Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T18:07:09.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Deconstructing queer theory, or, some difficulties in a theory and politics of difference

from Part II - Engaging difference: from lesbian and gay studies to queer theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2010

Steven Seidman
Affiliation:
State University of New York, Albany
Get access

Summary

From at least the early 1950s through the mid-1970s, the idea was widespread in American society that what was called homosexuality was a phenomenon with a uniform meaning across histories. Both mainstream America and the homosexual mainstream assumed that homosexuality marks out a common human identity. Public dispute has centered on the moral significance of this presumed natural fact. Whereas the post-World War II scientific, medical, and legal establishment routinely figured homosexuality as signaling a psychologically abnormal, morally inferior, and socially deviant human type, homophile groups and their supporters defended the “normality” of “the homosexual.” Even the mainstream lesbian and gay movements of the 1970s primarily contested stereotypes of homosexuality, not the notion that “the homosexual” is a distinct human type. Public struggles easily folded into friend-versus-foe of “the homosexual.”

Since the late 1970s, the terms of the struggle over “homosexuality” have changed dramatically. The assumption that “homosexuality” is a uniform, identical condition has given way to the notion that the meaning of samesex sexual desire varies considerably within and across societies (e.g., by class, race, ethnicity, or subcultural identity). By the early 1980s, it had become conventional wisdom among many intellectuals at least that the meaning and therefore the experience of same-sex sexuality articulates a social and historical, not a natural and universal, logic.

One consequence of the “constructionist” questioning of “essentialism” has been the loss of innocence within the gay community. The presumption of a lesbian and gay community unified by a common baseline of experience and interest has been placed into seemingly permanent doubt.

Type
Chapter
Information
Difference Troubles
Queering Social Theory and Sexual Politics
, pp. 139 - 162
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×