The document discusses queer theory, which examines normative and deviant sexual behaviors and identities as social constructs rather than essential categories. Queer theory looks at gender norms and non-normative sexualities, rejecting the idea that sexuality is determined by biology. It defines individual sexuality as fluid and dynamic, exceeding definitions of gender roles and biological sex.

1. Queer Theory
And Blood Red road

2. Queer Theory
from Dr. Mary Klages, UC Boulder
http://www.colorado.edu/English/ENGL2012Klages/queertheory.html
Queer theory emerges from gay/lesbian studies' attention to the social construction of
categories of normative and deviant sexual behavior. But while gay/lesbian studies, as
the name implies, focused largely on questions of homosexuality, queer theory
expands its realm of investigation. Queer theory looks at, and studies, and has a
political critique of, anything that falls into normative and deviant categories,
particularly sexual activities and identities. The word "queer", as it appears in the
dictionary, has a primary meaning of "odd," "peculiar," "out of the ordinary." Queer
theory concerns itself with any and all forms of sexuality that are "queer" in this sense--
and then, by extension, with the normative behaviors and identities which define what
is “queer" (by being their binary opposites).

3. Klages continued
Thus queer theory expands the scope of its analysis to all kinds of behaviors, including
those which are gender-bending as well as those which involve "queer" non-
normative forms of sexuality.
Queer theory insists that all sexual behaviors, all concepts linking sexual behaviors to
sexual identities, and all categories of normative and deviant sexualities, are social
constructs, sets of signifiers which create certain types of social meaning. Queer
theory follows feminist theory and gay/lesbian studies in rejecting the idea that
sexuality is an essentialist category, something determined by biology or judged by
eternal standards of morality and truth. For queer theorists, sexuality is a complex
array of social codes and forces, forms of individual activity and institutional power,
which interact to shape the ideas of what is normative and what is deviant at any
particular moment, and which then operate under the rubric of what is ”natural,"
"essential," "biological," or "god-given."

4. Queer Theory: From Lois Tyson: Critical
Theory Today
For queer theory, categories of sexuality cannot be defined by such
simple oppositions as homosexual/heterosexual. Building on
deconstruction’s insights into human subjectivity (selfhood) as a
fluid, fragmented, dynamic collectivity of possible “selves,” queer
theory defines individual sexuality as a fluid, fragmented, dynamic
collectivity of possible sexualities.

5. Tyson Continued
Our sexuality may be different at different times over the course of
our lives or even at different times over the course of a week
because sexuality is a dynamic range of desire. Gay sexuality,
lesbian sexuality, bisexuality, and heterosexuality are, for all of us,
possibilities along a continuum of sexual possibilities. And what
these categories mean to different individuals will be influenced by
how they conceive their own racial and class identities as well.

6. Tyson continued
Thus, sexuality is completely controlled neither by our
biological sex (male or female) nor by the way our culture
translates biological sex into gender roles(masculine or
feminine). Sexuality exceeds these definitions and has a
will, a creativity, an expressive need of its own. (Tyson 335)

7. Tyson continued
Finally, lesbian, gay, and queer criticism often rely on similar kinds of
textual evidence. No single textual cue can stand on its own as
evidence of a lesbian, gay or queer atmosphere in a text. Nor can a
small number of such cues support a lesbian, gay, or queer reading.
But a preponderance of these cues, especially if coupled with other
kinds of textual or biographical evidence, can strengthen a lesbian,
gay, or queer interpretation even of an apparently heterosexual text.
(Tyson 339)

8. Why am I bringing up queer
theory?
I do so because I feel that referring to Saba, The Free
Hawks and other dystopian New new women is reductive
and unfair, and just plain wrong. They are not becoming
manly. They are re-defining what ought to be and is a fluid
developing role for women and men. Referring to Jack,
Lugh, Ike, and Tommo as inferior males is also reductive
and unfair, although they often assume inferior male roles.
( we will discuss this further in our next class.)

9. Exercise
In what ways can you explain the ways in which the women we have discussed defy the
defining traits of traditional female roles? In what ways are they queer, divergent,
different from the stereotypical good girls that society has long defined as the role for
women? Think of examples of their looks, their strengths, their values, their clothing,
their behaviors, their attitudes towards the opposite sex, and their own sex? How is
Saba queer? Remember that queer does not mean lesbian, or it doesn’t have to. It
simply means that she is breaking through the traditional norms of gender and
sexuality. How are the Free Hawks queer? How is Emmi, for that matter? Are there
men who also fall into the category of queer theory? How? Remember to find several
quotes/examples for each point you make. I will ask each group to share their
responses.

10. Exercise
Spend the rest of the class writing down what you talked
about in your groups. This can serve as a part of your
rough draft for your next short paper.