Not Yet Queer Enough: The Lessons of Queer Theory for the Sociology of Gender and

Sexuality
Author(s): Stephen Valocchi
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Gender and Society, Vol. 19, No. 6 (Dec., 2005), pp. 750-770
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27640849 .
Accessed: 04/12/2012 05:03
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Gender and
Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

NOT YETQUEER ENOUGH

The Lessons of Queer Theory for
the Sociology
STEPHEN

of Gender

and Sexuality

VALOCCHI
Connecticut

Trinity College, Hartford,

This article

that sociologists
the
gauges the progress
of gender and sexuality have made in employing
that have utilized aspects of queer theory
insights of queer theory by examining four recent monographs
in their empirical work: Rupp and Taylor (2003), Seidman (2002), Bettie (2003), and Schippers (2000).
The article uses the insights of queer theory to push the monographs
in an even "queerer" theoretical
direction. This direction
involves taking more seriously the nonnormative
alignments of sex, gender, sex
uality, resisting the tendency to essentialize
identity or conflate itwith the broad range of gender and sex
as both performed
ual expression
and treating the construction
and
of intersectional
subjectivities
in nature. The analysis of these texts also insists that a queer sociological
performative
theory situate its
in economic, political,
and other institutional processes.
emphasis on discursive power more firmly
methods are proposed as the most useful way of combining queer theory with sociological
Ethnographic
analysis.

queer

Keywords:

theory;

performativity;

power;

ethnography

1994, Steven Seidman edited a volume of Sociological Theory on queer theory

(Seidman 1994) that introduced a queer theoretical perspective to a sociological
audience and suggested how queer insights might be useful in rethinking gender

In

and

Two

sexuality.

years

later,

he

followed

up

his

appeal

to sociologists

to

take

queer theory seriously by editing a collection of essays in which the contributors

utilized queer theoretical insights in their empirical work (Seidman 1996). Despite
are
a decade
and sexuality
of gender
ago,
sociologists
beginnings
promising
as a legitimate
now
see queer
to
useful
and
contemporary
theory
beginning
only
some of the
reassert
the original
article will
social
appeal
by reviewing
theory. This
these

recent work

AUTHOR'S

REPRINT

to highlight

the insights garnered using queer

Steve
/ would like to thank Mary Bernstein,
Rob Corber, Stephanie Gilmore,
their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this arti
Stein, and Salvador Vidal-Ortizfor
I would like to thank the anonymous
reviewers and the editor of Gender & Society,

NOTE:

Seidman, Arlene
cle. In addition,
Christine

in gender and sexuality

Williams,

for

REQUESTS:

their thoughtful
Stephen

and thorough comments.

Valocchi,

Department

of Sociology,

Trinity College,

Hartford,

06/06.
GENDER & SOCIETY, Vol. 19No. 6, December 2005 750-770
DOI: 10.1177/0891243205280294
? 2005 Sociologists forWomen in Society
750

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CT

Valocchi

YET

/ NOT

are evaluated
tenets
in light of the main
theory. Four monographs
these
the past decade.
tenets,
during
they have developed
Using
of the texts
in so doing,
indicates
in a critical
evaluation
and,
in an

extended

how

indicates
with

even
queer

theory
of

the materiality

of

in the construction
The

article

sex,

identity
that constitute

the whole

These

parts.

I first

involve

a different

the

describe

a focus

sexuality;

the

of

taxonomies,

where

sexual

of

systems
regulate

sexual

to deal
power

central

of understanding
way
on the
performativity

desires,

are also

concepts

power

signifying
in turn,

of

range

These

sexuality.

understanding
from

and

gender,

with

sexual

ioned

three

These

directions
institutional

and
concepts
the rela
of gender

in the formation of identities; and a refusal of the easy conflation

and sexuality

cursive

in

analysis.

between

tionship

gender,
identities.

as

theory

engages
how
they can be
also
the analysis

Conversely,
in more
sociological
pushed
and sexuality
and the role of

be

sex,

proceeds

of a queer

claims

can

of queer
the article

direction.

theoretical

queerer

751

ENOUGH

QUEER

dispositions,
on and operate

based
and

and

of

practices
a dis

within

are fash
subjectivities
and gender
taxonomies.
social
life in general.

gender

the dominant

sexual
and

subjectivity

have made several different kinds of critiques of queer theory

Sociologists
1996). These
(Edwards 1998; Green 2002; Jagose 1996; Seidman 1997; Walters
on
to
texts
focus
its
have
(Gamson 1994), its
literary
critiques
pointed
predominant
lack

of

to

attention

(Seidman
categories

but

critiques

the

institutional

and

contexts

material

discursive

of

power

1997), and the critical deconstruction of identity or group empowerment

(Collins 1998; Walters 1996). The analysis below shares some of these
at the
we

significant,

same

must

time

find

that because

insists

to make

ways

the

these

are
of queer
insights
theory
to empirical
amenable

insights

analysis.
out
laying
uses
article

After
of

the

the central
these

of a queer

elements

to evaluate

elements

and

analysis,
extend

the next,
the

section

larger

of

arguments

four

recent studies: Leila Rupp and Verta Taylor's (2003) Drag Queens at the 801 Caba
ret, Steven Seidman's (2002) Beyond the Closet: The Transformation of Gay and
Lesbian Life, Julie Bettie's (2003) Women without Class: Girls, Race, and Identity,
inAlter
andMimi Schippers's (2000) Rockin 'out of theBox: Gender Maneuvering
native

Hard

These

Rock.
were

monographs

chosen

for

several

reasons.

First,

these

texts

stand

as

in empirical
of utilizing
of a queer
examples
key components
perspective
serve
as
in
work
in
the area of
this
for
future
research;
way,
queer
they
templates
use elements
a queer
and
But
while
these
works
of
gender
sexuality.
perspective,
texts
for
these
Thus,
provide
springboards
they do not go far enough.
perfect
and queer
the ongoing
tensions
between
By pushing
theory.
sociology
addressing
excellent

the work

insights

in

this

direction,

my

into the sociology

in nature,

ethnographic

and

as I argue

practices,
tant component

of

and

hegemonic
a queer
perspective.

up

new

and sexuality.

in the conclusion,

well suited to handle themethodological

identities,

opens

analysis

of gender

challenges

structures
Third,

of

questions

Second,
ethnography

and

important

this research
is especially

associated with distinguishing

an
and sexuality,
gender
these monographs,
taken

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

impor
collec

is

GENDER

752

tively,

& SOCIETY

to some

point
ways

suggest

these

weaknesses.

the insights of these monographs

der

and

as a social
theory
The final
section

of queer

weaknesses

to address

2005

/ December

science
of

and

perspective

the article

on

builds

for doing queer work in gen

and offers guidelines

sexuality.

THE COMPONENTS OF QUEER ANALYSIS

and

Sex, Gender,

Rethinking

Sexuality

are used
as separate
to thinking
vari
and sexuality
of sex, gender,
Sociologists
or
are either male
terms:
with
discrete
in binary
attributes
defined
Bodies
our
are
and
roles
behavioral
social
either
female;
gender
presentation,
dispositions,

ables

or feminine;

masculine

see

We

1996).
affect

each

of norms,
we

are men

sociologists

admit

Thus,

tions

with

one

woman

life chances.

or

masculine
are

these

social

social

important
tend to see

signaling
We
also

that are

interests

or homosexual

heterosexual

them

important

indicators

feminine,

gay
but

constructions,

or
they

(Lorber
that

dynamics
as identities,
of

as
self.

the social

Of course,
straight.
are social
construc

consequences.
further

Sociologists
ables. As Lorber
sex,

and

or women,
that

as

variables

and

roles,

is either

sexuality

these

behavior,

attitudes,

bundles

our
of

144)

(1996,
and

across
these vari
relationship
assumes
that
has one
each
person
"sociology
... A
are congruent
which
and fixed
for life.
a masculine
a man
male.
Heterosexual
female;
the normative

acknowledge
states,

one

gender,
to be a feminine

sexuality,
is assumed

this alignment
recognize
this
in reproducing
them as
among
relationship

norm." Although
ity is the uninterrogated
sociologists
as
we
as a source
of power,
and hence
ideological
and
the
normative
the categories
by treating
alignment

do

conspire

on which
our research
lens through
is based
and the major
assumptions
our data. The conflation
of
with
identities
further
these
variables
interpret
or
in earnings
We
this tendency.
for sex differences
look, for example,

the starting
we

which

encourages

(Bittman et al. 2003); we examine

in the time balance between work and home

subordinate

dominant

and

(Connell

1995);

we

masculinities

narrate

the

and

femininities

nature

changing

of

lesbian

among
and

men
gay

and women
communities

(Armstrong 2002; Stein 1997).

These projects are essential, but the danger lies in their implicit recognition
of male/female,

the binaries

as the normative
somehow
as reified,
categories

alignment

masculine/feminine,
across

them

constructs
but are
ideological
or
as
these
By
taking
categories
givens
are constructed
that inequalities
by the

are more

naturally
occurring
phenomena.
we do not
the ways
fully consider
These
in the first place.
categories

that

as well

heterosexual/homosexual
than

exert

power

over

individuals,

espe

cially for those who do not fit neatly within their normative alignments.
these binaries,
Queer theory turns this emphasis on its head by deconstructing
foregrounding
tion
systems

nature

the constructed
and

resisting

the

tendency

of

and sexuality
sex, gender,
to congeal
these
categories

the

classifica
into

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

social

Valocchi /NOT YET QUEER ENOUGH

ical fictions,

of

the reality

incoherence

with

sexed

bodies

to be cultural

and

and

gender

In other words,
instability.
a broad
of complicated
range

and

represent

imperfectly
the meaning

are revealed

the binaries

Because

identities.

of bodies

and

the

social

cues,

these

construct

logical
Queer

and
focuses

theory
and

practices,
that violate

mies

the

those

and their
tionships
and
sexed
sexuality

subjectivities

surrounding
associated

of

contribution

the ideo

queer

analysis.
sexual

or

pays

cases,

not

fit

into

in terms

themselves

define

may

and

those

queer

analysis

ways

taxono

scheme

classification
and

independ
their
interrela

explores

the ways,

in nonnormative

and practices

dominant

as separate

sexuality

manifestations:

unanticipated
is gendered

of

the dominant

2002). While

to view
for example,
gender
and psychic
of social
life,

us,
encourages
ent dimensions

or

the anatomies,
genders,
or
either
of the binaries
neatly
category
of
and
and
sex, gender,
(Corber
alignment
sexuality
to how
the dominant
attention
taxonomies
fail to cap

1999; Halperin

(Delaney

processes

and

of individual gender and sexual subjectivities

who

fraught

incompletely

1996). This gulf between

is one

experience
"deviant"

that do

It also

2003).

among

on

normative

ture the complexity

even

lived

identities
the

Valocchi

the

binaries

ideolog

are

identities

social

practices,

with gender and sexuality (Jagose 1996; Lorber

or

constructions
sexual

753

for

example,
and
(Gagne

is

gender
Tewksbury

2002).
we

As
new

see

will

below,

rethinking
and

for

questions

sociologists
to the
happens

sex,
new

gender,
men

study of gay
In other
words,
analysis?
between
and
becomes
gender
sexuality
are not assumed
and practices
subjectivities
what

example,
central

to

more

useful

mies

of male

analytical
and

subjectivities,
instabilities

than

categories
lesbian

female,

when

erosexuality

may

what

the

and sexuality
up
opens
queerly
about
old concepts.
For
thinking
and lesbians
when
is made
gender
when
the relationship
happens

an

and

and gender

sexuality

by our

suggested
what
happens
are understood
queerly
Also,

and
subcultural
formations?
Queer
practices,
in this hegemonic
and is sensitive
sexual
formation
subvert
the normative
of sex, gender,
alignments

construction

individual
tax

the dominant

and lesbian masculinity

the ones
gay.

and

question
read off

empirical
to be easily

or identity categories? Gay femininity

onomies

uals

of

ways

may be
taxono

dominant
to the
and

study of het
to analyze
used

reveals
the
analysis
to the ways
individ
and

in the

sexuality

of heterosexuality.

Rethinking Gay Identity

a queer

While
alignments
also pays

difference
twenty-first
erary

Duggan
category

of

special

gender,
attention

scholars,

2000; Halperin
homosexual

sexuality,
to one particular

the

and

binary

and

cultural

2002; Sedgwick

at the end

of

the

gulf

and

between

the

lived

of

experience
that has served

throughout

the homosexual/heterosexual

centuries:
film

with

centrally

and

social knowledge

structuring

theorists,

deals

analysis

sex,

as

the twentieth

(Seidman
binary
social
historians

normative

the

century

became

of

trope

and into the

1997).
(Corber

1991) have shown, the emergence

the nineteenth

it

individuals,

a way

not

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

As

lit

2005;

of the
only

of

754

GENDER

ordering,

& SOCIETY

mal,

knowledge,

life,

binary.
do not

and

personalities,

and public

readily

human

became

abnor

and

the derivative

tropes

of

the centrality

acknowledge

but

types

Normal

discourse.

and private?these

public

however,

sociologists,

bodies,

social

the homosexual/heterosexual
Many

2005

regulating

and disclosure,

secrecy

of

and

classifying,

of organizing

also

/ December

this

binary to the study of social life but limit their attention to it as an identity formation
much

like

other

any

constructed

socially

1987; Murray

are

the

constructed

socially

and

expectations,
the hierarchy

in

action (West and Fenstermaker

cess

aside,

many

predictable
behaviors

people

nature

This
identity.
these categories.
and the modernist

of

thinking

on

only

and
practices,
and gender
Sexual

Latin

one

again,

and

that

the constructed

invalidate

of

power

categorical

nature

of

the homo

individual

desires,

sex of object
choice.
such as sadomasochism,
the

by

to
cannot
be reduced
example,
and these practices
and modes
become
the basis
for identity
may

1998). Transnational

research also

are Western

In many
categories.
on sex of object
is not based

subjectivity

that

masculine/feminine)

active/passive,
to the need

to interrogate

the gendering

1998).

the salience
and
calls
into question
analysis
to
is
its
attention
intersectionality:
categories
through
axes of social
differ
of individuals
several
along

on feminist work that criticized

the different

ethnicity,

pointing

the

identity,
institutions

a queer

identity
identifications

ence. Building

(i.e.,

a fairly

with

one's

social

contingent
in which
ways

identity

sexual

role

inter

for

choice,

sexual

the

embodiment

1997; Kessler

1993; Kulick

sexual

of

crosscutting

minimizing
race,

act,

in which

way

coherence
the

sexual

sexual

(Almaguer

Another

sex of object

1998; Hale

the scripted

of

trans sexuality,
or heterosexuality,

these

in the

of sexuality

and

of
categories
to take one example,

that

but on

plays

than

rather

(Chase

cultures,

choice

and modes

practices

intersexuality,
of homosexuality

us

reminds

hence

stable

of

not

but also on the many

binary
cannot
defined
affiliations
be accurately

sexual/heterosexual

formation

and

social

of sexual identity by focusing

this understanding

constructed

and

ideological
selves.

coherent

of

and culturally variable pro

and

does

and
cul

vary

systems

in the process

awareness

to the

of

assumption

the historically

leatherplay,
the categories
of embodiment,

attests

identities

systems;

these

of

as fixed

identities

of course,

experience,
It simply

A queer analysis challenges

not

with

subjective
the identity,

to or enact

this

enforce

categories;
the classification

the categories
and altered

these
the

ethnicity,

the meanings,

social

1995). This historically

experience
between

relationship
that correspond

of

associated

across
and power
and are constructed

as race,

such

1979; Stein 1997). These

number

norms

behavioral

of prestige

and historically

turally

that

formation

identity

and gender (Adam 1985; Epstein

interests

nation,

and

queer

power

the collective

adds

analysis

women

among

identity of woman
with

to this

sexuality

for

to class,
respect
set of differences

and by so doing points again to the limitations of identity-based analysis (Collins

1991 ;Crenshaw 1995). First, sex of object choice may be irrelevant to an individ
ual's
tant.

formation:

identity

depending

racial,

the understanding

Second,
on

racial,

ethnic,

and

ethnic,
of

sexual

or class

class
identity

affiliations;

differences

may

be

inflected

may
thus,

the practices,

be more
in unique

impor
ways

expressions,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Valocchi

and

interests

from

emergent

the dominant

this

or heterosexual

or any

755

ENOUGH

cannot

of differences

intersection

of homosexual

categories

YET QUEER

/ NOT

be

other

captured

single

by

identity

category.
As

we

see

will

in the

questions

below,

study

form of regulation
sexual/homosexual
differences

How

sexuality:

sexual

sex

are

and

gender

gay

that are not

practices

and
experienced
individuals
experience

how

affect

poses

several

identity

operate

ways

does

and

organized

subsumed

How

organized?
sexual

new
as a

and social life in

of social subjectivity

binary

how

versely,

and

in these

identity

in both the development

are gender

How

general?

gay

rethinking
of gender
and

the hetero

by

do

social

crosscutting
and desire,

identity

in terms

experienced

of

con

and

other

these

social differences?

Identity,

Performing
Most

structure

between

institutionalization
of

and

agency.

One

structure

in social
these

identities

and

are

that

way

tomany

socially
this way,
the

by

various

the

of

identi

is through their

sociologists,
In

culture.

with

as
products
constructed

identities

gender

constrained

partly
associated

resources

and material

labeling,

and

shaped and stabilized, according

ties become
enactment

sexual

understand

sociologists

interaction

Power

Rethinking

the

social

identities

and

learning

social
scripts,
and by the force

of externally imposed political naming (Giddens 1987). Racial and gender identi
ties, for example, are not infinitely flexible but are imposed by the power of the state
and various other social institutions (Omi and Winant
1986). Within these broad
institutional

and

individuals

however,

parameters,

can

groups

enact their individual identities in different ways or mobilize

to change
structure
the institutional
tively
different
of the meaning
understanding
movements
and
feminist
antiracist,
rights,
of

meaning
This
social

of Black,

the categories

structure/agency
paradigm
as partly
autonomous

self

these

constraining
are capable
viduals

exist

forces

of rejecting

in their lives (Bourdieu

though
that has

the

self

is a social

of

of

understanding
identity

situating

approach
"human
nomic
discursive

as

the
the

according
and interact

for

the conscious

with

and

the operation

of

of
the

thus

there

paradigm,
the social

and

in this

these

the
self;

these

indi
forces

even

is a core

environment

self

in ways

identities
and

social,

the autonomous

and unconscious

agency.

complicates
than

Rather

dualism,

a queer

(Stein 1989). It sees the self as

the manifold
of

sexual

structure/agency

this dualism
notion

a view

1989). In other words,

structure

between

from

the

environment.

of gender

relationship
term of agency

that is, as derived

subject,"
the false
forces
that construct

to this

civil

challenging

that construct

individual

1992; Stein

for a

support
example,

encourages

structures

or altering

forces

For

so on.

enactment

to the

and

agency

cultural

about

precisely
and
woman,

external

that

and

identities.

are

the power

and Wacquant

to the social self collapses

material

those

identity

from

on
to reflect
the capacity
or
that can either
change
reproduce
to the enactment
A queer
approach

this

of

Latino,

mainly
these

creation

to gain material

exercise

their identities collec

enactment

cultural,

and

eco

the
self, and provide
ofthat
self. In this

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

756

GENDER

view,

agency

& SOCIETY

/ December

2005

creation,

and

is a social

itself

if any, occurs within

the resistance

registered

social

by

actor against
For
the resistance
these same forces.
ofthat
social
shape
movement
the category
homosexual
the gay
liberation
did not eliminate
sex of object
an irrelevant
or unmarked
choice
social
characteristic;

and

"reversed the discourse"

from

gory

and

sick

heterosexuality's

to healthy
and normal.
The category
and sex of object
choice
continued
of self.
and as a core component

deviant

of sexuality
signifier
This
is best
understanding

sole

captured

by

Butler's

Judith

was

it simply
as

still marked

to hold

on

work

example,
or make

of the cate

(Foucault 1980, 101) by changing themeaning

opposite,

actors,

forces that both call the social actor into existence

themanifold

as

sway

the

the performa

tivity of gender and sexual identity (Butler 1989). For Butler, rather than the expres
of a core

sion
of

the

repeated
from

original
and

or an essence

self

gender

performance
which
gender
are
identities

that defines
of

certain

and

the

cultural

sexual

individual,

identities

and

conventions.

signs
are derived.

identities

constituted

"performatively

by

are

In this

the

very

and

unconscious

to the norms

adherence

and

cultural

is no
sexual

view,

of

expressions

gender and sexuality thought to produce them" (Corber and Valocchi

conscious

the effect

There

The

2003,4).

sexu

of

signifiers

ality and gender both bring the subject into being and constrain the identity
enactments ofthat subject (Butler 1993).
Butler's (1993) understanding of performativity, identity, and subjectivity derives
from amodel of power different from that used by most sociologists of gender and
1989).

(Stein

sexuality

tend

Sociologists

to view

power

as an external

force

operat

ing through social institutions to limit the life chances of some groups and expand
those

of other

is
of the self: The
is constitutive
power
subject
cultur
and
the
normative
structures,
systems,
meaning
through
the
that circulate
internalize
in society.
Individuals
taxonomies
as
are
circulated
of
and
the
discourses
they
by
by
gender
sexuality

groups.

for Butler,

But

in and

constituted

prescribed
ally
norms
generated
social
institutions

In so doing,

such

as schools,

clinics,

individuals become

mass

media,

self-regulating

and

even

in political
and changes
economy
operating
change
are backgrounded
actor
in this approach;
systems
meaning
but unanchored
in the culture,
internalized
by individuals,

Institutional
social

existing
tions are

understanding
For queer
normativity.

binary

This

is captured

theorists,
seem

heterosexuality
opposite.

of power

natural

set of norms

for granted
and Valocchi

or go

2003,4).

unconsciously
and

institutions

or

unmarked
As

or inways

discursive

works

the

above

and

discourses
institu

in social

that organize

concept
theory's
means
the set of

hetero

of

norms

that

as
that organize
homosexuality
to maintain
the dominance
of heterosexu

its

from being a form of sexuality that can be taken

in the way
heterosexuality
right
of heterosexuality
the dominance

thatmake
and

queer

can

seem

a result,

structure

by

heteronormativity
or right and

ality by preventing homosexuality

mative

1977, 1980).

from

foregrounded.

This

make

movements.

social

subjects (Foucault

that
promote

often

(Corber
operates

it particularly difficult to identify. It is this nor

is foregrounded,
that structure.

not

the

ensemble

of

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

social

Valocchi

we

As

up new

opens

sexual

about power,
thinking
about
the construction

questions

YET

and

structure,
of gendered

and

selves?

in these

agency
sexual

and

757

ENOUGH

QUEER

be extended
the conscious
of performativity
beyond
norms
our
to
the
of
gender
explain
adoption
everyday
can we
an analysis
How
of discursive
incorporate

the concept

ual

see below,

will

/ NOT

ways

selves.

Can
of

transgressions
and
gendered

sex

that operates

power

subtly but pervasively into a discussion of gender and sexual power inequality that
still recognizes the material and political impact of social institutions?
In the following
cal

important
queer

that

by

paradigm

and Taylor

nent). Rupp

across

alignments

outlined

(2000)

of

engage
tention

between

this

these

tively,

four

offer
and

works

and

sexuality

discourses

the

compo

the nonnormative

explore

life. Bettie

of

component
than one

these

how

align

(2003) and Schippers

that

construct

it, and

the

that identity formation. They apply

of heterosexuality
in so doing,
and,
study
an
of queer
and
of con
analysis
point
ongoing
nature
and sociology,
of
the
power.
namely,
Finally,
a queer
to apply
to the
another
opportunity
analysis

analysis

two monographs
of gender
sociology
these

various

a particular
on more

(2002)

the sociologi
of four

the arguments

focus

and

gender,

associated with
to the

of heteronormativity
concern
important

another

some

in everyday

the

instabilities and incoherences

the concept

(and

sex,

and enacted

on

focuses

and

analysis

extend

and

and Seidman

(2003)

heterosexuality,

explore

to evaluate

monograph
above

the categories

are experienced

ments

of a queer

the elements

analysis

Each

monographs.

theory

I use

section,

posed

questions

in their

sexuality
engage

every

treatment

of
of

component

the

Collec

intersectionality.
queer

theory

paradigm

above.

described

and to
My purpose here is to build on the queer aspects of these monographs
show the additional sociological insights that can be gained by taking queer analy
sis

seriously.

and

lined

above

to push

of

sex,
but

engagement

that

between

engagement

in their concerns with the performativity

alignments
this

describe

of a serious

the products

especially

the nonnormative

tion will

are

works

These

theory and sociology

gender,
also use

in queerer

engagement

and
the

sexuality.
tenets
of

The

following

a queer

queer

of identity

analysis

sec
out

ways.

APPLYING A QUEER ANALYSIS

Gendering

Drag

Sexuality:

at the 801

Queens

Cabaret

InDrag Queens at the 801 Cabaret, Rupp and Taylor (2003) use their extensive
categories
As
they

sexuality.
"reject

to make

observations

participant
and
sexual

or mock
use

and
argue,

traditional

the fact

queens
men
to challenge
The
boundaries.

the

several

drag

performances
and
femininity

that femininity
members
audience

drag

queens

the coherence
regarding
between
anatomical
sex,

claims

relationship

quite

explicitly

of gender
gender,

intentionally
117). The
drag

heterosexuality"
(p.
are being
heterosexuality
performed
to rethink
the naturalness
of sexual
and

and

"combine

maleness

and

femaleness

and

and

in a way

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

by gay
gender
that is

758

GENDER

hard

to describe"

/ December

& SOCIETY

2005

conventional
evoke
categories
(p. 126). They
using
as heterosexual
or homosexual"
be characterized
(p. 126).

that cannot

drag queens perform cultural critique by highlighting

and

identities

gender

between

This work's

the

and

anatomical

sex,

and

role,

gender

sexual

interest in the performativity

performances
core components

essentialist

critique

of a queer

the relationship
and
the inability
identity;

the

normative

alignments

identity.

identity

sex,

of gender

the

of

in

and

sexuality
in the construc

and

sexuality
taxonomies

gender,
available

the

several

engage

clearly

the performativity

of

these

of sexual

the performativity
of

desire

In sum,

of gender and sexuality and how these

of

notions

analysis:
between

life;

everyday
tion of

nature

constructed

"erotic

to capture

these

identities.

(2003) theoretical focus is on the collective

Rupp and Taylor's

"a gender
category
at their ethnographic

queenness,"
look

closely

gay

regarding
Two men

in the

gender

who

describe

of

construction

desire

Their

femininity
we find

evidence,

themselves

terms.

transgendered

outside

identity of "drag

or masculinity"
several
additional

the drag

(p.

sexual

queens'

as gay

their sexual
experience
not seem
to be homosexual

does

If we

5).

observations
subjectivity.
in

subjectivity
in nature

as

defined by the sex of object choice. As Rupp and Taylor (2003, 34-36) point out, for
Sushi and Gugi, "being a drag queen has to do with being in some sense
(p. 36).

transgendered"

makes

Gugi

her sexual and gender subjectivity:

woman

or because

I was

this

to men

attracted

if it is because

drag, I feel like I'm acting. In drag, I feel likemyself

the norms

and

friends

to one

attracted

fact

that

that

they

sexual

the only
time
in a threesome).

(i.e.,

"gay guys
are attracted

aren't

attracted

they had
In addition,

to drag

to normatively

queens,"
men.

and

that defines

tity categories
categories
ture these
are

of

their

men's

desire.

gendered

of

the drag
yet at the
The

the dominant

whether
subjectivity,
is
and
who
attracted
to,

attracted

to them.

the

bemoan

queens
same

time,

say

they

nature

the

of

implicit in these

taxonomy
choice

of

sexual

iden

and

drains

those
to cap

is inadequate
the category
gay
in terms of how
it is experienced,

Clearly,

sexual

boy

discussing

gendered

of object

the basis

of

Out

state that they are not

queens
sex together
was with
a differ

masculine

is a critique
on
sexuality

observations

about

to be a

a woman....

object is the primary feature of their sexual desire (p. 78).

Although Rupp and Taylor (2003) do not pursue this point,
statements

talks

Iwanted

(p. 37). When

the drag

relationships,

and

another,
man

gendered

ently

of

to be

I preferred

that

she

when

explicit

relationship

"I don't know

who

seem

In these

more

ways,
they
someone
is
who
(i.e., desiring
sex
someone
same
not
of
But
and
with
the
gendered
having
gender).
differently
seem
to capture
these
this complexity.
again,
categories
inadequate
to the life histories
statements
these
When
of the other
drag queens,
compared
to which
in the extent
the public
that there are differences
also suggest
performance
they
heterosexual

in their

of their gendered
Taylor
women"
formance

(2003)

sexual

desire

than homosexual

sexuality is congruent with their off-stage

note,
but

some

do

that does

(p. 38),
of it in their

everyday

not

think

not mean
lives

of
that

themselves
their

presents

as

identities. As Rupp and

"between
has

sexuality
an opportunity

no

genders
The
gender.

to extend

or

per

Butler's

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

as

Valocchi

(1989) analysis of the performativity

and

queens
empirical
of norms

into

their

everyday
to the concept

grounding
regarding

and

gender

sciously or unconsciously,
is a theory
of gender
to explore
how
queens

suggest

and

variable

process.

could

extension

of performativity,
and

sexuality

provide

particularly
these norms

how

of the drag

much
about

are

needed
the power

taken

con

up,

by different groups of individuals. Since performativity

can utilize
and sexual
itmore
formation,
sociologists
identity
occurs.
and sexuality
and Taylor's
socialization
gender
Rupp
that this process
of "taking
is an unstable,
up" norms
fragile,

fully
drag

This

759

ENOUGH

QUEER

the public performances

beyond

lives.

YET

/ NOT

Rupp and Taylor (2003) illustrate how a queer analysis highlights the limitations
of the dominant identity categories for capturing the complexity of people's lives,
at the same
the continued
in
of these
time,
power
they demonstrate
categories
The drag queens
of themselves.
say they are gay
shaping
people's
understandings
men
even
as they tell the ethnographers
and back
stories
that foreground
gender
The drag queens
consider
themselves
part of the gay community
ground
sexuality.
yet

even as they report varying degrees of marginality

announce

queens
mances

that

their

gay
the

highlight

on

identity
"trials

and

the

within
even

stage

tribulations"

gender
and then

and sexuality
gender,
in concrete
social
situations,

conceptually
they interrelate

they

of

sex,

separating

that community. The drag

as

construct

perfor
By
in

nonnormativity.
the ways
noticing

as
the dominant
by recognizing
are combined
of difference
in particu
to the performative
and historical
and by paying
attention
lar cultural
contexts,
a queer
us toward
a
nature
of sexed
and gendered
subjectivities,
analysis
pushes
more
and
of
of
and
the
intersection
gender
deeper
complicated
understanding

which

as alternative

well

in which

ways

these

axes

sexuality.

The

Limits

The

Transformation

of Gay

Identity:
of Gay

the Closet:
Beyond
and Lesbian
Life

Steven Seidman's (2002) Beyond the Closet: The Transformation of Gay and
Lesbian Life seeks to uncover the changing meaning of gay and lesbian identity by
men

interviewing

and

women

came

who

of

at different

age

throughout the latter half of the twentieth century. Using

to the

refer

lesbians

narrate

of power
of
and women

uses

generation
and

structure
men

interviews

their

he

the

sexual

language

lives

different

of

the closet.

the closet

interviews,
or

or communities.

the

affecting

changing

and 1960s
(p. 24) of the 1950s
in the 1980s
and
1990s.
Despite

that

a culture

analysis of Hollywood

the older
of gays
use
to

generation

the metaphor
these
individuals
or
at work,
with
their
relationships
family,
To account
for this shift, Seidman
argues

repression"
liberalization
argues

recent

Seidman

is not

changed

one

periods

of identity,
shape
and finds
that only

generations
For the most

neighborhoods
culture
has

from

historical

the concept of the closet to

of

of heterosexual

in

and
state-driven
pollution
to a culture
and
of normalization

dominance

change,
is still firmly

however,
in place.

film from the 1960s through the 1990s, Seidman

the

social

"homosexual

this

their

that

sexual

Seidman
Using

an

illustrates

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GENDER

760

& SOCIETY

has shifted from "the polluting gay" to "the nor

how the image of homosexuality

as citi
are made
and included
lesbians
visible
gays
mar
are gender
as
as
we
sex
to
link
love
and
conventional,
long
as long as we
defend
economic
values,
family
relationship,
personify

In other

mal

gay."
as long

zens

riage-like

lesbian

and

words,

as "we

national

and display

individualism,

as

have
identity
changed
them has changed.

shapes

It is this understanding
His

closet.

2005

/ December

of a materialist

analysis

of dominant

a view

reflects

of

as

power

of

analysis

at many

and

gay

lesbian

his

and

identity

constructed?another

torically

both

levels,

film

in Hollywood

and

constraining

to this insight is his rejection of a

demonstration
a queer

of

feature

that

with

homophobia

images of homosexuality

circulating

of power

(2002) analysis of the

state-sponsored

enabling particular identity formations. Related

unitary

nature

discursive

of power that queers Seidman's

coupling

discursive

and

of gay and

notions

(p. 189). Thus,

pride"

the material

these

that

are his

identities

analysis.

Iwant to build on these queer features of the analysis to historicize more deeply
and thus deconstruct further the notion of gay identity that Seidman's (2002)
ethnographic

use

participants

to describe

This

themselves.

notion

from

derives

gay liberation discourse of "coming out" and "the closet" of the 1970s and is itself a
of discursive

formation
ual politics.

that

power

tity risks reading a post-Stonewall

the

1950s

and

The

1960s.

tine bar raid by police

of riots

series

and

the construction
As

sociologists

their

segmentation
This

desire

and women

Men
from

applied

"came

the post-Stonewall

public
to everyone.

other

alongside

movement.

the meaning

of

2000).

(Chauncey
authenticity
a
constituency,

minority
queer

and

"finding
"lesbian"

uncovers
demonstrates

and

"gay"

by

the
the

became

incoherence
the

limitations

in the nature
of

reducing

of

component

identities

the

assertions
need

movement's

public

to one's

1956).

counterculture's
social

and

with
dramatically
was
the transformation

to a core

cast

the

self

about

to mobilize

increasingly

in

the notion of gay identity, a

1999). Thus, by historicizing

the

to oneself

admitting

a role
by

and

yourself

(Mills
sexuality
had
and women
who

as something
for the times,
or as something
to
important
of hostility
and repression.
climate
but that meant
different
something

out?changed
of this change

from

influenced

Greatly

decades

one's

men

Many

on

premised
these

suggest,

about

in and

component

homosexuality

terms (Valocchi

analysis
and
general

key

sixties

lesbians

(Lexnoff andWestley

being

and

necessary

in a national
carefully
out" during
this period,
and
involved
meaning

the closet?of

liberation

gay
of

of

meaning

a rou

engagements

social circle that one was a homosexual

The

and
reticence

it in ways

organized

in periodically
lives but practiced

iden

bar where

Village

by gays

identity.
the fifties

and

sex

and
sexual

hours of 28 June 1969 touched off a

era of organizing

about

1961).

homosexual
engaged

a new

writing

role

a Greenwich

Inn was

collective

self-understandings
of the closet
and

of lesbian and gay identity back into

definition

in the early morning

spurred
a gay

limits

the analysis

Stonewall

of

encouraged
1963; Reisman

and

shapes

that deconstruction,

Without

of

identity-based
understandings

in
thinking
of sexual

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

761

Valocchi /NOT YET QUEER ENOUGH

or

subjectivity
and

to the currently

self-awareness

sexual

dominant

of gay

taxonomies

straight.

That most
and

their

lives

to the power

speaks

the

in institutionalizing

the movement

of

used the language of the closet

interviewees

(2002)

to describe

out"

"coming
success

the

of Seidman's

of

language

and

the metaphor
in our culture.

Evi

dence from diaries (Russell 1993; Vining 1979), memoirs (Duberman 1991; Fel
lows 1994), novels (White 1982), and other historical texts (Chauncey
1994;
Howard 1999; Katz 1975) suggests that these stories are, like most life histories,
in the
available
readily
is
of which
the goal
era for
of the pre-Stonewall
not
the operative
It was
language
self-knowledge.
sev
would
reveal
interviews
these
queerly
sexuality.
understanding
Approaching
the
and
associated
closet
of
the
from
the
eral departures
language
identity-driven
of the self.
is the core component
that sexual
notion
identity
these

Approaching
to the intersection
in the

ing

manage

Both

this

has

sexuality.

As

and

this

system

relationship
there are no

sense
Here

53)

(2002,
of

self,"
see

we

of men

stories

erosexual/homosexual
bian movement
transsexuals,

reports,

dominant
alternative

sexual

this,

from

lesbians)

classification
system

sex/gender

closet

proved
sexual

and

gender

constructed

system

by
like

lesbians,
deeper

a process
the closet,
against
of
has
the consequence
in public

life

and

of

drained

that

the

core

her

and the het

subjectivity
in part by the gay and les
drag queens,
and subcul

also see the important place of

if it elicited
especially
to unsettle
the
the potential
an
an empirical
of
example
and
of
Rupp
Taylor's
analysis

is that the naming of and then

as a mark

of progress

for gays

the homosexual/heterosexual

inscribing
commitments
in the official

of

accommodation."

has

providing
a queer

is taken

at

narrative,

(2003) drag queens does for gay gender.

One of the ironies of Seidman's (2002) analysis
the fight

a tough

queers
(e.g.,
gender
social
networks,

marginalized
the organizations,

that binary.
Renee's
of her sexual
desire,

much

was

nonconventionality

(Wilchins 2002, 55). We

in policing
the nature

conformity
gender
about
information

sexuality

the closet.

are

self was the key to her sexual subjectivity. As

"the

Ren?e's

binary.
that after Stonewall,

ture of "the community"

subjectivities
that construct
and

iden

sexual

of
the utility
and the ade

the story of Renee,

that foreground
gender,
can easily
be read in transgendered

It is a binary

butch

on

49)

woman,"

"gender
of

between

slippage

sexual
the forces

based

(2002,

of managing
us about

to

attempts

to gender.

because

and

insight
to describe

as

read
Seidman

it tells

for what

again
liv

of

stories

several
be

As

is at the heart

still

are

terms where her differently gendered

Seidman

can

queerness.

once

closely

listening
of fact,

self-awareness

to describe

as a "masculine

herself

narrative,

requires
a matter

gender

and

of homophobia
this concept
and

system

describes

been

explore

classification

Although

also

to sexual

coming

gender
can
analysis

sexuality's

queerly

nonconformity

the concept

quacy

and

is now

language
a linear

constructing

interviews

"managing

of

who

and

closet

tity." Queer
our dominant

of

self,

of gender

gender

notes,

the

This

in the present."

told

of the past
to narrate

"stories

culture

of

the gay

and

lesbian

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

and

binary
move

762

GENDER

ment.

By

& SOCIETY

/ December

a queer

this binary,

critiquing

2005

analysis

and cultural
state-sponsored
homophobia
the language
but
of the movement?the
autonomy,
defined
choice
is a core
by sex of object
component
and

autonomy

calls

analysis
state and

sexual

any

attention

the discursive

to realize
politics
to both
sources
these

Performing
Intersectionality:
Women
without
Class:
Girls,
stated

As

a queer

earlier,

its conceptual

bring

relationship
race. Queer

and
ethnicity,
is a regulatory

class,
binary

and

sexual

self?also

limits

A queer
autonomy.
of power:
the material
that

identity
sexual

sociological
of

power

to the

responded

sexual

limit

the

state.

Identity

the study
to
of homosexuality
goes
beyond
to the study
of heterosexuality
and
apparatus
to gender
axes of social
and other
such as
difference

analysis
theoretical

and

heterosexuality's

Race,

of

Not

of power.

representations
notion
that

that

the movement

of

power

the analysis

deepens

do

only

that

regime

asserts
that the homosexual/heterosexual
theory
structures
of social
and political
many
aspects

life, but it has, for themost part, limited itself to addressing how that regime affects
homosexual identity, culture, and politics (Gagne and Tewkesbury 2002; Warner
1999). If it is to be useful to sociology in general, itmust extend its concerns with
the instabilities and incoherences of gay identity to all identity-based thinking, to
the discursive

demonstrating

of

power

the

heterosexual

specifically

of

component

the hetero/homo binary, and the utility of performativity as a mode of acquiring

social subjectivity for the study of heterosexuality. The following two studies go a
this:Women without Class takes up Butler's (1989)
great distance in accomplishing
notion of performativity and applies it to intersectional identities; Rockin 'out of the
Box

takes

up

as

heteronormativity

individuals can use the instabilities

regime

of

and

power

inherent in heterosexual

how

demonstrates

identity to resist this

regime.

Julie Bettie's

(2003) ethnography Women without Class: Girls, Race, and Iden

tity examines

the multiple

heterosexual

identities.
of high

groupings

school

and their
ily experience,
ence
into another,
Bettie
American

and

racial,
Bettie

white

girls

class,

and

analyzes
sense
make

gender
the ways
of

life chances.

girls

different

one

to collapse

that

ostensibly

social

their

themselves,

Refusing
these working-class
their
social
experience

argues

within

subjectivities
that

and

schooling
form

of

social

and middle-class
world

racial

and

complexly

fam

differ

Mexican
and

inter

sectionally: Their gender subjectivity is class and racially inflected, their ethnic
subjectivity is class inflected, and their class subjectivity is ethnically and racially
inflected.

Bettie's (2003) thinking about intersectionality is informed by queer theory, par

class as the
ticularly Butler's (1989, 1993) notion of performativity. Recognizing
less

visible

these

girls as class
do not preexist

girls

formance"

axis

of

social
difference
among
are constructed
who
subjects
the performance;
"rather

these

girls,
by their
the subject

(Bettie 2003, 53), "caught in unconscious

Bettie

nonetheless

class

performances.
is constructed
by

displays

views
These
the per

of cultural capital

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Valocchi /NOT YET QUEER ENOUGH

that are a consequence

Butler's

analysis

are

identities

and

the effect

Bettie's

performativity,

with

along

axes

of resource
their

status,

immigrant

norms

and

In several

tent

axes

class

class,

racial,

as

nature
that

for

in the

also

fledgling
(the

girls'

This

of

in so doing
of
and

limitations

the girls

adopting

heterosexual

without

couple
that

they
a relationship
these girls

explored,
can
which

in

rooted

Some

"middle
con

the cultural

"learned
capital

per

consciously

and

association,

by

as

perceive

they
She

resources.
norms

these

to a way

points

intersectional

their

own"

of

with

associated

in the

rooted

to behaviors

refers

rethinking
These

analysis.

systems
signifying
are also material,

but

statuses,

that

result

as performance
systems
and
thus less able
resources,

and

and

in material

open up when we

possibilities
of

their
and

analysis

the meanings,
identities.

sexual

apply Bettie's

identities.
about

asking

We

to be

By

be

seen

they

do

subculture.

among

affection,

have

they will
an ambivalent

chicas

of

resistance

the extent

can

as a function

foregrounding
and
that gender

the ways

the ethnography

ambivalences

surrounding
Mexican
American
working-class
girls
romance
as a way
of heterosexual
of resisting

of class
To

(2003)

hear

the

get
where

and

incoherences,

the discourse

discourse
gendered
and coupling.
sexuality
ual desire
and sexual
pleasure,
do not see within
the prep girl
awareness

The

the imitation of

conditions.

originally

the basis

performances

intersectional

explore
heterosexual

chicas)

arena

ethnic

their

(2003) constructs class queerly by show

and

form

example,
cultural

discourse of the middle-class

the postfeminist
middle-class
staff of the school who excoriate
na?ve.

cul

situation.

class operate in the formation of these girls' sexual subjectivities,

could

of

The

from

economic

example,

not

did

the norms

comprising
and ethnic

theoretical

to these

sexuality

signs

treatment

performative.

Additional
insights

for

they

identity

of economic
and political
inequalities
the conscious
from
of
manipulation
more
rooted
those behaviors
firmly
changed,

class

in large part from their

resource

by their material

origins,"
to acquire

began

performative
difference

are discursive,

cultural

interplay between
the

of

conditions.

conditions.

deriving

family's

and

in the ethnography,

a class

ing its complexly

the axes of social

their

hand,

192). In these ways, Bettie

(Bettie 2003,

different

one

not predicted

in ways

to perform

and

extends

the other.

of working
performers
of middle-classness,

learned

allocation,

gender,
on

class,

on

instances

formed class
class

of

signifiers

conditions,

those

lies in the variable

power of the ethnography

material

by material

displayed by these girls derives

tural capital unconsciously

ity, their

inmaterial

those subjectivities

in but not dictated

is rooted

various

(p. 52). In this way, Bettie

to the arena
and sexuality

of gender

of certain
the repeated
performance
Butler's
class
yet unlike
origins,

of

associated

conventions

location

or habitus"

origin

the performativity

and in so doing grounds

subjectivities
Class

of class

of

763

so with
We
in that

white girls (the preps) and the

these girls for being childlike and
by
that we

see

an openness
see a

also

they
and

their

these

intimacy,
be dependent.

relationship
class
position.

to the
girls also extends
sex
the chicas
exploring
and autonomy
that we

of
rejection
seem
to possess
family

without

Although
to normative

the
an

traditional
inchoate

or
marriage
never
explicitly
heterosexuality,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

764

& SOCIETY

GENDER

to foreground
a lesbian
of Kate,
lens

cussion

Bettie
culture

the prep

and

with

this
through
gender,
bic than prep culture

subculture
and

then

one

recent

sis is Mimi

in the area

book

comfortable

Schippers's
in Alternative

Maneuvering

Hard

Rock.

with

heterosexual

and

der maneuvering:
to not reproduce

the hierarchical

we

again,

and

Hard

of

the participants

identities, and symbolic

and

homosexual/

as gen
to this practice
Schippers
subverting
or
it so as
order
the
and
gender
twisting
existing
changing
"taking
the patterns
of structuration
that keep
the hierarchical
relationship
refers

guitars,

the norms

femininity

in rock

bands

drums,

and

but deploy
and the music

or audience
tion as groupies
subvert
of interaction

vocals

and

members,
culture

female
sexual
and
"hot."

subculture.

Girl

bands

with

scene

members.
the

feminist,

in ways

"rock":

and

antisexist,

that assert

these

women's

or these women's
in general
Men
do not "hit on" women:
male-focused

typical

sexual

signifiers of
leadership

privileged
posi
and
The norms

culture

of

rock music.

but that ethos is not rooted strictly in terms of

or sex of object
"make
out" with
other women
choice: Women
on male
men
for female
band members,
get crushes

the music,

instruments,

is a good

They

nonhomo

attraction

Here

with

strategies

and pair their

in this subculture adopt many

them

The culture is still highly sexualized,

express

the

lyrics typically associated with rock music

rules

male

of

in gender

associated

systems

meaning

and straight and gay through interactional

lyrics. Girls "kick ass": women

traditional
role

the dominant

rework

or alter

reinforce,

the misogynist

hard-hitting

phobic

they

and femininity

that create,

eschew

rock

the alternative
that

the ways

of man/women

binaries

analy

out of the Box: Gender

analysis
on

focuses

a queer

that uses

sexuality

Rockin'

their meaning.

whereby

masculinity

the

Rock

between masculinity and femininity in tact" (p. 119).

Time and again, Schippers's (2000) ethnographic participants engage
maneuvering

see

analysis.

Schippers's

nineties

is

is expressed
less homopho

and
Here

femi

of

conventions

sexuality

do gender and sexuality differently by using the practices,

associated

dis

smokers,"

in this working-class
resists
students

for Kate.

ethnography,

in the early

of Chicago

that

in Alternative

of gender

(2000)

"the

school

comfortable

intersectional

and Sexuality:
Gender
Performing
'
out of the Box: Gender Maneuvering
Rockin

systems

and

Kate

way

more

proves

is more

thus

utility of further queering Bettie's

subculture

whom

inter

(2003)

is in her brief

associates
132).
(p.
the
she "hangs
out" with
background,
Part of this downwardly
class
mobile
per

Since

134).

(p.

fourth

to know,

identity.
of gender
and sexuality
the meanings
that one way
this group
of high
mentions
a blatant
is through
of normative
"rejection

masculinity"

comes

Bettie

class

to do with

has

subculture.

whom

student

than

rather

sexuality

a smoker's

enacts

and

the utility of shifting Bettie's

and

gender

working-class
girls
a middle-class
from

comes

Kate

formance

ninity

white

of

group

Although
smokers

2005

place where we observe

Another
sectional

the

/ December

example

and

vocals
of

using

make
the

and
band

the participants

in the sub

queer

about

insights

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

the

Valocchi

/ NOT

of gender
to illustrate
and sexuality
built
into those binaries.
Here we have
inequalities
in nonheteronormative
ways.
acting

her mainly
discursive
couple
even
and sexual
inequality,
interactions

structure

larger
ited

within

that

by

their

bodies,

nifiers

of

the

of

toward

their

subjectivities,

erotic

unhinge

and

from

of gender
analysis
are contested
in the social

these

their
of

signifiers

heterosexual

to transform

interactions

traditional

structure

the

but

power,
women

The

unchecked.

desire

is careful to

(2000)

a structural

with

inequalities
a
resistance
still exists
within
gender
of their transgressions
and the impact
is indeed
lim
The women
of the subculture,
for example,
fashion

inequality,
structure.

into

the

rockers

Their

subculture.

larger

femininity
women
goes

of

and

heterosexual

(2003), Schippers

of gender

analysis
as some

to the binaries

ostensibly

765

ENOUGH

QUEER

resistance

performativity

Similar to the approach taken by Bettie

YET

sig
violence

of male

and

men

but

the heterosexual/homosexual

identity,

of

the

subculture

may

binary still retains its force in fashioning their identities, and the subcultural space
is still unambiguously heterosexual. In these ways, the analysis is explicitly guided
by the queer insights regarding the discursive power of the binary and the ways in
which

and

gender

of material

systems
These

in this

and

analyzing
A

are

uality
of

course

class

addition,

and

class
from

possible
some
of

their
the

as

lower

ture,

presents

they symbolically
much

have

In these

and

and

thus
as

the ways

in which

labels

sexual

many

of

these

stereotypes

of

slut

they

in themidst of neighborhood

distance
at

ways,
suggestive
and material

of

conversation

possibility
middle-class

themselves
least

that exist
of

the

participants
if not

a sociologically
nature
of power
axes

In

gentrification

their middle
the fact

that

and a suburban

from their new neighbors with whom

in material

bitch

the participants
in the subcul
and
sexual
alternative
gender
are ways
of this subculture

among
that

and

is accom

perform

In addition,

progressive.

is

behavior and attitudes

to construct

stereotypes

and

in

ability
middle

consequences.

negative

maneuvering

class

using

women
this

power;

sex

and

gender
young

the distance

no

with

these participants'

how

and

to claim

labels

it is precisely
coded
racially

enlightened

the possibilities
binary,
to other
of
that
binary
tionship

sexual

is

in

used

"bitch"

to those

gender

the young

in common,

the discursive

since

the class
claim

topic
frequent
the additional
of

subjectivities

and

inflected

subjectivities

this subculture existed

"invasion,"

the "slut"

or "red-neck,"

class

gender

It also

ways.

of these binaries

to foreground
issues
and
of class
use
of
and
(and nonnormative)
gender
sexuality
that takes
would
analysis
intersectionality
seriously
be

through naming sexist and homophobic

plished discursively
class

power.
can also

in this subculture
performed
those
For example,
identities.

to articulate

women

white

that make

are

revalorize

race

the rootedness

further to investigate

identities

used

the subculture

power

queer

push the ethnography

racial

in nonidentitarian

deployed

the discursive

subculture.

and

be

insights about

political

about

insights

race when

class

can

sexuality

by the sociological

guided

in aesthetic

informed
embedded

for dismantling

they

terms.

can explore
analysis
in the homosexual/hetero

queer

that binary,

and

the

inequality.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

rela

766

GENDER

& SOCIETY

2005

/ December

THE FUTURE OF QUEER SOCIOLOGY

to highlight
In examining
these four monographs,
I have wanted
the advantages
a queer
a num
to
to
of using
and
and
also
identify
approach
study gender
sexuality
can be extended
to better
ber of ways
in which
in sociology
queer
cap
approaches
ture the complicated
of gender
and sexual
and prac
identities,
reality
subjectivities,
tices.

Unlike

other

and

concepts

queer

analytical

this

analyses,
can
sociologists

sociological

lenses

that

article

use when

presents

doing

set

of

work

empirical

in the area of gender and sexuality. These are (1) queering the relationship between
sex,

and

gender,
the broad

with

(2)

sexuality;

these variables;

taking

of gender
to include
identity

sexual

and

range

ing of power

the nonnormative

seriously

formations

and (5) treating the construction

of intersectional

as both performed

subjectivities

we
queer
theory,
nature
the gendered
nature
but patterned

from

derived

interrogate
nature
the sexualized
and the complex
of gender,
sexuality,
across
axes of social
of human
various
difference.
subjectivity
is also suggested
a queer
As
can
by this examination,
analysis
of

on

insistence

the material

of

grounding

it

an understand
(4) broadening
as other discursive
formations;

practices;
as well

and performative.
these conceptual
Using
guidelines
can rethink
the nature
and resistance
of power
and

ology's

across

alignments

identity or to conflate

the tendency to essentialize

(3) resisting

the

benefit

discursive

from

soci
of

constructions

sexed bodies, masculinity

and femininity, and sexual identities. As Bettie (2003)
and Schippers (2000) quite rightly point out, the enactment of identities is an
or

accomplishment
of

array

forces

a sociological

this way,

but

performance,

institutional

that

understanding

of intersectionality

social

construction

in the social

and

In other

gender.

are

performances

tural

other

theorists

and

normative

edly part of this dynamic),

that

class,

racial,

plishments.
of identity
subjectivities
and the ways
nicely

with

As

gender,
two
these

can

be

combined

hierarchical,
texts

also

theory's

mechanism

is accomplished.

the work of Bettie

and

sexual
illustrate,

with

race,

inequality.
which

this

are

also

the

through

Butler
of

repetition
(and that

(2003) and Schippers

subjectivities

ethnicity,
the
about

about how these

Although

the unconscious
emphasize
of gender
conventions
and sexuality

theory's

of identity

sensibility

in social

would

texts

resources,

queer

class,

sensibility

rooted

one

suggests

(1993)
the cul

is undoubt

(2000) shows

interactional

accom

interactionist

symbolic
understanding
to illustrate
the ways
in which
analysis
can
the ways
in which
be
reconstructed,
they
each of these dimensions.
It also dovetails

a queer

are deeply
constrained,
in which
power
pervades
queer

and

In

notion of

(1993)

enriches

from
resulting
a queer
combine

an

by

heteronormativity.
in the rules,

theoretically

a sociological

of gender and sexuality

queer

signs

these

of norms

of power
works

these

constrained,
of

analysis

performativity
and

hierarchies

words,

constrained

by rooting the discursive possibilities

nature of identity with

performative
The

It also

institutions.

also
of

Butler's

embellishes

enactment

the repeated

by

are

identities
to the power

queer analysis

rooting

performativity
and regulations

of

these

contribute

anti-identitarian

posture

in that

symbolic

interaction's

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Valocchi

on practices
enactments
identity

can

focus

/ NOT

to the inconsistencies
point
to the dominant
in relation

YET

and

ENOUGH

QUEER

of

incoherences

767

individuals'

taxonomies.

Finally, and related to this emphasis on practices rather than identities, it is not
surprising that each of themonographs used here to illustrate the utility of queering
the

of

sociology

texts
achieve

and

gender

this

of gender

queering

cated and multilayered

social

within

settings

the

are

discursive,

individuals

claim

certain

even

identities

as

take

shape,

these

lives

where
Ethno

power.
given
create
meaning,
these
throughout

they

seem
ethno

these

undercut

to

and

are

and taxonomies
created,
images
on how
their emphasis
individuals
For
times
many
enterprise.
example,

this

to the

of individuals,

subjectivities
contexts
of

with

to

graphies,

and subjectivities

and
experiences
and
institutional

these

allocated,

methods,

graphic
best
suited

lived experiences
which

cultural,

larger
resources

methods.
As
these
employs
ethnographic
to
the concepts
of
mentioned
above
application
a
and sexuality
to the compli
requires
sensitivity

sexuality

the

demonstrate,

amply

claims

through their practices and their (sometimes unstable) desires and subjectivities.
This affinity between queer theory and ethnographic methods derives from
some

common

able-based,
and

quantitative
are

its reliance

on

ethnography
truth.
"objective"
observer

contrast,

assume

scientists

interests

of

methods

rely
tion between

on

participation

conducted

tion

systems

a more

can
in and

the degree

use
how

theory

discerning

and ethnography
theory
or used
in the culture

do
by

motivations,

practices,

systems.
Ethnographic
done
in interac
development
schemes
and the observations
and

of concept

of

the

incongruities
and even harder

the research.

and understand

used

concepts

queer
for

capacity

vari

in the field; queer theory focuses on the gap between

a theoretical
with
coupled
of interpretation.

tivities,

model

lived experiences.
people's
or
numerical
interviews,
secondary
or
out
laid
already
prior
developed

in the process

ethnographers
uals engage

named

and

identify, describe,

The

queer

or classification

concepts

to observe
it is hard
ogies,
individuals'
actual
behaviors
schemes

both

systems
to or help
elucidate
correspond
be
subsumed
within
those
may

processual

the initial

used

categories
on surveys,

indicators

accurately
those who

First,

other

by

both

as representation:
in
queer
theory
in its culturally
mediated
relationship
variable-based
Quantitative,
by
methodologies,
to measure
used
social processes
do indeed
cap

Second,
objective.
the classification

that

shared

ethnography

observed.
the

and

assume

always

social
or

and

real

agnostic
social
reality

emphasize
and

necessarily
in sociology.
about
their

or

ambivalent

Both

that

something

not

assumptions
used
methodologies

discourse

between

ture

not

epistemological

going
these

to which

data, by
to research.
between
to develop

Ethnography
that can

article

can

into

the field:

serve

call

these

Using

attention

as a queer
attention

paying
construct
their
practices
are organized
these practices

the

to

tools

different

coherent

is

levels

that

framework

to the practices
sexual
and gender
into

and

that this method

to these

theoretical

classifica

classification

researchers

provided

the
rely

methodol
systems

alternative

gives

that

approaches
have
contrast,

classification

these incongruities

framework

in this

Quantitative

individ
subjec
identities,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

768

GENDER

and

the correspondence

informed

queer
that

concepts
represents

these

between

der taxonomies. Combining

research

2005

/ December

& SOCIETY

identities

and

the dominant

sexual

and

gen

the sensitivities of ethnography with the sociologically

in this article

elaborated
individuals'

lived

can

experience

result
in ways

and
in gender
that honor

sexuality
the com

plexity of human agency, the instability of identity, and the importance of institu
tional

and

discursive

power.

REFERENCES
Studies in Society and His
Barry D. 1985. Structural foundations of the gay world. Comparative
tory 27 (4): 658-71.
1991. Chicano men: A cartography of homosexual
Tomas.
identity and behavior. Differ
Almaguer,
ences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 3 (2): 75-100.
1950
Elizabeth A. 2002. Forging gay identities: Organizing
sexuality in San Francisco,
Armstrong,
Adam,

of Chicago Press.
1994. Chicago: University
of California
Bettie, Julie. 2003. Women without class: Girls, race, and identity. Berkeley: University
Press.
2003. When does
Paula England, Nancy Folbre, Liana Sayer, and George Matheson.
Bittman, Michael,
109
and time in household work. American Journal of Sociology
gender trump money? Bargaining
(1): 186-214.
of
1992. An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University
Bourdieu, Pierre, and Loic Wacquant.

-.

-.

-.

Chicago Press.
trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.
Butler, Judith. 1989. Gender
1993. Critically
queer. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 1:17-32.
with attitude: An emergence of intersex political activism. GLQ:
1998. Hermaphrodites
Chase, Cheryl.
A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies A (2): 189-211.
1994. Gay New York: Gender, urban culture, and the making of the gay male world,
Chauncey, George.
1890-1940. New York: HarperCollins.
2000. The history of the closet. Lecture presented at the Lesbian and Gay Lecture Series, Trinity
College, Hartford, CT, 15 November.
and the politics of
1991. Black feminist
Patricia Hill.
consciousness,
Collins,
thought: Knowledge,
New York: Routledge.
empowerment.
1998. Fighting words: Black women

and the search for justice. Minneapolis:

University

of Min

nesota Press.
of California Press.
R. W. 1995. Masculinities.
Berkeley: University
in Joseph L.
femme: Cold war homophobia
J. 2005. All about the subversive
Corber, Robert
All about Eve. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 11 (1 ): 1-22.
Mankweiwicz's
reader. Maiden, MA:
Corber, Robert J., and Stephen Valocchi. 2003. Queer studies: An interdisciplinary
Blackwell.
the margins: Intersectionality,
1995. Mapping
Crenshaw, Kimberle Williams.
identity politics, and vio

Connell,

edited by
In Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement,
lence against women.
Neal Gotanda, Garry Peller, and Kendall Thomas. New York: New York Univer

Kathryn Crenshaw,
sity Press.

Press.
Samuel.
1999. Time square red time square blue. New York: New York University
Delaney,
1991. Cures: A gay man's Odyssey. New York: Dutton.
Duberman, Martin.
Duggan, Lisa. 2000. Sapphic slashers: Sex, violence, and American modernity. Durham, NC: Duke Uni
versity Press.
1 (4): 471-84.
the cultural turn. Sexualities
Edwards, Tim. 1998. Queer fears: Against

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Valocchi

1987. Gay
Epstein, Steven.
Review 93/94:9-54.

politics,

ethnic

identity: The

1994. Farm boys: Lives of gay men from

Fellows, Will.
consin Press.
-.

/ NOT

YET

QUEER

limits of social

the rural Midwest.

ENOUGH

constructionism.

Madison:

769

Socialist

University

of Wis

1977. Discipline
and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Pantheon.
Foucault, Michel.
1980. The history of sexuality. Vol. 1.New York: Pantheon.
sexualities. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
Gagne, Patricia, and Richard Tewksbury. 2002. Gendered
Joshua. 1994. Review of Fear of a queer planet: Queer politics and social theory, edited by
Gamson,
Michael Warner. Contemporary
23 (6): 905-907.
Sociology
1987. Social theory and modern sociology. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Giddens, Anthony.
Green, Adam Isaiah. 2002. Gay but not queer: Toward a post-queer
study of sexuality. Theory and Soci
ety 31:521 -45.
Hale, C. Jacob. 1997. Leatherdyke
Social Text 15 (3-4): 222-36.

boys

and their daddies:

How

to have

sex without

women

or men.

to do the history of homo sexuality. Chicago: University

of Chicago Press.
like that: A southern queer history. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
1996. Queer theory: An introduction. New York: New York University
Press.
Jagose, Annamarie.
Katz, Jonathan. 1975. Gay American history: Lesbians and gay men in the U.S.A. New York: Crowell.
David M. 2002. How

Halperin,
Howard,

1999. Men

John.

Suzanne.

1998. Lessons from the intersexed. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University
Press.
Chi
Sex, gender and culture among Brazilian
transgendered prostitutes.
of Chicago Press.
cago: University
andWilliam A. Westley.
1956. The homosexual
Lexnoff, Maurice,
community. Social Problems 3:257

Kessler,
Kulick,

Don.

1998. Travesti:

63.
Judith. 1996. Beyond
the binaries: Depolarizing
the categories
Sociological
Inquiry 66 (2): 143-59.
1963. Power, politics, and people: The collected essays
Mills, C. Wright.
Oxford University
Press.
Lorber,

of sex, sexuality,

and gender.

ofC Wright Mills.

New York:

Steven O. 1979. The institutional

elaboration
of a quasi-ethnic
International
Murray,
community.
Review of Modern
9 (July): 165-77.
Sociology
and Howard Winant.
1986. Racial formation
in the United States: From the 1960s to the
Omi, Michael,
1980s. New York: Routledge
and Kegan Paul.
1961. The lonely crowd. New Haven, CT: Yale University
Press.
Reisman, David.
Rupp, Leila J., and Verta Taylor. 2003. Drag queens at the 801 Cabaret. Chicago: Chicago
Press.

University

Ina, ed. 1993. Jeb and Dash: A diary of gay life: 1918-1945. Boston: Faber and Faber.
2000. Rockin' out of the box: Gender maneuvering
in alternative
hard rock. New
Schippers, Mimi.
Press.
Brunswick, NJ: Princeton University
1991. Epistemology
of California
Press.
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky.
of the closet. Berkeley: University
Seidman, Steven, ed. 1994. Special volume on queer theory, Sociological
Theory 4 (2).
1996. Queer theory/sociology.
Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.

Russell,

-.
-.
-.

1997. Difference
troubles: Queering social theory and sexual politics. Cambridge, UK: Univer
Press.
sity of Cambridge
2002. Beyond the closet: The transformation
of gay and lesbian life. New York: Routledge.
1989. Three models of sexuality: Drives,
Stein, Arlene.
identities, and practices. Sociological
Theory 1
(1): 1-13.

-.

1997. Sex and sensibility:

Stories

of a lesbian generation.

Berkeley:

University

of California

Press.
Valocchi,

Steve.

movement,
Vining, Donald.

1999. Riding the crest of a protest wave? Collective

action frames
4 (1): 59-74.
1969-1973. Mobilization
1979. A gay diary, 1933-1946. New York: Hard Candy.

in the gay

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

liberation

770

GENDER

& SOCIETY

/ December

2005

and the lesbian

1996. From here to queer: Radical feminism, postmodernism,
Walters, Suzanna Danuta.
menace
(or,Why can't awoman be more like a fag?). Signs: Journal of Women inCulture and Society
21 (4): 830-69.
1999. The trouble with normal: Sex, politics, and the ethics of queer life. New York:
Warner, Michael.
Free Press.
1995. Doing difference. Gender & Society 9(1): 8-37.
and Sarah Fenstermaker.
Candace,
1982. A boy's own story. New York: Dutton.
Edmund.
trans. In Genderqueer:
Voices from beyond the sexual binary,
Riki. 2002. Deconstructing
Wilchins,
West,

White,

edited by Joan Nestle,

Clare Howell,

and Riki Wilchins.

Los Angeles:

Alyson

Books.

at Trinity Col
in and the chair of the Department
of Sociology
Studies: An
Robert
J.
with
is
the
Corber,
coeditor,
o/Queer
along
lege, Hartford,
in
several articles on the gay and lesbian movement
Interdisciplinary Reader. He has published
activism inHartford.
the United States and is currently working on an oral history of progressive

Stephen

is a professor
Connecticut. He

Valocchi

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.52.75 on Tue, 4 Dec 2012 05:03:46 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions