Queer Visibility: The Double-Edged Sword of Online Platforms

Queer visibility has become a defining feature of the digital age. Platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube provide spaces where queer identities can flourish, enabling new forms of self-expression and community-building. Yet, this visibility operates within systems of technocapitalism that prioritise profit over authenticity. Scholars like Shoshana Zuboff and Sarah Ahmed remind us that visibility, while often empowering, is never neutral - it comes laden with power dynamics, shaped by the algorithms and policies of platforms. This article critically examines the double-edged nature of queer visibility: a site of both empowerment and control within the digital economy.

Visibility and the Illusion of Liberation

Digital platforms have revolutionised the concept of visibility, particularly for marginalised communities. For queer individuals, online spaces often serve as lifelines, providing opportunities to connect with global networks and challenge heteronormative narratives. As Sarah Ahmed notes in her writings on queer phenomenology, visibility is deeply tied to orientation - how identities align or misalign with the dominant gaze of the society or platform in which they exist.

Movements like #TransDayOfVisibility and #PrideMonth demonstrate how digital spaces can amplify voices and foster solidarity. However, this visibility often aligns with what platforms deem marketable, which Ahmed might argue reflects an alignment with the normative “straightening” effects of technocapitalism. While platforms celebrate diversity, the representations they highlight are often those that are polished, safe, and easy to monetise.

The Stabilisation of Queer Identities

Queer identities are inherently fluid, resisting fixed definitions and destabilising normative expectations. Yet, digital platforms rely on algorithms designed to categorise users into stable, predictable groups - a phenomenon that reflects what scholars like Judith Butler have described as the performative stabilisation of identity. These algorithms, trained to maximise engagement, prioritise forms of queerness that fit within neat, marketable boundaries.

Consider the prevalence of queer influencers who embody mainstream beauty standards or lifestyles. These individuals, while representing queerness, are often the only ones visible, as platforms filter out non-conforming content. This process echoes what Ahmed refers to as “queer orientations,” which challenge normative frameworks but risk being reoriented by the hegemonic gaze. The result is a narrow visibility that prioritises stability and profitability over the inherent instability of queer existence.

Commodification: The Price of Visibility

Technocapitalism thrives on the commodification of identity, turning personal expressions into marketable content. Shoshana Zuboff’s concept of “surveillance capitalism” explains how digital platforms monetise every interaction, creating economic value from user data. For queer individuals, this often means their visibility is reduced to a transactional relationship with platforms, where personal identity becomes a product.

For example, Instagram’s integration of e-commerce tools encourages users to present themselves in ways that align with consumerism. This commodification mirrors Butler’s analysis of gender performativity: the act of presenting oneself becomes tied to external rewards, in this case, the currency of likes, followers, and sponsorships. Such mechanisms reinforce a limited framework of visibility, where queerness is acceptable only when it can be sold.

Surveillance and the Risks of Being Seen

The surveillance inherent to digital platforms adds another layer of complexity to queer visibility. Zuboff highlights how data collection is presented as personalisation but ultimately serves the interests of technocapitalism. For queer users, this surveillance can have profound consequences, particularly in regions where queerness is stigmatised or criminalised.

Platforms’ algorithmic recommendations and public-facing profiles risk exposing users to harm, reinforcing Ahmed’s observation that visibility often comes at the cost of safety. While platforms market themselves as inclusive, their inability to safeguard vulnerable users demonstrates a prioritisation of profit over protection. For many queer individuals, being visible online is a precarious act, balancing self-expression with the potential for exploitation.

Reclaiming Visibility: Resistance Within the System

Despite the structural limitations of technocapitalism, queer communities continue to resist its confines, leveraging the same platforms that commodify them to foster solidarity and subvert norms. Grassroots organising, mutual aid campaigns, and creative subversions - such as glitch art and experimental content - challenge algorithmic expectations and reclaim visibility.

These acts of resistance echo Ahmed’s argument that queerness is inherently disruptive, existing in spaces of misalignment. By refusing to conform to stabilised, commodifiable identities, queer individuals assert the fluidity and complexity of their existence. In doing so, they disrupt the normative gaze of technocapitalism, keeping alive the radical potential of queerness in digital spaces.

Conclusion

Queer visibility on online platforms is both a beacon of progress and a site of tension. While digital spaces provide vital avenues for connection and representation, they also operate within technocapitalist frameworks that stabilise and profit from identity. Scholars like Zuboff, Ahmed, and Butler remind us that visibility is never neutral - it is always shaped by power structures that determine who can be seen, how they are seen, and what is gained from that visibility.

Understanding this duality is crucial for navigating these spaces thoughtfully. By critically engaging with platforms and resisting their normative constraints, queer individuals can reclaim visibility on their own terms. True liberation lies not in being visible according to the rules of technocapitalism, but in challenging and expanding the very boundaries of what it means to be seen.