Answer

Race, Gender and Sexuality in Post-Colonial Queer Studies

The intersection between race, gender and sexuality is an important area for anyone who attempts to make meaning of the queer aspects in the postcolonial sense. The distinctions that have been made over time by various theorists on race for example have amplified the need to understand gender and sexuality in novel ways. While it is important to understand these distinctions, one needs to establish connections and determine how such distinctions on race have had a bearing on what is considered the mainstream views of queer theory. What is often realised though is that the development of Queer theory has been characterised by instances of racial profiling and gender stereotypes that have collectively contributed in making this field either less representative of the non-White races but that are equally having a stake in the Queer world. The two questions I ought to answer from the beginning, of the historical and cultural relationship of race to gender and sexuality and whether race can be defined as a biological attribute are considered in-depth by the “Queer Race” reading.

The general race categorizations of White, Black or Asian have been explained alongside certain physical, psychological and mental features that these people generally exhibit. The size of the brain, the pigmentation of the skin, the size of the penis and certain emotional tendencies for these races have been explored by theorists in the past. What these theorists have posited is that depending on whether one is White, Red American, Brown or Black, they tend to follow peculiar characterizations that go along with their races. Even while some of these generalizations, by and large, may be true, they are in no way definitive. It is vital that the intersections of gender and sexuality too are considered and the manner in which the racialized dichotomy has helped shape the understanding of the peculiarities, even stereotypes that hold with regard to certain sexual inclinations.

Race, as is currently defined, has a lot of bearing to the gender and sexuality trends as we know it. This is especially true when it comes to interpretation of Queer behaviour. It has often been my view that heterosexuality, as the mainstream sexual orientation, is to be associated with all races. After all, the predominant gender interpretation in almost all races puts heterosexual thought at the core of understanding sexuality. Queer behaviour then, is the exception rather than the norm. In this view then, whether one is White, Black or Asian does not predispose them to being gay or lesbian. The reading asserts that while race may not be seen as a system of influence on whether one expresses queer behaviour or not, there are certain sexual peculiarities that have often been understood to be the preserve of some races. So while the Oriental people have the predominant heterosexual behaviour as the main orientation, there are certain “exotic” notions attached to their sexual preference. They may be predominantly heterosexual, but their race comes with a certain expectation especially when they engage in biracial relationships.

Understanding the queer interaction and the politics that surround it starts at the point where we consider the aspect of racial purity that has often been advocated by some races to the exclusion of the rest. For a long time for instance, the outlawing of biracial marriages could be seen as a propagation of a White race purity agenda. In my understanding then, the women who were responsible for reproducing within the confines of an ideal heterosexual relationship then had two “pure” constructs to protect—race and heterosexuality. It was through these lenses that the women then would be understood and constructed. If they engaged in non-reproductive homosexual relationships, then it was even worse for their definition. Such were a waste to not only the purity of the race but also a betrayal to the reproductive inclinations of heterosexual relationships.

It is a fact that researchers still grapple with the question of whether or not race is a biological rather than a social construct. It is in the view of such that the distinctions made by Philippe Rushton are vital. Rushton has three racial dimensions (Orientals, Whites and Blacks). He formulates a number of distinguishable traits like IQ, personality and brain size and reaches the conclusion that in all of these, Blacks come out last and Orientals, first. The White race sits right in the middle, with the right balance of the extremes. It is important to note that it is such dichotomies that shape the perceptions that often prevail on races and the biological predispositions that they have. In the Western imagination for instance, the oriental man comes across as feminine and weak while their women are eager to get dominated, with distinguishable exotic sexual preferences. In this way then, orientalism is just but one of the ways through which peculiar thought come to occupy the general public opinion and shapes the way in which interactions are done with these people.

In the course of the development of Queer theory, questions have been asked on whether race, gender and sexuality ought to be considered in isolation or integrated. Should the queer theorist confine himself or herself to sexuality at the expense of the other constructs? Such a view risks alienating a majority of the other queer people. This is especially true with the understanding that this perspective would define queer behaviour from the perspective of a White queer group. Gay and lesbian activism for example has certain qualities that set them apart from other forms of activism. However, these forms of activism have to be responsive to the differences in race that characterize the queer groups from different races. A White gay activist group cannot be assumed to speak for the interests of a Black gay activist group even if it has in its ideals the intentions to create a universal Gay activist voice.

The fact is that despite being joined together at the nexus of queer sexuality, the different queer groups operate in different racial environments, and while one group may find encouragement to come out and openly express their queer sexuality, it is not always true that the others easily can too. Besides being in racist environments, the Black queer groups for example have distinctions of having separate family ties and social grouping with their families and their communities that may not encourage the fact of their coming out as easily as their White counterparts. It is such facts that have to be taken into consideration by queer theorists. In my experience, there is no homogeneity in the racial distinctions; there can therefore be no homogeneous categorizations of sexual distinctions. Within the queer group, there are female, White male, Black, Asian distinctions. Such differences affect the way that these queer groups perceive and interact with their world.

One of the directions that this article avoids, and which for me is important in understanding modern postcolonial queer theory is the disavowal of queer groups within the confines of their own racial movements. It is not inconceivable to think of the inconsistencies that exist between feminist groups with lesbian movements, neither is it far-fetched to say that some Black gay community members have faced homophobia from the mainstream Black nationalist movements. White gay pride groups have also often complained of discrimination from their heterosexual counterparts. I feel that in this regard, queer groups have some common ground. What queer theory in the postcolonial sense has to explain is the manner in which the racial distinctions can be transcended by harnessing the exclusions that these queer groups face within their own races.

In conclusion, race as a social construct defined by the biological differences inherent in those races must be defined if we have to complete our understanding of postcolonial queer theory. Different queer groups are faced with diverse issues because/in spite of their races. It is easier for some to articulate their issues following the accepting environments within which they operate. It is much difficult for other queer groups to make similar articulation because of a history that has antagonised them against each other. Despite all these though, post-colonial queer theory has to recognize that against all odds, there is at least one thing that joins the queer community—exclusion from normal social lives within their own races. This could be harnessed as a potential frontier in finding a common voice (if any) in the post-colonial queer theory.

.