Is queerness something that all lesbian, gay, bi, and trans people have in common? Is it a sexual identity, a political identity, both, or something else entirely?

No doubt we are all familiar with the term, but coming up with a definition for “queerness” presents quite a challenge. Sometimes “queer” is used as a slur, yet there are many people who proudly self-identify as queer.

It’s not so unusual for slur words to get re-appropriated by the group targeted by the slur, but “queer” stands out in a certain way. Not only has the term been reclaimed as an identity, but since the 90s, we’ve also had Queer Studies departments in universities, devoted to the study of queer theory. Other slur words, like “bitch” or “slut” have been reclaimed (or attempts have been made), but it would be quite remarkable to find a program called Bitch Studies in any university. Similarly, I’ve never heard of anyone making “slut art,” though we do have queer art and literature.

Queer theory developed from the ideas of French philosopher Michel Foucault. He claimed that sexuality and sexual categories are not determined by genetics and biology. Rather, they are socially constructed, they are products contingent on history and culture. For example, in Ancient Greece, though young men were encouraged to take an older lover—a man who could act as a kind of mentor to the youth—they did not call those relations “homosexual” or “gay.” It would be an anachronism to apply those concepts to these kinds of relationships when that is not how the ancients thought about them.

In Medieval times, some people were described as “sodomites” — but that had nothing to do with which gender they preferred to have sex with. That label was not thought of as asexual identity在所有。它并没有表达关于你是谁的一些深刻而重要的东西。你是一个鸡奸者只有当你实施鸡奸行为，同样地，你是一个小偷只有当你偷别人的财产。一旦你停止了这些行为，这个标签就不再适用了。这与我们今天对同性恋的理解大相径庭。

These examples illustrate the various ways in which sexual identities are a function of culture and society. They’re not natural kinds, dictated by biological facts. So, queer theory is concerned with examining the various ways in which we construct gender and sexual identity.

That’s one way the term “queer” is used. It also seems to be used as a kind of umbrella term, a short hand for LGBT. But it’s also a contested term. There are gay men and lesbians who dislike the term “queer” and would not use it to self-identify, and there are also some who prefer “queer” and dislike the “gay” and “lesbian” labels. Often, the difference is generational, with younger, urban types preferring to call themselves “queer.” Given that fact, “queer” cannot simply be an umbrella term that includes all other categories.

选择“酷儿”而不是“同性恋”或“双性恋”通常是一种政治选择。想想上世纪90年代，像ACT UP这样的酷儿活动人士在纽约开始使用的挑衅口号——“我们在这里!我们是同性恋!习惯它吧!”这是对主流社会试图强加给我们的整齐划一的二元分类的拒绝，是对隐藏的拒绝，是对变得“正常”或“体面”或其他改变的拒绝。社会必须改变以适应酷儿。

说到不符合整齐的分类，我们还没有谈到LGBT中的“T”。虽然有些跨性别者可能被认为是酷儿，但“LGB”和“t”之间有一个根本的区别。前者说的是情色或浪漫的吸引力，而后者没有。例如，跨性别男性可能会被其他男性或女性所吸引，或者两者兼而有之。将某人描述为“跨性别者”并不能说明他们被谁吸引。但它确实以有趣的方式使性观念复杂化。例如，我有一些朋友，他们自认为是女同性恋，并有女同性恋伴侣，然后决定从女性转变为男性。她们的性取向并没有改变，但是从女性到男性的转变让她们从女同性恋变成了异性恋。他们的伴侣呢?他们的性取向改变是因为他们现在和一个跨性别的男人恋爱，而他们之前的关系都是和性别相同的女人?

Perhaps this is why the word “queer” is so useful—it encompasses human sexuality in all its complicated, non-binary messiness...