å Friday, April 7th, 2017

In her essay, Punks, Bulldaggers, and, Welfare Queens the Radical Potential of Queer Politics Cathy Cohen argues that “…a truly radical or transformative politics has not resulted from queer activism.” With politics getting any type of change to happen is a long and hard endeavour. For any type of significant change to happen it can take literal years with how rigid politics are. There are several reasons this process takes so long. One of them would be the unwillingness of people to act against politics. The major thought process among people is that if they were to act it would not make any difference; that they should just wait out the present problems in hope that they will fix themselves; or hope for a better person to come into a leading position and leave it to them to fix current problems. This kind of thinking leads to nothing being done in the way of change in a timely fashion. The only true way for change to occur is to speak out against injustice but even that has its drawbacks. Cohen finds that the one of the largest failings of queer theory and queer politics has been their inability to incorporate into the analysis of the world and strategies for political mobilization the roles that race, class, and gender play in defining people’s differing relations to dominant and normalizing power. For political change to work, those vying for it must avoid infighting as it only halts the process to achieve change. Power relations add to this problem as stating dominance over another based on, as an example, not holding a leading position such as a planner can cause the major reason of halting feeling useless or unneeded. Instead of making enemies of each other or excluding others based on race or class the common enemy must be focused on in order to instate political change.

In the article “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens,” Cathy Cohen discusses the radical potential of queer politics. She argues that queer activism could not be an efficient way to overcome oppression against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender groups. According to her, queer politics reinforced dichotomies between sexes. Problematic situations arose according to intersection of oppression and resistance. In queer theorizing, sexual subjects are regulated due to certain criteria, and therefore discounted as deviant. It normalizes sexuality, exploitation of labor, and constrains visibility. Often, the focus of queer politics have been “heteronormativity,” meaning that centralized institutions that legitimize heterosexuality (Cohen 440). Heterosexual relationships were acknowleged as the only natural act within society. Therefore, from a long time ago there existed dominance of heterosexuals, and queers, on the other hand, were all considered as inferior. They experienced limitations in many parts of the society, under multiple practices of normalization. Cohen throws intersectional analysis to this situation. For example, she mentions black lesbian, bisexual feminists that emphasized their experience of discrimination in their writings. As being in what is considered as inferior groups, they have gone through multiple layers of oppression. People of color and lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgendered are considered as minority groups of society and according to Cohen, the politics of them were arranged by radical intersectional left analysis. Within that, people recognize heteronormativity as a primary system of power and control. It interacts with fundamental political issues such as racism, classicism, sexism and institutional exploitations on class. Queer activists reject cultural norms of acceptable sexual behaviors. Instead, they come up with strategies that promote self-definition. Being acknowledged that problematic matters of heteronormativity exists in society, they argue fundamental challenge to the system. The privilege, power and institution heterosexuality has. As aspiring for challenges to domination and exclusion, in our society, new political identity has to be constructed, that is inclusive to all.

In her piece “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens”, Cathy Cohen discusses queer politics, an idea that many people thought would transform the structure and operations of oppressive systems especially against the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered communities. However, Cohen argues that queer activism is not an efficient way to transform oppressive conditions. According to Cohen, a downfall to queer politics is their dichotomization of sexuality and exclusion of other oppressed groups. Focusing on sexuality has cost the movement any potential growth due to their consistent isolation. The government’s domination over sexuality was critical because it used a “scientific” standpoint to prohibit and obstruct sexual identities that the queer movement has been focused on. Such intervention made it harder for people to associate freely with sexual behaviors that go against the law. Furthermore, the divide between different groups that were oppressed made it more challenging to change the politics surrounding sexuality and the identities of many. I think Cohen suggests a more successful transformation if the queer movement has connected with other minority groups who were also oppressed. The fight would become bigger if different groups joined all together as one and faced their oppressor (government).

Cathy Cohen suggests that in order to bring change and be more effective as activists, we must critically study power and the role that gender, race, and class play when it comes to its distribution. This is a very important point because it seems true that queer activist have overlooked other contributing factors to their oppression rather than just their sexuality and what people identify as.  It is very significant to bond with different groups of people in order to understand different forms of oppression from many perspectives. Not only does this concentrate more power to the activists, but it also strengthens the cause in which they are all fighting for (equality).

Weiyi Li, Jing Jiang

According to “A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies by Cathy J Cohen, she talks about the radical potential of queer activism in social and cultural criticism. People can transform the own perspectives and identity of the sexuality. Developing of the industry and economics, the sexuality of people became property of the society. Cohen focused on the history of lesbian, gay bisexual and other activists. The discrimination is one of the main reason causes of the queer activism. The oppression of the sexuality is not only in individuals, but also around queer community. The African American has a lower society status compare to the white American. It’s refresh people’s identity and how the prejudice of the homosexuality in people’s mind. Gay and Lesbian couples usually received lower pay rate or unable to survive independently. They are being discrimination by others and earned less money than a heterosexual couple. The growth of economics environment gives an unfair position among gender, sexuality and race. The queer politics is focused on personal identity in different class, race and gender. It’s limited their behavior and normative characteristics, and they struggle with others point of views. The reconstruction of political and others perspectives is the power to change idea of the heterosexuals.

In Cohen’s article, she was looking at the failed features of queer political activism. She argues that in order to make the new political activism for queer, a politics where the nonnormative and marginal position of punks, bulldaggers, and welfare queens. Cohen also discussed that intersectionality is the key for building the queer activism. She states that the transformation should not focus on the heteronormative oppression, also the systemic domination as race, gender, and economic class that overlaps sexuality. The queer politics has often been built around the edge between those queer and that heterosexuality society.

During the 1900’s real-life politics of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender started to emerge. Queers are usually underrepresented politically, which drives the community to create a new platform for themselves in order to speak up and stand out.  In Queer politics, sexual expression is something that progresses change, movement, redefinition, everyday. Queers are usually discluded in groups because of the un acceptance heterosexuals. They are not seen as normal to heterosexuals. Something that makes the queer community different than any other group is their willingness to confront power by emphasizing their “anti-normal” characteristic and traits.  They are fully aware of their “un normalness” and use it to their power to speak for themselves .

However, the inability of queer politics to effectively make changes is because of the dominance in the heterosexuals.  Heterosexuals are represented as dominant and more in control, whereas homosexuals are seen as marginalized and invisible in the real world. This show why people in the LQBT communities would want their voices to be heard more and why their activism as a whole became stronger.  In my opinion, I think heterosexuals (mostly Republicans) are not aware or don’t want to acceptance homosexual because they are not following the norm.  After taking a political science class, I learned that conservatives are not comfortable with change and/or have a hard time accepting change, which helps me understand and explains (not justify) why they do not accept the change in accepting homosexuals/transgender.

The concept of “de-gaying” reminds me of vice president Mike Pence and his gay conversion theory.  The concept of putting gay people in camps in order to de-gay them.  Although this essay was written 20 years ago, we can see that very little ideas about homosexuality progressed in our government.  This is something that needs to be changed in order for the world to progress and accept everyone for who they are.

In the essay, Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queen, Cathy Cohen pays attention to the feature of queer political activism. Society in this period was trying to change the understanding and responding to sexuality and oppressed the minor communities such as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community. Dominant society categorizes heterosexuality as the top class of society, and state that heterosexuality is norm and oppressed queer activists. Cathy Cohen found that looked at the factors that inhibited the radical potential of queer activism. Cath Cohen states that heteronormativity, the idea that homosexual relationship is bad, stopped growing of the queer activism. She is worried about “those manifestations of queer politics in which the capital and advantage invested in a range of sexual categories”(441) are ignored. Therefore, it brought to the result of reproduction of political identities that are narrowed and homogenized so that it inhibits the radical potential of queer politics. She thought it limited the character of queer politics that are comprehensive and transformational. To go against this unfair treatment, people who were discriminated and oppressed stood up together to show that they also have identity and there is no difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality. Queer activists were focusing on removing this discrimination and oppression. However, People who were queer activist were people in the minor societies such as black so that they had less advantages to describe their status to other people. Unfortunately, oppression on this group continued and they didn’t get chance to get accepted in the society as norm. If we look at the society we live nowadays, there are still so many forms of things that minority people get oppressed and not accepted as the part of their society. Although there are many people who are trying to show people that there are no harm to accept them as society, people still avoid to accept them in society.

What I took from Cohen’s description of queer politics, is that they enable the existence of a dichotomy between heterosexuals and queers. Queer politics rely heavily on their identities as homosexuals, to drive political reform. This behavior further enables the dichotomies set out between homosexual and heterosexual individuals. By shaping political reform with one sense of identity, the action to dismantle the systems of oppression and domination are discouraged. Cohen recognizes that heterosexuality is granted privilege as a result of being the normal or natural state of being. In order for queer activism to effect change, they have to completely shatter perceptions of identities. Perceptions of identities can often force individuals into broader categories. For example, if I tell a Catholic women I am a homosexual, she would likely heighten herself up on a social scale. All based on her personal beliefs in relation to an idea of normality. If we separated idea of identities, what it is to be normal or natural, and class or a space of being subjugated to marginalization, true political change can occur.

Cathy Cohens states that Queer Politics and Queer activism have the potential to radically change the political system and institutional oppression in our society, but Queer politics fail to recognize a broader understanding of queerness that should be based on multiple systems of oppression regulating the lives of most people. Why not include single mothers, blacks and exploited people in the political activism of Queerness if  heteronormativity is creating and oppressing the identities in the subordinated groups?  Lesbians, bisexuals, gays, transgendered, blacks, single mothers are oppressed by the institution of heterosexuality. Through definitions of heterosexuality the state regulates sexual behavior and creates social statuses, social identities that help sustain, reinforce, normalize and replicate the status quo of the privileged class.  On the other hand, definition of  class, race, sex and gender affect particular groups in society .

Cohen revises some historical facts to see how white supremacists implemented the institution of marriage (heterosexual marriage),  to regulate sexual behavior, to give rights and citizenship for those who qualify into the definitions of the sate. The sate also created laws to prohibit interracial marriage (whites and blacks) to reinforce division of class and to deprive blacks from equal opportunity.  Also, heterosexual women who procreate children outside the marriage institutions were/are seeing as deviants and “demonized” as people that takes advantage of the welfare system . But we should see that poverty, single mothers , and  incarceration affect blacks, Latinos the exploited and the underclasses. Race, class , gender, sexual identity are linked to institutional oppression, which  regulates the lives of people outside the heterosexual definition.

Queer politics focuses in the white middle and upper class lesbians , bisexuals, gays and transgendered people affected by sexism and homophobia, economic and political constrain. Queer activists want to challenge the static definitions of sexuality and restructure society, but the radical change of society would be impossible to accomplish if the left does not include changes that include other people’s interests, class, gender, sexuality, people of color and their disadvantage, sexism, AIDS activism. If Queer politics are meant to change the politics, economic , social and cultural institutions they need a broader view of society and its issues.

In order to explore Cathy Cohen’s ideas about what has inhibited the radical potential of queer activism, it is important to understand what she means by this “radical potential” idea in the first place. She describes “transformative politics” as breaking down powerful and dominant institutions and changing their values, laws and defining qualities which have oppressed marginalized groups for centuries (445). Cohen believes that ideas within queer politics tend to lean toward inclusion and assimilation into these dominant, heteronormative institutions which has done minimal, if anything, to help the cause. Queer theories have tried to do away with categories of sexuality (i.e. gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) and place them under one roof, that is, queer. In this sense, queer politics sees the world as queer versus everyone else. Cohen argues that this umbrella of sexual identities is not accurate because it does not recognize the ways in which each identity has suffered individually. In trying to combine these identities, it may encourage animosity among the groups who then may distance themselves from the overall goal.

The inhibition of transformative queer politics is strengthened further by insisting a monolithic view of heterosexuality and queerness (449-450). This idea, Cohen explains, has essentially taken over the political actions of queer activists and again, has not helped their cause. Heterosexuals, both normative and non-normative, have been marginalized according to race, class, and gender through powerful social and political institutions as well. Failure to recognize such historic forms of oppression is a failure to see just how boundless oppression is and how it exists across multiple realms. Queer activists need to realize that it is not merely heterosexuals versus queers – that different social identities of race, class and gender – no matter what their sexual preference – can and have contributed to both the successes and failures of queer politics.

In Cathy J. Cohens work, “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens,” she explains the oppression of queers. Cohen emphasizes how sexuality is socially constructed and how categorizing the different branches of sexuality is demeaning and oppressing.  Categorizing sexuality ultimately gives certain amount of powers to each group, putting heterosexuality at the top of it. This translates heterosexuality as the “norm” within our society. This unjust system continues to marginalize and hinder queer activists. With queer politics at the bottom of this man made sexual hierarchy, queers are given almost no social standing. They are arguably the most oppressed within the sexual categories; and to be a black, female queer would result in a triple oppression because of their sexuality,sex, and race, being that white males are evidently more privileged. It is nearly impossible for queers to make any progress until we realize sexuality is a spectrum. And, we have to re-conceptualize our understanding of the term sexuality. And by doing so, it is necessary to break down the categorizing of sexuality, so we can view each other as equals. For queer activists to achieve their goal to have their own rights, they have to recognize all rights, for all that are oppressed.  These multiple forms of oppression that is embedded in our system continues to put those that does not meet the social expectations to be unprivileged, socially and economically. I think before being an activist for a certain community, one must be a humanist before anything else. We are all fighting for human rights. And I think this is what Cohen is trying to get at. You cannot make any progressive change for a group, without attacking the whole system. By breaking down the divisions that have been historically made to oppress certain individuals, can we then begin to make any real changes for anyone.