Search results

In diesem Beitrag werden Praktiken der konventionellen zweigeschlechtlichen Umkleideorganisation in ihrer Relevanz für die Sportpartizipation von LGBTI*-Personen hervorgehoben, um anschließend alternative Praktiken zu diskutieren. Es werden exemplarische Umkleide-Strukturpraktiken queerer Sportkontexte beschrieben, um aus einer emotions- und raumsoziologischen Perspektive deren Potentiale und Grenzen für Fragen der In- und Exklusion aufzuzeigen.

Abstract
Gender studies and its professors are attacked and oppressed by patriarchal, masculinist, antifeminist, and anti-LGBTI discourses and institutional practices. This trend is not limited to white- and/or Christian-majority countries, as the literature has documented thus far. Antigender campaigns can easily infiltrate Middle Eastern and/or Muslim-majority contexts in which feminists and queers have long struggled to transform societies, cultures, and states. In Turkey a state-led antigender movement has been unfolding, with burdensome outcomes for women and sexual minorities as well as activists and faculty members. The most recent step taken in the state-led antigender turn was Turkey's withdrawal from the Council of Europe's Istanbul Convention Action by a precipitous presidential decree. Drawing on thirty-three interviews with gender studies scholars, this article documents their ambivalent and perturbing connection with the state. The recent antigender atmosphere may make them feel downtrodden, silenced, and vulnerable in personal and professional domains, while it rejuvenates their resilience, renders their ongoing feminist/queer struggles meaningful and passionate, and cultivates an air of hope and optimism. To fight ostracism by public institutions and to attain their academic rights, the respondents use their empowering feelings, hope, and commitment against patriarchal and homophobic state forces.

Recent research shows that lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans* and intersex (LGBTI) rights have become a core value of the European Union. Concurrently, hostility towards LGBTI rights is increasing across the European Union, including through anti-gender mobilisations, which reject 'gender ideology'. This study employs sequential discourse analyses to discover: (1) the regional specificities in anti-gender discourse; and (2) whether the European Commission is discursively responsive to these differences. We find that the European Commission adapts its LGBTI discourse to actual and expected regional specificities, both in the issues discussed and in the frames employed. These conclusions are relevant because they show that European Union discourse on LGBTI rights is not homogeneous and may be strategically adapted to regional contexts, which has implications for the purported universal protection of LGBTI rights in the European Union. Additionally, these findings shed light on the important but neglected role that social mobilisations play in sensitising European Union actors to regional variation in political attitudes and values.

This study is based on an empirical research to understand the production of nongovernmental spatial practices and representations with a counterformation to an authority, as well as an ontological discussion on the relations between public space and power. In this respect, the study is constructed on an alternative spatial reading of counterspaces (LGBTI-friendly spaces, political spaces, and resistance spaces) in the capital of Turkey, Ankara, benefiting from Henri Lefebvre's theory on the production of space and The Situationist International's mapping techniques. It is realized that these public spaces appropriated or occupied by marginalized groups in society because of their gender, sexual orientation, beliefs, or ethnicity have a strong socio-spatial network in the city as a result of ontological approximation as the necessity of solidarity, which is defined as a habitat of the public assembly of otherness. The existence of different identities in the same area of the city for the same spatial practices is a manifestation of similar subjective formations and spatial representations of vulnerability within power relations. In this context, the aim of this study is the mapping of counterspaces in Ankara within a theoretical ground to contemplate the relationship between subject, power, and space. This article, thereby, analyzes the ontological basis of this psychogeography by questioning the reasons for the spatial proximity or superimposition of spaces used to socialize, organize, and resist the power of the other.

AbstractThe literature on Normative Power Europe (NPE) largely omits the question of why the EU chooses to focus on particular norms in the first place. This paper goes beyond the assumption that the EU simply externalizes its internal norms, because such a perspective does not sufficiently explain why the EU prioritizes certain norms over others, particularly in the case of contested norms. Using LGBTI rights and Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) in the EU's external human rights policy as two cases, I demonstrate how norm entrepreneurs – both external and internal – have been essential for bringing these norms to the EU's attention. Only after initial internal resistances had been overcome, were these norms able to reach the EU's external agenda. The two cases illustrate the internal political struggles that precede norm selection, supporting recent calls for a more politics‐oriented perspective on Normative Power Europe.

ABSTRACTThis article examines organized opposition to feminist and LGBTI political projects in Colombia. Although there is a large body of literature on feminist movements and a growing literature on LGBTI movements, there is little research on resistance to them. Through an intersectional feminist lens, this study analyzes the "anti-gender" campaign organized against the gender perspective in Colombia's 2016 peace agreement to demonstrate the limitations of backlash theory and certain normative understandings of human rights. In contrast to assumptions that backlash is predetermined, the study demonstrates that the anti-gender mobilization against the peace agreement was circumstantial rather than inevitable. To highlight the productive nature of backlash, it traces how opponents employed human rights rhetoric to establish an alternative present and promote an imagined future rooted in exclusion and repression. In addition, it shows that mobilized backlash against feminist and LGBTI movements does not necessarily decelerate or reverse the respective movements' agendas.

This paper argues that current iterations of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) rights are limited by an overreliance on particular representations of sexuality, in which homosexuality is defined negatively through a binary of homosexual/heterosexual. The limits of these representations are explored in order to unpick the possibility of engaging in a form of sexuality politics that is grounded in difference rather than in sameness or opposition. The paper seeks to respond to Braidotti's call for an "affirmative politics" that is open to forms of creative, future-oriented action and that might serve to answer some of the more common criticisms of current LGBTI rights activism.

Three recent books are discussed which offer queer analyses of attempts to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people from violence and discrimination using the international human rights regime. A common theme is the way in which equal rights are invoked and institutionalised to address prejudice, discrimination and violence. The take, however, is critical: while it may be a remarkable turn of events that the United Nations (UN) and similar institutions have become LGBTI advocates, such Damascene conversions generate their own dilemmas and rarely resolve structural and conceptual paradoxes. This article foregrounds the curiosity of queer scholars engaged with the application of human rights to matters of sexuality and gender, observes how they articulate the paradoxes and dissatisfactions that are produced in this normatively and politically charged field, and draws out the limitations and complexities of rights politics in combating systemic exclusion.

Despite both unparalleled progress on and persistent backlash to LGBTI rights in world politics, LGBTIQ people are rarely centred in our work as political scientists. This article charts the status of LGBTIQ scholarship in political science, advocating the creation of new spaces for such scholarship in the field, including in the pages of journals like the European Journal of Politics and Gender. Drawing on recent studies of the profession and on the reflections of leading LGBTIQ thinkers on navigating their presence in the subfield, I argue that LGBTIQ scholars and their scholarship still face individual-level and structural discrimination in political science. This encompasses active and passive homophobia and transphobia in teaching, getting hired and promoted, gaining access to research funding, and the publication process.