Kit Kat Club
fear of a queer planet- queer politics and social theory

heyreadabook:

image

PDF- I apologise for the tags and excessive use of the word queer as i know it hasn’t actually been reclaimed by everyone, but this genuinely seems to be the books tags. I do apologize.

In recent years, lesbians and gay men have developed a new, aggressive style of politics. At the same time, innovative intellectual energies have made queer theory an explosive field of study. In “Fear of a Queer Planet”, Michael Warner draws on emerging new queer politics, and shows how queer activists have come to challenge basic assumptions about the social and political world. Existing traditions of theory - Marxism, cultural studies, psychoanalysis, anthropology, legal theory, nationalism, and antinationalism - have too often presupposed a heterosexual society, as the essays in this volume demonstrate. “Fear of a Queer Planet” suggests a new agenda for social theory. It moves beyond the idea that lesbians and gay men share a minority identity and special interests and that their issues can be subordinated to more general social conflicts. Instead, Warner and the other contributors to this volume show that queer sexualities take many forms, are the subject of many kinds of conflict and struggles, and must be taken as a starting point in thinking about cultural politics.

This collection explores the impact of ACT UP, Queer Nation, multiculturalism, the new religious right, outing, queerness, postmodernism, and other shifts in the politics of sexuality. The authors featured speak from different backgrounds of gender, race, nationality, and discipline. Together, they show how struggles over sexuality have profound implications for progressive politics, social theory, and cultural studies. Michael Warner has written extensively on censorship and the public sphere, the construction of American literary history, and the social and political implication of literary theories. He is author of “The Letter of the Republic: Publication and the Public Sphere in Eighteenth-Century America” and co-editor of “The Origins of Literary Studies in America: A Documentary Anthology”. 

itscandidlycara:

the problem with hanging out exclusively with feminists is that when you venture out of your social group and have to interact with the rest of the world you realize how fucking terrible everyone is

cisyphus:

Slurs are not oppressive because they are offensive, they are oppressive  because slurs by nature of being slurs draw upon certain power dynamics  to remind their target of his/her/their vulnerability in a certain relation to power and as an extension of that, to threaten violence and exploitation of that vulnerability.

homebeccer:

"oh my god stop criticizing young girls who like 50 Shades of Gray or Twilight you can’t tell them what they can and can’t read"

no we can’t but we have to protect young girls from mistaking abusive behavior for genuine affection at all costs

super-eklectic1:

Picture of an Arab Man


Started in 2009, the portrait series “Picture an Arab Man” is part of a large body of work capturing semi-nude Arab men of diverse backgrounds. The project is meant to literally picture a new face for Arab males than the one we are so accustomed to perusing in the mainstream media. Breaking down stereotypes as to how Arabs have been represented in the West, as well as in the East, is one of the conceptual aims of this project. I attempt to do so by highlighting the sensual beauty of the Arab man, an unexplored aspect of their identity on the cusp of change in a society that reveres an out-dated form of hyper-masculinity. Moreover, it is an attempt to uncover and break the stereotypes imposed on the Arab male in a post 9/11 world, and provide an alternative visual representation of that identity.

Thus far, I have photographed men in Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan, Dubai, Palestine and Canada. They have been Iraqi, Syrian, Palestinian, Lebanese, Egyptian, Sudanese, Emirati, Jordanian, and of mixed heritage. My plan is nowto photograph men from the remaining countries of the Middle Eastto truly represent the diversity of the Arab region. Receiving funding to complete the production of the project will also get me one step closer to my ultimate goal, which is to publish this project as a book. The funds that I am requesting will go toward covering my transportation and accommodation, and for printing of prototypes of the book.

Through “Picture an Arab Man”, I strive to do what I can to redefine the image of the Arab man for an audience so accustomed to one-dimensional stereotypes. Most importantly, I hope to properly represent my subjects as diverse and candid men whose only thing in common is their rich Middle Eastern heritage.

Thank you for your support.

Tamara Abdul Hadi

Photographer

TV doesn’t make the family, but it makes the family mean in a certain way. That is, it makes an exceptionally sharp distinction between the family as a biological unit and as a cultural identity, and it does this by teaching us the attributes and attitudes by which people who thought they were already in a family actually only begin to qualify as belonging to a family. The great power of the media, and especially of television, is, as Simon Watney writes, “its capacity to manufacture subjectivity itself,” and in so doing to dictate the shape of an identity. The “general public” is at once an ideological construct and a moral prescription. Furthermore, the definition of the family as an identity is, inherently, an exclusionary process, and the cultural product has no obligation whatsoever to coincide exactly with its natural referent. Thus the family identity produced on American television is much more likely to include your dog than your homosexual brother or sister.
Leo Bersani, from “Is the Rectum a Grave?” 1987 (via feministfilm)
Nobody in history has ever gotten their freedom by appealing to the moral sense of the people who were oppressing them.

Assata Shakur (via thegoddamazon)

ALWAYS REBLOG.

(via ndnsurgency)

*not even Martin Luther King Jr.* if you really think the progress of the Civil Rights Movement was achieved solely by the moral strength of their argument, you were miseducated. you really were.

(via so-treu)

Dominator culture teaches all of us that the core of our identity is defined by the will to dominate and control others. We are taught that this will to dominate is more biologically hardwired in males than in females. In actuality, dominator culture teaches us that we are all natural-born killers but that males are more able to realize the predator role. In the dominator model the pursuit of external power, the ability to manipulate and control others, is what matters most. When culture is based on a dominator model, not only will it be violent but it will frame all relationships as power struggles.
bell hooks (via sonofbaldwin)
Them: I don't think kids should be exposed to gay relationships.
You: Why not?
Them: It's introducing children to sexuality! They're too young for that!
You: So when a prince and princess kiss in a Disney movie, are they introduced to sexuality? When the prince and the princess get married and have a child, is that introducing your child to sexuality?
Them: NO! But if they see a man and a man, or a woman and a woman together... they're going to start asking questions! Like how a man and a man can... you know, do anything together.
You: You think the only thing people think when they see a gay couple is "I wonder how they have sex"? Furthermore, you think a CHILD is going to even know what that means? When the prince and the princess kiss, does your 4 year old daughter ask, "mommy, how do people have intercourse"? No. She just sees two people in love. If you remember when you were a kid, you probably didn't think about sex every time you saw two people happy together.
Them: But it'll bring up all kinds of questions, it'll confuse my child!
You: Then be a fucking parent and explain it to your child. The only question that might be brought up is "mom, why don't you want gay people to be happy?". And when you don't have a good answer for that question, you can look your child in the eye and say "It's because I'm a bigot".
Being a critical fan means that you love a famous human being, knowing fully well they are flawed and can make mistakes due to their privilege-blindness or outright ignorance (whether knowingly or unknowingly practicing misogyny, transphobia, homophobia, ableism, racism, etc.). When they fuck up, it is your duty as a critical fan to make them better, call them out and educate them. Your job is not to create excuses and adamantly defend their mistakes because they are so fierce in your eyes.
Janet Mock (via trans-ient)