towards trans topics. However, during that period, a lack of organised trans groups/movement meant a lack of visibility and representation of trans persons. In the second part, focusing on the 2011–2014 period, we reflect on the beginnings of self-organising among trans people and the conditions necessary for their empowerment. Further, we look at the development of Trans Aid, the first NGO in Croatia with the specific aim of tackling transphobia and protecting the rights of trans persons. We examine Trans Aid’s accomplishments in community outreach and support, raising societal awareness and media visibility, and its work towards improving legal and medical practices pertaining to trans individuals. In addition, we discuss the establishment of Trans Mreža Balkan (TMB, Trans Network Balkan) and its significant potential for regional mobilising and cooperation in the field of trans activism. We conclude with general features of the development of trans activism in Croatia, such as recognising the support provided by feminist and lesbian initiatives active prior to trans self-organising, situating T in the wider LGB and gender equality discourses, and highlighting the key role of collaboration and mutual support among groups working on gender justice.
In line with this overview, we argue that legal gender recognition and intersectionality remain vital for further development and work in the area of protecting and promoting human rights of trans persons. By taking an intersectional approach in the context of trans activism in the post-Yugoslav region, we emphasise marginalisation and discrimination that are widespread and intersectional—which, in turn, should set both the scope and targets of trans activists’ agenda, as well inform the strategies of reaching out to and including wider social actors as trans allies.
2004–2010: Positioning the T within LGBTIQ Activism
In this section, we unpack the beginnings of the discussion on the “inclusion/exclusion of T”, efforts and activities that have challenged the binary and have opened spaces for dialogue on a variety of topics related to gender and gender identity. All of these factors led to the creation of a progressive movement that has prompted many initiatives and established the necessary conditions for trans organising and visibility that started after 2010.
At the turn of the century, in Croatia, more precisely in Zagreb, the growth and integration of the community/movement was enabled partly by the changes after the 2000s elections as the right-wing wartime government was replaced by the coalition of centre-to-left parties (which significantly improved political liberties and the state of human rights) and partly by the development of Internet forums. In 2003, discrimination based on sexual orientation started being prohibited by many national laws. This was the result of intensive lobbying of NGO actors as well as the state’s response to the requirements of the accession processes to European institutions and associations. Nevertheless, the post-war reality was also characterised by xenophobia, patriarchal orders, nationalism, homophobia, the strong influence of churches, and heterosexism. The dominant oppressions that are common for societies in the region assist in the reinforcement of traditional gender roles, with people who do not conform to the set gender roles being discriminated against on an everyday basis and subjected to violence, as was recognised by the platform of action of the SEE Q Network:
At the onset of public activism in Croatia and neighbouring countries in 2002, the syntax of “LGBT” had already been widely established in the West, finding its way into newly founded local LGBT initiatives. The sentiment among newly formed groups (LORI, Iskorak, and Kontra)4 and independent activists who were part of the movement was undivided about including T in our language and demands, despite the fact that there were no visible trans activists in the movement at that time, similar to developments in Central and Eastern Europe (Mizielińska & Kulpa, 2011). Such incorporation felt like “the right thing to do”, and activists were willing to learn and insisted on opening up the movement to all identities and increasing diversity,5 even though at that stage such inclusion might have represented “purely discursive invocations” (Mizielińska & Kulpa, 2011, p. 14). During the early spring of 2002, at the time of establishment of the coordination of groups in Croatia, it was agreed that the coordination should be named “LGBTT coordination of Croatia”, where the two Ts stood for transgender and transexual. This decision was based on the idea that one term might render the other identity invisible. Consequently, such linguistic inclusion was at the foundation of the public queer movement, as evidenced by the introduction speech at the first Gay Pride in Zagreb in 2002: “We have gathered today to point to the existence of the LGBTT population in our society and emphasise basic human rights, the fulfilment of which we demand” (Zagreb Pride, 2002).Social order in the region of South-East Europe rests on a confined foundation of sex and gender, and roles and norms which are constantly manipulated through the patriarchal system of status and power, and additionally limited and restrained through violence, discrimination, sexism, transphobia and genderphobia.3 In this context, sex and gender, and all that comes out of those two, are created as biologically and socially unchangeable. Those which have been socially created and internalised are actually concepts of sex and gender, that is, clear roles which are based on the order of male-female relations of binary norms and values. It is impossible and, above all, unsuccessful to deconstruct sex and gender and prescribed social roles and norms without deconstructing the system itself and relations of power ruling within. (Southeastern European Queer Network, 2005)
The context in which the groups that organised Pride March emerged was marked by a legacy of violence and widespread social exclusion, fuelled by prejudice and hatred in the post-war societies. Our daily reality meant that very few persons were expressing their identities freely in public; activists and Pride March participants were repeatedly attacked and received life threats with no possibility to report the violence due to the general lack of public awareness about the mere existence of LGBTIQ persons. Placed in such an environment, discussions around the inclusion or exclusion of trans persons in the LGBTIQ movement that was generated by the Pride March in Zagreb and other initiatives and organisations from Croatia and the region, framed how gender identity and gender expression fit within this movement.
As individuals who organised Pride March, we were outsiders in a society polarised by ethnic tensions and war, presented with the significant challenge of navigating a political and social landscape in which exclusion was the rule. Moreover, given the legacy of cooperation of groups gathered around anti-fascist, anti-nationalist, and feminist causes, as well as the importance of maintaining these strong alliances for the Pride March to be successful, the Organisational Committee of Zagreb Pride came to an agreement to invite to Pride March as speakers or performers only persons who have not expressed discriminatory opinions about other identities (national, ethnic, religious, etc). However, the Committee reserved the right to make an exception to this rule with regard to persons who have expressed only homophobic or transphobic opinions, in which case the Committee would decide whether that person should be invited after directly speaking to them about their attitudes.6
Nevertheless, during the organisation of the second Pride March in Zagreb in 2003, the Committee became divided around trans issues when a trans person from Ljubljana, who had previously expressed homophobic attitudes, was invited to perform at the Pride March. A Committee member found a discriminatory statement made by this person with regard to gay parenting published in Croatian print media several years prior. Despite the agreement about handling such cases and having established communication with the person in question, the previously agreed-upon rule was not adhered to. The information went viral, resulting in immense pressure from the LGBTIQ community, including sentiments against the March being expressed on different LGBTIQ online forums. Consequently, exclusionary practices and transphobia started emerging within the Committee, leading to lengthy meetings, threats made by Iskorak that they would boycott the March, and the final withdrawal of the already confirmed invitation to Salome, the trans activist at the center of the debate, to perform at the Pride March that year.
However, this victory of transphobia and prioritising issues along the power axis of the LGBTIQ movement was temporary, as many members of the Organisational Committee did not abandon their commitment to inclusivity. Hence, the 2004 Pride March had Salome perform, together with a couple of other trans-identified performers, and the overall message of that year’s Pride was focused on trans issues7 and everyone’s right to define their own identities without fear of violence. The Pride March speech addressed sexual and gender stereotypes as one of the most powerful means of limiting our freedoms, and pointed to punishments faced by those who transgress the binary categories of male and female (Poštić, 2004). Thus, the attempt to formally mobilise the members of LGBTIQ community and our allies to oppose gender norms and actively demand gender freedoms publicly began in 2004 at Zrinjevac Park, the central manifestation site of the Zagreb Pride March.
From that moment on, activities intensified, and topics centering on gender identity and gender expression became part of the movement and platforms of many LGBTIQ initiatives in post-Yugoslav countries. This shift happened mostly thanks to the Southeastern European Queer (SEE Q) Network, which was active from 2003 to 2007. The Network strengthened the solidarity of the political and activist dimension through networking, created a base of political platforms for other organisations, and greatly influenced the direction of queer movement in the post-Yugoslav region. Members of the SEE Q Network, individuals and organisations from post-Yugoslav countries working on LGBTIQ issues, held several meetings a year during which they created a common Platform of Action that acknowledged discrimination based on sex, gender, gender identity and/or expression, sexual orientation, sexual identity, and (inter)sex characteristics as present in our daily lives and permeating our society. Further, they recognised as their foundation the feminist, anti-violence, gay, lesbian, transgender, intersex, and queer movements and their achievements in deconstructing patriarchy and transgressing binary definitions of sex and gender.
The proliferation of these activities was also brought about by the Transgressing Gender Conference: Two is Not Enough for Gender (E)quality, an international conference organised in Zagreb in 2005. This gathering sought to empower trans people, intersex people, women, LGB populations, feminists, and gender and human rights activists to bridge gaps between them and create strategic alliances between various groups concerned with gender issues and gender freedoms. The conference brought together 184 individuals from 22 countries, who participated in eight panels, six workshops, and a round table discussion on language as well as a film, arts and culture program. This event tackled a wide range of topics and bridged activism and academia in the quest to introduce trans issues and gender equality within feminist debates and develop a discourse on the meanings and concepts of gender(s) and gender equality. Discussion revolved around interconnected feminist, gender-, and transgender-related issues in order to generate a better understanding of overlapping dimen...