The ‘Pink Agenda’: Questioning and Challenging European Homonationalist Sexual Citizenship

Abstract

This article introduces the 'Pink Agenda' as a set of judicial, social and political instruments employed by both nation-states and international human rights institutions, such as the Council of Europe, to achieve some socio-political goals: on the one hand, the proactive promotion of specific lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender identities beyond Europe; on the other, the creation of a dichotomy between tolerant and intolerant countries within the borders of Europe. The successful enactment of the 'Pink Agenda' is achieved by building and reinforcing a concept of European Sexual Citizenship that is strongly homonationalist in nature. Through an analysis of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the article emphasises the way in which the homonationalist paradigm of sexual citizenship is applied to strengthen the divide between tolerant and intolerant member states and to suggest the existence of a difference between a queer-friendly 'West' and homophobic and transphobic non-western countries.

Constructions of Participatory Democracy Institutions and Same‐Sex Union Rights in Online Public Deliberation in Greece

“…In the same vein, Ammaturo (2015) maintained that the alleged transition from "heteronationalist" to "homonasionalist" discourses often functions to conjoin (or fuse together) the recognition of LGBTQI+ rights and sexual policies with nationalist themes in order to demonstrate the progress and the enlightenment of the West as opposed to the East (see also Puar, 2017). The idealization of the West and the portrayal of the East as regressive, oppressive, and uncivilized are often mobilized to support arguments against Islam, limiting altogether the space for the recognition and the appreciation of "cultural others" (Ammaturo, 2015;Puar, 2017).…”

“…In fact, constructions of sexual citizenship seem to be often accompanied by cultural, racial, and other boundaries and divisions, while representations of the West as a superior, progressive civilization concerning LGBTQI+ rights and sexual policies may indicate the "duty" of the latter to refine the rest of the world too (see Atluri, 2012;Richardson & Monro, 2012;Sabsay, 2012). In the same vein, Ammaturo (2015) maintained that the alleged transition from "heteronationalist" to "homonasionalist" discourses often functions to conjoin (or fuse together) the recognition of LGBTQI+ rights and sexual policies with nationalist themes in order to demonstrate the progress and the enlightenment of the West as opposed to the East (see also Puar, 2017). The idealization of the West and the portrayal of the East as regressive, oppressive, and uncivilized are often mobilized to support arguments against Islam, limiting altogether the space for the recognition and the appreciation of "cultural others" (Ammaturo, 2015;Puar, 2017).…”

Constructing European Union Identity through LGBT Equality Promotion: Crises and Shifting Othering Processes in the European Union Enlargement

“…From 2010 onwards, the EU adopted several external relations policy documents -the 2010 toolkit and 2013 guidelines to promote and protect LGBT rights -that would emphasise LGBT rights more explicitly. These documents constitute what Ammaturo (2015) has called a 'Pink Agenda', i.e. a strategy that creates a divide between presumably LGBT-friendly EU and backward homophobic countries.…”

Ethnonationalism and attitudes towards gay and lesbian rights in Northern Ireland

“…As Stychin () has noted, we have seen the emergence over time of LGBT‐Europe's ‘sexual others’, both internally against the Muslim and migrant communities, which are portrayed as more homophobic and thus less European, but also externally against bordering countries such as Russia and Turkey. In fact, some scholars go so far as to suggest that the advancement of gay and lesbian rights is creating new divisions and hierarchies between European nations, namely the perceived morally superior and gay‐friendly ‘modern West’ model, as advocated in established western democracies, vs. the backward and ‘homophobic East’ approach, such as that found in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), where homosexuality is portrayed as a perversion and foreign import (Ammaturo ). Not all scholars, however, agree with this bi‐polar and internally homogeneous view of these European nations, particularly in terms of the characterisation of CEE (Colpana and Habed ; Moss ).…”