During the 1960s and 1970s, a substantial number of LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer), African Americans, Latinos, and other marginalised youth found themselves homeless. This extreme situation was due to both familial rejections based on their sexual identity and societal discrimination. Paradoxically, this era ‘coincided with the climax of the United States civil rights movement’ (Lawrence, 2013), which saw increased persecution of African American and Latino individuals. The LGBTQ African American and Latino community experienced economic, cultural, and social insecurity during these turbulent years. Consequently, the Ballroom Culture began as a communal cultural event (Balls) within a House system, where different Houses competed and socialised. Ballroom Culture features improvisation-based battles during a Ball, which offers a unique perspective due to its gender-sex identity system when analysing various Ballroom category forms.

Mexican Ballroom Culture, as an extraordinary example, presents exceptional characteristics that challenge the criteria that delimit what is today called ICH by the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding UNESCO. According to experts, Duvelle (2014) explains that the ICH concept has been used briefly. Its implementation (ten years ago) as an international cultural policy is credited to the 2003 Convention of Safeguarding of UNESCO. Before that, the ICH concept was utterly unknown; however, it ‘is today recognised as a valuable and integral part of people’s cultural heritage’ (2014, p. 28). Duvelle highlights that the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the ICH has had both triumphs and disputes, emphasising its crucial function as a political instrument associated with national, local, and community requirements. This point is where MBS struggles with ICH conception due to problems with national values, such as the concept of family as a sacred and biological fundamental institution of Mexican society due to the creation of alternative families with different structural organisations and non-hierarchies. According to Acoatl Karnala, ‘aquí nadie es madre, y por eso por lo que nos llamamos Karnalas…. son todas hermanas-karnalas[1]’ (2023: 17’18-43). 

In response, Lázaro and Jiménez (2021) question the role of UNESCO’s list system as an institutional body that decides what cultural expression the right must be safeguarded, which they see as a tension between two fundamental 2003 Convention concepts, universality, and cultural diversity. The MBS challenge the Western universality conception through a plural gender-sex identity system. According to Jackson, regarding general aspects of Ballroom Culture, ‘the Ballroom Scene embodies members’ understanding of their whole notion of gender and sexuality. Rather than the binary of man and woman, this community conceives of three sexes and four genders’ (2001, p. 27). Notwithstanding, according to Mexican community members, the context of the MBS oscillates more in the third gender, known nowadays as non-binary. Observing cultural diversity as a fundamental 2003 Convention concept, MBS presents a unique way to experience kinship through auto-determination. Mother Suspirirum Apocalipstick mentioned ‘…había mucho contacto con House of Labeija, inicialmente HoA iba a ser un capítulo y luego se dijo: No, en lugar de ser un capítulo de Labeija en México….porque HoA ya existe[2]’ (Interview, 2023: 15’41). That also explains the necessity of the MBS to reach out to a diverse cultural identity according to the city’s context. 

In front of this scenario, Duvelle proposes integrating the ICH into cultural policies and laws according to the Convention’s Article 1 and stresses that although ‘many State Parties have already integrated the Convention’s provisions’ (2014, p. 45) firstly into its national cultural policies and regulations. Thus, this integration would lead to the implementation of human rights recognition policies for the LGBTIQ community at different levels. However, not everything is in question; the development of Ballroom Culture due to hypersegregation emphasises the concept of community, a historic product rooted in identity, solidarity, and relationship-building. Like Co-Madrota Franka Polari, initiator of the Ballroom Culture in Mexico City, states, ‘HoA decidió reproducirse no a través de los genes, sino de las ideas’ (2017)[3]. This concept resonates with the elements defining a ‘sense of community’ (McMillan & Chavis, 1986), including membership, influence, integration, easy accessibility, fulfilment of needs, and a shared emotional bond. As a result, BPP has been developed as an alternative that contributes to the growth and sustainability of the MBS. BPP are a strategic way of disseminating the MBS to a general and expert audience. According to the HoA, ‘su misión era abogar por la práctica del Vogue con una perspectiva feminista, consciente de la clase social, el género y otras condiciones invisibles, para fomentar una ética del cuidado de los demás en el marco del Ballroom Culture y la estética del Vogue’ (2017).[4]

Hence, the capacity building of the 2003 Convention can support the MBS. According to Duvelle (2014), as described in Article 1, UNESCO’s capacity-building program is crucial for the implementation of the Convention. Thus, Duvelle includes support for policy and legislative development, intersectoral cooperation related to ICH and sustainable development, community mobilisation and participation, and gender equality (including homophobia and transphobia) within the context of human rights. On the other hand, Lázaro and Jiménez (2021) consider the paradox of globalisation. According to them, the Convention was established to safeguard ICH from the effects of cultural globalisation, but the inscription on the ICH Lists paradoxically globalises local and regional heritage. The case of the Ballroom Culture presents a transnational phenomenon (Faist, 2010), which, on the contrary, is the successful dissemination of it in various (urban) contexts. According to Faist, ‘transnationalism and its derivatives, such as transnational social spaces, fields, and formations, have been used to connote everyday practices of migrants engaged in various activities. These include reciprocity and solidarity within kinship networks, political participation across borders and transfer and re-transfer of cultural customs and practices’ (2010, p.10). Thus, it is possible to understand how Ballroom Culture has counter-globalisation effects as a critical element in generating new Ballroom Communities due to the constant displacement and mobility of LGBTQ culture worldwide. Throughout the history of the MBS, there has been much evidence of transnational voguers from the United States of (North) America who have visited Mexico City and exchanged with Ballroom Houses from the Global South to reinforce Ballroom networks.

---

[1] Translation: No one here is a mother, and that is why we call ourselves Karnalas…. are all sister-karnalas.

[2] Translation: …there was a lot of contact with the House of Labeija. Initially, the HoA was going to be a chapter, and then it was said: No, instead of being a chapter of Labeija in Mexico… because the HoA already exists.

[3] Translation: HoA decided to reproduce not through genes, but through ideas.

[4] Translation: its mission was to advocate for the practice of Vogue with a feminist perspective, mindful of social class, gender, and other unseen conditions, to foster an ethic of care for others within the framework of Ballroom Culture and the aesthetics of Vogue.