In reading Epistemology
of the Closet, written by Sedgwick I found myself confused prior to even
reading the work. My confusion stemmed from my lack of knowledge of the actual
definition of ‘epistemology’. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary,
epistemology means “the study of theory of the nature and grounds of
knowledge”. Once I understood the full definition I could decipher the point of
the Sedgwick’s work, the point of this piece was to critically analyze the
theory that developed from partial knowledge about ‘being in the closet’, mainly
the ideas of sexuality. Sedgwick defined his purpose in the quote,
“epistemology of the closet proposes that… thought and knowledge in the
twentieth-century Western culture as a whole are structured… by…
homo/heterosexual definition, indicatively male” (1). The ideas of sexuality in
today’s society have been socially constructed in binary and in a male
dominated world. And this theory of sexuality in today’s society lacks a
critical analysis. Sexuality has been attributed to a category of homosexual
and heterosexual, when sexuality isn’t meant to fit into a binary one and zero
category. These definitions of sexuality are unstable as the stand in their
binary nature. We are not just male or female loving, because gender itself
isn’t binary. We cannot be just heterosexual and homosexual, because in
biological definition, from where homo and hetero have dominance- homo means to
be the same and or similar, and hetero means different. And sexuality is not
biological, or current society has moved past the idea that sexuality is based
on reproduction and producing offspring, sex in today’s society is about doing
something that feels great and doing it because you can and it’s your own body.
Because the ideas of sex have changed, then these outdated definitions and
theories of sexuality also must change. These definitions are stuck in the days
where we could not fathom the ideas of things not being binary, but in today’s
society we can fully understand the complex dimensions behind individuals. We
are not computer programs, where you put in a one of a zero for our sexuality,
gender, race, hair color; whatever- genetics doesn’t even work this way. This
reality of our sexuality stems from ignorance in our society today.
My favorite
part of Sedgwick’s piece was the comment, “knowledge is not itself power…
Ignorance and opacity collude or compete with knowledge in mobilizing the flows
of energy, desire, goods, meanings, [and] persons.” (4) In our world we value
knowledge so much, and presume that this knowledge will lead us to power, but
when we have this lack of knowledge from an obscure meaning we are held back
from development. This lack of knowledge of sexuality due to the corrupted
meanings withholds its mobility. Without fully understanding a subject and
information how can we fight for its rights and power? This ignorance of
society thinking sexuality is binary limits the development of comprehension
and equality. For me, this is why I am enrolled in queer theories, I may have
knowledge in neural sciences, but I am completely ignorant to society’s
struggles of sexuality, I don’t have the background understanding of the
histories of sexuality struggles, and the efforts made by the LGBT community to
gain their equality. But instead of accepting ignorance, I am here to gain the
knowledge so I am not lacking a grasp on reality and the efforts and struggles
of society and the communities around me.
It seems to
me that society needs reframing, a good lesson in sexuality and gender. An
outreach program that explains that we are no longer binary, but fluid creates
in every aspect: gender, sexuality, class, race, etc. And maybe if our
definitions and theories change to fit the current ways, maybe growth isn’t too
far behind.
No comments:
Post a Comment