Wounds and reinscriptions: schools, sexualities and performative subjects

receptive anal penetration as synonymous with homosexual (un)masculinity/femininity
(the mystery of the penetrator remains unresolved); provisionally constitutes Scott as this
wounded homosexual; and inscribes homosexuality as the poor imitation of the (illusory)
heterosexual original (Butler 1991).

Daniel is not potentially interpellating the denigrated homosexuality of a boy whose
bodily dispositions have somehow unwittingly failed to cite heterosexual masculinity.
Scott’s bodily practices cite the legitimate homosexual identity that he seeks to constitute.
Daniel’s discursive practices cite a wounded homosexual identity - his comment is an
injurious interpellation that potentially constitutes Scott in these terms. In this sense, the
mundane moment of leaning over a desk and a comment being passed can be seen as
skirmish over the limits of intelligible masculinity, homosexuality and gay identity.

In contrast, Ian’s practices in the second scene of the Episode do not immediately appear
to inscribe a sexuality or gender identity that breaches the confines of compulsory
heterosexuality and hetero-masculinity. Nevertheless, Ian is constituted as the denigrated,
Other homosexual through a series of intentional and tacit bodily and linguistic
performatives. This is not to suggest that Ohan arbitrarily selects Ian as the focus of his
injurious performatives. On the contrary, the moment represented here is one moment in
a complex chain of constituting practices, the echoes of which undoubtedly resonate in
this scene. Ian’s perceived high ‘ability’; his ambiguous (un)physicality; his adherence to
aspects of uniform rejected by other boys; and his primary relationship with a single boy
are all practices which seep beyond the bounds of legitimate hetero-masculinity in this

17

<<   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   >>

More intriguing information