S7) Queer Theories from Somewhere

by Margot Weiss

what does ‘ethnographising’ and ‘transnationalising’ queer theory mean?

• ethnographising: grounding concepts of queer theory in real life with help of ethnographic descriptions

  • emphasising positionality, focusing on fluidity, deconstructing norms and centering marginalized voices to understand power dynamics and social relations

• transnationalising: expanding queer theroy beyond it’s euro-american frame, understanding gender and sexuality globally

  • adressing limitations of eurocentric, traditional queer theory, analysing diverse queer experiences across boarders

  • emphasis on situatedness of (all) theories, not universal queer theory → instead queer theory of some geopolitical locations

  • PLURALITY OF QUEER THEORY

what understanding of the role of queer anthro does she criticise?

• un/undertheorised → queer anthro doesn’t produce own theory, it just applies queer theory in ethnographies

• voices and experiences of queer people are seen as data or evidence, not modes of theory

• theory and data are not dividable, they constitute one another

• anthro: data provider of situated knowledge, seems local and descriptive vs. queer theory portrayed as universal and unsituated

• (universal) queer theory is only ethnographised, it is only applied not expanded

how are genealogies/the “origin story” of queer theory political?

• queer theory is seen as unsituated and concepts seen as universal, but:

  • theories are situated and contextual!

• queer anthro as origin of many queer theories innovations

• genealogies challenge idea of a fixed, stable origin for queer identity/theory

• origin story emerged from activist movements, challenged heteronormativity, destabilises fixed categories of identity, …

(V) sexuality in classic ethnographies

• Malinowksi (1927): sexuality dominates almost every aspect of culture

• Margaret Mead (1928): sex before marriage and same-sex relations, criticises sexual repression

• C. Vance (2004): anthropologists as fearless investigators that break through erotophobic intellectual taboos

1960s/70s: women studies

• ethnographic male bias, missing representation of women

• Moore & Strathern, critique on women studies: self ghettoisation (focus on women makes it seem like women are v different from men)

postcolonial critique and intersectionality

• Mohanty: assumption of universal repression of women reproduces essentialised assumption of gender, no uniform category of ‘woman’

• Crenshaw, intersectionality: gender works alongside different discriminary lines (ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, age, religion, dis/ability)

• sex/gender system as socially constructed ‘set of arrangements’ (Gayle Rubin)

charmed circle (Gayle Rubin)

• hierarchal system of sexual value

• focus on sexual normativity (instead of sexual identity)

• much of the oppression of women is borne by, mediated through and constituted within sexuality

queer anthro - recent key aspects

• strong interest in masculinity (fragile, toxic, hegemonial masculinity)

• combination of gender and sexuality (sexual rights, anti-genderism)

• new focus on bodily materiality

fazit

• it’s not abt what gender “is”, it’s about how femininity and masculinity are created performatively and how they are normed societally

• researching gender requires intersectionality

• queer anthropology was never just “generating data” it also created theories

• queer theory is situated and “from somewhere”