Let's Queer the Pitch
I find it much easier to define as 'queer' these days. The first time this got suggested to me was by Ruth, when I was very drunk, and I explained that I'd heard it in a negative context so many times, that I didn't like it.
I still dislike the fact that the only collective word for 'queer' people that excludes no one is one that traditionally was a term of abuse meaning to be 'odd/strange/unsettling/corrupting/unsettling'. (Apparently the Swedish(?) equivalent means 'rainbow people' and I think that's brilliant, why couldn't we have that!)
However, there does appear to be a definite reclaiming of the word... maybe it's just because I see it happily proclaimed on the 'Queer Youth!' homepage so often that it's been redefined in my head, and that I know it's this label that will let me get into LGBT conferences (well, a lot easier than being 'asexual' anyway, I'd get kicked out).
Plus, it should be fine for people that I'm 'queer'. I define as ase, and I think it's important for me to tell people that. But the labels and nuance and explanation of this (I'm panromantic, pancurious, asexual with sensual tendencies) isn't something everyone needs to know, and nor is it easy or useful to spend 20 minutes to an hour explaining to people the jargon I'm using. Sometimes, I just don't want to go into it. So I'm 'queer'. It works brilliantly, and shows my fellow feeling with LGBT(QA?) people.
Queer means not to be heteronormative. If you transcend how society expects you to be in any way, you're queer.
But that's not a bad thing. Perhaps if we embrace the fact that society thinks we're a bit 'strange/unsettling' and queer the pitch, corrupt the idea that being heteronormative is the proper way to be, we can make out that to be queer isn't that queer at all.
I still dislike the fact that the only collective word for 'queer' people that excludes no one is one that traditionally was a term of abuse meaning to be 'odd/strange/unsettling/corrupting/unsettling'. (Apparently the Swedish(?) equivalent means 'rainbow people' and I think that's brilliant, why couldn't we have that!)
However, there does appear to be a definite reclaiming of the word... maybe it's just because I see it happily proclaimed on the 'Queer Youth!' homepage so often that it's been redefined in my head, and that I know it's this label that will let me get into LGBT conferences (well, a lot easier than being 'asexual' anyway, I'd get kicked out).
Plus, it should be fine for people that I'm 'queer'. I define as ase, and I think it's important for me to tell people that. But the labels and nuance and explanation of this (I'm panromantic, pancurious, asexual with sensual tendencies) isn't something everyone needs to know, and nor is it easy or useful to spend 20 minutes to an hour explaining to people the jargon I'm using. Sometimes, I just don't want to go into it. So I'm 'queer'. It works brilliantly, and shows my fellow feeling with LGBT(QA?) people.
Queer means not to be heteronormative. If you transcend how society expects you to be in any way, you're queer.
But that's not a bad thing. Perhaps if we embrace the fact that society thinks we're a bit 'strange/unsettling' and queer the pitch, corrupt the idea that being heteronormative is the proper way to be, we can make out that to be queer isn't that queer at all.