In “Digital Dualism and the Glitch feminism Manifesto” The author expresses the idea of the glitch as a digital orgasm, or similar to a physical orgasm. It is an interesting comparison as an orgasm is often desirable conclusion while a glitch would be thought of as an undesirable error of productivity, but the article does well to explain the similarity in the expression of a glitch and the orgasm as an involuntary response of the machine (as in the literal machine or our own bodies).
The author argues that glitch feminism is not a subversion of the hegemony, nor any subtext. It will not be marginalized or excluded. A subversion to the system accepts that the system is in place. The system should not be assumed to be idealized or desirable, just as glitch and error should not be exclusively understood in a negative connotation as unwanted or abnormal. Glitch feminism refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the system. An error in the patriarchal social system is a much wanted malfunction, a correction to the machine.
The article “Queer/Error: Gay Media Systems and Processes of Abjection is interesting in discussing the white masculine body as the ideal queer body; it is an ideal body in a heteronormative society, so is the ideal queer body ideal as it is able to adapt between two spaces (the heterosexual and the queer). This idealism continues to marginalize queer minorities and non-cisgendered bodies. Again, much like the glitch feminism article, it would be problematic to argue that queer is some sort of subversion or error of heteronormativity, as it contains a negative connotation of what is undesirable. It would be apt to use error as a way to refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of a heteronormative culture, and utilize glitch art as a medium for queer visibility and representation. Glitch becomes a revolutionary tool as a correction against the status quo, for invisible and marginalized groups to assert their relevance.