|
Fluidity

Thomas Eakins, The Swimming
Hole, 1885, oil painting
Queer identity is open and fluid, still best described as love and
longing. Although our bodies have been endlessly scrutinized and
interrogated, we cannot be contained. In other societies same-sex
sexual experience is enjoyed by one hundred percent of the
population.[i]
Nothing biological impedes the rampant reproduction of
homosexuality. Yet we are surrounded by “science” that aims to
pin it down, to make of us a minority who cannot help being what we
are. Simon LeVay,
neuroscientist and author of Queer
Science, notes that social
acceptance of homosexuals hinges on the belief that we are not like
them. We cannot infect, subvert or seduce them
because we are born that way and they, emphatically, are not. Still
there remains the lingering question of whether, perhaps secretly,
or unconsciously, they really are.
Homosexuality is the identity that is always possible. Queer cannot
finally be fixed by difference. We can never really be said to stand
opposite an other that constitutes our border and limit. We are
everywhere. Ours is an identity that lurks inside, and might just
rub the thighs of our fiercest enemies.
The scientists who puzzle over the ears of lesbians and the
hypothalami of gay men[ii]
wonder how to identify the objects of their research. How does one
search for a gay gene, without deciding just what constitutes
homosexuality? Is homosexuality defined by practices or desires?
Does the concept include only those who publicly describe themselves
as gay or lesbian, or does it also comprise those who hide, deny or
equivocate? Does homosexuality describe all
those who engage in same-sex sexual behaviors, even in
sex-segregated spaces like prison, the military, logging camps,
nunneries, and girls’ schools, where same-sex sexuality is so
widespread? What of those big, tough women and effeminate men who
are married with children and grandchildren? In different social
circumstances, would their gender dissonance be expressed in
homosexuality? And then there are the many people whose same-sex
relationships are not sexual, but are still passionate and primary.
Is there anyone at all who can remain untouched by the fluid fact of
homosexuality?
We are taught to assume that
opposite-sex sexuality is the erotic preference of the normal, the
majority. In the powerful 1980 essay, “Compulsory Heterosexuality
and Lesbian Existence,” Adrienne Rich comments, “[heterosexuality]
is an enormous assumption to have glided so silently into the
foundations of our thought.”[iii]
In fact, she notes and apparently proves with numerous examples of
coercion and punishment, “heterosexuality may not be a ‘preference’
at all but something that has to be imposed, managed, organized,
propagandized, and maintained by force. . . .” Without the brutal
imposition of gender roles, patriarchal powers, and opposite-sex
sexuality, would there be one person who did not enjoy the magic and
mystery of being gay?
In the 1980’s –
partially in response to Rich’s influential essay –
women opposing patriarchy seemed all to be privileging and
professing lesbianism. For a short time, “lesbian-feminist”
became a hyphenated identity, as if one never arrived without the
other. In the 1990’s “queer” achieved a similar kind of
slipperiness, until the word almost managed to refuse and abandon
its origins in homosexuality, and name everyone with the requisite
gear. Homophobia sometimes poisoned these willful assumptions of
almost-gay identities, as when lesbian-feminists called their
butch-femme contemporaries unenlightened, or queer straights decried
the essentialism of radical gays. Still, these are moments when
homosexuality was purposefully embraced as a tool, a mask and a
posture expressing social meanings. Perhaps it requires only a
quixotic courage to identify oneself as queer, and then to use
homosexuality as a source of knowledge and power.
Despite the fluidity of gay identities, and a suspicion that
homosexuality may be “the primitive form of sexual longing,”[iv]
as Freud wrote in 1899, there is no denying that being queer is a
radical form of existence. Where others submit to the same dull
round of repetition and reproduction, we go by preference,
astonishment, the surprise of desire. Instead of vanishing into
predictable categories, gays and lesbians transform established
patterns, seek new habitats and abandon others, live and thrive
where it seems we cannot.
Our identity-with-homosexuality is derived
through our kinship with one another. We seek and recall each other.
The connection is magical, for we not only see in each other a
present, kindred spirit, we know each other’s past: our childhood
as shy boys and bold girls who climbed trees and talked to
butterflies. We know, as Harry Hay describes it, how we had to pull
the green frog-skin of heterosexual conformity over ourselves to get
through high school with a full set of teeth.[v]
And how, if we are not yet free of it, the fairy prince or princess
that we are is there beneath the skin, waiting to be awakened with a
kiss. “I do not doubt I am to meet you again, / I am to see to it that I do not lose you,” sings Walt Whitman.
[vi] Queer is an irrevocable
bond. Ours is no subcultural community where people share a heritage
and common culture. More of an interculture, we are everywhere,
extending into the dominant culture in so many ways, on so many
trajectories, that queer could be the glue that holds the mosaic of
subcultures together. Being
queer means building identity across and between us, bridging
differences of sexuality, gender, race, culture and class. This form
of community is chosen and achieved, not simply given. Where most
communities gain their strength and structure by rejecting the
other, we accept each pilgrim who announces their affinity.
We are everywhere, and yet we each have to literally fabricate
ourselves and each other as lesbian and gay people in hostile
environments. The love which invents us is nothing ordinary. It is
tough and daring, gracious as a drag-queen, fierce as a bull-dagger,
and just as astonishing as a woman-loving-woman, a man-loving-man.
Through homosexuality we make an extraordinary leap into a sex with
no other abjected and
opposite.
Surely everyone has the capacity for homosexuality, but few
have the courage. No one who is not –
or not-yet – gay can grasp
this. In 1972 Martha Shelley writes, “I will tell you what we
want, we radical homosexuals: not for you to tolerate us, or to
accept us, but to understand us. And that you can only do by
becoming one of us. We want to reach the homosexuals entombed in
you, to liberate our brothers and sisters locked in the prisons of
your skulls.”[vii]
Liberating this inner homosexual means something different from
tasting the forbidden fruit of same-sex sexual experience. There is
not really a question of whether you have or have not. There is the
question of whether, from the endless possible responses to the
(universal?) experience of same-sex desire, you choose love. Instead
of living a bounded and defended sexual identity,
being queer means having open, fluid identifications
with other who are like
us, or who may become so, or who may once have been so. Will Roscoe
writes of the Navaho third-gender nádleehí,
“the one who is (constantly) changing.”[viii]
Adding a third and fourth term to the binary system of gender,
queer upsets the balance and invites motion and change.
Science would like to prove that homosexuality is a
permanent, pathological state. Western culture imagines us as a
distinct minority. But someone completely improbable is always
coming out, while others freeze up and go back in. Queer precludes
closure. If the lesbian and gay community has integrity, it is like
a watershed. Gary Snyder describes the watershed as “the first and
last nation, whose boundaries, though subtly shifting, are
inarguable. . . . The watershed gives us a home, and a place to go
upstream, downstream, and across in.”[ix]
The queer nation has this character. It is continually taking in and
letting go, the way rain swells the creeks and streams, and the
river flows into the sea. Of course gay and lesbian people can be
just as intent as anyone else on vanishing into predictable
categories: gender, sexual identity, family, race, class, nation,
occupation. Yet the water is still there, singing its secrets. Being
queer gives us a kinship with all life, like water. And even when
ditched, diked, dammed, and filled with garbage, water will find its
way down. ▼
[i]
As, for example, among the Sambian people of New Guinea where
sex between men and boys is universally practiced and endowed
with vital religious and cultural meanings, as studied by
anthropologist Gilbert Herdt. See Mondimore, 1996, ( 15-18).
[ii]
An article titled “Study Links Ears, sexual preference” in
the Province newspaper
(March 3, 1998, A15) describes a difference in the sensitivity
of the inner ears of lesbians and heterosexual women. “Now
researchers at the University of Texas, Austin, said they found
the inner ears of female homosexuals have undergone ‘masculinization,’
probably from hormone exposure before birth.”
Simon LeVay (1996)
is the author of the hypothalamus study. David Halperin (1995)
describes the appearance in San Francisco of a new gay disco
called Club Hypothalamus, shortly after the publication of LeVay’s
notorious study. He writes, “The point was clearly to reclaim
a word that had contributed to our scientific objectification,
to the remedicalization of sexual orientation, and to transform
it ludicrously into a badge of gay identity and a vehicle of
queer pleasure.” (48).
[iii]
Adrienne Rich, 1986, (34); (50).
[iv]
Sigmund
Freud, letter to Wilhelm Fliess, October 17, 1899, quoted by
Christine Downing, 1989, (50).
[v]
Harry Hay, in Mark Thompson, 1987, (198).
[vi] Walt Whitman, “To A
Stranger,” Calamus Cluster, Leaves
of Grass, Fredson Bowers, ed., 1955, (105).
[vii]
Martha Shelley,
1972 Gay Liberation Classic Out of the Closets Jay and Young
eds, reprinted 1992, quoted in Annamarie Jagose, 1996, (40).
[viii]
Will
Roscoe, 1998,
(45).
[ix]
Gary Snyder, 1992, (271).
|