Suchergebnisse

This article examines the 2017 German national election through
the lens of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) interests. It
depicts the ways in which sexual minorities articulated their policy preferences,
the degree to which these positions were taken up in party platforms
and electoral discourse, and the extent to which the resulting coalition agreement
pledged to address queer citizens' concerns. I argue that, as a result of
what Sarah Childs and Mona Lena Krook call a critical actor, this election
provided sexual minorities with a high degree of responsiveness on one core
issue: marriage equality. Other issues of interest to LGBTI voters, however,
remained largely invisible. The conclusions here are based on analysis of primary
documents including interest group statements, party platforms, and
coalition agreements, as well as on German-language news coverage of the
election campaign.

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.

This paper investigates the convergence of European Union enlargement strategies and queer politics in the production of Islamophobia in Kosovo. Through a reading of recent homophobic attacks in Kosovo, it examines how the incorporation of lgbti politics into the eu enlargement assemblages generate a representational praxis of queer communities in Kosovo under threat by Muslim extremists. This paper proposes that the Europeanization of lgbti rights depoliticizes queer communities and singles them out for protection as victims of Islamic fundamentalism by creating binary and exclusionary Queer/Islam divisions that prevent the emergence of intersectional solidarities and subjectivities such as queer and Muslim. In this context, European financed 'coming out' projects gain a new meaning in Kosovo, one where the promotion of visibility for certain queer subjects works simultaneously to expose Muslim 'extremists'. Queer acceptance in Islamophobic times, then, becomes the ultimate test of who can and cannot become European citizen.

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.

O presente artigo problematiza a incorporação da promoção dos direitos LGBTI nas políticas externas dos EUA e da UE. Em primeiro lugar, examina os principais documentos, discursos e políticas dos dois atores sobre à promoção dos direitos LGBTI no estrangeiro, e as semelhanças e diferenças entre as abordagens de ambos, atendendo às tendências da sua evolução e desenvolvimento contínuo. Em segundo lugar, o artigo analisa as condições internas nos países alvo que são propícias ao sucesso e ao fracasso do apoio internacional aos direitos LGBTI. Finalmente, o estudo apresenta uma visão crítica das medidas que são consideradas necessárias para aumentar a eficiência da promoção dos direitos LGBTI em países com tendências atuais mais negativas e/ou com historiais mais pobres sobre os direitos LGBTI.

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.

In this article I document the main German parties' 2021 election platforms regarding gender and sexuality. These manifestos contained considerably different portrayals of gendered inequalities in the Federal Republic, preferred diverse roles for the state in ameliorating gendered inequalities, and called for state action in distinct spheres. Parties also generally viewed "women" and "lgbti" people as homogeneous entities rather than intersectional groups. I conclude by discussing how the differences among the Social Democrats, Greens, and Free Democrats were reconciled in the 2021 coalition agreement. The "traffic light" proposals for achieving gender equality differ starkly from the platforms of the Christian Democrats and the Alternative for Germany.