Queer Theory: Sex and Sexual Orientation
Introduction:
Sex and sexual orientation are constantly questionable, they are never straightforward. Although it is not easy to understand, queer theorists want people to comprehend the idea of: What you believe you understand about sexual orientation, if it’s being gay, straight, etc. it can be undermined. Not a single thing is what it actually appears to be.
History & Practitioners:
Queer theory is a different field of concentration that includes a ton of unique thoughts. It's a quickly growing collection of writing that tries to respond to a progression of inquiries regarding what is ordinary, how ordinary comes to exist, and who is rejected or abused by those thoughts of standards. The queer theory acknowledges the verification of being a queer. Crossdressers, plus the individuals who don't exactly satisfy their sexual orientation desires.
The main philosophers for the evolution of the theory incorporate Gayle Rubin, Michael Foucault, Judith Butler, and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick.
Michael Foucault
Foucault believed that we need strong proof to cause sexuality to appear and not be a concealed truth. It must be uncovered and made exact. He will not agree that sexuality can be characterized, he rather concentrates on the making of sexuality in admins of ability and expertise.
Gayle Rubin
Gayle Rubin's article 'Thinking Sex' is frequently recognized as one of the essential writings, it proceeds with Foucault's avoidance of natural clarifications of sexuality by reasoning regarding the manner in which sexual ways of life and how practices are progressively composed through frameworks of sexual orders.
Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick
Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick wrote the book named “Epistemology of the Closet”. Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick believes that homo-hetero distinction in the advanced sexual definition is crucially disconnected for two causes: that homosexuality is believed to be a piece of a small category, and how homosexuality is gendered to be either manly or ladylike.
Judith Butler
She contends in her book “gender trouble” that sex, similar to sexuality, isn't a basic truth acquired from one's body yet something that is carried on and represented as 'reality'. She claims that there's a severe opinion that there's a truth of sex that shows heterosexuality as the main legitimate result since the rational pair is made of 'ladylike' and 'manly' which makes the main intelligent result of either becoming 'female' or 'male.'
Key Assumptions:
Questions:
What components can be seen as being manly (operative, strong) and female (detached, minimized) and how do the personalities help provide these common titled roles?
What kind of examples or evidence (assuming there's any) is given to those pieces or personalities who question manly or ladylike pairs? What are the chances of those pieces and personalities?
How does the queer theory build on people's knowledge of the queer, the gay, and the lesbian education and history, including the documented history?
Should queers, gays, or lesbians still feel the need to code their beliefs and their sexuality through their writing or be open and straightforward like straight people? and why?
What does the work reveal about the operations (socially, politically, psychologically) homophobic?
Conclusion:
All in all, There are numerous things that queer theorists will differ on, yet the one thing they won't differ on is that if the queer theory is to be understood as a way to test the established and stable categories of identity, then it should not be defined too early (or at all) because of the possibility of it becoming too limited.
