A obra fundamental de Marcel Proust, “Em busca do tempo perdido” tem fascinado, ao longo deste século, inúmeros intelectuais, pensadores e filósofos que se deixaram encantar/seduzir pela escrita, pela narrativa, pelas ideias.
O filósofo francês Gilles Deleuze é um dos intelectuais que nunca deixou de pensar e de escrever a partir da obra de Proust. Em 1964 publicou o ensaio “Proust e os signos”, que corresponde à primeira parte deste livro lido recentemente no âmbito da minha aventura #lerProust. Nessa primeira parte, Deleuze analisa a obra de Proust como o relato de uma aprendizagem da decifração de sinais/sgnos.
Em 1970 o filósofo retornou a Proust e acrescentou ao livro uma segunda parte, “A máquina literária”, na qual ele investiga o sistema de referências e ressonância várias que enquadram “Em busca do tempo perdido” no sentido da sua reflexão rizomática.
Ao longo deste ensaio conceitos como tempo, (homo)sexualidade, sujeito, diferença, essência e Arte são temas tratados com a densidade que Deleuze marca a sua obra. Por isso mesmo este é um ensaio a que, sei, voltarei mais vezes.
Publisher: University of Minnesota Press, Year: 2019
Daring new theories of masculinity, built from a large and geographically diverse interview study of transgender men
American masculinity is being critiqued, questioned, and reinterpreted for a new era. In Men in Place Miriam J. Abelson makes an original contribution to this conversation through in-depth interviews with trans men in the U.S. West, Southeast, and Midwest, showing how the places and spaces men inhabit are fundamental to their experiences of race, sexuality, and gender.
Men in Place explores the shifting meanings of being a man across cities and in rural areas. Here Abelson develops the insight that individual men do not have one way to be masculine—rather, their ways of being men shift between different spaces and places. She reveals a widespread version of masculinity that might be summed up as “strong when I need to be, soft when I need to be,” using the experiences of trans men to highlight the fundamental construction of manhood for all men.
With an eye to how societal institutions promote homophobia, transphobia, and racism, Men in Place argues that race and sexuality fundamentally shape safety for men, particularly in rural spaces, and helps us to better understand the ways that gender is created and enforced.
Introduction “I DON’T HAVE ONE WAY TO BE”
What does it mean to be a man in America? Leo pondered this ques- tion as he sat at the kitchen table, recently cleared of dinner dishes, in his San Francisco apartment. The evening summer fog had crept in over the hills and settled above the streets, putting a chill in the air. At the start of the second decade of the twenty-first century, Leo’s thoughts turned first to fear, even in the supposed progressive strong- hold of the Bay Area. The recent killing of Oscar Grant, a young black man living in the Bay Area, by a transit police officer in the early hours of New Year’s Day 2009 weighed heavily on Leo’s mind: The consequences of being a black man was made even more relevant in my life when a young man named Oscar Grant was pulled off a train and shot in the back, and you know, I just easily see myself in that position being on a train coming from a party. . . . There was just this feeling of being on this crowded train and being pulled off because there was some kind of chaos and just resembling someone and to have that happen. It’s just so tragic. As a black man in his midthirties living in the same area, Leo could easily see Grant’s fate as his own—pulled off a crowded train by po- lice for fitting the description of a suspect and losing his life amid the chaos of New Year’s revelry. The fear of being perceived by others as dangerous when in public spaces, by virtue of being a black man, was at the forefront of his mind. A big part of being a man meant watch- ing himself when out in the world, never sure when he might become a target.
Sponsorship: Applying for Space, Sexualities and Queer Research Group and Rural Geography Working Group
In popular discourse, sexual freedom is associated with the city (Hubbard 2012, Bilić and Stubbs 2015). Rural spaces are imagined as inherently heteronormative and hostile towards queer subjects (Butterfield 2018). Geographies of sexualities and queer geographies have been at the forefront of deconstructing rural spaces as sexually monolithic (Bell and Valentine 1997, Bell 2003, Gorman-Murray et al. 2012, McGlynn 2017). This body of work has complicated assumptions about queer migration patterns from rural to urban (Gorman-Murray 2007, 2009), explored anti-urban or lesbian feminist countercultures (Herring 2010, Valentine 1997) as well as the meanings of homonormativity in rural spaces (Brown 2015). These interventions have demonstrated that the sole understanding of the rural/urban axis through the progressive/conservative dichotomy has only provided a limited and arguably normative understanding of rural queer lives.
Recent policy research on queer lives in EU member states indicates that the marginalisation of LGBTQ people in rural societies and regions has to be understood through situated and geographically nuanced factors and analyses (Bilić and Stubbs 2015, Monro, Christmann et al. 2016, Butterfield 2018). Adding to the previous advances made by the queer geographical canon, this session queries how liveability can help us conceptualise rural queer lives. Judith Butler’s (2004) notion of liveability has lately been developed as an analytical tool for the queer social sciences to move beyond the common juridico-political understandings of equality and rights to one of lived experiences (Browne et al. 2019). With that, liveability disrupts place-based imaginaries about progress or its lack (Browne et al. 2015).
The session seeks to explore the diverse aspects of rural queer lives beyond the rural-urban dichotomy. Topics might include, but are not limited to:
Queer networks
Conviviality
Social and political participation and political activism
(In)visbility
Gentrification and urban-rural migration
Space and place-making
Intersectional queer rural lives
Queer economies and counter-cultures
If you are interested in submitting a paper, please send abstract of up to 250 words, and your name and institutional affiliation to stefanie.boulila@posteo.de by 31st January 2020.
Postgraduate Students, early-career researchers and activists are particularly encouraged to submit a paper. It is possible to give a remote presentation.
Stefanie C. Boulila (University of Göttingen), Kath Browne (Maynooth University) and Catherine Jean Nash (Brock University),
Call
for Papers for a session at the Annual International Conference of
the Royal Geographical Society with Institute of British Geographers
(RGS-IBG), London 28-30 August 2019. Sponsored by the Space,
Sexualities and Queer Research Group.
It
has long been argued that the national project is inherently
heteronormative – creating and celebrating specific family forms,
as well as reiterating nationalistic visions through gendered and
sexualised normativities (e.g. Binnie and Bell, 2000; Sharp, 1996;
Yuval-Davis 1997). More recently, investigations of homonationalism
have explored the cooption and use of (white) lesbian and gay
‘acceptances’ often in the form of civil unions to reproduce the
national project, affirm racial hierarchies and engage in
postcolonial military conflict (e.g. Puar, 2007; El-Tayeb 2011,
Haritaworn 2012). At the same time there have been new forms of
resistances to sexual and gender equalities, including anti-gender
campaigns. As an analytical category, heteroactivism opens up a space
to examine these phenomena relationally as well as in their
heterogeneity (Browne and Nash, 2017).
The
securitization of borders, the rise of populism and the far right in
allegedly post-racial times require sexual and gendered analyses that
engage with the multiplicities of support and oppositions to rights,
equalities and intersectional justice. This session seeks explore the
multifarious intersections of heteroactivism and nationalist
projects. Topics might include, but are not limited to:
Race,
religion and oppositions to/acceptances of sexual and gender
liberations
Modernity,
Europeaness And LGBT/Women’s rights
University
Cultural wars and governmental interventions
Sexualities
of the far right/populisms
Gender
Norms and nationalisms
Opposing
the Oppositions/acceptances Confrontation, debate and protest, the
promise of oppositional politics
Heteroactivism
and homonationalist affirmations
If
you are interested in submitting a paper, please
send your expression of interest including title, abstract of up to
250 words, and your name and institutional affiliation to the session
to
kath.browne@mu.ie,
sboulil@uni-goettingen.de,
and cnash@brocku.ca
by 31st
January 2019.
Following
a great response to this years CFP we are extending the deadline to
give more people the opportunity to be part of this brilliant event. The
theme for the 2019 Lesbian Lives Conference is The Politics of (In)
Visibility. The 24th edition of this conference is hosted by the
University of Brighton Centre for Transforming Sexuality and Gender in
conjunction with feminist scholars from University College Dublin and
Maynooth University. The organisers of this two-day international and
interdisciplinary conference now welcome proposals from academics,
scholars, students, activists, documentary and film-makers, writers and
artists.
The
Lesbian Lives Conference is not just the world’s most longstanding
academic conference in Lesbian Studies, it is a large international
event that draws speakers and participants from all continents and hosts
the best-known as well as emerging scholars in the field. In the past
we have hosted Emma Donoghue, Jackie Kay, Joan Nestle, Sarah Schulman,
Cherry Smyth, Del La Grace Volcano, Sarah Waters, Campbell X and
academics such as Sara Ahmed, Terry Castle, Laura Doan, Lisa Downing,
Lillian Faderman, Sarah Franklin, Claire Hemmings, Alison Hennegan,
Sally R. Munt, Helena Whitbread, Bonnie Zimmerman among many others.
Moving
beyond the notion of the politics of visibility as meaning only the
politics of being ‘out’ or being about erasure from cultural
representation, the conference seeks to further probe what the politics
of (in)visibility means to the LGBTQ community and individuals today.
With celebrity culture and new media is visibility still a burning
issue? Although visibility has increased, there are still media
representations drawing predominantly on limiting stereotypes; lesbians,
bisexual women and trans folks continue to be marginalised; yet visual
activism and expression; from painting, photography, and documentary
making to romcoms, comics, YouTube serials, and slasher fiction are at
the heart of LBTQ culture.
The
conference also would like to invite delegates to think about the
politics of (In) visibility beyond visual culture and media
representations, to include broader notions of public life and spaces.
Gay culture may be increasingly visible in some metropolitan areas but
lesbian spaces and places continue to be invisible. Similarly, Pride may
be considered a moment of public visibility for the whole of the LGBTQ
spectrum, but also in this case visibility is shaped by commercial
interests and this again marginalises LBT and other non normative
perspectives and experiences. Beyond these particular examples it is
also important to consider intersectionality in relation to societal
aspects of power that potentially render identities either or both in-
and hyper visible.
Proposals are welcomed on (though are by no means limited to) the following:
· The relation of queer to lesbian visibility
· Visual activism
· Revisiting debates about LGBTQ visibility and its discontent
· (In)visibility and intersectionality
· (Bi) invisibility in LGBT communities
· Visibility in mainstream media
· Fake news and tablodisation of sexual identities
· Social media and visibility
· Lesbian YouTube culture
· Sexuality and Instagram
· Dating apps
· Film and screen studies
· Comics
· Photography
· LGBTQ domestic photography and home movies
· Lesbians in the archives
· The visual imprint of subcultures
· The lesbian lens
· The lesbian gaze
· LBTQ looks
· Youth and (in)visibility
· Visibility and social class / disability/ race/gender
· Visibility and invisibility of LGBT in museums
The
conference organisers welcome proposals for (A) individual papers, (B)
sessions, (C) round table discussions, (D) workshops and (E) visual
presentations. We encourage submissions across all genres, both fact
and fiction which align to the conference theme, and which have been
produced between 2015-2018.
Lesbian
Lives aims to build bridges across disciplines and explore less
traditional forms of critical engagement with the politics of
(in)visibility. In 2019, this underlying ethos of inclusiveness and
dialogue will materialize in a fundraiser exhibition. Under the remit of
“The Lesbian Lens”, we invite artists to digitally submit visual work:
drawing, painting, photography and video. The exhibition opening will
take place on the 15th of March and it will close a week after.
For papers, panels or workshops, please submit proposals of no more than 300 words to: sexgencentre@brighton.ac.uk clearly the information required as per the guidelines below, by the 18 January 2019. For submissions to the exhibition, please send your work to: J.Keane@brighton.ac.uk
The
Lesbian Lives Conference is open to all genders and any political and
sexual orientations. There is an ethos of welcome and accessibility.
We particularly want to extend a welcome to bi and trans communities.
We
look forward to welcoming you to the conference and to hearing the
exciting papers, participating in the enlivening workshops, watching the
phenomenal films and engaging in a process of learning and growth.
For regular conference updates follow us on twitter: @CTSG_Brighton
Keynote speaker: Prof David Halperin (University of Michigan)
Author of ‘How To Be Gay’ and ‘Gay Shame’
Invitation from the conveners: Introducing the English translation of Mario Mielli’s 1977 ‘Towards A Gay Communism’, Tim Dean describes Mieli’s articulation of gayness as ‘loosening gayness from an exclusively sexual orientation to something more capacious’ (Mieli 2018:xi). Yet Mieli was writing before the emergence of queer theory, and in contemporary scholarly work around sexuality and sexual identity, queer appears to have achieved a hegemonic status. Over the past decade the articulation of theory or politics that is explicitly gay (rather than queer or LGBTQ) has often been attached to limiting, exclusionary, and oppressive practices, particularly regarding race and gender. As an unsurprising result, in both academia and activism ‘gay’ is frequently framed as the normative, assimilationist, and exclusionary past to queer’s fluid, radical, and inclusive present and future.
Yet critically engaging with what gay and queer mean (or could mean) nowadays can be elided precisely because of this problematic juxtaposition. While in many ways we broadly align ourselves with queer thought, we are sceptical of knee-jerk tendencies to unquestioningly surrender gay to a politics of exclusion and neoliberal assimilationism. We want to challenge and interrogate assumptions of how gay can be known and conceptualised, beyond conflation with / reduction to homosexuality. Consequently, this conference invites a focus explicitly gay scholarships, theories, identities, identifications, politics, cultures, histories, and futures. It asks:
‘Does gay have anything useful to offer in queer times?’
As part of its engagement with this question, the conference will include a limited-attendance half-day workshop with Prof David Halperin, focused on his influential text ‘How To Be Gay’.
We invite scholarly, activist, and artistic submissions. It has always been unclear how far queer scholarship, let alone gay scholarship, escapes a focus on gay men. Therefore we give special consideration to submissions by or about gay women, and gay people with other gender identities. Submissions might discuss some of the following provocations (though contributions beyond these are welcomed):
How can gayness be re/conceptualised? – identities, politics, activisms
What is gay culture, and what is the state of it now? – race, appropriation, mainstreaming
What opportunities and challenges do trans lives offer for understanding gayness?
When did gayness become exclusive? – bisexual, lesbian, & other ‘non-straight’ perspectives
How does gayness exist beyond gender binaries?
What are the vehicles of gay acculturation? – elders, spaces, media
How can gay space be made more trans-inclusive? – groups, bars, bedrooms
What are the boundaries of gay space, and what happens in its liminalities and margins?
Can or should gay escape its Western origins?
Do we need a re-engagement with radical gay writing? – histories, activisms, theories
To Apply: Please send abstracts of ~250 words, plus a short bio, to convenor Ian Sinclair (i.a.sinclair@brighton.ac.uk) by Friday Jan 11th 2019. Registration fees are on a sliding scale through £80 (institutional support), £40 (postgrad), and £10 (unsupported). A limited number of travel bursaries are available for presenters without any funding. We are happy to discuss your submission with you before the deadline.
Close Relations: a multi- and interdisciplinary conference on critical family and kinship studies (call for papers)
Uppsala University 24-26 October 2018
Few questions raise more heated debate than those of family and kinship, and few areas demonstrate more clearly the interconnectedness of the private and the public. Recent years have witnessed a growing emphasis on “family values” in the EU, with ongoing debates about marriage, migration, procreative practices, parental leave, meanings of childhood, and gendered divisions of (care) labour. In a time marked by globalization and migration, as well as neoliberalism and the rise of nationalism, an increasing recognition of non-conventional families and kin constellations has run parallel with re-affirmations of the nuclear family form. Growing anxieties around the (welfare) state’s (future) ability to care for its citizens also refocuses the family’s caretaking and wealth extending function. The conference Close Relations offers a platform for exploring urgent issues for critical family and kinship studies, across disciplines and areas. We wish to explore how changes in family and kin formation materialize in everyday lives, in stories, in fiction and art; how they are facilitated, contested, or hindered in cultural, political, legal, and medical contexts; how close relations play out, become closer or closed off, in specific contexts and situations.
The conference opens with a plenary lecture at 4 pm Wednesday October 24, and closes at 4 pm Friday October 26; the program comprises plenary lectures and a panel discussion, as well as parallel sessions with paper presentations.
Confirmed plenary speakers are:
David Eng, Professor of English, University of Pennsylvania, US
Susan White, Professor of Social Work, University of Sheffield UK
Rikke Andreassen, Professor of media and communication, Roskilde University DK
For the parallel sessions, we now seek abstracts for 15-minute presentations.
Contributions may address areas including, but not limited to, the following:
Assisted reproductive technologies
The child, the parent, the state – negotiating the child perspective with a focus on migration
Conceptualizing family and kinship
Family/Kinship and sex/intimacy
Migration/Transnational family and kinship
Motherhood, fatherhood, parenthood
Kin/NonKin, care, and responsibility
Kinship beyond the human
Solo by choice or single by chance? – (L)one-parent families
Orphanhood
Queer kinship
Researching family and kinship: critical methodologies
Time and place – the wheres and whens of families and kin
Trans* kinship
Submit abstract (max 300 words) and a brief bio (max 50 words) to helena.henriksson@gender.uu.se no later than January 31, 2018. Please write “abstract famkin” in the subject line. Acceptance will be communicated by the end of February. The conference registration will open no later than May and the registration fee will not exceed 3000 SEK (300 EURO; reduced fee for students).
The Swedish Network for Family and Kinship Studies is a multi-disciplinary network for scholars with an interest in exploring the meanings, boundaries, shifts and continuities in family and kinship, their links to power relations, and how they are maintained or disrupted by cultural values, social practices, or symbolic representations. We explore and develop critical perspectives on family and kinship historically as well as in the present. The Network is funded by FORTE 2016-2018 and based at Uppsala University.
This colloquium aims to bring together the study of sexual practices and desires and critical studies of men and masculinities. We are explicitly interested in returning to some of the provocations of sexology in the twentieth century to think through men’s sexuality today. For Kinsey there is an inherent paradox in “man’s absorbing interest in sex and his astounding ignorance of it; his desire to know and his unwillingness to face the facts.” Whilst we can see some of the failings and problematics in Kinsey, Masters & Johnson, and other Sexologists, it is critical to reflect not simply as criticism of these, but also of what they are suggestive and enlightening.
Today, nearly seventy years after the publication of Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, after the sexual revolution, after the censorship trials, after the rise of feminism, queer theory, increased visibility of trans* and genderqueer identities, and LGBT activism, we wish to ask: what are men doing sexually? Men’s sexual practices, more often than not, are pathologized, diagnosed, managed, treated. Whilst productive and valuable work has been undertaken in the areas of rape culture and sexual violence, this symposium aims to explore the diversity and scope of male sexual practices. More specifically, current discussions on masculinity and sexuality tend to marginalize the fear, the excitement, the shame, the pleasure and the embarrassment that men experience when doingsex. This symposium addresses this by focusing on men doingsex.
Genders are neither binary nor essential. Nor are they singular, unchanging, invariable, inherent, or flatly definitive. Genders are not names, labels, or identities; they are neither nouns nor adjectives. Gender is a verb, a process. Genderings constantly change. Individuals are always more than one gender. These multiple genderings are culturally intelligible.
To gender is to signal, mask, obscure, suggest, mislead, misrecognize, and simplify the uncontainable, uncategorizable chaos of desires and incommensurabilities characteristic of subjects, but energetically contained by society. Gender’s job is always to make the subject fit.
Insofar as one of two binary gender distinctions tends to stand in for and obscure the complex negotiations genders represent, “to gender” is always to reduce, locate, and simplify processes that extend through history from the psychical terrain of the subject to the sociocultural manifestations, ramifications, imperatives, and possibilities attached to genders’ binary resolutions.
Partilho, vindo de Parole de Queer, este texto demasiado bom para não ser partilhado. Partilho uma ideia de questionar e repensar a necessidade de transversalizar as opressões, os movimentos, as ideias, as políticas!
REVOLUCIÓN por PAUL B. PRECIADO
La palabra “pride”, orgullo, tenía sentido en un contexto en el que la homosexualidad y la transexualidad eran consideradas como enfermedades mentales y estaban en muchos casos criminalizadas. Las minorías sexuales llevamos muchos años luchando por la descriminalización, la despatologización y el reconocimiento de los derechos fundamentales. Desde 1969 hemos entrado en un proceso al mismo tiempo de normalización e integración. En simultáneo, han ido apareciendo otras exclusiones, de clase, de raza, de discapacidad que están presentes incluso en contextos en los que la homosexualidad se ha ido progresivamente normalizando y en parte ha habido en los últimos años una reafirmación de las convenciones heteronormativas.
Para mí una palabra que funcionaría hoy mucho mejor que “Orgullo” podría ser “Revolución”. Necesitamos un cambio de paradigma epistémico, el cuestionamiento del marco médico y jurídico en el que se asigna la diferencia sexual. Necesitamos una revolución de nuestros modos de amar, de entender la producción de placer, la filiación. Las minorías sexuales nos sentimos parte de un movimiento más amplio de transformación social, reclamamos un proceso de democratización política total, incluida la democracia sexual, pero sin olvidar la justicia racial, de clase o ecológica.
Uno de los problemas de las luchas actuales es que han quedado atrapadas en las lógicas de la identidad en la que cada movimiento (gay, lesbiano, trans, intersex, etc.) pelea por su propia representación y visibilidad. El reto es establecer alianzas que presten atención a la transversalidad de la opresión y que sean capaces de inventar procesos abiertos de experimentación social para producir otros modos colectivos de vivir.
Paulo Jorge Vieira 