Michaelson’s essay is interesting. There a few things that I was against , one being the description of the community as “GLBT.” This is technically fine, but at the same time ignores the history and the meaning behind the traditional acronym “LGBT” or “LGBTQ” or “LGBTQIA+”. The list goes on. Also the description of gays and lesbians comprising “a third (or third and fourth) gender, then perhaps they can help destabilize the assumptions of the other two as well-God willing” (217). The claim that gays and lesbians comprise another gender is completely false and ignores the reality of non-binary individuals. I will try my best to not let this aspects of the essay get under my skin.

An interesting point Michaelson does make is discussing the binaries that exist in the world, especially in the religious world and the LGBT community disrupts this boundary.

One other point that I found to be interesting was how queer persons relationship with religion. Michaelson describes how the religious queer person loves religion and then hates themselves, because their love contradicts their religion. These individuals then possibly affirm their love of self and hate religion, continuing to possibly hate themselves. Or the individual might repress the self and love religion or reconcile the whole thing including the realities of love and sexual expression. The next point that is made is that the queer religious consciousness is distrustful because it has seen and felt how rules, codes, and even the operation conscience can be tools of oppression and self repression. That was all a paraphrase. Some aspects of this claim are somewhat accurate. There is a constant conflict between one’s sexuality and their religion depending on the situation. But I’m not sure if it is has simple as Michaelson makes it seem. I also don’t agree with the religious consciousness of these people being distrustful because they’ve realized the reality of rules and codes. Declaring that they’re distrustful separates them from the heterosexual religious individual and I’m not sure if that is necessary.