{"title":"分类学的酷儿吗?","authors":"Kadji Amin","doi":"10.1215/10642684-10144435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Can taxonomy—a scientific method critiqued for its utility within Western imperial projects of racial and species classification—be queered? This article mines the tensions between the hostility to taxonomy within critical theory and the taxonomical renaissance within contemporary queer, trans, and asexual vernacular systems of classification. Contemporary queer uses of taxonomy express a shared utopian vision of combinatorial queerness, in which sexual, gender, and relational liberation occur through a multiplying menu of increasingly fine-grained identity options. The article examines the untimely echoes between contemporary queer classification systems and German sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld's 1910 taxonomy of “sexual intermediaries,” which forwards a combinatorially lush kaleidoscope of sexual and gendered possibilities that outflanks even contemporary developments. The goal is to simultaneously challenge the notion that sexology is contrary to queer projects and to consider the consequences of acknowledging sexology as a living inheritance of contemporary queer and trans culture. The conclusion asks how Native and racialized queers might resist the universalizing logics of taxonomy from within.","PeriodicalId":47296,"journal":{"name":"Glq-A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Taxonomically Queer?\",\"authors\":\"Kadji Amin\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/10642684-10144435\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Can taxonomy—a scientific method critiqued for its utility within Western imperial projects of racial and species classification—be queered? This article mines the tensions between the hostility to taxonomy within critical theory and the taxonomical renaissance within contemporary queer, trans, and asexual vernacular systems of classification. Contemporary queer uses of taxonomy express a shared utopian vision of combinatorial queerness, in which sexual, gender, and relational liberation occur through a multiplying menu of increasingly fine-grained identity options. The article examines the untimely echoes between contemporary queer classification systems and German sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld's 1910 taxonomy of “sexual intermediaries,” which forwards a combinatorially lush kaleidoscope of sexual and gendered possibilities that outflanks even contemporary developments. The goal is to simultaneously challenge the notion that sexology is contrary to queer projects and to consider the consequences of acknowledging sexology as a living inheritance of contemporary queer and trans culture. The conclusion asks how Native and racialized queers might resist the universalizing logics of taxonomy from within.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47296,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Glq-A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Glq-A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-10144435\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Glq-A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-10144435","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Can taxonomy—a scientific method critiqued for its utility within Western imperial projects of racial and species classification—be queered? This article mines the tensions between the hostility to taxonomy within critical theory and the taxonomical renaissance within contemporary queer, trans, and asexual vernacular systems of classification. Contemporary queer uses of taxonomy express a shared utopian vision of combinatorial queerness, in which sexual, gender, and relational liberation occur through a multiplying menu of increasingly fine-grained identity options. The article examines the untimely echoes between contemporary queer classification systems and German sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld's 1910 taxonomy of “sexual intermediaries,” which forwards a combinatorially lush kaleidoscope of sexual and gendered possibilities that outflanks even contemporary developments. The goal is to simultaneously challenge the notion that sexology is contrary to queer projects and to consider the consequences of acknowledging sexology as a living inheritance of contemporary queer and trans culture. The conclusion asks how Native and racialized queers might resist the universalizing logics of taxonomy from within.
期刊介绍:
Providing a much-needed forum for interdisciplinary discussion, GLQ publishes scholarship, criticism, and commentary in areas as diverse as law, science studies, religion, political science, and literary studies. Its aim is to offer queer perspectives on all issues touching on sex and sexuality. In an effort to achieve the widest possible historical, geographic, and cultural scope, GLQ particularly seeks out new research into historical periods before the twentieth century, into non-Anglophone cultures, and into the experience of those who have been marginalized by race, ethnicity, age, social class, body morphology, or sexual practice.