For my revisit, I'm going to choose to look at my blog post about the Hanhardt keynote at the Contingent Belongings conference and in conjunction, the Hanhardt readings we did for class prior to the conference.
Originally, I really enjoyed Hanhardt's arguments about gentrification and the privileging of certain gay bodies (white, productive, law-abiding) over queer bodies that are criminalized. I liked Hanhardt's methods for discussing and tracing the evolution of neighborhoods and gay organizing as well as the way she offers an alternative for intersectional political organizing in FIERCE.
Now, I feel like my original analysis and thoughts on this article and talk were a little shallow. I want to apply other lenses of theoretical analysis that we have elaborated on in class to this discussion of gentrification as well. Specifically, I think homonationalism is useful here. I want to think about Hanhardt's arguments alongside Puar as well as Butler.
Specifically, a source in my first annotated bibliography is making similar claims to Hanhardt. In "Intimate Investments: Homonormativity, Global Lockdown, and the Seductions of Empire," the authors discuss the increasingly dangerous privatization of rights and the privileging of certain gay subjects at the expense of other (non)subjects. Hanhardt referred to this phenomenon as "queer politics of contradiction" in that she saw an inherent contradiction in the goals of queer politics and the strategies employed. Intimate Investments makes a similar argument about how the inclusion of certain subjects denies rights and livability to others. In terms of privatization, both articles and authors are concerned with the ways in which the state has left the public sphere and rights are increasingly relegated to private spaces. In Intimate Investments, the authors are concerned with the prison industrial complex and how punishment of public laws are relegated to private companies. Hanhardt is concerned with the establishment of "neighborhoods" and the complicities with violence against certain people under the premise of safety for others. "Safety" and the absence of "crime" are code words used to commit violence on those that are perceived as threats ie black and poor people. The overriding concern of both arguments is the increasing role of capitalism in interactions and the state and the pervasiveness of neoliberalism as a means of regulation.
In terms of identity politics, I am now thinking of Butler in relation to Hanhardt's "utopian" politics. Hanhardt argues for a lessened role for identity in politics. Instead, Hanhardt's utopian politics focuses on intersections and lessened violence against all bodies. This is embodied in FIERCE and other resistances to police violence in general. Butler argues for a lessened role for identity politics as well. For Butler, identity politics constrains possibilities for those identities and labels tend to oppress rather than liberate. And identity politics are inherently exclusionary because they imagine ideal forms of "woman" and "gay" that exclude certain subjects from rights or liberation. They articulate similar visions for politics that is beyond identity movements that tend toward exclusion and fights for freedom from violence (including institutional) in every instance it occurs. Violence against one body is harmful to all bodies.
I hope that elaborates on my original blog post as well as discussion about the Hanhardt readings in class as well as ties Hanhardt to other theories and issues we've discussed. I think the blog was very helpful throughout the semester to look through my own arguments and posts as well as what others were thinking. I like the process of commenting on other arguments as well and gaining from other people's comments. I think it is helpful to have a conversation among the whole class about blog posts rather than traditional classes where only the teacher has input on your assignments. This is a lot like Luhman's pedagogy in practice that values the professor's knowledge as well as the students. I like revisiting my own blog posts as well to see the evolution of my thought processes. The class summaries have also helped me to think through ideas in the readings. I also think they are useful because the summaries have links to previous conversations and/ or current events that help to think through the sometimes complicated theories.