Book Discussion: Queering Fat Embodiment edited by Cat Pause et al

Attendees: Timmy, Asy, Raj, Nicole, Olivia, Zoe, Mya, Daniel, Jess, Alex, Aaron, Vic, Fiona

We had super delicious homemade deep-fried Indian food and curry puffs, packed with aromatic spices (Thanks Raj!), as we discussed about the book. The book seems to present (mostly) cis-women’s perspectives on queer fat studies, very different from Peter Hennen’s Faeries, Bears, and Leathermen, which we did last year. We spoke about the cultural discourses around fat studies such as the terminology (fat VS obesity) but perhaps the authors could deal with topics of denial of ill health and obesity. We also discussed the paradox of fat pride yet wanting to lose weight: there is no win for fat people. If you lose weight, you hate your fat self but if you remain the same weight, you don’t love yourself.

This complication about fat manifests in many other ways such as the “Forgotten Women” chapter in which the author points out the contradiction that fat women are sexually voracious but also seen as sexually undesirable.

Perhaps it is also because that fat studies is so complicated that different authors assume different things about the gender of fat without substantiating their assumptions. Some claim that fat is feminine, and some say it is masculine. Furthermore, there is an easy assumption that because fat bodies do not belong in a heteronormative narrative, fat is seen as queer. Surely fat and queer overlap in some ways but some rigorous scholarship is required here, instead of blanketing them together by the editors. The third assumption that went unchallenged in the book is that fat is subversive; sure, maybe it is but nobody ever says, “I want to be subversive, so I got fat.” Some editorial explanation may be required here to deal with the three assumptions.

Besides some editorial explanations, we were also disappointed by the article on fat and internet. There is much potential to discuss the “disappearance” of a fat body in cyberspace yet much of the article pontificates on how the internet can help with the movement.

We talked a lot about the portrayal of fat people in media, especially in comedy, relating it to Jack Black, Seth Rogen, Queen Latifa, Modern Family (specifically Cam and Jay), Amy Schumer, Margaret Cho, Melissa McCarthy, Rebel Wilson, Kevin James, and Louis C.K. While comedy embraces fat people, comedians are merely falling into stereotypes and not challenging any social structures. Perhaps other than This is Us, there are few body-positive depictions of fat people. Timmy brought up an excellent counter-example to the American shows, Under One Roof, a local sitcom where there are many fat people in the show but they are depicted as ordinary people who are not ashamed by their bodies.

Talking about performing fat, we wondered if it is so easy to transpose Butler’s theory of performativity onto fat studies. For one thing, while gender is a performance that creates one’s identity, a fat person cannot take off their fat like pants or skirts. A man can pass as a woman, and a woman can pass as a man, but a fat person can never pass as a thin person (unless they are in cyberspace, and that’s why we were disappointed about the article on internet and fat).

We also talked about the intersections of fat with race, with social class, with Asian culture (“You look healthy,” “You look prosperous,” and also fat can be considered beautiful in some Asian cultures), with consumerism, and with disabilities.

But perhaps most importantly, we celebrated Vicky’s birthday. Happy birthday!

By the way, if you’re counting, we noticed that, for the first time, there is finally some gender equality in the book club! 6 men, 6 women, and 1 genderqueer. Yay!

Advertisements

Movie Discussion: The Chinese Botanist’s Daughters (2006)

Attendees: Raj, Timmy, Asy, Fiona, Mya, Vicky, Reynard, Shawn, Aaron, Henry, Olivia.

We discussed The Chinese Botantist’s Daughters, directed and written by Dai Sijie, a French-Chinese, who writes in French, although he is a Chinese national. The themes that we talked about: nature/location, religion, music/soundtrack, rebellion, politics, race, and family.

In particular, we looked closely at the drug scene in the steamroom where hallucinogens are used to induce buried memories (of the Western mother), prompting Liming to cut her hair short and don a man’s uniform; why are drugs associated with homosexuality? And why does Liming fall into a heteronormative narrative of being a “man”?

We also talked about the phallic symbols in the movie and how male sexual desire needed to be extirpated in order for lesbian love to rise.

We also reached a conclusion that the rebellious actions are sometimes pointless and, coupled with the paradisal locale, the Western corruption into a carefully cultivated isle can be read allergically as serpent destroying Eden (Liming as the serpent, An as Eve, her brother as Adam, and the father who created the isle as God) or politically as Pro-China. The political aspects, we concluded, are so patent in the movie that we didn’t believe Dai Sijie when he claimed that his movies aren’t political.

Furthermore, in the last scene, which moved many of us, an educator and religious leaders support the lesbian couple; we read this as a form of resistance against the state laws. We thought the “Bury the Gays” theme deserves 10000 eye-roll, but, like all tragedies, their deaths make the movie more poignant.

 

 

Book Discussion: Candy Everybody Wants by Josh Kilmer-Purcell

Attendance: Henry, Daniel, Alexis, Timmy, Mya, Zoe, Vicky, Pierre, Raj, Aaron.

“Hopeful and optimistic.” — Timmy.

“It’s in the details!” — Vicky.

“But it’s the mid-west! It’s the mid-west!” — Pierre.

“Billy is the pet dog, right? Woof woof!” — Pierre.

“The space between the lines is huge… which makes reading easy.” — Alexius.

“Praise the author, not the characters!” — Zoe.

“We went in knowing this book is trashy.” — [I forgot whom]

“The book feels very noisy.” — Alexius.

We also discussed themes such as parenting, family, and diversity; and characters including Toni, Tara, Jayson with a Y, Helene, and Davin.

Season’s Greetings with the Club

It’s the second annual QBMC Christmas party! The club celebrated by having everyone who attended to recommend their favourite LGBTQIA+ literature or entertainment:

Book Discussion: Sappho’s Fables by Elora Bishop and Jennifer Diemer

Sappho’s Fables is a collection of three revisionist fairy tales (Snow White, Rapunzel, and Hansel and Greta) given a lesbian twist. Timmy, Shawn, Reynard, and Aaron thought that although it’s not written in a literary form, it is enjoyable. The authors have changed much details from the fairy tales, making it unexpected.

We talked about the sexualisation of the fairy tales and normalisation of sex, removing sex as taboo, providing a safe space in the fairy tales.

Most characters are complex without a clearcut morality. Shawn particularly disliked Greta who is a brat and couldn’t defend herself.

Like most lesbian novels, we wondered why men are portrayed as useless or evil. Perhaps, Shawn suggested, it is lesbians’ way to reclaim power. Seen in this light, the ragers with their physical prowess could be a symbol of hypermasculinity, threatening civilisation.

Interestingly, the stories could be read as the protagonists recovering from various medical conditions: schizophrenia a la Fight Club in Snow White; bipolarity and hallucinations in Rapunzel; paranoia, hysteria and eating disorder in Greta.

Book Discussion: A Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara

The book has been nominated for several important awards, but we–Chiams, Aaron, Alexis, and Juan–wondered why. It was an easy and gripping read, but there are many flaws. The writing is problematic such as the narratives of Harold and the incoherence of the narrative. It’s also not realistic in many parts, such as Jude’s incessant misfortune; the implausibility of diversity; and Willem suddenly turning “gay.”

 

We also talked about Yanagihara ignoring chronology (40 years in the narrative but no reference to the times); about the novel being “torture porn,” taking pleasure in pain; about the art inspiration behind the novel (images above); the friendship between the 4 men; the lack of woman characters; the architecture and food; and the likely-to-be-unconscious homophobia in the book (the HIV inspiration; the death of Willem; and homosexual pedophilia.)

All in all, this is a fun book to read but unfortunately, it is not good.

 

Book Discussion: Peter Hennen’s Faeries, Bears, and Leathermen: Men in Community Queering the Masculine

Present: Chong, Chua, Wenjun, Kelvin, Desmond, Scott, Yihao, Raj, Timmy, Chams, Edwina, Ryan, Thomas, Gary, Aaron.

A collaboration between the Bear Project and Queer book club.

We discussed the premises the thesis is based on, mainly, leathermen, faeries, and bears embody reactions to (a) the hegemonic masculinity, and (b) the historical burden of feminisation of gay people. We found that the author thinks in dichotomies, masculinity VS femininity, and not in degrees, which is frustrating and may undermine Hennon’s argument.

At a point, we tested Hennon’s hypothesis against Singapore’s bear community. Gary and Thomas shared with us their valuable insights.

We also talked about bears in relation to race, femininity, inclusivity, performativity, Westernisation, class, HIV. We also found the ursine nuzzling of a group of bears puzzling. In the end, we discussed the normalization and homonationalism of bears.