In “The Three Phases of Ellen: From Queer to Gay to Postgay,” Jennifer Reed outlines three approaches for sexual minorities to relate to society: queer, gay, and post-pay. Simply put, the queer approach destabilizes identity, the gay approach solidifies it, and the post-gay approach tries to make it irrelevant. The post-gay approach individualizes struggles and identity, obscuring larger power structures and depoliticizing identity in the process. It is a neoliberal, ahistorical strategy that insidiously re-establishes dominant norms and makes it more difficult for sexual minorities (and marginalized groups in general) to articulate and challenge them. The post-gay, like the post-feminist and post-racial, is essentially anti-progressive. This blog post will focus on the post-gay and how it relates to the concept of “political correctness.” 

Recently, there has been a widespread debate about the value and meaning of “political correctness,” especially in politics and comedy. Opponents of “political correctness,” including Donald Trump and Jerry Seinfeld, accuse its proponents of ‘word policing’ and ‘censorship.’ In doing so, they obscure the fact that we as a society are constantly making judgments about what kinds of language, ideas and people are acceptable or unacceptable. “Political correctness” is a post-gay (and post-feminist, post-racial etc) pejorative that is used to dismiss ideas that challenge the status quo. It both dismisses the concerns of those who are marginalized and compounds their marginalization. Indeed, the myth of “political correctness” is often strategically employed by people in positions of power to accuse marginalized groups of somehow oppressing dominant groups when they attempt to address the ways in which they are being marginalized. The rhetoric positions “political correctness” in direct opposition to free speech. This is ironic, as, in reality, issues of discrimination and safety affect people’s ability to participate in society and public discussion. Writing people’s concerns off as “politically correct” makes them much harder to address, and excludes marginalized people from the larger conversation. Ultimately, the “free speech” that opponents of “political correctness” are protecting is the freedom for people in positions of relative power to keep those with a lesser degree of power in their place, excluded from the conversation.