329
and critique of other queer
theorists. Seidman argues, like
Foucault and British sociologist
Jeffrey Weeks, that sexuality is
“constructed.” Industrialization
and urbanization, which gendered
social space by creating the public
male world of work and the private
female world of the home, produced
significant changes in how we
understand masculinity and
femininity, and the regulation of
sexuality. Many of the qualities of
gender and sexuality that we now
see as natural (“heteronormative”
means heterosexuality deemed to
be the normal sexual orientation)
were established at this time, such
as women being seen as nurturing
and caring, men being regarded as
sexually active, and homosexuality
being viewed as a perversion.
Seidman suggests that up until
the late 20th century, the study of
sexuality can be seen as a history
of homosexuality. To the sciences
of the 19th century, as well as to
sexology and Freudian psychology,
heterosexuality was normal and not
in need of examination. In effect,
this moment in history established
many of the social inequalities that
persist, such as the divisions
between men and women.Questions of identity
Because queer theorists such as
Seidman regard identity as socially
constructed, it is considered
unstable and lacking coherence;
even something seemingly
as stable as biological sex is
questioned. Few individuals fit
neatly into the categories “man”
or “woman”—when tested on
chromosomes, hormones, genes,
or anatomy most will fit somewhere
on a continuum. Some men may
look very masculine but have high
levels of “female” hormones, or a
micropenis, while some women
may be very tall or hairy, which
are qualities we are encouraged
to view as masculine.
When babies are born with
ambiguous sex, surgeons have
often intervened, removing a boy’s
small penis and suggesting that he
be brought up a girl: a paradoxical
response that is at one and
the same time essentialist, by
assuming that a characteristic of
“real” men is that they have large
penises, and social constructionist,
by implying that identity is really
a matter of social conditioning.
By challenging the idea of unitary
identity, such as straight, and
rejecting binary ways of thinking,
such as man/woman, Seidman is
fundamentally critiquing identity-
based theory and politics.
Feminism and the lesbian and
gay movements emerged as forms
of identity politics to challenge
patriarchal and heteronormative
society. However, critics argued
that these movements were
promptly dominated by the whitemiddle class (and men, in the case
of lesbian and gay politics). At
times, such groups also took
essentialist approaches to identity,
meaning that they saw identities
as rooted in biology and therefore
natural or normal. As Butler argues,
in this context the marginalized
identities themselves, by producing
fixed meanings, become complicit
in reaffirming the binary regimes.
Seidman argues that queer theory
provides a necessary challenge
to the normative gay and lesbian
politics because these sexual
identities reproduce the processes
of power they seek to challenge.Challenging the norm
In his influential text The Trouble
with Normal: Sex, Politics, and the
Ethics of Queer Life (1999), Michael
Warner argues that the concept of
“queer” is not just about resisting
the norm but challenging the very
idea of normal behavior. Because
“queer” is about attitude rather
than identity, anyone who
challenges the norm or the
expected can be ”queer”—for
instance, couples who decide
not to have children. ❯❯See also: Judith Butler 56–61 ■ R.W. Connell 88–89 ■ Michel Foucault 302–03 ■ Adrienne Rich 304–09 ■
Christine Delphy 312–17 ■ Jeffrey Weeks 324–25
FAMILIES AND INTIMACIES
Let’s declare war against
the center, against all
centers, all authorities
in the name of difference.
Steven SeidmanIn India, the Supreme Court in
2014 upheld the right of transgender
individuals, an ancient group called
hijra, to self-identify their sex, thereby
creating a third gender status in law.