I'd been publishing this blog for less than 24 hours when someone questioned the name of the blog. This, it seems to me, is troublesome, as I would hate for something I'm doing to get off to a rocky start.
I named this blog what I did for several reasons, as most things I do. Firstly, I like the employ of the word 'queer' without having to say it directly. We know it's there, even if we can't see it, like some LGBT populations. Also, 'queer' is a good umbrella word that encompasses the entire LGBT community, including the QIA populations. (And now I am considering adding that to the general mission of the blog...).
The thing that has been brought to my attention is the part of the phrase used in the title of my blog. Apparently, others feel the 'correct' phrase is 'Queer as a three-dollar bill.' I, however, have never heard such a thing, and will continue to keep the title of my blog. For one, in my entire life, I have never heard of someone referring to a three-dollar bill. To me, that wouldn't be logical. It wouldn't be queer to see a three-dollar bill, it would be impossible, as they are not in print/circulation. (Apparently, Texas once printed a three-dollar bill, but this was in the 19th century, from what I understand. And we know what kinds of choices Texas made back then.)
Now, to see a two-dollar bill would, in fact, be queer, as it's rare, but possible. They are in circulation. In addition to that, I'd hate to address queer people as three-dollar bills which don't exist, further demonstrating a total lack of visibility of LGBTQIA people. Two-dollar bills, however, can be found anywhere, sometimes in unexpected places.
So, I stand by my blog's title, and will keep it..
I accept this explanation.
ReplyDelete