Notes: Pamela VanHaitsma, “Gossip as Rhetorical Methodology for Queer and Feminist Historiography”

Pamela VanHaitsma. (2016). Gossip as rhetorical methodology for queer and feminist historiography. Rhetoric Review. 35(2), 135-147.

Summary:

VanHaitsma, drawing on her previously published work, outlines the queer, feminist rhetorical possibilities of gossip as a methodology for rhetorical historiography. She argues that gossip-as-methodology offers the ability for methodological speculation, access to gossip’s illicit knowing-and-meaning-making, and an insistence on openness with special regard for who is allowed to speak for whom.

Keywords: feminist rhetorics, queer rhetorics, rhetoric, writing studies, methodology, research methods, archives, historiography

Sources:

Kirsch, Gesa E., and Jacqueline Jones Royster. “Feminist Rhetorical Practices: In Search of Excellence.” College Composition and Communication 61.4 (2010): 640–72.

Friedman, Andrea. “The Smearing of Joe McCarthy: The Lavender Scare, Gossip, and Cold War Politics.” American Quarterly 57.4 (2005): 1105–29.

Quotations:

“[G]ossip is a speculative methodology indispensible to feminist and queer ways of relating to the past, but instead of seeking to fix history or queerness, gossip ideally remains open to indefinite suggestion” (136).

“Following feminist scholars, gossip may thus be understood, on the one hand, as a positive rhetorical methodology: as another form of speculation or imagination that is practiced in ways consistent with traditional standards for scholarly rigor, reason and order, and truth claims” (138).

“Working with this understanding of gossip as illicit evidence, scholars of queer rhetoric may treat speculation about the past, much like more traditional archival materials, as grounds on which to develop narratives about non-normative sexual, romantic, and/or erotic practices—while simultaneously underscoring the impossibilities and uncertainties inherent in attempts to know the “truth” of sexuality, identity, and history” (139).

 

Notes: Jennifer Clary-Lemon, “Museums as Material: Experiential Landscapes and the Canadian Museum for Human Rights”

Clary-Lemon, Jennifer. (2015). Museums as material: Experiential landscapes and the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. Enculturation, 20.

Summary:

Clary-Lemon develops a network material approach to working with museums as distributed and choric.

Keywords: Archives, Methodology, Materiality, Network, Research Methods

Quotations:

“I map a material-rhetorical approach to analyzing contemporary museum sites, drawing on Vicki Tolar Burton’s notion of rhetorical accretion (547) and the heuristic work of Carole Blair with memorial sites. By bringing the work of these scholars together, I demonstrate that “reading” museum sites with material methodology in mind results in tactics for invention which emphasize networks over discrete discursive elements” (para. 1).

“I argue for an approach to material sites that engages each layer as connected to the next in a network of accretions which can help researchers form an attendant whole from seemingly disparate markers of diffuse texts” (para. 6).

“It is my hope, then, that considering museum interiors and landscapes as both housing and being different “core texts” that can be seen through a lens of material rhetoric can encourage complex understandings of the layers that are formed from objects, spaces, architecture, and affect from a range of different subject positions, and disturb the bifurcation of inside/outside that emerges from considering museums as object repositories—instead opening these landscapes to see inside and outside as connected in a network of place” (para. 6).

“Layers of durability connect with reproduction, with human relationships. Affect and force interconnect with layers of preservation and enabling functions of the museum-as-text on other texts. A material-rhetorical networked approach to invention in museum sites which layers and connects gathered moments, materials, places, emotions, texts, and technologies offers more than heuristical knowledge; instead, it opens up possibilities for analysis that ‘depend greatly on the principle of response’ within diffuse distributed textual and spatial frames (Swarts 122)” (para. 28).

“Too, this analysis reveals a partial look at the ways in which museum texts work within material contexts as they come into being; that is to say, to read other texts, relationships, and artifacts as arising out of and in conjunction with the materiality of museums disrupts, to some degree, the notion of originary orderliness that museums often unintentionally curate. In moving the topos—’place as empty container’—to the chōra—place as a seat of “dream reasoning” (Walter 68)—examining networked accretions of built sites offers another attempt at Ulmer’s (Heuretics) notion of chorography, and gives scholars a rich place to invent, explore, find, and qualify wholes out of seemingly disparate parts” (para. 29).

Carolyn Steedman, “Something She Called a Fever: Michelet, Derrida, and Dust”

Steedman, Carolyn. “Something She Called a Fever: Michelet, Derrida, and Dust.” The American Historical Review, vol. 106, American Historical Association, United States, 2001..doi:10.2307/2692943.

6912766335_4a57466e64_o

Summary:

Steedman responds to Derrida’s Archive Fever and explores the purposeful consideration and, indeed, fever to archival work, the doubled Everythingness and Nothingness that it considers.

Keywords: Archives, Methodology, Method, History

Quotations:

“Derrida broods on revisionist histories that have been written out of these archives of evil (a shadow of a suggestion here, then, that it is not archives he has in his sights so much as what gets written out of archives: formal, academie history); but he broods as well on never giving up on the hope of getting proof of the past, even though documentary evidence may be locked away and suppressed” (1162).

“But as English-language readers, we are forced to have the fever, and, if we are historians, forced to exasperated expostulation that archives are nothing like this at all” (1163).

“In a parody (but not quite a parody) of empirical doggedness, we might ding to the coattails of one figure of Derrida’s, one image, one literal meaning of “fever” (which wasn’t even a word that was there to start with), and find not only a different kind of sickness but also the magistrate who is actually present in his text, though wrongly named” (1164).

“It remains completely uncertain—it must remain uncertain, that is its point—who or what rises up in this moment. It cannot be determined whether it is the manuscripts or the dead or both who come to life, and take shape and form” (1171).

“The archive that isn’t there in “Archive Fever” is not and never has been the repository of official documents alone. And nothing is there from the beginning. Archives hold no origins, and origins are not what historians search for in them. Rather, they hold everything in medias res, the account caught halfway through, most of it missing, with no end ever in sight. Nothing starts in the Archive, nothing, ever at all, although things certainly end up there” (1175).

“There is everything, or Everything, the great undifferentiated past, all of it, which is not history, but just stuff.” The smallest fragment of its representation (nearly always in some kind of written language) ends up in various kinds of archives and record offices (and also in the vastly expanded data banks that Derrida refers to in “Archive Fever”). From that, you make history, which is never what was there, once upon a time. (There was only stuff, fragments, dust.)” (1176).

“Contemplating Everything, the historian must start somewhere, but starting is a different thing from originating, or even from beginning. And while there is closure in historical writing, and historians do bring their arguments and books to a conclusion, there is no End—cannot be an End, for we are still in it, the great, slow-moving Everything” (1177).

“There is a double nothingness in the writing of history and in the analysis of it: it is about something that never did happen in the way it comes to be represented (the happening exists in the telling or the text), and it is made out of materials that are not there, in an archive or anywhere else” (1179).

Notes: Jacqueline Rhodes & Jonathan Alexander, “Genealogies.” In Techne: Queer Meditations on Writing the Self

Rhodes, Jacqueline, and Jonathan Alexander. “Genealogies.” In Techne: Queer Meditations on Writing the Self. Logan, UT: Computers and Composition Digital Press/Utah State University Press, 2015. Web.

tumblr_nqgadvynU71tdxuggo1_500

Summary:

Alexander traces a queer-self-genealogy, exploring his own relationships with his family (particularly his uncle) to discuss how his queerness became thinkable to him.

Keywords: Queer, Queer Theory, Queer Rhetorics, Genealogy, Archive, Expirimental Writing, Multimodality, Composition, Writing Studies

Sources:

Eribon, Didier. Returning to Reims. Trans. Michael Lucey. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e), and Cambridge, MA: MIT P, 2013.

Love, Heather. Feeling Backward: Loss and the Politics of Queer History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2007.

Quotations:

“It was such a thoughtful recognition of my past relationship with my uncle. Another part of me, though, felt that this handing off to me of his deathbook and photos was a simultaneous acknowledgment and disavowal of our shared queerness. The identity was recognized, but the gift also seemed to say, “This is your thing. It really belongs to you, not us.” Perhaps the fact that only one—only one—of my cousins asked me about Mack, my husband and partner of seventeen years, prompted me to feel that my queerness, along with Glen’s, was being both evoked and dismissed at the same time” (gene1).

“For while I may have strayed from both my immediate and extended families in many ways, the gifting of Glen’s memorabilia to me makes visible, if fleetingly, alternative genealogies, different trajectories of affiliation, divergent paths of relational contact and influence—paths that even my family, so clearly ill at ease with queerness, could acknowledge” (gene2).

“A history might record events, but a genealogy asks that we consider why those events, recorded in that order, as opposed to other events, other orders” (gene6a).

“[S]uch leaving is never a complete rejection of our origins, the fixed genealogies that we might want to leave behind. We might try to suppress them, but they can never be fully forgotten” (gene6e).

“I would always live in tension with the contradictions of this inheritance: my queerness taking me out of my family, but my periodic return to blood relations to enjoy their company; my delight in classical music and literature and my appreciation of rough-trade tough boys; my choice to live and work in urban areas and my love of down-home, deep-fried, slow-cooked country food. I’ve called these contradictions. But they are only so in this timeline, not out of historical necessity. If anything, I’m living these contradictions. And my return “home,” while also carrying my “home” with me, is the delicious, vexed, incommensurable meeting of contradictions: the handing to me of photographs that might want to disavow a queer genealogy but nonetheless cannot help but acknowledge it” (gene6e).

“For me, creative and experimental writing has been a way to trace the genealogical contours that, as Foucault points out, do not constitute the “gradual curve” of an evolution but rather the “different scenes” and “instances” through which we can not only critique the dominant view but also open up possibilities for orienting ourselves in other directions” (gene7).

“The contradictions are valuable. They speak to deliberateness, to chosen relations, not just to historical ones. They speak to craft in designing a life and loves” (gene7g).

“To be clear, though, my approach here is not to find a home for that queerness as much as it is a recognition that queerness is always already in the making” (gene8).

Questions, Reflection, Response:

unnamed

I think about the orienting force of the fixed genealogies I carry quite a bit. These genealogies that direct me personally and professionally, they work in/through/with the identities I am situated in bringing me out of different “homes” and back to them. There is a between-ness and an already-ness to them.

I am fortunate to have queer mentors in my academic life who will call attention to the contours and contradictions we inhabit in academic spaces. These mentors as well as others have also helped me be cognizant of the academic genealogy that I am situated in, that I can be aware of how this influences their thinking and my own. I think of disciplinary “home”-ness and how scholars carry that with them even when they wish to move away, even thinking (or especially) about methodologies.

I think about the way that we construct archives and genealogies. The ephemera, the excesses, the ordering. An intentional design.

I think of the queer senses of family I’ve encountered. The mentors I’ve known and the intentional tending to those relationships that became familial: Will, Matt, John, Rich, to name a few. I think of the way that those became something more than associative relationships and the deliberate, cultivated meaning ascribed to them in familial terms. The way I used to call John my “gay dad.”

I think about my departures from a “blood” family. I remember growing up in Delaware, I remember our move to North Carolina when I was 12. I remember being so afraid. My impressions of the South from my previous education had been reducible to a statement: “conservative racists.” I was already very much aware of my queerness. I swore I’d move northward as soon as I was able. Sure enough, I ended up in grad school in Michigan (Yay?). But I remember growing up with the narratives that Alexander touched on of young queers running to cities for security, better lives, safer spaces, etc. These impact me. Yet, inasmuch as I have departed from this “home” I can still feel those periodic returns and those contradictions in which my various spaces and identities I inhabit are at once acknowledged and disavowed.

Tending to Archives and a Summer Reading List

Tending to Archives:

3326092093_3b9c264e84_o.jpg

The question of curating, (at)tending to, and constructing an archive also asks how knowledge is (co)created, valued, and arranged. Popova (2015) reminds that “[w]e tend to treat our knowledge as personal property to be protected and defended. It is an ornament that allows us to rise in the pecking order.” This makes knowledge political and material in how an archive is produced. Clary-Lemon (2014) offers materialist archival processes; to define material, she writes, “By material, I mean the connection to the “real” (Blair 16), or as Barbara Dickson has it, “the signification of material things and corporeal entities” like bodies, texts, substance, and site” (382). By discussing materiality in terms of archival methods, she argues, one can examine how meaning is accrued through the curation of objects. One of the key critiques of how archival research has been talked about is the relationship to meaning and objects when she writes, “The separation of objects from ideas by the notion that ‘objects mediate knowledge’ has a long history in Western thought, and as researchers we often do not disrupt this assumption, looking instead to explicitly mine that mediation in our archival glimpses” (384).

In tending to this repository, I’ve continually grappled with how we could invent new ways of creating, being, and becoming in the design and continuation of this webspace. After all, Derrida (1998) writes that the “structure of the archiving archive also determines the structure of the archivable content even in its very coming into existence and in its relationship to the future. The archivization produces as much as it records the event” (17). Derrida writes later that the archive “produces more archive, and that is why the archive is never closed. It opens out of the future” (68). My intent is to make this an archive of play; one that encounters pasts and imagines futures. A teleological golden snitch that opens at the close, an inhabiting of khôra. A blogged archive that gives place a prior and conjecture (Derrida, 1995). A willful archive in which the parts may not producing the whole, where parts can be followed, traced, invent new trajectories, and create excesses of archival experiences (Ahmed, 2014).

Having wrapped up my first year of grad school at Eastern Michigan, this blog has become a sustained habit for me—one that serves as a repository for notes, making public my explorations and reflections, as well as one that sustains my inquiry. It makes followable and returnable, it makes interactive and exploratory, it produces and mediates texts and contexts for writing, reading, thinking, and knowing. I hope to continue this habit critically and conscientiously, becoming aware of the texts that are included and the futures it imagines as well as those that are not included. I hope this is a repository that invents, sustains, “and makes an attempt not to treat his knowledge as a treasure, or even a possession, or even a self-esteem enhancement device —” (Popova, 2015).

References:

Ahmed, Sara (2014). Willful Subjects. Durham: Duke University Press.

Clery-Lemon, Jennifer (2014). “Archival Research Processes: A Case for Material Methods,” Rhetoric Review 33.4, 381-402.

Derrida, Jacques (1998). Archive Fever. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Derrida, Jacques (1995). On the Name. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Popova, Maria (2015). “Umberto Eco’s Antilibrary: Why Unread Books are More Valuable to Our Lives than Read Ones.” BrainPickings.

Reading List:

Journal Articles:

Alexander, Jonathan, and William P. Banks. “Sexualities, Technologies, and the Teaching of Writing: A Critical Overview.” Sexualities, Technologies, and the Teaching of Writing. Spec. issue of Computers and Composition 21.3 (2004): 273-293.

Alexander, Jonathan, Janell Haynes, and Jacqueline Rhodes, eds. Public/Sex: Connecting Sexuality and Service Learning. Spec. issue of Reflections: A Journal of Public Rhetoric, Civic Writing, and Service-Learning 9.2 (2010).

Alexander, Jonathan, and Jacqueline Rhodes. “Queer: An Impossible Subject for Composition.” JAC 31.1–2 (2011): 177–206.

Banks, William P. “The Values of Queer Jacketing: What Happens When Student Writers Go Gay?” MEAT Journal 1.2 (Winter 2005–06).

Banks, William P. “Written Through the Body: Disruptions and ‘Personal’ Writing.”The Personal in Academic Writing. Spec. issue of College English 66.1 (2003): 21-40.

Banks, William P., and Jonathan Alexander. “Queer Eye for the Comp Program: Toward a Queer Critique of WPA Work.” The Writing Program Interrupted: Making Space for Critical Discourse. Eds. Donna Strickland and Jeanne Gunner. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 2009. 86-98.

Barradell, S. (2013). The identification of threshold concepts: a review of theoretical complexities and methodological challenges. Higher Education, 65(2): 265-276.

Bennett, Jeffrey. “‘Born This Way’: Queer Vernacular and the Politics of Origins.”Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 11.3 (2014): 211-230.

Bianco, Jamie. “Composing and Compositing: Integrated Digital Writing and Academic Pedagogy” Fibreculture 10 (2007).

Carr, Allison. “In Support of Failure.” Composition Forum 27 (2013).

Curtis, M. & Herrington, A. “Writing Development in the College Years: By Whose Definition?” CCC 55 (2003): 69-90.

Dean, Tim. “Bodies that Mutter: Rhetoric and Sexuality.” Pre/Text: A Journal of Rhetorical Theory 15.1-2 (1994): 80-117.

Fox, Catherine. “Reprosexuality, Queer Desire, and Critical Pedagogy: A Response to Hyoejin Yoon.” JAC 26.1-2 (2006): 244-53.

Fox, Catherine Olive-Marie. “Toward a Queerly Classed Analysis of Shame: Attunement to Bodies in English Studies.” College English 76.4 (2014): 337-56.

Goltz, Dustin Bradley. “It Gets Better: Queer Futures, Critical Frustrations, and Radical Potentials.” Critical Studies in Media Communication 30.2 (2013): 135-151.

Gray, Mary L. “‘Queer Nation is Dead/Long Live Queer Nation’: The Politics and Poetics of Social Movement and Media Representation.” Critical Studies in Media Communication 26.3 (2009): 212-236.

Hall, Donald E. “Cluelessness and the Queer Classroom.” Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture 7.2 (2007): 182-91.

Highberg, Nels P. “‘Because We Were Just Too Scared’: Rhetorical Constructions of Patient Zero.” Medical Humanities Review 18.1-2 (2004): 9-26. Print.

Houle, Brian R., Alex P. Kimball, and Heidi A. McKee. “‘Boy? You decide; Girl? You Decide’: Multimodal Web Composition and a Mythography of Identity.” Computers and Composition Online (Fall 2004).

Jordan, Jay. “Rereading the Multicultural Reader: Cross-Cultural Composition Readers and the Reconstruction of Cultural Identities.” College English 68.2 (November 2005).

Kopelson, Karen. “Queering the Writing Program: Why Now? How? And Other Contentious Questions.” Writing Program Administration 37.1 (2013): 199-213.

Landau, Jamie. “Reproducing and Transgressing Masculinity: A Rhetorical Analysis of Women Interacting with Digital Photographs of Thomas Beatie.” Women’s Studies in Communication 35.2 (2012): 178-203.

Libretti, Tim. “Sexual Outlaws and Class Struggle: Rethinking History and Class Consciousness from a Queer Perspective.” College English 67.2 (2004): 154-171.

Matsuda, Paul Kei. “Embracing Linguistic Diversity in the Intellectual Work of WPAs.” WPA 31.1-2 (2009): 168-71.

Mitchell, Danielle. “I Thought Composition Was about Commas and Quotes, Not Queers: Diversity and Campus Change at a Rural Two-Year College.” Composition Studies 36.2 (2008): 23-50.

Monson, Connie and Jacqueline Rhodes. “Risking Queer: Pedagogy, Performativity, and Desire in the Writing Classroom.” JAC 24.1 (2004): 79-92.

Morrison, Margaret. “Laughing with Queers in My Eyes: Proposing ‘Queer Rhetoric(s)’ and Introducing a Queer Issue.” Queer Rhetoric. Spec. issue of Pre/Text: A Journal of Rhetorical Theory 13.3-4 (1992): 11-36.

O’Donnell, R. (2010). A critique of the threshold concept hypothesis and its application to opportunity cost in economics.(Working Paper No. 164). http://www.finance.uts.edu.au/research/wpapers/wp164.html

Ramsby, Fiona Harris. “The Drama as Rhetorical Critique: Language, Bodies, and Power in Angels in America.” Rhetoric Review 33.4 (2014): 403-420.

Rand, Erin J. “Queer Critical Rhetoric Bites Back.” Spec. issue of Western Journal of Communication 77.5 (2013): 533-7.

Rawson, K. J. “Transgender Worldmaking in Cyberspace: Historical Activism on the Internet.” QED: A Journal in GLBTQ Worldmaking 1.2 (2014): 38-60.

Rawson, K. J. “Rhetorical History 2.0: Toward a Digital Transgender Archive.”Enculturation 16 (2013).

Rawson, K. J. “Accessing Transgender // Desiring Queer(er?) Archival Logics.”Archivaria68 (2009): 123-140.

Selfe, Cynthia L. “The Movement of Air, the Breath of Meaning: Aurality and Multimodal Composing.” CCC 60.4 (2009): 616-63.

Sewell, John Ike. “‘Becoming Rather Than Being’: Queer’s Double-Edged Discourse as Deconstructive Practice.” Journal of Communication Inquiry 38.4 (2014): 291-307.

Shipka, Jody. “A Multimodal Task-based Framework for Composing.” CCC 57.2 (2005): 277-306.

Smith, J. “Students’ goals, Gatekeeping, and Some Questions of Ethics.” CCC 48 (1997):299-320.

Smith, Lauren. “Staging the Self: Queer Theory in the Composition Classroom.” In Calvin Thomas (ed.) Straight with a Twist: Queer Theory and the Subject of Heterosexuality. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2000. 68-85.

Spade, Dean, and Craig Wilse. “Sex, Gender, and War in an Age of Multicultural Imperialism.” QED: A Journal in GLBTQ Wordmaking 1.1 (2014): 5-29.

Wallace, David L., and Jonathan Alexander. “Queer Rhetorical Agency: Questioning Narratives of Heteronormativity.” JAC 29.4 (2009): 793-819.

West, Isaac. “Queer Generosities.” Spec. issue of Western Journal of Communication 77.5 (2013): 538-41.

West, Isaac, Michaela Frischherz, Allison Panther, and Richard Brophy. “Queer Worldmaking in the ‘It Gets Better’ Campaign.” QED: A Journal in GLBTQ Worldmaking. 0.1 (2013): 49-86.

Wight, Jules. “Saving Private Manning? On Erasure and the Queer in I Am Bradley Manning Campaign.” QED: A Journal in GLBTQ Worldmaking 1.1 (2014): 118-129.

Young, Anna M., Andria Battaglia, and Dana L. Cloud. “(UN)Disciplining the Scholar Activist: Policing the Boundaries of Political Engagement.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 96.4 (2010): 427-35.

Book Chapters and Edited Collections:

Alexander, Jonathan, and Elizabeth Losh. “‘A YouTube of One’s Own?’: ‘Coming Out’ Videos as Rhetorical Action.” LGBT Identity and New Online Media. Eds. Christopher Pullen and Margaret Cooper. New York: Routledge, 2010. 37-50.

Andrews, John. (2001). Meaning, knowledge, and power in the map philosophy of JB Harley. In Paul Laxton (Ed.), The new nature of maps: Essays in the history of cartography (pp. 1–32). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hesse, Doug. 2012. “Who Speaks for Writing? Expertise, Ownership, and Stewardship.” In Who Speaks for Writing: Stewardship for Writing Studies in the 21st Century, edited by Jennifer Rish and Ethna D. Lay, 9-22. New York: Peter Lang.

Morris, Charles E., III, and K. J. Rawson. “Queer Archives/Archival Queers.”Theorizing Histories of Rhetoric. Ed. Michelle Ballif. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 2013. 74-89.

Neary, Mike and Joss Winn. “Student as Producer: Reinventing the Student Experience in Higher Education.” The Future of Higher Education: Policy, Pedagogy and the Student Experience. London: Continuum, 2009.

Ouellette, Marc. “Come Out Playing: Computer Games and the Discursive Practices of Gender, Sex, and Sexuality.” Computer Games and Technical Communication: Critical Methods and Applications at the Intersection. Eds. Jennifer deWinter and Ryan M. Moeller. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2014. 35-51. Print.

Prior, Paul, & Shipka, Jody. “Chronotopic lamination: Tracing the contours of literate activity.” In Charles Bazerman, & David Russell (Eds.), Writing selves/Writing societies: Research from activity perspectives. Fort Collins, CO: WAC Clearinghouse and Mind, Culture, and Activity, 2003.

Rhodes, Jacqueline, and Jonathan Alexander. “Experience, Embodiment, Excess: Multimedia [E]visceration and Installation Rhetoric.” The New Work of Composing. Eds. Deborah Journet, Cheryl Ball, and Ryan Trauman. Logan, UT: Computers and Composition Digital P / Utah State UP. 2012. Web.http://ccdigitalpress.org/nwc/chapters/rhodes-alexander/home.html

Books:

Banks, Adam J. Race, Rhetoric, and Technology: Searching for Higher Ground. Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum, 2006.

Bell, David and Jon Binnie. The Sexual Citizen: Queer Politics and Beyond. Cambridge, UK: Polity, 2000.

Goncalves, Zan Meyer. Sexuality and the Politics of Ethos in the Writing Classroom. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 2005.

Gould, Stephen J. The Mismeasure of Man. New York: E.W. Norton, 1981.

Hanson, F. Allan. Testing Testing: Social Consequences of the Examined Life. Berkley: University of California Press, 1993.

Haggerty, G. C. & Zimmerman, B. Profession of Desire: Lesbian and Gay Studies in Literature. NY: MLA (1995).

Moretti, Franco. Graphs, Maps, Trees: Abstract Models for a Literary History. London: Verso, 2005. Print.

Plummer, Ken. Intimate Citizenship: Private Decisions for Public Dialogues. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003.

Prosser, Jay. Second Skins: Body Narratives of Transsexuality. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998.

Rubin, Henry. Self-Made Men: Identity and Embodiment among Transsexual Men.Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press, 2003.

Sloop, John M. Disciplining Gender: Rhetorics of Sex Identity in Contemporary US Culture. Amherst: U of Massachusetts P, 2004. Print.

Spurlin W. (Ed.) Lesbian and Gay Studies and the Teaching of English. Urbana, IL: NCTE, 2000.

Turner, William B. A Genealogy of Queer Theory. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2000.

Wallace, David L. Compelled to Write: Alternative Rhetoric in Theory and Practice. Logan: Utah State UP, 2011. Print.

Yancey, Kathleen Blake, & Huot, Brian (Eds.). Assessing writing across the curriculum: Diverse approaches and practices. Greenwich, CT: Ablex, 1997.

Yep, Gust A., Karen E. Lovaas, and John P. Elia, eds. Queer Theory and Communication: From Disciplining Queers to Queering the Discipline(s). Binghamton, NY: Haworth, 2003.