Overview
Queer Theory Journal (QTJ) Entries & Responses (30%): 6 weeks of our quarter, you will write and share a Journal Entry or Response on our Canvas discussion boards following the guidelines and schedule below:
- QTJ Entries: Identify a key term encountered in course texts and/or films from the appropriate course unit. In 400-450 words, develop a focused analysis of this term as it appears in two separate sources. How do two different thinkers define and use this term? Write in the third person, avoiding “we” and “they” statements. Provide in-text citations for sources used, directing your readers to key passages. Use either the APA or Chicago Style Guide for citations; no additional “References” or “Works Cited” section is needed. I encourage you to choose key terms and course materials that stimulate, excite, and challenge you. Important instruction: Your entries should end with a question that you would like to ask the group. Please, finally, sign off with a brief bio, to share a little about yourself with our class (see sample entry for a reference).
- QTJ Responses: In about 200 words, respond to two peers’ entries and questions as indicated in the course schedule. In your responses, you should write in the first person. You may offer critical affirmations, pose follow-up questions, and share resources and references. While you are only responsible for responding to two writers’ entries each round, you are encouraged to read everyone’s entries. I ask that you respond to different writers each time. Since we are a large group, for each round of QTJ Entries and Responses, you will be placed into a smaller group.
QTJ Entries & Responses: What matters most is that your writing facilitates honest and thoughtful reflection. The process of writing should help lean in to texts and films more deeply, and to think more carefully about ideas that might not make sense right away. Examples will be provided. Both entries and responses are graded for completion. To receive credit, you must fulfill all assignment criteria. You are always welcome to discuss your writing in office hours.
Please reply 200 words to this passage(this is part 2)
Violence
Violence is one idea discussed in Adrienne Rich's "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence" (1980) and Viviane Namaste's "Undoing Theory: The 'Transgender Question' and Epistemic Violence of Anglo-American Feminist Theory" (2009).
Rich discusses violence in relation to sexual violence perpetuated through pornography. Rich writes, "The most pernicious message relayed by pornography is that women are natural sexual prey to men and love it; that sexuality and violence are congruent; and that for women sex is essentially masochistic, humiliation pleasurable, physical abuse erotic" (Rich 1980, p. 641). Rich uses the word "violence" to mean a physically harmful act. This relates to Rich's discussion of male power and how pornography is one way that male sexuality is forced upon them. This process of "[denying] women sexuality" while simultaneously "[forcing] male sexuality upon them" are just two of the many violent processes that exist because of male power and the institution of heterosexuality (p. 638).
Namaste speaks of physical violence too, but also of epistemic violence. Physically, the violence experienced by trans women of color is different and intersectional. Namaste writes, "My point here is that a detailed, contextual analysis of the different ways social relations of race, labor, and gender intersect is required in order to adequately understand violence against trans women of color. A simple appeal to the prevalence of that violence does not, in my view, offer an appropriate model for understanding these social relations" (Namaste 2009, p. 20). Though Namaste is writing in response to Butler, I think the work is also applicable to Rich. Rich speaks of the violence of heteropatriarchy, but it is not through an intersectional lens. In this way, the violence upon trans women of color is not only in all the physically violent ways that Rich explains, but also the epistemic violence of the framework and field of Anglo-American feminism. Anglo-American feminism has historically erased gender-variant and trans people of color.
I found it interesting to read Adrienne Rich alongside Viviane Namaste. Though Rich is writing on oppression and advocating for the liberation of one oppressed group, Rich is simultaneously contributing to an Anglo-American feminist project that erases the experience of a different oppressed group.
Since Namaste points out the limits and violence of Anglo-American feminist theory, my questions are: What does it mean to undo theory? What does undoing theory look like? When undoing theory, do we include that theory in our framework still or completely let it go? Is undoing a going back or a new path forward? When Namaste speaks of undoing theory, is it undoing all theory or only specifically Anglo-American feminist theory?