分类学的酷儿吗?

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Kadji Amin
{"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}
引用次数: 3

摘要

分类学——一种因其在西方帝国式的种族和物种分类计划中的效用而受到批评的科学方法——会被质疑吗?本文挖掘了批判理论中对分类学的敌意与当代酷儿、跨性别和无性恋分类系统中分类学复兴之间的紧张关系。当代酷儿分类法的使用表达了一种对组合酷儿的共同乌托邦愿景,在这种愿景中,性、性别和关系的解放通过越来越细粒度的身份选择的倍增菜单发生。这篇文章探讨了当代酷儿分类系统与德国性学家马格努斯·赫希菲尔德(Magnus Hirschfeld) 1910年的“性中介”分类法之间不合时宜的呼应,后者提出了一种丰富的性和性别可能性的组合万花筒,甚至超过了当代的发展。我们的目标是同时挑战性学与酷儿项目相悖的观念,并考虑承认性学是当代酷儿和跨性别文化的活遗产的后果。结尾处询问本土和种族化的酷儿如何从内部抵制分类法的普遍逻辑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Taxonomically Queer?
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Glq-A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies
Glq-A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信