Tabulating Queer: Space, Perversion, and Belonging

Keilty, Patrick

doi:10.5771/0943-7444-2009-4-240

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…7 Patrick Keilty uses Foucauldian understandings of borders and belonging to argue for classification as both productive and flattening of queer identities and desires. 8 Roberto analyzed and critiqued LC classification as "passively hostile" for transgender users, arguing that both the classification and subject headings reinforce normative cultural boundaries that alienate transgender individuals. 9 Melodie Fox critiqued the use of classical theories for library classification and subject construction, and applied prototype theory to concepts of sex and gender that raised many questions about the effectiveness of such categories.…”

Section: Queering Librariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What's Gender Got to Do with It? A Critique of RDA 9.7

Billey

Drabinski

Roberto

2014

Cataloging & Classification Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Library of Congress (LC) and the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) interpretation of Resource Description and Access (RDA) 9.7 regarding gender when identifying persons reinforces regressive conceptions of gender identity. The rule instructs catalogers to record gender when identifying persons, and although RDA gives catalogers the flexibility to record more than two gender labels, LC limits Name Authority Cooperative Program (NACO) catalogers to a binary label: male, female, or not known. In this article, the authors challenge gender as a descriptive attribute for personal names, critique how LC is instructing NACO catalogers to record elements about gender, and make recommendations to address describing persons in LC authority records.

show abstract

Section: Queering Librariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What's Gender Got to Do with It? A Critique of RDA 9.7

Billey

Drabinski

Roberto

2014

Cataloging & Classification Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A significant amount of the literature concerning classifications of gender and sexuality within information studies cites Foucault as a major thinker guiding their analyses. Those particularly reliant on Foucault include Campbell (2001), Lau (2008), Keilty (2009), and Adler (2009 and forthcoming). Each of these scholars relies on Foucault's understanding of the relationship between power, knowledge, and language in relation to institutions, as variously described in History of Sexuality, Volume I (trans.…”

Section: Forget Foucault?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As I show in a previous essay (Keilty 2009), Xtube attempts to provide a near instantaneous mass mediation and dissemination of sexual representation. One might argue that this wealth of images offers an emancipatory scenario whereby subjects can project their virtual selves into a seemingly endless variety of environments, and to embody an infinite number of freely chosen subject positions, roles, and desires.…”

Section: Taggingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, some readers may question where power is being exercised. In this essay, I mostly focus on vertical power that stems from a dominant culture, but vertical power also comes from Xtube's administrators, which I discussed in a previous essay (Keilty 2009). Vertical power, as I have said, occurs simultaneously with horizontal power, which occurs between members of a subculture.…”

Section: The Relation Between a Dominant Culture Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With particular proliferation in the last decade, library and information scholarship, too, critiques the effects of institutionally sanctioned and authoritative gender and sexual subject categories, including Sanford Berman (1981 and, Ellen Greenblatt (1990 and, Hope Olson (1998Olson ( , 2001Olson ( , 2002Olson ( , and 2007, Grant Campbell (2001 and2004), Andrew Lau (2008), Ben Christiansen (2008 and, Patrick Keilty (2009), J. K. Rawson (2009), Matt Johnson (2010), Melissa Adler (2009, and 2013, and Analisa Ornelas (2011), to name only a few. Most of these scholars have forcefully shown the way the Library of Congress Subject Headings or the Dewey Decimal Classification System do not reflect the nomenclatures accustomed to gender and sexual non-conforming people.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Sexual Boundaries and Subcultural Discipline

Keilty¹

2012

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

His writing examines and critiques knowledge structures, digital culture, digital humanities, gender and sexuality, intersectionality, and science and technology studies. With Rebecca Hong, he is co-editor of Feminist and Queer Information Studies Reader (forthcoming). With Katie Shilton, he is currently coediting Critical Information Studies. In addition, he is editing Gender and Sexual Boundaries and preparing a monograph entitled Seeking Sex: Embodiment and Electronic Culture, which examines how the Internet has reconstituted our ways of being sexual. His most recent essays have appeared in Knowledge Organization, Proceedings of the iConference, and InterActions. He has recently presented papers at the iConference, the Society for Cinema and Media Studies, and Thinking Gender.

show abstract

Advancing information practices theoretical discourses centered on marginality, community, and embodiment: Learning from the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA+) communities

Kitzie

Wagner

Lookingbill

et al. 2021

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This conceptual paper identifies future directions for information practices theoretical discourses addressing marginality, community, and embodiment. We extend arguments from critical research identifying how existing discourses fail to capture the nuanced, lived experiences of people and communities confronting marginalization, predominantly via their reinforcement of deficit narratives. We then connect a series of qualitative projects examining the information practices of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual communities in the American South with relevant Library and Information Science (LIS) research to examine how marginality, community, and embodiment shape these practices. Specifically, we introduce a conceptual model that describes marginality by framing information practices as tactical and agentic responses to and refutations of social and structural barriers and risks. While some of the information practices of participants and communities appear to be uninformed or unsafe, they represent the products of community sharing and vetting. Embodied navigations further inform participant practices as they navigate information worlds produced and informed by their intersectional identities. These arguments coincide with key categories established within our model that describe information practices: defensive and protective, and community and self. Based on these insights, we offer directions for future research and theory to reorient existing discourses in ways that inspire middle-range theory building that fully captures people's lived experiences.

show abstract

Tabulating Queer: Space, Perversion, and Belonging

Cited by 21 publications

References 6 publications

What's Gender Got to Do with It? A Critique of RDA 9.7

What's Gender Got to Do with It? A Critique of RDA 9.7

Sexual Boundaries and Subcultural Discipline

Advancing information practices theoretical discourses centered on marginality, community, and embodiment: Learning from the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQIA+) communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About