Homonationalism Revisited

Abstract

As various “right kind of queers” make their way into the social mainstream, researchers have moved their attention from compulsory heterosexuality as queer theory’s main other towards the new normativities created by these “exclusive integrations”. This article looks at existing critiques of homonormativity, homonationalism and homocolonialism and asks how we can develop these concepts, in order to maintain their relevance for well-needed analyses of the role LGBT rights play in projects of (national) boundary-making, as well as the ways in which LGBTQ people are variously positioned to deal with these. I argue that we need to take into account the ways in which these concepts have developed as they have entered new academic disciplines while also re-engaging with one of the central aspects of Puar’s initial framing of homonationalism: The racialized nature of sexualised/gendered difference. The article discusses the excessive potential of “gay-rights-as-human-rights” discourses, Cynthia Weber’s “plural logics of and/or” in order to challenge seemingly straightforward narratives of homonationalism, homonormativity and homocolonialism. It also draws on Alexander Weheliye’s “Habeas Viscus” in order to renew our theoretical engagement with questions of racialisation and colonialism, and to expand our view beyond issues of (legal) recognition.

Swedish LGBTQ Activists’ Responses to Neo-Nazi Threats:

“…In the quote above, Lo also describes how the neo-Nazi threat not only challenges the idea of all goals having been achieved, but also makes visible the differences within the community or movement, pinpointing yet another kind of conflict. This is something Lo links to having the opportunity to exercise rights -an argument that ties into Spade's (2011), about a key drawback of investing in a rights discourse being that opportunities to exercise such rights are stratified, often along the same lines of inequality that the rights are intended to counterbalance, for example in relation to class or race (see also Kehl 2020). Eli touches upon a related matter when asked about the kind of long-term work their organisation does in relation to neo-Nazi threats, saying:…”

“…As mentioned earlier, a fantasy is marked by its status, by whether or not it stirs up acts of resistance (Glynos & Howarth 2007, p. 145), and fantasy as such can include aspects of reproduction as well as defiance. The later quotes from Lo, Eli and Mika can be argued to challenge the fantasy of politics as conflict free, because they reveal a desire for a different approach towards the political, a desire to politicise the LGBTQ subject as well as to highlight its racialised nature (see also Kehl 2020;Wasshede 2021). This alternative narrative can be seen to represent a desire for a different political strategy, often connected to a radical queer politics (see Engebretsen 2021), which carries the promise of transformed relations of domination (Scott 2011, p. 49).…”

“…This aligns with Spade's (2011) argument about the mainstream LGBTQ movement in the US; by appealing to the state for legal reforms, it tends to overlook state violence and reproduce the very power relations it seeks to challenge. The appeal for legal reform, according to Spade, obfuscates how homophobia and racism operate, and empowers the state and its institutions by providing an opportunity to make claims on legitimacy and fairness (see also Alm 2020;Kehl 2020). Similarly, Eli's quote illustrates both how police presence might create an unsafe environment for LGBTQ people who lack citizenship, and how walking in the Pride parade in uniform may create goodwill and serve purposes of legitimising the police.…”

“…In a similar vein, states such as Sweden and Norway are often embedded within an "exceptionalism" narrative, where they are portrayed as homotolerant and a haven with regard to gay rights ( Engebretsen 2021). At the same time, other LGBTQ people are constructed as not belonging and not worthy of protection (Kehl 2018(Kehl , 2020Puar 2007Puar , 2013. Drawing on Puar's (2007) and Mbebe's (2003) work, Haritaworn, Kuntsman and Posocco (2014) use the term "queer necropolitics" to denote a specific kind of liberal gay politics in the UK, in which some queer subjects are assimilated by the liberal state and seen as "reproducing life", while others are deemed disposable.…”

“…Drawing on Puar's (2007) and Mbebe's (2003) work, Haritaworn, Kuntsman and Posocco (2014) use the term "queer necropolitics" to denote a specific kind of liberal gay politics in the UK, in which some queer subjects are assimilated by the liberal state and seen as "reproducing life", while others are deemed disposable. However, as Kehl (2020) notes, it might be impossible to not want rights. Kehl (2020, p. 24) argues:…”