You are here
Announcements
Recent blog posts
- Male Sex Trade Worker
 - Communities resisting UK company's open pit coal mine
 - THE ANARCHIC PLANET
 - The Future Is Anarchy
 - The Implosion Of Capitalism And The Nation-State
 - Anarchy as the true reality
 - Globalization of Anarchism (Anti-Capital)
 - Making Music as Social Action: The Non-Profit Paradigm
 - May the year 2007 be the beginning of the end of capitalism?
 - The Future is Ours Anarchic
 
Jackie Susann, "Queer Theory in a Nutshell"
                        
  
                
    
      
               
  May 25, 2003 - 11:10am -- jim
  
    
  
  
    Anonymous Comrade submits:
"Queer Theory in a Nutshell"
Jackie Susann 
 Queer theory is the academic discourse that has largely
 replaced what used to be called gay and lesbian studies. The
 term was coined by Teresa de Lauretis for "a working
 conference on theorisising gay and lesbian sexualities that was
 held at the University of California, Santa Cruz in February 1990".
 The word queer has since come to be pretty much synonymous
 with gay and lesbian (or maybe just gay male) but at the time
 one of its main advantages was seen as its inclusiveness:
 queer covered gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, trans people,
 sadomasochists and a potentially endless list of others
 somehow marginalised by their sexuality.
 Queer theory is based largely on the work of Michel Foucault, a
 French philosopher with a healthy taste for a wide range of drugs
 and anonymous gay sex, especially SM, in particular his History
 of Sexuality: Volume One, Introduction. Foucault's thesis (to
 simplify it a lot) is that our ideas about sexuality are a fairly
 modern construction (he dates them to 1870, if I remember
 right). Before that there was no such thing as, say, a
 homosexual. There was just sodomy, a particular kind of sin that
 anyone, potentially, could partake of. But in the late 1870s, the
 'homosexual' was invented, somebody whose life was defined
 around the sex acts he participated in. Subsequently, this sort of
 categorisation spread until everyone's life was defined by their
 sexuality. The interesting thing about Foucault's account of the
 invention of homosexuals is that it allows, for the first time, for a
 "reverse discourse": homosexuals could begin to defend their
 interests using the same categories and terminology that had
 been used to marginalise them. Although the category
 'homosexual' functioned to oppress those it labelled, it also let
 them see themselves as a definable group with common
 interests that could be fought for and defended.
 Foucault himself wasn't a queer theorist per se (he once
 famously claimed his work had nothing to do with gay liberation)
 but his theses are pretty much axiomatic across the field. They
 are picked up, for example, by probably the two most prominent
 and significant queer theorists, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and
 Judith Butler.
 Sedgwick's reputation was made by her book Epistemology of
 the Closet, which consists largely of deconstructive readings of
 canonical texts to bring out the fluidity of the distinction between
 homosocial and homosexual relations. She argues that this
 homosocial/homosexual distinction is fundamental to Western
 culture, and says that any analysis of any aspect of our society
 that doesn't take this into account is fundamentally flawed.
 Judith Butler is most famous for a series of books (including
 Gender Trouble and Bodies That Matter) in which she argues
 that gender is 'performative', meaning that the sexes have no
 intrinsic ("ontological") validity, that gender isn't a natural part of a
 person but something they have to constantly enact. This isn't,
 as some readings would have it, a simplistic claim that you can
 just decide each day what gender you want to be. Her point is, as
 I understand it, that all gender distinctions are false, but this
 doesn't negate their historical power.
 Besides Foucault, other important theoretical reference points
 for queer theory are Derrida and deconstruction, Freud/Lacan
 and psychoanalysis, and 'French feminism' from Kristeva to
 Irigaray.
 Despite the overwhelming diversity of the material that's been
 called queer theory, there are a few basic tenets common to all.
 Queer theorists agree that sexuality is a historically specific
 construct (note that this has nothing to do with the argument as
 to whether homosexuality is natural or cultural); that our society
 systematically oppresses those outside its categories of sexual
 normalcy; that homophobia is a structural, rather than individual
 problem, but that this doesn't excuse individual homophobics.
 Beyond those basic agreements (which I'm sure would be
 contested by some queer theorists), there's plenty of room for
 argument and in-fighting.
  
  
  
    
  
      
Anonymous Comrade submits:
"Queer Theory in a Nutshell"
Jackie Susann 
 Queer theory is the academic discourse that has largely
 replaced what used to be called gay and lesbian studies. The
 term was coined by Teresa de Lauretis for "a working
 conference on theorisising gay and lesbian sexualities that was
 held at the University of California, Santa Cruz in February 1990".
 The word queer has since come to be pretty much synonymous
 with gay and lesbian (or maybe just gay male) but at the time
 one of its main advantages was seen as its inclusiveness:
 queer covered gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, trans people,
 sadomasochists and a potentially endless list of others
 somehow marginalised by their sexuality.
 Queer theory is based largely on the work of Michel Foucault, a
 French philosopher with a healthy taste for a wide range of drugs
 and anonymous gay sex, especially SM, in particular his History
 of Sexuality: Volume One, Introduction. Foucault's thesis (to
 simplify it a lot) is that our ideas about sexuality are a fairly
 modern construction (he dates them to 1870, if I remember
 right). Before that there was no such thing as, say, a
 homosexual. There was just sodomy, a particular kind of sin that
 anyone, potentially, could partake of. But in the late 1870s, the
 'homosexual' was invented, somebody whose life was defined
 around the sex acts he participated in. Subsequently, this sort of
 categorisation spread until everyone's life was defined by their
 sexuality. The interesting thing about Foucault's account of the
 invention of homosexuals is that it allows, for the first time, for a
 "reverse discourse": homosexuals could begin to defend their
 interests using the same categories and terminology that had
 been used to marginalise them. Although the category
 'homosexual' functioned to oppress those it labelled, it also let
 them see themselves as a definable group with common
 interests that could be fought for and defended.
 Foucault himself wasn't a queer theorist per se (he once
 famously claimed his work had nothing to do with gay liberation)
 but his theses are pretty much axiomatic across the field. They
 are picked up, for example, by probably the two most prominent
 and significant queer theorists, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and
 Judith Butler.
 Sedgwick's reputation was made by her book Epistemology of
 the Closet, which consists largely of deconstructive readings of
 canonical texts to bring out the fluidity of the distinction between
 homosocial and homosexual relations. She argues that this
 homosocial/homosexual distinction is fundamental to Western
 culture, and says that any analysis of any aspect of our society
 that doesn't take this into account is fundamentally flawed.
 Judith Butler is most famous for a series of books (including
 Gender Trouble and Bodies That Matter) in which she argues
 that gender is 'performative', meaning that the sexes have no
 intrinsic ("ontological") validity, that gender isn't a natural part of a
 person but something they have to constantly enact. This isn't,
 as some readings would have it, a simplistic claim that you can
 just decide each day what gender you want to be. Her point is, as
 I understand it, that all gender distinctions are false, but this
 doesn't negate their historical power.
 Besides Foucault, other important theoretical reference points
 for queer theory are Derrida and deconstruction, Freud/Lacan
 and psychoanalysis, and 'French feminism' from Kristeva to
 Irigaray.
 Despite the overwhelming diversity of the material that's been
 called queer theory, there are a few basic tenets common to all.
 Queer theorists agree that sexuality is a historically specific
 construct (note that this has nothing to do with the argument as
 to whether homosexuality is natural or cultural); that our society
 systematically oppresses those outside its categories of sexual
 normalcy; that homophobia is a structural, rather than individual
 problem, but that this doesn't excuse individual homophobics.
 Beyond those basic agreements (which I'm sure would be
 contested by some queer theorists), there's plenty of room for
 argument and in-fighting.
