Living or Surviving: LGBTQ Liberation vs Liberal Assimilation
Laila Goldthorpe
This article is largely being written in response to the problems of a non-Marxist approach to LGBTQ liberation, how Liberalism has become the dominant mode of analysis, and the risks of the struggle being assimilated into the capitalist order. If we are serious about our survival we must strive for liberation, not integration.
To analyze how queer identities operate within capitalism, we should look at how and why the concept even came to exist. Under capitalism there is a notion that the idea of gay, trans, or any queer identity operates as the “Other” to the “Us” (heterosexuality and cisgenderness in this case) what counts as Us(Cishet) and Other(Queer) is defined by ones socially perceived gender and conformity to it. Homosexuality is classified in the other role due to heterosexuality being seen as the intrinsic state of humans, and thus deviation from it makes you into an Other. So if gender roles define what are and aren’t exceptions from the norm, as materialists we must then look for a physical cause for gender developing in this way.
It can be argued that the concept of gender that capitalist society operates under arose out of the construction of the nuclear family, which in turn rose out of the need for a social structure that reproduces a viable labour force available for exploitation. Heterosexuality, at the time, was needed to produce children and a division of labour arose around this where a traditionally male spouse would participate in the labour force while a female spouse would be required to reproduce the structure going forward by raising children and socializing them into repeating the same process. These are the material needs and practices that define current gender roles. So any behaviour or identity (such as queer identities) that would contradict this process is thus made the Other. Given the past victories of the women’s rights movement, and women increasingly participating in the workforce, as well as stagnating wages making supporting others on one person’s labour a nonviable practice for most people, these conditions have started being altered. A form of more technocratic neoliberal meritocracy has thus risen alongside it. While this is an improvement over the naked hostility and absolute lack of autonomy faced in the past, it’s not a full success for most people.
Rather than seen as inherently hostile to the dominant capitalist culture, we are now seen as capable of integrating ourselves into and participating in it. This means while not legally discriminated against to the same extent as before we’re still expected not to stand out as distinct from the heterosexual standard for behaviour and presentation. For Trans people, this is especially damaging due to how much of a long and expensive process “passing” as cis can be. Despite minor legal protections we are still overwhelmingly denied work opportunities and are much more likely to face poverty. This problem also applies to most other minorities, but not always as a result of the same conditions.
Assimilation results in the concession of power to the people you are assimilating into. Ashkenazi Jews are an example of how assimilation into European Gentile society results in being used as a glorified human shield for capital. There is a possibility that queer identities will be used as a scapegoat for things like mental health problems, a decline in population growth, or other cultural changes and suffering leading to heightened persecution. Emancipation thus places a more difficult, but necessary, need to maintain a distinct identity from the capitalist system that has caused our oppression to ensure self-determination. Trade Unionism and the Marxist-Leninist model offers an extremely effective way of organizing our leadership into something that allows us to project the strength we need to protect ourselves while allowing us a safe structure where we are able to fight for our rights without liberal notions destroying our capacity to do this.
“To use the evolution of the feminist movement as a comparison we can look at how the liberal answer to inequality isn’t to address the root cause, i.e. the material reality of capitalism and the exploitative relations its existence is based on, but instead to make it possible for minorities to potentially join the ruling class.”
The most famous example of this is attempting to address gender inequality by advocating for the promotion of more female CEOs. Liberalism thus seeks to remedy oppression by reforming the demographics of the bourgeoisie. Liberalism is anathema to class consciousness so there is really no other way for this to work under hegemonic liberalism. The end result though is a view of equal rights that is both ineffective, due to only having access to reformist strategies, and also incapable of truly alleviating the symptoms of oppression because of an inability to genuinely change the material conditions that created them. This is why we as Marxists must strive to create a counter to the prevailing ideology. Marxism is the only solution to the problems of capitalism and by extension the only solution to the problems that exist within it.