Queer and trans lives do not always follow the same timelines that cis and straight lives follow. We do not always hit the same milestones at the same times. Our lives are not always legible to those on the outside. This is one of the most beautiful things about queerness — the way it invites us to shed ways of moving through time that do not serve us.
I feel like this is trying too hard to claim for queer folks what is intrinsically, universally human. Is anyone’s life always legible to those on the outside? And come on, non-linear narratives are hardly new or unique to queer authors, lol. Plenty of folks have been bothered by that kind of narrative, it certainly doesn’t mean there’s anything special about that.
Of course I remain open to being corrected. It could well be that I’m just ignorant on the history and function of non-linear narratives. But this reads like the author is trying way too hard to lay claim to things that pretty much everyone experiences to varying degrees at one point or another.
There’s very much a whole theory/literature around queer time (see the reference to Muñoz in the article) – being queer frees you from this sort of linear heteronormative progression through stages of life. This JSTOR blog post might be of interest. The argument isn’t that this sort of non-linearity is specific to queer people (see the bit in the JSTOR post tying the economic precarity of millenials to the notion of “adulting”), but rather that it is an extremely common queer experience precisely because the markers of “progression” through life are heavily rooted in hetero- and cisnormativity.
I agree with you that straight people and cis people can also have confusing timelines in terms of experiences and growth and you of course don’t know what any person you meet has gone, or is going, through. Regardless of sexuality and gender.
I think the point made, the way I read it, is that because the general public still does not quite grasp the gender debate fully, there’s a tendency to think of transgender people in a very stringent way (to be transgender you must fit x, y, z standard). How can you be transgender if you didn’t know from being born? Why are you only coming out now? You’re not really transgender, etc. To be honest, similar to how gay people have been, and are being, treated too: Okay, we will “accept” you, but only if you fit a narrow definition that makes us the most comfortable (in this case a more chronological timeline to express yourself in).
I’m a genderqueer bisexual myself, just as an fyi.
Edit: I will say, however, of course you’re allowed not to like a certain writing style. Maybe this book just wasn’t for the people complaining about the lack of a chronological timeline and that’s also fine.
I feel like this is trying too hard to claim for queer folks what is intrinsically, universally human. Is anyone’s life always legible to those on the outside? And come on, non-linear narratives are hardly new or unique to queer authors, lol. Plenty of folks have been bothered by that kind of narrative, it certainly doesn’t mean there’s anything special about that.
Of course I remain open to being corrected. It could well be that I’m just ignorant on the history and function of non-linear narratives. But this reads like the author is trying way too hard to lay claim to things that pretty much everyone experiences to varying degrees at one point or another.
There’s very much a whole theory/literature around queer time (see the reference to Muñoz in the article) – being queer frees you from this sort of linear heteronormative progression through stages of life. This JSTOR blog post might be of interest. The argument isn’t that this sort of non-linearity is specific to queer people (see the bit in the JSTOR post tying the economic precarity of millenials to the notion of “adulting”), but rather that it is an extremely common queer experience precisely because the markers of “progression” through life are heavily rooted in hetero- and cisnormativity.
I agree with you that straight people and cis people can also have confusing timelines in terms of experiences and growth and you of course don’t know what any person you meet has gone, or is going, through. Regardless of sexuality and gender.
I think the point made, the way I read it, is that because the general public still does not quite grasp the gender debate fully, there’s a tendency to think of transgender people in a very stringent way (to be transgender you must fit x, y, z standard). How can you be transgender if you didn’t know from being born? Why are you only coming out now? You’re not really transgender, etc. To be honest, similar to how gay people have been, and are being, treated too: Okay, we will “accept” you, but only if you fit a narrow definition that makes us the most comfortable (in this case a more chronological timeline to express yourself in).
I’m a genderqueer bisexual myself, just as an fyi.
Edit: I will say, however, of course you’re allowed not to like a certain writing style. Maybe this book just wasn’t for the people complaining about the lack of a chronological timeline and that’s also fine.