What is interesting about Professor Shakhsari’s piece Cyberspace, the War on Terror and the Hypervisible Iranian Queer is that in the discussion of the politics of visibility, there are examples where the Iranian queer subject is not just made hypervisible, but can also be made invisible. It is necessary when constructing a hegemonic narrative to quell those stories and views that challenge and diversify that narrative. Thus we see how the tensions between representing the various situations, opinions, and desires of the queer members of the Iranian diaspora and representing a narrative stripped of complexity are acted out. This seems to end up a diversity of voices being subjugated in favor of a narrative like Parsi’s who “repeats the usual narrative of escape from a home of oppression in Iran to freedom in the ‘West'”; many voices are made invisible.

Parsi’s effective use of the tools of Weblogistan to disseminate his message has immense power to shape the larger narrative. At first I was surprised at the ease with which this hegemonic narrative of the queer Iranian experience was able to be created because you would think that the web would actually be the perfect platform to highlight a variety of opinions and experiences on the matter. However Shakhsari also discusses the barriers of access to the world of Weblogistan for some people to disseminate their opposing views. Furthermore, we can’t forget that those stories, video clips, and articles which were picked up and circulated most widely after 9/11 were those that operated to serve the geopolitical project of otherizing and demonizing Iran. Anything that served that larger project was made highly visible. This happened often, Shakhsari writes, to the detriment of safety for many queer Iranian subjects. Shakhsari piece aims to warn us against the tendency to separate the politics of Weblogistan from the politics of real bodies moving through the world and to keep in mind the consequences for the narratives that Weblogistan helps construct and perpetuate. Who are we making invisible? Who are we making hypervisible and why?

As a side note I would be really interested to put this article in conversation with something like Hillary Clinton’s most recent video about marriage equality. What is the political project of the Secretary of State in this video. Who is she making hypervisible? Who is she making invisible in this plea? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6HBExa6LAY