No abstract

This chapter demonstrates how the Iranian state, far from being the pawn of Western machinations, has varied its stance toward homosexuality in pursuit of its objectives—namely modernization, consolidation, and most recently, deliberalization. In doing so, it has refashioned family and gender relations, positioned itself concerning the imperial appetites of the West, and centralized and expanded its power. To trace how this happened, the chapter anchors the story around three moments in which anti-homosexual rhetoric and practice have been deployed. First is the modernization moment lasting from the early nineteenth century to the onset of the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Second is the Islamic nation-state consolidation moment following the revolution. Third is the conservative backlash following the attempted liberalization of 1997 and persisting until today.

While peacekeeping’s effects on receiving states have been studied at length, its effects on sending states have only begun to be explored. This article examines the effects of contributing peacekeepers abroad on democracy at home. Recent qualitative research has divergent findings: some find peacekeeping contributes to democratization among sending states, while others find peacekeeping entrenches illiberal or autocratic rule. To adjudicate, we build on recent quantitative work focused specifically on the incidence of coups. We ask whether sending peacekeepers abroad increases the risk of military intervention in politics at home. Drawing on selectorate theory, we expect the effect of peacekeeping on coup risk to vary by regime type. Peacekeeping brings with it new resources which can be distributed as private goods. In autocracies, often developing states where UN peacekeeping remuneration exceeds per-soldier costs, deployment produces a windfall for militaries. Emboldened by new resources, which can be distributed as private goods among the selectorate, and fearing the loss of them in the future, they may act to depose the incumbent regime. In contrast, peacekeeping will have little effect in developed democracies, which have high per-troop costs, comparatively large selectorates, and low ex-ante coup risk. Anocracies, which typically have growing selectorates, and may face distinctive international pressures to democratize, will likely experience reduced coup risk. We test these claims with data covering peacekeeping deployments, regime type, and coup risk since the end of the Cold War. Our findings confirm our theoretical expectations. These findings have implications both for how we understand the impact of participation in peacekeeping – particularly among those countries that contribute troops disproportionately in the post-Cold War era – and for the potential international determinants of domestic autocracy.

This paper traces the transformation of sexual space in Iran during the past 200 years; a process which culminated in the emergence of Iranian gays at the beginning of this century. We reconcile the work of Najmabadi [2005. Women with mustaches and men without beards: gender and sexual anxieties of Iranian modernity, Berkley: University of California Press], Foucault [1990. The history of sexuality, Vol. 1: an introduction, New York: Vintage Books], and Massad [2002. Re-orienting desire: the gay international and the arab world. Public Culture 14(2), 361-385; 2007. Desiring arabs, Chicago: University of Chicago Press] and describe distinct moments of modern subject construction.We claim that gays are constituted in Iran through a process of heteronormalization of social space, followed by the 'fixing' of deviant types in law and medicine and then the availability of a positive frame of reference which makes its appearance in the mid-1990s when the discourse of identity and human rights enters Iran. We conclude by signalling a new chapter in the constitution of sexual space in Iran in which gay activists experiment with Persian culture to create gay-friendly speech.

performed. Data obtained included age; sex; ASA physical classification score; Mallampati score; indication; type of anesthesia; and pain levels pre-procedure, immediate (0-2 hours) post-procedure, and 24-hour post-procedure via a verbal numerical scale or visual analog scale. Patient requirement for post-procedural narcotic analgesia was also evaluated. Patients unresponsive to stimuli were excluded. Results: Ninety-eight patients underwent successful percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement. Eleven patients (11%) received regional anesthesia via ultrasound-guided rectus sheath and/or transversus abdominis plane nerve block. Indications for regional anesthesia included compromised airway from head or neck malignancy (5), cerebrovascular accident (4), or other neurologic condition (2). Patients receiving regional anesthesia tolerated the procedure without need for additional intraoperative analgesia. Average pain level in the regional anesthesia vs. conscious sedation groups recorded: 0.0 vs. 0.1 pre-procedure (p ¼ 0.11), 2.4 vs. 6.1 immediately post-procedure (p ¼ 0.005), and 3.0 vs. 2.6 at 24 hours post-procedure (p ¼ 0.47). Patients receiving regional anesthesia had decreased overall post-procedure narcotic analgesia requirement. No complications relating to nerve block were seen. Conclusions: Regional anesthesia is effective at controlling perioperative pain for percutaneous gastrostomy tube placement and is a useful alternative for patients who cannot tolerate conscious sedation due to airway or respiratory compromise.