Evidence Record

Summary and claim

Anzaldúa's code-switching, Cha's multilingual archive and silence, Lee's intimate diasporic memory, Baldwin's implicated moral address, Jordan/Lorde's intersectional solidarity, and Vuong's fragment and epistolary distance assign readers unequal access intentionally. Fluency cannot be the only evaluation criterion.

Provenance and limitations

Author records, hosted works, and canonical bibliographies were reviewed. “Immigrant” and “queer” are overlapping contexts, not genres; Baldwin source coverage in this cycle was less systematic than the poetry records.

Counterevidence

Many works also pursue direct accessibility and broad solidarity. Partial access is a function in some texts, not a rule for all diasporic or queer work.