Judith Butler Critically Queer

Many of the symbols that have been used against LGBT+ or queer individuals have been reclaimed as symbols of pride, whether that be the pink triangle used by Nazis to mark homosexuals, or the bloodied hands from AIDS adopted by ACT UP, who used that imagery as symbolic of the Reagan administration’s ignoral of AIDS. Regardless of its past and current use as a pejorative, the term “queer” has a worthy place and unique definition in the realm of queer theory. Unlike the rather concrete definitions of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual, the definition of “queer” has been approached as a deconstruction of heteronormativity, as a label to an existing marginalization, as a linguistic construction, and as an embraced intersectional identity. But regardless

Furthermore, since queer and homosexual are only categories that emerge when compared to the dominant power matrix, or by failing to repeat heteronormative performativity, the queer identity is inherently a deconstruction of the heteronormative identity. Queer culture and art draws heavy emphasis on this disassembly of societal norms, such as Butler’s highlight of drag queens, who perform shows that satirize white ideas of femininity to absurd degrees (Butler 22). But Butler importantly acknowledges the failure of “queer” as an umbrella in racial minority communities and in its inability to coalesce the LGBTQ+ community because of how “queer” must function in relation to “other modalities of power,” and each separate minority has a different relationship to dominant power structures. Calls for intersectionality in contemporary queer theory seek to address this concern

However, the close proximity of queer and intersectionality despite their differences drew certain theorist, such as Gloria Anzaldua, to identify as queer before terms such as LGBT+ both because of race and class. When thinking of the term “lesbian,” Anzaldua imagines the white lesbian, particularly one of upper class, and instead would choose to refer to herself as “queer” or a “dyke” because of their working class and more racially inclusive communities (164). The race and class connotations of the term “lesbian” become even more exclusive if “lesbian” is used to refer authors, because it can then be connotated that the author is white, upper class, and writes exclusively about sexual and romantic relationships. Like at the beginning of the paper, “lesbian” is a concrete term, but it also carries suggestions of race, class, and gender presentation. Contrarily, “queer” can even be considered a deconstruction of terms such as “lesbian” by working against race and class expectations. This allows “queers (including cultural Others) can fill in gaps in a lesbian text and reconstruct it, where a straight woman might not,” and she continues that she is “arguing for a lesbian sensibility, not a lesbian aesthetic” (170). Anzaldua approached more than the queer identity from a deconstructionist standpoint, and also sought to deconstruct white societal expectations, as well as