An old Chinese proverb says: “A family in harmony will prosper in everything.” » In the 21st century, harmony looks different in every home, especially in queer homes, which are not always conducive to harmony in heteronormative family structures. In her essay “With Friends Like These: The Liberalization of Queer Family Politics,” Angelia Ruth Wilson argues that in non-heterosexual relationships, “individual choice becomes the indispensable conduit to intimacy: “Individual Autonomy is about identity and space, but it is also about intimate involvement. Through this you can become free” (58). This statement encapsulates Wilson's assertion that queer relationships liberate families from the heterosexist normativity that typically shapes family dynamics, since queer parents have the freedom to choose how they structure their families and raise their children. This individual choice appears in Moving Forward Sideways Like a Crab by Shani Mootoo, when India chooses to let Sydney care for her son, as well as in The Argonauts by Maggie Nelson, when Nelson chooses to be the son's primary caretaker Harry's and his biological: both Some of these choices reject traditional family structures and therefore challenge heteronormativity, but they do so in very different ways. Examining these two texts through the lens of Wilson's "With Friends like These: The Liberalization of Queer Family Policy" and Hannah Dyer's "Queer Futurity and Children Innocence: Beyond the Bless of Development" reveals an inherent dissatisfaction with the regard to the heteronormative family structure as it appears. as well as a desire for stability: the choices to conceive, give birth, and raise a child amid this non-heterosexual tension in these texts expose the different ways in which these couples challenge, successfully or unsuccessfully, the dynamic heteronormative family. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"? Get the original essay Although India in Moving Forward Sideways Like a Crab and Nelson in The Argonauts choose to have a biological child, neither Neither do it in a traditional or heterosexual way: these two women choose to conceive via a sperm donor. In his essay, Wilson states: “The result of the reliance on donor insemination or self-insemination has resulted in almost infinite permutations of familial and parental relationships, and structures that are experienced by many non-heterosexuals. » These “parents of choice” have presented society with a “perceived threat to the conventional order of things that continues to restrict possibilities, [and] prompt a redefinition of necessary parenting practice (62). This statement suggests that although procreation is traditionally a heterosexual act, the ability of non-heterosexual couples to conceive their own children challenges the fundamental heteronormativity: conception. Heterosexual sex is usually the beginning of the heteronormative family structure, but non-heterosexual sex and reproduction are distinct from each other. In the introduction to Moving Forward Sideways Like a Crab, Sydney wonders, "in the months before he was born, when India would ask after our lovemaking, 'How did you know how to do that?' Does he need to know that she gripped my shoulders and shook? Or should he know? I wonder if he would believe it” (2). Although Wilson claims that non-heterosexual couples are "oversexed" in literatureand in theory, by including a brief discussion of their sex life before becoming parents, Mootoo confirms Wilson's idea that the "generic restructuring of intimacy" gave rise to "a situation where a... relationship is made for its own sake, for what each can gain from a sustained association… which continues only to the extent that both parties believe that it provides sufficient satisfaction for each individual to remain in himself” (54) .Early relationships between Sydney and India emphasize the importance of choice and pleasure in non-heterosexual relationships, since, as Wilson says, that is the only reason people enter them. While relationships happen for their own sake, conceiving a child requires a much more conscious effort. Briefly describing the beginning of Sydney and India's relationship, Jonathan says: “Shortly after meeting Sid, my mother decided to get pregnant through artificial insemination. After she got pregnant, Sid was by her side and… she was grateful for… the help…” (Mootoo, 203). After describing their sex life, this scene illustrates Wilson's idea that "the decision...to undergo...fertility treatment for a lesbian...is not a singular choice, nor 'an accident.' As a result, these children of lesbian and gay parents are intrinsically chosen” (63). Wilson also mentions that some theorists argue that in addition to being completely separate from sex, non-heterosexual people's reproduction is also completely separate from their relationships, because they can choose to do so without their partner's consent. Although Wilson argues that this certainly cannot be said of all relationships, it is true for India and Sydney: this excerpt about India's choice to become pregnant clarifies for the reader that it is entirely the his (63). In sharing this information, Jonathan specifically says that his mother decided to do it herself: the choice was hers and Sydney was simply there for it. Meanwhile, in The Argonauts, Nelson and Dodge challenge the heteronormative conception by choosing to stabilize their family through marriage. before having children. While the account of conception shared by Jonathan is brief and listless, Nelson's discussion of his experience with artificial insemination. She introduces the story of conception by saying: “Insemination after insemination, wanting our baby to be…. You hold my hand month after month, with devotion, with perseverance. They're probably pulling egg whites, I said, tears welling up. Shh, you whispered” (77). She goes on to describe the different processes and procedures and the final decision she makes to ask a friend for sperm instead of receiving anonymous donations. Most importantly, however, is Harry's involvement in Nelson's choice to father a child: before this point, Nelson repeatedly mentions their discussion about having a child, and although Harry is not physically involved, his emotional support is clear. This refutes Wilson's suggestion that non-heterosexual people's reproduction is also completely separate from their relationships, but confirms that it is completely separate from sex between those two people. Although this seems less to challenge heteronormativity than India's independent decision to become pregnant, Nelson challenges traditional family structures by rejecting familial biological constraints. Wilson makes a point of saying that "the emphasis on the biological perpetuates a heterosexist assumption of the nuclear family rather than recognizing the 'social' parenting roles of mothers andbiological and non-biological fathers” (68-69). Since the child Nelson conceives will have been fathered by a stranger or friend, and he will have no biological connection to his father or half-brother. As with conception, there is an assumed heteronormativity with birth; however, the birth stories in Moving Forward Sideways Like a Crab and The Argonauts challenge this heteronormativity. A key difference between these two texts is that the first is narrated by the child born, while the second is narrated by the mother who gave birth, which contributes to the fact that Jonathan's account is extremely sparsely detailed by compared to that of Nelson. , these two texts reveal different ways of questioning the heteronormative narrative of birth. Jonathan says: “When I was born, the nurse who looked after me wrapped me in a towel and handed me to Sid. Sid took me to my mother, who told me she would wait to hold me until I got cleaned up. I know because India told me” (Mootoo, 204). India's instant disinterest in her son is shocking to the reader, but also a clear rejection of heteronormative family roles. At this point in the novel, India emerges as the distant mother despite the fact that she has just given birth to him. As with the conception account, the discussion of Jonathan's birth is brief and to the point, and it contrasts profoundly with Nelson's lengthy birth report. Nelson describes her birth experience over several pages, focusing so much on herself and the baby that sometimes it seems like no one else is present (and sometimes, no one else is present). He concludes, however, with a warm observation: “When his first son was born, Harry cried. Now he holds Iggy close, laughing sweetly in her little face” (133). Her narrative emphasizes the togetherness between her and Iggy, but this shift in focus toward her husband and son contrasts perfectly with Johnathan's. Despite clearly having an interest in being a motherly figure, Nelson allows her partner to hold the child in her arms immediately after giving birth. Although Sydney has not fallen into a stereotypical parental role for Jonathan, he and Harry challenge heteronormativity by noting their children immediately after their birth. Although pregnancy and birth stories reveal some ways in which non-heterosexual couples challenge heteronormativity, it is ultimately their role as parents that confirms their success or failure as a non-heterosexual family. When considering Mootoo's Moving Forward Sideways Like a Crab, it is important to consider the role of labor in the character's life: India and Sydney hold unconventional jobs as writers and artists, they still had a career when Jonathan was born and when he grew up. up. Because India is Jonathan's biological mother, a heteronormative family structure would require her to be the more active parent in her son's life. However, as a queer parent, India chooses her own family structure and rejects traditional motherhood to remain a working writer and lets Sydney take the wheel in raising her son. However, Jonathan claims that "Sydney had been like a father to [him] from the day [he] was born," but by heteronormative standards, this statement contradicts other anecdotes (Mootoo, 116). When Jonathan says: Sid's willingness to take care of me allowed India to immediately get back into her writing. When his book was published three years later, it was a finalist for three major awards. She took care of one event after another, interviews, toursacross the country and on trips abroad, and Sid and I became a team (Mootoo, 204). Sydney was both butch and female-identifying when Jonathan was growing up. : Although she was not Jonathan's biological mother, she had a more stereotypical maternal position and therefore did not fit the heteronormative role of mother or father. Hannah Dyer, who uses the term queer to both "(a) classify sexuality and (b) refer to deviance from cultural norms", would say that Jonathan's unique and somewhat traumatic upbringing made him “queer”, and he carries this queerness into adulthood (4). . This has a strong impact on his relationship with Sydney and India, who is also a queer person. Dyer says: Adults, for example, sometimes find it difficult to cope with the child's aggression and negative emotional reactions because these reactions often overwhelm childhood narratives of innocence. The homosexual adult must then return to childhood and rework his childhood memory to clarify the appearance of inversion. In this diagram, what is at stake is the adult's memory of childhood, and not the child's present (5). These relationships challenge heteronormativity because all parties involved have been queer, albeit differently. Because Jonathan tells the story as an adult, he can reveal how the end of India and Sydney's relationship impacted him, and his anger towards them both can be explained by their homosexuality. As a product of artificial insemination and a lesbian, Jonathan's chances of having a heteronormative father were slim. However, being abandoned by his queer father figure to be raised by his queer mother is what ultimately makes him a queer individual: his "reactions...beyond stories of childhood innocence" are to the difficulty of being part of a family that challenges others. In her essay, Wilson highlights the fact that many issues are not addressed in feminist theory, stating that "Giddens (a queer theorist) fails to consider the impact of institutionalized heterosexism/homophobia and fluidity of gender and sexual identity. (61). Institutionalized heterosexism and homophobia as well as the fluidity of gender and sexual identity are all present in The Argonauts. One scene that exhibits institutionalized heterosexism is when Nelson describes their experience at the restaurant where the waiter calls all four of them "ladies", even though Harry and his son identify as men. Harry tells his son that they are not all women, but does not explain further: he simply says that girls are very cool. Nelson identifies herself as his stepmother, but his memoir states that she raised him. Therefore, even though Harry can say that no, they are not women, it falls to Nelson to explain at some point to Harry's son that they were the victims of heterosexism: the waiter clearly demonstrates of discrimination against Nelson's family because Harry is a trans individual. Although Nelson has the choice to reject heteronormative family structures as a queer woman, she instead chooses to redefine the maternal role. As a stepmother and then a mother, she is aware not only of the heterosexism she experiences outside the home, but also of how heterosexism affects her choice and ability to parent. Wilson says that "the centrality given to biological parenthood necessarily imposes heterosexist limits on parenting choices by prioritizing the biological mother's 'natural' caring role" (69). The beginning of Nelson's memoir introduces the question of biology which is also important in Moving Forward Sideways Like a Crab: Harry's son, whose identity.