Queer'd Liberalism : Ch. 6

 VI. PORTRAIT OF STEPHEN UNIVERSE-STYLE QUEERISM

At this point, we have touched on elements of “Stephen Universe” -style Queerness and the origins, history, and material foundations in the development of Queer society; however, we have neglected to paint a complete and detailed portrait of the styles of Queerness whom we are referencing. The principal question remains: Who is the “Stephen Universe” Queer?

The “Stephen Universe” style of Queerness “synthesizes”[13] the assimilationist and pseudo-“respectable” tendencies of the liberal, petit-bourgeois Queer with a thin coating of progressivism or “alternative” -ism. It is not progressive or liberatory in the sense that it has material effect on the standing of Queer people in wider society so much as it refers to itself as “progressive” or “alternative” in the sense that it is superficially opposed to Queer oppression and dominationism at large. However, despite this superficial opposition, the “Stephen Universe” style is entirely compatible with the aforementioned oppression and constitutes no significant resistant force to such oppression. 

Engagement— however uncritical and undialectical— with media is a central feature of this style. To the “Stephen Universe” the roles of “fandom” spaces, cultural consumption, and “representation” are vastly overstated to the extent of constituting a totality of the meaning of Queerness. Queerness— in their view— is not a material process with material standing. It is an idea; it is an identity that one ascribes to themself rather than it being ascribed to them through engagement with a given community. 

Relating to their perspective of Queerness as a self-prescribed identity that exists beyond the material, the “Stephen Universe” style is unique in its role as a distractive force that engages in endless “discourse” and what could be sophomorically described as a superficial “theory” that does not, in any way, contain any elements of practice. It is from this realm— from the domain of “Stephen Universe” -style Queerness— that unhelpful and long- answered questions such as the “validity”[14] of lesbians using masculine pronouns and the presence of sexual “kinks” at Queer events and during Pride arise. From the perspective of the “Ketamine” style, these questions have been thoroughly answered and explored by their foremothers; however, this unveils another critical distinction between the “Stephen Universe” and “Ketamine” styles. The “Stephen Universe” style, born through the atomizing character of the bourgeois internet, is obfuscated from its lineage. Of course, this cannot simply be blamed on the internet.

Queer history has long been suppressed and erased going back millennia. The suppression of this history serves a purpose which is precisely its effect. Atomized Queer people are divorced from their (lumpen)proletarian history and revolutionary character of struggle. This goal aligns closely with wider bourgeois society. If a significant mass of people is alienated from their long history of struggle, then they will know not where even to “begin” in the process of struggling against the oppressions that continue to exist. 

Also worth noting in a rigorous portrait of the “Stephen Universe” style is the youth of those who take on the style. While not exclusively composed of adolescents, the “Stephen Universe” style of Queerness frequently takes on a sophomoric simultaneously self-infantilizing and self-aggrandizing attitude that is a common feature of adolescence. The retort that one is “literally neurodivergent and a minor”[15] is the most salient example of the “Stephen Universe” style. Atomized Queer teenagers from whom their history has been obfuscated are likely to find solace on an internet that may initially appear friendly to them. We must admit that, however idealist it may be, it would be erroneous of us to deny the benefits conferred by access to a space in which one may dissociate themself from their present conditions.

The conditions of Queer adolescents— particularly those with mental illnesses or other neurodivergences— are exceptionally hostile in general society and internet algorithms (and the corporations by whom they are controlled) take advantage of this. It is under these circumstances that certain Queer adolescents may be siloed off into their insular media-centric communities and adopt the “Stephen Universe” style. The importance of these communities to them (and their importance in these communities) becomes the basis of their identity rather than their material standing in reality. They are effectively the Lost Boys in Neverland who are terrified of aging. The drama that exists within their subcultures becomes the totality of struggle, and the maintenance of these subcultures becomes primary of the struggle for liberation in material reality.

We must lastly acknowledge the puritanism and negativity towards sex that is abundant in the “Stephen Universe” style. On its face, Queer’d puritanism appears different than the “Christian purity culture” that is ever-dominant in the United States. However, it is effectively the same phenomenon painted in new varnish. To define our terms, the puritanism to which we are referring is generally characterized by the repudiation of the particularly sexually counter-cultural character of the “Ketamine” style. To provide an example, consider a sexual proclivity that is generally considered “deviant” like “Puppy Play.”[16] Those of the “Stephen Universe” style have repeatedly expressed desires to exorcise the community from all manner of Queer discourse and Queer representation. They mindlessly parrot the refrain that sexual expression should remain behind closed doors and out of common consciousness. This is in sharp contrast to the fact that “Pups” have been engaging publicly (with a degree of obvious decency) with Queer culture and Queer community for longer than the vast majority of those of the “Stephen Universe” style have been on this Earth. In fact, longer than their mothers and grandmothers have been on this Earth. Their argument comes with the alleged justification that it is “poor optics” and inhibits the ability of “normal” Queer people to engage in bourgeois-heterosexual society. Put simply, it is a liberal respectability politic wrapped in the “sheep’s clothing” of liberation. Furthermore, this emphasis on “optics” and general assimilationism is often accompanied by a repudiation of the sexual in general and a moral denunciation of the sexually “deviant” in particular. 

To summarize, the “Stephen Universe” style of Queer person is one alienated and atomized. She is divorced from her history, and she retains the puritanical and assimilationist backwardness of the society that reared her. In forthcoming chapters, we will paint a similarly analytical portrait of the “Ketamine” style and elucidate how to struggle against petit-bourgeois ideals of the “Stephen Universe” style.

[13] In the sense of eclectically combining backwardness and advancement, and more specifically in the sense of a post-hoc “mashing” of liberal Queer-isms with the veneer of “alternative”-ness and progressivism.

[14] The centrality of “validity” in online and “Stephen Universe”-style discourse is another common feature. We will not address it in detail here, but put simply the idea that “validity” in one’ s identity supersedes the need for liberation is another expression of the idealism present in this style.

[15] A retort that has been overused and exaggerated to the point of ironic usage by the present.

[16] Also known as Puppy and Handler (PAH), this “kink” involves erotic roleplay as a dog or other domesticated animal. We cannot address the entirety of it here, and it mostly serves as a placeholder for any consensual (between adults), non-conventional sexual behavior.