Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 50

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

1 Queer Theory K

Queer Theory K Index


Queer Theory K Index...................................................................................................................1 1NC 1/3............................................................................................................................................3
Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona. Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM...................................................................................................................................................................3

1NC 3/3............................................................................................................................................5 Link - Generic...............................................................................................................................6


Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona. Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM...................................................................................................................................................................6

Link - Hegemony/Soft Power.......................................................................................................7


Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona. Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM...................................................................................................................................................................7

Link - Same Sex Visas...................................................................................................................8 Link - Same Sex Visas....................................................................................................................9


Yue 2008 lecturer in cultural studies at the University of Melbourne. ......................................................................9 Audrey, GLQ Volume 14, Number 2-3, 2008 AJM...................................................................................................9

Link - Same-Sex Visas................................................................................................................10


Same-sex visas integrate homosexuality into a conventional social world by following the norms of heteronormative intimacy to determine eligibility....................................................................................................10 Yue 2008 lecturer in cultural studies at the University of Melbourne. ....................................................................10 Audrey, GLQ Volume 14, Number 2-3, 2008 AJM.................................................................................................10

Link - Same-Sex Visas.................................................................................................................11


Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona. Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM.................................................................................................................................................................11

Link - Naturalization...................................................................................................................12 Link - Citizenship.........................................................................................................................13 Link Asylum..............................................................................................................................14


Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona. Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM.................................................................................................................................................................14

Link Work Visas.......................................................................................................................15 Link - Terrorism..........................................................................................................................16 Link - Terrorism.........................................................................................................................17 Link - Terrorism..........................................................................................................................18 Impact - Heteronormativity........................................................................................................19 Impact - Heterosexism.................................................................................................................20

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

2 Queer Theory K

Alternative - Queering.................................................................................................................22 Alternative Queer Uncertainty................................................................................................23 Alternative - Queer Pedagogy.....................................................................................................24 AT: Perm......................................................................................................................................25 AT: Perm......................................................................................................................................26 AT: Queer = capitalist.................................................................................................................27 AT: Queer = Capitalist................................................................................................................28 AT: Queer = Capitalist...............................................................................................................29 AT: Queer = Capitalist...............................................................................................................30 AT: Queer = Capitalist...............................................................................................................31 AT: Feminism Arguments...........................................................................................................32 AT: Feminism Arguments...........................................................................................................33 AT: Queer = Bad Word...........................................................................................................34 Aff Queer Citizenship Fails.......................................................................................................35 Aff Queer Citizenship Fails......................................................................................................36 Aff Queer Citizenship Fails.......................................................................................................37 Aff Queer Citizenship Fails.......................................................................................................38 Aff Queer Citizenship Fails.......................................................................................................39 Aff Queer = Whiteness.............................................................................................................40 Aff Queer = Bad....................................................................................................................41 Aff Queer Opposition Fails.....................................................................................................43 Aff Action Key............................................................................................................................44 Aff Action Key............................................................................................................................45 Aff ID Politics Good...................................................................................................................46 Queer Theory = Capitalist..........................................................................................................47 Queer Theory = Capitalist..........................................................................................................48 Aff Perm.....................................................................................................................................49 Aff - Perm.....................................................................................................................................50

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

3 Queer Theory K

1NC 1/3
A. LINK. The calculated management of migrant populations relies on a gendered and sexualized notion of citizenship. Even as they make progressive steps, there is always a violent underside to immigration policy that is steeped in heteronormativity. Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona.
Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM

Queer migration scholarship has been enabled by and contributed to the growing scholarship on immigration, transnationalism,
diaspora, and refugee movements, as well as scholarship about the role of space and spatiality, both material and virtual, in constructing queer identities and communities.12 Such scholarship has particularly built on migration theory's shift away from

understanding migration as primarily driven by rational actors making cost-benefit decisions within a push-pull framework, toward an understanding that overlapping, palimpsestic histories of imperialism, invasion, investment, trade, and political influence create what Saskia Sassen calls "bridges for migration"
between and among nation-states.13 This shift has somewhat altered the temporal and geographic frames within which queer migration is conceived.The alteration is evident, for example, in the decentering of nationalist frameworks premised on

space-time binaries, developmental narratives, and static models of culture, community, nation, race, gender, identity, and settlement.14 Instead, scholars increasingly attend to contradictions, relationality, and borders as contact zones, and the construction of identities, communities, practices, hegemonies, and alternatives linked to local, national, regional, and transnational circuits. The study of queer migration has
participated in and enhanced scholarship about the emergence of multiple, hybrid sexual cultures, identities, identifications, practices, and politics. These are marked by power, contestation, and creative adaptation. Although the nation-state, nationalism, and nation-based citizenship are [End Page 173] no longer the unquestioned horizon for analysis, these categories have not disappeared. Instead, scholars have theorized them as critical loci for upholding

and contesting regional, transnational, and neo-imperial hierarchies, and for producing forms of exclusion, marginalization, and struggle for tranformation.15 Indeed, sexuality scholarship has a rich history of engagement with questions of nationalism. Many scholars have characterized modern nationstates and citizenship as heteronormative in a manner that (as described above) involves hierarchies based on not only sex and gender but also race and class.16 The calculated management of migration comprises a critical technology for (re)producing national heteronormativity within global and imperial fields.17 Thus, throughout the first half of the twentieth century, nation-states including the United States and Australia
implemented eugenic policies that encouraged migration and settlement by families that both conformed to the normative sexual order and were (or would become) "white." Settlement and family formation by migrants from colonized regions, however, was generally barred (although in the United States, temporary labor for low wages was often permitted). Racial and neocolonial preferences have become less explicitly stated in recent decades, but actual migration policies display continuing anxieties (and encode punitive practices) where childbearing, cultural concerns, and possible economic costs among migrants racialized as minorities and from neo-colonized regions are concerned. Furthermore, although most nation-states may no longer bar LGBTQ migrants, their

presence nonetheless challenges and disrupts practices that remain normed around racialized heterosexuality. National heteronormativity is thus a regime of power that all migrants must negotiate, making them differentially vulnerable to exclusion at the border or deportation after entry while also racializing, (re)gendering, (de)nationalizing, and unequally positioning them within the symbolic economy, the public sphere, and the labor market. These outcomes, in turn, connect to the ongoing reproduction of particular forms of nationhood and national citizenshipwhich have ramifications for local, regional, national, transnational, and imperial arrangements of power.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

4 Queer Theory K

1NC 2/3
B. IMPACT The modern world is dominated and controlled through a master logic of heteronormative whiteness. This privileges white, masculine, heterosexual men and maintains itself through war and imperialist domination.
Winnubst 06, philosophy PhD, Penn State University
Shannon, Queering Freedom 2006. p 5-6 AJM GoogleBooks

This is the domination and violence of our historical present, late modernity: to reduce our lives so completely to the order of instrumental reason that we cannot conceive of any political or philosophical problem without reducing it to that narrow conception of reason. This renders us captive to presuppositions which assume that solutions to problems must follow the same temporal register as the posing of the problem itself i.e., that they must appear immediately effective and useful if we are to recognize them as solutions at all. But what if these are only
truncated, shortsighted views? What if a vital resistance to politics of domination comes through freeing ourselves from these closed economies of late modernity and their clearly demarcated, controlled, mastered, and useful ends? What if a vital resistance to politics of domination requires a temporal register other than that of immediate and clear efficacy? As Bataille tells us sympathetically, It is not easy to realize ones own ends if one must, in trying to do so, carry out a movement that surpasses them (1988 91, 1:21). His orientation toward general economies asks us to think differently from the habituated patterns of our historical present. In his language, this historical

present is characterized by the fact that judgments concerning the general situation proceed from a particular point of view (1988 91, 1:39). This particularity can be outlined, described, pinned down, and its blind spots excavated: I attempt to do so in this text. But to think generally from and about the historical present may lead us into different questions and different orientations: it has led me to query systems of domination through the registers of temporality and spatiality, while framing them through the identity categories (race, gender,
sexuality, class, religion) that are their most explicit historical tools. For example, how does the temporality of a persistent future orientation ground systems of racism, sexism, and heterosexism? What assumptions about the ontology of space allow for the biological conception of race that grounds racism, or of sex that grounds sexism and heterosexism? Bataille warns us that, if we do not learn to think in this counter-cultural register of general economy, we will always be subordinated

to the violent and even catastrophic expressions of the excess, abundant energy of the planet, such as war and imperialist domination. We do have a choice in this matter. But that choice is not one which will derive from calculating our interest, analyzing the specific problem, or charting the solution: it will not derive from the domains of instrumental reason and its persistent mandate of utility. It may, rather, involve
recuperating senses of freedom lost to us in late modernity, where nation-states promise freedom as the facile liberation from subservience and mastery as the domination of nature and culture. To think generally may lead toward sensing freedom as a dangerous breaking loose...a will to assume those risks without which there is no freedom (1988 91, 1:38). It is toward recuperating these more general senses of freedom, which Bataille signifies as sovereign and I signify as queer in this historical period of late modernity and phallicized whiteness, that this text moves.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

5 Queer Theory K

1NC 3/3
C. ALTERNATIVE Refuse to participate in the production and promotion of citizenship and its democratic foundations. Queerness is the anticitizen. There can be no compromise or reform, queerness must undermine the foundations of the oppressive nation-state.
Brandzel 05 PhD candidate at the U of Minnesota. Amy L.Queering Citizenship. GLQ: Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 11.2 AJM.
I describe such events as conferring gay and lesbian rather than queer citizenship because I believe that "queer" and "citizen" antithetical concepts. I am proposing that queers, especially those who are privileged and well off enough to do so, should

are

refuse citizenship and actively subvert the normalization, legitimization, and regulation that it requires. In claiming that queer is anticitizen, I am referencing a more nuanced understanding of what it means to be a citizen. To be a citizen is not simply a matter of enjoying a specific legal status; it includes the wide variety of practices and imaginings required by citizenship. That is, one must imagine oneself as a citizen as well as be imagined by the American citizenry as a member of it. "Citizenship for Asian Americans in the form of
legal status or rights," Leti Volpp notes, advancing a similar claim, "has not guaranteed that Asian Americans will be understood as citizensubjects or will be considered to subjectively stand in for American citizenry. . . . While in the contemporary moment Asian Americans may be perceived as legitimate recipients of formal rights, there is discomfort associated with their being conceptualized as political subjects whose activity constitutes the American nation."73 Historically, Asian Americans have been deemed, in legal and popular discourses, as always already aliens and outsiders to U.S. community practices and political rights. Throughout U.S. history they have been figured as abjected citizens and, as such, have withstood egregious discriminations and harms that continue to this day. I want to [End Page 197] apply Volpp's insight to queers, but by no means to diminish the substantial harms suffered by Asian Americans through U.S. orientalism or to equate Asian American with queer experience. While an intersectional queer critique aims to make connections among practices, experiences, and identifications, it must not equalize these experiences or treat them as if they were the same. In fact, a central argument of this essay has been that citizenship displaces nonwhite, nonheterosexual, nonmale peoples via intersections of

normativities, but it does so in very different and meaningful ways. A radical queer critique of citizenship has a stake not in saving it or in redefining it but in undermining its production and promotion of normativity. Queers are seen as oppositional and/or antagonistic to U.S. community-building practices and institutions. In the American imaginary, they often epitomize indulgence and selfishness, traits seen as extensions of their excessive sexual identifications. While queers do not choose to be positioned outside or in opposition to U.S. citizenship, their positioning can and should be used to critique normative citizenship practices and institutions. Queerness as an identification and a politics allows for a reflective stance that can represent the paradox of citizenship: that the great umbrella of American ideals does not shelter everyone. It allows for a position from which we, as deviants, can work to undermine and exposethat is, queerthe normativities of citizenship. Queer citizenship requires a critique of citizenship, of the nation-state, of normalization and heteronormativity. To queer citizenship, then, we need to work to conceive a citizenship that does not require universalization, false imaginaries, or immersion in and acceptance of the progress narratives of U.S. citizenship. At a time when immigrants are terrorized, when hate crimes are on the rise, when wars are waged to extend the U.S. empire and are excused through racialized and gendered imagery as well as through the supposedly benevolent desire to spread American ways of life (such as "citizenship" and "democracy"), we cannot afford to participate in any colonial rhetorics or orthodox appeals. Queer citizenship requires a constant critique not only of the break between queer and normative citizens but of the boundary maintenance inherit in citizenship. If the history of citizenship is in fact the history of normalization, of legitimization, of differentiation, then to queer citizenship would transform these practices radically. A queer citizenry would refuse to participate in the prioritizing of one group or form of intimacy over another; it would refuse to participate in the differentiation of peoples, groups, or individuals; it would refuse citizenship altogether.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

6 Queer Theory K

Link - Generic
Border controls and immigration management in the US are always connected to the ideals of implicit national heteronormativity
Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona.
Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM

The heteronormative governance of migrants implicates the status of groups who hold official citizenship but are nonetheless marked as suspect, subaltern, and second-class members of the nation. For example, in the United States, same-sex partners still cannot legally immigrate under the existing spousal reunification provisions of immigration law, and couples where one or both partners are transgender experience extraordinary difficulties. Family, Unvalued describes how current laws impugn the status of
citizens who are lesbian, gay, or trans: "Solely because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, they find their relationships unrecognized, their families endangered, their lives shadowed by dislocation and separation." The report concludes that these practices "assault human dignity in an essential way."23

The assault is part of a wider network of queer experience involving the "social and political costs of partial citizenship and the psychic and bodily costs of violence, which the habits of heterosexual privilege" produce.24 Given the diversity of queer couples, these assaults materially articulate histories of racialization, sexism, neo-imperialism, and classism, too.25 Similarly, U.S. public representations of Mexicanorigin women as unrestrained "breeders" of welfare-consuming children, which consistently animate anti-immigrant discourses, not only racialize and heterosexualize them within colonialist imagery that legitimizes violence but also deeply affect U.S. citizens of Mexican descent, who are continually treated as "aliens" even though they hold national citizenship.26 As Pierrette Hondagneu-Sotelo describes, these representationsmaterialized in punitive public policies in the areas of welfare, health care, voting, education, and law enforcement, as well as immigration controlreject people of Mexican and Latino/a descent "as permanent members of U.S. society" and reinforce "a more coercive system of labor."27 They also legitimize racialized homophobia and transphobia. In these and other instances, the ongoing imbrication of exclusionary forms of national citizenship with immigration control is laid bare.

The anxious, ongoing (re)production of national heteronormativityincluding through border controls and immigrant managementis connected with wider neocolonial and neo-imperialist processes, historically and at present, as queer migration studies has started to document.28 Historically,
for example, "simultaneous [End Page 175] efforts to shore up and bifurcate categories of race and sexuality in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were deeply intertwined."29 According to Emma Prez, these efforts were also centrally connected to the intensified policing of the U.S.-Mexico borderwhich itself was an outcome of colonial relations, war, and annexation.30 At

present, immigration policies in neo-imperial countries link efforts to produce properly privatized, heteronormative families with strategies for securing cheap migrant labor; for fighting the "war on terror" through linking sexual "perversity," enemy status, and orientalism; for manufacturing loyal hetero-masculine soldiers who participate in global warfare; and for building the prison-industrial complex and
extrajudicial detention regimes.31 Heteronormativity in the global south also results in complicated complicities with these relations of power while also shaping migration circuits in particular ways.32

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

7 Queer Theory K

Link - Hegemony/Soft Power


Theres no risk of a link turn here the US uses superficial tolerance to promote a nationalistic agenda of globalization and violence
Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona.
Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM The final group of essays works within these expanded temporalities and geographies to explore how queer complicities with neoliberalism affect contemporary queer migration.33 Lisa Duggan's concept of homonormativity has shaped recent debates on queer complicity; according to Duggan, homonormativity is "a politics that does not contest dominant heteronormative assumptions and institutions, but [End Page 178] upholds and sustains them, while promising the possibility of a demobilized gay constituency and a privatized, depoliticized gay culture anchored in domesticity and consumption."34 As Duggan describes, homonormativity is intimately connected with neoliberal capitalism and associated modes of governmentality that operate through economy and culture as linked domains. Jasbir K. Puar extends Duggan's formulation by showing that homonormativity colludes with hegemonic forms of nationalism,

including as it is deployed for capitalist profiteering and neo-imperialism. For example, U.S. nationalist discourses claim exceptional openness, tolerance, and sexual liberation. According to Puar, these "highly contingent forms of nationalism" accrue their "greatest purchase through comparative transnational frames rather than debates within domestic realms."35 Many U.S. queers support this nationalist discourse, which seems to promise inclusion in the nation-state. Yet the discourse is being used to authorize imperialism, warfare, and torture in the Middle East. Moreover, since queers of color and those perceived as "foreign" experience heightened surveillance and violence under these nationalist rubrics, this kind of homonationalism (as Puar describes it) both reflects and reinforces racial, cultural, and other hierarchies within queer communities, with significant consequences on local, national, and transnational levels.
Other dominant nationalisms, not only in the global north but also in the south, selectively use LGBTQ issues to reposition themselves within transnational circuits, global hierarchies, and dominant relations of rule.36 U.S. homonationalist discourses of sexual freedom position queer migrants in complex ways. As Chandan Reddy describes, the

LGBTQ migrant finds herself or himself situated "in the contradiction between the heteronormative social relations mandated for immigrants of color by the state's policies and the liberal state's ideology of universal sexual freedom."37 The LGBTQ person seeking asylum because of persecution on account of sexual orientation, gender
identity, or HIV status faces even more acute contradictions. This is because asylum involves "a moment of transnational judgment when the decision-makers of one nation decide not only on the credibility of the individual asylum claimant, but on the errors or strengths of the protection of rights in the country from which the claimant flees."38 Successful asylum claims generally require generating a racialist, colonialist discourse that impugns the nation-state from which the asylum seeker comes, while participating in an adjudication process that often depends on constructs of "immutable" identity refracted through colonialist, reified models of culture shorn of all material relations.39 The queer asylum seeker's contradictory positioning is further exacerbated by the fact that "asylum . . . keeps migration exclusion morally defensible" in the global north.40 In other words, the granting [End Page 179] of asylum to select individualswho must be few enough in number not to threaten dominant systems, but sufficient to lend credence to claims of first-world humanitarianism and democratic freedom legitimizes exclusionary, repressive immigration control systems. The system thus positions queer asylum seekers in conflict with those seeking admission through the immigration system. Moreover, it "reinforces the self-congratulatory posture inherent in the geopolitics of asylum" while erasing the fact that the global south is actually host to a majority of the world's refugees and asylum seekers.41

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

8 Queer Theory K

Link - Same Sex Visas


The nation-state will use immigration as a key site for the government to produce sexual categories and identities that are instilled within the population.
Somerville 05 teaches in the Department of English and the Gender and Women's Studies Program at the
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Siobhan, American Quarterly 57.3 (2005) 659-675 AJM But queer studies has focused less frequently and consistently on the ways that the state itself (rather than the nation) might be understood as sexualized and sexualizing.9 As Davina Cooper notes, few scholars have explored "the ways in which sexuality as a disciplinary structure, identity and culture shapes state form and practice."10 Cooper argues that "although dominant discourses

identify the state as asexual, and the state works to maintain this ideological image, from the perspective of oppositional discourse, the sexual surplus possessed by the state pervades state practices."11 Likewise, Jacqueline Stevens points out the stakes of understanding the state as an institution embedded in, not separate from, the sexual: "Once it is understood that the most fundamental structures of the modern statethe rules regulating marriage and immigrationare what enable the state to reproduce itself and what make possible the power relations associated with nationality, ethnicity, race, and family roles, then it is clear that piecemeal approaches to eradicating certain inequalities will not work." 12 Furthermore, scholars have recently begun to consider the myriad ways in which particular state practices promote and produce various forms of sexuality. Eithne Luibhid, for instance, has identified the immigration control apparatus itself as "a key site for the production and reproduction of sexual categories, identities, and norms within relations of inequality." I want to return to the construction of the immigrant "as someone who desires America" and linger on it in light of these provocative insights about [End Page 660]
the mutually constitutive relationship between sexuality and state form and practice. To what extent, for instance, does the construction of a desiring immigrant obscure the ways that the state itself, through immigration and naturalization policy, sets the terms of this imagined love, actively distinguishing between which immigrants' desire will be returned and which will be left unrequited? To what extent does the presumed lovability of the United States distract us from, among other things, the state's own

construction of certain immigrants and citizens as "lovable," and others as inappropriate objects for the nation's love? And what would it mean to understand the historical production of "undesirables" as a process of "queering"
certain immigrants' imagined desire?

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

9 Queer Theory K

Link - Same Sex Visas


Same-sex visas are co-opted by the host-country to selectively decide which queer populations it would like to assimilate and homogenize Yue 2008 lecturer in cultural studies at the University of Melbourne. Audrey, GLQ Volume 14, Number 2-3, 2008 AJM
In Entry Denied: Controlling Sexuality at the Border, Eithne Luibhid examines the construction of sexual norms and identities in American immigration policy.13 The policing of the sexuality of immigrant women, she argues, reflects the construction of the nation through practices of exclusion that marginalize lesbians, prostitutes, and other immoral women. In her 2005 introduction to the coedited collection Queer Migrations: Sexuality, U.S. Citizenship, and Border Crossings, she reinforces how immigration regulates sexuality by

producing oppressive sexual norms that are gendered, classed, and racialized.14 This article extends these approaches to show how the regulation of sexuality in Australia functions as a site of selective inclusion, rather than exclusion. It uses the same-sex immigration policy to examine the governance of sexuality through the institution of immigration and to demonstrate how sexuality provides a mechanism to govern immigrants in ways that enable their selective incorporation.15 Official policy discourses are historicized to account for the changes in categorizing the same-sex visa class. The regulation of sexuality as a management of [End
Page 241] population is analyzed using a sociological approach to the collation of migration statistics. These statistics, gathered from the Gay and Lesbian Immigration Task Force History Archives at the Mitchell Library Manuscript Deposit at the State Library of New South Wales and recalled through the Freedom of Information Act from the Department of Immigration's Statistics Section, as well as from interviews conducted with key social movement activists and immigration officials, will be rendered both quantitatively and qualitatively. Ian Hacking has shown how the development of statistics enables bureaucracies and institutions to refine their practices of classification. Behind these practices, he argues, are "new technologies" that invent categories into which people could be conveniently counted.16 The use of statistics in this article has two aims. These statistics can be likened to what Michael Taussig has seminally termed "public secrets." A public secret is "that which is publicly known, but cannot be articulated."17 These statistics have never been made public or documented in the annual reports of the Department of Immigration. Although same-sex migration has always been championed by

mainstream and queer communities, no one is really sure how many gays and lesbians have resettled in the country through this migration program. The statistics are intended in the first instance to enumerate a face and scale a group. The second aim is to deconstruct these statistics to expose heteronormative intimacy as a new technology for assimilating the queer migrant. Intimacy is central to statistics because it is a tool that connects the personal to the public.18 In the following, I first show how same-sex migration policy has reconstituted Australia's immigration history, redefined the kinship structure of the family, and produced select queer migrants as good citizens. I further
examine how the interracial gay Asian Australian couple potentially secures and disavows good citizenship by uncannily mimicking and twisting the norms of heterosexual intimacy. For these couples, intimacy is also an affective and critical site for defamiliarizing the host country and revealing its public secrets.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

10 Queer Theory K

Link - Same-Sex Visas


Same-sex visas integrate homosexuality into a conventional social world by following the norms of heteronormative intimacy to determine eligibility Yue 2008 lecturer in cultural studies at the University of Melbourne. Audrey, GLQ Volume 14, Number 2-3, 2008 AJM
In the migration application, statutory declarations by the applicant and the partner must provide a history of the relationship, including how the couple met, when the relationship developed, and when they decided to commence an interdependent relationship. The application must also provide evidence of the financial aspects of their partnership, the nature of the household, social context of the relationship, and nature of their commitment to each other. Cases where partners have met through Internet chat rooms, gay saunas, or lesbian nightclubs are not considered favorably.44 Heteronormative rightness is evident here in the tacit regulation of sexual practices. Homosexuality is further made intelligible through its domestication by the heteronormative institutions of intimacy. These institutions include the private spheres of personal life and the public spheres of social life. In the former, private practices such as living
arrangements within the household, the distribution of housework, joint utilities, and joint responsibilities for bills, daily expenses, and child rearing are made public in order to reproduce same-sex partnerships through the conventions of

normative heterosexual culture. In the latter, statutory declarations by friends, family members, partners' parents and
relatives; public declarations of the relationship to government bodies, commercial institutions, and public authorities; and evidence of joint travel and participation in groups and social organizations establish the forms of private life through a heteronormative sociality accorded by the state, the law, the family, and commerce.

These practices integrate homosexuality into a conventional social world by following the conventions of heteronormative intimacy. They reflect the changing status of sexual identity politics in the social fabric of society that relies on the progressive logics of social inclusion and affirmation. The decentering
of the traditional family suggests the symbolic boundaries separating heterosexuals and [End Page 246] homosexuals have lessened considerably, to the extent that homosexuality is now normalized at an interpersonal and institutional level.45 Steven Seidman criticizes this assimilationist model by showing how heterosexualized norms govern behavior, including monogamy, love, romance, and mutual dependency.46 Shelly Dudgeon and Sasha Roseneil point to the "heterorelationality" of this practice through its focus on coresidence and the conjugal couple.47 Carl Strychin shows how the queer migrant is incorporated through self-cultivation

and disciplinary regulation: "On the one hand, same sex couples were strongly encouraged to mimic the supposedly 'private'
institution of marriage as the prerequisite for obtaining immigration . . ., the couple subject their relationship to detailed surveillance and examination, in order to determine whether it sufficiently copied an imagined and imaginary model."48 These practices

support the hegemony of heteronormative institutions despite the transformation of heterosexuality effected by an expansion of lesbian and gay rights. Central here is the changing value accorded to the family as an intimate site for patriotic nationalism and capitalist production.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

11 Queer Theory K

Link - Same-Sex Visas


The Same-sex visa program will force applicants to conform to heterosexual notions of family and citizenship and make sure that only the wealthy and good immigrants will receive them.
Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona.
Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM

Neoliberal representations of immigration sever legal and illegal status from larger operations of power, recoding these statuses as individual signs of character. The campaign to enable same-sex partners to acquire legal immigration status based on their relationship with a U.S. citizen or resident importantly highlights sexuality as one of these larger relations of power that governs access to il/legal status, thereby challenging the individualizing
logics of the current debate, which refuses difficult conversations about the historical legacies and contemporary realities of inequality. Yet focusing

on sexuality without addressing how other crosscutting social hierarchies also shape the production of il/legal status may primarily benefit the most privileged same-sex couples. Thus the campaign risks
reinscribing what Carl Stychin describes as the "good homosexual"or what Lisa Duggan calls the "homonormative" queeras a neoliberal figure complicit in the abandonment of broad-based social justice struggles in favor of incorporation for a select few.73 According to Stychin,

the "good homosexual" is financially responsible, believes in privatization, is in a committed relationship that mirrors the heterosexual norm, and seeks inclusion within the existing system rather than challenging structures of domination. It is the "good" homosexual's immigrant partner who will become eligible for spousal reunification if the UAFA becomes lawbecause that partner will not have been ruled out on various grounds and because the couple relationship will most closely approximate the model for proper incorporation and citizen formation within neoliberal logics that the immigration system mandates. Meanwhile, less-privileged lesbians and gay mensingle, in couple relationships, or with various unrecognized tieswill remain shut out unless they can mobilize a high degree of human or economic capital. Other groups who may conform to heterosexual coupledom or family, but who are not sufficiently rich, or who have other strikes against them, will continue to face struggle and exclusion. Relationships, affiliations, and intimacies unrecognized under the current system will still not provide a basis for legalizing. For the few who do succeed in gaining legal admission through having state-recognized family or couple ties that are not nullified by other, crosscutting exclusions, their ties will serve as a technology for enforcing a particular model of neoliberal citizenshipwith the threat of potential detention and deportation always hanging over anyone who does not conform.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

12 Queer Theory K

Link - Naturalization
Naturalization is a heteronormative process by the way it forces individuals to conform to unspoken rules for how to act and speak.
Somerville 05 teaches in the Department of English and the Gender and Women's Studies Program at the
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Siobhan, American Quarterly 57.3 (2005) 659-675 AJM In fact, the echoes of monogamous marriage vows in the oath of allegiance suggest another way that we might contrast birthright citizenship and naturalization, by focusing on how the sexual is situated in each. As the term suggests, birthright citizenship entails the literal production of citizens through sexual reproduction. In the United States, citizenship is granted at birth to anyone born within the nation's territory (regardless of the citizenship status of the child's parents) or to any child of a U.S. citizen (regardless of the place of birth).19 Notably, the United States is somewhat anomalous in granting the first kind of birthright citizenship (jus soli, being born within the nation's territory); most nations, especially in Europe, assign citizenship at birth according to the citizenship status of at least one parent (jus sanguinis).20 Nevertheless, both forms of birthright citizenship are seemingly "natural" or organic forms of the production of citizens through sexual reproduction. In contrast, naturalization presumably entails the nonsexual production of

national subjects, so that citizenship is acquired rather than ascribed. In a self-consciously performative process, naturalization takes place through speech acts (oaths and pledges of allegiance) adjudicated by the state.21 In this way, there appears to be something very queer at the heart of the naturalization process, a performance whose very theatricality exposes the constructed nature of citizenship itself. At least, that is one way to describe the radical potential of naturalization: to enact a purely consensual form of
citizenship, without any necessary relationship to sexual reproduction or ancestry.

Yet, even though naturalization is theoretically a performative, nonreproductive model of producing citizens, the very term naturalization demonstrates the difficulties that modern states have had in imagining the full potential of that process.22 Instead of breaking with a model of citizenship based on bloodline, the very language of naturalization has historically been encumbered with assumptions about a heterosexual, reproductive subject, and so tends to reinforce the model of an organic, sexually reproduced citizenry. As I argue, we should be more skeptical of the distinction typically drawn between birthright citizenship and naturalizationascriptive versus consensualand attend to the ways that the opposition between the two models actually serves to mask how both have historically been embedded within (hetero)sexualized understandings of production. Despite its potential to make good on the liberal promise of consent, even naturalization cannot escape a logic of belonging that depends on the transmission of citizenship through biological reproduction. This is not simply because legislation has tended to instantiate exclusionary ideologies of identity (race, gender, class, sexual orientation) that have "spoiled" the liberal promise of citizenship in the United States, but also, and [End Page 663] perhaps more stubbornly, because this blood logic is embedded within the very metaphors through which such a form of producing citizenship is imagined.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

13 Queer Theory K

Link - Citizenship
Citizenship functions as a political tool for fostering exclusionary violence against queer immigrants.
Brandzel 05 PhD candidate at the U of Minnesota. Amy L.Queering Citizenship. GLQ: Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 11.2 AJM. Calls for citizenship have often been universalizing claims for inclusion and solidarity in forging a national polity.13 Citizenship is envisioned as a great equalizer, the problem being how to include more and more people under its umbrella. In this way, citizenship has served as a powerful ideal for disenfranchised groups seeking to make claims for inclusion and rights. Without underestimating the power of this ideal, it is important to be aware of its sentimentalizing uses. As critical race, feminist, postcolonial, and queer scholars are quick to point out, not all citizens are created and/or treated equally, and not all citizens are included in the national polity. Citizenship, then, functions as a double discourse: it serves as a source of political organizing and national belonging and as a claim to equality, on the one hand, while it erases and denies its own exclusionary and differentiating nature, on the other. It is this doubled character of citizenship that most recommends a healthy skepticism toward calls for citizenship, especially those couched in terms of universality and inclusion.
Discriminatory treatment of noncitizens is often justified as a means to safeguard the rights and benefits of citizenship as the exclusive property of recognized citizens. In the United States, where differentiation between citizens and noncitizens is racially loaded, noncitizens become "aliens" and "illegal aliens," identifications historically associated with Asian and Mexican immigrants.14 California's Proposition 187, the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, and, most critically, the events since 9/11 are ample evidence that a war on "aliens" is seen as justified. "Because direct attacks on minorities on account of their race is nowadays taboo," Kevin R. Johnson points out, "frustration with domestic minorities is displaced to foreign minorities. A war on noncitizens of color focusing on their immigration status, not

race, as conscious or unconscious cover, serves to vent social frustration and hatred."15 Not only is citizenship exclusionary, but discursive pronouncements to the contrary continue to undermine attempts to expose and critique the presumptions of universal citizenship. Put differently, citizenship is a normative discourse that presupposes universality and therefore exacerbates and negates difference. [End Page 176]

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

14 Queer Theory K

Link Asylum
Asylum claims are a moment of judgment by the nation state in which the applicant is either violently excluded or selectively included. The process itself is steeped in heteronormativity
Luibhid 2008. Eithne; director of the Institute for LGBT Studies and associate professor of women's studies at the University of Arizona.
Queer/Migration: An Unruly Body of Scholarship GLQVolume 14, Number 2-3, 2008. AJM U.S. homonationalist discourses of sexual freedom position queer migrants in complex ways. As Chandan Reddy describes, the LGBTQ migrant finds herself or himself situated "in the contradiction between the heteronormative social relations mandated for immigrants of color by the state's policies and the liberal state's ideology of universal sexual freedom."37 The LGBTQ person seeking asylum because of persecution on account of sexual orientation, gender identity, or HIV status faces even more acute contradictions. This is because asylum

involves "a moment of transnational judgment when the decision-makers of one nation decide not only on the credibility of the individual asylum claimant, but on the errors or strengths of the protection of rights in the country from which the claimant flees."38 Successful asylum claims generally require generating a racialist, colonialist discourse that impugns the nation-state from which the asylum seeker comes, while participating in an adjudication process that often depends on constructs of "immutable" identity refracted through colonialist, reified models of culture shorn of all material relations.39 The queer asylum seeker's contradictory positioning is further exacerbated by the fact that "asylum . . . keeps migration exclusion morally defensible" in the global north.40 In other words, the granting [End Page 179] of asylum to select individualswho must be few enough in number not to threaten dominant systems, but sufficient to lend credence to claims of first-world humanitarianism and democratic freedomlegitimizes exclusionary, repressive immigration control systems. The system thus positions queer asylum seekers in conflict with those seeking admission through the immigration system. Moreover, it "reinforces the self-congratulatory
posture inherent in the geopolitics of asylum" while erasing the fact that the global south is actually host to a majority of the world's refugees and asylum seekers.41 Gay asylum claims have been taken up by mainstream LGBTQ and human rights organizations in sometimes problematic ways, including to reinforce their claims for civic status and legal protections within liberal, neoliberal, or homonormative frameworks.42 This process reflects a larger problem about how queers with relative privilege may appropriate queer migrant figures to serve various agendas, without understanding or critically engaging with the politics of contemporary migration. In these cases, queer migrants provide the material ground for dialogue among others, while becoming silenced. Thus, queer migrants disappear "in the very exchange that depends on [them] for its moral weight."43

Asylum issues thus exemplify how homonormativityqueer complicities with dominant neoliberal, imperial, nationalist, racialist, and heterosexist logicsgenerates acute dilemmas where queer migration is concerned.
Yet asylum also makes plain that these issues have to be addressed. Quite simply, queers facing violence and persecution demand justice and transformation.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

15 Queer Theory K

Link Work Visas


Economic motivations for migration are integrally linked to the sexualization that migrant populations face Bernstein 01, PhD, New York University
Mary, Queer Families, Queer Politics: Challenging Culture and the State, Edited by Mary Bernstein and Renate Reimann. p.121 AJM For example, all of the men I interviewed, in one form or another, gave financial reasons for migrating to the United States. And indeed,

immigration scholars have traditionally placed a great deal of emphasis on economic reasons for migration, yet to a great degree their vision of the economic realm is extremely limited. The social inequalities of sexuality, like race and gender, are integrally linked to the economic structures of society. Groups that are marginalized as sexual minorities are constrained by the limits of discrimination and prejudice that may limit their socioeconomic opportunities. Thus, when immigrants, who are a sexual minority, say that they immigrated for financial reasons, part of the analysis must include sexuality. For instance, even the person I interviewed
in Mexico who owned his own pesticide and fertilizer business felt the constraints of heterosexism. Business networks, he explained, depend upon having the right image, which means a wife, children, and social events tied to church and school. Clearly, as a gay man he was outside this world. His class privilege and the fact the he is his own boss, however, permit him to remain in Mexico relatively free from some of the pressures that drive others to migrate.

Thus, while [people] men such as Lalo clearly migrate to escape a sense of sexual oppression, for others the decision to migrate to the United States is influenced by a combination of sexual liberation and economic opportunities. For example, Gabriel moved to the United States from Nayarit, Mexico, when he was eighteen but explained that he had
begun to prepare himself for immigrating at sixteen. When I asked him why, he explained that he had two major reasons for coming to the United States: First, I wanted to get a better level of education. And the second reason was sexuality. I wanted to be able to define myself and have more freedom with respect to that. I wanted to come here to live, not to distance myself from my family but to hide what I already knew I had. I knew I was gay but I thought I might be able to change it. I needed to come here and speak to people, to learn more about it, because in Mexico it's still very taboo. There isn't so much liberation.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

16 Queer Theory K

Link - Terrorism
Counter terrorist discourse is a result of the anxieties of a heteronormative civilization. Immigration law is at the heart of this ideology. Puar 02, Associate Professor of Women's and Gender Studies at Rutgers University Jasbit K., Social Text 20.3 (2002) 117-148 Monster, Terrorist, Fag Muse. AJM
In the contemporary discourse and practice of the war on terrorism, freedom, democracy, and humanity have come to frame the possibility of thinking and acting within and beyond the nationstate. We have sought to show how the uncanny monster-terrorist-fag is both a product of the anxieties of heteronormative civilization and a marker of the noncivilizedin [End Page 139] fact, the anxiety and the monster are born of the same modernity. We have argued that the monster-terrorist-fag is reticulated with discourses and practices of heteronormative patriotism but also in the resistant strategies of feminist groups, queer communities,
and communities of color. We suggest that all such strategies must confront the network of complicities that structure the possibilities of resistance: we have seen how docile patriots, even as they refuse a certain racist positioning, contribute to their own normalization and the quarantining of those they narrate themselves against. This genealogy takes on a particular urgency given the present disarray of the antiwar Left, as well as the lack of communication, debate, and connections between white progressives and communities of color, especially those implicated by changing immigration laws, new "border" hysteria, the Patriot Act, and the widespread detention of noncitizens. 43 Moreover, these questions of discipline and normalization serve to foreclose the possibilities of solidarities among and within communities of color; for instance, between Sikhs and Muslims or among Sikhs who inhabit different class locations. So that even if the long-time surveillance of African American and Caribbean American communities might have let up a bit after September 11, what we see is the legitimation and expansion of techniques of racial profiling that were in fact perfected on black bodies. If

contemporary counterterrorism discourses deploy tropes and technologies with very old histories rooted in the West's own anxieties of otherness and normality, what transformations are we witnessing in the construction of the terrorist-monster? What innovations and reelaborations open new vistas to dominant and emergent forces in the hegemonic politics of the war on/of terrorism? The return of the monster today has enabled a multiform power to reinvest and reinvent the fag, the citizen, the turban, and even the nation itself in the interests of
another, more docile modernity.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

17 Queer Theory K

Link - Terrorism
We control the direction of the link any aff advantages are superficial justifications for furthering the domination of postcolonial subjects across the globe through arguments against terrorism Diaz 08 PhD, Wayne State University
Robert, Transnational Queer Theory and Unfolding Terrorisms Criticism: Volume 50, Number 3, Summer 2008 AJM

The relationality between terrorism and sexuality is revisited in chapter 2 (Abu Ghraib and U.S. Exceptionalism).
Puar studies the controversial Abu Ghraib photographs, which depict Iraqi prisoners being tortured by U.S. military personnel. These photographs expose the United States failure to treat its prisoners humanely and ethically. Puar notes that the national grief and embarrassment the Abu Ghraib photos produce have depended upon an understanding of torture, especially sexual torture, as an uncommon military practice. She contends, however, that these photographs do not mark an exceptional moment at all. They

demonstrate the constant mobilization of sexuality as a policing mechanism that justifies state violence.
More importantly, she argues that the nationalistic shock exhibited by a majority of the countrys population intrinsically polices what Muslim sexuality ultimately means. At its base, this sexuality must be inherently different from the

liberated sexuality practiced in the United States. The obvious point here is that this myopic way of thinking about Muslim sexuality negates and disavows the multiple ways that the United States itself limits particular sexualities and sexual practices within its border. Moreover, the focus on Muslim sexuality
valorizes sexuality as the site of violence within torture rather than thinking of violence as a networked strategy in compartmentalizing specific terrorist populations for death as it secures the lives of the privileged few. As the author notes, [T]he sexual is the

ultimate site of violation, portrayed as extreme in relation to the individual rights of privacy and ownership accorded to the body within liberalism (81). Thus, the axiomatic grief that goes hand in hand with the declaration that these pictures are uniquely abusive fosters the very same practices of marking the ethnic national as outside of the United States citizen. This presumably also leads to justifications for furthering the domination of postcolonial subjects across the globe through arguments against terrorism. In one brief but astute moment, Puar points out that we know so much
about the U.S. military personal perpetrating the abuse, but very little about the Iraqi prisoners. This lopsided over-abundance of information suggests a skewed form of historiographyone that fills in the information for the U.S. subject in order to argue for this figures unexpected departure from norms of justice and ethical behavior, while marking the suspected terrorist as only capable of being sexualized and violated, and nothing else. I find Puars attention to the speed, forms, and [End Page 537] intensity in which these photographs were mass distributed as a new approach to thinking about their importance. Following the work of Brian Massumi on affect and visuality, Puar shifts away from merely reading these photographs as representational artifacts, but as sites for exploring how the changing speed, intensity, and distribution of images in an age of technological simulacra go hand in hand with modern forms of imperial consolidation and expansion.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

18 Queer Theory K

Link - Terrorism
Counter terrorism efforts infect policy and morph it into a hegemonic machine that controls and constructs crisis situations in order to fuel a militaristic colonized subjectivity Puar and Rai 04, Assistant professor of women's and gender studies at Rutgers University; English
department at Florida State University. Jaswat K. and Amit,The Remaking of a Model Minority . Perverse Projectiles under the Specter of (Counter)Terrorism Social Text 22.3 (2004) 75-104 AJM The importance for counterterrorism of this necessary and panicked sliding between a fixed explanatory framework (that manages the crisis of monstrous terrorism) and a transnational, hypertechnologized, shifting terror network (constantly escaping the crosshairs of counterterrorist power) cannot be overstated: it is a productive machine, creating desires (for surveillance, for security, for the other, for knowledge, for unveiling and deturbaning), legitimation crises and techniques for their management, academic discourses, and new subjective and bodily forms (the citizen, the civilized, the terrorist-fag, the monster, the spy, the suicide bomber, the alien). The sliding from pyramidal structure to tentacling network generates perverse subjective, affective, and disciplinary forms (in)adequate to the new security state. Again, this sliding is not a metaphor: what is productive in it, what effects are produced through it is in fact the
question of an articulated machine.33 This machine organizes representations (discourses of civilizations, sexuality, races, nations, democracy, good, evil), temporalities (present modernity and archaic other), spaces (both the familiarizing techniques of military occupation of other nation-states and the uncanny otherness of the always receding "casbah," the new politics of "sovereign verticality" contending with the undulating folds of the camouflage-burka),34 and modulated intensities (the differential speed of the news, the triumph of victorious revenge, the pain of defeat, "IraqThe Video Game," the burden of freedom's defense, the anxiety of an ever-spreading virus). Thus counterterrorism constantly slides between the mobilization of uncertain affects (the blurring between patriotism, heroism, betrayal, fear, cruelty, pain, and pleasure through the encasing and knitting together of modulated rhythms of the mediatized body of technoscience) and the production of affects of uncertainty (anxiety, fear, vertigo). This terrifying sliding from always already mastered fixity to the untrackable diffuseness of terrorism is a machinic assemblage [End Page 90] in itself. Fixity and diffuseness are not two metaphors for terrorism and counterterrorism. They

name an interminable movement constituted by a set of specifiable practices and colonial histories immanent to the hegemonic project of counterterrorism itself: "Trajectories by which the state of exception and the relation of enmity have become the normative basis of the right to kill. In such instances, power (and not necessarily state power) continuously refers and appeals to exception, emergency, and a fictionalized notion of the enemy."35 Counterterrorism and its supposed Other, terror networks, are locked in a transnational struggle that in fact draws on all the strengths of the nation. In that sense, the new global alliance against the terrorist threat and the national security state function in tandem, developing a joint strategy (in other
words, structure sliding into network) that at once reterritorializes once exotic lands of the Near and Far East (not to mention Southeast Asia, South Asia, North Africa, and South America) and deterritorializes the now always vulnerable borders and already contaminated territories of the American nation-state.36

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

19 Queer Theory K

Impact - Heteronormativity
The normalization of heterosexuality has become a hidden monolith of power that controls all aspects of society. The epitome of domination and oppression is manifested in phallic whiteness' ability to normalize and determine the consciousness of individual subjects.
Winnubst 06, philosophy PhD, Penn State University
Shannon, Queering Freedom, 2006. p 125 AJM GoogleBooks And so what does this strange signifier, queer, have to do with these struggles for concepts of freedom? I offer three points of departure: the oppositional logic of gender (male/female) internal to heterosexuality as the naturalized norm of sexuality, and the oppositional politics (heterosexual/ homosexual) emergent from it; the doubled reduction of the self to desire and of desire to fields designated as sexual in cultures of phallicized whiteness, particularly as driven by dynamics of prohibition; and the intricate intersections of heterosexism and white supremacist racism. The normalizing of heterosexuality presents one of phallicized whitenesss most insidious

forms of domination namely, the normalizing of our self-consciousness as subjected to the law of desire. This model of subject-formation instantiates the forms of freedom specified above: the self emerges as an intrinsic identity harboring essential desires that must be liberated from the field of social, political, or economic prohibitions in order to fulfill the lack that drives them. The field of sexuality consequently becomes the field of liberation in cultures of phallicized whiteness, particularly as it attempts to totalize the possible positions of resistance to it: the signifier queer works to step outside of this totalizing logic and conceive of freedom down different rails of experience. (And it also conveniently introduces us to the last signifier in
the chain constituting phallicized whitenessstraight white propertied Protestant male.) As David Halperin describes the salient characteristics of heterosexuality, its structures echo my working hypothesis about the structures of whiteness and its domination of the signifying field. Heterosexuality functions in the same way that all privileged positions function: it hides its power. As Foucault puts it in volume 1 of The History of Sexuality, a text with a long and storied past in relation to queer theory and queer politics, 16 power is tolerable only on condition that it mask a substantial part of itself. Its success is proportional to its ability to hide its own mechanisms (1978, 86). Just as whiteness is phallicized through its necessary

veiling of the phallus, so too does heterosexuality now pose as the naturalized, ontological condition of humanity, rather than as the complex deployment and repetition of historicized and politicized discourses.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

20 Queer Theory K

Impact - Heterosexism
Compulsory heterosexuality is a social disease that erases anything different than it. Griffin 98, Alabama Environmental Council
Gwendolyn, Women and Language, Spring, http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-20852452.html AJM Heterosexism is a pervasive social disease which is widely (and silently) accepted throughout family, media, and society. Nearly all the media (which constantly reflect the focuses and desires of society) is exclusively heterosexual. The way our society is constructed and the influence media have in society only work to implement heterosexism. I question the ways which individuals may strive to cast out heterosexism, how we may refute compulsory heterosexuality, i.e., heterosexism. In turn, I hope to shift societys reference points such that people that they are, (including asexuals, bisexuals, and homosexuals) are considered by our society to be normal. Monique Wittig calls heterosexuality a political regime. Following from this, heterosexism is the enforcement of that regime. The overbearing presence of heterosexism within our society only highlights the hierarchy of heterosexuality over homosexuality. Heterosexuality is given more validity, more location, and infinite space to speak. As a result, homosexuals live in silence, unrecognized and invalidated. Unrecognition is the forerunner of these. If one is not presented in the everyday language and images surrounding us, one is in essence dismissed. As a homosexual, one has to fight for the notion that we even exist. It is by and from this recognition that violence against homosexuals is allowed to go virtually unchecked. Knowing this, one cannot help but have some grain of fear arising from having to question whether or not one is protected. This is also the fear of not being accepted by friends, coworkers, family, and acquaintances. In not having some part of ones self recognized, one may lead a fractured identity in which the homosexual aspect is muted. There is not space for that part to speak in the everyday realm. The barriers constructed by heterosexism would try to mold us. We must resist. We must speak until we are heard. We must fight the barriers, stand up for ourselves as our whole (not fractured) selves. We must work to undo the myths surrounding homosexuality, which flow form the stream of unrestrained ignorance. We must educate. That is the ultimate purpose of this paper: education. The following are examples from old journals of mine, added in an attempt to personalize this essay, in order that one might realize: it is not all just abstract theory; the personal is indeed political.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

21 Queer Theory K

Alternative Queer Citizenship


Refusing citizenship doesnt mean we relinquish our legal status it means when confronted with the question of queer migration, we should ask ourselves other ways of imagining collectives and communities. Harris 09, professor of English literature, Shippensburg University,
William Conley, Queer Externalities: Hazardous encounters in American culture. p191-3 AJM
Brandzel makes several important points that resonate with Queer Externalities; the failure of minority claims and experiences from one another; and, most importantly, the centrality of maintaining a stake in difference to an animating progressive political vision. Not treating race as if it were the same as queerness is important, but so is not treating queer the same as if it were straight (as much of an ideal as that seems). Otherwise, how profoundly can one undermine the production and promotion of normativity without the preservation of boundaries such as the gayborhood and gay and lesbian identitarian positions

All the same, Brandzel recommends withdrawal not from the poltical process per se but from that process, and from the nation, as imaginatively constituted. Instead of inducing the nation to imagine queer citizens (an imagining likely to draw on heteronormative terms), queers should seek, instead, to undermine the concept of citizen as the normative, exclusive unit of the nation. Citizen is a concept, as both Brandzel and Lee Edelman point out, structurally antithetical to and defined against queers. Neither the
marketing of queer in the entertainment industry nor perhaps even the institution of same-sex marriage can truly normalize queer. There will be gays and lesbians who dont wish to get married; the United States will still be constituted against a number of excluded inhabitants, unimaginable citizens. Conceiving of a citizenship that does not require universalizations, false

imaginaries, oracceptance of the progress narratives of U.S. citizenship is precisely what the opportunistic deployment of essentialism can procure, when paired with a healthy cognizance of categores fabricated status and exclusionary character (Brandzel p 64). To refuse citizenship altogether is not to opt out of the nation, but to ask what other ways of imagining collectivities are available to us. And gay and lesbian identity
homosexuality broadly and communally conceived is one source of collectivity that has sustained life and mobilized action in ways and through channels alien to the larger culture. At the same time, the confines of gay and lesbian identity should not fully dictate imaginative limits for queer politics or organization, but rather serve as a home base at once starting point, refuge, and bellwether. Critical reading of cultural artifacts from a full, even conflicting, set of

perspectives is indispensable to tracing normativitys pervasive yet irregular rhetorical effects and, correspondingly, the efficacy of various strategies and allies, both old and new, both local and wide ranging.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

22 Queer Theory K

Alternative - Queering
The act of queering is to transform an idea to allow it to exist outside of the dominant order. It has no identity or set of principles, it simply acts to deconstruct the violent anxiety and xenophobia of phallic whiteness.
Winnubst 06, philosophy PhD, Penn State University
Shannon, Queering Freedom 2006. p 139 AJM GoogleBooks If queer emerges from a space of endless contestation, it shifts and changes with historical contexts and their differential forces of power. To queer is to turn that historicity back upon itself, rendering order vulnerable to the excessive

possibilities swarming in the site of its emergence. It is to reinvigorate the endless space of contestation that haunts any claims to stasis, or nature, or identity. To queer is to emerge out of the fleeting space in which meanings are shaped before repetition rigidifies the excess possibilities beyond recuperation.
This is not a moment in any Hegelian self-consciousness. This is the space prior to the emergence of that damning self-Other dyad:

there is no self here and queer does not emerge against some Other. We cannot point to and identify that which is queer. (It is not a noun!) We can only track down its reverberations in the socio-psychic fields of our experience.
We can only attune ourselves to its effects, listening carefully for the interstice in which social signifiers are contested and excessive possibilities revisited or birthed for the first time. To queer things is to transform them, in ways we cannot

anticipate: to queer is to foil anticipation and its temporality of a future-anterior. If to queer is to speak and act from a space in which meanings are endlessly contested, this is not the space of reason. We late moderns constantly jump over this space, superseding it without even knowing we have done so. We habitually live in the space of assumed reason. Despite our alleged hedonism, we consistently grant privilege, and even a moral imperative, to the meaningful over the meaningless. 42 The meaningless causes anxiety, a restlessness that cannot function and is denied epistemological legibility. Rather than reducing it to the restful quietude and (alleged, apparent) stability of reasons control, to queer embraces this restlessness, antagonizing and exacerbating it. It causes anxiety in cultures of phallicized whiteness and their praise of reason. And it is this anxiety that takes on historicized forms, projected onto raced and sexed Others in cultures of phallicized whiteness, as we have seen over and over in these pages. This anxiety, expressed socially and psychically in the many forms of xenophobia, is bound tightly to the disavowal of meaninglessness, which we can only speak as a lack. Anxiety is the loss of reason, the beheading of reason, the entering of kinds and modes of experience where reason does not reign. To queer is to veer off the rails of reason, causing sheer anxiety in late modernity. AM.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

23 Queer Theory K

Alternative Queer Uncertainty


Refuse to act within systems of domination. We must open ourselves to the political queerness of our lives and embrace the radical uncertainty of events.
Winnubst 06, philosophy PhD, Penn State University
Shannon, Queering Freedom 2006. p 195 AJM GoogleBooks The scarcity at work in the production of our cheap consumer goods is not the scarcity of the middle class in the U.S. The United States is not a country of scarcity, but of a remarkably lopsided distribution of immense wealth. 15 The excess that drives our market

economy perpetuates inhuman scarcity in the lives that produce its goods. To excavate these lost pasts erased from our consuming consciousness opens middle-class consciousness onto the actual scarcities at work in the fictional scarcity of our consumption practices. To cultivate these memories opens onto a queer consciousness of how desire perpetuates systems of domination. It can
also open onto possibilities that things could be otherwise: we could consume differently, buying and growing and exchanging locally; we could even enjoy our lives without the onslaught of cheap consumer goods that increasingly keep most of the worlds population trapped in economic dependency and political subordination, while also locking us into the endless cycle of anxious consumption and future satiety. And we could recognize that the alleged scarcity of goods that sends us into buying frenzies and their promise of a more secure future is nothing but another marketing tool, one that depends on our not remembering how or where or why or for whom these objects are made. Our senses of

power and freedom change when we begin to think and act in these queer ways. Power is not about one class wielding economic and political power over another; it is about a web of interlocking values that perpetuate the domination of the most privileged at the expense of all other lives, most often through the narrative of desire and its myth of scarcity. And freedom is not to own as much as we desire; it is not to gain an illusory and impossible security in George W. Bushs Ownership Society. Freedom is to recognize the lost pasts embedded in our everyday practices and to cultivate pleasures that do not perpetuate these violences. It is to stop ignoring and erasing these lost pasts in our idolatry of the (markets) future, and thereby open onto different kinds of pleasures. These snapshots of different subject positions responses to living life without a concept of the future give us some sense of how cultures of phallicized whiteness perceive a call to a politics without a future. To halt the temporality of the future anterior as the dominant mode in which we live our lives is to resist these cultures and their values. It presents a way of interrupting and disrupting the domination of phallicized whiteness, decentering its grip on us. At the same time, to halt the temporality of the future calls us to risk radical uncertainty in the politics and erotics of our lives, to open ourselves to not-knowing and unknowing as viable modes of experience. For bodies in power, such a call to risk will likely affront our deepest senses of our selves and worlds: it will likely fall on deaf ears. For oppressed and dominated bodies, this may already be how we are living and to embrace it consciously may be experienced as a call to joy and creativity or, at a minimum, a profound relief. (I use we on both sides of this division to express the multiple subject positions I hold on the social map of power.) The call to a politics without a future strikes us in varying ways; it can be decentering, or even a relief, hilarious, and a sense of grounding for movements already underway, giving voice and a space in which to cultivate unimaginable pleasures. How we respond may tell us much about how queerly multiple our I of identity can become.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

24 Queer Theory K

Alternative - Queer Pedagogy

Pedagogical work requires that we consistently engage our institutions from a personal position. Heteronormative discourses are maintained through their process of ignorance and keeping queer issues relegated to the sidelines.

Winans 06, associate professor of English at Susquehanna University


Amy E., Pedagogy 6.1 (2006) 103-122 Queering Pedagogy in the English Classroom: Engaging with the Places Where Thinking Stops. AJM Crafting an effective pedagogy for addressing sexual orientation in the English classroom can transform how we understand the work of teaching critical thinking. As Henry A. Giroux (2001: 18) argues, "Pedagogy must always be contextually defined, allowing it to respond specifically to the conditions, formations, and problems that arise in various sites in which education takes place." Thus my
approach follows Giroux's call for educators [End Page 104] to "engage their teaching as a theoretical resource that is both shaped by and responds to the very problems that arise in the in-between spaces/places/contexts that connect classrooms with the experiences of everyday life" (1819). This work requires both

that we consciously invite into our classrooms discourses often kept outside them and that we help students recognize which discourse communities play such important roles in their lives that they frequently remain unquestioned. As students explore their memberships in various discourse communities and develop a deeper understanding of what those affiliations mean in their lives, they often begin to identify conflicts, sometimes between their discursive affiliations. Indeed, the task of negotiating memberships in multiple discourse communities is vital to the critical thinking with which students need to gain experience in our institutions. The cognitive dissonance that students experience in the midst of this work can challenge them to understand better both how their discursive affiliations impact them and how those communities produce knowledge.
At its root, the pedagogy I explore here asks that instructors consider, both for themselves and for their students, where, why, and how thinking and questioning stop within and

between various discursive positionings. Doing so entails recognizing that discourse communities are defined by both ignorance and knowledge. As Susanne
Luhmann (1998: 150) suggests, we are wise to read "ignorance and knowledge not as mutually exclusive but as implicated and constitutive of each other." What she means is that within a discourse community,

knowledge is defined by what it addresses, assumes, and questions as well as by what it ignores and leaves unquestioned. In discussing sexual difference in class, then,
students ask themselves questions like these: How do I feel and what do I know about this topic? Where does my knowledge come from? What is unknown to me? What is unthinkable to me and why? Questions like these are central to queer pedagogy because they help students learn both that knowledge is created and how knowledge is created.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

25 Queer Theory K

AT: Perm
___PERM DOESNT WORK. Adding queer content to a dominant framework leaves the heteronormative structures unchallenged. The alt can only solve if it remains distanced from the dominant mode of thought by challenging the tensions between the alt and the affirmative. Winans 06, associate professor of English at Susquehanna University
Amy E., Pedagogy 6.1 (2006) 103-122 Queering Pedagogy in the English Classroom: Engaging with the Places Where Thinking Stops. AJM
What I am proposing in this essay is not simply that we should discuss sexual orientation in our classrooms, although I believe that we should. Simply adding sexual orientation to the list of issues that we explore in our classes is insufficient for reasons that many scholars of multiculturalism have discussed. As Urvashi Vaid (1995), E. Shelley Reid (2004), and others have argued, simply adding materials

about "the other" does not challenge our pedagogy or conceptual framework in meaningful ways; the additive approach of inclusivity or celebration of difference tends to leave dominant cultural assumptions and their complex relationships to power unexamined. Simply put, changing the content of our classes does not necessarily impact our pedagogy. As Harriet Malinowitz (1995: 25253) explains, "It is possible to 'include' new discourses and yet simultaneously deny the tensions that exist around their proximity and their competing claims for territorial definition. Naming and engaging with these tensions is what sparks the chemical reaction that ineluctably queers the brew." It is this process of "queer[ing] the brew" that merits further exploration in our
classrooms.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

26 Queer Theory K

AT: Perm
ONLY COMPLETE CHANGE IN LOGICS SOLVES. The perm is just an add-and-stir approach. The only way to overcome the heteronormativity of citizenship is to completely overhaul the logic that fuels this oppression Koschoreck 2010, PhD Educational Policy and Planning Program UT Austin.
James W., Queer Scholarly Activism: An Exploration of the Moral Imperative of Queering Pedagogy and Advocating Social Change, International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 3.1, 8-25, http://www.freireproject.org/images/2321/IJCPv3_2.pdf AJM
At heart, this critical queer pedagogy aims at analyzing and deconstructing power structures, including the separation of knowledge into disciplines, and thus queer signifies not an identity, but a questioning stance, a cluster of methodolo- gies

that let us explore the taken for granted and the familiar from new vantage points, as Piotnek (2006) has defined it (p. 2). Queer is not limited to functioning as an umbrella term for all non-normative sexual orientations and practices, nor is queer pedagogy satisfied by the simple add-and-stir techniques of multicultural- ism or the similar logic of identity politics. Queer Studies, rooted in intersectional theory (Collins, 2000, 2004), would look very
different from Gay and Lesbian Studies, but queerness does embody (with an emphasis on the body) an anti-nor- mative, gender- and sex-centered perspective that is grounded in the knowledge that gender and sexuality are critical intersections of interlocking systems of op- pression (Combahee River Collective, 1_77, p. 2_) and are thus fundamental to any social justice initiative. My own queer pedagogy therefore engages Dotys (1__3) idea that queerness should challenge and confuse our understanding

and uses of sexual and gender categories (p. xvii) and pushes it further to challenge and confuse the very act of categorizing, disembodying, and institutionalizing.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

27 Queer Theory K

AT: Queer = capitalist


Our cards are more specific even if there is a capitalist link to queer theory, the benefits to immigration outweigh Bernstein 01, PhD, New York University
Mary, Queer Families, Queer Politics: Challenging Culture and the State, Edited by Mary Bernstein and Renate Reimann, p. 115 AJM

Yet, the capitalism/gay identity argument is limited in several important ways. First, it fails to capture the complexity of stratified-power relations beyond a simple class argument even if held to the Westernindustrial experience. Racial/ethnic dimensions are notably absent and must also be considered especially when family-economic interdependence plays so central a role in the paradigm. In the case of international migration,
familyeconomic interdependence may continue to play an important role in relations and identity even while reconfigured through migratory processes and when new systems of support are created. Second, while most social constructionists agree that gay identity is

linked with capitalist development, this body of literature fails to capture the multiplicity and fluidity of sexual identity and fails to conceptualize capitalist development as a global phenomenon with implications for sexuality and migratory patterns on a global scale. Unfortunately, migration-studies scholars have in turn ignored this literature
marked as gay studies and have not examined how sexuality may shape migratory processes.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

28 Queer Theory K

AT: Queer = Capitalist


Marxism refuses to recognize the importance of heterosexual institutes on capitalisms progress and identity production Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 4-5, GoogleBooks) AJM

One of the most remarkable features of the history of sexual identities is the lack of any consensus over how to understand precisely what sexuality is. What is the materiality of sexuality? Is it libidinal desire? Bodies and pleasures? Discourses? Culture-ideology? How do presuppositions about the materiality of sex affect how we understand sexual identity and how we craft a sexual politics? As I mentioned in the previous chapter, histories of sexuality invariably do not allow us to know sexuality as part of a social system in which humans produce what they require to meet their needs. And yet there is now a fairly substantial archive of scholarship on sexuality and sexual identity that sees them as material. I want to review some of this work in order to consider several currently reigning ways of thinking about the material of sex in relation to other ways of understanding it that have been marginalized or suppressed. This review will also highlight the pervasive ideological mandate to disconnect sexuality from capitalist production. Marxists themselves have been among the prime promoters of the fragmented thinking that has separated sexuality from social production. Both the work of Marx and most of the canon of Western marxism has with rare exception dismissed or ignored sexuality, desire, and affect, and simply not seen heterosexuality as a normative institution. I do not think it is necessary to excuse Marx and Engels's inability to theorize the role of sexuality and domestic labor in capitalist production by saying that they were products of their time or by claiming their biographical history is irrelevant to their theories. Male homosexuality was criminalized in Russia in 1832, outlawed in Prussia in the 1860s, and added to the penal code of Germany in 1871; the United States developed anti-homosexual laws on a state-by-state basis from the mid-1800s onwards (Edge 6-7). Engels died the year of Oscar Wilde's arrest, but the Labouchere Amendment under which Wilde was accused was enacted a decade earlier as the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885. In other words, both Marx and Engels could and perhaps should have known about these struggles, and especially about the law reform efforts in their native countries (Edge 44). Throughout Marx's life feminist arguments were also in the air, most of them liberal, some socialist. Yet while Marx supported the general principle of the emancipation of women, he did not directly engage with these feminist knowledges or address the linked roles of sexuality and gender in capitalist production. Nonetheless, the material connections between gendered sexuality and labor were very immediate-perhaps too immediate- material concerns in the lives of both Engel and Marx.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

29 Queer Theory K

AT: Queer = Capitalist


We must combine the global and the local in order to effectively solve for capitalism Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 4-5, GoogleBooks) AJM
By the same token, the organization of group identity, including sexual identities, by late capitalism's global reach is played out in local situations. Because late capitalist productionof capital, commodities, and forms of consciousnesshas so incorporated localities, an

oppositional critique has to be able to explain the interpenetration of these local arrangements with capital's global structures. It has to be able to offer an analysis that explains the ways capitalism functions as a complex structured totality and to make visible the myriad ways these structures manifest across a range of local sites. By affirming that a global analysis includes inquiry into localized cultural formations, I am not advocating that local concerns and identities be subsumed to a mechanistic social theory. We need analyses that examine how structures of power function in concrete, local ways. Sexual identities are racially and nationally differentiated, for example,
and they are differentially gendered in particular ways within and across social formations. These particulars are important components of the complex historical realities that people live by. Because localized understanding and local identities are the most available and intelligible ways of making sense of sexuality, however, they are often the most expedient and pedagogically useful points of entry for oppositional critical knowledge. But unfortunately, sexual identities are most often approached only in terms of their most immediateand in that sense local manifestation. The challenge for a

sexual politics that is to be truly radical, that not only sees and changes the immediately apparent social forms but makes visible and aims to change their reasons for being, is to trade in this local perspective for another pair of lenses, one that can allow us to know the historical relationship between the contradictions we most immediately experience and the social structures they are shaped by and help support.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

30 Queer Theory K

AT: Queer = Capitalist

Discourses of sexual oppression should be combined wth the fight against capitalism Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 4-5, GoogleBooks) AJM
One set of texts that succinctly demonstrates these different leanings is Carl Whitman's "Gay Manifesto" and the reply to it written by the gay socialist group Red Butterfly (Blasius and Phelan 38o-9o). Although Red Butterfly supports Whitman for

generally linking the individual effects of gay oppression to "the social and economic facts which are at once the cause and effects of this situation," they note the tension in his manifesto between personal freedom and the need for collective action, and they critique Whitman's promotion of "coming out" as an inadequate strategy for social change in itself because it can so easily separate personal liberation from changing the social conditions that foster gay oppression. Comprised of a loose network of collectives, journals, newsletters, study groups, conferences, and actions whose most intensive activity lasted only until the mid-seventies, the Gay Left represented a short-lived but vital willingness to make use of marxism as a critical framework to link sexual oppression to global capitalism. In fact, however, there were more gestures in this direction than there were developed theoretical explanations from which to forge a fundamentally anticapitalist activist politics. Nonetheless, the fact that a broad sector of the discourse of

gay liberation was at least in spirit directed toward connecting sexual oppression to the history of capitalism made this one of the most exciting flash points in the historical development of a critical and materialist understanding of sexuality.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

31 Queer Theory K

AT: Queer = Capitalist


We must combine the global and the local in order to effectively solve for capitalism Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 4-5, GoogleBooks) AJM
By the same token, the organization of group identity, including sexual identities, by late capitalism's global reach is played out in local situations. Because late capitalist productionof capital, commodities, and forms of consciousnesshas so incorporated localities, an

oppositional critique has to be able to explain the interpenetration of these local arrangements with capital's global structures. It has to be able to offer an analysis that explains the ways capitalism functions as a complex structured totality and to make visible the myriad ways these structures manifest across a range of local sites. By affirming that a global analysis includes inquiry into localized cultural formations, I am not advocating that local concerns and identities be subsumed to a mechanistic social theory. We need analyses that examine how structures of power function in concrete, local ways. Sexual identities are racially and nationally differentiated, for example,
and they are differentially gendered in particular ways within and across social formations. These particulars are important components of the complex historical realities that people live by. Because localized understanding and local identities are the most available and intelligible ways of making sense of sexuality, however, they are often the most expedient and pedagogically useful points of entry for oppositional critical knowledge. But unfortunately, sexual identities are most often approached only in terms of their most immediateand in that sense local manifestation. The challenge for a

sexual politics that is to be truly radical, that not only sees and changes the immediately apparent social forms but makes visible and aims to change their reasons for being, is to trade in this local perspective for another pair of lenses, one that can allow us to know the historical relationship between the contradictions we most immediately experience and the social structures they are shaped by and help support.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

32 Queer Theory K

AT: Feminism Arguments


We can only solve for patriarchy by addressing heteronormativity Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 4-5, GoogleBooks) AJM

In positing male and female as distinct and opposite sexes that are naturally attracted to one another, heterosexuality is integral to patriarchy. Woman's position as subordinate other, as (sexual) property, and as exploited laborer depends on a heterosexual matrix in which woman is taken to be man's opposite; his control over social resources, his clear thinking, strength, and sexual prowess depend on her being less able, less
rational, and never virile. As a pervasive institution within other institutions (state, education, church, media), heterosexuality helps guarantee patriarchal regulation of women's bodies, labor, and desires. Critiques of heterosexuality have often not acknowledged in fact they often disavow the relationship between heterosexuality and patriarchy. But

the struggles of lesbians in groups like Queer Nation and other gay political organizations are testimony to the fact that gender hierarchies persist between men and women even when both are fighting against heterosexuality as a regime of power (Maggenti).

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

33 Queer Theory K

AT: Feminism Arguments


The Man/Woman binary in feminism reinforces heterosexism Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 4-5, GoogleBooks) AJM
One of the most notable and trenchant features of Butler's analysis is her extension of feminism's theory of gender as culturally constructed to the more radical argument that the internal coherence of the identities -man" or "woman" presumes institutional heterosexuality. Much of the oppositional force of her critique lies in its insistent claim that

heteronormativity is absolutely central to the bourgeois ideology of expressive and coherent selfhood. This imaginary representation, she argues, "conceals the gender discontinuities that run rampant within heterosexual, bisexual, gay, and lesbian contexts where gender does not necessarily follow from sex, and desire or sexuality generally does not seem to follow from gender" (199oa, 135-36). From this perspective, heterosexuality, which is generally assumed to be an expression of the core of oneself, is exposed as a precarious fabrication always potentially at risk.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

34 Queer Theory K

AT: Queer = Bad Word


We must re-appropriate of the term queer from a negative term of exclusion to stand for the inherent instability in ANY identity. Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 4-5, GoogleBooks) AJM

Queer theory presented itself in the late eighties as an emphatically postmarxist critique of sexual identity politics. One of the defining features of queer theory is its effort to reorient a cultural and social movement based on identity politics and founded on the categories "gay" and "lesbian" in order to produce "another discursive horizon, another way of thinking the sexual" (de Lauretis 1991, iv). By the early nineties in academic theory, invoking the signifier "queer" paralleled the shift away from the terms "lesbian" and "gay" among some activists (Queer Nation, which gave the signifier "queer" national publicity, was founded in I99o). Claiming a queer identity is an effort to speak from and to the differences that have been suppressed both by heteronorms and by the homo-hetero binary: the transsexual, bisexual, and any other ways of "experiencing" and expressing sensuality and affect that do not conform to the prevailing organization of sexuality. It is an effort to unpack the monolithic identities "lesbian" and "gay," including the intricate ways lesbian and gay sexualities are inflected by heterosexual norms, race, gender, and ethnic differences. Embracing the category used to shame and cast out sexual deviants, queer theory and politics defiantly refuse the terms of the dominant discourse, offering instead an "in your face" rejection of proper sexual identities that is both anti-assimilationist and anti-separatist. Touting queerness is a gesture of rebellion against compulsory heterosexuality's pressure to be either hetero or invisible, either confidently normal or apologetically, shamefully, quietly queer. These knowledges carry an important critical force to the extent that they denaturalize how we think about sexuality and identity. Much of this denaturalizing draws from an array of postmodern theories that see sexuality and identity not as a fact of nature or a libidinal drive but rather as an unstable symbolic construction, a cultural effect. Queer theory distances itself from lesbian and gay identity politics because it sees any identity as internally divided and therefore not an apt or effective rallying point for change. "Queer" is a mark of the instability of identity. It makes visible the ways that heterosexuality functions as a normative power regime and highlights the arbitrariness of the neat distinctions it enforces (between masculine and feminine, straight and gay, for example) in how sexuality and genderand for some queer theorists race, toocome to be known. In all of these respects queer theory is a significant departure from lesbian and gay studies.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

35 Queer Theory K

Aff Queer Citizenship Fails


Queer citizenship is not as inclusive as it sounds it denies the material conditions that queers of color are trying to overcome Loutzenheiser and MacIntosh 04. Lisa W. is assistant professor of curriculum studies and Lori B. is a doctoral student in
educational studies, University of British Columbia. Theory Into Practice 43.2 (2004) 151-158 AJM

Queer citizenship is not part of multicultural or anti-racist teaching as it has been popularly constructed. The queer body, in its racialized, class-based, ethnically diverse subjectivities, has few access points in this dialogue. Without access, there can be no discernable voice, no political presence, no "legitimate" civic identity. Consequently one's identity as citizen proper is greatly compromised. While attempts to infuse curriculums with gender and sexuality have met with reasonable success, the recipe is largely an add-and-stir model in which gay and lesbian issues are treated as pedagogical isolates, focused on just long enough to substantiate a politics of Otherness. Now, publicly identified, the queer body is a socialized and political misfit known only through, and in, its Otherness. For the
queer student, this takes the form of a hidden and explicit curriculum that is unable and unwilling to fully incorporate pedagogies and contents that more than tolerate the inclusion of queer content through specific and planned curricular goals. By isolating curriculum and pedagogies, educators also lose opportunities to construct classroom knowledges that break down the hierarchical structure the classroom, where the teacher is all-knowing and students are deficit bodies bringing little or no useful knowledge to the classroom. Marginalized students often call for the pedagogical inclusion of curricula that has been typically relegated to the private (outside of school) sphere. By failing to incorporate these experiences, schools exclude relevant pedagogy for those most likely to be pushed out (Fine, 1991; Loutzenheiser, 2002).

Within education, the problem of restructuring heteronormative curricula and pedagogies involves reforming both the definition and enactments of citizenship. Often, notions of citizenship put forth in a rush to all-encompassing inclusivity reify the very paralytic structures they are working to overturn. The result is a citizenship discourse that, while partially inclusive in its categorical frameworks of naming, does not address the underlying dominant ideologies. These same underlying ideologies prohibit some newly named political bodies from engaging in the practice of citizenship. The inherent rights and freedoms of heteronormative citizenry are not accorded equally to the queer body, the body of color, the Othered bodies of those who do not fit neatly within the sociopolitical parameters. The result is the formation of boundaries in our classrooms.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

36 Queer Theory K

Aff Queer Citizenship Fails

The nature of capitalism means that queering citizenship is only beneficial for the people that are living within the US Ryan 07, PhD, University of Florida,
Maura, "Queer Internal Colonialism: Aiding Conquest Through Borderless Discourse" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, TBA, New York, New York City Online <PDF>. 2010-06-04 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p183033_index.html AJM To undertake a discussion of globalization and sexuality, one must understand that globalization operates unevenly, creating inequitable effects for people in different locales so that the specific effects of sexuality changes will be experienced differently depending on place (Binnie, 2004). Sexuality norms and sanctions for crossing them differ both between nations and within nations (Bell & Binnie, 2000; Binnie, 2004). In a very early example of this type of thinking Evans (1993) argued that in highly capitalistic societies,

the interests of the market state lead to commodification of the personal and private through the encouragement to purchase sexual lifestyles. Because of autonomy ideologies that come from capitalist economies, where people believe they should have human rights if they have economic/buying power, the purchasers of sexual lifestyles may demand sexual minority rights. The state, balancing the possibility of delegitimizing the ideology of capitalism and trying to keep sexual dissidents at bay, grants some privileges to sexual minorities, but refuses to grant others. This being so, people living within highly capitalistic nations will benefit from sexual progressiveness more so than people living outside of these nations. Further, within these capitalistic nations, those with the most economic power will benefit the most from this sexual permissiveness.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

37 Queer Theory K

Aff Queer Citizenship Fails

Most queers would not like queer citizenship it is a niche action that does not help most queerS Ryan 07, PhD, University of Florida,
Maura, "Queer Internal Colonialism: Aiding Conquest Through Borderless Discourse" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, TBA, New York, New York City Online <PDF>. 2010-06-04 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p183033_index.html AJM

If queer people are always outside of the national community, it is certain that some of them are more outside than others due to gender, race, and class markers that also place them outside the bounds of dominant citizenship. This
section of the paper takes for granted that overt forms of racism occur in the GLBT community in manifestations like gay white male eroticization of gay men of color and discriminatory practices within clubs, meeting places and organizations [for in-depth discussions of these occurrences see Hemphill, 1991; Manalansan, 2004]. Instead, the focus of this section is the way in which covert racist ideology functions in the GLBT community, creating an exclusionary environment for queer people of color, and possibly creating a queer version of internal colonialism. It stands to reason that, for queer people, the workings of the GLBT community are of more immediate consequence than queer theory. That being so, the idea of sexual citizenship would probably not resound with most queer people. However, a similar idea the idea that gay people are family members because of their similar experiences with sexual orientation would most likely sound familiar [see Weston, 1997]. So, where the theoretical body of literature on sexual citizenship argues

that queer people are all strangers to a national identity, but share the linkage of sexual dissidence, the GLBT community has increasingly become a self-described ethnic community with common language, culture, and political goals (Weston, 1995;
Stychin, 2000).

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

38 Queer Theory K

Aff Queer Citizenship Fails


Progressive policies and actions such as queer citizenship meant to help queers disproportionately aide affluent, white queer people. Ryan 07, PhD, University of Florida,
Maura, "Queer Internal Colonialism: Aiding Conquest Through Borderless Discourse" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, TBA, New York, New York City Online <PDF>. 2010-06-04 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p183033_index.html AJM According to Armstrong (2002), the GLBT community recognizes that their ethnic status is markedly different from other ethnic types because queerness is a category that people from very different backgrounds come to in later life. To mediate this problem, the community has reveled in the idea of celebrating diversity, both as a call to wider society to celebrate the sexual differences of its inhabitants and as a proud reminder that the community itself is diverse. However, since the 1980s, the GLBT community has received constant criticism from queers of color that this testament to diversity fails to include them (Armstrong, 2002; also see Ferguson, 2003). In fact, creating the appearance of a unified gay community has been a political strategy, produced to disassociate gay from strange or abnormal, and, more specifically to dissociate gay from queer; this particular strategy has meant a gay and lesbian dissociation from bisexual, transgender, and queer people in the social and political spheres (Gamson, 1995; Phelan, 2001). In what Phelan (2001) calls a flight from strangeness, gays and lesbians have attempted, as of late, to approximate normality by making the claim that the only difference between them and everyone else is the slight matter of sexual orientation and that they should therefore be entitled to privileges of the state [see also Warner, 2000]. As Kadi (1997) points out, when gay people

make the claim were just like you, what they mean is were just like you if you are White, male, and affluent and they do not mean, we are just like single Chicana mothers. The appeal to a national you, is a plea to be understood as just like the privileged members of society. It is also a way that white gay people have symbolically distanced themselves from all people of color, including queer people of color. If we were providing these gay claim makers with the benefit of the doubt, we might believe that when they say were just like you, what they mean is we (all queer people) are just like you (all Americans). However, Jindal (2004) argues that this type of gay and lesbian
political claim was especially present following the events of September 11th, where there was an attempt made by (white) gays and lesbians to benefit from the nationalist discourse that celebrated American insiders and demonized outsiders as dangerous and criminal. Specifically, gay and lesbian organizations touted that American hero Marc Bingham, who helped bring down flight 93 in Pennsylvania, was a gay man.2 They also called attention to the gays and lesbians who died in the towers and vocalized a gay and lesbian demand that these deaths be brought to justice. Hoping to be seen as patriotic members of the national community, gays and lesbians willingly entered into a racist discourse that legitimated some citizens and demonized others. This kind of political positioning has also occurred in

gay and lesbian arguments about same-sex marriage and same-sex parenting. In these arenas, affluent, white gays and lesbians, presenting themselves as the communitys representatives, position themselves as more legitimate partners/parents than people who can marry and choose not to, people who divorce, people who have children they cannot afford to care for, and people who have children by mistake (Boggis, 2001; Bailey, et al.,
2004; Hicks, 2006). In this way, affluent white gays and lesbians use their class and race privilege to legitimate themselves as partners, parents, and citizens by reifying the illegitimacy of other citizens (Hicks, 2006). Further, Bernstein and Reiman (2001) make the argument that progressive policies

meant to help gays and lesbians, such as domestic partnership benefits, disproportionately aide affluent, white gays and lesbians. If we return to the

necessary dimensions of internal colonialism, that there is an involuntary nature associated with the relationship between the dominant and subordinate September 16th is officially Marc Bingham day in San Francisco, California.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

39 Queer Theory K

Aff Queer Citizenship Fails

Queer theory fails to escape the heteronormative nation-state Smith 2010, teaches in media and cultural studies at the University of California, Riverside
Andrea; teaches in media and cultural studies at the University of California, Riverside. Queer Theory and Native Studies 16.1-2 AJM The question arises, then, why is settler colonialism so seriously undertheorized in queer studies, even within queer of color critique? One possibility may be that [End Page 58] queer studies has not considered the possibility of alternative forms of nationalism that are not structured by nation-states. To be fair, queer theory does offer strong critiques of the heteronormativity of the nation-state as well as the heteronormativity of the citizen, particularly the U.S. citizen. Puar's and Gopinath's work demonstrates how the noncitizen, particularly in the figure of the refugee or the immigrant, queers the state's heteronormativity. Berlant also looks at how queer activist

groups within the United States attempt to reconfigure citizenship within the current nation-state and even to question the "censoring imaginary of the state."66 Muoz similarly gestures to "beyond" the current political system when he
says, "Our charge as spectators and actors is to continue disidentifying with this world until we achieve new ones."67 Thus, queer theorists seem to exhibit some desire to think beyond the nation-state.

At the same time, queer theory seems to lapse back into presuming the givenness of the nation-state in general, and the United States in particular. For instance, Berlant contends: "It must be emphasized . . . that disidentification with U.S. nationality is not, at this moment, even a theoretical option for queer citizens. . . . We are compelled, then, to read America's lips. What can we do to force the officially constituted nation to speak a new political tongue?"68 This statement curiously occludes the struggles of many indigenous peoples who have articulated themselves as belonging to sovereign nations rather than as being U.S. citizens. The reason
for this occlusion can be found in another statement: Berlant contends that Native peoples "have long experienced simultaneously the wish to be full citizens and the violence of their partial citizenship." She collapses Native peoples into the category of racial minority rather than recognize them as colonized peoples struggling against a settler state.
69

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

40 Queer Theory K

Aff Queer = Whiteness


Within queer communities, affluent white gays and lesbians have been dominant in relation to GLBT people of color and experience greater social privileges outside of the gay community. Ryan 07, PhD, University of Florida,
Maura, "Queer Internal Colonialism: Aiding Conquest Through Borderless Discourse" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, TBA, New York, New York City Online <PDF>. 2010-06-04 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p183033_index.html AJM In a queer context, the first criteria might be rephrased to say that queer

internal colonialism includes a voluntary relationship between the dominant and subordinate group via entrance into the queer community, but where the dominant group members assert themselves as the representatives of the community and where subordinate group members cannot successfully make their needs visible to dominant group members or members outside the group. The second criteria might be paralleled to the white queer erasure, if not the destruction, of the specific needs of queer people of color. Finally, racism, both in overt and covert manifestations, is woefully present in the queer community. Certainly, for white queer people to be a dominant group, they would need to be a group that enjoyed the rights of full citizenship participation, which they do not. However, within gay enclaves, gay and lesbian organizations, and national positioning of GLBT rights issues, affluent white gays and lesbians have been dominant in relation to GLBT people of color and experience greater social privileges outside of the gay community. Because of external forces of institutionalized discrimination outside the gay community, white gays are able to marginalize queers of color within gay communities and through a racist discourse that attempts to legitimize affluent white gays as normal citizens, it reifies the larger U.S. internal colonialism of people of color in a more general fashion.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

41 Queer Theory K

Aff Queer = Bad


The term queer is demobilizing and the heart of contemporary queer theory is locked within an Ivory Tower McNulty 03, head of Brooklyn College's MFA program in dramaturgy and theater criticism
Charles, Queer Misgivings, Theater 33.3 (2003) 112-117 AJM When I wrote "The Queer As Drama Critic" for the Queer Theater issue of Theater that I guest-edited in 1993, the term queer had been newly radicalized. From its long-held derisive meaninga variant of queen and fagthe word had been reclaimed by gay and lesbian theorists and activists as a defiant call for building a broader coalition in the fight against AIDS. Rallying

together those minority groups most vulnerable to the epidemic's color-blind assault, queer became a banner under which more than just white, middle-class gays and lesbians could march. Implicit was the recognition that our identities were plural, not singularthat we belonged to concentric communities even as we are made to feel like we're living in the cracks of no community whatsoever. The new queer vision offered a revision of those identity politics movements, steeped in too fixed and narrow a sense of group belonging, which at
best amounted to a temporary corrective or reverse discourse, at worst a form of mini-nationalism blind to all but its own parochial struggle. As the opening of "Queer As Drama Critic" reveals, I couldn't resist adopting the new rainbow rhetoric, an academic form of hippiedom that was infinitely seductive to my graduate student ears: "The

term Queer is manifold; it seeks to encompass that which has been excluded, ridiculed, oppressed. Life caught in the margins. Sex yes, and sexuality, but also gender, race and class, and that which refuses easy taxonomy and
suffers the fate of difference. A philosophy never fixed nor realized, but a politics of shared struggle, and a striving for community." [End Page 112] Queers pursued this quixotic agenda raucously in the streets with ACT UP and Queer Nation, to name two of the more prominent avatars of the new militancy, which derived much of its rage from the mourning and melancholia of stigma. Meanwhile,

queer academics opted for a more abstract form of revolution, with a new generation of lesbian and gay scholars arming themselves with post-structuralist weapons to dismantle the calcified assumptions of identity. At question were the very tenets that had formed the basis of
the gay and lesbian civil rights movementsthat homosexuality was the basis of a valid minority identity. Though no queer theorists wanted to roll back the modest protections accrued since the Stonewall rebellion, there began a vigorous interrogation of the politics of identity categories, in particular the way binaries such as male/female, white/black, and straight/gay had shaped our social geography and thus distorted the internal landscape on which we patch together a sense of self. Admittedly, there was from the beginning a disconnection between the guerrilla-style protests taking place in New York, Washington, and San Francisco and the often recondite scholarly indirection of the theory. Worse, the

academic face of the movement didn't adequately reflect the new diversity that queer was meant to denote. Its look, in fact, was every bit as ivory tower as its formidable jargon. After the first flush of
intellectual passion, a kind of hypocrisy dogged queers in the university. Ironically, the real nail in the coffin came as a consequence of the miraculous changes wrought by medical breakthroughs in the fight against AIDS. The relative success of protease cocktailsthe wonder drug every HIV+ person can't help wondering aboutsapped the queer movement's sense of urgency. Though access to health care and the spread of new infection among the world's poor only went from worse to worse, activism in the United States measured steep declines. With the black and Latino inner-city communities being ravaged by the epidemic, never mind sub-Saharan Africa, the queer movement began to seem as phony about its political commitments as the ending of Tony Kushner's Angels in America, where the character Prior, somehow surviving his illness, utters the Pollyannaish sentiment, "The disease will be the end of many of us, but not nearly all, and the dead will be commemorated and will struggle on with the living, and we are not going away. We won't die secret deaths anymore. The world only spins forward. We will be citizens. The time has come." From its brief rabble-rousing caper, the word queer has now come full circle, returning to its primary definition of "strange, odd or unconventional in behavior, eccentric"though this time with a faddish (Queer As Folk) rather than freakish (Quentin Crisp) twist. What is the legacy of the queer movement? Even the most superficial glance at the current American milieu would suggest that the answer is neither political nor intellectual but cultural. Call it the Will and Grace phenomenon, which is essentially a nonnude version of the

Continues

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

42 Queer Theory K

Continued
Terrence McNally phenomenonLove! Valour! Compassion! for the PG-13 boob tube. Undoubtedly, gays and lesbians have [End Page 113] gained wider acceptance in the media, owning their social identities without apology or plea for tolerance. Homoa gay bar coinage that sums up the community's apolitical insouciancehas become fashionable in the urban mainstream. Like much else in the triumphal capitalism of the slaphappy Clinton nineties and the current Bush imperium, the

term

reflects the national trend of pervasive, even assaultive, commodification. Just as the
mainstream's uncritical faith invested globalization with the capacity to initiate democratic change, so there has been a ditzy sense that TV and Disney can more effectively pursue social justice than communal enlightenment and grassroots engagement can. Yet representation doesn't necessarily imply progressiveness, as any Will and Grace episode will attest. (For starters, why not try the genderretarded one when Grace gets into a jealous snit because Will offers his sperm to another woman friend desperate to have a baby?) Meanwhile, nothing short of a dirty bomb seems capable of awakening the complacently gayish American theater from its selfengrossed torpor of queeny jokes and drag musicals inspired by Hollywood hiccups. Assimilation in queer theater has left the scene intellectually impoverished at its core, financially so at its fringe.As I write this on the eve of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the New York City terrorist threat level still a menacing orange, consideration

of queer theory seems somehow quaint, a throwback to an era when the domestic scene could be fictitiously divorced from an international context. At this turbulent hour, it feels rather indulgent to parse Lacanian-inflected notions of desire and
identity, yet the unique potential of queer theory to deconstruct the boundaries between self and Other has never been more needed in the current military climate. The

major thrust of the queer movement, naively utopian as it may have been, was to bridge together disparate forms of marginalization under a proud sign of difference and to reflect on the paradoxical nature of identity, which can't help containing those debased terms it most vigilantly tries to exclude. If sexual practice was
the underlying queer theme, it wasn't exclusively so, as sex was understood to be one point in an interlocking matrix of personal data that includes gender, race, class, and as we so often conveniently forgot, national origin.In his new book, Savran tries to expand the queer construct so that it can grapple with concerns that include but are not limited to the usual queer bric-a-brac: sexual orientation, gender, and identity politics. Many of the essays were written after September 11, 2001, and hence give voice to a refreshing internationalist perspective. But what unites the work from both before and after this watershed historical moment is Savran's commitment to Marxism, which he treats as purely a tool of analysis and not an ideology.Questions of culture and identity are, for him, inseparably related to concerns of economics and power. Can there be a legitimate queer agenda that distances itself from such political concerns as the environment, human rights abuses, global poverty and famine, nuclear proliferation, and the world AIDS situationin short, the full spectrum [End Page 114] of issues that splits the world's haves and have-nots, oppressors and the oppressed? Can queers, no matter how economically advantaged, detach themselves from the larger struggle of civil injustice and still claim a designation that purports to be nothing if not inclusively political? As Savran warns, "Too

often, a self-congratulatory queer identificationthe politics of lifestylehas functioned as a substitute for a commitment to radical social change. And like the identity politics that it once embraces and problematizes, a queer politics too often, as Wendy Brown notes, 'may specifically abjure a critique of class power and class norms precisely insofar as these identities are established vis--vis a bourgeois norm of social acceptance, legal protection and relative material comforts.'"

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

43 Queer Theory K

Aff Queer Opposition Fails


The K represents queerness in opposition to heteronormative spacethis re-codes queerness as a stable identity with the essential quality of resistance. Oswin 08 Professor of Geography @ Natl University of Singapore
Natalie, Critical geographies and the uses of sexuality: deconstructing queer space Progress in Human Geography 32(1) p. 89 AJM Geographical engagements with queer theory have put the lives of non-heterosexuals on the disciplinary map. This is a somewhat paradoxical development since the main contribution that queer theory has made to sexuality studies has been a critique of sexual identity politics. As a poststructuralist approach, queer theory challenges the idea of the preconstituted sexual subject and understands power as productive rather than simply oppressive. In other words, it challenges sexuality studies to move beyond

humanist understandings of essential sexual identities that animate a politics of liberation for those who are presumably excluded from heterosexual hegemony. Yet, critical geo- graphers generally depict queer spaces as spaces of gays and lesbians or

queers existing in opposition to and as transgressions of heterosexual space. This article critiques this dominant disciplinary notion of queer space by exploring recent works within and beyond geography that offer new directions for queer geographies. The scholarship examined here attends to the instability of sexual subjectiv- ity and complicates abstract calculations of heterosexual dominance and homosexual resistance by conducting embodied analyses of queer cultural politics. As such, it accounts for fractures within queer cultural politics and merges postcolonial and critical race theory with queer theory to bring questions of race, colonialism, geopolitics, migration, globalization and nationalism to the fore in an area of study previously trained too nar- rowly on sexuality and gender. Some queer geographers have pushed these

insights so far that they, in fact, challenge the analytical usefulness of the notion of queer space and instead utilize queer theory to understand the ways in which sexuality is used as part of broad constellations of power across the heterosexual/homosexual divide. This deconstructive move has the potential to re-orientate

queer studies within geography by highlighting the ways in which a queer approach can be deployed to understand much more than the lives of queers. This article is written to contribute to the ad- vancement of a critical geography that goes beyond a sexual politics of recognition and a queer geography that engages deeply with feminist, postcolonial and critical race theories.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

44 Queer Theory K

Aff Action Key


We must combine micro and macro political strategy in order to address structures of heteronorative oppression Kirsch 00, professor of comparative studies at Florida Atlantic University
Max, Queer Theory and Social Change, 2000, page 117 AJM Strategy in this context consists of the ways in which we organize energy to meet the ends we seek to achieve. Strategy

as such is the mechanism by which true politics is generated, both on the personal and the political level. A true resistance politics has to incorporate both the micro and the macro levels of analysis to mediate differences and to confrton effectively the forces of well-organized opposition.
Lesbian, gay, and queer movements have, so far, depended on the involvement of individuals as the primary drivers of social change (and particularly the experience of labor movements) that individuals need to have structural representation in order to maintain the energy needed for sustained opposition. Individuals working against their oppressors, whether in the workplace or neighborhood, cannot succeed without a mechanism that can play a larger role in incorporating

them into communities of resistance where mutual recognition is present. Were Queer and Were Here is a necessary declaration of identity. But it is only a moment. Required is a strategy that can institutionalize a movement towards resistance so that change may be recognized as a social necessity. Differences will continue to exist. Black women face the sexism inherent in their relations
with men while confronting racism; lesbians are confrtoned with the hierarchy of sexual politics while dealing with arguments around pornography and sexual pleasure. And more economic issues such as the pervasive and growing feminization of poverty. Bisexual, transsexual, and transgendered peoples are often ignored by all. Queers, in general, encounter the real differences based on status and class as they experience the oppression of the dominant culture. But these are all in fact part of a larger class

struggle which is borne out in the conflict of the uses and control of energy and, ultimately, human regeneration. They need to be recognized as such. The test of successful movement will be whether we might honor all these divergent interests and experiences while joining together to forge a successful attempt to redistribute the rewards of labor and to end the violence of prejudice. Resistance, then, involves more than language-based opposition to noxious forces. Real opposition takes place in the realm of reproduction of community and the larger social sphere, on the basis of daily existence and in the realm of social and productive power.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

45 Queer Theory K

Aff Action Key

We must engage institutional structures to create social change Kirsch 00, professor of comparative studies at Florida Atlantic University
Max, Queer Theory and Social Change, 2000, page 9 AJM The gay and lesbian movement of the 1970s and 1980s politicized the conditions of everyday life and everyday culture. Almost everything we do, all art we create, all writing we do, is consciously or unconsciously political: it comes from

somewhere, it supports a particular point of view. But this abstract view of politics becomes more difficult when we start to consider social change and social movements. To say that everyday life is political does not guarantee that a political program is in place.
If our goal, then, is to create a society that accepts difference, welcomes diversity, and champions human rights, how do we get there? The relativity of identity and experience is not enough. We need to confront power in all of its aspects: who

holds it, how hegemony is maintained, what the dominant culture consists of and how it influences our daily lives and experiences. Strategies for change need to be connected and collective. This means that we need to refocus analytic energies, realizing that consciousness and action towards basic social change are interconnected; consciousness does not act on its own. There needs to be an identification process with social movements and with each other. In short, we still need to consider class, race, and history.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

46 Queer Theory K

Aff ID Politics Good


Identity categories are necessary to address the material realities of sexual minorities Kirsch 00, professor of comparative studies at Florida Atlantic University
Max, Queer Theory and Social Change, 2000, page 8 AJM

Whether queer, gay and lesbian, or neither, what these writers and activists have in common is their call for the acceptance of diversity. Diversity has become the benchmark of academic tolerance, the catch-all for policies that range from academic admissions and course of offerings, to the distribution of positions and power within workplaces and within broader communities. Whether their ideas are taken to extremes (the stand that to identify any categories is an affront to the differences that constitute diversity), or more geared toward institutional policy reform, these theorists are trying to work against current cultural trends that attempt to assimilate all difference into an arena of ideal types suitable for social cohesion and control. Diversity in Queer theory assumes the resistance to normativity and dominant cultural values. As we have seen, the use of power for Queer theorists is self-reflective: you can subvert its hegemony by refusing to conform to its practices. In to far as being political involves the exercise of power, individual action is political. It is subjective. Ultimately, the confusion and entanglement that the category queer creates in academic circles is constituted with contradictions: while Queer theory supposes that categories and labels are to be ignored, it is still a deconstruction of existing categories of peoples and cultures. In one sense, it is simply a reaction to labeling, and on that level it is undefinable in relation to a purpose, for it does not propose a social alternative. The we of identification is omitted. What is not addressed is the material reality that minorities are by definition part of the larger culture, labeled and determined by it. Like ethnicites, the act in tandem with dominant structure of power that militate against their full expression. Deconstructing categories of identity erases the specificity of the components of queer, in the name of queer is as queer is, or does

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

47 Queer Theory K

Queer Theory = Capitalist

The focus on tolerance for the queer identity is the wrong approach because it ignores the affects of capitalism on identities Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 3-4, GoogleBooks) AJM
By the early nineties AIDS had already reaped a staggering harvest of lives and mobilized the gay community in the United States, fueling cam paigns for social change that extended gay politics beyond demands for tolerance or "a place at the table." Many middle-class lesbians and gay men were in fact gradually if grudgingly being offered places tolerated and profitably eased into the newer, hipper currents of mainstream com modity culture. In this context, Bill Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military was only one very prominent articulation of a new backhanded change in the public face of gay tolerance and its link to na tional identity and state control. Indeed, tolerance was gaining more air

time; in the streets, in the media, and in the academy, "queer" was being promoted as a badge of pride and a standpoint for a new sexual politics that would extend beyond a liberal civil rights agenda. In the academy, and in the humanities especially, new knowledges some of them under the signature "queer theory"challenged traditional humanist under standings of the self and were nudging their way out of the embattled margins, moving
closer onto center stage. British cultural studies had al ready crossed the Atlantic to join indigenous variants in the United States; in critical concert with the voices of feminist and race theorists, postcolo nial, and lesbian and gay critics were redrawing the boundaries of tradi tional disciplines and redefining what counted as legitimate objects of study. Inside and outside the academy, capital

accumulation was being pumped up with new cyber subjects as its prime promoters, even as profits continued to rely on a very traditional source the gendered and racialized division of labor. As I will argue throughout this book, these and other contradictions are not so disparate as they may seem. Yet the complex social structures and power relations they span and that undergird the lived reality of late capitalism often remain invisible. This problem of visibilitywhich in cludes how we know and recognize certain identities (a very basic feature of the history of sexual identity) will be one of the recurring issues in this book. It is now a given that we cannot see homosexualtiy as a monolithic or universal identity, and it has become axiomatic that all sexual identities as they
are lived and experienced are intimately inflected by gender, race, nationality, ability, age. How these markers of difference have shaped lesbian and gay history and the history of sexuality in general is finally being studied, and in the process many of the cultural presuppo sitions and divisions on which the very concept of sexual identity is premised are being questioned. But often this work still

leaves unexam ined why the cultural differences that shape identities are organized as they are, and the relationship between sexual identities and capitalism re mains for the most part an unexploredeven unspeakablearea of in quiry.' Against this trend, I begin with the assumption that the history of sexual identityin all of the varied ways it has been culturally differenti ated and livedhas been fundamentally, though never simply, affected In several aspects by capitalism: wage labor, commodity production and consumption.' Because the relationship between
capitalism and sexual identity is complex, indirect, and historically variable, and because there is not a readily accessible conceptual vocabulary for explaining these connec taccid.. I give some extended attention to concepts (late capitalism, gendered divisions ions of labor, ideology, patriarchal structures) that may not seem to 'be related to sexual identity in any obvious way. I invite the reader to be patient with these seeming detours. I offer them because I hope they as interventions into the power of more obvious and perhaps more compelling ways of seeing.

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

48 Queer Theory K

Queer Theory = Capitalist

By redefining the term queer the affirmative defends potentially exploitive capitalist practices Hennessy 00, Professor of English at Rice University
(Rosemary, Profit and Pleasure, Pg. 4-5, GoogleBooks) AJM
Drawing on the ideas of Laclau and Mouffe, Butler, too, argues that the

constitutive antagonism written into meanings the nonclosure of definitions and identitiesis assured by a contingency or provisionality that underwrites every discursive formation (Butler 1993, 193). This mobilizing incompleteness is guaranteed, she contends, by the instability in "any and all signifying practices" (Butler 1993, 193). Each of these post-marxists insists
that the articulation of identities is not simply a linguistic process but pierces the entire density of a discursive formation. But

founding their conceptions of materiality only in symbolic processes means that social struggle, or what they call antagonism, is anchored only in the signan effect of differance. Differance is the term Jacques Derrida invented for the continual subversion of any positive meaning (or identity) by the excessive proliferation of signifiers (sound-images in language) that refuse to be attached to a single signified (referent or concept). Laclau and Mouffe, like Butler, contend that the neat oppositions (like heterosexual vs. homosexual or man vs. woman) underlying positive identities are, by virtue of their discursive construction, always open to deconstruction. The materiality of identities, as well as the inevitability of their deconstruction, is presented as a given feature of signification, an effect of the provisional fixing of the sign.
How are we to understand the materiality of this fixing? Why are meanings secured in certain ways and not others? Why do certain "nodal points" in a culture's logic (heterosexual, for instance) constitute the naturalized axes for identity in some social formations? These questions mark the limits of postmarxism: the unspeakable causal logic elicited by the question "Why?" However, as Althusser's conception of overdetermination suggests, causality need not be reductive, totalizing, or expressive, even as it directs us to consider that the reproduction of the means to meet human needs is never entirely subsumed by cultural or symbolic forms.

Capitalism as a mode of producing the means for survival is tellingly absent in post-marxist cultural materialist analysis. Indeed, it must be if social life is to be seen as constitutively symbolic. This symbolic openness, defined exclusively in relation to political
(state) and ideological (normative) processes, is the basis for Butler's enthusiastic endorsement of Laclau and Mouffe's radical democracy. Butler sets radical democracy against "a causal theory of historical events or social relations" (1993, 192) and insists that the basic ingredient in how we understand the social is its indeterminacy, always leaving open the possible production of new subjects (1993, 193). One problem with this argument for openness is that it potentially endorses anyeven exploitativesocial relations. Giving priority to political reform and to democratic ideals that recognize no relation between state formations, constructions of meaning, and divisions of labor and wealth has, of course, a long history in liberal reform movements where questions about "rights for what?" get suppressed under the impetus for equal rights within capitalism. If the aim for social

movement is to secure democratic rights and privileges within capitalism, what responsibility does a radical queer politics have to confront the limits of this endeavor?

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

49 Queer Theory K

Aff Perm
Queering means breaking down the binary frames of reference and moving beyond the either/or stance that competition creates. Combine the Kritik with the affirmative to create realistic change while affirming queerness. Ronald 04, MA in Gender Studies from the University of Leeds
Lee, Reading as Act of Queer Love: The Role of Intimacy in the Readerly Contract Journal of International Womens Studies, 5.2, Googlescholar. AJM Although it may be useful to debate the notion of a queer reader and the problems inherent in this identification, I wish to instead to concentrate upon the possibility of using queering itself as an active strategy for rethinking and reordering readerly possibility; here, it becomes an activity that allows us to rethink binary frames of reference. I propose that this

strategy manifests mainly through the reader/text encounter where re-imagining this encounter is one method of moving beyond an oppositional either/or stance. Through the activity of queering, the reader/text encounter could be reinvented, made strange and its conventional framework undermined. By this I mean by concentrating upon reconfiguration of the oppositional stance, reader/text, re-imagining it as a different sort of relationship, one less competitive and tense, instead more inclusive and mutual. Here, a queer charge may also be detected in an awareness of how confidently we label what an encounter between may involve. Such a concentration upon the relationship (or rather the relationship potential) of reader/text, and its openness to being queered also operates to foreground the nature of desire in all textual liaisons. Simultaneously, rethinking relationships between may also lead us to emphasise the position and possibility of
the other. Perhaps it is this queer approach that may most effectively be mined for a new readerly discourse regarding difference?

ADI 2010 Fellows--Montee

50 Queer Theory K

Aff - Perm
Perm: We must combine Queer Theory with specific institutional appeals to create social change and resistance against oppression Kirsch 00, professor of comparative studies at Florida Atlantic University
Max, Queer Theory and Social Change, 2000, page 42 AJM GoogleBooks Because much

of Queer theory confuses personal action with structural power, it asserts the primacy of the first or individual aspect, while ignoring its determinants. On an interpersonal level, we can demand and expect to be treated as equals, capable of determining our own fate. But resistance to structural power requires the more concerted energy of collective action. To analyze aspects of interpersonal power and politics
in isolation from the larger structural concerns and barriers they confront denies the agency of the individual in the social. For our purposes, sexuality and gender are site[s] of power (Weeks, 1985: 176), and as such they need to be situated in place and time. The movements of the 1960s and 1970s located personal decision in the realm of the political. But it is in the discussion of what level of politics is being brought to the forefront that Queer theory has failed to make inroads, and this has worked against this essential element of political relationships. While certain Queer theorists celebrate difference and see the refusal to identify as a radical act (cf. esp. Butler, 1991; 1994), we can see that these assertions are supportive of the same ideal of the individual as

self that capitalism has created. It attempts to take the logical effect and material consequence of the captialist system, the reified individual, and use it to rectify inequality. Queer theory needs to account for the difference between the self and the individual in much the same way that it needs to inorporate postomodernity into the realm of the postmodern A perception that we can reject binary systems of gender without rejecting all bases for identity, however temporary they may be, is necessary for true resistance and social change. We cannot fight alone, not against a world system with military power and the ever-present threat of force and economic destruction. If all things queer, then, is to become anything more than a novel digestion of difference, it must include the individual as more than the self as text. It must accommodate the individual in society.