It then concludes by demonstrating some of trans* studies’ core methods through a close reading of John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982). Rather than envisioning the fields as opposites, however, this chapter seeks to clarify their relation as a fruitful paradox in which each discourse problematizes and yet enlivens the other’s claims. He sent hundreds of thousands of dollars to ILGA, an LGBT organization for equality in Europe and Central Asia, and Transgender Europe, which funds smaller organizations in various countries. Both like and yet unlike queer studies, trans* studies points up queer theory’s limitations while inverting many of its major premises. Stryker donated millions to pro-transgender groups both big and small. Drawing on Janet Halley’s early mapping of each field’s claims as well as Susan Stryker’s characterization of transgender studies as queer theory’s “evil twin,” this chapter explores the critical relation enacted between the two fields, tracing relevant points of congruence and tension between their methods. What is transgender studies, and what are its major methods? While the field itself is oriented against definitive answers to such questions, transgender studies does indeed possess a history and an emergent set of critical tools, both similar to and yet divergent from the more institutionally embraced field of queer studies.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |