Queer Theory, Gender Theory by Riki Wilchins is a very good basic introduction to the theory for those who either don't want to read the theory or want a basic foundation before diving into the nuance and detail of the theories.

I wasn't prepared for just how basic this was going to be, so it took a while for me to appreciate what it does so well. I've been reading this theory and using it since the 80s (the 90s for Butler) and forget that not everyone enjoys reading theory. As I've said before, yes, I am a nerd. What this book does is highlight where much of the theory (foundationally Derrida, Foucault, and Butler) meets the application or activism. This does not try to express every nuance, it offers the reader a basic understanding so that they can then better understand where some of the ideas come from. I would imagine that for those looking for an intro, this may well suffice. For others, this may pique their interest to learn these ideas in greater detail.

One thing that makes this particularly interesting is that Wilchins does not spare any one or any group critique. Not so much confrontational but more pointing out where feminism(s) or some gay rights groups miss main ideas or, even worse, do to trans what had been done to them. This is done in hope of creating understanding and making bridges, not condemning.

I would recommend this to readers who want a foundation either for better understanding or as a prelude to more serious study.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley. ( )

I picked this up mostly as a joke after learning that iced coffee and walking quickly are queer symbols. While researching whether or not I was queer for liking iced coffee (and wondering if this is what my San Francisco friends meant when they said they were queer,) I came across this book, and was surprised to learn that there is a THEORY behind being queer! Fascinating!

After a quick wikipedia-job on queer theory that didn't prove to be helpful in the least, I thought I should probably read a book on the topic. Either it would be informative, or it would be further evidence that the humanities are full of crazy people spouting off on "theories" that are completely impenetrable -- win/win, really.

So I dove in during a long bus ride. And I was pleasantly surprised! Wilchins makes a good argument that it's stupid to draw strong dichotomies based on sexuality. Does it make a man a homosexual if he thinks about kissing another man? Not only is this not right, argues Wilchins, it's not even wrong. These categories are useful insofar as they help us predict the future, but they are not helpful as _identifiers._

I don't remember much else about the book. I ran out of steam on it. I never intended to abandon it, but I did, and I have no desire to read more. Queer Theory was significantly less shit than I was expecting it to be! I remember being impressed with a few of the arguments while reading it, but damned if I can remember what they are now. ( )

I finished reading Queer Theory, Gender Theory: An Instant Primer by Riki Wilchins. As I have said previously, I don't read a lot of non-fiction so a lot of what was being said in this was new to me. Postmodern theory, Derrida, Foucault. Nothing I had heard of. Despite that the book was accessible enough for me to follow.

The applications of postmoderism Wilchins presents though are ideas that have been floating, rather informally, in my mind for a while. The idea of man and woman being a gender binary which should be broken apart seems to me to match some of my ideas around identifying as "queer" rather than "gay". Wilchins presents the boxes "man" and "woman" (as only ever defined as a derivative of "Man") in the same way I do "gay", "lesbian" and "bi" and uncovers similar problems with identifying within them. Of course, my definition of queer cannot stand without the definition of straight and is presented as it's opposite and derivative - a superb way to put forward an air of inferiority.

I'm going to read some other, similarly veined books and have a go at re-examining some of my beliefs and working them into essays. The book must be good to inspire me back onto this track 8-) ( )

This might come off as pompous or something, but it just isn't heavy enough for me. It's incredibly readable. Too readable. In the beginning it focuses very heavily on Foucault, which sort of irked me because there's more to queer theory than Foucault, but towards the end it branched out and I enjoyed that more. I have a great deal of affection for Riki Wilchins. ( )