While the women in this study recognise the importance of sexuality labels, we argue that neoliberal discourses encourage an individualist rejection of labels. However, as we observe throughout this article, sexuality labels are also simultaneously meaningful for women as they demonstrate an extended, reflexive engagement with labels. What is their motivation for asserting that public identity categories do not matter? We suggest that in a homonormative, rural context, there is more to be gained from claiming ordinariness than emphasising minority status. Under neoliberalism, ‘identity politics’ is increasingly used as a derogatory synonym for feminism and anti-heterosexism – akin to complaints of ‘political correctness gone mad’ (Bernstein, 2005: 48). Homonormativity represents individuals as free, neutral citizens, whereas identity politics is reserved for ‘others’, thereby making the notion of the ‘ordinary’ citizen gendered, raced and classed. For example, as Hekman (2004: 6) argues, white, heterosexual men are never acknowledged as having an identity.
This interesting article explores how women in rural Australia identify or disidentify with sexuality labels. I have never really considered they way in which people in the LGBTQ community form their identities especially in regards to neoliberalism.