Deliberate Transgression, Live and Televised

Let me begin by saying that I'm not going to claim to understand Foucault, but in regard to a Queer Planet, my interpretation of one of his points seems important here. Foucault talks about the myth of repression, and this was something I had a hard time wrapping my head around – sexual repression is not a myth! Right? Well, when I look to the world around me, I think it say fairly and honestly, that our culture is consumed with sex. It's everywhere. Not only that, but all of the sex we see is ripe for Queer, Feminist, or Gender studies interpretations.

How can we say we are repressed when shows like “Bones” and “Saturday Night Live” have characters which are gender ambiguous? While the skits like “It's Pat” make the gender ambiguous character the center of the conflict, the joke seems to be on the people who care whether Pat is male or female. While everyone else is wracking their brains trying to figure out “what” Pat “is,” Pat is busy living hir life and falling in love with the also gender ambiguous Chris (see the movie for more). And that example is from the 90's... When I look around today, I don't see a truly repressed society. But I do see a society that has tied the ideas of sexuality to repression.

There are many “reality” television shows that focus on issues that may be considered Queer, or at least nonstandard sexualities. Both “Big Love” and “Sisterwives” come to mind instantly; however, I'm sure there are some who would argue against the “queerness” of these shows – in fact, the family from “Sisterwives” would likely reject the idea they are partly Queer. But beyond that, shows like “Strange Sex” on the learning channel, “Trans Generation” on Sundance, and many things on Logo (not to say that Logo isn't FULL of assimilationist propaganda as well) like “Gender Rebel” prove that sexuality isn't simpley being repressed – that is “condemned to prohibition, non-existance, and silence” because as Foucault says, “the mere fact that one is speaking about [sex] has the appearance of deliberate transgression” (6).

While I feel like we have talked a lot about defining Queer, I think it is important to add in here two of Foucault's words: Deliberate Transgression. Because Queer is a verb, a response, something that is done, and as we said in class “Queer is both deliberate and political,” the notion of repression is important. You cannot transgress without something to transgress against. This makes me think that both sides (and by both sides I mean those who think sexuality should be repressed, and those who feel the need to transgress that repression) are both responsible for what actual repression exists. I'm afraid I'm going to be misunderstood along these lines... I by no means think that discrimination, sexism, genderism, homophobia, or any of the rest don't exist, and again, I by no means blame the victim (as I myself have often been one) – living a nonstandard life is hard – but I tend to connect to one of S. Bear Bergman's ideas: people who live nonstandard lives need to talk about the good parts too, not just repression, not just the homophobia, and not just the sexism. BUT back to my point: the notion of repression is double edged. Queer prides itself on being elusive and possibly undefinable, this is because, like I said, Queer is a response, and without repression of some sort there is no way for Queer to be on the cutting edge... this is why mainstream gays (of the assimilationst stripe) are not Queer.

I haven't read very far into the Foucault text, but I have a feeling that he isn't going to make a judgment on this issue, but rather report it. I hope this is the direction he goes in, because I don't feel like this needs to be judged. To me Queer is synonymous (or at least should be) with progress. The way Foucault describes the repression myth in “We 'Other Victorians'” suggest to me something interesting: “What sustains out eagerness to speak of sex in terms of repression is doubtless this opportunity to speak out against the powers that be, to utter truths and promise bliss, to link together enlightenment, liberation, and manifold pleasures; to pronounce a discourse that combines the fervor of knowledge, the determination to change the laws, and the longing for the garden of earthly delights” (7). These lines make me think that this planet is very Queer, and that because Queerness is progress we may never actually have a finished product. Queerness allows us to “appeal to the future, whose day will be hastened by the contribution we believe we are making” (6-7).

So what? Well, we live on a Queer planet and there is no stopping that. All that can happen is that the word Queer loses cultural reverence and is replaced by something else. Either way, viva la revolution... and if you don't believe me, see how many hits you find on YouTube with transgendered folks on talk shows...