Search
Close
Search
Advanced Search
Search Menu
AI Discovery Assistant

Extract

Generally speaking, theorists of IR imagine states as heterosexual. To the extent that some feminist scholars have posited essentialist roles for “men” and “women” in the (re)production of nations, they too have imagined states as heterosexual, even if patriarchal. Queer studies scholars have begun to posit something different: Queer states that are not inherently “straight” or heterosexual (Weber 1999, 2014a; Canaday 2011) are “gay-friendly,” and in some significant cases paradoxical, simultaneously promoting and opposing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) liberation. It is this latter category that I find most relevant to and useful for understanding the current global fascination with and concurrent disdain for LGBTI rights; a paradox observed both within and among nations, a paradox notable for how LGBTI rights get mapped onto a myriad of other political struggles involving sovereignty, westernization, modernity, (de)colonization, and globalization. On the one hand, we are witnessing joyous celebrations of “gay pride” and same-sex partner recognition around the world unlike ever before. Yet there are numerous virulent homophobic and transphobic responses to queer visibility, including where states promote the criminalization of queers, as in the case of Uganda's proposed “Kill the Gays” bill or Russia's “gay propaganda” bill. Increasingly, states have become vocal and visible actors in constructing homophobic as well as homopositive strategies related to homosexuality and gender identity, and it is this paradoxical queer visibility that I address here.

Issue Section:
The Forum: Queer International Relations
You do not currently have access to this article.
Download all slides