Loving Unbecoming: The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

This chapter offers provisional thoughts on the collisions and collusions of queer theory and colonialism within critical Indigenous studies through a close reading of queer theory’s subjectlessness, Samuel R. Delaney’s short story “Aye, and Gomorrah,” and the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia on antimiscegenation law. It argues that Indigenous critiques of colonialism challenge social normativities in ways that are deeply misunderstood—or dismissed—by queer anti-normativity efforts as identity politics at its worst. This inadvertently refutes an Indigenous analytics that insists on locating Indigenous bodies and desires in the contexts of Indigenous nations and territories, refiguring Indigenous analytics as merely advancing colonialism and its normativities. Examining how Indigenous analytics reject colonial formations and their ideological architects, the chapter unpacks the Loving decision to show how it reserves an Indigeneity that disavows Black-Indigenous lineage for a liberal tale of Whiteness—and queerness in subjectlessness—to protect the normativities of same-sex marriage that undergird a liberal colonial state.
Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationCritically Sovereign
Subtitle of host publicationIndigenous Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies
EditorsJoanne Barker
Place of PublicationDurham, NC
PublisherDuke University Press
Chapter6
Pages207-228
ISBN (Electronic)978-0-8223-7316-2
ISBN (Print)978-0-8223-6339-2, 978-0-8223-6365-1
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2017

Fingerprint

normativity
colonial age
politics
architect
Supreme Court
marriage
Law

Keywords

  • queer theory and colonialism
  • Samuel R. Delaney
  • Loving v. Virginia
  • subjectivity
  • Black-Indiginous identity

Cite this

Byrd, J. (2017). Loving Unbecoming: The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native. In J. Barker (Ed.), Critically Sovereign: Indigenous Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies (pp. 207-228). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822373162-007

Loving Unbecoming : The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native. / Byrd, Jodi.

Critically Sovereign: Indigenous Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies. ed. / Joanne Barker. Durham, NC : Duke University Press, 2017. p. 207-228.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Byrd, J 2017, Loving Unbecoming: The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native. in J Barker (ed.), Critically Sovereign: Indigenous Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies. Duke University Press, Durham, NC, pp. 207-228. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822373162-007
Byrd J. Loving Unbecoming: The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native. In Barker J, editor, Critically Sovereign: Indigenous Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. 2017. p. 207-228 https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822373162-007
Byrd, Jodi. / Loving Unbecoming : The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native. Critically Sovereign: Indigenous Gender, Sexuality, and Feminist Studies. editor / Joanne Barker. Durham, NC : Duke University Press, 2017. pp. 207-228
@inbook{e4a53a1208cb497a80725d1644b7f1cc,
title = "Loving Unbecoming: The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native",
abstract = "This chapter offers provisional thoughts on the collisions and collusions of queer theory and colonialism within critical Indigenous studies through a close reading of queer theory’s subjectlessness, Samuel R. Delaney’s short story “Aye, and Gomorrah,” and the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia on antimiscegenation law. It argues that Indigenous critiques of colonialism challenge social normativities in ways that are deeply misunderstood—or dismissed—by queer anti-normativity efforts as identity politics at its worst. This inadvertently refutes an Indigenous analytics that insists on locating Indigenous bodies and desires in the contexts of Indigenous nations and territories, refiguring Indigenous analytics as merely advancing colonialism and its normativities. Examining how Indigenous analytics reject colonial formations and their ideological architects, the chapter unpacks the Loving decision to show how it reserves an Indigeneity that disavows Black-Indigenous lineage for a liberal tale of Whiteness—and queerness in subjectlessness—to protect the normativities of same-sex marriage that undergird a liberal colonial state.",
keywords = "queer theory and colonialism, Samuel R. Delaney, Loving v. Virginia, subjectivity, Black-Indiginous identity",
author = "Jodi Byrd",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1215/9780822373162-007",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "978-0-8223-6339-2",
pages = "207--228",
editor = "Joanne Barker",
booktitle = "Critically Sovereign",
publisher = "Duke University Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Loving Unbecoming

T2 - The Queer Politics of the Transitive Native

AU - Byrd, Jodi

PY - 2017/4

Y1 - 2017/4

N2 - This chapter offers provisional thoughts on the collisions and collusions of queer theory and colonialism within critical Indigenous studies through a close reading of queer theory’s subjectlessness, Samuel R. Delaney’s short story “Aye, and Gomorrah,” and the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia on antimiscegenation law. It argues that Indigenous critiques of colonialism challenge social normativities in ways that are deeply misunderstood—or dismissed—by queer anti-normativity efforts as identity politics at its worst. This inadvertently refutes an Indigenous analytics that insists on locating Indigenous bodies and desires in the contexts of Indigenous nations and territories, refiguring Indigenous analytics as merely advancing colonialism and its normativities. Examining how Indigenous analytics reject colonial formations and their ideological architects, the chapter unpacks the Loving decision to show how it reserves an Indigeneity that disavows Black-Indigenous lineage for a liberal tale of Whiteness—and queerness in subjectlessness—to protect the normativities of same-sex marriage that undergird a liberal colonial state.

AB - This chapter offers provisional thoughts on the collisions and collusions of queer theory and colonialism within critical Indigenous studies through a close reading of queer theory’s subjectlessness, Samuel R. Delaney’s short story “Aye, and Gomorrah,” and the landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia on antimiscegenation law. It argues that Indigenous critiques of colonialism challenge social normativities in ways that are deeply misunderstood—or dismissed—by queer anti-normativity efforts as identity politics at its worst. This inadvertently refutes an Indigenous analytics that insists on locating Indigenous bodies and desires in the contexts of Indigenous nations and territories, refiguring Indigenous analytics as merely advancing colonialism and its normativities. Examining how Indigenous analytics reject colonial formations and their ideological architects, the chapter unpacks the Loving decision to show how it reserves an Indigeneity that disavows Black-Indigenous lineage for a liberal tale of Whiteness—and queerness in subjectlessness—to protect the normativities of same-sex marriage that undergird a liberal colonial state.

KW - queer theory and colonialism

KW - Samuel R. Delaney

KW - Loving v. Virginia

KW - subjectivity

KW - Black-Indiginous identity

U2 - 10.1215/9780822373162-007

DO - 10.1215/9780822373162-007

M3 - Chapter

SN - 978-0-8223-6339-2

SN - 978-0-8223-6365-1

SP - 207

EP - 228

BT - Critically Sovereign

A2 - Barker, Joanne

PB - Duke University Press

CY - Durham, NC

ER -