Hmmm... quite interesting to think about, and I guess we'll find out soon. There's also the subject of "identification" (which you do give a nod towards) i.e. if someone chooses to identify as one or the other (i.e. queer or non-queer), can one really say they are something else even if they have existing traits? I really love reading how you dissect different topics, even the ones that are "non-mainstream" like you call it. Also, I don't think the article read in any way that your thoughts are all over the place haha. Can't wait for the next one!! 💃🏾💃🏾💃🏾
Hey, Arinze. This piece set me off for days. Trust me when I say thinking about this was intense mental gymnastics and a cocktail of emotions. Thank you for the experience.
It's correct to believe the population of queer people is suppressed. There is evidence letting us understand how when a sexual identity is less suppressed, their population tends to increase.
Your thoughts became reified with your proposition of the silo and solo-distancing effects. Brilliant.
I hold a similar opinion. I've preached how sexuality is a spectrum. While I don't believe we are in the majority, I believe arguing heterosexuals are in the majority is just as presumptuous. This is because there isn't enough data or even a methodology to allow us pursue these claims.
I support your notion of one's awareness to be 'capable' of executing non-heterosexual activities. Some of my homegirls identified as homosexuals for the longest time before they had sex. Before then, they had gone ahead to determine the sexual positions they believed most suited them. What can I say? Queer Culture is versatile(pun intended?).
However, I'll push back on considering Gay4Pay folk as invitees to our ball. I don't believe their part-time engagement allows them to be qualified as queer people. Are they having non-hetero sex? Yes. But then, you can't casually call my friends and I who hit stage for karaoke singers. I mean, as much as I'd like my talent to be recognized, I'm still not a singer. Lol.
The idea is: after getting paid, do they lose their cishet privileges? Will they suffer the systemic oppression faced by queers who embody Queer Culture? Will they help us bring the system down? At most, I propose we consider them as allies-- if they are willing to put in the work needed from them.
I believe the concept of being queer accommodates your streamlined definition. But probably as long as it keeps to the notion of Queer Theory. We should note that it is not simply how we are yet to take on a more consistent profile. Rather, its indeterminacy is its constituent characteristic. An identity without an essence.
One thing? To be considered queer, the individual must have OPENLY exhibited elements of being at odds with the normal, legitimate and dominant.
Just like you, my thoughts on this are not fully-formed. I understand making this proposition would mean individuals in the closet are shut out from the community. And this is where I couldn't go on.
Hmmm... quite interesting to think about, and I guess we'll find out soon. There's also the subject of "identification" (which you do give a nod towards) i.e. if someone chooses to identify as one or the other (i.e. queer or non-queer), can one really say they are something else even if they have existing traits? I really love reading how you dissect different topics, even the ones that are "non-mainstream" like you call it. Also, I don't think the article read in any way that your thoughts are all over the place haha. Can't wait for the next one!! 💃🏾💃🏾💃🏾
Hey, Arinze. This piece set me off for days. Trust me when I say thinking about this was intense mental gymnastics and a cocktail of emotions. Thank you for the experience.
It's correct to believe the population of queer people is suppressed. There is evidence letting us understand how when a sexual identity is less suppressed, their population tends to increase.
Your thoughts became reified with your proposition of the silo and solo-distancing effects. Brilliant.
I hold a similar opinion. I've preached how sexuality is a spectrum. While I don't believe we are in the majority, I believe arguing heterosexuals are in the majority is just as presumptuous. This is because there isn't enough data or even a methodology to allow us pursue these claims.
I support your notion of one's awareness to be 'capable' of executing non-heterosexual activities. Some of my homegirls identified as homosexuals for the longest time before they had sex. Before then, they had gone ahead to determine the sexual positions they believed most suited them. What can I say? Queer Culture is versatile(pun intended?).
However, I'll push back on considering Gay4Pay folk as invitees to our ball. I don't believe their part-time engagement allows them to be qualified as queer people. Are they having non-hetero sex? Yes. But then, you can't casually call my friends and I who hit stage for karaoke singers. I mean, as much as I'd like my talent to be recognized, I'm still not a singer. Lol.
The idea is: after getting paid, do they lose their cishet privileges? Will they suffer the systemic oppression faced by queers who embody Queer Culture? Will they help us bring the system down? At most, I propose we consider them as allies-- if they are willing to put in the work needed from them.
I believe the concept of being queer accommodates your streamlined definition. But probably as long as it keeps to the notion of Queer Theory. We should note that it is not simply how we are yet to take on a more consistent profile. Rather, its indeterminacy is its constituent characteristic. An identity without an essence.
One thing? To be considered queer, the individual must have OPENLY exhibited elements of being at odds with the normal, legitimate and dominant.
Just like you, my thoughts on this are not fully-formed. I understand making this proposition would mean individuals in the closet are shut out from the community. And this is where I couldn't go on.
I'd like to know your thoughts on this.