Department for International Trade

The subject of this study is the term: "queer" which I analyse as a political concept. In many English-speaking countries "queer" has been a common abusive term for homosexuals and other sexually non-normative individuals. From around the end of the 1980s the term was picked up by many activists and academics as a tool for political engagement. Initially "queer" was politicized in the context of the AIDS crisis but soon afterwards, the term was used to address political, social and cultural marginalization of sexual minorities. "Queer" has ever since remained one of the most significant concepts in contemporary sexual minority politics. I examine how "queer" became a powerful political signifier and I study political messages that the term carried. My study focuses on multiple uses of "queer", rising from various forms of direct political activism to numerous academic publications. I argue that the term often functioned as a type of alternative identity, a basis of community, an incitement for political action and even a philosophical category. Rather than trying to establish common elements between the uses of "queer", I present the multiplicity of routes by which "queer" was mobilized politically. The research here described investigates an underexplored topic in the academic literature, as most publications to this day offer analyses of queer theories or activism, while the very concept "queer" has often been overlooked. By discussing the political uses of the term, my study therefore goes beyond the scope of so-called queer theory. Instead, I analyse these theories from a novel standpoint, reflecting on the conceptual politics that "queer" performs in various texts. This thesis traces the conceptual change that "queer" underwent to become an umbrella term for various political claims. At the end of the 1980s, "queer" was used by ACT UP activists and, subsequently, by other groups and individuals to express disagreement with mainstream U.S. sexual politics. From about 1991 "queer" enters academia. I study texts by Teresa de Lauretis, Michael Warner, Judith Butler, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, Lee Edelman and several others. I offer conceptual analyses of their use of "queer" as a political concept. I also engage in discussion about the consequences of certain political claims for sexual minorities. My findings indicate that "queer" was one of the central concepts used in academic debates concerning sexual minorities in the 1990s. For instance, Teresa de Lauretis used the term to criticize the previous lesbian and gay discourse and to incite development of a new language that would accommodate the multiplicity of experiences of lesbian and gay people. Judith Butler used the term to address intersections of sex, class and race. For Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick "queer" is a specific deconstructive term, whereas for Jack (Judith) Halberstam it is an anarchic term that opens a horizon of an alternative politics. Over the past recent decades there have been countless uses of "queer" as a political concept. My thesis analyses the most influential ones. I present a variety of political purposes the concept serves and point out the importance of this concept within contemporary sexual minority movement and thought. Halperin (1995) and Lynne Huffer (2010) attach "queer" to the Foucaultian philosophical tradition. Lee Edelman (2004) and Teresa de Lauretis (2008) use the term within psychoanalytical tradition. Judith Butler (1993) deploys "queer" as part of a poststructural political framework and Eve Kosofsky-Sedgwick (1993) brings out the political potential of literary criticism when using the term "queer". To study "queer" as a political concept one has to start with a few basic questions. It is important to know initial signifiers related to the terms "queer" and "political" and finally one needs to ask whether "queer" is a political concept. This introductory question is in itself quite challenging. Politics is traditionally understood as activities which are related to making and changing law. Inspirational for me is the description of "politics" proposed by Chantal Mouffe. She writes that "politics" "refers to the ensemble of practices, discourses and institutions that seek to establish a certain order and to organise human coexistence in conditions which are always potentially conflicting" (Mouffe 2013, 2-3). I also follow her understanding of hegemony. In this context, many have used "queer" as a way to oppose various hegemonic orders. Nevertheless, as one of the functions of "queer" is to be a form of personal and collective identification, the above description seems to be insufficient. In my study I follow a comprehensive understanding of politics as activities that people engage as individuals, groups, communities or even nations in order to create or challenge the world in which they live. Politics can be theorised in this context as a project of world making/challenging that people engage in by forming specific groups. Thus, a preliminary working definition of politics is: interventions that contest hegemonic order and aim at establishing new ones. Although in general I find it fruitful to think of politics through the notions of action and collectivity, sometimes an individual act can be deeply political. However, an individual act is often made in the name of a group of people or a community. A disputable issue, specifically in the case of the use of "queer", is the use of "political" in relation to various works of art and performances, especially considering that "politics" is attached to groups and their interests. Frequently artists claim that their work is political, as do academics in their analysis of works of art such as literature or film. My intention is not to say who has the right to use the term "political" to describe their activities or which articulation of "political" is correct. Clearly, when applied to works of art and their analysis, the connotation of "political" has a different dimension. It refers to objects that can potentially change or challenge our understanding of social reality. My study of "queer" is based on a heterogenic understanding of politics, not on one specific articulation of "politics". "Queer" is related to various individual and group actions but it also refers to artistic or academic works. One thing is certain and that is that this term in most of its uses is not neutral, but instead occurs as part of a specific political judgement. Personally, I believe that politics is an activity that is close to people's lives therefore in my thesis I criticize uses of "queer" that, according to me, lose relation to lives and experiences of LGBT people. In this regard, I think that the adjective "political" can be graded, certain acts 1 The approach has been applied and developed within the research team Politics of Philosophy and Gender (PPhiG)

This question is one of the most urgent questions in our literature, philosophy and politics. William Shakespeare sharply posed this question at the heart of "Romeo and Juliet". Two young, idealistic lovers wish to transgress social rules, family traditions and the political context in which they lived. Naïve Juliet claims "That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet. " Names are a problem with which many of us struggle. What does it mean that I am a man, that I am a gay or that I am Polish? We often find these names limiting and oppressive. We wish to be truly ourselves, beyond these names imposed on us. Romeo says: "Call me but love, and I'll be new baptis'd, Henceforth, I never will be Romeo". Young lovers idealistically wish to abandon their names and their city; two things that limit them and mark their social positions. Shakespeare was not so idealistic, perhaps according to him roses don't smell as sweet by any other name. It seems he deeply understood limitations of names. His lovers are not able to abandon their names and they die in their own city.