The 'Queer Turn' in International Relations

What is it about?

Queer International Relations’ momentum in the past four years has made it inconceivable for disciplinary IR to make it ‘appear as if there is no Queer International Theory’. The ‘queer turn’ has given rise to vibrant research programmes across IR subfields. Queer research is not only not a frivolous distraction from the ‘hard’ issues of IR, but queer analytics crack open for investigation fundamental dimensions of international politics that have hitherto been missed, misunderstood or trivialised by mainstream and critical approaches to IR. As queer research is making significant inroads into IR theorising, a fault line has emerged in IR scholarship on sexuality and queerness. Reflecting the tensions between Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Studies and Queer Theory in the academy more broadly, the IR literature on (homo)sexuality largely coalesces into two distinct approaches: LGBT and Queer approaches. The article will lay out the basic tenets of Queer Theory and discuss how it diverges from LGBT Studies. The article then turns to the books under review and focuses on the ways in which they take up the most prominent issue in contemporary debates in Queer Theory: the increasing inclusion of LGBT people into international human rights regimes and liberal states and markets. The article finishes with a brief reflection on citation practices, queer methodologies and the ethics of queer research.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Queer IR demonstrates that sexuality and gender are important registers in the making and governing of subjects (people; states; organisations) and the international. The article challenges recent criticism that queer research is limited to poststructuralist deconstruction, treats real world politics as secondary and leaves unchallenged material inequalities. Rather a wide range of theoretical and methodological commitments, including historical materialism and materialist postcolonial approaches, animate Queer IR scholarship. Queer IR research equally proves wrong queer voices that frame empirical research as inherently essentialising. Simultaneously, there is nothing inherently progressive about queer. Queer IR ought to pay close attention to questions of difference, positionality and the politics of citation practices. In particular Queer/ Trans of Colour scholarship has important lessons to offer to Queer IR in this regard.