Marginalized identities resist and reshape societal labels imposed on them
-
One of the keys issues that ties these readings together is how society places label on people and forces them into boxes that don't reflect their full identity. Whether it's queernees, race, or religion, we see that dominant systems of power create narrow definitions of who people are supposed to be. These readings push back against that idea, showing that identity is much more complicated and that people who don't fit in those boxes have to find ways to navigate and resist them. For example, José Esteban Muñoz idea of "misidentification" really captures this issue. Misidentification is about not fully rejecting or fully accepting the labels society gives you but finding your own way to exist between them. It's a form of resistence that allows people to survive within a system that doesn't recognize them. I find this concept important because it acknowledges that marginalized people can't always just "opt out" of the systems of oppression around them. Instead, they have to figure out how to work within those systems while still holding on to their own sense of self.
This ties into what E.Patrick Johnson talks about with the term "queer". He points out that "queer" can sometimes feel too general, flattening the experience of people who are both Black and queer. He introduces the term "quare" to better reflect the specific struggles of Black queer people. I agree with Johnson's critique because the mainstream LGBTQ+ movement has often centred whiteness, leaving out the particular issues faced by queer people of colour. For people who face both racism and homophobia, a single term like "queer" doesn't always capture their lived reality. I think Johnson is right to call for more specific language, because without it, we risk erasing the experience of people who live at the intersection of multiple forms of oppression.
Then we have the issues of the veil, which is discussed by both Jasmin Zine and Homa Hoofer. Zine talks about how veiled Muslim woman is seen as a threat to national identity in places like Quebec. This is because she doesn't fit the idea of what it means to 'belong" in a secular, Western country. The state claims to be neutral, but policies like banning the veil show that certain identities are still seen as a problem. I think this is a clear example of how state power is used to control marginalized people, especially women of colour. The veil becomes a symbol that the state wants to regulate, claiming it's about "liberating" Muslim women, when in reality, it's about restricting their freedom to choose how they express their faith. Hoofer builds on this by talking about how veil is misunderstood in Western society. Many people see it as a sign of oppression, without ever considering that for some women, it's a choice and a form of residence. This really resonates with me because it shows how deeply ingrained stereotypes are. people often don't take the time to listen to what muslim women actually say about their own lives and choice. Instead they project their own fears or assumptions onto the veil. Hoodfar's work highlights the need for us to move beyond these simplistic views and actually engage with the complexities of identity.
All these readings make the same basic point: identity is never just one thing. People, especially those from marganalized groups, are constantly negotiating their place in a society that tries to simplify and control them. Whether, it's queerness, blackness, or being a veil Muslims woman, these authors show that identities are layered and require a deeper understanding. What strikes me is how much this applies to the world today. We see these same issues playing out in politics, media, and everyday life. The push to force people into boxes, whether it's through laws, languages, or cultural expectations continues, but so does the resistance against it.