@ahimsa: not at all! It’s definitely a complicated thing. And people like me have probably benefited from this kind of interaction without knowing it.

I tried to include that point about identity as an interaction between what you present and what people see with my parenthetical phrase–”whether intentionally or not”–but I guess it was not clear. There’s a lot of complexity around this topic which is why it was enough material for a whole book of essays on different aspects it.

Sorry if it sounded like I was making the issue too simple in my very brief (and obviously confusing, you probably weren’t the only one) comment. I should have just mentioned the book and left it at that rather than trying to give a couple of examples. My book summarizing skills obviously suck.

@mm … I’d agree that it’s not accurate to say that those in the center have no stake and/or interest in the margins … but in practice, arguments for centrist gains often take on the tone of “At least I’m not as crazy / radical / out there / creepy / unacceptable as [insert scapegoat here]!” I think that’s where the discussion about being “faggoty” comes in, because in certain parts of the gay male subculture there’s a lot of pressure to be “straight acting,” which means to perform heteronormative masculinity. Gay men who don’t conform to gender expectations get punished in the queer community just like they get punished by non-queer folks for making people uncomfortable. There’s a lot of unexamined sexism in queer culture that continues to privilege normative gender even as we accept same-sex sexuality and relationships.

@ahmisa: There are 2 side to passing, though. One is the one you present. The other is the assumption by members of the majority culture that you are what they are. I don’t try to pass as a gentile, but neither do I dress like an Orthodox Jew, so am I trying to pass or are Christians presumptuous to assume I’m Christian?

For example, most people don’t think much about passing (whether intentionally or not) as healthy or able bodied when you have an invisible chronic illness. Or passing as the majority religion because you don’t look or dress differently. I wasn’t thrilled with the writing style of all the authors but even the essays that I didn’t like much provided food for thought.

http://www.mattildabernsteinsycamore.com/nobodypasses.html

I, personally, don’t think that keeping one’s eye on goals that are feasible practically, from a political standpoint, should be used to obscure the continued marginalization of people who are more visibly queer. Kenji Yoshino’s Covering is a really compelling analysis of this dynamic, and the way it throws some folks under the bus in the interest of political gain for others. And in the end, how it hurts us all.

So rather than the once/then structure you’re suggesting, I’d throw my weight behind a both/and approach … working to gain what we can in terms of existing civil rights while working hard to re-frame the debate in more radical/liberatory ways.

So once we agree that same sex couples should have the right to marry and that LGBT people should receive civil rights protections, anyone who would deny fringe members those things has to base their argument on their own personal feelings, rather than any abstract belief system. Saying, “I just don’t feel comfortable with [drag queens, transgender people, or whatever it is] lays the problem exactly where it should be-with the person who is uncomfortable, not with the object of his/her discomfort. And if you’re not comfortable with the spectrum of people you meet, well, tough.