Marxism and the LGBTTQ*

            What comes to your mind when I say Marxism?  You probably think of a Marxist economy, maybe you think of the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, or maybe you get confused and think of communism.  Maybe you think of his famous quote “each provides according to his ability and receives according to his needs” (Mullaly, 142).  But what does Marxism have to say about the LGBTTQ* community?  Turns out Marxists aren’t willing to say a whole lot, tending to avoid questions of human sexuality all together (Floyd, 2).  However we can use Marxism as a lens through which to view issues pertaining to sexuality.  Marxism looks at relationships of power between those who owns the means of production (bourgeoisie) and the workers (proletariat).  In the same way we can look at sexualities relationship to power/capital; especially heteronormativity’s relationship to power/capital (Floyd, 3). 

            Let’s look at the issue of gay marriage.  One of the main objections cited by those who oppose same-sex marriage is that it undermines and posses a threat to the structure of a traditional family (Agostinone-Wilson, 16).  Marxist’s would point out that the family unit is the basis of the capitalist economy; where the husband is the breadwinner and the wife, the bread maker.  Since society is built with capitalism’s best interest and maintenance in mind, no model of government functioning within capitalism can be in full support of same-sex marriage.  Marxist’s would advocate for complete revolutionary change of society rather than structural changes from within (Mullaly, 153).  If Marxism was able to dismantle capitalism then the argument that gay marriage undermines traditional family structure would disappear. 

The basic philosophy underpinning Marxism is humanistic; basically this means that Marx believed in the dignity and worth of all human beings (Mullaly, 138).  He intended this in the context of the dignity and worth of the proletariat, but what about other disadvantaged groups?  Marx believed that social equality could be achieved if production was publically owned and economic class structure was eliminated (Mullaly, 141).  I guess the question is, would greater economic equality do away with other forms of oppression; would a Marxist society still be heteronormative?  I would argue that since we see sexuality as discrete categories (where membership to one group excludes membership to another) and not as a continuum (where sexual identity would be viewed as something fluid) people tend to disassociate from members of the opposite group.  Making sexuality into categories enables one group to have more power and minoratizes other forms of sexuality.  This is in keeping with several Marxist principles.  Marxism views social problems not as the fault of the individual, but as the result of capitalism and the accompanying forms of social relationships (Mullaly, 147).  Marxists believe that by labelling people as “criminals, drug addicts, or poor people, is actually labelling them as troublemakers” (Mullaly, 148).  Once they are labelled we can ignore the social conditions (inequality, powerlessness, oppression…) that form the basis of our communities were these problems take root.  So, Marxists would trace social problems back to social relationships determined by capitalism, not the individual.  Personal problems are therefore rooted in capitalist politics (Mullaly, 148).  

 

            Heterosexuality has been a social norm since the early twentieth century (Floyd, 14).  The idea of having one fixed sexual identity is therefore a modern concept.  The rise of heterosexuality as a social norm creates a binary that subjugates and minoratizes LGBTTQ* communities (Agostinone-Wilson, 9).  Because of this ‘otherness’ to the social norm, LGBTTQ* individuals have limited access to power.  Marxists would contend that this stems from social conditions, like inequality and oppression, created by living in a capitalist society.

Julianna

Agostinone-Wilson, F. (2010). Marxism and education beyond identity: Sexuality and

            schooling (1^st Ed.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan

Floyd, K. (2009). The reification of desire: Towards a queer Marxism (1^st Ed.). 

            Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press

Mullaly, R. (2007). The new structural social work (3rd Ed.). Don Mills, ON: Oxford

 University Press.