Universalism and Queer Entanglements
Given the rapid homogenisation of queer discourse transnationally through its attachment to Euro-US avatars, it has become commonplace to consider the normativity of the queer-as-antinormative narrative as a “field-defining rule” (Wiegman and Wilson, 2015). Transnational feminist, queer and queer of...
Guardat en:
| Publicat a: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/miranda, |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Format: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Idioma: | Anglais |
| Publicat: |
Miranda
2025
|
| Matèries: | |
| Accés en línia: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Sumari: | Given the rapid homogenisation of queer discourse transnationally through its attachment to Euro-US avatars, it has become commonplace to consider the normativity of the queer-as-antinormative narrative as a “field-defining rule” (Wiegman and Wilson, 2015). Transnational feminist, queer and queer of colour theorisations have alerted to the coloniality of the queer universal that disregards the specific particularisms of race, migration and global North-South circulations. In this regard, the overarching investment in the metaphor of the closet through the coming-out sequence, same-sex marriage, and homoparenting in the geopolitical West becomes exceedingly “the dominant.” The coloniality of the queer universal develops through modes of being queer, dictating a sequence of queer ways of existing in the world. The global South is corralled into a teleological relationship with the global North as the leader of queer universalisms. Following the extension of queer theorisation from the Sedgwickian binary of minoritising/universalising discourse, this essay foregrounds entanglements between standard queer discourse and debates on universalism. Attending to particular situations of queer worlds (Chen and Luciano, 2015), it forges intersections with decolonial theorisation to understand the challenge to the queer universal as well as the construction-consolidation of queer particularisms—which may or may not be considered pluriversal. In alignment with decolonial thinking, it traverses beyond the agenda of solely knowing and “undoing” the violence of the universal. Instead, it advocates for a sensing, a feeling of queer particularisms that do not disinter nor resurrect the universal/particular binary, remaining sutured to the “open mesh of possibilities” (Sedgwick, 1993) in both decolonial and queer frameworks. |
|---|