In addition to our discussion this week we will also be brainstorming topics for next year's syllabus. Please come prepared with ideas, suggestions, etc.
Questions
1.) Respond to this statement "Theoretically speaking, homosexual identity does not enjoy the same privileged stability as racial identity" (Takagi 6)
2.) In the Poon and Ho article, the authors include this quote:
"There are tiny micro-movements of resistance, barely perceptible, even invisible or covert--quiet stealthy masquerades resistant to categorisation and definition" (252). Do you think these acts are effective forms of resistance?
3.) Does this academic setting frame how we talk about personal experience?
1. I don’t have to worry about “coming out” as someone of East Asian descent; I can casually mention visiting my family in South Korea without ever encountering astonishment or confusion. For the most part, I don’t have to field xenophobic questions for clarification or worry about the ways in which such a statement might alter the dynamics of a relationship. But in some ways, I chafe at the confines of “privileged stability” that this visible racial identity lends me. To people outside of the AARC community, I find myself working extra hard to define my Asian-American identity as highly political and sensitive rather than something that is a stable and uncomplicated adjective, forever in stasis. Most difficult is that it seems to blind people to the possibility that I might be queer, as well. The security of racial identity can therefore act as an impenetrable and alienating kind of security--another closet from which to emerge.
ReplyDelete2. While these microscopic acts of resistance might help the individual cope with injustices, I doubt that these acts aid in dismantling macroscopic, institutionalized systems of oppression. Though the individuals mentioned in the article might consider themselves beneficiaries of their particular mode of resisting stereotypes about gay Asian men, other individuals cannot reap these highly subjective benefits. In fact, I’d say that their resistance to categorization itself is a strategy to evade addressing the problems inherent in specific categories. I see parallels in debates about National Coming Out Day: some people contend that since their sexuality is a personal preference, there’s no need to blast it in public, while others argue that the queer community needs to amplify itself before the rest of society can comfortably accept non-heterosexuality with the nonchalance that we’d like it to.
3. For me, absolutely. The pressure to communicate eloquently and defend my statements logically is frequently at odds with my convoluted, cacophonous personal experiences.
1. While I understand where Takagi is coming from with that statement, I have to disagree with it. Even a cursory look at the history of race reveals with as a highly unstable social category, changing based on time, geography, gender, sexuality, class, etc. Social discourse has given race certain physical aspects that are materially harder to cover, but this does not change the various ambiguities that inhere to the body. The body exists as a local site of knowledge where social discourse and personal autonomy are both mapped, collude, and conflict with each other. To me it is not a question of stability but why is race considered the "marked" identity, while sexuality is dealt with as being "hidden" and thus necessary to be brought out.
ReplyDelete2. I mostly agree with Kelly, that acts of micro-resistance for the most part fail to challenge systems of oppression. However, I do think there is potential in the individual's ability to define them self within discourse. One form of resistance is to refuse to identify the self, or the present a self at odds with racial and sexual common sense, and thus open a space that manages to defy normal discourse. Again, this does not do much structurally, but I think it has potential when it comes to combating cultural hegemony, where the battle is over ideas and representation.
3. Certainly academics affects how we talk. For me personally, I enjoy the academic structure as it gives me a framework that I can then apply to most situations and analyze. Though I understand that this isn't everyone's preferred process and there are issues of elitism when it comes to academics.
1. Race is performative. Moreover, it - and this applies to a number of labels/site of identity - is perceived. What race means to the individual is one thing (which in itself is unstable) but frequently what counts is what it means to those interacting with the person. Perceived identity, be it racial, orientative or anything else, comes with ascribable values which influence treatment by others, and these values can reflect back on the original person who will then act on them as they think they should. There is no singular, stable definition of race, just as their is no singular, stable definition of identity. Everything is contextual and denoted through interaction, identity forming in relation/opposition to other identities in a social context.
ReplyDelete2. I have to disagree slightly with the first two comments. I've personally found personal presentations of "[selves] at odds with...common sense" (Quinn, previous comment) to be the most important events in changing my "common sense" and opening it up to new identities. I would argue that it is the sum of these micro-acts that turns the social tide rather than larger, more focussed efforts.
3. The academic setting does not necessarily limit how I personally talk, especially because there is a range when it comes to that setting. In this class, for instance, it is appropriate to watch "Like a G6" and delve into personal experience, yet that would be inappropriate for my math class. Each academic space has a different tone and set of expectations. I will say that I withheld certain examples from my response to question 2.
1. Takagi’s statement argues two fundamentally different implications of identity—one with which I agree and another that I find dangerous and misleading. First, that homosexual identity does not enjoy “privileged stability,” and second, that racial identity does enjoy that “privileged stability.” Although I agree that the homosexual identity lacks privileged stability, I have a concurring opinion regarding why. The ambiguity of one’s sexuality, as Takagi contends, does contribute to the volatility of that identity (e.g. closeted vs. out). However, I maintain that the sheer nature of identity, especially for one that deviates from the normative, is fluid. Does the homosexual identity, or identity in general, ever exist in stasis? History leans toward not; identities, racial or sexual, are inherently changing, undermining the stability of any identity. Thus, to assume that racial identity enjoys privileged stability is false and dangerous to discourse concerning it.
ReplyDelete2. I, as a general rule, am a fervent proponent of micro-movements, especially within social and political realms. Micro-action, despite its frequent invisibility, provides the structural support for any movement, macro or otherwise. In fact, I argue that no movement or social/political campaign (campaign as community organization toward a goal rather than a campaign for reelection) can sustain itself without micro-action. I cannot think of any instances where it has. To assume that change or reform can “trickle down” is ignorant.
I would not consider micro-movements of resistance a form of evading of the issue. Micro-movements and in-your-face protests are not mutually exclusive; there is no definitively correct method to redress institutionalized oppression. Apathy and shame, on the other hand, are separate issues that I don’t equate with what the quote refers to.
3. Yes. Comparing discourse in the classroom and discourse outside, I notice that in academia, I (1) use less personal anecdotes (pathos) and more theory/logic (logos), and (2) assume more moderate positions. This is a strictly positive observation; I’m unsure which I prefer.
1) I understand that Takagi's point is that unlike questions of sexuality, race is neither questioned, nor is it easily veiled. However, to suggest that race has a "privileged stability" suggests that everyone of a certain race will identify with his/her race similarly and that everyone is accepted by other members of his/her race similarly. Race as an identity is completely unstable and is subject to change throughout various parts of a person's life. As an individual figures out his own, greater identity, the portion of his identity shaped by his/her race is bound to have different effects on him/her at any given point.
ReplyDelete2)Later in his article, Steve Pile says that resistance occurs because of "...a desire to survive intolerable conditions" (252). On a micro level, these intolerable conditions are purely from an individual's standpoint: what's keeping him/her down. Thus, while in that person's life such resistance may be effective in dealing with bad conditions, such effects do not help others. I agree with Kelly and Quinn that a macro-level approach is necessary in order to make any real change. Because everyone faces different injustices, of course micro-level resistance must occur as well. But in order for us to see difference, we must think bigger.
3) The academic setting absolutely frames how we talk about personal experience not just because as a general rule it is rather formal, but also because in such a setting it is difficult to forge the sort of trust-based relationships that promote personal talk.
1) As many other people have already mentioned, it seems a bit presumptuous to say that race enjoys a "privileged stability." Furthermore, "homosexual" identity is not necessarily a completely unstable category. It is structured around desire exclusively for members of the same sex, and carries (culturally variable) scripts and narratives along with it. For example, the coming out narrative is viewed in Western gay culture as a defining moment/aspect in/of a gay person's life, and a necessary one. This is not to say that sexuality is a stable category, or that the term or conception of "homosexual" is anything but a modern invention - I believe both race and sexuality are complex, fluid categories. However, if Takagi is arguing the rigidity of racial categories based on clear and ubiquitous signifiers, narratives, and scripts, it seems unfair to attribute those solely to race without consideration for the role they play in forming a conception of homosexuality.
ReplyDelete2) It is important to distinguish between necessary and sufficient when discussing resistance. Micro-resistance is *necessary* to battle hegemony, and important for the sanity and survival of a person who experiences oppression from the dominant culture. In fact, micro-resistance is important on a larger scale because of its ability to affect individual lives. However, it is not *sufficient* for the kind of large-scale change that we conceive of as "true" social change.
3) The academic setting definitely affects how I speak about personal experience. It forces me to frame my own experience in larger social contexts, and through this, helps me understand that experience better. The academic setting also fascinates me in its continued delineation of my boundary between public and private - which relevant experiences do I feel comfortable sharing and which do I not feel comfortable sharing? Which potentially irrelevant experiences come to mind during discussion and which do I mention?
1) Stability is one of the last things I’d attribute to either my experience with race or sexuality. As others have mentioned, establishing race as something stable would assume that both the person of that race and those around them perceiving the individuals race would share an unified conception. Using the mixed race card again I’d say that it wasn’t easy for me growing up deciding which of my races I belonged more to or if the possibility for me to claim both existed. Takagi’s argument trying to disassociate (minority) race and sexuality loses validity when it comes to mixed raced people. There are those who pass for white, practice race bending, and have to “come out” about their racial/ethnic background.
ReplyDelete2) I’m unsure of what my views are on this. I suppose it would depend on just how “invisible” these micro-moments of resistance are for me to believe that they have to power to bring about collective change. If anything these small acts may help foster a sense of community and unified thought if one can find others carrying out similar micro-acts. The problem is that it’s near impossible to gauge the influence that these micro actions have. I’m thinking specifically those Facebook movements like when everyone changed their profile picture to a cartoon and was supposed to post a status about preventing child abuse. I was one of the people that refused to join the bandwagon because the movement was only making people aware that child abuse exists and not what one could do to prevent it. Anyways guess what I’m saying is it really depends on what the action is resisting against or trying to accomplish for me to believe that it can be effective…
3) If I were more articulate I think that the academic setting would influence how I talk about personal experience. This being said, I rarely divulge anything personal within class or talk in class generally. I feel like academia is a place where the self is absent and one attains recognition based upon how many more learned individuals one can reference…even that sentence felt uncomfortable for me. Talking colloquially is fun.
1.) I do agree with this statement, but I believe that Takagi has unfortunately overlooked mixed race people. As a person of mixed Latino and Caucasian descent (my mother grew up on the border, my grandparents immigrated to America from Mexico, and my dad is just a stereotypical white redneck from the South), I do not feel race is stable at all, especially since I do not particularly look like the typical Latino that Americans picture. I am often able to pass for full white, and then occasionally people will see my full name or be able to tell I am half Latino, so I am constantly switching fields. This is also the same as my sexuality. Although I do not know how to properly identify myself, I have had sexual experiences with both men and women (though definitely more men :P) and when I am around a group of straight guys it is just easier for me to use my straight experiences to find connections to them without mentioning I also have done a lot more stuff with guys and prefer them a bit more over women anyway. So yeah, I'd say she should have delved more into the situation for those of mixed race.
ReplyDelete2.) For me, resistance is how you make it. If they would rather resist by themselves in their own ways by themselves than join with the majority for mass action, I think that is fine and just as effective, because they are still touching people's lives and changing their views about their community. I can relate because everything I do is very much micro-action. I never go to any mass gay events that are supposed to change culture because I disagree with the method they do things, and I feel sexuality is a personal thing and not something to scream out at the top of a mountain (Kelly touched on this earlier.) So I do my own micro-action, and I feel that if I have improved the image of the gay community in at least one person's life, I've done something good.
3. Yeah it does. I mean I am still pretty shameless with or without a prof, I am more likely to curse in our class I have noticed.