Wednesday, January 29, 2014

More Definitions: Queer Theory*, what is it?


There has been some work by feminist and lesbian scholars...


"... Increasing numbers of people today, even within the Church, are bringing enormous pressure to bear on the Church to accept the homosexual condition as though it were not disordered ..." - CDF



Many people do not understand the origins or roots of the 'new' theories on gender and sexuality - so I will occasionally print a sort of glossary of terms, to help the interested - albeit confused - ordinary person understand some of the sources. 

Queer theory is a field of post-structuralist critical theory that emerged in the early 1990s out of the fields of queer studies and women's studies. Queer theory includes both queer readings of texts and the theorisation of 'queerness' itself. Heavily influenced by the work of Gloria AnzaldúaEve Kosofsky SedgwickJudith ButlerJosé Esteban Muñoz, and Lauren Berlant, queer theory builds both upon feminist challenges to the idea that gender is part of the essential self and upon gay/lesbian studies' close examination of the socially constructed nature of sexual acts and identities. Whereas gay/lesbian studies focused its inquiries into natural and unnatural behaviour with respect to homosexual behaviour, queer theory expands its focus to encompass any kind of sexual activity or identity that falls into normative and deviant categories. Italian feminist and film theorist Teresa de Lauretis coined the term "queer theory" for a conference she organized at the University of California, Santa Cruz in 1990 and a special issue of Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies she edited based on that conference.

"Queer focuses on mismatches between sex, gender and desire. For most, queer has prominently been associated with simply those who identify as lesbian and gay. Unknown to many, queer is in association with more than just gay and lesbian, but also cross-dressing, hermaphroditism, gender ambiguity and gender-corrective surgery." Karl Ulrich's model, he understood homosexuality to be an intermediate condition, a 'third sex' that combined physiological aspects of both masculinity and femininity.

"Queer is a product of specific cultural and theoretical pressures which increasingly structured debates (both within and outside the academy) about questions of lesbian and gay identity" - Source



Queer theory is closely related to gender theory, which together form the foundation of a new philosophy of sexuality, something Pope Benedict XVI warned about:

 According to this new theory of sexuality “people dispute the idea that they have a nature, given by their bodily identity… They deny their nature and decide that it is not something previously given to them, but that they make it for themselves.” If the duality between man and woman ceases to exist, the Pope explained, then “neither is the family any longer a reality established by creation. - Source 
Words have meaning - yet modern philosophers love to play with the meaning of meaning - which I compare to sleight of hand, or shell games when it comes to discussions on gender and sexuality as 'social constructs'.

"The Church's ministers must ensure that homosexual persons in their care will not be misled by this point of view, so profoundly opposed to the teaching of the Church. But the risk is great and there are many who seek to create confusion regarding the Church's position, and then to use that confusion to their own advantage." - CDF





*Queer theory is a field of critical theory that emerged in the early 1990s out of the fields of LGBT studies and feminist studies. It is a kind of interpretation devoted to queer readings of texts. Heavily influenced by the work of Jacob Edwards, queer theory builds both upon feminist challenges to the idea that gender is part of the essential self and upon gay/lesbian studies' close examination of thesocially constructed nature of sexual acts and identities. Whereas gay/lesbian studies focused its inquiries into "natural" and "unnatural" behavior with respect to homosexual behavior, queer theory expands its focus to encompass any kind of sexual activity or identity that falls into normative and deviant categories. - Source

9 comments:

  1. Words are being cut off on the right side and I'm having difficulty figuring out what some of them are.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm not sure what happened so I edited the template.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That's why I love Pope Benedict so much. He was timely, relevant, direct, and succinct in his analysis and criticism. He always strikes at the heart of the issue. Almost always, he identifies the assault on true religion, which is post modernism. It pains me when I hear him criticized as someone who is retrograde in his thinking. I think no one is more contemporary or relevant in his thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ABC-DEF-GHI-JKL-MNOP-QRSTUV-WXYZ
    It's the most remarkable word I've ever seen
    ABC-DEF-GHI-JKL-MNOP-QRSTUV-WXYZ
    I wish I knew exactly what I mean
    It starts out like an "A" word as anyone can see
    But somewhere in the middle it gets awful "QR" to me....

    ReplyDelete
  5. I like the new look, Ter.

    ReplyDelete
  6. A new look Terry...always keeping up to date. By the way, that broad in the picture has a lot of uh, "gumption," doing that to a nun. I think there was quite a bit of eraser cleaning that was done after that one.

    According to this new theory of sexuality “people dispute the idea that they have a nature, given by their bodily identity… They deny their nature and decide that it is not something previously given to them, but that they make it for themselves.” If the duality between man and woman ceases to exist, the Pope explained, then “neither is the family any longer a reality established by creation. -

    Benedict is extremely intelligent man ..not disputing that or his intentions. However, he indulges in the same kind of theoretical babble the queer studies people do...(and thank God I never had to take one of those classes, my eyes would be crossed from rolling them all the time.). No one is disputing their nature..quite the opposite of it. I know for a fact that I was born gay and never had any interest in girls...nothing twisted me on the way to make me gay or "confuse," me or make me deny my nature (quite the opposite.) The Church is asking people to deny their nature by twisting their sexuality into something they politicaly correctly try to call "disordered" (i.e "Your a big FREAK..") Benedict, while not trying to, comes of as a condescending straight person..(which the Church fathers often do) who has no clue what it is like for a gay person and their sexuality. Unfortunately this doesnt achieve what the Church wants to (I truly to believe the Church has nothing but good intentions toward gay people, it is just misguided by human perception on misunderstanding) quite the opposite.

    As for those queer study fruitcakes...

    Karl Ulrich's model, he understood homosexuality to be an intermediate condition, a 'third sex' that combined physiological aspects of both masculinity and femininity.

    "Queer is a product of specific cultural and theoretical pressures which increasingly structured debates (both within and outside the academy) about questions of lesbian and gay identity" -

    and the paragraph above it..what the hell does that even mean??? Both sides of the debate frame their arguments so densely only a theology expert or a academic could ever understand them. Its not that confusing, I am just a guy who likes guys. Nothing special, I don't feel feminine at all or if I am a "third," sex...(what the hell is that..someone with a combo of sexual organs...a he/she???)

    No wonder the kids today don't listen to either side.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry everyone didn't put proper quotes where they should have been.

      Delete
  7. I think this is a little hysterical now, Terry. You're making it sound like Queer Theory is a particular ideology. It's not. It is the STUDY of gender and sexuality in their socially constructed aspects. It's not ultimately saying "this is good" or "this is bad." It's just studying (and, yes, that involves to some degree "dissecting," deconstructing, or "looking behind the curtain") the concepts and how they have played out across history, in different cultures, among different people, etc.

    Your position almost seems to be "ignore that man behind the curtain!" as if this is an area where we should not indulge thought-experiments, or gain any sort of cross-cultural or long-historical perspective because to do so is to realize that, well, "nothing is created as fast as a tradition" and that many of the "essentialist" assumptions about men's roles or women's roles are absolutely contingent historically and malleable.

    But I'd point out this applies to sexual orientation too. Mark Malone speaks of "gay nature." I think that sort of essentialism is naive too. One can be an out and proud (and liberal) gay and still be a Social Constructionist when it comes to sexual orientation, because frankly that isn't even incompatible with biological ideas. Biology may provide the "raw material," but human beings always INTERPRET matter through a lens of language that is the product of culture and history. A set of characters doesn't mean anything "intrinsically." Meaning is always the product of a network of people and ideas; an author in a community intends a meaning by his symbols, a reader understands them in a community too, but time and distance can cause this to evolve.

    And this is profoundly Catholic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I enjoy your comments - I suppose I do sound a bit hysterical.

      Delete


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.