Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The article proposes a political ethnography of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex (LGBTI) asylum founded on a fieldwork (2017–19) in an associative and activist context that supports LGBTI asylum applicants. Through the analysis of the narratives mobilized and produced during the interviews between asylum applicants and institutional agents in charge of receiving and assessing the requests for international protection, the article explores the institutional uses of the SOGI framework. The hypothesis that the article puts forward is that, far from concerning exclusively a confrontation/dispute among models of sexual orientation and gender identity, these interactions actually bring forth a logic of exchange of moral goods (vulnerability, feelings of shame and fear, identity, narratives). Given the impossibility for LGBTI asylum applicants to produce probatory documentation, this study exposes the strategies for determining legitimate from illegitimate LGBTI migrant subjects, 'good' from 'bad' migrant stories, and, therefore, the political and moral dimension of the institutional work and the grant of the right of asylum.

The essay problematizes the incorporation of LGBTI rights promotion into the US and EU foreign policies. First, the paper examines the two actors' key documents, speeches, and policies devoted to the promotion of LGBTI rights abroad, the similarities and differences between the two actors' approaches, attending to the tendencies of their evolution and the
ongoing development. Second, the article discusses the internal conditions in target countries that are conducive to the success and failure of international support of LGBTI rights. Finally, the study makes a critical overview of the measures that are argued to be necessary to increase the efficiency of LGBTI rights promotion in countries with most negative current trends in and/or poorest records on LGBTI rights.

AbstractPolitical competition accelerates the enactment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans*, and intersexual rights (LGBTI+) due to the dynamic, rational behavior of mainstream parties across the political aisle to adapt to the sociopolitical environment. We argue that LGBTI+ social movements capitalize on median voter shifts combined with the rising pressure of ideologically close challenger parties to enact legislation. To examine this argument, we employ quantitative event history analysis with a unique dataset with measures for social movement, institutional, political, and sociocultural dimensions across 33 years in Spanish subnational arenas. We find that rising leftist and liberal contenders challenging dominant center‐left and center‐right parties, respectively, widen the opportunity political structure of LGBTI+ organizations. Ultimately, rising political fragmentation in a multiparty, multidimensional party system turns both left and right mainstream parties into allies of LGBTI+ organizations, which propose new legislation, due to political platforms seeking to preserve and enhance their electoral base.Related ArticlesBurnett, Craig M., and Aaron S. King. 2015. "The Personal Politics of Same‐Sex Marriage." Politics & Policy 43(4): 586–610. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12126.Lewis, Gregory B., Marc A. Rogers, and Kenneth Sherrill. 2011. "Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Voters in the 2000 US Presidential Election." Politics & Policy 39(5): 655–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2011.00315.x.Skipworth, Sue Ann, Andrew Garner, and Bryan J. Dettrey. 2010. "Limitations of the Contact Hypothesis: Heterogeneity in the Contact Effect on Attitudes toward Gay Rights." Politics & Policy 38(5): 887–906. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2010.00262.x.

This article aims to enrich the literature on EU sanctions in two ways. First, it argues that the absence of material sanctions does not imply a non-response. When faced with human rights violations, policymakers enjoy a third option besides exerting material pressure or refraining from intervening. They may instead employ what constructivist scholars call social sanctions. This option consists of verbally calling out the violators, either publicly, through a naming-and-shaming strategy, or diplomatically via political dialogue and demarches. Social sanctions can be a credible alternative or complement to material sanctions. Second, we argue for the importance of disaggregating the EU as a sender of sanctions. A non-response by executive institutions does not mean that the EU as a whole is standing idly by. Looking at social sanctions alongside material ones more accurately describes the choices policymakers face when designing their response to human rights violations. We demonstrate the value of our arguments by examining the EU's various responses to LGBTI rights violations in Lithuania and Uganda.

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.

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.