Queer Theory

[which doctor]

What do you people think about queer theory.

In brief it states that one's gender and sexual identidy are created by the environment in which the person exists?

I have to agree with it, what about you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_theory

[BurnTheOliveTree]

Hmm. I always imagined that people were at least slightly pre-disposed to a particular sexuality. Could it not be the case that it is a combination of environment and genetics? I mean, there are people who don't want to be gay for fear of being ostracized, particularly people brought up in religious families. In this case I cannot imagine that genes have nothing at all to do with it. I confess I have not read the wikipedia article, i'm slightly strapped for time.

-Alex

[Angry Young Man]

I grew up in a very homophobic area (Norfolk) and yet I'm gay... possibly bi.

[TC]

Of course there is a social basis to traditional gender roles in so far as they follow from the power dynamic in class society...but this does not mean that sex, gender, and sexual orientation are purely social constructs...they have a physiological and biological basis as well so they can not be completely reduced to social constructs (although society migh exaggerate aspects) and to ignore this is to reject a materialist analysis which considers all material factors, both social and biological.

Both an 'essentialist' strict biologically deterministic perspective and a post-modernist social constructionist "queer theory" are reductionistic in their approach and artificially reject important apects of gender and sexuality. Gender and sexuality are neither purely social or biological because people are influenced by both social and biological affects.


So i suppose, i think queer theory is a catagorically flawed reaction to another catagorically flawed theory (evolutionary-pschology's biological essentialism), and that gender and sexuality need to be evaluated from a materialist, marxist perspective taking all factors into account.

[VermontLeft]

In brief it states that one's gender and sexual identidy are created by the environment in which the person exists?

...and nothing else?

Sorry but that sounds really simplistic. and frankly its just as dangerous as saying that all identity comes from biolog.

i mean i understand the political benefits of "queer theory". if its true, it means that all the problems of discrimination, sexism, homophobia, heterosexism, gender identiy disorder, and everything else are all due to "bad societies" and can be eliminated by "fixing" it.

it also gives a nice political response against those who say that women or gays are "naturally" weaker or whatever. instead, you can say, no, cause theres no such thing as naturally anything!

its the same reason as leftists we reject any notion of a "human nature" and why rigthtists are so quick to embrace any hint of one.

now, we know that right now any evidence for that "nature" is pretty much nil and history has shown that so-called "unchangable" human traits are actually quite sociable changable.

but that does not mean that all human behaviours are the products of society. logically, that just doesnt make sense anyway. i mean tyhe brain is just like any other part of the body and to say that it cant evolve, that it cant match conditions ....that's pure fnatastic idealism.

no, traits that are basic to humanity, things like sex and reproduction. attraction and sexual identity those things really cant be compleytely "social" creations.

for one thing, again, these things are too bsic and for another they are just too univerrsal for evey society on earth to have "made up" so similar "identities" and "roles".


look, i really do get the appeal of this kind of theory, again for political reasons, but we really cant let science become politicized like that. that kind of pseudoscience is why some members of this site reject established physics like the big bang cause it seems to "close" to "chrisitianity".

real scientists should be allowed to do real science without politicians picking and choosing what they "like" from their work!

[Mujer Libre]

I'm very much into queer theory, especially from a feminist point of view. Sounds weird, combining an identity politics point of view with what is essentially an anti-identity movement- but it makes sense. By breaking down gender/sex/sexuality binaries you get rid of the discrimination and stereotypes that go with them.

I find queer really exciting, radical and in line with anarchist ways of looking at things. Yay, now I'm all excited about queer theory...

[TC]

I completely agree with everything VermontLeft just said.

By breaking down gender/sex/sexuality binaries you get rid of the discrimination and stereotypes that go with them.

There are other ways of breaking down discrimination and sterotypes than taking the anti-materialist view that sex for instance, is not a binary or virtual binary. The claim that sexual orientation cannot be reduced to relatively distinct catagories, is an empirical claim, (perhaps not two but half a dozen, but those would still be distinct), so it requires an empirical method of evaluation; to assert that sexuality is indistinct, fluid, or a spectrum, without giving any empirical basis for it, is to grant an untested hypothesis the status of a substantiated theory without the required standard of proof.

People make this as a political claim, but its actually a scientific question, so making unscientific assertions about it (like, that a "gender/sex/sexuality binary" is socially constructed) is really not very meaningful.