WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.319 Welcome to the Deep Dive. We're really so glad 00:00:03.319 --> 00:00:04.879 you're joining us today. You know, we spend a 00:00:04.879 --> 00:00:07.500 lot of time on this show looking at these sprawling 00:00:07.500 --> 00:00:10.500 cultural movements and massive paradigm shifts, 00:00:10.660 --> 00:00:13.539 but today's mission is a bit different. Yeah, 00:00:13.580 --> 00:00:16.179 it's much more focused. Exactly. We are going 00:00:16.179 --> 00:00:19.120 to explore how a single, highly controversial 00:00:19.120 --> 00:00:22.170 piece of paper... Literally just a folded shoot 00:00:22.170 --> 00:00:25.829 of newsprint helped completely reshape language, 00:00:25.989 --> 00:00:29.350 identity and activism in the 1990s. It really 00:00:29.350 --> 00:00:31.030 is an incredible story. It's about the mechanics 00:00:31.030 --> 00:00:33.850 of a cultural shockwave. You know, we're looking 00:00:33.850 --> 00:00:36.109 at a moment where a community just decided to 00:00:36.109 --> 00:00:38.450 completely rewrite the rules of their own identity. 00:00:38.969 --> 00:00:41.310 And we've been looking through this really fascinating 00:00:41.310 --> 00:00:44.030 stack of materials for this. We have the original 00:00:44.030 --> 00:00:46.549 text of the manifesto itself, the historical 00:00:46.549 --> 00:00:48.909 record surrounding its release, and, of course, 00:00:48.950 --> 00:00:51.250 all the decades of academic critiques that followed. 00:00:51.390 --> 00:00:53.310 Right, which are extensive. Oh, very extensive. 00:00:53.590 --> 00:00:56.939 So the essay is titled Queers Read This. But 00:00:56.939 --> 00:00:59.479 it is also widely known by the title of its deeply 00:00:59.479 --> 00:01:02.399 polarizing back page, which is I Hate Straits. 00:01:02.479 --> 00:01:04.939 Just hearing those titles, I mean, you immediately 00:01:04.939 --> 00:01:07.019 get a sense of the friction and the sheer anger 00:01:07.019 --> 00:01:09.599 that was just poured into this document. Oh, 00:01:09.620 --> 00:01:12.439 the tension is baked right into the ink. And 00:01:12.439 --> 00:01:15.140 OK, let's unpack this just as a quick note to 00:01:15.140 --> 00:01:18.280 you listening before we really jump in. We are 00:01:18.280 --> 00:01:21.180 looking at a deeply polarizing, radical piece 00:01:21.180 --> 00:01:23.719 of history today. Very radical. And because of 00:01:23.719 --> 00:01:26.159 that, our goal here isn't to endorse the text, 00:01:26.260 --> 00:01:28.840 nor are we endorsing the critics who tore it 00:01:28.840 --> 00:01:31.439 apart later. We are completely impartial here. 00:01:31.540 --> 00:01:34.060 We are simply acting as your historical guides 00:01:34.060 --> 00:01:37.180 to understand what this document said, why it 00:01:37.180 --> 00:01:39.200 was written, and why it created such massive 00:01:39.200 --> 00:01:41.640 shockwaves. What's fascinating here is why you 00:01:41.640 --> 00:01:43.760 should actually care about this. Yeah. I mean, 00:01:43.780 --> 00:01:45.840 even if you don't typically read 1990s political 00:01:45.840 --> 00:01:49.370 manifestos, This text is essentially a masterclass 00:01:49.370 --> 00:01:51.890 in how marginalized groups take language and 00:01:51.890 --> 00:01:54.530 just reappropriate it. We're looking at the exact 00:01:54.530 --> 00:01:56.870 historical moment, the exact physical document, 00:01:56.969 --> 00:01:59.810 where a word began to rapidly transform from 00:01:59.810 --> 00:02:02.670 a really harmful slur into a recognized weapon 00:02:02.670 --> 00:02:05.109 of political empowerment. It shows us how radical 00:02:05.109 --> 00:02:07.310 texts can force these sudden shifts in cultural 00:02:07.310 --> 00:02:10.629 paradigms. So take us back to that historical 00:02:10.629 --> 00:02:12.310 environment, because from what I'm seeing in 00:02:12.310 --> 00:02:14.530 the sources, you really cannot understand this 00:02:14.530 --> 00:02:16.889 piece of paper without understanding the sheer 00:02:16.889 --> 00:02:19.930 terror of the late 1980s and the very beginning 00:02:19.930 --> 00:02:22.490 of the 1990s. You really can't. The climate of 00:02:22.490 --> 00:02:25.310 that era just cannot be overstated. It was in 00:02:25.310 --> 00:02:27.949 many ways an incredibly grim time to be part 00:02:27.949 --> 00:02:30.949 of the LGBT community. The HIV AIDS epidemic 00:02:30.949 --> 00:02:34.389 was completely ravaging the United States. And 00:02:34.389 --> 00:02:36.650 what made it so horrific wasn't just the disease 00:02:36.650 --> 00:02:40.289 itself, but the staggering, devastating lack 00:02:40.289 --> 00:02:43.610 of an effective response from the broader society 00:02:43.610 --> 00:02:46.389 and from the government. People were watching 00:02:46.389 --> 00:02:48.849 their friends and partners die. Yeah, they were. 00:02:48.969 --> 00:02:50.870 Well, the world largely just looked the other 00:02:50.870 --> 00:02:53.069 way. So you have this devastating public health 00:02:53.069 --> 00:02:56.419 crisis. Did the broader society's apathy toward 00:02:56.419 --> 00:02:59.599 AIDS directly fuel the anger we see in this pamphlet? 00:02:59.740 --> 00:03:02.139 It was the apathy, but it was also active hostility. 00:03:02.419 --> 00:03:04.560 Compounding the tragedy of the epidemic was a 00:03:04.560 --> 00:03:06.699 really severe environment of heterosexism and 00:03:06.699 --> 00:03:09.680 homophobia. Violence against LGBT people wasn't 00:03:09.680 --> 00:03:12.180 just a background issue. It was skyrocketing. 00:03:12.199 --> 00:03:15.099 The historical records point out a shocking statistic. 00:03:15.120 --> 00:03:19.740 By early April of 1990, instances of discriminatory 00:03:19.740 --> 00:03:24.599 violence had spiked 122 percent. from just the 00:03:24.599 --> 00:03:28.680 start of that very same year. Wait, a 122 % spike? 00:03:28.919 --> 00:03:31.419 Yes. In just the first few months of the year? 00:03:31.580 --> 00:03:35.840 Exactly. A 122 % increase in roughly three months. 00:03:36.120 --> 00:03:39.680 That is terrifying. It is. It completely changes 00:03:39.680 --> 00:03:42.699 how you view the activism of that moment. It 00:03:42.699 --> 00:03:45.800 makes total sense why the existing, perhaps more 00:03:45.800 --> 00:03:48.039 polite forms of activism just weren't cutting 00:03:48.039 --> 00:03:50.300 it anymore for the people actually living through 00:03:50.300 --> 00:03:52.840 that reality. Precisely. When a community is 00:03:52.840 --> 00:03:55.360 facing a deadly epidemic and simultaneously experiencing 00:03:55.360 --> 00:03:58.099 a massive surge in physical violence in the streets, 00:03:58.240 --> 00:04:01.360 you reach a boiling point. Yeah. And that pressure 00:04:01.360 --> 00:04:04.039 cooker birthed a completely new kind of movement. 00:04:04.080 --> 00:04:06.099 It led to the creation of direct action groups, 00:04:06.259 --> 00:04:09.080 most notably Queer Nation. And Queer Nation has 00:04:09.080 --> 00:04:10.900 a really interesting origin, right? Because they 00:04:10.900 --> 00:04:13.199 didn't just form out of nowhere. They didn't. 00:04:13.360 --> 00:04:15.759 Queer Nation was actually formed by members of 00:04:15.759 --> 00:04:19.600 ACTUP. Which was the massive AIDS advocacy group. 00:04:19.720 --> 00:04:23.000 Right. An incredibly influential group. But these 00:04:23.000 --> 00:04:26.459 specific members formed Queer Nation to explicitly 00:04:26.459 --> 00:04:29.860 reject what they viewed as liberal conservatism 00:04:29.860 --> 00:04:33.060 within parts of the LGBT community. Let's pause 00:04:33.060 --> 00:04:36.339 on that term. What did liberal conservatism actually 00:04:36.339 --> 00:04:40.639 mean in the context of 1990s LGBT politics? In 00:04:40.639 --> 00:04:43.439 this context, it referred to an assimilationist 00:04:43.439 --> 00:04:49.040 approach. asking politely for acceptance, trying 00:04:49.040 --> 00:04:51.660 to show the mainstream heterosexual world, look, 00:04:51.759 --> 00:04:53.759 we are just like you, please give us our rights. 00:04:53.959 --> 00:04:56.759 Right, fitting in. Exactly. But the founders 00:04:56.759 --> 00:04:58.759 of Queer Nation believed that survival in their 00:04:58.759 --> 00:05:00.879 current climate required a completely different 00:05:00.879 --> 00:05:03.680 approach. They wanted to replace polite assimilation 00:05:03.680 --> 00:05:06.680 with radical, unapologetic disruption. Which 00:05:06.680 --> 00:05:08.759 brings us to the physical object they created 00:05:08.759 --> 00:05:10.899 to spread that disruption. I really want to paint 00:05:10.899 --> 00:05:12.519 a picture of this for you listening because it's 00:05:12.519 --> 00:05:14.980 such a contrast to how we consume information 00:05:14.980 --> 00:05:17.279 today. Oh, completely. This wasn't a published 00:05:17.279 --> 00:05:19.439 book and it wasn't a glossy magazine. It was 00:05:19.439 --> 00:05:22.600 a broad sheet, just a single sheet of standard 00:05:22.600 --> 00:05:24.899 size newsprint. It was printed on both sides 00:05:24.899 --> 00:05:27.360 and just folded in half to create four pages. 00:05:27.560 --> 00:05:29.920 There's something incredibly raw and urgent about 00:05:29.920 --> 00:05:33.339 that medium. A folded piece of newsprint is cheap 00:05:33.339 --> 00:05:36.959 to produce. It's disposable. It smears ink on 00:05:36.959 --> 00:05:40.199 your fingers and it is incredibly easy to conceal 00:05:40.199 --> 00:05:42.540 and hand out. Yeah. Before the Internet existed, 00:05:42.879 --> 00:05:45.720 this was the perfect vehicle for a grassroots 00:05:45.720 --> 00:05:49.420 viral spread. And viral it went. The materials 00:05:49.420 --> 00:05:52.180 detail how this drop actually happened. It was 00:05:52.180 --> 00:05:55.220 at the June 1990 New York Gay Pride Parade. A 00:05:55.220 --> 00:05:57.339 collective calling themselves Anonymous Queers, 00:05:57.360 --> 00:05:59.259 who were generally understood to be acting as 00:05:59.259 --> 00:06:02.699 Queer Nation, marched alongside the ACTUP contingent. 00:06:02.699 --> 00:06:05.060 And as they marched, they manually handed out 00:06:05.060 --> 00:06:07.879 roughly 15 ,000 copies of this newsprint pamphlet 00:06:07.879 --> 00:06:10.720 directly into the crowd. 15 ,000 copies dropped. 00:06:10.800 --> 00:06:12.540 straight into the hands of the community during 00:06:12.540 --> 00:06:16.360 a massive public event. But the virality didn't 00:06:16.360 --> 00:06:18.319 stop at the parade ramp. How did it spread after 00:06:18.319 --> 00:06:21.420 that? From that initial drop, the essay spread 00:06:21.420 --> 00:06:25.459 person to person. People were physically photocopying 00:06:25.459 --> 00:06:27.399 the newsprint. They were faxing it across the 00:06:27.399 --> 00:06:29.680 country to other activists. They were stuffing 00:06:29.680 --> 00:06:31.319 it into envelopes and sending it through the 00:06:31.319 --> 00:06:33.759 mail. It was a total analog viral sensation. 00:06:33.899 --> 00:06:36.519 But what was actually written on those four pages 00:06:36.519 --> 00:06:38.839 that made people go to the office fax machine 00:06:38.839 --> 00:06:41.139 and send it to their friends? What was the core 00:06:41.139 --> 00:06:43.740 argument? The fundamental proposal of the essay 00:06:43.740 --> 00:06:47.319 was a radical shift in identity. The authors 00:06:47.319 --> 00:06:49.819 made a very sharp, deliberate distinction between 00:06:49.819 --> 00:06:53.329 being gay or lesbian and being queer. That feels 00:06:53.329 --> 00:06:55.750 like a massive philosophical distinction to make 00:06:55.750 --> 00:06:58.269 in 1990. How did they define the difference? 00:06:58.670 --> 00:07:01.089 Well, the essay framed gay and lesbian identities 00:07:01.089 --> 00:07:03.610 as being based on natural or inherent characteristics. 00:07:04.089 --> 00:07:05.750 Essentially, it was about who you are attracted 00:07:05.750 --> 00:07:09.069 to. Okay. But it defined queer as something entirely 00:07:09.069 --> 00:07:12.629 different. It characterized queerness as a community 00:07:12.629 --> 00:07:15.089 that you access through choice, through your 00:07:15.089 --> 00:07:17.370 social situation, and most importantly, through 00:07:17.370 --> 00:07:20.110 action. So it's an active state. Yes. It wasn't 00:07:20.110 --> 00:07:22.649 just about who you loved. It was about how you 00:07:22.649 --> 00:07:24.670 chose to stand in opposition to the mainstream. 00:07:24.949 --> 00:07:27.769 It was an identity of defiance. But we have to 00:07:27.769 --> 00:07:30.470 remember the context of that word. Using the 00:07:30.470 --> 00:07:33.610 word queer in 1990 was incredibly controversial. 00:07:33.870 --> 00:07:36.110 Highly controversial. Even at the pride parade 00:07:36.110 --> 00:07:38.629 surrounded by the LGBT community, there were 00:07:38.629 --> 00:07:41.370 people who literally refused to take the pamphlet 00:07:41.370 --> 00:07:43.870 from the activist's hands simply because that 00:07:43.870 --> 00:07:46.370 word was printed in huge letters on the front 00:07:46.370 --> 00:07:49.649 cover. Because for decades, that word had been 00:07:49.649 --> 00:07:52.970 used almost exclusively as a pejorative. It was 00:07:52.970 --> 00:07:55.730 a violent slur. It was the very word shouted 00:07:55.730 --> 00:07:58.509 during those exact acts of street violence we 00:07:58.509 --> 00:08:00.060 just talked about. about. And the essay actually 00:08:00.060 --> 00:08:02.639 anticipated this exact reaction from its readers. 00:08:02.839 --> 00:08:04.879 I want you to read the excerpt from the text 00:08:04.879 --> 00:08:06.600 addressing this because it really brings the 00:08:06.600 --> 00:08:09.160 author's voices into the room. Sure. The text 00:08:09.160 --> 00:08:13.579 says, do we really have to use that word? It's 00:08:13.579 --> 00:08:15.879 trouble. Every gay person has his or her own 00:08:15.879 --> 00:08:18.500 take on it. For some, it means strange and eccentric 00:08:18.500 --> 00:08:21.180 and kind of mysterious. And for others, queer 00:08:21.180 --> 00:08:23.279 conjures up those awful memories of adolescent 00:08:23.279 --> 00:08:26.600 suffering. Well, yes, gay is great. It has its 00:08:26.600 --> 00:08:29.019 place. But when a lot of lesbians and gay men 00:08:29.019 --> 00:08:31.879 wake up in the morning, we feel angry and disgusted, 00:08:31.899 --> 00:08:34.620 not gay. So we've chosen to call ourselves queer. 00:08:35.019 --> 00:08:37.919 That is such a powerful piece of linguistic jujitsu. 00:08:38.059 --> 00:08:40.220 They're explicitly acknowledging the deep pain 00:08:40.220 --> 00:08:42.159 associated with the word the adolescent suffering, 00:08:42.360 --> 00:08:44.379 but they're choosing to wield it anyway because 00:08:44.379 --> 00:08:47.340 the word gay implies a sort of lightness or happiness. 00:08:47.519 --> 00:08:49.279 And they're saying we aren't happy right now. 00:08:49.299 --> 00:08:51.440 We are furious. Exactly. The essay literally 00:08:51.440 --> 00:08:54.080 calls the word a sly and ironic weapon we can 00:08:54.080 --> 00:08:56.100 steal from the homophobe's hands and use against 00:08:56.100 --> 00:08:59.700 him. It completely disarms the oppressor. If 00:08:59.700 --> 00:09:01.820 you willingly call yourself the very thing they 00:09:01.820 --> 00:09:04.419 are trying to hurt you with, you take away their 00:09:04.419 --> 00:09:07.480 power. The text goes on to define being queer 00:09:07.480 --> 00:09:10.480 as leading a different sort of life, a life inherently 00:09:10.480 --> 00:09:13.840 opposed to profit margins, opposed to patriarchy, 00:09:13.940 --> 00:09:17.080 and opposed to assimilation. Here's where it 00:09:17.080 --> 00:09:19.679 gets really interesting, though. The essay also 00:09:19.679 --> 00:09:21.879 made a really specific point about gender in 00:09:21.879 --> 00:09:24.340 relation to that word, didn't it? Yes, it explicitly 00:09:24.340 --> 00:09:26.600 noted that the term queer was gender neutral. 00:09:27.200 --> 00:09:31.399 The text stated, Queer, unlike gay, doesn't mean 00:09:31.399 --> 00:09:34.740 male. Why was that distinction so critical at 00:09:34.740 --> 00:09:37.299 that specific moment in time? It was a direct 00:09:37.299 --> 00:09:39.080 critique of the broader gay rights movement, 00:09:39.179 --> 00:09:41.899 which many felt had historically sidelined the 00:09:41.899 --> 00:09:43.820 voices and experiences of women and people of 00:09:43.820 --> 00:09:46.440 color. Right. By adopting a new gender neutral 00:09:46.440 --> 00:09:49.200 umbrella term, they were trying to build a coalition 00:09:49.200 --> 00:09:51.440 that didn't automatically default to the white 00:09:51.440 --> 00:09:53.879 male experience. They wanted something more inclusive, 00:09:53.919 --> 00:09:56.490 yet simultaneously far more radical. And the 00:09:56.490 --> 00:09:58.870 tone of the essay certainly matched that radical 00:09:58.870 --> 00:10:01.789 ambition. It wasn't a polite request for a seat 00:10:01.789 --> 00:10:03.990 at the table. It was broken up into distinct 00:10:03.990 --> 00:10:06.250 sections written in different voices, but the 00:10:06.250 --> 00:10:09.009 overarching tone was consistently urgent. Very 00:10:09.009 --> 00:10:12.429 urgent. It varied from upbeat to incredibly angry. 00:10:12.669 --> 00:10:15.470 In fact, it explicitly told its readers to let 00:10:15.470 --> 00:10:18.549 yourself be angry, entirely rejecting the notion 00:10:18.549 --> 00:10:21.480 that good queers don't get mad. In a climate 00:10:21.480 --> 00:10:24.320 where people were dying and facing violence daily, 00:10:24.559 --> 00:10:27.320 the authors viewed anger as the only rational 00:10:27.320 --> 00:10:30.299 response. The essay framed the simple act of 00:10:30.299 --> 00:10:33.299 surviving as an act of defiance. Yeah, listen 00:10:33.299 --> 00:10:35.960 to how they open the manifesto. How can I tell 00:10:35.960 --> 00:10:37.659 you? How can I convince you, brother, sister, 00:10:37.779 --> 00:10:40.059 that your life is in danger? That every day you 00:10:40.059 --> 00:10:42.379 wake up alive, relatively happy, and a functioning 00:10:42.379 --> 00:10:44.399 human being, you are committing a rebellious 00:10:44.399 --> 00:10:47.360 act. You as an alive and functioning queer are 00:10:47.360 --> 00:10:49.559 a revolutionary. Just breathing is political. 00:10:49.820 --> 00:10:52.139 Exactly. It's a profound reframing of existence. 00:10:52.539 --> 00:10:54.879 It challenges the reader to tear themselves away 00:10:54.879 --> 00:10:56.940 from passive acceptance and to become visible. 00:10:57.080 --> 00:11:00.059 It demanded action over acceptance. And it spoke 00:11:00.059 --> 00:11:02.779 very directly to different factions of the community 00:11:02.779 --> 00:11:06.429 to spur that action. For instance, it urged queer 00:11:06.429 --> 00:11:09.509 women not to wait around for society or even 00:11:09.509 --> 00:11:12.090 other activists to change. What do they say to 00:11:12.090 --> 00:11:15.070 them? The text read, girl, you can't wait for 00:11:15.070 --> 00:11:17.210 other dykes to make the world safe for you. Stop 00:11:17.210 --> 00:11:19.789 waiting for a better, more lesbian future. The 00:11:19.789 --> 00:11:22.529 revolution could be here if we started it. The 00:11:22.529 --> 00:11:25.320 emphasis is constantly on the now. Not tomorrow, 00:11:25.600 --> 00:11:28.779 not when society is ready, but today. And that 00:11:28.779 --> 00:11:32.080 unapologetic, immediate demand for space culminated 00:11:32.080 --> 00:11:34.559 in the most polarizing part of the entire pamphlet. 00:11:34.700 --> 00:11:37.820 The final page. Right. The entire back page of 00:11:37.820 --> 00:11:39.879 this fold in newsprint was taken up by a single 00:11:39.879 --> 00:11:42.879 section titled, I Hate Straits. What was the 00:11:42.879 --> 00:11:45.019 actual demand being made in that section? Because 00:11:45.019 --> 00:11:47.019 it's obviously a deliberately shocking title. 00:11:47.120 --> 00:11:49.659 And remember, everyone, we are just looking at 00:11:49.659 --> 00:11:51.220 the history here. Right. Looking at it purely 00:11:51.220 --> 00:11:53.659 historically, it was a blistering demand for 00:11:53.659 --> 00:11:55.850 absolute. accountability from heterosexual society. 00:11:56.129 --> 00:11:58.830 The essay asserted that until queer people could 00:11:58.830 --> 00:12:01.409 enjoy the exact same freedom of movement and 00:12:01.409 --> 00:12:03.490 the exact same freedom of sexuality as straight 00:12:03.490 --> 00:12:07.009 people, straight privilege must stop. It must 00:12:07.009 --> 00:12:09.870 stop. And it must be handed over to them. It 00:12:09.870 --> 00:12:11.690 was a confrontational challenge to the status 00:12:11.690 --> 00:12:14.730 quo designed to shock the reader into recognizing 00:12:14.730 --> 00:12:17.870 the stark inequalities of daily life. So what 00:12:17.870 --> 00:12:20.389 does this all mean? What actually happens when 00:12:20.389 --> 00:12:23.450 you drop 15 ,000 copies of a manifesto titled 00:12:23.450 --> 00:12:26.190 I Hate Straights into a parade? What was the 00:12:26.190 --> 00:12:28.929 fallout the next day? The fallout was immediate, 00:12:29.049 --> 00:12:32.350 and it was explosive. It sparked a ferocious 00:12:32.350 --> 00:12:34.730 debate instantly, and not just in the broader 00:12:34.730 --> 00:12:37.309 society, but fiercely within the queer community 00:12:37.309 --> 00:12:40.350 itself. The historical records give us a really 00:12:40.350 --> 00:12:43.570 fascinating snapshot of this exact tension. What 00:12:43.570 --> 00:12:45.590 happened? The very next day after the parade, 00:12:45.730 --> 00:12:49.440 there was an ACT -UP meeting. Now remember, ACTUP 00:12:49.440 --> 00:12:51.059 members were the ones who formed Queer Nation 00:12:51.059 --> 00:12:52.779 and handed these broadsheets out. Right, their 00:12:52.779 --> 00:12:54.500 own members. At this meeting, a straight woman 00:12:54.500 --> 00:12:56.840 stood up and condemned the I Hate Straits essay. 00:12:57.320 --> 00:13:00.139 And the room applauded her. But when a gay man 00:13:00.139 --> 00:13:02.519 stood up to defend the essay, his defense completely 00:13:02.519 --> 00:13:04.399 bombed with the crowd. That is so interesting. 00:13:04.519 --> 00:13:06.840 Why did the room react that way? Why applaud 00:13:06.840 --> 00:13:08.899 the condemnation of a text written by their own 00:13:08.899 --> 00:13:11.600 members? Because it highlights a deep internal 00:13:11.600 --> 00:13:15.500 conflict regarding strategy. ACTUP was a big 00:13:15.500 --> 00:13:18.399 tent anti -AIDS organization. They relied on 00:13:18.399 --> 00:13:20.720 a broad coalition of people, including straight 00:13:20.720 --> 00:13:23.320 allies, politicians, and donors, to fight the 00:13:23.320 --> 00:13:25.960 health crisis. Oh, I see. The distribution of 00:13:25.960 --> 00:13:28.220 this pamphlet inappropriately linked this broad 00:13:28.220 --> 00:13:32.080 health organization to a highly polarizing radical 00:13:32.080 --> 00:13:35.320 gay liberation stance. It alienated their allies 00:13:35.320 --> 00:13:37.879 and forced the group to confront a massive strategic 00:13:37.879 --> 00:13:40.440 divide. But despite that internal friction, the 00:13:40.440 --> 00:13:43.299 pamphlet didn't just fade away. The media amplification 00:13:43.299 --> 00:13:46.610 of it was massive. It's huge. An article in Outweek 00:13:46.610 --> 00:13:49.009 by a journalist named Nina Reyes actually praised 00:13:49.009 --> 00:13:51.230 the essay. She called it a persuasive argument 00:13:51.230 --> 00:13:53.850 for unified queer intolerance. She did. Reyes 00:13:53.850 --> 00:13:56.269 even compared it favorably to Sojourner Truth's 00:13:56.269 --> 00:13:59.470 famous Ain't I a Woman speech. She loved the 00:13:59.470 --> 00:14:01.610 unapologetic anger and called the title both 00:14:01.610 --> 00:14:04.210 concise and eloquent. And that media coverage 00:14:04.210 --> 00:14:08.539 was essentially the rocket fuel, right? It propelled 00:14:08.539 --> 00:14:10.600 Queer Nation from a local New York collective 00:14:10.600 --> 00:14:13.919 to a national audience. Almost overnight, it 00:14:13.919 --> 00:14:16.340 spawned a new chapter in San Francisco, and soon 00:14:16.340 --> 00:14:18.620 chapters in other major cities across the United 00:14:18.620 --> 00:14:20.620 States were established. Yeah, the manifesto 00:14:20.620 --> 00:14:23.440 had done its job. It mobilized a radical new 00:14:23.440 --> 00:14:25.879 faction. But the conversation surrounding this 00:14:25.879 --> 00:14:29.740 text didn't stop. in the 1990s. This is where 00:14:29.740 --> 00:14:32.700 the story takes a fascinating turn. This single 00:14:32.700 --> 00:14:35.179 piece of paper handed out at a parade is widely 00:14:35.179 --> 00:14:37.500 credited with helping birth what we now call 00:14:37.500 --> 00:14:40.720 queer theory in academia. Right. But if we connect 00:14:40.720 --> 00:14:43.120 this to the bigger picture. As the text moved 00:14:43.120 --> 00:14:45.100 from the streets into university classrooms, 00:14:45.519 --> 00:14:49.059 academics began to levy some heavy, heavy critiques 00:14:49.059 --> 00:14:51.899 against it. Let's bridge that gap. How did a 00:14:51.899 --> 00:14:54.139 street -level handout become a foundational yet 00:14:54.139 --> 00:14:57.220 heavily criticized text in universities? What 00:14:57.220 --> 00:14:59.100 were the academics actually pushing back on? 00:14:59.240 --> 00:15:01.779 The primary pushback came a few years later, 00:15:01.799 --> 00:15:05.399 in 1997, from a prominent scholar named Kathy 00:15:05.399 --> 00:15:08.659 J. Cohen. Her critique raises a crucial question 00:15:08.659 --> 00:15:11.799 about how we define oppression. Cohen's main 00:15:11.799 --> 00:15:15.940 argument was that queers read this targeted heterosexuality 00:15:15.940 --> 00:15:18.779 as an identity rather than targeting heteronormativity 00:15:18.779 --> 00:15:21.899 as a systemic structure. Wait, let's break that 00:15:21.899 --> 00:15:24.340 down for a second. What is the practical difference 00:15:24.340 --> 00:15:27.139 between attacking heterosexuality versus attacking 00:15:27.139 --> 00:15:29.539 heteronormativity? Attacking heterosexuality 00:15:29.539 --> 00:15:31.940 means you're attacking a group of people based 00:15:31.940 --> 00:15:34.580 on who they love, straight people. Attacking 00:15:34.580 --> 00:15:36.759 heteronormativity means you are attacking the 00:15:36.759 --> 00:15:39.399 societal assumption that being straight is the 00:15:39.399 --> 00:15:41.519 default. And you're attacking the systems that 00:15:41.519 --> 00:15:43.679 punish anyone who falls outside that default. 00:15:43.840 --> 00:15:46.299 That is a very clear distinction. Cohen argued 00:15:46.299 --> 00:15:49.000 that by just saying, I hate straights, the essay 00:15:49.000 --> 00:15:51.500 reinforced simple black and white dichotomies. 00:15:51.500 --> 00:15:53.960 You're either heterosexual or you are queer. 00:15:54.120 --> 00:15:56.460 So they were flattening everyone's complex experience 00:15:56.460 --> 00:16:00.220 into a single binary. Precisely. Cohen felt this 00:16:00.220 --> 00:16:02.879 created a massive blind spot. She argued the 00:16:02.879 --> 00:16:05.379 manifesto completely lacked class and racial 00:16:05.379 --> 00:16:08.500 consciousness. By creating this hard line, the 00:16:08.500 --> 00:16:10.879 essay failed to account for what she called queer 00:16:10.879 --> 00:16:13.179 privilege. How does queer privilege work in this 00:16:13.179 --> 00:16:16.980 context? Cohen pointed out that a white, wealthy, 00:16:17.200 --> 00:16:20.340 able -bodied queer person still holds massive 00:16:20.340 --> 00:16:23.179 systemic advantages in society advantages that 00:16:23.179 --> 00:16:25.559 the manifesto completely glossed over in its 00:16:25.559 --> 00:16:28.039 anger. Wow, yeah. Furthermore, she argued it 00:16:28.039 --> 00:16:29.879 failed to recognize the systemic disadvantages 00:16:29.879 --> 00:16:32.919 faced by some heterosexuals. Give me an example 00:16:32.919 --> 00:16:35.179 of that. How did the manifesto ignore disadvantaged 00:16:35.179 --> 00:16:38.279 straight people? Cohen noted that non -normative 00:16:38.279 --> 00:16:40.200 family structures of straight people of color 00:16:40.200 --> 00:16:42.840 or lower -class straight families are also heavily 00:16:42.840 --> 00:16:45.480 regulated, marginalized, and excluded by society. 00:16:45.980 --> 00:16:48.539 So by drawing the battle lines purely at sexual 00:16:48.539 --> 00:16:51.799 orientation, the wealthy white queer person is 00:16:51.799 --> 00:16:54.220 ignoring the very real oppression of the lower 00:16:54.220 --> 00:16:56.480 class straight family of color. That makes complete 00:16:56.480 --> 00:16:59.399 sense. If you ignore how race and income level 00:16:59.399 --> 00:17:02.080 change a person's experience of oppression, your 00:17:02.080 --> 00:17:03.639 revolution is leaving a lot of people behind. 00:17:03.940 --> 00:17:06.240 Did other scholars build on Cohen's critique? 00:17:06.619 --> 00:17:09.859 Yes. The academic consensus heavily evolved in 00:17:09.859 --> 00:17:13.190 that direction. Another scholar... Ulrika Dahl 00:17:13.190 --> 00:17:15.869 even suggested that this blanket stance against 00:17:15.869 --> 00:17:19.130 heterosexuality as a whole was heavily linked 00:17:19.130 --> 00:17:22.029 to lesbian separatism movements. Which were what 00:17:22.029 --> 00:17:24.410 exactly? Movements that often sought to completely 00:17:24.410 --> 00:17:26.769 sever ties with mainstream society rather than 00:17:26.769 --> 00:17:29.750 reform it. So when we look back at Queer as Read 00:17:29.750 --> 00:17:32.390 This through the lens of modern intersectional 00:17:32.390 --> 00:17:34.750 theory, it's clear it had major blind spots. 00:17:34.950 --> 00:17:37.190 It was a blunt instrument used to smash open 00:17:37.190 --> 00:17:39.569 a door in a time of extreme life or death crisis. 00:17:39.650 --> 00:17:42.559 Right. But it wasn't a surgical tool for long 00:17:42.559 --> 00:17:45.859 -term inclusive activism. That is a perfect way 00:17:45.859 --> 00:17:48.680 to summarize it. As queer theory developed, scholars 00:17:48.680 --> 00:17:50.680 realized that a blunt instrument isn't always 00:17:50.680 --> 00:17:53.539 the best tool for understanding the nuanced intersecting 00:17:53.539 --> 00:17:56.319 webs of societal power. But you cannot deny the 00:17:56.319 --> 00:17:58.579 door it smashed open. What an incredible journey 00:17:58.579 --> 00:18:02.579 for one folded piece of newsprint. Let's synthesize 00:18:02.579 --> 00:18:05.480 everything we've uncovered today. We started 00:18:05.480 --> 00:18:08.579 in a terrifying historical climate, a soaring 00:18:08.579 --> 00:18:11.539 AIDS epidemic and physical violence spiking by 00:18:11.539 --> 00:18:15.599 122 percent in just a few months. A literal boiling 00:18:15.599 --> 00:18:18.839 point. That pressure cooker led to a 15 ,000 00:18:18.839 --> 00:18:21.680 copy physical pamphlet drop at a pride parade. 00:18:22.240 --> 00:18:25.000 We saw a community deliberately reappropriate 00:18:25.000 --> 00:18:28.079 a harmful slur, literally stealing the weapon 00:18:28.079 --> 00:18:29.980 from their oppressors and turning the word queer 00:18:29.980 --> 00:18:33.079 into a symbol of political empowerment. And then 00:18:33.079 --> 00:18:35.980 we witnessed the fierce internal battles that 00:18:35.980 --> 00:18:39.140 followed at that ACT -UP meeting. Yes, and the 00:18:39.140 --> 00:18:42.019 long -lasting academic debates over race, class, 00:18:42.099 --> 00:18:44.279 and binary thinking that continue in universities 00:18:44.279 --> 00:18:47.200 to this day. It is a phenomenal example of how 00:18:47.200 --> 00:18:49.960 text can be an active, disruptive agent of history, 00:18:50.099 --> 00:18:53.089 not just a passive record. Before we go, we want 00:18:53.089 --> 00:18:54.829 to leave you with a final thought to mull over, 00:18:55.009 --> 00:18:57.130 building on everything we've just discussed regarding 00:18:57.130 --> 00:18:59.730 how information spreads. Think about the physical 00:18:59.730 --> 00:19:03.670 medium of this manifesto. In 1990, a revolution 00:19:03.670 --> 00:19:06.750 in language and identity was sparked by manually 00:19:06.750 --> 00:19:09.470 handing out 15 ,000 folded pieces of paper at 00:19:09.470 --> 00:19:12.289 a parade. The activists had to rely on faxes 00:19:12.289 --> 00:19:15.109 and physical smearing photocopies to go viral. 00:19:15.850 --> 00:19:18.410 Today, we live in an era of algorithmic feeds, 00:19:18.710 --> 00:19:21.190 endless scrolling, and digital echo chambers 00:19:21.190 --> 00:19:23.970 where millions of words are published every single 00:19:23.970 --> 00:19:26.150 second. It's a completely different world. It 00:19:26.150 --> 00:19:29.230 is. It begs the question, could a singular physical 00:19:29.230 --> 00:19:32.430 document ever force an entire community to pause, 00:19:32.670 --> 00:19:35.009 debate, and redefine its own identity the way 00:19:35.009 --> 00:19:38.109 queers read this did? Or has the digital age 00:19:38.109 --> 00:19:41.079 made that... kind of focused analog shockwave 00:19:41.079 --> 00:19:44.140 impossible. It is a wild thing to consider next 00:19:44.140 --> 00:19:45.900 time you're scrolling through your feed. Thank 00:19:45.900 --> 00:19:47.579 you so much for joining us on this deep dive. 00:19:47.700 --> 00:19:49.339 Keep questioning the words you use every day 00:19:49.339 --> 00:19:50.640 and we will see you next time.