Queer Politics as Radical Democratic Citizenship?

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. bluesmokeofparadise says:

    Thanks for this working definition.

    I admit that I am wary of discussions which seek to entirely dislocate gender from the body: it seems to me a further development of male paradigms which in the long run harm the female body, and therefore women’s lives.

    For example, we know that women at least 5 times (but please don’t quote me on that) than men to die from a heart attack, because for decades medicine has ignored symptomatic differentials between men’s and women’s cardiac arrest.

    Moreover, at the risk of inappropriately essentializing, I see much of this radical dislocation between life lived in the body and social discourse (the formation of culture) as being driven by “male” paradigms.

    That written, such discussions force us to question and evaluate what is given as “male” and “female,” and in what ways we can incorporate notions of the particular (gender specificity) and the universal (hermanity) in meaningful ways.

    Working against something is counterproductive; rather, we should strive to work towards an evolving more inclusive and enlightened society.

    Enjoy this blog immensely, and thank you for linking to mine.

  2. kiyallsmith says:

    The norms of marriage are shifting radically outside of California, as more state within the US allow same-sex marriage. I wonder how this will impact both queer politics and the same-sex marriage movements? When will this be a hurdle and when will it be an advantage?


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *