twists and turns with Queer Theory 
I always thought that queer is no revolution, just stay in provocative and sometimes a challenge in poor taste and disrespect manifest sexuality. They wanted to shock and make the clown / the clown ... and I feel myself so caustic and radical, but I'm a little tired of biting my tongue with the queer issue, because I know many people who sympathize or partakes queer ideas and people appreciate it or want much. But one thing is friends and other ideas ... I am a woman, feminist and lesbian and proud of my cloud ... These cuire see them as the Dada movement, ephemeral ... important at the time, because they make you reflect on things that need a good washing, but did not propose anything practical or feasible ... Anyway, in this article, written by an Indian woman, is reflected very well expressed the same ideas as I shuffle about what queer (but with far more diplomacy and courtesy than I'm capable ...) Here I post some excerpts from the article Nxu Zana, reflected in Mary's blog Yan Yaoyólotl . can read the full article at: http://yanmaria.blogspot.com/2010/10/contra-la-teoria-queer.html By the way, you can visit the blog Yan, a dense area of \u200b\u200bfeminism, lesbianism, ecology, indigenous y. .. Women's spirituality!
am an indigenous woman [...] has had the opportunity to study and read things that a large majority of my sisters and brothers have not been due to lack of opportunity, lack of economic resources, in a nutshell by the oppression of a system that discriminates against us, violent, kills because not agree with his way of conceiving the "development", "progress", "work", "success", "exploitation of resources," thus deprive us of our lands, our voice, our language, our customs , our cultures, our ecological environment, our knowledge to learn "their" way of life, a way of life they consider "better" than ours, which is ultimately imposed. selfdenomination
[...] the queer, we know that the word was used as a means of referring disparagingly to gays and lesbians, since some sectors decided to use it as a form of pride against the homophobic attitudes of society Anglo-Saxon, so we could say that this was the beginning of a movement under that name. As you try to make sense of rebellion to call themselves the way, as society faces under the same terms but with an air of pride and defense of their despised status in the eyes of "normal." Under this appropriation is generated queer discourse that begins to question the identities and categories that we use various movements for the defense of our rights, our way of life, our cultures such as gender, class and race, arguing that we should not use them because they finally are terms coined from the historical experience of such a system oppressive patriarchy, colonialism, capitalism and racism. So we should dilute the manhood, womanhood, being indigenous, being white people, being Black people, being latin europe @ or @, the @ be workers, being political prisoners, being proletarians and bourgeois. In Instead it proposes a "hybrid" as a form of resistance against the homogenizing globalizing and individuality is enhanced with multiple variables and differences involving the common interests which replaces the identity.
regard the following questions arise if ell @ s marked the right to call themselves queer as a form of response to the homophobia of the system why me and indigenous peoples negársenos must call ourselves the possibility of Indians? If finally the term "indigenous" was coined in a system of oppression to differentiate the European white man civilized us and we (a situation similar to the appropriation of the term queer), so I have and assume the right to retake the class to call themselves against the system that tries to dominate and that is racist, finally, its action is equivalent to ours since the word queer also deserves a homophobic and inserts its action in this system.
identity as opposed to what they think queer means not only an area of \u200b\u200blife, for being indigenous is not only an aspect my life is my life, our life: the way of living and thinking about life, the history of my people, our culture, our relationship with the environment in which we live and develop, with Mother Earth, how we relate to each other and ourselves.
I think this confusion about the identity struggle arises because the focus on a single domain: sexuality in the individual, and because the struggle is directed against the feminist, gay and lesbian believing that they only focus on gender and sexuality; not see beyond that and understand that initially these movements had a political background, economic, social and not just as it is this: sex and sexuality, preferences, guidelines, right to pleasure, being that this only is a deformation of movements given by the system and medical discourses and marketers of the body, gender and sexuality.
Queer theory that the affinity is a way to struggle through the differences of each individual, so there may be as many queer queer tendencies exist (which is an entitlement), but this is a fallacy because more it eliminates the possibility of collective organization.
Another questionable situation is the fact seek to eliminate the male or female, I am and I identified as female, though I disagree with many things they taught me much about being a woman in my culture of origin in society West (like the fact that I had to be a mother because I do not performing as a woman, the imposition to be married, he could not dispose of my body, not having access to pleasure, or could not be independent but that would depend on my husband, that I should devote myself to home, allow me to work today but I must also comply with the housework as a woman, or even tell me that I feel attracted to men that if I feel emotional attraction or erotic by other women is not considered normal), ie I imposed a series of provisions to be met by being a woman and you should not be judged, punished, marginalized stigmatized and even violated, this does not agree but I would never deny the reality of my body and what it takes in my group, history, personal and collective life, they have refused to deny reality and my experience with trying to abandon a lie.
biological reality is undeniable: he who is born male and every animal has some type of corporeality and physiological attributes that are different from those born female, they have the force of muscle volume and external genitalia, internal genitalia and we have We put forth by the simplest example, although the biological differentiation generated a social and cultural construction particularly gender and sexual division of labor (which has been unfair background), on the other hand I can not deny that we biologies and different aspects that can not justify the injustice and violence that women are subject.
And I would ask queer theory and those that support does the fact of eliminating the categories of male and female eliminates the social injustice? I doubt that eliminating those categories change the system because they would rather change the whole system (thing you do not speak the queer and would imply a significant collective organization) to eliminate injustice and violence that is exercised towards sex women, eliminating the terms do not change the reality of the facts, do you stop feeling for woman will be raped, beaten, kidnapped, raped or sexually exploited? and I will say that it is only a beginning to reconceptualize, to begin to change but then how do we change if we do not recognize our differences start generating substantial injustice and violence?
How do I ask trying to change reality if they want to live apart from her even within her? Be said for not recognizing queer male or female, gay or lesbian, Indian or white, working or policy does not change the relationships so social groups in which they operate, only adjust its own subjectivity and the individual I think change begins, more is not change involves political action or social and / or effective for real change, only becomes the creation of a world apart settled, finally, within the same system that seeks to criticize.
[...] If queer theory and his followers claim that I get rid of my identity as an Indian and a woman I can rightly say, you are a weapon system, an ideological current that promotes globalization, homogenization tool because, as mentioned Susana López play the role of queer end to penetrate the bodies marginalized "and attaching them to legitimize the very institutions that form the pillars of the deployment of sexuality. For queer personal life is sexualized, and so is the politics and economics, and they do not desexualized, but sexualized proposed alternative to what already exists. Does not occur, therefore, a real break, but that option is incorporated into the scientia sexualis ... "
If you consider that" the personal is political "and therefore bring sexuality into the public space to claim the marginalized sexualities and achieve emancipation and subvert culture seems to me that this is wrong because background consider having sex (defined as sexual practices) is to practice politics and therefore increasingly engaged in non-normative practices are doing a subversion of the system as a form of resistance that lead to social change, the question is how to make a collective change their ideology and practices when only concern the strictly private sphere: to desire, individual pleasure?
If there is no identity and the movement is based on individual desire and pleasure is "the struggle with the affinity of differential private sexual practices only go against the regulatory system? How can this be real social change and background? How it is envisaged to "individuals" to generate real change strategies? [...]
generation of queer theory to the generation of knowledge that is part of the power plays in the breaking system of communities and identities . Against women, and indigenous peoples of the world, and the workers, the peasants and, lesbians, gays, feminists, trade unions, in order queer theory becomes the perfect neoliberal ideological weapon based individuality and pleasure as well as promoting a commercialized form of sexuality that is oppressive, again, for women, and children, and adolescents, paving the way for a new oppression and exploitation of sex and gender . And while serving as a way of dismantling, scorn and stigmatization of the movements of all kinds, especially against us, indigenous men and women.
So as I write against indigenous women and queer theory in the hope that anyone reading this to reflect and make a severe criticism of this theory and its postulates, hoping that whoever calls itself make a self queer regard.
