Week three we started to discuss the importance of language and how it pertains to identity. The term “Gay” is a modern invention. It was not until the 60’s and 70’s liberation movement did the term begin to mean homosexual. It was used as apart of the movement for the political goals of visibility and equality. The word “Queer” used to be a slur for homosexual people, but the LGBTQ community reclaimed the word and nowadays use it as apart of their identity (hence the Q in LGBTQ). We read in Queer World Cinema that queer became a political standpoint that refuses minority and identity politics, queer was a more radical critique of heteronormativity. It’s important to remember that all identities are historically and socially constructed. Heteronormativity is the normalization of heterosexuality and a gender binary that matches one assigned sex at birth. Queer is all the possibilities, gaps, overlaps, and open meshes of gender.
We read about heteronormativity in Tendencies, the author stated that it is when all institutions speak with one voice. It is the lining up of assumptions and expectations of a subjects place in social life. They gave the example of Christmas, all the stores are filled with decorations, all the media talks about it, the government and schools close, every voice is saying go be with your heterosexual, nuclear, and christian family. Heteronormativity is a force used to reinforce the status quo. However, cinema helps make queer spaces possible. In Queer World Cinema, they listed dozens of spaces that are able to be made queer spaces because of queer cinema. Truthfully, queer cinema is everywhere and anywhere we want it to be, it is cinema that in any form explores outside the historically and socially accepted norms. And it is through this cinema that we ourselves are able to explore and understand queerness.
With our discussion of queer identities we watched the film “Law of Desire” by Pedro Almodóvar. This film was the very first to receive the Teddy Award, an international film award dedicated specifically for LGBTQ cinema. It surrounds a gay director, Pablo, and his relationships. Specifically, one with a psychotic and obsessive man that will stop at nothing to have him, including murdering his former lover and seducing his transgender sister while he is in the hospital. This dramatic film handles queer relationships very realistically, from the alias’s they have to use when writing letters, to Pablos sisters issues with dating men as a trans woman. What I liked about this film is that none of the characters personalities or service in the film was centered or dependent on their identities as members of the queer community. The flamboyant gay bff trope is a personal pet peeve when it comes to “diverse” cinema. This film felt ahead of its time as far as its portrayal of queer people as real people with complicated identities. It was very raw, to the point of making me uncomfortable at times, but I believe that was the entire point, and that’s what makes it one of my favorites.
