Our Shared Shelf discussion

The two core themes in my reading of this book are:
-Must queerness be oppositional?
-Can someone be both a queer and a mother, equally?

The first question is more personally relevant to me. I hasn't given much thought to it, maybe because I am one of those young queers that grew up in the comfort and luxury of the 90s. But I do think the queer community continues to grapple with these questions. It can be hard to be unashamed. Indignance at being shamed might be natural, or it might grant power to the shamer, where there would otherwise be weakness. Either way, being “different” can force an obstinacy that complicates compromise. Finding the place for pride while pushing away this obstinacy, I think, is a conscious choice that we queers must make every day.

I am interested in both sides of this, and also in those who find themselves straddling the divide.

Also, any other queers out there just overwhelmed with “yes” when they read, “Heterosexuality always embarrasses me?”

I think the act of labeling yourself queer is an act of opposition. In a lot of ways, most of the other segments of the LGBTQIA population have been more accepted, less marginalized. We at least are discussing how to view them, how they/we view ourselves. With queerness, the very name suggests some sort of otherness, "weirdness." People don't get or accept that readily, which is where a lot of the opposition comes from. It forces the person to become a kind of rebellious force.

As for embarassing heterosexuality, amen! lol. As a bisexual woman married to a woman, it's weird to see public MF PDA. It often feels like it's being rubbed in my face in a kind of "look what you can't as readily do" kind of way.

For me, it just looks super strange. I guess it might be a reverse "yuck" factor - circling back around into the shame discussion.

I use queer as a term of inclusivity. Someone can be differently sexed or oriented and not have to fit into any one of the derivative labels. I can be a lesbian, and my friend can be a trans woman, and our other friend is gay, but if we all call ourselves queer we are the same.

Hmmm. Why would heterosexuality 'embarrass' anybody? Don't get me wrong, it works the other way around as well. I just don't see how that would be a good/acceptable thing, either way!

In what ways are the queer gaze's embarrassment and the privileged gaze's shame the same?

Rose wrote: "In what ways are the queer gaze's embarrassment and the privileged gaze's shame the same?"

The exact reason I said 'it works the other way around as well' was precisely to make clear that I know that many heterosexual folks do feel embarrassed about queerness and/or homosexuality, and that it baffles me as well, no matter how firmly rooted has it been in society since, well, forever, and still is. Take it as a sort of disclaimer against the 'privileged gaze' you have just mentioned.

That being said, mine was an honest question. Why should you feel embarrassed about heterosexuality? I feel like the explanation behind it may be better described with words other than 'embarrassment' to me, but I was genuinely curious about it. The question was for Melle as well, since she did provide a bit more of an explanation. :)

Nobody should feel embarrassed about others' sexual orientation. That's my only thought on that, but I'm willing to listen more on your thoughts about it.

Jessica wrote: "I think that all of that is very closed minded. I'm a lesbian, and I can say for the entire community that we are all the same as everyone else, and we just want to be treated like equals. We are c..."

I don't know if this was also a reply to my original comment or an observation to the answer it got? Either way, this is exactly what I was thinking. It feels so weird to me that you can feel embarrassed about someone for being straight / gay / queer / whatever else sexual orientation. Obviously, if you go to the right place (well, the wrong place actually, haha) and profess your embarrassment about queer people, you are going to get some headpats and applauses, but yeah, try to do that out in public today, at least in Western societies, and you will most likely get rightly called out. You avoid the things you are embarrassed about and likely end up judging them and detaching yourself from them, so that embarrassment is going to do more harm than good in the end, no matter who does it come from and who gets to be the target of it.

@Jessica It's not a choice for me, either, but there is nothing wrong with choosing it (my girlfriend has). We shouldn't need to simplify the conversation into “I can't change” - or to apologize, for anything - to attain acceptance. But we clearly are doing both. Is this compromise, made by “unthinkingly neoliberal” young queers like us, ultimately worth it? We aren't all the same, and saying that one of our experiences is representative of the whole is an injustice. I think that is one of the main messages of “The Argonauts.”

@Ana I wish I could say that I've got it figured out. I could propose that my embarrassment stems from an internalized sense that orientation/sexuality should be private, as it has to be for me. I don't know.

The context that Nelson builds around it (the private photography that was shown in her seminar) is important here, too. This is the context of my discomfort. A queer moment of intimacy or sexuality is fine, but the heterosexual one embarrasses me. It might just be the unfamiliarity of it. (How could straightness be unfamiliar? It is.)

"Heterosexuality always embarrasses me." This seems hypocritical to me. You expect absolute acceptance from normal people, but feel veiled aversion to ALL of us.
I am a STRAIGHT, WHITE man. And I am proud to be such. You will NOT shame into saying otherwise.

Jason wrote: "This seems to me a perfect example of rampant, out of control political correctness. I don't buy into the doctored propaganda that passes as "good" science that says that there's no such thing as a..."

No one here has suggested that individuals do not have the right to identify as they see fit, and no one has sought to shame you or any other "STRAIGHT, WHITE man" for his identification.

Jason, have you read the book? It might be helpful to do so if you haven't, as these discussions derive from the contents of the books each month, and you might understand a bit better what we're all talking about if you did so as well. Not sure why you're talking about political correctness, propaganda, and science... that seems to me to have very little to do with both The Argonauts and the discussion being had here. We ask that our members attempt to keep discussions on topic. You can start your own thread if you don't see one for a particular subject already, but please check first (by utilizing the search bar to the right of the discussion board), as we will remove duplicate threads.

Jason wrote: "The term "heterosexuality always embarrasses me" is all I needed to read to know if I did read, it would only be to be shamed for being a straight white male. Further more, the way this conversatio..."

You're of course entitled to your opinion, but that single sentence taken our of context is hardly representative of the book as a whole. Again, these discussion boards are for members who have read the book who will understand the meaning of isolated quotes having read them in context. Jumping to conclusions based on an out-of-context quote is not relevant or worthwhile in this discussion, and it is unlikely that other members will take your input seriously when you've not made an effort to engage with the material.