• No results found

Reformulating Sexuality and the renunciation of Gender

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Reformulating Sexuality and the renunciation of Gender"

Copied!
41
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Reformulating Sexuality

and the renunciation of Gender

Göteborgs Universitet

Instutitionen för kulturvetenskaper Genusvetenskap

Uppsats, 15 hp, fördjupningskurs HT 2016

Författare: Claudia Kent

Handledare: Elin Lundsten

(2)

ABSTRACT

My main focus in this essay is to pinpoint current discourses within a section of the queer community regarding the use of language and terminology when describing gender, identity, sexuality and desire. In particular I have chosen to focus on inclusion and exclusion when the labeling of sexuality is based on a binary notion of gender.

The most commonly used words for sexuality today are hetero-, homo- and bisexual which all derive from a binary understanding of gender and a rather inflexible view on sexual orientation. Within the queer community where gender is often transgressed, deconstructed, politicized and frequently renounced through trans, non-binary and gender non conforming persons it becomes futile and in many cases irrelevant or restrictive to use cis- and heteronormative words in order to describe one’s sexual identity in these terms.

I have chosen to use discourse analysis to study a specific discussion in an online dating forum. The group moderator urged the other members to refrain from using gender specific language in their personal ads as this has an essentialist tone that may explicitly or implicitly exclude trans and gender non-conforming persons.

Key words: sexuality, language, gender, queer, identity, transgender, online dating.

(3)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT... 2

BACKGROUND... 4

PURPOSE... 5

QUESTIONS AT ISSUE... 6

LIMITATIONS... 6

RESEARCH OVERVIEW... 7

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES...12

MATERIAL... 13

METHOD... 15

REFLEXIVITY AND SOURCE CRITICISM...17

ANALYSIS... 19

GENDER AND SEXUALITY... 19

IDENTITY AND PRESENTATION...21

GENDER SPECTRUMS... 23

LANGUAGE... 24

QUEER... 26

LABELS... 27

EXCLUSION... 30

POLITICAL SEXUALITY... 32

FETISCHISM... 34

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION...34

REFERENCE LIST... 39

(4)

BACKGROUND

Today a large part of our lives, identities and communication is played out through various online forums. This has amongst other things enabled a strengthening of minority groups where support, knowledge and information are accessible and quickly shared through global networks. One such forum that has caught my interest is a particular online dating page on Facebook for queer identified persons. I am interested in what personal information is disclosed and what aspects of identities are of importance in this context of finding sexual, and occasionally non-sexual partners.

In a society where cis-gender, hetero- and monosexuality is the ruling norm (along with other desirability norms relating to race, class, body type and ability) how does this play into a queer space where these norms are in certain aspects contested but in other ways perhaps still being perpetuated? I would like to examine present

contention within a specific group regarding the linguistic expression of desire as sexual identity.

Self proclaimed queer spaces and identities are, in my experience, often closely connected to activism and politics. The second wave feminist slogan from the 70’s

“the private is political” is still today highly relevant. Queer spaces often question its own inclusivity and call for a continuous reevaluation of who is welcomed and recognized in these settings. Queer activists and academics have developed language, knowledge and ways of combatting problematic, exclusionary or discriminatory acts against people based on their gender and sexuality. There are internal battles and struggles around the language and knowledge produced and the discourse is constantly being renegotiated.

The material I have chosen to study is a specific post that was published on an American queer dating Facebook group by one of the founders of the group. The post sparked a lengthy discussion regarding whether or not people should be

gender/genital specific in their ads when seeking partners. One influential reason for studying this specific topic has been my own encounters with the problem of defining my sexuality with the few limiting choices available to me such as commonly

acknowledged identities like lesbian, bisexual or queer. Lesbian often times connotes

(5)

a gender essentialism that has historically excluded trans persons and while queer has been useful in making the point of being not normatively heterosexual and actively eluding definition it can sometimes be rather vague. I therefore seek new ways in communicating sexuality that neither simplifies nor derogates my entire personhood to a singular sexual identity nor impedes on my possibility of sexual self-realization and exploration.

PURPOSE

Through this research I wish to bring into light discourses on sexuality and how the use of language affects, limits or expands the possibility for expressing and even living out sexual desires. Our understanding and knowledge around sex is constantly growing and changing and we need to keep reworking our language to keep up with the changes in society as well as consciously reforming our language in order to achieve political change and progress. People and groups that are breaking down norms are crucial to restructuring society on several levels, for example in institutions of education, health, law etc.

Through an investigation of the linguistic tendencies in queer language use we may predict or even propose a restructuring of the ways we perceive sexuality. Movements have worked hard to reclaim identities and words such as gay and queer but I wonder, are we not approaching a time when these categories have achieved an academic level of social respectability that the next move would be to renounce them? The queer movement in particular is founded upon destabilizing what is thought of as

indisputable knowledge and perceived as a universal truth. What are the benefits of being incorporated or even assimilated within the acceptable? Anthropologist Gayle Rubins ‘Charmed circle’ describes the sexual hierarchy and what it means to be included in the inner circle or in the outer circle.

1

Being included in the inner circle means that one is granted privileges of normativity such as legal protection, being seen as a good, normal and healthy citizen. Examples of this would be

heterosexuality, monogamy and sex in a relationship. If one on the other hand inhabits

1

G. Rubin, “Thinking Sex, Notes for a Radical Theory of the Politics of Sexuality” in Carole S. Vance Pleasure and Danger: Exploring Female Sexuality, Routledge & Kegan, Paul, 1984 p. 153

(6)

an identity that positions you in the outer circle you may be subjected to

criminalization, state or street violence, pathologization, shame and discrimination.

The outer circle contains homosexuality, sex for money and BDSM to name a few.

This shows the great importance that sexual identity has on our lives.

The progress achieved has historically been made possible by all the people that have contested the status quo of being deemed a second-class citizen. It has been through unification, community and solidarity that the rights of LGBTQ people are becoming more recognized in certain parts of the world but it is still a shockingly slow process in comparison with the tremendous advances made in for example science and technology. The purpose of this essay is to draw attention to what can be done and changed in order to create a greater understanding and acceptance of sexuality as fluid, expansive and changeable and hopefully move away from attaching identity to sexuality.

QUESTIONS AT ISSUE

How is language used and does it challenge normative notions of sexuality based on a gender binary?

How is this forum negotiated and what is the consensus around expressions of desire and sexuality?

LIMITATIONS

The question of desire and sexuality is an immense subject to embrace and therefore I have primarily chosen to narrow it down and look at the effects that language has on our ability to express ourselves and our identities, and how this language may restrict or open up for greater opportunities of self-actualization.

In my research it has of course been very tempting to ask ‘what is desire?’ which one

might think would lead us to the bottom of all issues surrounding sex. This is a

question that neither natural nor social scientists have been able to answer. What

(7)

constitutes and creates our sexual desires is in psychoanalysis a subconscious

occurrence that is made visible through language. This language becomes in relations with others a discourse that in turn lets us establish our identities. I have tried to limit the research to mainly incorporating language regarding gender and sexuality but acknowledge that there is a growing discourse with an intersectional view on sexuality encompassing race, body type, ability and class.

I will concentrate on the expressions of people based on their understanding of desire as sexuality, and what implications this has for our understanding of desire itself. I believe that looking at how desire is expressed and spoken about in terms of identity and sexuality that we can perhaps come a little closer to understanding the workings of sex within our society. This might lead to a more positive stance towards people, identities and desires that today are shamed, shunned or even criminalized.

Another difficulty in studying language is trying to find the silence, the missing words, the empty space, the unintelligible, that which can be found at, or outside the margins of our understanding. My hope is that this analysis may help in opening up possibilities, that might not be immediately visible, by finding words and indicators that challenge normative assumptions of sexuality and gender.

I view my material as a place where these empty spaces and the lack of words are consciously being contested by formulating new words, identities and ways of expressing sexuality that could better suit the needs of the people engaged in this particular group. It might even eventually prove to be applicable and beneficial within a larger heteronormative setting.

RESEARCH OVERVIEW

There has been extensive research done on the topic of language, gender and

sexuality. I have directed my focus on philosophers, linguists and researchers that

have contributed to feminist thinking, queer theory and gender studies. What most of

the previous research explores is the importance that language plays in the formation

of knowledge. Some of the texts question the existing use of language and other texts

aim at solidifying the meaning of words.

(8)

I have found great inspiration in the writings of Don Kulick and Deborah Cameron’s book Language and Sexuality that explores the semantic values connected to words, how we talk about sex and why we talk about it the way we do.

2

It encompasses a broad spectrum of sexuality and includes issues surrounding sexual orientation and identity, questions about the discursive construction of sexuality and verbal

expressions of erotic desire. The authors look at historical and current affairs while drawing on linguistics, anthropology, psychology and psychoanalytics and make reference to both Butler and Foucault who I have chosen as the main theorists for this essay.

The article written by Galupo, Ramirez and Pulice-Farrow in Journal of Bisexuality

‘Regardless of Their Gender’ provides a recent study of the conceptualization of sexual identity among bisexual, pansexual and queer identified individuals and their differences and/or similarities.

3

The authors found four relevant themes through the analyzed data: labeling sexual identity, distinctions of attraction, explicit use of binary/nonbinary language, and identity transcendence. In the text the word

plurisexual is used to refer to anyone who is attracted to more than one gender, such as bisexuals, pansexuals and many queer identified persons. Heterosexuals and homosexuals are named monosexuals since they are, in theory, only attracted to one of the binary genders.

In their research Galupo et al. found that many of the participants used multiple labels to describe their sexual identity. It was particularly common for queer and many pansexuals to express a transgender identity or history, which shows that it is more common for transexual, and I add probably gender-queer individuals to endorse a plurisexual label. When compared to monosexuals, according to this study,

plurisexuals were less likely to feel that their sexual identity label fully captured their sexuality.

4

The purpose of this study was to illustrate when and whether grouping bisexual, pansexual and queer identities may be useful and when it might distort an 2

D. Kulick and D. Cameron, Language and Sexuality, Cambridge University Press, 2003

3

P. Galupo, J. L. Ramirez and L. Pulice-Farrow, “Regardless of Their Gender: Descriptions of Sexual Identity among Bisexual, Pansexual and Queer Identified Individuals”, Journal of Bisexuality, nr 9, 2016, p. 1-17

4

P. Galupo, J. L. Ramirez and L. Pulice-Farrow, ‘Regardless of Their Gender’: Descriptions of Sexual Identity among Bisexual, Pansexual and Queer Identified Individuals, Journal of Bisexuality, nr 9, 2016, p.11.

(9)

understanding of the diversity in plurisexual experience. This is of interest to my study since I will through my analysis problematize the notion of basing sexuality on gender.

Diane Richardsons Patterned Fluidities: (Re)Imagining the Relationship between Gender and Sexuality examines the ways in which gender and sexuality have been theorized and what can be changed in future research.

5

She suggests a metaphor for the relationship between gender and sexuality to be viewed as a shoreline, a boundary in motion between land and sea affected by interconnecting discourses about

sexuality, gender, age, class, race and ethnicity that might be informed by wider discourses of place, culture, religion and governmentality. The idea of both gender and sexuality as fluid and unstable is one of the main themes for my study. Both Foucault and Butler argue for the unstableness and changeability of sexuality and gender.

This leads me to the authors James Horley and Jan Clarke who in their article Constructing Sexuality: A Theory of Stability and Fluidity wrote that there are a number of difficulties found within the contemporary study of sexuality.

6

They experience a lack of conceptual clarity and consistency due to the institutional, community and personal politics being major obstacles. They also perceive an absence of a broad and useful unified theory that could move research forward.

Sexuality is, in part, a linguistic construct open to interpretation, questioning and change, which has made it hard for researchers to define these fluid and flexible categories.

Randall. L. Sell’s article “Defining and Measuring Sexual Orientation: A Review” in Archives of Sexual Behaviour discusses the need for a standardization of the

definitions and measures of sexual orientation if advances are to be made.

7

He argues for researchers to be critical of how they classify subjects based upon sexual

orientation. Sell’s and Horley and Clarks articles differ from several of the others by 5

D. Richardson, “Patterned Fluidities: (Re)Imagining the Relationship between Gender and

Sexuality”, Sociology, vol 41, no 3, 2007, p.457-74

6

J. Horley and J. Clarke, ”Constructing Sexuality: A Theory of Stability and Fluidity”, Sexuality &

Culture, no 20, 2016, p. 918.

7

R. Sell, “Defining and Measuring Sexual Orientation: A Review”, Archives of Sexual Behaviour, vol.

26, no. 6, 1997, pp. 643-658

(10)

not seeking to deconstruct but rather attempting to find a consensus around the meaning of sexuality. This is similar to what I believe is happening within the

Facebook group I have studied, as a negotiation aiming to unify our understanding of sexuality and identity.

There are voices seeking clarification when studying sexuality while others are very cautious with providing a universal solidifying meaning of it since, as I argue in this essay, and several others including Richardson, Cameron and Kulick, that sexuality is an ever changing and highly fluid construct.

Two authors have, for the reason of combatting discrimination, created a survey guide that leaves little to no space for questioning and doesn’t permit a fluid or complex experience of sexuality. Lucy Haseldon and Theodore Jolozas made a handbook for the Office for National Statistics in the UK 2009 called Measuring Sexual Identity- a guide for researchers.

8

It provides guidelines on how to include sexual identity in surveys with the purpose of estimating how many people in the population are

lesbian, gay or bisexual. This can then be used to help monitor equality of opportunity in areas such as employment education and the provision of services. This has been introduced in the UK since the Government introduced the Equality Act Regulations in 2007 to tackle discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities and services on the grounds of sexual orientation as well as race, gender, disability, religion and belief, and age. I found it to be useful as a comparison between a governmental script defining homo- and bisexuality and with that of the personal experiences of sexual identity found in the material used for this essay. In the guidebook Haseldon and Joloza chose to only look at discrimination based on lesbian, gay and bisexuality, leaving out the T in LGBT, which is to me remarkable since often times, gender and sexuality are intrinsically conjoined. These questions are seemingly based on a binary assumption of the two genders and exclude non-binary experiences, gender non conforming persons and certain trans people who might self-identify as heterosexual but don’t “pass” as such in mainstream society. They write that some non-

heterosexual participants chose the ‘other’ category because “they were either anti- categorization or because they rejected the ‘simplistic’ male/female ‘gender binary’

which, as they noted in their text, was particularly mentioned by some transgender

8

L. Haseldon and T. Joloza, Measuring Sexual Identity- A guide for researchers, Household, Labour Market and Social Wellbeing Division, Office for National Statistics, 2009

(11)

participants. It should be recognized that those who used this category were thus excluded from the analysis. So basically the study will only be useful for studying discrimination against persons that fit neatly into the normative categorizations of sexual identity. Although I do see the importance of acknowledging the fact that LGB persons are treated differently in society and that quantitative research can aid in providing support of these claims, I do find it troubling that believing that an L, G or B is a way of fully expressing an individual’s identity since as we can see from the material I am analyzing, sexual identity is so much more complex than a simple letter, especially for the remaining sexual deviants, gender-queer and plurisexuals.

A book that brings up the people that would not be visible in Haseldon and Jolozas guidebook is Pomosexuals: Challenging Assumptions about Gender and Sexuality by Carol Queen and Lawrence Schimel (1997), which is an anthology of stories by people who defy current presumptions about gender and sexuality.

9

Despite being 20 years old it surprises me that the ideas raised in this book, the concept of

pomosexuality, have not been more widely spread. In a similar way that postmodernism critiqued modernism, pomosexuality wanted to examine and

challenge the notion of homosexuality. I found this book to be the first that provided material with similar questionings as the ones I posed for this essay. What happens to the people who do not conform to certain identities and sexualities? How can we actively transform the language to incorporate the diversity and fluidity that exists but hasn’t yet been given a space in our understanding? Queen and Schimel have

collected 15 voices of people who have struggled, and subsequently failed, to fit into the categories currently available to them. What they all call for is a much broader concept of sexuality, one that permits more freedom in exploring the possibilities of one’s desires. This book makes use of practical examples rather than theoretical or academic propositions and provides a clear approach to what can be done to achieve a positive change for the future. Kulick and Cameron also critique theorists and

theoretical literature for engaging in the discourse of desire but rarely refer to empirical research that examines how desire is actually conveyed through language

9

C. Queen and L. Schimel, Pomosexuals: Challenging Assumptions about Gender and Sexuality, Cleis Press, 1997.

(12)

and social life.

10

This research overview shows the difficulty as well as the need for defining sexuality while continuously questioning the definitions created.

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

I have chosen two primary theoreticians to analyze the material in this paper, French philosopher Michel Foucault and US philosopher and gender theorist Judith Butler. In Foucaults book The History of Sexuality: An Introduction the reader is introduced to the discourses on sex since the 18

th

century.

11

Foucault studied power relations and how current institutions such as the field of medicine, psychology and academic theories have dominated the discourses surrounding sexuality. Foucault did not set out to understand the workings of our desires but rather the constant need to control what is said and what can be said about sex. His interest lies in the workings of knowledge and power and the various currents that strive to gain control of the discourse on sexuality by methods of normalization, pathologization or criminalization. Discourse plays a vital role in the production of power and knowledge through language.

Whoever does the speaking also determines what can be talked about as well as what can be known. This in turn influences how we think and inevitably who we are. In Thinking with Theory the authors Jackson and Mazzei see Foucault as inverting the traditional questions such as ‘what is power?’ and ‘where does power come from?’

and instead of searching for the essence and origin he investigates ‘the productive effects as it circulates through the practices of people in their daily lives’.

12

I will implement this in my analysis of the material I have by not asking what it is the individuals desire and why but what are the effects of the language they use.

Judith Butler was a pioneer in queer theory and deconstructing the notion of

normative gender by proposing that gender is a social construct that is performatively created and continuously susceptible to being altered or opposed. The repetition isn’t 10

D. Kulick and D. Cameron, “Introduction: Language and desire in theory and practice”, Language

& Communication, vol. 23, 2003, p. 93.

11

Michel Foucault, The history of sexuality. Volume I. An introduction.

Penguin Books, London, 1990 (originally published 1976)

12

A. Y. Jackson, and L. A. Mazzei, Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives, Abingdon, Routledge, 2012, p. 64

(13)

a performance consciously acted out by a subject but a performativity that constitutes a subject through cultural recognition.

13

Bucholz and Hall interpret Butler’s

understanding of gender performativity as brought into being through linguistic and other semiotic practices.

14

As an academic and an activist Butler advocates for the rights of sexual minorities and identities that are excluded from being part of a normative society and thus by the nature of their gender or sexuality not being able to enjoy a fully livable life. By studying transgendered and intersex lives Butler questions heteronormativity and the essentialist ideas of the gender binary. Although these theories mainly discuss gender norms, these are often tied to sexual norms and thus have great consequences for sexuality as well. Butler’s queer theory helps our way of thinking and understanding gender so that ideally more people living on the margins of intelligibility will be recognized as ‘human’ and reap the benefits of being part of the norm. Butler links desire with recognition and writes that it is through the experience of recognition that we become constituted as socially viable beings, which makes us dependent on others for the validation of our social existence.

15

Horley and Clarke also concede that gaining self-knowledge or self-validation is inherently satisfying even if others interpret the validation as negative, unpleasant, criminal or threatening.

16

Butler insists that a livable life requires a degree of stability so a life for which no categories of recognition exist is not a livable life, and a life for which these categories constitute unlivable constraints is not an acceptable option.

17

MATERIAL

13

A. Y. Jackson, and L. A. Mazzei, Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives, Abingdon, Routledge, 2012, p. 23.

14

Bucholz, Mary and Kira Hall, “Theorizing Identity in Language and Sexuality Research”, Language in Society, Vol. 33, No. 4, Cambridge University Press, 2014, p. 491.

15

J. Butler, Undoing Gender, New York, Routledge, 2004, p. 2-3.

16

J. Horley and J. Clarke, ”Constructing Sexuality: A Theory of Stability and Fluidity”, Sexuality &

Culture, no 20, 2016, p. 917.

17

J. Butler, Undoing Gender, New York, Routledge, 2004, p. 8.

(14)

I have chosen to study a specific online discussion that happened during the summer of 2016 on a Facebook dating page for circa 3 000 queer identified persons. In order to respect and protect the privacy of the people engaged in this group I will not disclose the exact name. The Facebook group is primarily used to post personal ads seeking sex (dates, cuddles, play partners for BDSM etc.) but also caters for persons looking for friendships, companions or other forms of temporary or lasting intimate, sexual or platonic relationships. The group is location specific to a larger city in the United States. It is designated for people that might find alternative online dating meaningless due to the often times cis-exclusiveness of mainstream dating sites and apps. For example the popular dating app Tinder provides only two gender options and the sexuality option for one or both genders, which makes it hard for queer, non- binary and trans people to fit themselves into these categories.

The group is closed, meaning individuals can only see the content if their request to join has been approved by one of the administrators/moderators (often in text referred to as admin or mod) of the page. As far as I am aware there is no system of screening or validifying process of people wanting to join but it is taken for granted that the individuals in the group identify with queer sexuality and it is strongly advised in the description for cis-gendered straight people and heterosexual couples as well as queer curious persons to refrain from joining the group.

During the time that I was actively engaged in the group there were several instances of heated political discussions regarding what people posted and how they express themselves. Often times these discussions concerned racism, misogyny and

transphobia. I chose one particular discussion that arose after one of the founders and moderators of the page made a public announcement. The post requested that

members refrain from posting gender-specific ads. This sparked a discussion within the group about how and whether one should be ‘allowed’ to state one’s gender specific preferences, how this should be done and in what cases this can be useful or simply exclusionary and in particular transmisogynistic or transphobic. Some of the comments also referred to power structures in society and how this plays out within

‘queer’ spaces. Arguments for minorities to be allowed to seek out other minorities,

such as trans and people of colour were also advocated for. Some maintained that

sexuality is per definition exclusionary while others argued for a decolonization of our

(15)

own desires, since we are never completely freed from the socialization of a patriarchal, racist, classist and ableist society.

The Facebook post containing around 50 comments is a limited material to do a discourse analysis on and may be questioned whether this has any greater relevance to a larger discourse on gender and sexuality. There are several reasons why this has caught my interest and why I believe that this particular discussion will have ripple effects on the queer community and eventually spread well beyond the confined spaces of sexual minority groups.

This group is created by and for people whose needs are not met by mainstream dating options. Thus they together set the rules for how the group shall be used and through ‘community policing’ boundaries are created. Despite the mods having the power to remove content and members it is still a democratic process where each member has the possibility to express their views and influence what will ultimately be seen as ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ within this group. For many this is not only a dating group but offers a sense of community and the standards that are set in this self proclaimed queer group will spread through the 3 000 members into the physical world. Thus I argue that the discussion happening between the 20 commentators is possibly seen by 3 000 people who themselves might not engage in the post but are forced to take a stand, or at least consider what their views are on the ‘correct’ use of language.

METHOD

I chose to use discourse analysis and focus on the meaning and power of written and spoken language. I found the discussion in the Facebook group to be particularly important since it shows the issues around sexuality and gender that are still highly contested and cause both controversy and conflict. The discussion relates to who is included or excluded and how in our language and how we talk about sexual identity.

Out of the circa 50 comments I chose to focus on the ones that caused the most

dispute and the arguments that were used to defend a certain standpoint. I searched for

the propositions that were offered on what words should be used and how we should

ideally express our sexual desires without harming people through exclusion. My

focus lay on the themes that caused dissonance amongst the group and how attempts

(16)

were made at coming to a consensus regarding the continued use of language in this setting.

Discourse analysis is closely tied to power structures since language creates boundaries, limitations and regulations for our way of thinking and acting. In Thinking with Theory the authors describe discourse as the social structure and processes that shape our subjectivities. These are situated within discursive fields, where language, social institutions, subjectivity and power exist, intersect, and produce competing ways of giving meaning to and constructing subjectivity.

18

Mazzei and Jackson write about subjectivity as inherently unstable, constructed in the relationships with others and in everyday practices. A persons subjectivity is neither stabilized nor essentialized by identity categories such as race, class and gender because ways of existing can depend on social relations, historical experiences, material conditions and geographic location. The way we take on certain subjective positions is an ongoing process of becoming through discourse, rather than a static way of being.

19

Kulick and Cameron use an example in their book Language and Sexuality that shows the implications that a discourse around sex may have on us as individuals. Firstly it shapes our understanding of sex and how it should be, secondly it informs our

understanding of ourselves as sexual beings, and thirdly it affects our interpretation of sexual experiences.

20

They continue in the spirit of Foucault that the ‘reality’ of sex does not pre-exist language in which it is expressed but rather, language produces the categories through which we organize our sexual desires, identities and practices.

21

These ideas will be further explored through the analysis of my material. In this essay

18

A. Y. Jackson, and L. A. Mazzei, Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives, Abingdon, Routledge, 2012, p. 65.

19

A. Y. Jackson, and L. A. Mazzei, Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives, Abingdon, Routledge, 2012, p. 65.

20 D. Kulick and D. Cameron, Language and Sexuality, Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 18.

21

D. Kulick and D. Cameron, Language and Sexuality, Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 19.

(17)

I will attempt at a netnographic study of language socialization within a particular group, investigating the interwoven process of linguistic and cultural development.

Language is not a representation of reality but rather a means of creating it.

22

It constitutes situations, objects and knowledge, and the social identities between people. It both sustains and reproduces the social status quo at the same time as it has the ability of transforming it. Discourse implies that certain acts are permitted and forms what is intelligible, thinkable.

The question of power lies in the claiming of certain interpretations of reality as knowledge that then becomes a truth. Bergström and Boréus are inspired by Foucault and describe disciplinary power as the means that on a micro level use ‘positive’

means to form, create and train the individual.

23

They acknowledge that power can also be described with ‘negative’ functions when we refer to punitive measures and restrictions. Through my material I will look at the micro level of power negotiations within a subculture currently negotiating the ‘correct’ use of language and certain words.

REFLEXIVITY AND SOURCE CRITICISM

The material I have chosen to analyze may not reflect the majority of people that self identify as queer or even outside the setting of an American dating page on Facebook.

Queer as a concept can be understood and interpreted in various different ways, it can be a chosen identity by people who defy and subvert norms regarding gender and sexuality, or an analytic theory that questions what is often seen as ‘natural’ for example heteronormativity. Buchholz and Hall write that what “queers” the subject of queer linguistics and queer theory is not sexual orientation but sexual

marginalization.

24

22

G. Bergström and K. Boréus, Textens Mening och Makt, metodok i samhällsvetenskaplig text och diskursanalys, Lund, Studentlitteratur, 2012, p. 365.

23

G. Bergström and K. Boréus, Textens Mening och Makt, metodok i samhällsvetenskaplig text och diskursanalys, Lund, Studentlitteratur, 2012, p. 383.

24

Bucholz, Mary and Kira Hall, “Theorizing Identity in Language and Sexuality Research”, Language in Society, Vol. 33, No. 4, Cambridge University Press, 2014, p. 491

(18)

The Facebook group is location specific to a larger US city but the demographics of its members exceeding 3 000 people is hard to define. The commentators and their identities and backgrounds are not specified and it is therefore hard to say who is taking a leading role in the discussion, e.g. what is their level of education, class, race, gender and identity and does this affect who has power in this specific discourse? Can this limited number of voices represent a larger discourse within the community or are these just a select few that have the confidence of making themselves heard and seen in an online discussion? On the other hand it is the voices that make themselves seen and heard that set the parameters for the politics and opinions within a group. I have chosen to only analyze one specific online discussion but I do believe that this can represent a broader discussion emerging within the field of sexuality and queer politics.

One difficulty of studying anything queer is that it per definition eludes any forms of definition. People who identify as queer may do this in a myriad of ways. It may be their politics, relationships, sexuality, gender identity/expression or sexual practice.

Despite the intention of queer as defying norms and evading categories it is still constantly forced into these categories and within the queer community norms are still being produced and reproduced. There is a lot of internal contestation about who and what is validified as queer enough. In the comments on this post there is no way of telling the persons gender, sexuality or race unless they claim or disclose an identity in their comments. In discussions about gender and race in particular, there is often a relevance of who has the preferential right of interpretation and that this should in particular go to voices within groups of minorities or otherwise marginalized identities.

Another concern has been the ethics of using this material without requesting personal consent from the people engaging in the post through their comments. An issue today with the use of Internet and digital communication is the grey zone of public/private that these spaces administer. The field of netnography is new and the rules of ethics and jurisdiction around it are still vague and seem to always be lagging one step behind the development of technology. This is also a question of global politics since internet is available in nearly all parts of the world so one country’s laws and

legislations would not necessarily apply to another country with the same access to

(19)

this media. For this thesis I made the decision to contact the original poster/moderator and ask for their permission to use their quote in my thesis, which they granted.

In the article Ethical dilemmas in researching sensitive issues online: lessons form the study of British disability dissent networks by Reilly and Trevisan they discussed how the blurring of boundaries occur between personal and political content on social media which creates ethical dilemmas for researchers in relation to their responsibility to protect the privacy of the participants.

25

Reilly and Trevisan advocate for an

approach that allows for the use of direct quotes when it is unlikely to prove harmful to the user but also sets out to provide as much anonymity as possible for those who disclose sensitive information in these semi-public spaces. Trevisan and Reilly conclude that qualitative research is fundamental to understanding the impact of social media on society but assert that creative solutions are necessary to ensure that we can meet the challenges of the digital era.

26

ANALYSIS

In this section I will introduce and analyze a few quotes from the Facebook post that I found to be valuable for understanding the internal problematics of language and sexuality as seen in a part of a queer community. The original post generated 77 likes and 50 comments. The analysis has been divided into themes that were relevant in the material and I have picked out a few quotes that point at the linguistic disunity within the community. Through the method of discourse analysis I will attempt at providing a broader understanding of the negotiation of words and concepts being developed and contested.

GENDER AND SEXUALITY

The main theme of this analysis and material is the relationship between gender and sexuality and how we are to understand their dependence or perhaps independence 25

F. Trevisan and P. Reilly, “Ethical dilemmas in researching sensitive issues online: Lessons from the study of British disability dissent networks”, Information, Communication & Society, vol.

17, no. 9, 2014, p. 1131.

26

F. Trevisan and P. Reilly, “Ethical dilemmas in researching sensitive issues online: Lessons from the study of British disability dissent networks”, Information, Communication & Society, vol.

17, no. 9, 2014, p. 1142.

(20)

from one another. I will begin by introducing the two quotes from the moderator's post (referred to as OP meaning original poster) that prompted the debate:

All these posts being gender specific is harmful to the people u are blatantly excluding – not to mention no one can assume anyone’s gender – so change the language, or take ur gender specific posts down.

And further down the comments the moderator replies:

Be open to what comes ur way. Having gender preferences is not queer. We are trying to deconstruct that idea all together.

The moderator's motivation for this was due to a series of personal ads seeking people with certain assigned sexes at birth (abbreviated ASAB, AFAB for female or AMAB for male). This post exclaims that part of queer politics is to completely dissolve and transcend gender through embracing a form of pansexuality. It also proposes a non- gender based sexuality by pointing out that specific genitals should not act as a valid requirement for queer conscious dating.

Diane Richardson writes in her essay Patterned Fluidities that during the 19

th

century it was mainly the theories of biologists, medical researchers, psychologists and sexologists that dominated the understanding of gender and sexuality. A key characteristic of these assumptions where that gender and sexuality are natural phenomena and the relationship between them is universal and fixed. There was believed to be a natural order of the dualism, binaries and the complementary polarity of male/female, heterosexual/homosexual, and masculine/feminine.

27

Foucault seems bemused and confounded by the disjointment in the development of knowledge between the biology of reproduction, which developed continuously according to a general scientific normativity and a medicine of sex conforming to quite different rules of formation. The second, which would find traditional fears to be recast in a scientific-sounding vocabulary. Foucault exclaims that it is as if a fundamental

27

Diane Richardson, ‘Patterned Fluidities: (Re)Imagining the Relationship between Gender and Sexuality’, Sociology, vol. 41 no. 3,2007, p. 459.

(21)

resistance blocked the development of a rationally formed discourse concerning human sex, its correlations, and its effects.

28

Richardson expands the analysis of gender and sexuality by theorizing the links between them and opening up to allowing a more complex and diverse understanding.

She gives the example of the possibility of thinking about sexualities without genders, where sexual desires, practices and identities do not depend on a person’s gender for their meaning.

29

Is sexuality inherently gendered, is it intelligible outside a gendered discourse? Can we see gender as merely one of many aspects of sexuality? Butler states that transgendered lives are the evidence of the breakdown of any lines of causal determinism between sexuality and gender.

30

Richardson’s theories regarding the relationship between gender and sexuality acknowledges the fluidity, instability and fragmentation of identities and a plurality of subject positions. She views gender and sexuality as sharing an intra-connectedness that is not determinate or

unidirectional. Instead of viewing it as completely random, unstructured and chaotic she proposes a kind of patterned fluidity to the relationship between gender and sexuality.

IDENTITY AND PRESENTATION

One recent trend I have observed that avoids essentialist gender language is by using gender expression or aesthetic when talking about ones interest in a certain type of person. It is common to see in ads that people specify their gender identity (cis, trans or non-binary) as well as their gender expression such as feminine (femme) or

masculine (masc). Here are two comments on differentiating between gender identity and gender expression:

28

Michel Foucault, The history of sexuality. Volume I. An introduction.

Penguin Books, London, 1990, p. 54.

29

Diane Richardson, “Patterned Fluidities: (Re)Imagining the Relationship between Gender and Sexuality”, Sociology, vol. 41 no. 3,2007, p. 463.

30

J. Butler, Undoing Gender, New York, Routledge, 2004, p. 54.

(22)

But what about things I see that are femme for femme? Masc for masc? Should folks really be policed on who they desire to be with? Once it does not reach the realm of racism, colorism, fetishization, transphobia, cis-sexism, ableism and fatphobia?

I think it’s a bit oppressive to say folks can’t have a preference. But I also think there are ways to not be shitty and gross about preferences.

And an answer to the previous comment:

Except masc and femme aren’t independent genders and they’re expressions or presentations of ones gender identity so this logic doesn’t even hold up because f4f and m4m aren’t gender specific. The issue is the blatant transmisogyny.

This person seems to point out that we may be attracted to certain expressions of gender, but need to consciously include gender variations such as people that identify as non-binary or trans. Identities as feminine and masculine are more inclusive and don’t denote a certain gender.

I would like to raise the question of differentiating between sexuality and sexual identity. Cameron and Kulick write that sexual identity is merely one aspect of sexuality and that the study of language and sexuality needs to move beyond the exclusive focus on identity in order to explain the many ways in which sexuality is materialized and conveyed through language.

31

They see sexuality as a social and psychological phenomenon that both exceeds and sometimes contradicts the sexual identities that people consciously claim or disclaim.

32

Sexuality relates to sexual practice, desires, who, how, when, with what and where, for what reason one wants to express or perform sex and intimacy. Sexuality can, but does not directly, determine a persons sexual identity. Ideally sexual identity is self- claimed, but as mentioned previously in this essay, this is not always the case. If a person of a certain gender expresses desire towards a person of a certain gender others often identify them as this or that. One example of a positive shift in the field of medicine is that men who have sex with men are not referred to as gay or homosexual but the group is talked about as MSM (abbreviation of men who have sex with men), which is a sexual act that they perform and not what they identify as.

31

D. Kulick and D. Cameron, “Identity Crisis?”, Language & Communication, 2005, p. 109.

32

D. Kulick and D. Cameron, “Identity Crisis?”, Language & Communication, 2005, p. 113.

(23)

There are as I see it several ways of identifying and expressing gender. Firstly there is the assigned gender at birth, designated to an infant by a medical professional based on the child's genitals, then there is gender identity and gender presentation.

For example one comment says:

A lot of time people use masc and femme as categories for presentation.

For instance, I am femme ID. But because of the clothes I wear people think I’m masc. I don't comment on many posts because I think they are looking for someone who reflects classic femininity, which is fine but makes me wonder where I fit. Because I don't consider myself masc of center.

It seems to me that this commentator is suggesting that femme and masc are not necessarily connected to an exterior or aesthetic but as a personality identity that is not connected to one’s gender identity. The comments in the discussion seem fairly unanimous about gender identity being fundamentally different from ASAB (assigned sex at birth). If gender expression and identity are seen as legitimate focuses for our desires, what then happens when the gender dichotomy is blurred? What if there was no aesthetic differentiation between the two genders? This is in my experience what many queer, non-binary and trans people are doing by not adhering in their identities or exteriors to the dichotomy of female/male.

I wonder if OP has a very radical but legitimate point. Is it conceivable that we cease in founding our sexualities on gender? Butler believes that sexuality does not follow from gender in the sense that what gender you “are” determines what kind of

sexuality you will “have”. Butler proceeds with the question “Am I a gender after all?

And do I “have” a sexuality?”.

33

GENDER SPECTRUMS

The following comment discusses the importance of differentiating between gender identity and gender essentialism:

I seriously don’t see how ‘I am looking to hook up with girls [with no specifications as to ASAB]’ is a problem on that level? Like, I see nothing exclusionary about someone advertising that they are interested in dating people with a specific gender- and I don’t

33

J. Butler, Undoing Gender, New York, Routledge, 2004, p. 16.

(24)

altogether buy that ‘femme’ or ‘masc’ is different; you could argue that ‘girl’ or ‘boy’ also covers a range of different genders, just along a different spectrum.

(...)

To be totally clear: The post that (I think? The one where someone was specifying AFAB ppl as her target audience, right?) prompted this one was seriously disgusting. I just think ‘gender specific posts’ are a separate issue from gross gender essentialism, and also kind of a weird thing to focus on if what you’re actually aiming to do is set community standards that reduce the amount of overt transmisogyny/transphobia in posts.

This commentator brings up a theory of a plurality of gender spectrums. As

previously mentioned there might be a gender identity as well as a gender expression or presentation that may or may not be the same as your ASAB. The use of ‘boi’ and

‘gurl’ for example are colloquial terms often used in the LGBTQ community. A boi could be a young butch, a lesbian tomboy or a trans guy in early transitioning. A gurl is commonly used by drag queens and gay men (in particular amongst people of colour in America) but was also popularized by the political feminist punk movement riot grrrls. We have learned to play with gender both in language and presentation.

One might present as high femme but prefer a gender-neutral pronoun or one could have a masectomy and still go by she.

There are so many different ways for people to interpret and express gender and the development has happened very rapidly during the past few years especially due to the trans movement and a growing intersex movement.

LANGUAGE

Through a discourse analysis on this material I look at what words are used and how people in this group are active agents in creating meaning. A process of knowledge solidification and equalization is apparent in the comments. Anyone who reads the OP is prompted to consider their own way of vocalizing their desires and identities and the inherent political implication of such actions.

Kulick and Cameron quote Immanuel Kant who argued that language both gives us our world of experience, and also keeps us from perceiving the world in an

unmediated form.

34

This serves as a reminder that words are simply an attempt at 34

D. Kulick and D. Cameron, “Introduction: Language and desire in theory and practice”, Language

& Communication, vol. 23, 2003, p. 96.

(25)

trying to understand our surroundings and ourselves but can never fully encompass any form of universal truth. Words are merely representations, highly sensitive to individual interpretation. This needs to be kept in mind when discussing identity and sexuality that have come to mean very different things to different people. One also needs to consider the fact that groups, institutions and politicians are through various means trying to influence, control, negotiate and solidify the definition of these extensive concepts. Horley and Clark discuss personal construct theory in their essay Constructing Sexuality: A theory of stability and fluidity and believe that events are completely void of meaning until we take or make meaning from our encounters with the physical or social world.

35

Our interpretation is the very essence of experience.

These constructs and interpretations are in turn mediated through the language available to us.

Cameron and Kulick pose a highly relevant question when they ask, “How can an analyst of language study the unconscious processes of prohibition, repression and fantasy? How can they begin to get at what is not said or what cannot be said in the sample of discourse they are analyzing?”.

36

I agree that it is equally important, when studying a particular discourse, to look at what is said as well as what is omitted in speech. What is yet unspeakable and unknowable? What I find interesting is the language in the twilight zone, new words forming in the foggy distance. In the current discourse on sexuality, where do we find the words and tendencies that might be part in changing or forming the future of sexuality, gender and identity? Queen and Schimel suggested two decades ago that we introduce the concept of pomosexuality.

37

This idea wasn't picked up at the time and instead the word queer was largely

incorporated into daily speech within the LGBT community and academics and has largely shaped the way sexuality is understood today. Butler says in Gender Trouble that it would be a mistake to think that received grammar is the best vehicle for radical views; given the constraints that grammar imposes on thought and even upon 35

J. Horley and J. Clarke, ”Constructing Sexuality: A Theory of Stability and Fluidity”, Sexuality &

Culture, no 20, 2016, p. 912.

36

D. Kulick and D. Cameron, “Introduction: Language and desire in theory and practice”, Language

& Communication, vol. 23, 2003, p. 98.

37

C. Queen and L. Schimel, Pomosexuals: Challenging Assumptions about Gender and Sexuality, Cleis Press, 1997.

(26)

the thinkable itself.

38

This is why the need for minorities to create our own words, language and meaning is so important. Kulick and Cameron write that even in the queer community, founded on the idea of openness to a multiplicity of desires, it seems language sets limits on what desires can be made intelligible.

39

Within the community there are strong voices advocating for whom, how and what gets to be included under the rainbow umbrella.

QUEER

D. Travers Scott gives us a poignant visual in Pomosexuals explaining the

hopelessness in basing your identity on sexuality. He poses the question “if gender is fluid, how can sexual ‘orientation’ not be as well? How can you be rigidly ‘oriented’

towards something that is amorphous, shifting, fluid, tricky, and elusive? Basing your identity on sexuality is like building a house on pudding.”.

40

Scott is critical of the policing of identity boundaries and writes that he is personally more inclined towards the bi, transgender, S/M and kink movements where sexuality is often less of an issue, compared to certain groups like the gay and lesbian

communities that are often accused of separatism. Scott sees this strict policing of identities and use of symbols and signifiers as a right-wing project resembling both fascism and conservatism seeing sexuality-based identities as unrealistic due to the unstable notion of sex and gender.

41

One reason why the kinksters and people involved in BDSM might have been less protective of their identity boundaries and spaces is likely because they have not been persecuted and deemed as a type in the way that homosexuals have endured and experienced violence and exclusion.

Separatism and a strong sense of identity has been a way of survival through

38

J. Butler, Gender Trouble- Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Routledge, 1999

39

D. Kulick and D. Cameron, “Introduction: Language and desire in theory and practice”, Language

& Communication, vol. 23, 2003, p. 102.

40

C. Queen and L. Schimel, Pomosexuals: Challenging Assumptions about Gender and Sexuality, Cleis Press, 1997, p. 66.

41

C. Queen and L. Schimel, Pomosexuals: Challenging Assumptions about Gender and Sexuality, Cleis Press, 1997, p. 67.

(27)

community and the protection, safety and recognition that this offers as well as political strength in the unity of a larger group of people.

One of the commentators in the FB group would probably agree with Scott in the desire to escape the idea that we can be determined as people based on our sexual desires.

It isn't wrong having preferences. And one person can’t determine what it means to be queer.

THAT mindset, that someone else can define how we identify, is what we’re trying to deconstruct, not having preferences (even gender specific).

While this person disagrees with other people setting the parameters of what is and is not the right way to ‘be queer’ they also reiterate that as queers we should be actively deconstructing identities and sexualities that others have given us. But how do we go about this deconstruction? Would pansexuality not be exactly that, by not specifying any gender identity, ASAB or gender expression as part of your sexual identity? Or should we perhaps start to sever our sexualities from our identities? Would this be possible in a society that still strongly associates us as a ‘type’ because of our romantic, erotic and sexual connections- thus by default identifying us.

The very act of acquiring an identity means in a way accepting an accompanying set of pre-existing expectations and assumptions. Butler writes that one only determines

“one’s own” sense of gender to the extent that social norms exist that support and enable that act of claiming gender for oneself. One is thus dependent on this “outside”

to express what is ones notion of self.

42

LABELS

The labels for sexuality available today were not created by ‘us’ or for ‘us’, speaking as part of the queer community, but by medical and legal institutions to control, pathologize and normalize us. So we need to question whether the

reclamation/incorporation/internalization/identification of and with these words work in our favour or ultimately to our disadvantage. Words contain power and this

malleable power can be renegotiated and repossessed through actions and relations

42

J. Butler, Undoing Gender, New York, Routledge, 2004, p. 7.

(28)

between individuals on a local level as well as on a global level. Foucault recounts how the various institutions began producing discourses on sex by attempts at controlling and prohibiting it. In medicine there were in the 18

th

and 19

th

century

“nervous disorders”, in psychiatry they discovered mental illnesses focusing on onanism, frustration and perversion and criminal justice was highly concerned with sexualities referred to as “crimes against nature”.

43

Foucault mentioned that for a very long time hermaphrodites (today called intersex persons) were criminals since their anatomical disposition confounded the law that distinguished the sexes and prescribed their union.

44

Up until this very day it is common praxis that babies born with genital ambiguity, while their bodies may be fully functional and not cause the person any physical harm or discomfort, undergo surgical modification so that they will fit into the norms of what a male or female body should look like. This proves how strongly society values a clear distinction between the two genders and is unwilling to create space for intersex, trans and gender non-conforming people.

Foucault writes about the persecution of peripheral sexualities that entailed a new specification of individuals. He famously writes that the 19

th

century homosexual became a personage, a past, a case history, and a childhood. Nothing that went into the persons total composition was unaffected by his sexuality. Sodomy was no longer a temporary aberration of a sinful act but was becoming an identity.

45

Foucault reminisces a few definitions of sexual and gender deviants given by psychiatrists in an attempt at categorizing and understanding in order to ultimately curing/eliminating these individuals. There were names such as auto-monosexualists, mixoscophiles, gynecomasts, presbyophiles, sexoesthetic inverts and dyspareunist women.

46

Today a similar trend is occurring within the queer community where new 43

Michel Foucault, The history of sexuality. Volume I. An introduction.

Penguin Books, London, 1990, p. 30.

44

Michel Foucault, The history of sexuality. Volume I. An introduction.

Penguin Books, London, 1990, p. 38.

45

Michel Foucault, The history of sexuality. Volume I. An introduction.

Penguin Books, London, 1990, p. 42.

46

Michel Foucault, The history of sexuality. Volume I. An introduction.

Penguin Books, London, 1990, p. 43.

(29)

words are created to define a multitude of sexualities, genders and identities with the purpose of acceptance rather than penance. A few examples might be gender

expressions such as femme, tomboy, masculine of center or gender identities for example gender non-conforming, fluid, non-binary, transfeminine/masculine or it might be gender expression mixed with sexuality like butch, twink, lipstick lesbian, bear or sexualities like pansexual, sapiosexual, ace or demisexual to name a few recently occurring words relating to gender and sexuality.

We need to continuously ask ourselves if these constructed identities create

opportunities for self-realization. Who reaps these benefits and who is still excluded from the privileges of becoming a subject of these identities? Who is excluded or forced to compromise themselves in order to fit into these categories?

COMMUNITY

Kate Bornstein writes in the introduction to Pomosexuals questioning whether words themselves are in fact a danger in the defining of community. Can allowing anyone at all to define the identities being politicized solve the problem of suffocating identity politics? Or would a better solution be the abandonment of politicized identities in favour of the politics of values?

47

She writes shortly of her own identity journey that she starting out as a heterosexual man who transitioned into becoming a lesbian girl but when her partner transitioned into a man, retaining a lesbian identity became too complicated. The following comment offers similar thoughts to Bornsteins of how words and identities have acted as means for gaining power and recognition but simultaneously this has resulted in negative implications for the ones that get rejected.

This omission of certain identities is experienced by some as an act of queer policing, meaning the micro control mechanisms within the community.

This post/thread is everything that is wrong with queer policing of queer people. And part of the reason being queer is still not being taken seriously in some spaces.. Why are we policing ourselves when we already get enough of that from cis exclusively hetero people and society?

47

C. Queen and L. Schimel, Pomosexuals: Challenging Assumptions about Gender and Sexuality, Cleis Press, 1997, p. 16.

(30)

A reason why this happens in ‘the queer community’ may be that it has been built on an idea that queer identity implies shared experiences, politics and ideals. It is clear that queerness is highly contested as to what exactly it is and this study only further proves the elusiveness of both gender and sexuality. Intersectional feminism has helped point out that we all have subjective experiences and that

privilege/disadvantage can be multiple and contextual. As Bornstein said, it may be time to create a community based on values and affinity and not a community of identities in order to achieve political change.

EXCLUSION

In the next comment the person defends another commentator who here is referred to as XXX that feels excluded from the community for dating a cis male and being perceived as living in a heterosexual relationship.

XXX is bringing up the very real issue of BI, PAN, and QUEER erasure within the ‘queer community’ which totally fits within the OPs blanket statement about gender based exclusion.

Her feelings of exclusion from this group are a real problem, and to take her post a step farther the fact that there are a lot of queer cis men (read: not exclusively or at all gay identified) that will not post in this group because they are ‘blatantly excluded’ by most of the posts actively rejecting them is a problem that is within the parameters of the OPs request to be addressed.

Our goal as a community should not be to simply flip an oppressive system on its head and put every identity that has been marginalized at the top and allow us to make those identities currently in power (keeping in mind that this system of ‘oppression olympics’ing is in fact impossible because we all hold a variety of privileged and marginalized identities...) feel worthless, but instead to be inclusive and kind and keep space open for people in the community.

This comment criticizes the we/them dichotomy that is created when anything remotely heteronormative is rejected, which might specifically affect bi- and

pansexuals or other fluid sexualities that are not as visibly “queer”. The person uses

the phrase ‘oppression olympics’ criticizing how people seem to compete based on

their level of intersecting minority identities. Transwomen of colour are subjected to

high levels of discrimination and violence while the white cis male is on the top of the

hierarchy that creates a hostile environment within the community towards white cis-

(31)

passing males regardless of their personal queer identities. The commentator wants to point out that even in the queer community that strives to be inclusive and give space to minorities does in fact create a closed group where many people based on their identities will feel left out.

Butler ends the preface to Gender Trouble expressing hopes for a coalition of sexual minorities that will transcend categories of identity and be based on an irreducible complexity of sexuality and its implication in discursive and institutional power.

48

Another discussion in the comments that also vocalizes a hostility towards

straightness is when one of the commentators who identifies as a transman expressed his desires for feminine women. Here is one of the reactions to his statement:

(...) I don't think trans ppl embodying cisheteropatriarchy in their desires is anything but 1:1 straight. It’s not actually subversive to be a dominant sleazy masculine partner if yr a man who seeks out women.

This commentator is averse to queerness impersonating heteronormativity. When a trans person identifies as heterosexual does this mean they can easily assimilate into heteronormativity? Or is a cis-gendered body a prerequisite for recognized

heterosexuality? The comment below offers another response to the discussion of straightness versus queerness by stating that there are people of genders and

sexualities that may be defying certain sexual norms but don't identify themselves as queer:

Is this group queer, or should the name be changed to “QT”? Not all trans people are queer, as was mentioned on that status. And a lot of you trans mens seem really binary and only wanna date women or femme folk. That’s fine. Live your best and authentic life. But that sounds pretty straight? Therefore this being a “QT” group would make more sense, just logically.

(Authors note, QT stands for queer and trans)

This demonstrates how differently people perceive their sexuality, queerness and politicalness. Cameron and Kulick believe that we can claim or disclaim identities however I propose that identity can only come into being as an interpersonal construct in a negotiated process. It demands affirmation and acknowledgement of others,

48

J. Butler, Gender Trouble- Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Routledge, 1999.

References

Related documents

The answer to the question of whether AI and humans can be friends is both yes and no. In this thesis, I have embraced the ancient philosophers’ claim that moral status is a

The main findings reported in this thesis are (i) the personality trait extroversion has a U- shaped relationship with conformity propensity – low and high scores on this trait

We hope that this project will contribute to an increased awareness of the growth possibilities for Nordic SMEs that lie in the concept of CSR-driven innovation and that

While different support processes should be part of such categorization, the results of this thesis also show that energy use in production processes for the wood industry account for

Today, millions of purchased domain sites names are sitting unused with no real web designs or concrete purpose coupled with them. Why would not owners engage a

Since an inflation targeting framework was first adopted by New Zealand in 1989, a growing number of countries have their monetary policy anchoring to an

Framgångsfaktorer Gården strävar efter att vara arbetskraftsoberoende och hålla läglighetskostnaderna låga genom att med egna maskiner och egen personal själv stå för beslutet

Such technologies are architectural styles or patterns solving reoccurring known design problems quite contrary to conceptual SOA (Erl, 2005; Holley &