Jaime BellemareWGS 400 Final PaperMay 10, 2011

An Exploration of Munoz’s Disidentifications

INTRODUCTION

Disidentification is a strategy of survival and resistance, often utilized by queers of

color. Within dominant culture, minoritized bodies often go without representation

making it difficult to place oneself in history and community. By reworking these

dominant images, disidentification allows subjects to find a source of identity, and a space

to situate oneself to find social agency (Muñoz, 1).

This paper will explore disidentifications and disidentification theory as explained

by José Esteban Muñoz. In order to create a working definition of disidentification and its

uses I will examine the ways in which disidentification has been taken up by people in

particular social locations. Focusing on the intersections of race, gender and sexuality, I

will examine the ways in which subjects employ disidentification as a way to understand

identity in a culture that provides little representation for those outside of the

majoritarian sphere. In order to do this I will look closely at the examples used by Muñoz

and then find a contemporary image, which could possibly be taken up by queers of color

as a source of disidentification.

Considering the way that Muñoz places disidentification theory in relation to

social constructionism and essentialism, I will then carefully look at the limits of these

theoretical models and their application in daily life. In doing so, I hope to break the

binary relationship that is often created between social constructionist theory and

essentialism to show that disidentification works to fill a gap created by these two

popular theories.

WORKING TOWARD A DEFINITION

Disidentification is a way of survival, a means of resistance, and a strategy of

claiming identity. Muñoz writes, “Disidetification is meant to be descriptive of the

survival strategies the minority subject practices in order to negotiate a phobic

majoritatian public sphere that continuously elides or punishes the existence of subjects

who do not conform to the phantasm of normative citizenship” (Muñoz, 4). Breaking this

definition down, it seems that Muñoz is exploring how subjects who are not represented

in dominant culture are able to find representation and community that does not reiterate

negative stereotypes and assumptions created by the majority. For those who do not fit

within the normative identification space, disidentifying becomes an active way of

manipulating normative representations for one’s own use.

In a culture that actively works against and simultaneously ignores people of color

and queer identities, disidentification allows minoritized bodies the possibility to work

through the impossible dominant culture that is so clearly represented through art,

media, academia, public and political spheres. Muñoz represents disidentification as a

way for minoritized subjects to take up these dominant images and transfigure them as

sources of resistance and representation of queer bodies. Through these representations,

queers of color are given the tools needed to understand the “power and shame of

queerness” while imagining a world where “queer lives, politics and possibilities are

represented in their complexity.” (Muñoz, 4, 1).

This is not to say that disidentifying allows subjects to pick and choose from

sources of identification to find a representation that fits. It allows one to rework the

identification and accept the need for interjection without accepting the negative

components that one may associate with the identification source. Rather than identifying

with a dominant culture or attempting to break free from the pressures of such culture,

disidentification works to “transform a cultural logic from within” (Muñoz, 11). This

rethinking of identity allows minoritized subjects to empower their own identity, while

disempowering the belief that such identification is impossible (Muñoz, 31). This allows

for a progression toward social and structural change, while still understanding and

appreciating the everyday struggles that queer of color people face and the ways in which

resistance is employed. The every day recognition that one does not identify with the

dominant culture becomes a source of identifying.

INFLUENCING THEORY

Disidentiication utilizes a framework of identities-in-difference that Muñoz

borrows from Third World feminist and women of color, especially Chicana, theorists

who have “expanded identity, looking at the intersections of race” (Muñoz, 6). These

theories point to an agreement that an adequate theoretical framework and

representation to understand the intersectionality of identity has not yet been reached.

Through this negation emerges an understanding of identity that disidentifies with the

dominant culture creating a counterpublic space.

Cherríe Moraga and Gloría Anzaldúa’s This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by

Radical Women of Color plays an influential role in the workings of Muñoz. Bridge calls on

gender theory to look at the intersections of class, race, gender, sexuality, etc. creating a

disidentification with previous writings that focused solely on women collectively

identifying as female. In ignoring the complexity of identity, former writings created a

default representation of women as white, heterosexual, middle class, able bodied, etc

therefore not confronting white supremacy and heteronormativity (Muñoz, 26).

Disidentification, as explained by Muñoz, draws on “revisionary identification,” which

Muñoz explains as an effort to hold together different parts of identification that have

been typically viewed separately (Muñoz, 26). Through revisionary identification,

subjects are able to look at their social location in a new way that accounts for multiple

ways of viewing.

Muñoz also draws from Foucaldian theory in order to oppose “the conception of

power as being a fixed discourse” (Muñoz, 19). Disidentification relies on strategies of

resistance and negotiation between systems of power and oppression. Recognizing that

power is not stable gives room for subjects to disidentify and work against the structural

roots of dominant identification systems.

A RELATION TO PSYCHOANALYSIS

Many queer theorists do not take up psychoanalysis to examine the role it has

played in forming contemporary theories and methods of identification. For most

minoritized identities, psychoanalysis is a place of pain and frustration that offers little

insight into understanding identity. However, Muñoz discusses psychoanalysis and its

relation to disidentification theory, recognizing the important role that psychoanalysis

has played in many other theoretical models of identity.

Muñoz places disidentification as an argument with, but not a complete rejection

of, psychoanalytic studies (Muñoz, 12). In fact, Muñoz argues that one can have a

disidentificatory relationship with psychoanalytic theory. It is no secret that

pschoanalysis utilizes racism and homophobia in its exploration of identity through

desire. Psychoanalytic theory relies on the compulsory heterosexuality set in place by

Freud, which helps create a “false dichotomy between desire and identification” (Muñoz,

13). Disidentification, on the other hand, separates out desire and identification,

recognizing the possibilities of queer sexuality.

Using psychoanalysis, there is a reliance on subjects to assimilate or align with a

performed model; however, disidentification theory directly combats this creating room

for identification even when a performed model is not present or through an

identification of resistance (Muñoz, 7). In doing this, disidentification makes rooms for

queer bodies to exist outside of dominant gender constructions while psychoanalytic

constructions of gender identitification eliminates the possibility of transgenders.

Muñoz does recognize that disidentification and psychoanalytic theory both

examines the ways in which subjectivity is created in dominant cultural spaces in relation

to identity. In doing this, psychoanalysis suggests that identification is full with

possibilities of “incorporation, diminishment, inflation, threat, loss, reparation and

disabowal,” while disidentification equally recognizes the complexities that exist with

identification (Muñoz, 8).

WHY DISIDENTIFICATION

Individuals with privileged identities often have no need to work within and

around identity in order to live within majoritarian space. Although these subjects are

part of the culture that continuously pushes heteronormitivity, white supremacy and

misogyny; the way in which they identify often correlate with this system making it

unnecessary for these individuals to actively confront or resist such cultural forces in

order to find a place within society. Minoritized subjects, however, can utilize

disidentification in order to work toward building “counterpublic spheres” (Muñoz, 5).

For queer people of color, it may be necessary to work or resist within dominant culture

spaces. Disidentification allows for this negotiation to take place, utilizing socially

constructed images and roles in a way that creates identity outside of those boundaries.

Disidentification also offers an alternative to previous models that keep

individuals who are minoritized in multiple ways from accessing systems of identification.

Many cultural studies and theoretical models utilize a single-issue identity politic that

doesn’t account for the convergences of race, sexuality, gender etc. Disidentification

makes room for individuals to take up these systems of identification while negating

certain aspects and utilizing others. In this way, queers of color are able to form identity

in recognition that queer spaces have often ignored and intentionally left out people of

color. By recognizing the intersection of race and sexuality, disidentification theory

shows that it is necessary to discuss the ways in which multiple identities interact with

each other for all individuals and not just those who have marginalized identities.

Through disidentifying, subjects are also able to avoid assimilationist attitudes

without framing separatism as the only option to thrive outside of the dominant culture.

Separatism, while problematic, also relies on privilege and it not accessible for those who

do not have white privilege or class status (Muñoz, 14). It also helps maintain the

dominant social order. Therefore, the use of disidentification allows queers of color to

exist within dominant space, which already helps to challenge the privilege utilized by the

majoritiarian subject.

Disidentification also exists to fill the gap created by other methods of

identification. Queer theory has often utilized cross-identification which has been taken

up as being both useful and dangerous. Muñoz looks as the ways in which Eve Kosofsky

Sedgwick uses cross-identification as an example of non-normative identification, while

Judith Butler argues that crossing identity may result in erasure of what is considered

“dangerous” or “shameful” (Muñoz, 30). Disidentification responds to these two

viewpoints by filling in the middle ground. Muñoz puts forward disidentification as a way

to understand the power and need of non-normative identification forms, creating new

possibilities rather than losing objects of identification.

DISIDENTIFICATION IN ACTION

Muñoz utilizes many examples of disidentification in action in order to show the

numerous possibilities of how disidentifying can be used as a source of identity. Many of

these representations use disidentification as a “process of production and a mode of

performance” that is able to dismantle images of dominant culture (Muñoz, 25).

One of the examples that Muñoz focuses on most is James Baldwin’s

disidentification with Bette Davis. Baldwin, an African-American writer disidentified with

Davis, a white actress who he found to be beautiful in a non-normative way. Baldwin’s

disidentification with Davis was a survival strategy, in which he recognized that she was a

wealthy white woman, but found a certain pleasure in the fact that she did not fit the

image of what a white woman on television stereotypically should look like. Baldwin is

able to see that he is outside the identity of this woman, however, he describes her

movements as “just like a nigger” and uses this as way to position himself within the

image of Davis (Muñoz, 15).

One of the examples that I found most interesting and helpful to me as I was trying

to understand disidentification theory was that of gay men and opera divas (Muñoz, 30).

The self creation and performance strategies taken up by opera divas made them

important sources of disidentification pre-Stonewall (Muñoz,31). I found this example to

be particularly interesting, because Muñoz explains disidentification to be a performance

based concept, and it seemed that the subjects disidentified with the opera divas around

the sharing of that performance. It also seemed interesting because this is the one

example in which race was not actively discussed, which made me wonder what type of

day men were disidentifying with the opera divas.

In studying how identification and disidentication are taken up in film theory,

Manthia Diawara argues that the way in which bodies of color have been portrayed in

dominant cinema portrays people of color for the pleasure of white spectators (Muñoz,

28). Creating images that represent people of color fulfilling roles of white domesticity or

losing within a dominant white culture allows for the white audience to go without having

their white privilege threatened. An example of this can be seen in the portrayal of queer

men of color in the television series Noah’s Arc. While the series might work to close a

gap in the lack of queer people of color in mainstream media, it does so while portraying

queer men of color in a way that conforms to stereotypical assumptions typically

associated with white gay men. Noah’s Arc does little to explore the intersection of race,

gender and sexuality, but rather uses the bodies of black men to tell a story intended for a

white male audience while intentionally white washing experiences of queer men of color.

The show follows the lives of four African American men living in Los Angeles

mainly focusing on their personal romantic relationships. The show has been described

as a queer of color version of Sex in the City and it seems this comparison is fairly

accurate. The men, although different, all fulfill a cultural stereotype associated with gay

men and men of color. While Noah fulfills the effeminate gay male role, Alex is the loud

and obnoxious group leader, Ricky is hypersexualized and Chance plays the successful

and conservative family man. Many of these characters align themselves with

homonormative ideals set in place largely by the dominant culture or white queer

subculture.

Despite this problematic portrayal of queer men of color, it is possible that Noah’s

Arc could serve as a source for disidentification. In recognizing the influence of dominant

culture and whiteness on the way that these characters are portrayed, the minoritized

group can read between the “dominant text’s lines” to identify with the show while

actively resisting the way in which black characters are being taken up by white

domestication. Although the show rarely discusses the lived experience of what it means

to be a queer person of color in a phobic majoritarian space, Noah’s Arc still provides a

way for queer men of color to navigate through a dominant media that rarely represents

options of identity outside of the white, middle class, heterosexual man.

USE OF SPACE: MAKING THE PRIVATE PUBLIC

One of the concepts that I found most interesting in Muñoz’s exploration of

disidentification was the use of public versus private space. Muñoz discusses multiple

examples of disidentification in action, but some of these uses are taken up within the

privacy of one’s own self while others outwardly express their process of disidentifying.

As discussed earlier, there are limitations to the use of visible resistance because it places

one outside of the dominant culture in a way that may be recognizable to the majoritarian

sphere.

As Muñoz begins his introduction to disidentification theory, he explores Marga

Gomez’s performances; particularly Marga Gomez is Pretty Witty and Gay. In the show,

Gomez delivers a monologue from her bed, bringing the private queer bedroom into the

dominant public space (Muñoz, 1). In performing this queer of color identity within

public, Gomez creates a counterpublic space open to minoritized bodies.

Keeping with the example of Gomez, Muñoz looks specifically at one part of

Gomez’s performance in which the public is utilized in the private identification space. As

Gomez discusses a panel of lesbians on television, she disidentifies with the women,

recognizing the homophobic portrayal of the women, but desires for a queer world

(Muñoz, 34). Gomez is able to identify with the language of the queer women like the way

in which one woman flicks her tongue. While Gomez is able to understand the meaning of

this public action, it goes unnoticed except within her personal identity space.

Muñoz looks at the way in which politics of disidentification have been

represented through the video projects of Osa Hidalgo in which women of color are

celebrated and represented as having positions of power (Muñoz, 23). One of Hidalgo’s

films addresses the contrast between the public and private lives of two queer Chicana

archeologists (Muñoz, 23). In taking up a profession that is typically represented as a

being overpowered by white, male masculinity Hidalgo creates a disidentification

utilizing queer sex and sexuality to create a counterpublic space within dominant culture.

The private sexual act between the two women is seen on film as the public educational

archeology films are playing in the background. The contrast of the two images helps in

imagining a public sphere in which queer sexuality, particularly queer sex between two

women of color is no longer marginalized by dominant culture.

THEORETICAL MODELS: A PLACE FOR DISIDENTIFICATION

Muñoz’s study on disidentification theory is performed on the belief that both

social constructionism and essentialism are exhausted theories that over simplify the

ways in which bodies interact with dominant cultures (Muñoz, 5). Muñoz positions

disidentification theory as existing in addition to social constructionist theory, in order to

create a lens that is not “monocausal or monothematic” (Muñoz, 8). In doing this, Muñoz

uses an intersectional approach to create a model that takes into consideration how

multiple social identities and processes of identifying affect how bodies interact with

social construction. He is challenging the way that social constructionist theory often

reaffirms the socialization that forces us to see one identity at the expense of others.

Social constructionism is often positioned as the only alternative to essentialism

without taking into consideration the differences in how social identities are constructed.

Although social constructionism may work well for some bodies, it does not fit all people

equally. Social constructionist theory results in a push to resist conditions set in place by

dominant culture without recognizing the privileges around actively and visibly doing so.

This often assumes or relies on the subject having a singular minoritized identity. When

focusing solely on socially created identities, we forget to address the ways in which these

social constructions have been formed around oppressive notions of race, gender,

sexuality, etc.

Disidentification recognizes the power structures that have been socially created

and how they affect the identification of minoritized subjects. In this recognition, the

subject has room to make space for oneself within the culture of dominant social

constructions while actively resisting assimilation.

LIMITATIONS OF DISIDENTIFYING

Muñoz states early on that there are limitations to disidentifying and that

disidentifcation in not always an adequate strategy of resistance or survival. At times

resistance needs to be visible and direct, while other situations call for subjects to take up

conformist paths in order to protect personal well being and resources for survival.

Although subjects outside of the majoritarian sphere may utilize disidentification to

overcome obstacles that exist in the process of identifying, disidentifying still requires an

image or figure to use as the disidentification object. This is something that may not be

accessible to everyone in a way that disidentification can be taken up.

CONCLUSIONS AND ANALYSIS

Muñoz’s representation of disidentification as a source of survival is clearly

displayed in the examples that he sets forth through Marga’s Bed, Baldwin’s writing,

Hidalgo’s film, This Bridge Called My Back, opera divas and multiple others. In these

representations the process of disidentification was never the same. How one

disidentifies does not rely solely on the identity that the subject posses, but also on the

source, and the interaction and relationship between the two.

Although I believe I now have a moderate understanding of the way in which

disidentification is taken up by minoritized subjects to navigate through dominant

culture, I do not fully understand all of the examples that Muñoz utilizes to show

disidentification in action. In particular I find the example of Baldwin’s “fictional” writing

difficult to understand. While I find the concept of using autobiography as rehearsal for

fiction to be interesting as a concept, when Muñoz begins to talk about Baldwin’s

disidentifcatory practices in relation to the understanding of genre I become lost. The

exploration of Just Above My Head makes me further understand the way in which

Baldwin utilizes his fiction as a way to create an image of the self. I believe it is this self as

represented within Baldwin’s writing that is disidentificatory, but I am left asking what is

the source of disidentification? Is there a resistance created? As Muñoz tries to clarify the

example through using the word song rather than fiction, I become more intrigued,

although more confused. I find the concept of disidentification to be explained in a way

that is easily comprehendible, although I find myself lost within its implementation at

times.

Muñoz often talks about disidentification as a means of resistance. I understand

this resistance to be the active recognition that one does not need to assimilate to the

dominant culture, although the subject may at times need to work within that dominant

framework. For example, legal systems within the United States require individuals to

place themselves in categories of identity, despite whether or not an individual feels

he/she/ze is able to fit within those terms. Disidentification allows for a negotiation to

take place that allows bodies to fulfill these requirements of law, while recognizing the

space that exists outside of this dominant identification system

I think one of the main uses of resistance that disidentification is able to allow is

within the realm of queer theory. White, privileged bodies have dominated queer theory,

often intentionally excluding queers of color. Disidentification would allow queers of

color the opportunity to work within some of the theoretical frameworks that have been

created in the white privileged space, while resisting the notion that the white queer

subculture is dominant and that white queer theorists were the original creators of many

of the theories they have taken from theorists of color.

Disidentification in a way allows for queer bodies to reject dominant culture as the

only valid option of existence. While social constructionism offers a way to understand

how dominant culture is created, it fails to help construct a way to actively work against

such constructions. While disidentification recognizes the complexities of such social

construction, it also gives minoritized bodies a way to move more freely trough

majoritarian spheres with the knowledge that this is a counterpublic space.

Works Cited

Muñoz, José Esteban. (1999). Disidentifications: Queers of Color and the Performance of

Politics. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.