Are you QUEER enough?
Thursday, July 7, 2011 at 3:02PM RULZ to live by, or MY QUEER MANIFESTO!
WARNING! This is probably offensive, but is put out there in hopes of starting smart, thoughtful, fun dialogue. Deal?
Oh man, do I love me some queer theory. I am a self-identified (though not pretentious...as this post will surely show) THEORY NERD! I've also got a bit of the super-community-whore in me as well. I love being part of communities. Getting involved, making food, making friends...It's my jam. So what could be more interesting to me than the myriad of conversations I've been having recently about the Queer Community.
These conversations are commonly in this vein: "I love the queer community, but I find it can be very unfriendly", or "I don't feel like I'm accepted in the queer community because I don't LOOK queer", or...there's always the good old, "I think I'm more part of the lesbian community than the queer community". I have some strong reactions to these comments.
So, I thought I'd write about what QUEER means to me. The hard and fast RULZ! of being queer (tongue in cheek here people, obvi there aren't rules). But here's how I know a queer when I see 'em.
Rule #1. Anyone can be queer.
Yup. You heard me. Anyone. Straight, white, cis-gender, non-disabled, monogamous, vanilla, rich, stereotypically fit and attractive frat boys can be queer. Stop freaking. Read on to rule #2
Rule #2 Being queer is political, behavioral, as well as community based.
I will consider you queer if you a) support queer politics through words and actions in your life (which I see as feminist, focusing on bringing attention to how power and privilege work in our world, mostly to the disadvantage of people of color, poor people, GSM* people, fat people, people in the disability community, etc..) b) want to be in the queer community and c) support other people being queer in the ways that make them happy.
*Have you guys heard of GSM? It stands for Gender and Sexuality Minority. I think this acronym should include people who are into polyamory, BDSM, and sex work as well as the LGBTIQQA crowd. Why? Well because I still think that's a minority of people, and the majority of folks have some feelings about those sexual practices...mostly negative feelings. So....I have started using GSM instead of LGBT a lot of times. And! I'd put GSMers into the queer pot as well. Well, except for those who don't want to be in the pot. They don't have to get into the pot if they don't want to.
Rule #3 You probably have a strong affinity for glitter, rainbows, and unicorns. And Lady Gaga.
I can't explain this rule. I just know it to be true in my experience. If you hate these things, you can still totally be allowed into my queer club (which I didn't know I had til right then)...but I bet you're just SAYING you don't like them to be contrary. But maybe I'm wrong, maybe you really hate those things even though you're queer. That's cool. You're rare, friend.
My rulz of queerness have officially ended.
What's the point? Mostly I want the amazingly engaged, active, subversive and transformative power that I see harnessed within the queer community to be open to people who care about being engaged, active, subversive and transformative. I don't want people to feel awkward or unwelcomed because they're not "gay enough", "queer enough" or "trans enough". I want people who are radical to be fucking friendly to each other. I want people who grew up wearing polo shirts and who still wear polo shirts, because that's how they're comfortable...to sit next to a totally DIY grunge outfitted kid and be able to talk turkey about making this world DIFFERENT and BETTER.
This doesn't mean I don't support SAFE SPACES. I do. I think having space where people who share specific experiences can get together and talk shop or support each other is REALLY important. I'm mostly saying that I wish being queer wasn't JUST about who you wanna get it on with, or being gendervariant. I wish being queer meant what it says on the bumper sticker in my car:
As opposed to this:
So. Do you identify as queer? I wanna know, What makes you queer?
love!
Donkey
Reader Comments (18)
YES! i love this.
and the funny thing is, when we see the identity as more inclusive, we start to feel more included! when we accept the self identification of others as valid, we believe that others might accept our own. and it feels good. it's all win-win-win.
ways that i've identified my queerness:
1. my politics inform my sexuality and my sexuality informs my politics- they're inextricable!
2. i will constantly question norms. and if i end up subscribing to them, it's not blindly- i play an active role in the construction of my identities, presentations, roles, dynamics, etc.
3. the scope of my desire is big and weird and i refuse to contain it. regardless of what kind of a relationship i'm in and with whom, it doesn't erase my past, present, future, or theoretical lovers or crushes.
YES! This is great, Donkey. As a complicated homo I embrace queer as more inclusive of my lived experience and ideology. Some of my favorite queers are heteros and I love that we can find shared community in feeling safe and celebrating in queer spaces.
Queer does not equal gay and gay does not equal queer but the venn diagram between the two definitely includes unicorns. It's such a tough dynamic to put into words and I appreciate your rules :)
Oh man! I love the idea of constantly questioning norms, and if you DO subscribe to them than that not bad, if it's done consciously. Yes!
I really thank you for writing in. I literally stayed up last night worrying that I might have come across as too angry or frustrated with people who do not make others feel welcome. I know it's not always easy, and often times there are reasons why.
My biggest point is that I don't think anyone wins when we police our communities with unfriendliness.
Win-Win-Win!! Man- your brain and my tongue are making out in my mind...
... no. No, no, no, no, no.
Queer is a reclaimed slur. It's a word that has been applied to gay/bi and gender-non-conforming people with anger and aggression. It's a word that has accompanied violence against us, including sexual assault and murder.
It's not a word anyone else is free to take, without having suffered that history. It's not a "coolness" title. It doesn't exist for straight cis people to use to feel good about themselves, because every other fucking thing already belongs to them. God knows they spend enough time hanging out in our bars because it's "cool" and then being pissed off when they get hit on by unsuspecting gay people. They don't get our words and get to take over our community, too.
I'm co-signing on Molly's comment. Right fucking on. Also, that last "rule" is most definitely offensive to a huge portion of the queer community. Pretty hypocritical to insist that the queer community is so huge and diverse in one breath and then in the next tell queers what they like. Being queer isn't a fun little club for everyone to join. If you are straight, then you're not queer. It's that simple.
i think 3 is pretty obviously a joke.
it's weird having identities that are so important to us get trendy and i absolutely understand how seeing people reclaim 'queer' who haven't been hurt by that label can feel frustrating. but once we start using strict qualifiers and putting up walls and boundaries, i only see it hurting more people. i'm really curious as to who you feel is entitled to claim the label. (people who have recieved x amount of harrassment? people who are currently in non hetero relationships? people who have been out for x amount of time?) molly & staci please share your "rules"!
personally, i'm way more comfortable sharing it with anti-capitalist straight kids who actively pursue non-normative lifestyles and fight for progressive causes than having it co-opted by assimilatory gay institutions trying to profit off of a sort of trendy label (ie, q-fest, q lounge).
personally, i'm way more comfortable sharing it with anti-capitalist straight kids who actively pursue non-normative lifestyles and fight for progressive causes than having it co-opted by assimilatory gay institutions trying to profit off of a sort of trendy label (ie, q-fest, q lounge).
... wow. Just wow.
Straight kids can be lots of things, but they can't be queer.
It's not that difficult. Straight cis people are not queer. People who are not straight cis people are queer.
Straight cis people HAVE EVERYTHING ALREADY. Why do they need this, too? Why can't they just have their own fucking stuff and leave our tiny, tiny little piece of the world alone?
And Lady Gaga's a racist, transphobic hack.
Rule # 4: Must live in West Philly. (oh, no, it just feels that way).
But in all seriousness, this is such a super important conversation! I'm constantly examining this for myself-- mostly as a result of never feeling queer enough. AND WHAT IS THAT? Why don't I ever feel queer enough? Like, I'm like, REAL fucking queer. And wait, what is that... how can I even say that I'm real fucking queer? Am I basing this on my appearance? On my sexuality? On my politics? Is there like a queerness Likert Scale out there to determine just how queer I am? No sadly there isn't.... or actually, I'm glad there's not.... Because the crucial part about having an identity is that it is yours, determined by you, and not by someone else.
Because, you see... the problem with placing limitations on how someone is allowed to identify is that it inherently implies that there then has to be some sort of gate keeper to the queer barracks. and here in lies the problem... I understand the need to create these identities as a means to fight back against systematic oppression. It is so important to reclaim words and identities that have been used to marginalize us... and our anger and need to hold onto these identities is 100% just! We build up these walls to keep ourselves safe. By claiming identities we are trying to find safe spaces for ourselves and for our community.
But seriously, is there some sort of pandemic of straight cis people claiming a queer identity? am I missing something? But even if there were, I wouldn't feel comfortable kicking them out and telling them, NO, you can't be queer! In order to be queer you have to be X-Y-Z. And that my friends, would feel awful, because part of my queer identity says I will actively fight against systems of oppression.. or even systems that make people feel bad about themselves. Because lets be real, I want people to feel like they have a home and like they have a community. It's the sort of dichotomous thinking that says you're either in or you're out that makes me feel not queer enough when I enter my community. Its holding onto these notions of fulfilling all the qualities of a queer person as defined by *who the fuck even knows* that keeps our community stagnant. Does anyone ever feel queer enough? It's my understanding that the entire queer community doesn't feel queer enough.... I mean seriously, who are we holding in such high regards? Who is this queer gate keeper?
Now, lets go back into the queer barracks I mentioned earlier. In my utopian queer barracks, there is no gate keeper. The door to my gate is wide the fuck open. Because in my queer war against systematic oppression, I want all different types of people to walk through my gate and feel good about themselves. I want them to feel like they've found a community that loves, values, and celebrates them. If you walk through my gate and say you are queer, I'm not gonna ask you to justify it... I'm just gonna give you a high five.
Thanks to everyone who has been commenting. I appreciate it...a whole lot. Especially those folks who super disagree and are clearly offended by the post. I appreciate you weighing in with your thoughts. Let's keep the smart and thoughtful dialogue going...and not get into random angry insults. Deal?
I'm gonna talk back to a few of the things said that I think could be looked at another way, and continue trying to back up my original point.
"Straight kids can be lots of things, but they can't be queer.....It's not that difficult. Straight cis people are not queer. People who are not straight cis people are queer."
Molly- You've said a lot of stuff that has made me re-think my original post. Cheers to pushing back and letting yourself be heard. Here's a point you've made that I think about differently. I know TONS of people who are not straight who DO NOT consider themselves to be queer. It is a label that does not fit their experience, politics, or idea of self. At all. They get angry or offended when I imply their membership in the queer community. Also, I think sexuality is a bit too complicated and fluid to be drawing a clear line between straight and queer. Many queer activists that I know and love (and who are icons of the queer community...Ani? Anyone?) are in what could be seen as straight relationships. Do you get your queer card taken away if you fall for someone of another sex?
A big part of my original thinking is how blurry these definitions and identities are. I see people feeling alienated from a community because of petty bullshit like how they look, or who they're currently attracted to. So many women who "look straight" get ignored and feel like outsiders in the queer community, even though they're looking to have some hot gay sex.
And no, there's really nobody beating down the doors of the queer community demanding to be let into the "cool club" the club was made up by me to make a point in the original post. Honestly, most of the conversations I had that inspired the post were with people who, by Molly's logic, are queer. My original point was picked up and carried even further by Rooster and 2lgt. I love the high-fives given and interesting ways they've identified queer- to them! Thank you!
"Straight cis people HAVE EVERYTHING ALREADY. Why do they need this, too? Why can't they just have their own fucking stuff and leave our tiny, tiny little piece of the world alone?"
I know that I try to stay away from grouping large amounts of people into one group. There are plenty of straight cis-folks who are struggling with issues of power and privilege (poverty, sexism, racism, and many more shitty ends of the stick). I certainly don't want this post to get involved in a game of oppression poker, mostly because there's nothing productive to gain from that. Also, I don't want to portray the queer community or queer folks as being powerless. I feel like it's a massively powerful community that has much more than a tiny, tiny piece of this world. And it's growing every day!
Queer is in my mind (which it doesn't have to be in your mind...thasscool) a much more political label than just a sexual/gender identity. After feeding some of my favorite queer smarties and picking their brains about how to respond to this post, they brought up some important points. Queer is hard to define because it's so complicated. In the words of a friend, "It's hard to say where queer politics ends and racial politics, or feminism, or sex-positive culture begins". These things are all mushed in together, at least in my mind. So know that I'm approaching a definition of queer that is trying to be more complicated and therefor more inclusive.
What do we have to gain by allowing straight people to claim a spot in the queer community? A lot, I think. I include allies in a community. Like aren't white people allowed to be members in anti-racism organizations? It's true that they're not morphed into a persons of color after that, and certainly don't know the lived experience of being a person of color in our society- but they are part of a community. Right? Most likely, if a straight/cis/whatever-else-privileged-experience person is self-aware enough to want to hold communion and live/work within the queer community- they probably won't wave around a queer badge of honor at parties. They'll probably be aware of the privileges that they have, and are just there to have fun, make friends, and damn! the man! just like the rest of us.
And Rule #3 is in fact to make people laugh...I am usually laughing about the most important things. Because it's a ton better than crying, and it'll keep me in the fight longer.
love!
I really like this. My definition of queer is different from those above-- it doesn't include Lady Gaga, it only sometimes involves glitter, and it's not anywhere near Philly. I also believe, for me, that there are no rules that define queerness. :) But I enjoy that different people have different definitions and identities in the word "queer" -- that's one of the reasons why I embrace it. I do have straight friends who are so socially and politically in-tune and pro-active for the queer community that, if they chose to identify as queer, I would support them. I don't think that goes for the majority of straight people. But I believe that "queer" is about making exceptions to rules, about the strength and power of self-identity and community, about politics and support created by and for ourselves. So, yes, some of my queer family is queer in non-sexual ways. I also find that many of the "straight" people in my world who are a bit queer have fluid and open definitions of gender and sexuality, whether that reflects in their own attractions and sexual practices or not. Personally, I don't care who other people are sleeping with, as long as they have a really healthy respect, appreciation, and understanding that all gender identities and sexual expression is equally valid. And I have to agree that, for me, sex-positivity, anti-racism, feminism, and social justice are very interlinked with my queer identity. Also why I believe in intersectionality theory :)
Just a different take, but thanks for posting about your queer identity!
I'm cis. I've dated women and am attracted to all kinds of bodies but the only two people I've fallen in love with are both straight cis guys. Sometimes I'm butch, less often I wear dresses and heels, but usually I just dress to be comfy. My hair is short, my legs, armpits, and (as the Screws like to call it) bizness is hairy, and my eyelashes are frequently mascara'd. I do not like Gaga at all (sorry Donkey) and I'm west philly community for life. So am I queer or not? Who gets to decide?
Queer to me is about an outlook on the world, a breaking down of binaries/walls regarding who you are and who you want to get it on with, and this challenging of rules and hierarchies naturally extends itself towards other oppressive structures regarding race/class/bodies/all-the-others-I'm-neglecting-to-write-here. So while there are many ways this can manifest itself in individuals, some more common than others, being queer is about BELIEFS, not BEHAVIORS. I know lesbians who would not appreciate being called queer (interestingly, who I'm thiking about are all of an older generation). They're engaging in a lot of the same behaviors as queer women (smooching other ladies) but beliefs about their identity are different.
Final note: sexuality and gender being as fluid as it is within the queer community, I find it interesting that some commenters have delineated so starkly between "queer" and "straight." It seems the focus is on who you have sex with, which can change anytime, and not the politics that are so deeply ingrained in queer identity.
The only people suggesting that being in a relationship with an opposite-sex partner makes a bisexual person "not queer" are the people who are claiming that anyone can be queer. I think that's fascinating.
Bisexuals are bisexuals no matter who the fuck they're dating, and I would expect anyone who claims to be politically radical to know that.
It's really not that complex, even though people keep pretending to be stymied. Queer doesn't cover the following: straight cis people. Queer can cover the following, if they choose to use it: people who are not straight cis people.
I agree with Molly, I'm not comfortable with well-meaning cis heterosexuals calling themselves "queer". It's a loaded word with a history, in the same way that it's not okay for me to casually use the N-word just because I deeply care about racial civil rights and listen to hip-hop.
Queer is an important word to me as I see aspects of gay culture go increasingly mainstream (e.g. the marriage equality movement), and have mixed feelings about it all. I don't want "a place at the table" of a society whose values are so informed by greed, violence, and oppression -- I want a whole other table where I can feel comfortable in my skin and relate to like-minded people without being judged.
If you are want to identify as sexy-positive, radical, kinky, or whatever, awesome! I will happily talk with you and lovingly treat you as an equal no matter how square you come off, provided you treat others (and other communities) respectfully. And that includes being respectful of the fact that sometimes a cultural ecosystem needs to be territorial in order to insure its survival. Separatism isn't the answer, but neither is naive well-intentioned blind inclusiveness.
Hi friends! I just want to say that this is so great! It's had me thinking all day! So thanks for that! That being said... I am just so weary of defining someone's identity for them. It is just historically problematic and harmful. It is not mine or anybody else's job to say how you are allowed to identify. I also just don't think identities fit into neat little boxes like that... it's too simplistic and ignores the complexity and beauty that is the human experience. Anyway, In my last post I was so caught up with gate keeping that I didn't get to talk about what being queer means to me (from here on out I will speak in I statements)! I believe that my queerness is the intersection of all my political beliefs and at the core of how I try to live my life. It is informed by feminism, gender theory, and my sexuality. It is, I think, the embodiment of my personal politics-- committed to examining and deconstructing systems of oppression (the ism's).
Here are things that I've read that I completely loved and I want to give little shout outs to:
"my politics inform my sexuality and my sexuality informs my politics- they're inextricable!"
"i will constantly question norms. and if i end up subscribing to them, it's not blindly- i play an active role in the construction of my identities, presentations, roles, dynamics, etc."
"personally, i'm way more comfortable sharing it with anti-capitalist straight kids who actively pursue non-normative lifestyles and fight for progressive causes than having it co-opted by assimilatory gay institutions trying to profit off of a sort of trendy label (ie, q-fest, q lounge)."
"Lady Gaga's a racist, transphobic hack.'
"Queer is hard to define because it's so complicated. In the words of a friend, 'It's hard to say where queer politics ends and racial politics, or feminism, or sex-positive culture begins'"
"I include allies in a community."
"Queer to me is about an outlook on the world, a breaking down of binaries/walls regarding who you are and who you want to get it on with, and this challenging of rules and hierarchies naturally extends itself towards other oppressive structures regarding race/class/bodies/all-the-others-I'm-neglecting-to-write-here. So while there are many ways this can manifest itself in individuals, some more common than others, being queer is about BELIEFS, not BEHAVIORS."
Thanks
I think that it is inherently problematic to separate out categories into little boxes as rooster just mentioned. I think that being queer is not defined by who or how you're fucking today, but the experiences and feelings and thoughts you experience throughout your life. I think that by saying queer equals not cis straight people means one of two things: I need a clearer definition of what queer equals, or a clearer definition of what being straight is. Is queer who you're sleeping with, your politics, who you admit to fucking, who you want to be fucking, the sex you are having, or the sex you wish you were having? Is it about another person, or an act (to bring Donkey's use of GSMs back into the equation)? I think that having strong reactions about use of language and the ownership of words is something to be examined. Queer means something different than it did a generation ago, and language is something (like our sexuality!) that is always changing and modifying. It's not black and white, and we have to become comfortable in a shade of gray.
beliefs not behaviors. that is for me.
queerness is different from gayness in my mind. gay, is something cultural yes, but it is centered around who you are doing it with. but i use this word because as a younger queer, "gay" felt like the umbrella term to my straight > bi > dyke > straightish trajectory. i just knew there was something "gay" taking place. since then, i have found community, and ways of talking, of flagging, of making the books i read and the businesses i choose to support with my queerly-earned dollars all be QUEER.
donkey's initial post stirred something in me that connected queer to coolness (qoolness?) in terms of my mid-thirties experience with exclusionary actions within the queer community. i was once out with a group of folks who talked about being EDP (you know, Elite Dyke Posse)... and then i threw up everywhere and was never invited back. Thank god. When there is a pecking order within an oppressed community, i fear that we're just living out cycles of oppression again. That well-learned lesson that you've made it once you're standing on the back of someone else. Dammit, some of this is about being kind to one another in my mind. I was recently at a Being Queer Saved My Life reading and the organizer reminded us all to go over and sit next to queer folks and say hi if you see them in need. To connect with your community as queer civic duty. It may be woo-woo but i believe in the idea of taking care of my queer family because there's already so much against us. And if someone comes out as queer in the world, they will instantly have to dodge some slings and barbs; i choose to stand with them.
While I disagree, what Bunny so thoughtfully said gave me pause: "And that includes being respectful of the fact that sometimes a cultural ecosystem needs to be territorial in order to insure its survival. Separatism isn't the answer, but neither is naive well-intentioned blind inclusiveness." I don't think that folks having a queer experience could demolish the queer world because the queer world (in some iteration) will always be. And I don't think it's blind inclusiveness to give extra chances to folks who queer-identify- because as Charlie said, it's about the experiences that you have throughout your life- i could never look at a person in a bar, on the bus, at work or in any passing moment and assume I've seen them through their life and say for them "you are not queer enough."
i could never look at a person in a bar, on the bus, at work or in any passing moment and assume I've seen them through their life and say for them "you are not queer enough."
But this is a straw man. No one is saying, "you, there! I can tell you're not queer!"
We're saying if you know that you are straight and cis, then please don't co-opt our identity. Call yourself an ally, call yourself radical, call yourself a feminist, etc--or better yet, be an ally and a radical and a feminist, etc.
Why is it necessary to take this word, this once ugly, violent word that is still ugly and violent to a lot of people? What good does it do to steal it? Why do straight cis people need to call themselves queer instead of just accepting that they're straight and cis and trying to be allies in a way that doesn't appropriate our lived experience?
This is a good discussion!
I don't advocate policing anyone's right to identify as queer, that's deeply personal. I agree there can be a tendency in minority communities towards elitism and being judgmental, especially towards outsiders. That's problematic, especially for someone who is going through the scary and vulnerable process of coming out, only to find that their newly-discovered tribe isn't always the most easily welcoming. People do need to recognize this, and not behave in a way that's likely to edge out newcomers who might have something valuable to contribute, who might have nowhere else to go.
That said, there have been a few comments in this thread about shades of grey and how queer is a system of belief etc. which I take exception to. We can have a great theoretical discussion about the various nuances of queer identity, but thing is, identity isn't just who we think we are: it's an intersection of our self image, with how we are perceived by others. If I openly flag as queer, it might get me invited to some great parties, but it also could mean (depending on where I live and other factors) I could lose my job, or get evicted, or be the target of physical violence, and generally be treated as a second-class citizen in hundreds of ways both implicit and explicit. For most of society, queer is pretty fucking black and white.
To be sure, everybody has their own unique little mix of privilege and oppression, and it doesn't do anybody any good to fixate on being victimized. But people should be respectful of the difference between speaking up in support of someone, as opposed to presuming to speak on someone's behalf. If we broaden the definition of queer to "open minded radicals who like Lady Gaga" -- and don't make an effort to learn and teach about Stonewall, Harvey Milk, ACT UP, Gertrude Stein, James Baldwin, Josephine Baker, Quentin Crisp, "On Our Backs", William S. Burroughs, Virginia Woolf's "Orlando" (to name a very few) -- there's a danger of some beautifully empowering history and culture getting relegated to the footnotes.
To casually presume "the queer world will always be" is to overlook that the accessibility and variety of queer culture in the US today is, historically, utterly unheard of. To lose sight of the richness and delicate nature of a culture can endanger that culture; let's not forget that even in industrialized educated nations in the 21st century, it is appallingly common for queerness to be met with prison, corrective rape, or death.
There's another concern at the opposite end of the spectrum, of queer getting absorbed into the mainstream -- of society bending queer culture to conform, rather than accommodating its difference. The two big equality issues over the past few years, the right to military service and to marry, are two of the most wildly un-queer things I can imagine. They're important, and major change can't happen overnight, but all too often the debate is couched in terms of "queers should be free to be just like everybody else", rather than "queers should be free to be themselves".
I watched the documentary "Small Town Gay Bar" a week or two ago, which is about gay bars in rural Mississippi. There's a part where they talk to some people who fondly remember a bar that's now closed, which started out as a veritable anything-goes queer paradise, but over time it got more popular, and more people showed up because they wanted to check out the freak show and not because it was family, and the bar couldn't survive under those conditions. Even at events today with a major queer presence (of which are but a precious few in most places), I see pansexual / polyamorous / etc. folks behaving in ways which aren't always the most respectful or understanding towards queer experience, in ways which are likely to make queer folks uncomfortable or edged out. By and large these people are friendly and accepting, and I'm glad to have them around as allies, to mutually share and learn from one another's experience. But people in the broader alt-sex community need to be aware that queer isn't just a fashion statement plus a checklist of political and sexual practices, it's also and identity and community that is frequently a necessity for survival.