Jaime Bellemare WGS 400 Final Paper May 10, 2011 An Exploration of Munozs Disidentifications

INTRODUCTION Disidentification is a strategy of survival and resistance, often utilized by queers of color. Within dominant culture, minoritized bodies often go without representation making it difficult to place oneself in history and community. By reworking these dominant images, disidentification allows subjects to find a source of identity, and a space to situate oneself to find social agency (Muoz, 1). This paper will explore disidentifications and disidentification theory as explained by Jos Esteban Muoz. In order to create a working definition of disidentification and its uses I will examine the ways in which disidentification has been taken up by people in particular social locations. Focusing on the intersections of race, gender and sexuality, I will examine the ways in which subjects employ disidentification as a way to understand identity in a culture that provides little representation for those outside of the majoritarian sphere. In order to do this I will look closely at the examples used by Muoz and then find a contemporary image, which could possibly be taken up by queers of color as a source of disidentification. Considering the way that Muoz places disidentification theory in relation to social constructionism and essentialism, I will then carefully look at the limits of these theoretical models and their application in daily life. In doing so, I hope to break the

binary relationship that is often created between social constructionist theory and essentialism to show that disidentification works to fill a gap created by these two popular theories.

WORKING TOWARD A DEFINITION Disidentification is a way of survival, a means of resistance, and a strategy of claiming identity. Muoz writes, Disidetification is meant to be descriptive of the survival strategies the minority subject practices in order to negotiate a phobic majoritatian public sphere that continuously elides or punishes the existence of subjects who do not conform to the phantasm of normative citizenship (Muoz, 4). Breaking this definition down, it seems that Muoz is exploring how subjects who are not represented in dominant culture are able to find representation and community that does not reiterate negative stereotypes and assumptions created by the majority. For those who do not fit within the normative identification space, disidentifying becomes an active way of manipulating normative representations for ones own use. In a culture that actively works against and simultaneously ignores people of color and queer identities, disidentification allows minoritized bodies the possibility to work through the impossible dominant culture that is so clearly represented through art, media, academia, public and political spheres. Muoz represents disidentification as a way for minoritized subjects to take up these dominant images and transfigure them as sources of resistance and representation of queer bodies. Through these representations, queers of color are given the tools needed to understand the power and shame of

queerness while imagining a world where queer lives, politics and possibilities are represented in their complexity. (Muoz, 4, 1). This is not to say that disidentifying allows subjects to pick and choose from sources of identification to find a representation that fits. It allows one to rework the identification and accept the need for interjection without accepting the negative components that one may associate with the identification source. Rather than identifying with a dominant culture or attempting to break free from the pressures of such culture, disidentification works to transform a cultural logic from within (Muoz, 11). This rethinking of identity allows minoritized subjects to empower their own identity, while disempowering the belief that such identification is impossible (Muoz, 31). This allows for a progression toward social and structural change, while still understanding and appreciating the everyday struggles that queer of color people face and the ways in which resistance is employed. The every day recognition that one does not identify with the dominant culture becomes a source of identifying.

INFLUENCING THEORY Disidentiication utilizes a framework of identities-in-difference that Muoz borrows from Third World feminist and women of color, especially Chicana, theorists who have expanded identity, looking at the intersections of race (Muoz, 6). These theories point to an agreement that an adequate theoretical framework and representation to understand the intersectionality of identity has not yet been reached. Through this negation emerges an understanding of identity that disidentifies with the dominant culture creating a counterpublic space.

Cherre Moraga and Glora Anzaldas This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color plays an influential role in the workings of Muoz. Bridge calls on gender theory to look at the intersections of class, race, gender, sexuality, etc. creating a disidentification with previous writings that focused solely on women collectively identifying as female. In ignoring the complexity of identity, former writings created a default representation of women as white, heterosexual, middle class, able bodied, etc therefore not confronting white supremacy and heteronormativity (Muoz, 26). Disidentification, as explained by Muoz, draws on revisionary identification, which Muoz explains as an effort to hold together different parts of identification that have been typically viewed separately (Muoz, 26). Through revisionary identification, subjects are able to look at their social location in a new way that accounts for multiple ways of viewing. Muoz also draws from Foucaldian theory in order to oppose the conception of power as being a fixed discourse (Muoz, 19). Disidentification relies on strategies of resistance and negotiation between systems of power and oppression. Recognizing that power is not stable gives room for subjects to disidentify and work against the structural roots of dominant identification systems.

A RELATION TO PSYCHOANALYSIS Many queer theorists do not take up psychoanalysis to examine the role it has played in forming contemporary theories and methods of identification. For most minoritized identities, psychoanalysis is a place of pain and frustration that offers little insight into understanding identity. However, Muoz discusses psychoanalysis and its

relation to disidentification theory, recognizing the important role that psychoanalysis has played in many other theoretical models of identity. Muoz places disidentification as an argument with, but not a complete rejection of, psychoanalytic studies (Muoz, 12). In fact, Muoz argues that one can have a disidentificatory relationship with psychoanalytic theory. It is no secret that pschoanalysis utilizes racism and homophobia in its exploration of identity through desire. Psychoanalytic theory relies on the compulsory heterosexuality set in place by Freud, which helps create a false dichotomy between desire and identification (Muoz, 13). Disidentification, on the other hand, separates out desire and identification, recognizing the possibilities of queer sexuality. Using psychoanalysis, there is a reliance on subjects to assimilate or align with a performed model; however, disidentification theory directly combats this creating room for identification even when a performed model is not present or through an identification of resistance (Muoz, 7). In doing this, disidentification makes rooms for queer bodies to exist outside of dominant gender constructions while psychoanalytic constructions of gender identitification eliminates the possibility of transgenders. Muoz does recognize that disidentification and psychoanalytic theory both examines the ways in which subjectivity is created in dominant cultural spaces in relation to identity. In doing this, psychoanalysis suggests that identification is full with possibilities of incorporation, diminishment, inflation, threat, loss, reparation and disabowal, while disidentification equally recognizes the complexities that exist with identification (Muoz, 8).

WHY DISIDENTIFICATION Individuals with privileged identities often have no need to work within and around identity in order to live within majoritarian space. Although these subjects are part of the culture that continuously pushes heteronormitivity, white supremacy and misogyny; the way in which they identify often correlate with this system making it unnecessary for these individuals to actively confront or resist such cultural forces in order to find a place within society. Minoritized subjects, however, can utilize disidentification in order to work toward building counterpublic spheres (Muoz, 5). For queer people of color, it may be necessary to work or resist within dominant culture spaces. Disidentification allows for this negotiation to take place, utilizing socially constructed images and roles in a way that creates identity outside of those boundaries. Disidentification also offers an alternative to previous models that keep individuals who are minoritized in multiple ways from accessing systems of identification. Many cultural studies and theoretical models utilize a single-issue identity politic that doesnt account for the convergences of race, sexuality, gender etc. Disidentification makes room for individuals to take up these systems of identification while negating certain aspects and utilizing others. In this way, queers of color are able to form identity in recognition that queer spaces have often ignored and intentionally left out people of color. By recognizing the intersection of race and sexuality, disidentification theory shows that it is necessary to discuss the ways in which multiple identities interact with each other for all individuals and not just those who have marginalized identities.

Through disidentifying, subjects are also able to avoid assimilationist attitudes without framing separatism as the only option to thrive outside of the dominant culture. Separatism, while problematic, also relies on privilege and it not accessible for those who do not have white privilege or class status (Muoz, 14). It also helps maintain the dominant social order. Therefore, the use of disidentification allows queers of color to exist within dominant space, which already helps to challenge the privilege utilized by the majoritiarian subject. Disidentification also exists to fill the gap created by other methods of identification. Queer theory has often utilized cross-identification which has been taken up as being both useful and dangerous. Muoz looks as the ways in which Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick uses cross-identification as an example of non-normative identification, while Judith Butler argues that crossing identity may result in erasure of what is considered dangerous or shameful (Muoz, 30). Disidentification responds to these two viewpoints by filling in the middle ground. Muoz puts forward disidentification as a way to understand the power and need of non-normative identification forms, creating new possibilities rather than losing objects of identification.

DISIDENTIFICATION IN ACTION Muoz utilizes many examples of disidentification in action in order to show the numerous possibilities of how disidentifying can be used as a source of identity. Many of these representations use disidentification as a process of production and a mode of performance that is able to dismantle images of dominant culture (Muoz, 25).

One of the examples that Muoz focuses on most is James Baldwins disidentification with Bette Davis. Baldwin, an African-American writer disidentified with Davis, a white actress who he found to be beautiful in a non-normative way. Baldwins disidentification with Davis was a survival strategy, in which he recognized that she was a wealthy white woman, but found a certain pleasure in the fact that she did not fit the image of what a white woman on television stereotypically should look like. Baldwin is able to see that he is outside the identity of this woman, however, he describes her movements as just like a nigger and uses this as way to position himself within the image of Davis (Muoz, 15). One of the examples that I found most interesting and helpful to me as I was trying to understand disidentification theory was that of gay men and opera divas (Muoz, 30). The self creation and performance strategies taken up by opera divas made them important sources of disidentification pre-Stonewall (Muoz,31). I found this example to be particularly interesting, because Muoz explains disidentification to be a performance based concept, and it seemed that the subjects disidentified with the opera divas around the sharing of that performance. It also seemed interesting because this is the one example in which race was not actively discussed, which made me wonder what type of day men were disidentifying with the opera divas. In studying how identification and disidentication are taken up in film theory, Manthia Diawara argues that the way in which bodies of color have been portrayed in dominant cinema portrays people of color for the pleasure of white spectators (Muoz, 28). Creating images that represent people of color fulfilling roles of white domesticity or losing within a dominant white culture allows for the white audience to go without having

their white privilege threatened. An example of this can be seen in the portrayal of queer men of color in the television series Noahs Arc. While the series might work to close a gap in the lack of queer people of color in mainstream media, it does so while portraying queer men of color in a way that conforms to stereotypical assumptions typically associated with white gay men. Noahs Arc does little to explore the intersection of race, gender and sexuality, but rather uses the bodies of black men to tell a story intended for a white male audience while intentionally white washing experiences of queer men of color. The show follows the lives of four African American men living in Los Angeles mainly focusing on their personal romantic relationships. The show has been described as a queer of color version of Sex in the City and it seems this comparison is fairly accurate. The men, although different, all fulfill a cultural stereotype associated with gay men and men of color. While Noah fulfills the effeminate gay male role, Alex is the loud and obnoxious group leader, Ricky is hypersexualized and Chance plays the successful and conservative family man. Many of these characters align themselves with homonormative ideals set in place largely by the dominant culture or white queer subculture. Despite this problematic portrayal of queer men of color, it is possible that Noahs Arc could serve as a source for disidentification. In recognizing the influence of dominant culture and whiteness on the way that these characters are portrayed, the minoritized group can read between the dominant texts lines to identify with the show while actively resisting the way in which black characters are being taken up by white domestication. Although the show rarely discusses the lived experience of what it means to be a queer person of color in a phobic majoritarian space, Noahs Arc still provides a

way for queer men of color to navigate through a dominant media that rarely represents options of identity outside of the white, middle class, heterosexual man.

USE OF SPACE: MAKING THE PRIVATE PUBLIC One of the concepts that I found most interesting in Muozs exploration of disidentification was the use of public versus private space. Muoz discusses multiple examples of disidentification in action, but some of these uses are taken up within the privacy of ones own self while others outwardly express their process of disidentifying. As discussed earlier, there are limitations to the use of visible resistance because it places one outside of the dominant culture in a way that may be recognizable to the majoritarian sphere. As Muoz begins his introduction to disidentification theory, he explores Marga Gomezs performances; particularly Marga Gomez is Pretty Witty and Gay. In the show, Gomez delivers a monologue from her bed, bringing the private queer bedroom into the dominant public space (Muoz, 1). In performing this queer of color identity within public, Gomez creates a counterpublic space open to minoritized bodies. Keeping with the example of Gomez, Muoz looks specifically at one part of Gomezs performance in which the public is utilized in the private identification space. As Gomez discusses a panel of lesbians on television, she disidentifies with the women, recognizing the homophobic portrayal of the women, but desires for a queer world (Muoz, 34). Gomez is able to identify with the language of the queer women like the way in which one woman flicks her tongue. While Gomez is able to understand the meaning of this public action, it goes unnoticed except within her personal identity space.

Muoz looks at the way in which politics of disidentification have been represented through the video projects of Osa Hidalgo in which women of color are celebrated and represented as having positions of power (Muoz, 23). One of Hidalgos films addresses the contrast between the public and private lives of two queer Chicana archeologists (Muoz, 23). In taking up a profession that is typically represented as a being overpowered by white, male masculinity Hidalgo creates a disidentification utilizing queer sex and sexuality to create a counterpublic space within dominant culture. The private sexual act between the two women is seen on film as the public educational archeology films are playing in the background. The contrast of the two images helps in imagining a public sphere in which queer sexuality, particularly queer sex between two women of color is no longer marginalized by dominant culture.

THEORETICAL MODELS: A PLACE FOR DISIDENTIFICATION Muozs study on disidentification theory is performed on the belief that both social constructionism and essentialism are exhausted theories that over simplify the ways in which bodies interact with dominant cultures (Muoz, 5). Muoz positions disidentification theory as existing in addition to social constructionist theory, in order to create a lens that is not monocausal or monothematic (Muoz, 8). In doing this, Muoz uses an intersectional approach to create a model that takes into consideration how multiple social identities and processes of identifying affect how bodies interact with social construction. He is challenging the way that social constructionist theory often reaffirms the socialization that forces us to see one identity at the expense of others.

Social constructionism is often positioned as the only alternative to essentialism without taking into consideration the differences in how social identities are constructed. Although social constructionism may work well for some bodies, it does not fit all people equally. Social constructionist theory results in a push to resist conditions set in place by dominant culture without recognizing the privileges around actively and visibly doing so. This often assumes or relies on the subject having a singular minoritized identity. When focusing solely on socially created identities, we forget to address the ways in which these social constructions have been formed around oppressive notions of race, gender, sexuality, etc. Disidentification recognizes the power structures that have been socially created and how they affect the identification of minoritized subjects. In this recognition, the subject has room to make space for oneself within the culture of dominant social constructions while actively resisting assimilation.

LIMITATIONS OF DISIDENTIFYING Muoz states early on that there are limitations to disidentifying and that disidentifcation in not always an adequate strategy of resistance or survival. At times resistance needs to be visible and direct, while other situations call for subjects to take up conformist paths in order to protect personal well being and resources for survival. Although subjects outside of the majoritarian sphere may utilize disidentification to overcome obstacles that exist in the process of identifying, disidentifying still requires an image or figure to use as the disidentification object. This is something that may not be accessible to everyone in a way that disidentification can be taken up.

CONCLUSIONS AND ANALYSIS Muozs representation of disidentification as a source of survival is clearly displayed in the examples that he sets forth through Margas Bed, Baldwins writing, Hidalgos film, This Bridge Called My Back, opera divas and multiple others. In these representations the process of disidentification was never the same. How one disidentifies does not rely solely on the identity that the subject posses, but also on the source, and the interaction and relationship between the two. Although I believe I now have a moderate understanding of the way in which disidentification is taken up by minoritized subjects to navigate through dominant culture, I do not fully understand all of the examples that Muoz utilizes to show disidentification in action. In particular I find the example of Baldwins fictional writing difficult to understand. While I find the concept of using autobiography as rehearsal for fiction to be interesting as a concept, when Muoz begins to talk about Baldwins disidentifcatory practices in relation to the understanding of genre I become lost. The exploration of Just Above My Head makes me further understand the way in which Baldwin utilizes his fiction as a way to create an image of the self. I believe it is this self as represented within Baldwins writing that is disidentificatory, but I am left asking what is the source of disidentification? Is there a resistance created? As Muoz tries to clarify the example through using the word song rather than fiction, I become more intrigued, although more confused. I find the concept of disidentification to be explained in a way that is easily comprehendible, although I find myself lost within its implementation at times.

Muoz often talks about disidentification as a means of resistance. I understand this resistance to be the active recognition that one does not need to assimilate to the dominant culture, although the subject may at times need to work within that dominant framework. For example, legal systems within the United States require individuals to place themselves in categories of identity, despite whether or not an individual feels he/she/ze is able to fit within those terms. Disidentification allows for a negotiation to take place that allows bodies to fulfill these requirements of law, while recognizing the space that exists outside of this dominant identification system I think one of the main uses of resistance that disidentification is able to allow is within the realm of queer theory. White, privileged bodies have dominated queer theory, often intentionally excluding queers of color. Disidentification would allow queers of color the opportunity to work within some of the theoretical frameworks that have been created in the white privileged space, while resisting the notion that the white queer subculture is dominant and that white queer theorists were the original creators of many of the theories they have taken from theorists of color. Disidentification in a way allows for queer bodies to reject dominant culture as the only valid option of existence. While social constructionism offers a way to understand how dominant culture is created, it fails to help construct a way to actively work against such constructions. While disidentification recognizes the complexities of such social construction, it also gives minoritized bodies a way to move more freely trough majoritarian spheres with the knowledge that this is a counterpublic space.

Works Cited Muoz, Jos Esteban. (1999). Disidentifications: Queers of Color and the Performance of Politics. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.