Quickie

This post will be a quickie, just two more definitions that are meant to help me better understand the Queer theory I’ll be using for my project.

Definition of lesbian continuum from The Columbia Dictionary of Modern Literary and Cultural Criticism:

A term introduced by Adrienne Rich in her essay on COMPULSORY HETEROSEXUALITY, lesbian continuum refers to the broad spectrum of intimate relations between women, from those involving the experience of or desire for genital sexuality, to mother-daughter relationships and female friendships, to ties of political solidarity – all of them “forms of primary intensity between and among women.”  Rich associates such bonds, within each woman’s life and throughout the course of history, with resistance to heterosexuality and male domination.  The concept is similar to what Carroll Smith-Rosenberg and Eve Sedgwick describe as “female homosocial” ties, including but not limited to explicitly lesbian ones.  It has been part of the feminist critical project to call attention to such ties as a theme in literary texts and as a pattern of influence among women writers.  See also HOMOSOCIAL, LESBIAN CRITICISM.

Rich, Adrienne.  “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence.”  In Blood, Bread, and Poetry: Selected Prose 1979-1985.  New York: Norton, 1986.

Sedgwick, Eve.  Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire.  New York: Columbia University Press, 1985.
 
Smith-Rosenberg, Caroll.  “The Female World of Love and Ritual: Relations Between Women in Nineteenth-Century America.”  In Disorderly Conduct: Visions of Gender in Victorian America.  New York: Knopf, 1985.

This definition is fascinating, and the use of the term broad spectrum reminds me of the Kinsey scale, a sliding scale of sexuality.  Specifically, it reminds me of the idea that the boundaries between heterosexuality and homosexuality are not necessarily solid and/or impenetrable. 

A point that I’m not sure I agree with is the idea that these feminine bonds are formed within the framework of “resistance” to heterosexuality and male domination.  Why does the lesbian continuum have to be pressed against a framework of resistance, instead of working independent of male domination?  Is this resistance to heterosexuality the only way to reveal these bonds between women?  If so, why? 

After reading this definition, I realize that I really, really, really need to read Rich’s article.  It is also pretty clear to me that Rich’s stance is rather radical.  The benefits of a radical stance is, in my opinion, that it breaks open the issue, tearing it open to a broad spectrum of responses.  I will also try to track down the reviews of Rich’s article, which should help gauge the reaction of her peers at the time of publication -which, incidentally, was in 1980, a year before I was born.         



Now, let’s take a look at the definition of compulsory heterosexuality, also from The Columbia Dictionary of Modern Literary and Cultural Criticism:

In her 1980 essay of the same title, feminist poet, essayist, and activist Adrienne Rich uses this term to suggest that heterosexuality, though commonly understood as a natural and personal “preference,” is actually shaped and imposed upon women by society.  A social and cultural “institution” that Rich sees as fundamental to the subordination of women by men, it is upheld by means ranging from physical violence and economic coercion to the idealization of heterosexual romance and erasure of lesbian sexuality from history and literature.  Specific techniques mentioned by Rich include rape and wife-beating, clitoridectomy and the psychoanalytic denial of the clitoris, unpaid maternal and domestic labor, sexual harassment of and discrimination against women in the workplace, persecution of lesbians, and the destruction of documents relating to lesbian experience, among many others.  As this list implies, Rich takes heterosexuality in its broadest sense to mean the general viewing of women and measuring of female value in terms of male needs and desires.  Against “compulsory heterosexuality,” Rich poses the LESBIAN CONTINUUM, by which she means the broad spectrum of ways in which women, despite compulsory heterosexuality, have historically been primary to each other.   

Rich, Adrienne.  “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence.”  In Blood, Bread, and Poetry: Selected Prose 1979-1985.  New York: Norton, 1986.

Again, just by reading this small description, one can tell that Rich’s position on heterosexuality is a radical one.  It’s also important to remember, I think, the historical context of the 1980s (and I assume the earlier 70s), during which Rich’s article was composed and published.  It’s been thirty years since Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence, and while discrimination against gays and lesbians has decreased (this is my own personal opinion, obviously) and important legal, social, and cultural victories have occurred, there is still a lot of work to be done before equality can be claimed.  These issues of female homosocial, compulsory heterosexuality, and the lesbian continuum are still relevant and alive for today’s culture, though in different ways than thirty years ago.  Again, I need to read Rich’s full article and soon, especially now that I’ve read these two definitions.   I wonder how much my position on Rich, the lesbian continuum, compulsory heterosexuality, and the (female) homosocial will change as my project progresses.  Stay tuned, and we’ll find out together.



Works Cited:

"Compulsory Heterosexuality." The Columbia Dictionary of Modern Literary and Cultural Criticism. Ed. Joseph W. Childers and Gary Hentzi. New York: Columbia UP, 1995. 52-53. Print.

"Lesbian Continuum." The Columbia Dictionary of Modern Literary and Cultural Criticism. Ed. Joseph W. Childers and Gary Hentzi. New York: Columbia UP, 1995. 167-168. Print.