Queer Community and a “Concerned Space” in India: Reclaiming “The Self” From the Intersectionalities of Marginalization

Introduction

Tracing the history of the term Queer, we can see the protracted journey is made in case of its meaning. The word trace back to 1508 in Scotland when it was popularly associated with ‘strange or peculiar’ as the established meaning; with time the meaning somewhat progressed to ‘spoil or ruin’ by 1812. It was like after the practice of nearly a hundred years that the term came to be associated with ‘homosexuality or homosexuals’ in 1935. Now, the issue here stands that although the term now meant an ‘identity’ within the political domain of representations, it nevertheless remained ‘unchanged’ in its initial meanings. This means that the term or the sign ‘Queer’ meant the identity ‘homosexuals’- the signifier, which thus signified peculiar, strange, ruin, unnatural, etcetera. Gradually this term ‘encroached’ all ‘spaces’ that were meant only for the “natural” identities- cis-heterosexual phalluses (majorly) and sometimes cis-heterosexual vaginas and started politically retracting the imposed definitions by unifyingly representing the LGBTQAI++ community. The Queer then was understood as an umbrella term that started demonstrating the spectrum of identities (designated as ‘complex and strange’ by the society), that was deviating the teleology of the sex-gender-desire continuum. In this process, this term eventually commenced portraying the inclusion of identities, and marked inclusivity as a strong and politically conscious element of its definition, as opposed to patriarchy. But there stands a notable difference between a few terms which were eventually now equated with Queer- gay and homosexuals. These terms may mean the same, and yes queer included both gay and homosexuals. But when we delve within the stratified layers of identity politics, it is crucial to ‘un-link’ the connectivity. Homosexual is a more formal term, used within the medical domain signifying the sexual attraction in assistance of medicinal culture. Gay means happy; it once did mean happy and was applicable for both the sexes irrespective of their sexual preferences. Gay in sexual content was first used by Gertrude Stein and Alfred A. Gross in the 1950s. Finally, Queer stands as a term intricately covering these meanings but queer in a more politically efficacious manner. It is a vibrant political discourse of a ‘body’ indicating exactly what ‘sexual non- conformity’ means. It was Gertrude Stein who developed how politics made sexuality a commodity of capitalism; thereby, creating a good/pure/accepted form on one hand while a bad/impure/unaccepted form on other hand. As Luce Irigaray demonstrated how nature functions as a ‘foundationalist fable’ to construct identities that are ‘natural’ in opposition to what is ‘unnatural’; similarly, capitalism was commodifying sexuality as a product of political discourse within a phallogocentric social dome. Judith Butler in an interview titled “The Desire for Philosophy” stated what ‘queer’ meant for her- “My understanding of queer is a term that desires that you don’t have to present an identity card before entering a meeting. Heterosexuals can join the queer movement. Bisexuals can join the queer movement. Queer is not being lesbian. Queer is not being gay. Queer is an argument against certain normativity, what a proper lesbian or gay identity is” (Butler).