Essay 1 - Grade: A PDF

Preview

Summary

first essay...

Description

Lee 1

Bridget Lee Professor Heather Love GSWS 096 10 October 2018

A New Form Strategic Politics

Queer politics, historically, have emphasized the simple dichotomies between the heterosexual and everything queer — all heterosexuals are dominant and queers are invisible. However, in Cathy Cohen’s piece, “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens: The Radical Potential of Queer Politics?,” she rejects the idea of queer politics as a simple dichotomy. Cohen puts forth a more radical idea in which a “queer identity” is not just about being not heterosexual. She believes that a queer identity, as well as a heterosexual identity, is more complicated and fundamentally integrated with other aspects of an individual’s identity. Consequently, she promotes a heteronormative understanding of power rather than heterosexual. Heteronormativity suggests an integrated relationship between heterosexuality and both race and class — in which white and upper/middle class heterosexual identities are considered the norm. The coded forms of class, gender, and race privileges in queer politics are already integrated factors of intersectional identities in which Cohen suggests should be used as interconnected sites of resistance in organizing transformational political work. While queer politics have long been used as a tool to challenge the heterosexual norms and powers associated with being heterosexual, Cohen recognizes the power differences that still exist within both the two categories -- even within heterosexuality. If queer politics continues to

Lee 2

be about opposing heterosexuality as a dominating power force, the system of resistance and power dominations will not change and inherently ignores the differing privileges even within the realms of being heterosexual. For instance, in the article, Cohen points out the moment in history in which heterosexual African American slaves were forbidden to marry. Heterosexual couples were not allowed to get married interracially. Heterosexual women, often African American of Latino, are depicted as incapable of controlling their sexual desires and are conceived with “illegitimate children” are denied of welfare as a result of their perceived “inability” to manage state assistance. Through the lens of viewing “queer” as a binary (heterosexual versus queer), situations such as these often get ignored and are left unrecognized. Heterosexuality does not define every heterosexual identity’s power status as “more dominant.” And in some situations, some homosexuals have more power than heterosexuals. Through history, it is rather the white supremacy lens, in which, is used to oppress anyone who does not fit the white, upper-middle class heterosexual identity (39). But viewing situations as heterosexual versus all else, often gets caught in a system in which only focuses on just oppression based on sexuality. In reality, this method is at risk of generalizing every nonheterosexual individual as holding the same amount of rights and that it is only the difference in sexual preferences that sets them apart. Cathy Cohen uses this basis to argue that a single identity politics that create binaries are not effective and pushes for a politics in which multiple components of identity interplays in one’s position in society. Furthermore, Cohen explains how multiple components of one’s identity is important to recognize because it can play a role in how some individuals adopt a certain identity for survival. Queer theorizing is often guilty of suggesting everyone who does not fit under the heterosexual identity should be a part of this new political force, abandoning all historical and traditional

Lee 3

forms of identity: “queers who operate out of a political culture of individualism assume a material independence that allows them to disregard historically or culturally recognized categories and communities or, at the very least, to move fluidly among them without ever establishing permanent relationships or identities within them” (34). Cohen makes the point that since one’s identities are interconnected, it is often difficult to separate a specific identity to use as the sole factor in mobilizing a discussion that forgets about the other identities that are already defined as a product of existing in a society that inherently creates categories. Especially, as queer theorists critique the family structure as one of the most harmful concepts that threaten the development of non heterosexual identities, people who are non heterosexual are expected to stand against it. However, this queer theory of “fluidity” is not always available to everyone. For instance, economically disadvantaged queers cannot just abandon their families. But focusing in on just differences in sexuality puts at risk in undermining unequal rights based on income levels in which can be crucial in which people who are just as oppressed in the realms of sexuality are not able to participate in activist movements because of other withholding factors such as their class status in society. With this in mind, Cohen emphasizes the importance in recognizing the inherent interconnectedness of race, class, gender, and sexuality. There is no system of power domination that is related to just one. Rather, Cathy Cohen contends a strategic organization against heteronormativity, against the white upper middle class ideal, in which can include all people who are oppressed by one dominant force of power. This organization, however, should not be just about asking for equal rights. While single identity politics like the gay liberation movement argues for equal rights, Cathy Cohen rather suggests a coalition politics in which challenges the fundamental structure and system of hierarchies. Single identity politics are prone to the risk of asking for assimilation where

Lee 4

marginalized groups choose to inhabit in the hierarchical society dominated by white upper middle class heterosexuals and are only asking for similar privileges. But what Cohen is interested in is the aim for a radical transformation of society, where the hierarchical society dominated by white upper middle class heterosexuals should be broken and replaced by a society based on a coalition of economically disadvantaged, imprisoned, highly stigmatized, marginalized groups in society. Cohen emphasizes some of the marginal positions of those who do define themselves as heterosexual in order to point out that she “recognize[s] the potential for shared resistance with such individuals” (36). Thus, this shared resistance should be a foundational grounds of a transformational politics. The coalition politics, Cathy Cohen suggests, is a more powerful and useful organizing tool in abandoning the restrictions of a power dominated society based on the normativity of white upper middle class heterosexuals. She proposes a form of politics that is focused on all communities that are being oppressed by the effects of heteronormativity: “...I am suggesting here that the process of movement building to be rooted not in our shared history or identity but in our shared marginal relationship to dominant power that normalizes, legitimizes, and privileges” (43). In this way, she recommends searching for specific interconnected sites of resistance that has the potential of waging broader political struggles. For instance, AIDS activism and prison activism, where multiple forms of oppression are present. For instance, Cohen highlights a focus on a coalition against the power force that denied wealthy gay men were denied access to drugs to combat HIV and AIDS is the same as the one that denied basic healthcare to those incarcerated. She desires a form of organization in which different identities who are being affected by the same power of government can come together against it. However, she complicates this idea by recognizing the fact that, in the same way that not

Lee 5

all people who identify under the same category within race, class, gender, and sexuality share equal rights, people who are potential allies in the battle against heteronormativity do not hold equal rights as well. There will be people who identify as a dominant type frequently more than others. Just because people are fighting against the same target, it does not mean they have to share the exact same kind of oppression. Rather, in Cathy Cohen’s words, she is calling, “...for the destabilization and radical politicalization of [traditionally named] categories [of identities and communities]” (45). It is breaking above the comfortable position of simple dichotomies and recognizing the multiple social relationships to the dominant power position that is relevant in any category of our identities. It is recognizing the intersectionality that belongs to everyone and understanding that an identity that may make people feel like they belong in society it is important to utilize that in challenging other parts of their identity that may be oppressed by the same society. In this way, the organization for political strategies against the dominant positions of power includes all of those who feel or have felt neglected or oppressed by these existing structures of power.

Works Cited

Cohen, Cathy J. “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens: The Radical Potential of Queer Politics?” GLQ 3 (1997): 437-465....