I've a bone to pick with Queer Anarchist politics
Jun 3 2007 10:43
Being a 'paid up member' [doing the dishes, carrying sound systems] of Queer mutiny has given me friends, confidence, knowledge and insight into my own 'sexuality', and pleanty of nights of just being absolutely munted...
However nearly all QM party-goers, members so forth are the well-off crusty types... while I have less issues with this than some do [though I see the issues and agree with most] I'm wondering- why is this a majoritively university student thought?
Any clues how to get over this hurdle?
Jun 3 2007 14:00
#2
yeah queer theory is obviously just a "uni kid thing". It couldn't possibly be ideas about the billions of queer people suffering under the violent domination of gender and heterocapitalist norms. clearly its just about parties and reading groups. 
Jun 3 2007 14:15
#3
well that's my limited experience of the queer scene in one particular place. thrashing chomsky asked why it was a sub-cultural thing in one particular place, i told him my own experience of the copenhagen scene, and the reasons i thought it was confined to the subculture in that circumstance, i'm not pretending to speak for all queer movements or for queer theory itself.
Jun 3 2007 16:19
#4
"when we do not know, we should cease to speak"
Wittgenstein
Jun 3 2007 16:37
#5
I think the problem is culture, not politics. I know a fair amount of radical queers who are not from the university scene, and they have a lot of the same politics and beliefs as the scene you are describing. I think it is the culture that is not in common. Plus, communities become more and more insular when it is the same 50 people attending the same conferences and festivals with no thought towards outreach. And by outreach I don't mean "How can we get more people of color/poor folks to get involved in our projects," but "what might people of color/poor people not feel welcome in our organiizing."
Jun 5 2007 14:50
#6
revolutionrugger wrote:
yeah queer theory is obviously just a "uni kid thing". It couldn't possibly be ideas about the billions of queer people suffering under the violent domination of gender and heterocapitalist norms. clearly its just about parties and reading groups.
How many queer people do you know that talk about queer theory outside of a university context RR? I've not heard of it outside of a university context (although to be fair that is where I meet most people)
There's a difference between everyday action and queer theory. I would also imagine that younger people are much more likely to be involved with queer theory because they will have an identity to negotiate with/create, whereas older queers will have made their peace with it.
Ideas about the day to day life of queer people are not necessarily queer theory, and to be honest I don't think we need queer theory, it seems divisive. I would speak against groups based on gender/race/nationality and I don't see this as any different.
heterocapitalist is a stupid term. Capitalism could quite easily work on a clear model, the fact that heterosexuality is the norm under capitalism does not make heterosexuality bad in any sense. Capitalism is the problem, it degrades all of us. As a straight male my sexuality is also under attack from capitalism, it is straightened, channelled and homogenised so it has little or nothing to do with what I actually think or feel. Just because 'my' sexuality is suposedly valourised does not mean that it is or that I derive any benefit from it. I thought we'd had this one out already RR.
If queer theory is to have any purpose it is to improve people's daily lives by freeing them from the constrictions imposed upon sexuality and behaviour. I don't want to be Mr Big from SATC any more than you want to be Stanford.
Jun 6 2007 16:02
#7
all i know about queer mutiny is that my straight friend in london has started saying he is 'queer' and not being restrained by sexuality labels 
May 23 2009 04:37
#8
The only thing I don't like about Queer Anarchists or some other groups in general is the assumption that I am vegan or vegetarian...
I don't mind eating vegan or vegetarian food but for fuck's sake if I like meat as well don't look at me like I'm evil. If the setting is a no-meat area then I will comply with that out of respect.
This brings me to my other question...do vegans swallow? Lol
May 23 2009 05:51
#9
Thrashing_chomsky wrote:
Being a 'paid up member' [doing the dishes, carrying sound systems] of Queer mutiny has given me friends, confidence, knowledge and insight into my own 'sexuality', and pleanty of nights of just being absolutely munted...However nearly all QM party-goers, members so forth are the well-off crusty types... while I have less issues with this than some do [though I see the issues and agree with most] I'm wondering- why is this a majoritively university student thought?
Any clues how to get over this hurdle?
In London, there was a Sexwork University held which drew in about 200+ police including sex workers, prosititutes, students, academics. Apparently was really succesful and was outward looking in the sense of organising sex workers through the GMB amongst other things. This was organised by people who are involved in Queer politics in London.
There was also an active no borders group whose main activists were all heavily involved in the Queer scene.
As for parties, have yet to experience the "wank tent" or the "cock wall" - (you can use your imagination). What can I say I am heterosexualconservative, doesn't really turn me on. :-0)
May 23 2009 19:48
#10
revolutionrugger wrote:
yeah queer theory is obviously just a "uni kid thing". It couldn't possibly be ideas about the billions of queer people suffering under the violent domination of gender and heterocapitalist norms. clearly its just about parties and reading groups.
LOLZ you said heterocapitalist.
Maybe because most gay people get on with doing what they doing without needing to imagine their sex lives are something revolutionary?
May 24 2009 01:57
#11
Quote:
There's a difference between everyday action and queer theory. I would also imagine that younger people are much more likely to be involved with queer theory because they will have an identity to negotiate with/create, whereas older queers will have made their peace with it.
Ideas about the day to day life of queer people are not necessarily queer theory, and to be honest I don't think we need queer theory, it seems divisive. I would speak against groups based on gender/race/nationality and I don't see this as any different.
heterocapitalist is a stupid term. Capitalism could quite easily work on a clear model, the fact that heterosexuality is the norm under capitalism does not make heterosexuality bad in any sense. Capitalism is the problem, it degrades all of us. As a straight male my sexuality is also under attack from capitalism, it is straightened, channelled and homogenised so it has little or nothing to do with what I actually think or feel. Just because 'my' sexuality is suposedly valourised does not mean that it is odoes not mean that it is or that I derive any benefit from it.
Spot-on critique right there.
Most of the Queer politics around this area involve activities such as this:
http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/swf/mvp.swf?8%3A152716%3A1&v=84510643574&ev=0
(Personal fav part when they chant "we're here, we're Queer, we're Anarchist we'll fuck you up")
As well as going into churches and screaming words like "Cunt" and "fuck" and thinking they are starting a sexual revolution or having "queer slumber parties". I have asked a few about what they think sexual revolution actually is and what they are doing and they generally have nothing of substance to say other than some Crimethink/lifestylist BS.
May 24 2009 05:16
#12
Ina wrote:
http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/swf/mvp.swf?8%3A152716%3A1&v=84510643574&ev=0
(Personal fav part when they chant "we're here, we're Queer, we're Anarchist we'll fuck you up")
uh... wow... that was painful to watch...
my personal fav was when they asked consent of the headstone to have an "orgy" on emma's grave.
May 24 2009 05:55
#13
Ye that was a little bit fucking juvenile not to mention utterly fucking stupid and pointless...
Emma Goldman was a fucking great writer and thinker but I really do not see why we need to be like the far Left and have idols to look up to like the Marxists do or the Bolsheviks...
When I read something from any of the better known thinkers I take it on board and make my own opinion of it...I don't worship them. That is just stupid.
May 24 2009 12:27
#14
Pretending to fuck on someone's grave is treating them like an idol?
May 24 2009 12:43
#15
why the fuck would you fuck on someone's grave, unless you're a goth?
also all these queer anarcho activities just sound like an excuse to be a sex pest.
May 24 2009 14:43
#16
that video is one of the most cringe-worthy I have seen all year. So much for "reterritorialising desire through public orgies" ...
May 24 2009 18:43
#17
Everything else in that video is far too childish to comment on. I know gay class struggle anarchists, they dont bang on about which gender they like to fuck, that is the domain of useless lifestylist fucks who really want to identify as part of an oppressed group.
Admin delete: no 'jokey' homophobia please.
May 24 2009 18:45
#18
ps - worst orgy ever, I cant fap to this
May 25 2009 00:00
#19
I can't believe that many people all agreed that this would be good idea. Really fucking disturbing. I am afraid to sleep, for I know what grotesque nightmares await me!
May 25 2009 06:33
#20
weeler wrote:
ps - worst orgy ever, I cant fap to this
Yeah, shit as it is, it can hardly be called sex; at most a couple of strapons got wanked. I would imagine that even most crusties would want a bit of skin at least, what's the point?
May 25 2009 12:46
#21
weeler wrote:
Hands off pat benetar faggots. Everything else in that video is far too childish to comment on. I know gay class struggle anarchists, they dont bang on about which gender they like to fuck, that is the domain of useless lifestylist fucks who really want to identify as part of an oppressed group.
TBF, there are plenty of queer class struggle anarchists who organise around both the specific oppression they face as queers and around wider class struggle issues. Nowt wrong with that. The idea that gays can only be communists as long as they don't "bang on about which gender they like to fuck" sounds a little too close to telling them to get back in the closet to me.
May 25 2009 12:52
#22
weeler wrote:
Hands off pat benetar faggots.
Nice. Any chance you could fuck off and die?
May 25 2009 12:55
#23
Anyway, I've got a lot of time for the saner end of queer theory, the concept of heteronormativity seems pretty useful, even if orgies on Emma Goldman's grave are not.
May 25 2009 13:06
#24
Farce wrote:
TBF, there are plenty of queer class struggle anarchists who organise around both the specific oppression they face as queers and around wider class struggle issues. Nowt wrong with that. The idea that gays can only be communists as long as they don't "bang on about which gender they like to fuck" sounds a little too close to telling them to get back in the closet to me.
Personally unless it's someone who fancies me then I don't really want to hear about who wants to fuck anyone. And as much as I'd enjoy getting laid tonight, with or without a tombstone, I doubt it would advance communism either way.
Gays can be communists whether or not they bang on about who they like to fuck as long as they realise that it has no impact on bringing communism about.
May 25 2009 14:12
#25
jef costello wrote:
Personally unless it's someone who fancies me then I don't really want to hear about who wants to fuck anyone. And as much as I'd enjoy getting laid tonight, with or without a tombstone, I doubt it would advance communism either way.
I suspect that even after the revolution, people who're in love will still bang on and on about it, despite no-one in earshot giving a shit. But maybe that's just me being heteronormative again.
jef costello wrote:
Gays can be communists whether or not they bang on about who they like to fuck as long as they realise that it has no impact on bringing communism about.
Whether or not it helps bring communism about, it's still the case that gays face specific forms of oppression, and attempts to organise against that oppression deserve the support of...anyone who's not a dick, really. I'd also argue that one of the aspects of that oppression (not the most important one, obv, but still one that exists, and should be challenged) is the idea that it's less legitimate for gays to bang on about who they like to fuck than it is for straights to do the same thing. And, to be fair, a lot of existing mainstream culture consists of straights banging on about who they like to fuck.
May 25 2009 19:34
#26
Farce wrote:
Whether or not it helps bring communism about, it's still the case that gays face specific forms of oppression, and attempts to organise against that oppression deserve the support of...anyone who's not a dick, really. I'd also argue that one of the aspects of that oppression (not the most important one, obv, but still one that exists, and should be challenged) is the idea that it's less legitimate for gays to bang on about who they like to fuck than it is for straights to do the same thing. And, to be fair, a lot of existing mainstream culture consists of straights banging on about who they like to fuck.
Aye.
I think a lot of straight people don't realise that they talk about being straight all the time, they just don't talk about it in those terms. When a straight person mentions their partner, they're making conversation, when a queer person mentions their partner, they're "banging on about it".
May 25 2009 20:35
#27
madashell wrote:
When a straight person mentions their partner, they're making conversation, when a queer person mentions their partner, they're "banging on about it".
that very much depends on who you're talking to.
May 25 2009 20:44
#28
jef costello wrote:
that very much depends on who you're talking to.
Well obviously, but it remains the case that LGBTQs exprience oppression of a sort that straight people do not, and organising against that is a positive thing, it just seems to me like a fair few people on here are coming very close to dismissing that altogether because of the stupidity of a few lifestylists.
May 26 2009 13:22
#29
Obviously dismissing any group that experiences oppression is wrong. However, as stated before by jef costello both straight people and LGBTQs sexuality is marginalized and exploited. I've never really thought about it but judging by my past I am probablly considered Bi, but really it is not really an important issue to me and I don't strictly identify as such. My sexuality does not affect the way I relate to other people as much as my position as a worker does. LGBTQ people may be more oppressed than straight, but I think the point is niether will gain any "sexual freedom" or whatever in till all groups do. This is will probably never happen in till capitalism is abolished and that will not happen unless we see eachother as united as oppressed in our everyday lives as workers/students/anyone who is not an elite not in our personal lives as LGBTQs or any other isolated group identity.
Don't get me wrong, being from a place where in most states gay people are not allowed to have the same opportunites as married straight couples is totally wrong and I would support gay rights if it ever came up. Reforms to help oppressed groups are great and all, but as long as capitalism and government are intact everyone will still be oppressed or exploited in one way or another if not because of their sexuality then because they are workers. These reforms are not revolutionary and not something I personally care to spend much time concentrating on.
May 26 2009 14:02
#30
madashell wrote:
Farce wrote:
Whether or not it helps bring communism about, it's still the case that gays face specific forms of oppression, and attempts to organise against that oppression deserve the support of...anyone who's not a dick, really. I'd also argue that one of the aspects of that oppression (not the most important one, obv, but still one that exists, and should be challenged) is the idea that it's less legitimate for gays to bang on about who they like to fuck than it is for straights to do the same thing. And, to be fair, a lot of existing mainstream culture consists of straights banging on about who they like to fuck.Aye.
I think a lot of straight people don't realise that they talk about being straight all the time, they just don't talk about it in those terms. When a straight person mentions their partner, they're making conversation, when a queer person mentions their partner, they're "banging on about it".
I don't really think that's the point though, it's more the issue of these self prcolaimed Anarcho-Queer activists banging on about who or what they fuck like it's of political relevance, this is made especially banal because the very places where this "queeer activism" happens tend to be the most sexually liberal in the first place.
As for Queer theory being useful because of the notion of 'heteronormativity', well I'm afraid just like 'Queer theory' itself, it's really just a rebranding of a body ideas that have been aound for quite a while, in this case 'heterosexism' for posers.
well i have a pretty limited knowledge of queer politics (only that i've been around it through the anarcho scene in copenhagen and had some friends who were into it) but since comes out of academia it shouldn't be very surprising that it's mainly a uni kid thing. i suppose you should look at its language and its arguments (very abstract and academic) but also the institutions and cliques through which it spreads (e.g. workshops, counter cultural festivals etc) for clues. certainly in copenhagen it was centred around the counter-cultural scene which was itself very much a privileged scene. as far as i know, the practice of the queer scene in copenhagen consisted predominantly of very public parties and more private reading groups, it seemed like it was fairly content in the subculture to be honest.