At the Borders of Queer Nation
< < Can you? || Strategy > >

But, one for all?
{some bisexuals} have committed ourselves to gay liberation. We see gay identity and solidarity as crucial, since heterosexism opposes all gay people, whether homosexual or bisexual, and we can only struggle against it as a self-conscious group. The ambiguous nature of our sexuality needn't imply any ambiguity in our politics. (Orlando 1991:230)
One young man characterized "the fight" as "non-heterosexuals vs. the general society"(Higgins 1993). And in the end, "queer is queer" to homophobic people; voters, employers, and baseball-bat wielders. Some bisexuals assert that "we are a part of" lesbian and gay communities, though they "often refuse to recognize us"(Weise 1992:xiii). Often lesbian and gay communities assert their inclusiveness with extended abbreviations like L/G/B/T (lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender), such as at the OutWrite Conference I went to with Bigala, whose name is another such conglomerate. Another strategy of inclusion (more is better in politics) is the relatively recent incarnation of the word "queer" as "an umbrella term for all kinds of sexual minorities."(Newitz and Sandell 1994) However, for some people, queer turns into a gloss for "lesbian and gay," and remains in a nationalist mode: "{bisexuality} remains a marginalized term within queer (read: mostly homosexual) politics." (Newitz and Sandell 1994) And this could be why, when I was at the OutWrite conference, I had a strong feeling of not being 'queer enough.' Not being represented. Because as Shuster asserts, I can't just leave part of me that isn't lesbian at the door; I would not be a whole person.

< < Can you? || Strategy > >

Log in or registerto write something here or to contact authors.