La lente intégration du queer au féminisme québécois francophone: douze ans de résistance et le rôle de passeur des Panthères roses

Abstract

RésuméLe voyage et l'appropriation des théories queer dans les milieux féministes francophones du Québec ont été particulièrement longs et ardus, appelant un questionnement non seulement sur les raisons de ce retard, mais aussi sur les dimensions qui ont permis, ultimement, l'intégration des théories queer chez les féministes francophones. Combinant des outils analytiques en provenance de la littérature sur la diffusion des mouvements sociaux (passeurs ou brokers, cadres interprétatifs, répertoires d'action collective, etc.) et une approche en idées politiques, nous analysons l'insertion des théories queer chez les féministes en deux temps. Dans un premier temps, les intellectuelles féministes critiquent de manière assez généralisée les théories queer, critiques regroupées en 3 axes : 1) la déconstruction des femmes et des lesbiennes en tant que sujet politique ; 2) l'investissement dans l'univers symbolique du politique comme espace de subversion, au détriment des relations matérielles et des structures de pouvoir ; et 3) la disparition de la spécificité lesbienne et l'absence de remise en question des privilèges masculins dans les mouvements queer. Dans un deuxième temps, le travail de passeur des Panthères roses–groupes queer radical–permet la traduction des cadres (frame bridging) et leur inscription dans un répertoire d'action reconnaissable des féministes, répondant ainsi à deux des trois axes de critiques. Nous avançons donc que ce rôle de passeur permettra d'ouvrir une brèche qui, rapidement, permettra l'inscription et l'intégration, même si conflictuelles, du queer dans les milieux féministes francophones.

The Future of Canadian Political Science: Boundary Transgressions, Gender and Anti-Oppression Frameworks

“…In the 2000s, CJPS/RCSP had articles on race (Besco, 2015;Bilodeau et al, 2012;Hurwitz and Peffley, 2010;Nath, 2011;Thompson 2008) Thompson and Wallner, 2011; and on disability (Prince, 2001). "Finding Feminisms" included articles that for the first time in the journal's history substantively addressed transgender issues, gender fluidity and queer theory (F. MacDonald, 2017;Manning, 2017;Page, 2017), perhaps signalling the emergence of scholarship that "queers" CPS. Also in the 2000s, CJPS/RCSP featured articles that recognized overlapping experiences of marginalization, as seen in Green's research (2001Green's research ( , 2006 and Dick's (2006) on Aboriginal women, Abu-Laban and Couture's work on "multiple minorities" in the Alberta public school system (2010), Hankivsky's advocacy of diversity mainstreaming (2005) and Hankivsky and Dhamoon's discussion of intersectionality (2013).…”

“…Returning to these abstracts but using the terms (and their derivatives): oppression, dominance, settler colonialism, colonization, exploitation, marginalization, sexism, heterosexism, homophobia, heteronormativity, homonormativity, racism, poverty, settler, privilege, whiteness, white supremacy, intersectional, resistance, justice, liberation, Indigenous, citizenship, anti-oppression, and Aboriginality, yielded 22 more articles in CJPS/RCSP. Articles in CJPS/RCSP and CPSR that adopt an intersectional antioppression approach disrupt specific concepts that have defined CPS including, but not limited to, identity (Hakivinsky and Dhamoon, 2013;Nath, 2011;Page, 2017;Thompson, 2008), Aboriginality (Ladner, 2017;Lugosi, 2011, D. MacDonald, 2007Murray, 2017;Panagos, 2007), sovereignty (Bruyneel, 2010;Green 2001Green , 2006Hudon, 2017;Voth, 2016), mobilization (Tungohan, 2017) and equality (Abu-Laban and Couture, 2010;Hakivinsky, 2005Hakivinsky, , 2012. While these concepts are an intrinsic part of CPS and are discussed extensively in CJPS/RCSP and CPSR, analysis typically reproduces structural forms of power inside and outside the discipline.…”

“…In the 2000s, CJPS/RCSP had articles on race (Besco, 2015; Bilodeau et al, 2012; Hurwitz and Peffley, 2010; Nath, 2011; Thompson 2008) Thompson and Wallner, 2011; and on disability (Prince, 2001). “Finding Feminisms” included articles that for the first time in the journal's history substantively addressed transgender issues, gender fluidity and queer theory (F. MacDonald, 2017; Manning, 2017; Page, 2017), perhaps signalling the emergence of scholarship that “queers” CPS.…”

“…Articles in CJPS/RCSP and CPSR that adopt an intersectional anti-oppression approach disrupt specific concepts that have defined CPS including, but not limited to, identity (Hakivinsky and Dhamoon, 2013; Nath, 2011; Page, 2017; Thompson, 2008), Aboriginality (Ladner, 2017; Lugosi, 2011, D. MacDonald, 2007; Murray, 2017; Panagos, 2007), sovereignty (Bruyneel, 2010; Green 2001, 2006; Hudon, 2017; Voth, 2016), mobilization (Tungohan, 2017) and equality (Abu-Laban and Couture, 2010; Hakivinsky, 2005, 2012). While these concepts are an intrinsic part of CPS and are discussed extensively in CJPS/RCSP and CPSR , analysis typically reproduces structural forms of power inside and outside the discipline.…”