On Queer theory: Part 1

[Siddharth Chatterjee <siddhart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 25 Apr 1996, Gary MacLennan wrote:

> In an attempt to get the debate on homosexuality and Marxism moving I
> thought i would begin the long promised series of posts on queer theory.  I
> have to say frankly that such is the level of homophobia on this list that I
> do not think it is a task worth undertaking but there may be who knows some
> sympathisers among the lurkers and besides, Doug, Louis, Rakesh, Jorn, Jeff,
> Lisa, Robert, Rahul  and others have been decent and supportive in the best
> tradition of Marxist progressivism. Besides it also might just be possible
> that I am not the only gay on this list. Certainly looks like it though.

You once again level the charge of homophobia against some list members
without any justification. Are you implying that people who take a
"critical" view of the gay liberation movement are in the same boat as
the christian fundamentalists and the far-right who advocate bannings
and attacks on gay people? For the nth time I repeat that all such
attacks from the right wing should be met head on and gay people who
are attacked by the right should be defended. But that does not mean
that all movements of gays for what is called "liberation" should be
given blanket support. You have side-stepped the question of reactionary
gays like the Log-Cabin republicans. What attitude will you take towards
gay people siding with reaction? Should the fact that they are gay
make them inmmune from all criticism? That is, being gay by itself, makes
one belong to the most advanced section of the proletariat?
It can be dangerous sometimes to forget the issue of class. What about
gay hedonism like the clubs in the big cities where orgies take place?
A gay orgy is a sign of liberation? (A similar reasoning would
hold for straight orgies - however here the issue is gay liberation). If
it is, then the senators of Ancient Rome and the Greeks were fighting
for emancipation of the working class.
>
> 1. In June 1993 there was an extremely fiery meeting in Sydney where a row
> broke out between the "queers" and the "gays".  the issue seems to have been
> whether bisexuals or transexuals should have been allowed into the movement.
> the queers were tossed out and the gays won the day.  I was at the time
> particularly interested to theorise what the dispute was about.  My long
> term goal was then as always to try and construct both a theoretical and a
> practical interface between Marxism and gay politics.  It is just such an
> interface which I believe was in operation in russia before the advent of
> Stalin's rule.

Could you further elaborate on the difference between "queers" and
"gays"? Also what was in operation in Russia before Stalin? That is,
what was the concrete form of gay society in pre 1934 Russia.


> Isaac Julien's story of how he persuaded the distributors of his film "Young
> Soul Rebels to go with a poster of the  black and white man kissing in bed
> and how this move increased audinece sales, is I believe a paradigmatic case
> (Rich, 1992: 31)
>
> For gays the transition from Feared - Despised to Exotic Other does
> represent a leapforward but it is a circumscribed one.  As long as we can
> put on an act, as long as we are unusual then we have the only kind of value
> that capitalism knows -market value and the only kind of acceptance that it
> has to offer, that of being a marketable commodity.
>
> Gays and lesbians are of course conscious of this.  For instance Christine
> Vanchon, the producer of "Swoon" and "Poison" is very aware that the
> interest in Queer cinema is motivated by money.   As she puts it "suddenly
> there's a spotlight that says these flims can be commercially viable".
> eschews no profit, or very small profit, just as nature was formerly said to
> abhor a vacuum, with adequate profit capital is very bold. (Marx, 1974: 712)
---------
> Like Vachon the organisers of Mardi gras understand the economic imperatives
> involved.  thus in 1992 they commissioned a study which showed that Mardi
> Gras injects millions into the Australian economy and that it is more
> successful than other festivals in Australia. (Harris b 1993)

This commodification described above is similar to that going on with
certain aspects of Black culture, e.g., the phenomena of "gangsta" rap
where the giant music companies are making a fortune by selling it to
millions of teenagers. Many on the left call this music "liberating"
and quote its lyrics in their pages since it came from the "ghetto".
A person making any sort of criticism of such music is immediately
labelled a "racist". A closer analysis of rap music reveals that it
is not uniform. There are millionaire rap hucksters whose lyrics are
full of lumpen language, hatred and demeaning against women which
the liberal left find quite fashionable to support (simlarly, the
Beatles can be considered to be "young rebels"). There is however a
strain in rap music which is political but which has a small base.
So is the picture of a black and white man in bed truly revolutionary
or is it mere showmanship?

-------------->
> Many people interiorise the identiy given to them by straights.   On this
> list Marxist contributors have attempted to push the equation of homosexual
> = pedophile and suggested that homosexuality is equvialent in moral terms to
> incest and that a state could be justifed in criminalising homosexuality.

Once again you make a false accusation. No one said that homosexuality =
pedophilia. What was asked was what was your attitide towards NAMBLA
(North American Man Boy Love Association). You have not taken a position
on this yet. It is well known that pedophilia (homo and hetero) is a
very profitable business. Thailand's biggest foreign exchange earnings
may be from the sex industry. Also you seem to morally condemn incest.
Why? If incest occurs voluntarily (say between two siblings), why should
it be suppressed by society according to your liberatory logic? That
is why the question of INCEST LIBERATION (liberation for people who
practise incest and who are condemned by society) was posed. No
satisfactory answer yet. You see, this is bourgeois logic taken to
its ultimate conclusion. Would it ADVANCE or RETARD the cause of freedom
for human society AS A WHOLE if incest was widely practiced?
Another example of liberal logic taken to its extreme conclusion is
the concept of competition whose glories are constantly sung. Take this
concept and apply it to the fundamental unit of modern society - the
family. What would happen? Since in general Father is physically stronger
than Mother and children, Dad would take every thing - Mom and children
would starve. Bourgeois society would collapse! And on its ashes, a new
society would be built!

> The result of such attacks from the dominant straight world is generally is
> destructive self loathing among gays.  The gay movement of the seventies
> understood this very well, hence the slogan "Gay is good".
>
> Of course  being a member of such a wonderful list as Marxism1 makes it all
> so different.
>

It is a difficult to understand what is meant by "queer" theory from
your post. A theory is an effort to correlate natural or historical facts
and it is not clear what exactly you are trying to explain. Finally, I am
sincerely sorry for making you sorrowful. Please don't me so mournful.
After all, we are still alive!.





     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---