Abstract:

Jack Halberstam’s evocative description of a fellow airline passenger’s service animal is both an artful performance of queer negativity, and also an outstanding example of the nested interdependencies that are the subject of my essay. However, he misrepresents my definition of care by claiming that it depends on benevolent human regard. I agree with Halberstam that desire is often taboo in our understanding of good care relationships because all too often the care of vulnerable people—children, ill, disabled, or elderly dependents, and their caregivers—is accompanied by sexual abuse. But the concern with safety may deprive dependents of self-expression and leave vital needs unmet. Our failure to address the erotics of care more openly can further disadvantage dependents and their caregivers by denying sexual desires as real as their need for life-sustaining care.

摘要：

杰克·哈尔伯斯塔姆（Jack Halberstam）对同胞乘客的服务动物的回味描写既是对酷儿消极态度的巧妙表现，也是我的论文所涉及的嵌套相互依存关系的杰出例子。但是，他声称这取决于人类的仁慈对待，从而歪曲了我对医疗的定义。我同意哈尔伯斯塔姆的看法，在我们对良好护理关系的理解中，欲望常常是禁忌，因为弱势群体（儿童，病残，残疾或老年人的家属及其照料者）及其照料者的照顾常常伴随着性虐待。但是，对安全的关注可能会剥夺家属的自我表达能力，使重要需求得不到满足。