‘—

Cathy Cohen Assignment

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.