Introducing ‘Queer Theory Of Identity’ and Judith Butler

We were having some debates on Identities and their actions/effect on the society. I also faced debates in my freind circle couple of times. I think it will not be bad idea, after all, to introduce readers about the ‘Queer’ theory. Since we have space/size limitations, we can briefly go with it and you can put your own twist in the blog.

The ‘Queer’ means ‘peculiar’, i.e, ’something that is not of normative form’. Judith Butler is the lady behind this theory. If you want more information, please search in google. There are plenty of links.

Let us define some ‘words’ here. The word ‘Sex’ will mean ‘male’, or ‘female’ based on ‘organic’ difference, the word ‘gender’ will be ‘feminine’ or ‘masculine’. Notice carefully that  the ’gender’ and ’sex’ are not equal in this sense!

Now lets jump into the classic theory(you always have a ‘classic’ version of a theory before you get a new one!). The ‘Humanist’ in early to mid 70’s claimed that Identity group based on Sex is natural, innate (something fundamental that is inescapable). The ‘Feminist’  later then challenged this(Humanist) ‘rigid boundaries’ of the identities telling that ‘Sex is not the ultimate destiny’. Now Judith Butler was arguing that the ‘Feminists’ made a mistake by choosing an Identity class first based on sex (For example, they are telling ‘We are Feminists’) and then trying to get rid of it’.

Today I will try to reach the same conclusion but from POST modernist view point. I will explain why ‘Feminism’ did not gain enough ‘appeal’ to the philosophers’ world. I will simply show that Judith Butler’s theory is infact equivalent to Jacques Derrida’s Theory. Some people might already have done that but I dont know about such analysis. I want to give it a shot!! I will ‘deconstruct’(not exactly the true deconstruct…..) the idea of ‘Sex’ based Identity(which a lot of people did long ago but I am re-introducing).

‘Having a ‘p’ oran is not necessarily put you in power’. Without having a ‘P’ organ (i.e having a ‘V’ organ) should not necessarily put you in any ‘complex’(Read Asad bhai’s previous comments on sexuality and castration complex). This idea, according to experts, is borrowed from the ‘animal’ world. But look, even in the animal world we have plenty of examples where animal with ‘V’ organs are more active and industrious and capable than those with their corresponding ‘p’ part(Honey bee vs Drone,etc etc). So if someone construct  a ‘discourse’ putting the ‘p’ organ in the center(POST modernist call it Logo Center) and putting ‘V’ in the perifery or ‘less important partner in the binary pair’, can not definitely claim the validity of entire postulation of the ‘Discourse’, thus one can not say “Hey ,We have ‘P’ so we are better than the ‘V’ groups”–In short, sex based identity  doesnot have valid/universal ground. Now, some of you guys will still frawn and  argue, “Well we are stronger than females”. But again this new ’strength’ based ‘Discourse is claiming ‘Strength’ as the center and ‘weakness’ at the perifery of the circle and again forming binary (biased )pairs. Now, the more you ’strengthen’ the ‘repelling force’ in this binary junction, the more stronger will be the ‘Discourse’. However if you choose other ‘pairs’ and adjust their poles and align them together, YOU WILL CREAT FACT, YOU WILL CREAT KNOWLEDGE’. Let me pick some of the other pairs: 1. Strong vs Weak(I am repating, though) 2. Larger brain vs smaller brain 3. Intellient vs dumb 4. Savingly vs Wasteful 5.Loyal vs Trecheraous 5. Bold vs Meek 6. Big vs Small 7. Masculine vs Feminine 8. Grave vs Light

Now pick all the left hand side of the partner word:

(Strong, Intelligent, Brainy, Thoughtful, Saving,Loyal) are the ‘MAN’!

(Weak, dumb, wasteful(do more shopping),meek, trecherous) are the WOMAN! they suck!!

Once a discourse is formed, otehr pairs  come into the picture and strengthen it, make it more believable and you put it inside your brain and  knowlege, because knowledge is formed from such ‘texts’.

The feminists based their ground on ‘gendar’, denying sex, telling “Just because I have a ‘V’ , you should not pay me less money in my job. We women need more”. But they disregard the fact that ‘They already subclassed their Identity class from a base class-Sex”.(Oops! I am using  OOP in software, my professional discourse!), they are standing on a very strong, thousand years old discourse, and basing themselves on a much ‘Fluidic’ identities  based on gender(Feminine vs masculine). The sex based identity separation was far way stronger than ‘gender’ based separation. Let me clarify, please read my following sentences:” Some females are stroneger than males“(please see the muscles of female WWF wrestler!!, they  capable of  rupturing your bones in bed! Oops taht sounded so hurting for my male ego!!). “Some males behave like females(Dont forget  hermafrodytes)”,” Some males behave ‘females’ to other ‘males’(gay)”.”Some males have more passion about beautification, gardening, flowery things, are very nitty”.”Some males are very meek, loyal”. Folks, now you tell me,”Gender is a valid center for contrast”. So feminist movement could not have much ground when the ‘Lacan(Or Focault, I forgot) raised a comparison between ‘White middle class woman in western vs Black asian/african man elswhere’ and challenged that the ‘Tortured White Female was gaining more from the Untortured, male-shuvenist (pig )African/Asian Male in the east’-THEREFORE Feminism is not an Universal movement and CANNOT BE”. It is unjustify to have some movement.

Here comes Judith Butler with her queer theory that Identitites are not innately constructed, are not something rigid, not fundamental, rather, they are ‘Fluidic’ in nature. They are kinda like ‘Floating’. She told us about feminists’ movement, that based on such ‘Fluidic Boundaries’, you lost your chance to win the battle. She used the word ‘Inescapable‘. 

Advertisements

One Response to “Introducing ‘Queer Theory Of Identity’ and Judith Butler”

  1. leannpoole20708 Says:

    In this way you can improve your Facebook supporters.nIt was a fairly appealing, kind of depressing video. In the last 7 weeks,nmy Fibromy Click http://tu2s.in/pookme100830

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: