Sexual orientation and gender identity are separate, distinct parts of people's overall identity. Equality and freedom from discrimination are human rights belonging to all people, however, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, gender diverse and intersex (LGBTI) people experience harassment and hostility in many areas of everyday life. Under recently enacted Australian law it is illegal to discriminate against a person on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity and intersex status. Same-sex couples are now also protected from discrimination under the definition of "marital or relationship status". This book explores issues involving sexual orientation, gender diversity and intersex status; and explains what equality means for people who are often subjected to misunderstanding and homophobia.
Much of what goes on in the production of a security state is the over-zealous articulation of the other, which has the effect of reinforcing the myth of an essentialized, unambiguous collective identity called the nation-state. Indeed, the focus on securing a state (or any group) often suggests the need to define more explicitly those who do not belong, suggesting, not only those who do, but where and how they belong and under what conditions. Feminists are concerned with how highly political gender identities often defined by masculinism are implicated in marking these inclusions and exclusions, but also how gender identities get produced through the very practices of the security state. Feminists in the early years critiqued the inadequacy of realist, state-centric notions of security and made arguments for more reformative security perspectives, including those of human security or other nonstate-centric approaches. At the same time, feminist research moved to examine more rigorously the processes of militarism, war, and other security practices of the state and its reliance on specific ideas about women and men, femininity and masculinity. Feminist contributions from the mid-1990s through the first decade of the millennium reveal much about the relationships between gender identities, militarism, and the state. By paying attention to gendered relationships of power, they expose the nuances in the co-constitution of gender identities and the security state.
Abstract: On May 9th, 2012, the Argentinean Senate converted into law the long collective process, driven by trans* activism, towards the legal recognition of gender identity. The Gender Identity Act (GIA) meant a large contribution to the field of civil and sexual rights interationally, especially in the matter of trans* policy. Nevertheless, what was at stake in the approval of the GIA was not just a step forward in legal terms and at a personal level for trans* people, but a whole set of representations, desires and social stakes on trans* lives and population. Thus, as regards to the scope and achievements of the GIA and its social and parliamentary debates, we can assert that in that realm a specific trans* life does not qualify as a living life. This article addresses the specific ways of presentation and apprehension of trans* lives in parliamentary debates about the GIA, and in social disputes within trans* activism. A biopolitical analysis of gender identity leads us to rethink the social conditions that sustain life and, by the same token, the interpretative frameworks of death.Keywords: Gender Identity; Law; Trans*; Biopolitics; NecropoliticsNecropolíticas trans*: Ley de identidad de género en ArgentinaResumen: El 9 de Mayo de 2012, el Senado Argentino convirtió en ley lo que fuera un largo proceso colectivo impulsado por el activismo trans*, la llamada Ley de Reconocimiento a la Identidad de Género. La Ley de Identidad de Género (LIDG) significó un gran aporte de escala internacional en materia de derechos sexuales y civiles, y en particular, en materia de política trans*. No obstante, lo que estaba en juego en la aprobación de la LIDG significaba no sólo un avance de carácter personal y global en términos jurídicos, sino también un conjunto de representaciones, deseos y apuestas sociales sobre la población y la vida trans*. A tenor de los alcances y logros de la LIDG y sus respectivos debates, tanto sociales como parlamentarios, puede sostenerse que en ellos una vida concreta, una vida trans*, no califica como vida viva. El artículo propone una reflexión crítica sobre los modos específicos de presentación y aprehensión de una vida trans*, sea en los distintos debates parlamentarios en torno a la LIDG, sea en las disputas sociales del activismo trans*. Desde un análisis biopolítico sobre la identidad de género, el texto busca repensar las condiciones sociales que sostienen la vida y, por lo mismo, aquellos marcos interpretativos de la muerte.Palabras clave: Identidad de Género; Ley; Trans*; Biopolítica; NecropolíticaNecropolíticas trans*: Lei de Identidade de Gênero na ArgentinaResumo: Em 9 de maio de 2012, o Senado argentino converteu em lei o que fora um longo processo coletivo impulsionado pelo ativismo trans*, a chamada Lei de Reconhecimento da Identidade de Gênero. A Lei de Identidade de Gênero (LIDG) significou uma grande contribuição de escala internacional em matéria de direitos sexuais e civis e, em particular, em matéria de política trans*. No entanto, o que estava em jogo na aprovação da LIDG significava não só um avanço de caráter pessoal e global em termos jurídicos, mas além disso um conjunto de representações, desejos e apostas sociais sobre a população e a vida trans*. Nesse sentido, se nos ativermos aos alcances e êxitos da LIDG e aos seus respectivos debates tão sociais como parlamentares, poderemos sustentar que neles uma vida concreta, uma vida trans*, não se qualifica como vida viva. O presente artigo se propõe a uma reflexão crítica sobre os modos específicos de apresentação e de apreensão de uma vida trans*, seja nos distintos debates parlamentares em torno da LIDG, seja nas disputas sociais do ativismo trans*. A partir de uma análise biopolítica sobre a identidade de gênero, vamos repensar as condições sociais que sustentam a vida e, pela mesma razão, aqueles marcos interpretativos da morte.Palavras-chave: identidade de gênero; Lei; trans*; biopolítica; necropolítica ; Last May 9, 2012, the Argentinian Senate turned into a law what was a long colective process driven by trans activism, the so called Gender Identity Acknowledgemente Law. The Gender Identity Law, meant a large step forward at an international level in the sexual and civil rights field, and specifically in the Trans politics subject. Nontheless, what was concerned in the approval of the GIL implied not only an advance at a personal and global level in legal terms, but also a set of representations, desires and social pledges over Trans population and life. Theoretically, if we adjust to the scope of the GIL’S achievements, we can state that a concrete life, a Trans life, does not qualify as a living life. The following lines are centered in a critical consideration over the specific ways of presenting and understanding a Trans life, both in the variety of parliamentary debates regarding the GIL as in the social disputes withing Trans activism itself. From a biopolitical approach over gender identity, we plan to rethink the social conditions that sustain life, and consecuently, the interpretative frames of death.
The terms LGBT and Islam mentioned together in a sentence rarely evoke positive connotations. Rather, LGBT and Islam are often considered inherently incompatible. While there is little evidence on which an inherent incompatibility can be claimed, persecution of LGBT people across the globe is routinely carried out in the name of Islam. Yet at its heart, Islam can be a powerful force acknowledging sexual and gender diversity. Of all the world's great religions, Islam is arguably the most sex positive of all.Three main avenues provide understanding of sexuality and gender in Islam. First is the Qur'an, or the Islamic holy book. Second is hadith, which are the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. Third are fatwah, which are the rulings of religious leaders. Certainly, most of this literature positions sexuality as properly confined to heterosexual marriage between a gender normative woman and a gender normative man. However, it is often difficult to distill such an imperative from cultural aspects that inflect all readings of religious scripture. In other words, it is often not Islam per se that prohibits same-sex sexuality and gender diversity but rather cultural interpretations of religious aspects. Moreover, it is not uncommon for fatwah to contradict each other, and thus which fatwah are followed comes down to which imam or religious leader espouses it.A further difficulty with discussing sexuality and gender vis-à-vis Islam, or indeed any religion, is that terms such as sexuality and gender are inherently modern and were developed long after understandings of religion were culturally and politically enshrined. As such, particular understandings of the categories of woman and man within scripture exist in a state where interrogation is not possible. If Muhammad were alive today, he would have linguistic tools available to him to talk about sexuality and gender in a much more nuanced way. To thus discuss LGBT subject positions within Islam, given that Islam was largely developed before words like gender and sexuality were invented, is difficult. Nevertheless, such discussion is warranted and fruitful and shows that while many interpretations of Islam seek to vilify LGBT, many aspects of Islam and its practice are inclusive of sexual and gender diversity.