Paper short abstract:

I suggest that queer studies keep its "intuitively oppositional and antinormative" character yet move beyond sexuality and the body. I argue for queer theory that addresses technology as an actor, diverts its focus from the body and the human, onto multispecies, technoassemblages on a large scale.

Paper long abstract:

Wiegman & Wilson (2015) have argued that queer theory need to modify this antiness and consider the power of norms as well as their heterogenous characteristic, their dynamics in order to debunk the notion that norms are fixed, immotile categories for interpretation. The question is, does this take away the initial impact of queer theory to start from a point of complete difference and alternative ways of understanding and formulating worlds? I suggest instead that queer studies that keeps its very core the argumentation and "intuitively oppositional and antinormative" character yet moves beyond sexuality and the body (cf. Weigman & Wilson 2015). What implications does this have for queer sts? Is queer sts too anthropocene? Why the focus on the human, the body and its sexuality to the exclusion of the nonhuman. How can we use queer theory to think through things other than bodies and sexuality. Do such ways of thinking through things already exist within queer studies? In the spirit of an antianthropocene queer theory, I argue for queer theory that addresses technology as an actor in more explicit ways, diverts its focus from the body and the human, onto multispecies, technoassemblages on a large scale.