Leaving the U this morning to come home from class I began to think about my place in the queer community, my gender, my privelage, my erasing, my assimilation. We move in such a visual world that is is impossible for us not to see the differences between us. Why is it then, that so many people believe that they know no gay people? Statistically speaking, there is most likely at least one gay person for every nine in the world, a statistic which is slightly problematic as it refers to sexual practice instead of sexual identity. How, then do "invisiblize" these bodies from our consciousness? What is it that gay people themselves use as gaydar? Why can't heterosexuals see this as well? Is there something in the unconscious erasing of sexuality that is taught to us when we are younger that erases these qualities for some and intesifies them for others? I couldn't help but wonder if queerness really can be seen in the body and how people attempt to erase it or ignore it.
I decided to conduct my own social experiment while getting off the city bus while on my way home from class one day. I was wearing purple skinny jeans, a rainbow hat, a houndstooth scarf, big white sunglasses...really, the excess which I would define as queer, was readily visible and seen. Walking to my next bus stop to catch my transfer, a group of "thug"ish men walked by and one said mockingly "nice pants." I smiled coquettishly, replying "Thanks." I shifted my plans, deciding to take a walk down Nicollet mall, the center of Minneapolis downtown and the heart of the business world, performing my sexuality loud and proud.
What I found as I walked was neither alarming nor new, at least not to a gay man who's dealt with these glares since 5th grade. My posture was pristine, my strides long and confident, no one could stop me. I decided to walk four blocks on the streets, where I received a good amount of attention. People would stare, smile, laugh, snicker, get on their cell phones. Several people even talked to their friends about me, as if I couldn't hear them, but my presence was acknowledged.
When I decided to move up to the skyways, the downtown traffic network for business, corporation types where I was noticeably erased. It was as if I wasn't there. The few looks I did get were quickly averted, looking at the ground as they walked by. Even the other men and women who I would've identified as queer and would've normally made eye contact with would erase me and fail to make a connection. What made these people so different than those on the streets? How was I so easily erased and invisiblized?
This idea of invisibility is key to the histories of those who have been ignored, erased, and pushed to the streets. Whose history do we read in the books? That of the middle class, skyway-business types or that of the queer man walking through them? Bodies do not just slip through the cracks, falling off the historical map, they are pushed into them, writing them out of their own histories.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I just wanted to further problematize a few of your ideas/questions...
To complicate your statements about gay-day, how do you explain hetersexuals that are able to locate or pinpoint homosexuals using this gaydar? How can homosexuals who are inept at identifying other homosexuals explained? How does the panorama of other sexual-orientation labels factor into this idea of gay-dar? What does it mean for a gay man to identity and be correct in his assumption that another person is bisexual, not exclusively gay or straight?
Maybe it plays into levels of pheromones, or just reading stereotyped mannerisms...
I also want to point out that at several points, you convolute sexual orientation and gender (identity and performativity, at times). In your statement "performing my sexuality loud and proud." I'm somewhat perplexed. You weren't having sexual relations with another male-bodied person while walking down the street... you were pushing against several gender boundaries in the way that you were dressed (transgressing standard/approved male-associated items of clothing via color and fit, as well as combinations of items), and while this could fall under the category of queer, I wouldn't personally associate it with sexuality.
Also, your mannerisms, at least in your description: "My posture was pristine, my strides long and confident, no one could stop me." could probably be use to describe many of the business-people you later went on to describe. Confidence, faux or real, can be a tricky thing to measure in others.
I just want to caution you on your perceptions and labeling of others as anything, especially queer. there is a lot of history with that word, and many communities haven't re-appropriated it (especially many communities of color, disability, and some women's groups). Judging how others interact with you should only be done by what you observe... said from the perspective of an anthropologist-in-training... your statement of: "Even the other men and women who I would've identified as queer and would've normally made eye contact with would erase me and fail to make a connection." jumps to several conclusions about "normality" - how do you know they would have made eye-contact if you were dressed another way? did you walk down the same path in a different outfit? maybe they just didn't interact with their surroundings, including other people, as many people downtown do in my past experiences do.
Just try to keep these things in mind, and keep work on breaking apart/analyzing assumptions and observations. I didn't intend, and I hope this did not come off as authoritarian or pompous, just some things I wanted to share and point out from the perspective of someone who has had similar experiences, done my own studies and have been involved in a range of arenas and organizations that interact with many of these issues.
I look forward to reading more of your discoveries :-)
~Ryan~
i think you bring up an interesting concept with the whole "why do people feel like we need to invisibilize", but the issue, I think, goes beyond GLBT issues.
The problem I always feel with queer theory is that, while queer theory, by some definitions (and understand, my knowledge of queer theory IS only limited to a few simple definitions that I could not attribute to anyone in particular), is a study of the "bizarre" or at least, "abnormal" in terms of conventional society, I think that goes beyond GLBT.
I have a friend, like yourself (in terms of diving into the queer theory quite extensively) and half the time when I listen to his monologues he writes based in this perspective, or his research-esque papers, it so excludes the possibility that some of the issues within queer theory relate to the heterosexual community as much as it can the homosexual community.
I just feel it's dangerous to alienate parts of the heterosexual community that can be just as "queer" as the homosexual community because of generalizes made at the heterosexual community.
I believe a more accurate term would be to label it queer and non-queer (while the term queer definitely has connotations of homosexuality, and it is often assumed that queer theory is always dealing with homosexual theory, it doesn't HAVE to be, by some definitions).
I just am afraid that further digging a divide between the two communities of homosexuals and heterosexuals will only further your feelings of alienation, rather than building a bridge that you can identify with all levels of humanity.
I can agree with you that there are people who work very hard to maintain the status quo, and are condemning of those who stray (either homosexual or heterosexual. Just think of goth kids, emo kids, theatre kids [straight as well as homosexual]), it's more than just a homosexual issue.
Post a Comment