Homogeneity and Individuality
-
Zine and Johnson explore themes of homogeneity, appealing to a quasi-homogenous society despite claims of multiculturalism, hiding behind terms like “queer” to avoid discussion of cultural nuances, and the frames through which cultural issues are viewed.
In exploring these ideas, Zine opens up the conversation on ‘death by culture.’ Discussing the tragic death of Aqsa Parvez, Zine argues conversations about her death revolved not around issues of domestic violence, but that of culture; it was so framed that, indeed, it was her culture that killed her, not her father. Many are left anxious that, God forbid, the benevolent Canadian nation is corrupted and infiltrated by other cultures. This frame exposes an overall narrative that the Muslim woman, whether natralized Canadian or not, is universally oppressed and is victim to her culture’s misogyny.
What stands out to me in Zine’s reading is the acquisition of “national capital” by performing the national identity to then purchase national belonging. The life of an immigrant, especially a young immigrant, becomes a journey of discovery of what is that immigrant’s true identity. It is this performative identity to fit in, or the former life that has been discarded? Looking back at Aqsa’s case, what was behind her desire to not wear her hijab? Certainly it is her choice to dress as she wishes, with or without a headscarf. But was this fatal journey of her cultural discovery just an extreme example of swinging back and forth between the inherited and performative cultures?
Questions of homogeneity, differences, and complexities are also explored in Johnson’s reading where quare folks are now in a greater, more complex journey of both their racial identity, their performative identity, and their sexuality.
Queer, as an overgeneralizing term blurring the lines of differences, may not stand to reflect the nuances, complexities, and beauties of one’s identity. In this case, as Johnson explores an alternative that would best represent a queer person of colour, he finds ‘queer’ to be ‘out of my name’ and so wishes to identify with a term that does not shun his racial identity away.
Queer has become a term that dismisses discussion, dismisses the nuances of a person identifying with the LGBT+ community. Queer is perhaps less confrontational, less bold. It conveys the message it is meant to convey, but does not open up a conversation. Generally taboo subjects, sexuality and gender are kept behind closed doors; they are ‘matters of the bedroom’ and so have no place in public discourse. Perhaps “queer” is a term that reconciles societal norms, and the unique identities that may not squarely fit into said norms.
Johnson quotes Gloria Anzaldua, claiming “even when we seek shelter under it [“queer”], we must not forget that it homogenizes, erases our differences.” What Johnson highlights is that although a quare person is shunned from the racial community to which the person identifies, the quare cannot afford to abandon this identity. Racial identity also faces nuances, complexities, and discrimination that can be handled only with a community. As Johnson quotes Audre Lorde : “without community there is not liberation, only the most vulnerable and temporary armistice between an individual and her oppression.”
My question then is, what is the community? Is it the one the immigrant appeals to and performs for and so adopts? Is the benevolent community where the quare person can be authentic, or the racial community that shuns matters of gender and sexuality? Is the community the immigrant—least partially—discards?