Marxism In The Queer Theory

1850 Words 8 Pages
Queer theory has been largely developed by three women: Judith Butler, Gayle Rubin and Eve Sedgwick. Each author argues different viewpoints about a person’s gender, identity and sexuality. Their arguments explore the social and political frameworks through which society interprets sexuality and gender. Since the three arguments regard sexuality in society and politics, could their arguments be compatible with the Althusserian Marxist concepts, especially Marxist definition of ideology? Each of the three writers have their own views in their arguments about how Queer Theory intersects with Althusserian Marxism (or Marxism in general) and the concepts of “interpellation” and “ideology”. These queer theories are compatible with Althusserian Marxism …show more content…
On page 2391, the charmed circle chart shows that sex is considered to be “good,” “ normal,” or “natural.” This is the idea that sex is heterosexual and the purpose of it is to reproduce. The other example Rubin provides in the charmed circle is that sex should be coupled, rational, and from the same generation. This is opposed to a person involved with pornography, fetish objects, sex toys, or any role that is not male and female. Anyone who violates these rules are seen as “bad” and “unnatural,”with harsher criticisms aimed at people who have homosexual attractions (2390). The reasons for criticizing homosexuality are multiple: this kind of sex is not procreative, often not married/coupled, and is sometimes commercial (2390). Rubin’s argument supports Althusserian Marxism theory in that the chart mentioned above shows a hierarchy of value, and that these values are changing. Marxist theory focuses on the economics of social class, however Rubin’s argument may not be about the economics of social class, but more about what is moral and what is immoral. As explained previously, sexual practices are seen to be a sin in Western society, especially to the heterosexual norm. As for Althusser, according to his ideology, a religion is a ritual, which offers moral outlooks and sustains obedience. Rubin argues that what religion does to sexuality is give negative connotations to people who …show more content…
The point which Sedgwick argues is that males may have been promoting the interests of men. However, it is different when the homosocial relationship between males is seen to be homophobic. Sedgwick mentions that mandatory heterosexuality that is constructed into the male kinship systems. This leads to her argument when males group all together, their relationships enhances the status of males, ultimately leaving heterosexual men with more power and privilege than homosexual men. She also mentions in her argument that, “it has apparently been impossible to imagine a form of patriarchy that was not homophobic.” (2468). Which displays how society views male relationships that are not sexual or have any romantic feeling towards each other. They can not show a display of companionship without society looking down on that behavior due to the patriarchal homophobic culture

Related Documents