Equality between Men and Women - Essay Example

?Topic: Queer Theory Affiliation: Social trends have never ceased to be dynamic over time. Social diversity has been a driving force in the emerging trends, covering different social aspects around the globe. Numerous theories and studies have come to explain the experiencing phenomena, trying to trace the roots of the emergence of a social issue, and the factors that led to the realization of the issues at hand. Feminism has been a social issue since time immemorial. It has acted as the key driver of reforms and development that is female-oriented. The interests of feminism are not limited to social aspects. It cuts across social, cultural, economic aspects. Its main is to achieve equity between men and women, leading to the realization of opportunities that distributed equally between genders. Sexual identities have also taken the same direction as that taken by feminism. Although the advocacy in this case may be different, the crucial aspect to account of is sexual rights. Lesbian and gay studies have been conducted over the years. As this is done, there are emerging and changing trends in sexual identities in both and women (Green, 2007, p.26-45). Lesbians and gays have in the contemporary world become outspoken, demanding rights of recognition and identification. While some nations have embraced their demands, others have remained adamant on the illegality of the two. However, the fact that lesbians and gays are part and parcel of many societies in the world cannot be refuted. Queer theory is the central focus in the analysis of feminism and sexual identities, especially when it comes to lesbians and gays. Numerous studies have argued in favour or against queer theory, but it is evident that its influence in these dealings in inevitable, given the current position of feminism, lesbian and gay scenarios in the world. Queer theory traces its emergence in the 1990s, based on women studies. This theory evaluates feminism and identifies the underlying challenges in feminism. However, it not fixed to feminism theories, as it expounds its boundaries beyond the natural or unnatural. It therefore identifies that sexual identities are constructed socially through the gender aspect of the society. Studies outside the queer the theory suggest that gay and lesbian studies stems from the natural and/or unnatural aspect of a society. Queer theory on the other hand makes an extensive focus into sexual activities and identities, introducing normative and deviant acts or activities that are sexually based. The position held by queer theory in feminism, lesbian and gay studies is subject to challenge these studies now and in future. Challenges to these studies emanate from the continuous critique and contribution of queer theory. Studies are basically built on theories and arguments of other scholars. In order to effectively draw relevant inferences to studies, and further come up with a study that can be adopted as a reliable reference, it is important to account for the claims presented by other scholars in and outside that field. Social identities and structures are held as the primary functionality mechanisms of feminism. Queer theory is opposed to this argument, thereby holding radical change as a limited in that agenda. As a result, studies that come in that line are divided, some argument for and others against. Striking a balance to derive an optimal argument is therefore a challenge. This is because all these arguments are backed up by relevant evidence that is drawn from real social life and sexual identities of different groups in the society. Queer theory argues that sexuality is more fluid than it is already expressed by feminism, lesbian and gay studies. It holds that sexuality is not a constrained binary of heterosexual or homosexual acts and identities (Turner, 2000, p.106-107). Theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies is consistently being forced to encompass aspects that did not factor in in its interests before. Homosexuality is normally held to come after heterosexuality. In other words, there is a hierarchical ranking of sexual acts and identities by many theories and politics that surround feminism, lesbian and gay activities. However, queer theory is opposed to this motive, arguing that there is multiplicity in sexual possibilities as opposed to hierarchy ranking of sexuality. Therefore, practices that relate to gender and sex are pluralized by queer theory. In other words, queer theory encompasses an inclusiveness aspect that is not available in feminism and studies related to lesbians and gays. Queer theory is positioned to address both social and political goals. However, the equality aspect of in social and political is lacking. As a result, there are conflicting grounds on the arguments presented by queer theory in the context of the studies of feminism. Feminism has over time sought to address equality concerns at social, economic and political levels. While this has encompassed sexual rights with regard to minority sexual orientations, the so called queer oppression has been left out. Feminism, lesbians and gay studies have focused on those activities that are considered natural or unnatural. The arguments presented therefore ignore the queer theory arguments that normative and deviant sexual behaviours should be accounted for. There are conflicting interests between queer theory and the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies. There lacks complementarities between the two, making them appear like they are competing rather than promoting their interests. Persistent critiques between queer theory and the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies is another basis upon which queer theory challenges the other. Social examination by queer theory encompasses an extrapolation of a very wide textual analysis. However, some conditions that are social and institutional in nature are somehow ignored. These conditions are those that lesbians and gays are subjected to in the social set up. As a result, the deconstructionist application of queer theory renders feminism limited or places it in a situation where alternatives are limited. This means that the loopholes of queer theory can hardly be accounted for by the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies. The theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies ought to address the interests of minority groups in society, as well as those of marginalized communities. The focus here is both the minor and the major communities. Queer theory does not hold lesbians and gays as minority groups, but rather a marginalized community of significant proportion. This proportion is in the queer theory referred to as the queer community. The theory does not ignore the queer oppression in the broader community as referred to by feminism theories. The challenge posed by this phenomenon to the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies is that it is difficult to evaluate and assess their impact on the real-life of queer communities. It is therefore difficult to capture queer theory identities in the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies context. Since the inception of queer theory in the 1990s, its definition has taken a number of advancements by encompassing diversity and dynamism over the years. There are certain sexual self-identifications that remained culturally marginalized before the inception of queer theory. Its development marked an era of uniting these identities. Queer theory is also considered to be the outcome of a nascent theoretical model that has been realized through traditional lesbian and gay studies (Barry, 2002, p.139-155). As a result, annexing queer theory in historical and contemporary discussions is relatively easy. However, theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies have been significantly reluctant in incorporating queer arguments in the issues addressed by these studies. The growing demand to balance queer and feminism arguments are challenging the undertaking of the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies. Institutional transformation challenges are also significantly being posed to the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies by queer theory. Studies relating to lesbians and gays are by contemporary terms a recent construction. The incorporation of institutional transformations in the contemporary constructions of feminism, lesbians and gays is relatively challenging because the concepts that define its foundation are somewhat conflicting with queer theory arguments. Combining these arguments into a single study that diversely addresses all underlying interests is a difficult undertaking. There are analytical models that are intensively described by queer theory. These models account for gender and sexuality identity incoherencies, drawn from the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies. Queer theory identifies mismatches in sexuality, gender and social desires. These are relatively similar to those highlighted in the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies, but the focus on cross-dressing, hermaphroditism, gender ambiguity and gender-corrective surgery outperforms feminism (Halperin, 2005, p.117). Defining man as man and woman as woman, and consequently positioning women in equity perspectives by political feminism prior to queer interests is a challenge. Rupture of continued traditional models has been an unavoidable circumstance in queer and related arguments. Feminism, lesbian and gay studies have sought to maintain these models as they pursue their interests. Even with this, contemporary trends in social changes have encompassed modernization of traditional models. As a result, the queer aspect has merged with modernity to try and make feminism, lesbian and gay studies integrate the aforementioned rapture. This means that queer theory is a complementing factor to feminism, lesbian and gay studies. However, feminism, lesbian and gay studies have not acted in such a way that prompts this complementarity. Social, economic and political discursive horizons are always embracing new and emerging theories that treat all underling issues therein. Queer happens to form one of the modern times horizons. The sexual aspect of individuals and the society at large is changing, prior to the contribution of queer theory. However, the efficacy of this theory has been questionable for years now. This is due to the fact that the theory does not provide for the reinstallation of generic masculinity, but rather promotes gender-neutral queer (Butler, 2003, p.234). While feminism, lesbian and gay studies advocate for equality between men and women, generic masculinity is not the subject. In this regard, this differential complicates the advocacy of feminism as well as lesbian and gay dealings in a society. Queer theory therefore seems to downplay the feminism efforts by letting issues loose than feminism, lesbian and gay studies do. In other words, queer theory presents and addresses constituencies that are unlimited in its line of interest. Identificatory categories included in queer theory are less progressive I comparison to those covered by feminism, lesbian and gay studies. The alignment of these identificatory categories in treating complementarity between queer theory and feminism, lesbian and gay studies fails to match. This raises concerns over the superior theory between the two, and further the evaluation of whether queer is a historical amnesia replication. Studies addressing gays and lesbians cannot refute the fact that queer theory has had significant on them. This diacritical term “queer” dominated the social market shortly after its inception. Years later, it became a common vernacular, spreading its roots to politics of feminism and studies of gays and lesbians. By the time queer theory became so eminent, it seemed to have simplified feminism interests and further highlighted issues that feminism had failed to. As a result, providing a strong distinction between queer theory, feminism and lesbians and gays is not a straightforward agenda. In fact, queer theory has been embraced by mainstream forces and institutions it was coined to resist (Eldeman, 2005, p.343-346). Feminism, lesbian and gay studies may therefore not be independent of highlighting features of queer theory. Unlike feminism, lesbian and gay studies, advance anticipation of the effects of interventions of queer theory is hardly possible. This is because such interventions are not singular, and the multiple interventions are hard to predict which comes first. In other words, the diversity encompassed by queer theory is not comparable to the limited scope of feminism, lesbian and gay studies covered outside the queer theory context. On the same note, queer theory continues to challenge social discourses and normative structures. Queer theory treats gay and lesbian formations as sexuality acts and identities that are constantly forming, thereby naturalizing them. The discourse of minority rights is mobilized by subjects that seek to promote identity politics logic. These subjects are characterized by shared aims that relate to the subject matter. Gathering together queer and feminism, lesbian and gay subject is farfetched. These subjects share significant aims and interests, but the means in which they address them vary. Queer theory is partial, flexible and responsive (Halperin, 2005, p.81). While some or all these aspects are embraced by feminism, lesbian and gay studies, the embracement is hardly self-evident or natural. It is important that the process remains natural and be purely based on self-evident, a scenario which is yet to be realized in feminism, lesbian and gay studies. Queer operations have been and are still subject to criticisms. The interesting outcome of such criticisms is that they serve as the shaping factors of queer theory over time. The theory hardly seeks to defend and find its way out of the criticisms. It therefore employs them to shape its components from time to time. Future directions of feminism, lesbian and gay studies are jeopardized by critiques in their line. Feminism is quick to address critiques posed to it, unlike queer theory. Getting feminism, lesbian and gay studies to match up the response of queer to critiques is therefore a different agenda altogether. In the light of outlining the challenges posed by queer theory to the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies, it is important to highlight on a light note emerging reconciliations within the contradictions that exist between queer theory and theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies. This is an account of the balancing factors within the identified challenges. Debates that have characterized contemporary feminism and queer theory depict a revolving scenario that encompasses multiple interrelated issues that emphasize on sex, gender and sexuality (Rudy, 2001, p.190-222). Overly moralistic has been the unfair condemnation that feminism have had to deal with, while on the other hand queer theory has for wrong reasons been held as a theory that emphasizes on pleasure. This dichotomy is subject to investable failure if no clarifications are offered where necessary. This is due to the fact that both theories are characterized by mistaken understanding of their advocacies. The underlying contradictions can be accounted for by undertaking necessary actions to ensure complementarity of the two theories. Issues that characterize each of the two theories can be evaluated and assessed so that a functional theory emerges from both of them. Sex, sexuality and gender have been the primary focus of both feminism and queer theory. The only difference evident in the two is the approaches used in treating the underlying interest. Feminist and queer theory frameworks should integrate racial and ethnic differences in addressing the issues that define each theory (Rogoff, 2003, p.63-64). Such an attempt has been made by Francisco Valdes, but his paradigm is yet to receive full integration in feminist and queer undertakings. Francisco Valdes’ paradigm is a suggestion to theory linkages that will encompass feminist-queer dialogues. Deconstruction of sex and gender is a noble enterprise for queer theory to pursue. On the other hand, inclusion of sexual orientation in the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies should be focussed on. This will combine all aspects attributed to each theory, resulting in collaborative efforts rather than opposing motives against each theory. With this, issues that arise from conflationary traditionalism are bound to be addressed with prior consciousness of both feminist and queer theories. Queer and feminist theorists among other cultural, social, economic and political can combine their efforts and work together by accepting their duty to work in contradiction (Heinamaa, 2006, p.159). For queer theory and the theory and politics of feminism, lesbian and gay studies specifically, working in contradiction will enhance theoretical collaborations. This will positively influence balancing of critical arguments of each of the two theories, thereby promoting operationalization and functionality of the theories through combined efforts. In conclusion, the contemporary world has significantly addressed sex, sexuality and gender concerns. Lesbians and gays have become more outspoken than it was the case few decades ago. Women rights have also been embraced in almost all nations around the world. It is important to note that there are a number of countries that still downplay women rights, for example Middle East countries. Many other countries around the world have embraced affirmative actions, as a result of feminist politics. Sex, sexuality and gender rights have also taken the same direction. Lesbian and gay sexual orientations have added to heterosexuality. While lesbian and gay practices are legal in a several countries around the world, the two remains strictly illegal in many countries. However, enormous practices of the two across the globe are irrefutable. Queer theory and the theory and politics of feminism, gay and lesbian studies have over the years shed the light on their practices, accounting for their prevalence and incorporating them in the social setting. References Turner, B, (2000), A Genealogy of Queer Theory, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, pp. 106–107. Barry, P, (2002), Lesbian/gay criticism, in P Barry (eds.), Beginning theory: an introduction to literary and cultural theory, Manchester University Press, Manchester, pp139-155. Halperin, D, (2005), Saint Foucault: Towards a Gay Hagiography, New York: Oxford University Press. Butler, J, (2003), Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of 'Sex', New York: Routledge. Eldeman, L, (2005), Queer Theory: Unstating Desire, GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 2, 4, pp. 343-346. Halperin, D, (2005), Saint Foucault: Towards A Gay Hagiography, New York: Oxford University Press. Rudy, K, (2001), Radical Feminism, Lesbian Separatism and Queer Theory, Feminist Studies, Vol. 27, No. 1. pp. 190-222. Rogoff, B, (2003), The Cultural Nature of Human Development. New York: Oxford UP, pp.63-64. Print. Heinamaa, S, (2006), Toward a Phenomenology of Sexual Difference, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Green, A, (2007), Queer Theory and Sociology: Locating the Subject and the Self in Sexuality Studies, Sociological Theory 25 (1): 26–45. Read More