Op-Ed on Reclaiming Queer

Reclaiming Queer, for the Better.

Over the last couple of years there has been an ongoing debate in the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Trans (gender/sexual) on whether or not the term Queer should be included/added onto the existing LGBT therefore forming LGBTQ.  Although I would have figured there to be a discussion about it on the LGBT Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:LGBT
The majority of the discussion was instead on the talk page of the Queer Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Queer

I will be looking at the Queer page for the basis of the Op-Ed piece, the LGBT page was just looked at to see if there was a further discussion that ventured off of the Wikipedia page.
Looking on the Wikipedia page titled “Queer” there are many open ended questions and debates about what Queer is, and if it’s good for the LGBT grouping. It must be noted that this page lacks a lot of sources as to where the information has came from, though from my knowledge on the term Queer the majority of it sounds correct. I have spent hours trying to find journals or a credible site that gives a real true definition of what Queer is. Through using 2 different articles the main concept/definition of what Queer is, is simply not being categorized into any distinct LGBT category, but rather being identified or simply seen as something other than “straight” or “heterosexual” (Allen, 2011)( Jagose, 2009).

What I find interesting is how some people don’t think the Queer should be used/added to the LGBT acronym, yet don’t hold any real credible information backing up what they’re saying, they’re using their opinions alone to determine what’s right and what’s wrong.  This is a pure example of a bias being held and posted on Wikipedia. As outlined in Jensen’s article about the constant pushing of POV Point of View, which is considered vandalism to the Wikipedia pages because the things that are being posted are just opinions or biases as towards how someone feels on a particular topic (Jensen, 2012).

Throughout the Wikipedia talk page for Queer, there seems to be one constant editor, when a point gets raised by someone else, this editor for the most part not only gives his POV but finds sources to help back up what he’s saying. Many of the people in the talk section have logged into their account, although there are several comments made from people with anonymity, saying things for the sake of saying them, knowing that nothing will come back on him/her. The main editors get annoyed with this happens, these people just seem to make one comment then never reply or try to further what they’re saying. This is just another way that although there may be editors on each topic, it’s the people who try to raise controversy or change things to vandalize the pages in complete anonymity. If I was an editor, if it was a continuing thing it’d be hard for me to want to continue trying to constantly update and fix things, knowing very well the next day it could be all be changed. Also note that when I further looked into the editor, their account had been blocked and this user is no longer allowed to access Wikipedia for evidently having multiple accounts, which is against Wikipedia policy. I’m sure this happens quite frequently, which makes it even harder to have real discussions through Wikipedia talk pages, personally if I wanted to discuss or talk about things relating to being Queer, I’d look for a forum vs trying to voice my questions or opinions on Wikipedia.

According to the Queer Canada website, the defition gave by them was Queer is:
“ as members of the gender and sexually diverse populations, include but are not limited to 2-spirited, agender, ambigender, androgyne, asexual, bigender, bisexual, cross-dresser, drag queen, drag king, fluid, gay, gender fluid,  genderqueer, intergender, intersex, intrasex, kink, lesbian, non-gendered, omnisexual, pangender, pansexual, polysexual, transgender, transsexual, and             transvestite, individuals”. (Mule, 2010)

In other words Queer is just an umbrella term for a further expansion of the LGBT acronym. In my opinion adding the Q to LGBT should be installed, it allows more freedom to every individual to be who they are free of a specific grouping or title. For a lot of people who don’t just fall under the basic Lesbian, Gay or Bi-Sexual identification, it may be hard to come out to people and say right away exactly who they are. A lot of these terms falling under Queer are sometimes hard for heterosexual people to completely understand what they mean or more importantly how someone could fall under that heading, which causes a lot of discrimination right from the start. So instead of someone coming out right away and saying “Hi my name’s Sally, I used to be a male but now I’m female, nice to you meet you” it could simply be “Hi my name’s Sally, I’m queer, nice to meet you”. It gives that individual the option of how much they feel comfortable with disclosing, but also allows them to still be themselves without full disclosure. They still want to let others know that they don’t fall under the kind of specifications of the “heteor-norm”, queer gives the ability for people to do that without being completely out. To me Queer identification can help protect people falling under these certain “groupings” of gender and sexuality.

I for example feel much more comfortable identifying with either being gay or being queer, this is personal preference as I know many other LGBTQ who like to be indentified by something else. For me there’s a lot of degrading ideas that come with the word lesbian. The way that the media generally portrays lesbians are generally in 2 groups the “lipstick” lesbians, who are generally the more “eroticized” and feminine type in the media, because it attracts many viewers, mainly men. Then there’s the “butch/dyke” lesbians, who are generally portrayed in a very negative stereotypical way of being “manly” or “non-feminine” simply because they don’t conform to the feminine ideals that society puts on women. I don’t like being “grouped” into a specific grouping, therefore just be able to indentify myself as gay or queer, just simply puts it that I’m not a heterosexual, and that’s all I really care for people to know.

Unfortunately this Queer Wikipedia page fails to cover a lot of the important information on what Queer is, or how it’s beneficial for LGBT communities. It may make sense as to why this is “coverage for items that were current, deemed important, or held power measure by country size or company wealth produced more hits and thus were covered more frequently on the web” ((Royal & Kapila, 2009)). Which could indicate that since the topic of Queer isn’t highly publicized and covers such a small population, that the edits are never constant and that the effort isn’t there to update it with valuable information because of the small amount of visitors on the page. And without a lot of visitors on the page it because a lot harder for Wikipedia to really be seen as resourceful since the information being posted is from the visitors and editors. I found it interesting that in the article Encylopedias go head to head, they mention Britannica as a kind of compeditor for Wikipedia, though Britannica was supposed to be the better and more credible site (Giles, 2005), but when I looked up Queer on Britannica the search was inconclusive and held no real resources on Queer Theory or anything.

In conclusion, I think that there’s such hesitation to incorporate Q-Queer into the LGBT acronym, simply because a lot of people are misinformed of the real definition and proper use of what queer is. Wikipedia does a poor job in giving a real definition of what the term Queer is, and how it’s used in the LGBT community, it covers the bare minimum. If I had no clue on what being Queer means, Wikipedia would not help to further my knowledge in that topic. In Allen’s article he talked about the word Queer used to be used in a negative way to discriminate against lesbian and gay’s in the mid 1900’s, although since then the word has been well on it’s way of being “reclaimed” (Allen, 2011).  More discussion should occur and knowledge needs to be spread on the topic of what being Queer means, and the positives that come with it. With the positive reclaiming of the word Queer, and as more knowledge becomes available and spreads and with growing equality for the LGBT community in society, I think that in the future the current LGBT acronym will expand to ensure that everyone’s included within the community.

Peace, Love & Rainbows
Marissa

Toronto Gay Pride 2012

Other Students Blogs 

http://koooch12.blogspot.ca/

http://cm11ud.wordpress.com/

http://agirlthatfoundlove.wordpress.com

References

Allen, L. (2011). BENDING THE RULES: ATTEMPTING QUEER RESEARCH ON SEXUALITY IN SCHOOLS. Gay & Lesbian Issues & Psychology Review, 7(2), 155-167.

Giles, J. (2005). Internet encyclopaedias go head to head. Nature, 438(7070), 900-901

Jagose, A. (2009). Feminism’s Queer Theory. Feminism & Psychology, 19(2), 157-174.

Jensen, R. (2012). Military History on the Electronic Frontier: Wikipedia Fights the War of 1812. Journal Of Military History, 76(4), 1165-1182.

Mule, N. (2010). Queer in Name. http://queerontario.org/about-us/foundational-ideas/queer-in-name/. Retrieved May 27,2013.

Royal, C., & Kapila, D. (2009). What’s on Wikipedia, and what’s not…? Assessing completeness of information. Social Science Computer Review, 27(1), 138-148.