Teaching young queers a lesson: How police teach lessons about non-heteronormativity in public spaces

This paper analyses qualitative data with LGBT young people to think about police-LGBT youth interactions, and the outcomes of these interactions, as pedagogical moments for LGBT young people, police, and public onlookers. Although the data in this paper could be interpreted in line with dominant ways of thinking about LGBT young people and police, as criminalization for instance, the data suggested something more complex. This paper employs a theoretical framework informed by poststructural theories, queer theories, and pedagogical theories, to theorise LGBT youth-police interactions as instruction about managing police relationships in public spaces. The analysis shows how LGBT young people are learning from police encounters about the need to avoid ‘looking queer’ to minimise police harm.

Policing lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender young people : a gap in the research literature

This article argues for exploring lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) young people’s experiences with police. While research examines how factors such as indigeneity influence young peoples’ experiences with police, how sexuality and/or gender identity mediates these relationships remains largely unexplored. Key bodies of research suggest a need to explore this area further, including: literature documenting links between homophobic violence against LGBT young people and outcomes such as homelessness that fall within the gambit of policing work; research showing reluctance of LGBT communities to report crime to police; international research documenting homophobic police attitudes and Australian research demonstrating arguably homophobic court outcomes; and research outlining increasing police support of LGBT communities. Drawing on these bodies of literature, this article argues that LGBT young people experience policing warrants further research.

The invisible elderly : lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender older adults

More than 2 million older adults identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT). The purpose of this article is to present an overview of the physical and mental health needs of LGBT older adults to sensitize nurses to the specific needs of this group. Nurses are in a prominent position to create health care environments that will meet the needs of this invisible, and often misunderstood, group of people.

Identifiable, queer and risky : the role of the body in policing experiences for LGBT young people

This paper explores how visibly non-heteronormative bodies mediate policing experiences of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) young people, an area that has been mostly ignored in research about policing young people. Informed by interviews with 35 LGBT young people in Brisbane, Queensland, this paper addresses this gap by exploring how the non-heteronormative body mediates policing experiences of LGBT young people. Drawing on Foucault (1984), Butler (1990a), and other queer theory, the paper argues young non-heteronormative bodies visibly perform ‘queerness’, are read by police, and shape police-LGBT youth interactions. While this is complicated by looking at-risk (in terms of risk factors like homelessness, substance abuse), and looking risky (in terms of risk-taking or criminalised activities), the paper concludes noting how youthful LGBT bodies are regulated by police as non-heteronormative and deviant.

“We’re not like these weird feather boa-covered AIDS-spreading monsters” : How LGBT young people and service providers think riskiness informs LGBT youth–police interactions

Research has suggested that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) young people are “at-risk” of victimization and/or legally “risky.” Relatively few studies have examined the social construction of risk in “risk factor” research and whether risk as a concept influences the everyday lives of LGBT young people. This article reports how 35 LGBT young people and seven service provider staff in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia perceived LGBT youth–police interactions as reflecting discourses about LGBT riskiness and danger. The participants specifically note how they thought looking at-risk and/or looking risky informed their policing experiences. The article concludes with recommendations for improving future policing practice.

Pleasures, perversities, and partnerships : the historical emergence of LGBT-police relationships

Relationships between LGBT people and police have been turbulent for some time now, and have been variously characterized as supportive (McGhee, 2004) and antagonistic (Radford, Betts, & Ostermeyer, 2006). These relationships were, and continue to be, influenced by a range of political, legal, cultural, and social factors. This chapter will examine historical and social science accounts of LGBT-police histories to chart the historical peaks and troughs in these relationships. The discussion demonstrates how, in Western contexts, we oscillate between historical moments of police criminalizing homosexual perversity and contemporary landscapes of partnership between police and LGBT people. However, the chapter challenges the notion that it is possible to trace this as a lineal progression from a painful past to a more productive present. Rather, it focuses on specific moments, marked by pain or pleasure or both, and how these moments emerge and re-emerge in ways that shaped LGBT-police landscapes in potted, uneven ways. The chapter concludes noting how, although certain ideas and police practices may shift towards more progressive notions of partnership policing, we cannot just take away the history that emerged out of mistrust and pain.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer visibility through selfies: Comparing platform mediators across Ruby Rose’s Instagram and Vine presence

This article investigates the relationship between social media platforms and the production and dissemination of selfies in light of its implications for the visibility of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer (LGBTQ) people. Applying an Actor Network Theory lens, two popular visual media apps, Instagram and Vine, are examined through a comparative walkthrough method. This reveals platform elements, or mediators, that can influence the conversational capacity of selfies in terms of the following: range, the variety of discourses addressed within a selfie; reach, circulation within and across publics; and salience, the strength and clarity of discourses communicated through a selfie. These mediators are illustrated through LGBTQ celebrity Ruby Rose’s Instagram selfies and Vine videos. Instagram’s use expectations encourage selfies focused on mainstream discourses of normative beauty and conspicuous consumption with an emphasis on appearance, extending through features constraining selfies’ reach and salience. In contrast, Vine’s broader use expectations enable a variety of discourses to be communicated across publics with an emphasis on creative, first-person sharing. These findings are reflected in Rose’s Instagram selfies, which mute alternative discourses of gender and sexuality through desexualized and aesthetically appealing self-representations, while Vines display her personal side, enabling both LGBTQ and heterosexual, cisgender people to identify with her without minimizing non-normative aspects of her gender and sexuality. These findings demonstrate the relevance of platforms in shaping selfies’ conversational capacity, as mediators can influence whether selfies feature in conversations reinforcing dominant discourses or in counterpublic conversations, contributing to everyday activism that challenges normative gender and sexual discourses.

‘Just stupid drama queens’ : how police constrain, regulate, and punish the public visibilities of sexual/gender diversity as out of place

Using interview data on LGBT young peoples’ policing experiences, I argue policing practices work to constrain public visibilities of sexual and gender diversity in public spaces. Police actions recounted by LGBT young people suggest the workings of a certain kind of visuality (Mason, 2002) and evidenced more subtle actions that sought to constrain, regulate, and punish public visibilities of sexual and gender diversity. Aligning with the work of sexualities academics and theorists, this paper suggests that, like violence is itself a bodily spectacle from which onlookers come to know things, policing works to subtly constrain public visibilities of “queerness”. Policing interactions with LGBT young people serves the purpose of visibly yet unverifiably (Mason, 2002) regulating displays of sexual and gender diversity in public spaces. The paper concludes noting how police actions are nonetheless visible and therefore make knowable to the public the importance of keeping same sex intimacy invisible in public spaces.

Policing visible sexual/gender diversity as a program of governance

Using interview data on LGBT young people’s policing experiences, I argue policing and security works as a program of government (Dean 1999; Foucault 1991; Rose 1999) that constrains the visibilities of diverse sexuality and gender in public spaces. While young people narrated police actions as discriminatory, the interactions were complex and multi‐faceted with police and security working to subtly constrain the public visibilities of ‘queerness’. Same sex affection, for instance, was visibly yet unverifiably (Mason 2002) regulated by police as a method of governing the boundaries of proper gender and sexuality in public. The paper concludes by noting how the visibility of police interactions with LGBT young people demonstrates to the public that public spaces are, and should remain, heterosexual spaces.

There is no relationship : service provider staff on how LGBT young people experience policing

There has been an extended engagement with how young people experience policing, with a focus on the intersection between policing and indigeneity, ethnicity, gender, and social class. Interestingly, sexuality and/or gender diversity has been almost completely overlooked, both nationally and internationally. This paper reports on LGBT youth service providers’ accounts about police and LGBT young people interactions. It overviews the outcomes of semi-structured interviews with key LGBT youth service providers in different regions of Brisbane, Queensland. As the first qualitative engagement with these issues from the perspective of service providers, it highlights not only how LGBT young people experience policing, but also how service providers need to ‘work the system’ of policing to produce the best outcomes for LGBT young people.

‘It’s not like we’re going to jump them’: how transgressing heteronormativity shapes police interactions with LGBT young people

This paper explores how visibly transgressing heteronormativity shapes police interactions with LGBT young people. While research evidences how sexually and gender diverse bodies can be abused in schools, policing is overlooked. Interviews with 35 LGBT young people demonstrate how bodies transgressing heteronormativity (that is, non-heteronormative bodies) mediate their policing experiences in Queensland, Australia. Drawing on Foucault, Butler, and others, the paper suggests police interactions and use of discretion with LGBT young people was informed by non-heteronormative bodies discursively performing queerness in ways read by police. The paper concludes noting tensions produced for youthful LGBT bodies in public spaces.

Damaged goods: riskiness and LGBT young peoples’ interactions with police

For some time now, research has suggested lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) young people are ‘at-risk’ of victimisation and legally ‘risky’. Relatively few studies have examined how ‘risk factor’ research influences the everyday lives of LGBT young people. This paper reports how the experiences of police by 35 LGBT young people in Brisbane, Queensland reflected discourses about LGBT riskiness and how danger informed their interactions with police in public spaces. The participants specifically note how looking at-risk or looking risky affected their experiences of policing. The paper will conclude with recommendations for improved future policing practice.

Queer cops in Queensland : exploring LGBT narrative histories in the Queensland Police Service

This chapter reports on a narrative project recording the experiences of LGBT former and current police officers in the Queensland Police Service (QPS), Australia. It begins by examining the historical and research contexts of LGBT police officers, followed by a discussion of the methodology employed for the project. The chapter then examines and analyzes key themes emerging from the data about coming out, macho police culture, and the double life syndrome often experienced by LGBT police officers. Finally, it suggests that further research might uncover a more widespread application of these findings.

Same-sex intimate partner violence : exploring the parameters

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is not only a problem for heterosexual couples. Although research in the area is beset by methodological and definitional problems, studies generally demonstrate that IPV also affects those who identify as non-heterosexual; that is, those sexualities that are typically categorized as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or intersex (LGBTI). IPV appears to be at least as prevalent in LGBTI relationships as it is in heterosexual couples, and follows similar patterns (e.g. Australian Research Centre on Sex, Health and Society 2006; Donovan et al. 2006; Chan 2005; Craft and Serovich 2005; Burke et al. 2002; Jeffries and Ball 2008; Kelly and Warshafsky 1987; Letellier 1994; Turrell 2000; Ristock 2003; Vickers 1996). There is, however, little in the way of specific community or social services support available to either victims or perpetrators of violence in same-sex relationships (see Vickers 1996). In addition, there are important differences in the experience of IPV between LGBTI and non-LGBTI victims, and even among LGBTI individuals; for example, among transgender populations (Chan 2005), and those who are HIV sero-positive (Craft and Serovich 2005). These different experiences of IPV include the use of HIV and the threat of “outing” a partner as tools of control, as just two examples (Jeffries and Ball 2008; Salyer 1999; WA Government 2008b). Such differences impact on how LGBTI victims respond to the violence, including whether or not and how they seek help, what services they are able to avail themselves of, and how likely they are to remain with, or return to, their violent partners (Burke et al. 2002). This chapter explores the prevalent heteronormative discourses that surround IPV, both within the academic literature, and in general social and government discourses. It seeks to understand how same-sex IPV remains largely invisible, and suggests that these dominant discourses play a major role in maintaining this invisibility. In many respects, it builds on work by a number of scholars who have begun to interrogate the criminal justice and social discourses surrounding violent crime, primarily sexual violence, and who problematize these discourses (see for example Carmody 2003; Carmody and Carrington 2000; Marcus 1992). It will begin by outlining these dominant discourses, and then problematize these by identifying some of the important differences between LGBTI IPV and IPV in heterosexual relationships. In doing so, this chapter will suggest some possible reasons for the silence regarding IPV in LGBTI relationships, and the effects that this can have on victims. Although an equally important area of research, and another point at which the limitations of dominant social discourses surrounding IPV can be brought to light, this chapter will not examine violence experienced by heterosexual men at the hands of their intimate female partners. Instead, it will restrict itself to IPV perpetrated within same-sex relationships.

Introduction : queering paradigms, interrogating agendas

The introduction to the first volume of Queering Paradigms suggested that to queer a paradigm is to of fer a challenge to “the hetero/homonormative and gender binarist assumptions of any given academic discourse.” As queer subjects defy the “seduction of identity by exclusion,” and celebrate “the whole potential of sexuality and gender fluidity and diversity,” any attempt to understand them through the lenses offered by standard discourse is destined to fail (Scherer 2010: 2). “Queer” is not simply a synonym for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex and Questioning/Queer (LGBTIQ) subjects, as common use might suggest. Rather, it ought to be read as a reference to all who defy being pigeon-holed, pushed to the margins, or being pressured to adopt common social narratives regarding gender and sexuality.