Last night whilst reading, I had a wild thought: G-d is queer.
And I’m just gonna throw out some unordered, messy thoughts out here.
I was reading about queer theory; many queer theorists even refuse to say what queer theory is, arguing that it resists definition and is impossible to capture.
This, of course made me think of G-d right away.
G-d, for sure is impossible to capture, and in a certain way, resists definition.
We can try to define, or better, describe G-d with our words, images, and all sorts of comparisons. The Bible has many of such images, and believers throughout the times have used and invented many images and metaphors to speak about G-d and convey their ideas, perceptions and experiences. Many of them are of a raw beauty and are very strong, and still speak to us today.
And yet, G-d resists definition, for G-d is always beyond all that we can say about him, all that we can imagine about her. G-d created human beings in her image, male and female he created them; as such, both genders are in G-d’s image, and G-d contains them both. I’ll go even further: when saying that G-d created the heavens and the earth, we mean that he created also all that is in-between; when we say that G-d created earth and water, we mean that she created also all that is in-between. So when we say that G-d created male and female, G-d also created all that is in-between.
With that, G-d contains all genders, all no-genders, all in-between genders – and is everything to everybody.
But that is not, or not only, why I’m saying that G-d is queer. And I’m also not saying that G-d is queer to exclude those who are not queer.
G-d herself is queer for several reasons. G-d is the One who transgresses the boundaries that others -or ourselves- have put up. Boundaries between people, boundaries inside ourselves, boundaries between us and the Divine. Transgressing those boundaries, G-d allows us to simply be, to simply exist, the way we are, the way I am. In doing so, a space is created in which different relations can be lived: vertical and horizontal, with G-d, with others and also with our (true) selves.
G-d is also queer in that, through that impossibility of definite definition, he leaves room for experimentation. There is room for trial and error, as this room is filled with a graceful generosity. This grace allows for doubts, questions, failures and all that makes us human.
Lastly, G-d is queer in that like in queer theory and activism there is a call to action, likewise G-d issues a call to action and presents us with an ethic to live by. It is not a holier-than-thou ethic, but one that demands to stand by those that struggle, to be their ally, to defend people’s dignity, and to accompany the other in their journeys and to be the helping hand when needed, and to stand up against violence in all of its forms – and if possible, in unconventional ways: queer, that is.
 My goal is not to create a distinction between those who describe themselves as ‘queer’ and those who do not – it is not them versus them, or us versus them.