Why is there no Queer International Theory?

Abstract

the anonymous referees, and the editors of EJIR for their close readings of and astute engagements with my argument. Thanks to Aristea Fotopoulou for her research assistance and Joanna Wood for her editing assistance. Abstract:Over the last decade, Queer Studies have become Global Queer Studies, generating significant insights into key international political processes. Yet the transformation from Queer to Global Queer has left the discipline of International Relations largely unaffected, which begs the question: If Queer Studies have gone global, why hasn't the discipline of International Relations gone somewhat queer? Or, to put it in Martin Wight's provocative terms, why is there no queer international theory? This article claims that the presumed non-existence of queer international theory is an effect of how the discipline of IR combines homologization, figuration and gentrification to code various types of theory as failures in order to manage the conduct of international theorizing in all its forms. This means there are generalizable lessons to be drawn from how the discipline categorizes queer international theory out of existence to bring a specific understanding of IR into existence. Since its formation as an academic field, Queer Studies has questioned "the uniformity of sexual identities," tracing how sexual and gender variance undo fixed identity categories like gay, lesbian, and straight. This led to theorizations of sexuality and gender as flexible, often anti-normative, and increasingly politicized (Duggan, 2003).Most of this work involved thinking sex, sexuality and their performances on a personal, institutional or national scale (Rubin, 1984;Butler, 1990; Berlant and Freeman,1992). In response to contemporary global incidents ranging from "the triumph of neoliberalism" to the "infinite 'war on terrorism'" to "the pathologizing of immigrant communities as 'terrorists'" (Eng et al, 2005:1), QueerStudies has largely transformed itself into Global Queer Studies (GQS). In this guise, it produces significant insights on the global workings of "race, on the problems of transnationalism, on conflicts between global capital and labor, on issues of diaspora and immigration, and on questions of citizenship, national belonging, and necropolitics" (Eng et al, 2005:20; also see Povinelli and Chauncey, 1999). GQS contributions to what are arguably the three core areas of International Relations (IR) research -war and peace, state and nation formation, and international political economy -are regularly featured in top-ranked journals and in top-ranked book series (e.g., Puar, 2007; Puar and Rai, 2002;Hoad, 2000;Binnie, 2004;Briggs, 2003;Luibhied and Cantu, 2005;Luibhied, 2002Luibhied, , 2007Kuntsman, 2009;Spurlin, 2013; 3 Cruz-Malave and Manalansan, 2002;Eng et al, 2005, Khanna, 2007. But not in the field of IR.Strikingly, this resurgence of activity in and attention to GQS and to the scholarship it is producing has largely bypassed IR. Since Queer Studies made the turn to Global Queer Studies over the ...

Gender in Global Studies

“…This was also complemented by a range of recent articles on issues such as masculinities research (Elias & Beasley 2009;Connell 2011), queer theory (Weber 2015), and intersectionality (Lorber 2011; Walby 2011). The course was structured in a way that the sessions engaged first with conceptual issues (Sjoberg 2010b;Hansen 2010), and then discussed specific feminist, gender and queer perspectives, mainly from a Global Politics/International Relations angle.…”

“…8 Subsequently, the course focused on methodology and methods, researcher positioning and ethical issues. In the evaluation, students rightly pointed towards the relative lack of attention to queer perspectives in the overall course, even though over the last decade Global Queer Studies have been generating significant insights into key international political processes (Weber 2015). This will be discussed below, also in conjunction with the significance of having included intersectionality and masculinities research in the curriculum.…”

LGBTQ politics and International Relations: Here? Queer? Used to it?

“…This is not surprising given the rather narrow disciplinary and disciplining focus of political science outlets, and points to the fact that political science/IR discovered the relevance of LGBTQ politics rather late, comparatively speaking. And there is even less of an understanding for queer international theory in parochial mainstream IR (Weber, 2014). While the contributors acknowledge the relevance of queer approaches in deconstructing essentialist understandings of gender and sexuality, they recognize that in practice 'law, policy and states appear to need identifiable categories to combat discrimination' (p. 13) -a fundamental tension between the theory and practice of LGBT advocacy.…”

A Escola Galesa de Estudos Críticos em Segurança Internacional – 25 anos depois

“…Weber (2014) argumenta que os bairros mais carentes de Relações Internacionais, povoados pelos imigrantes intelectuais marxistas, pós-estruturalistas, feministas, teóricos críticos, pós-coloniais, dentre outros, estariam produzindo insights teóricos para uma disciplina que passava por uma crise intelectual no pós-Guerra A primeira é a própria ideia de Segurança Humana, que emerge a partir da discussão sobre novos referentes para além do Estado. Além das controvérsias envolvendo as diferentes concepções de Segurança Humana defendidas pelo PNUD e por potências médias como o Canadá, assim como as críticas que destacam sua ambiguidade (PARIS, 2001), o debate em torno do conceito reduziu-se a uma discussão em torno de um indivíduo genérico ou a humanidade como um todo, o que culmina em uma marginalização de questões importantes, como as de gênero, por exemplo (CHENOY, 2005;WALKER, 2006).…”