An Inquiry into Georgian Queer Activism
in the Context of EU Integration
Joep Kies
Ivory Towers & Trojan Horses:
A Queer Tragedy
Ivory Towers & Trojan Horses:
A Queer Tragedy
An inquiry into Georgian Queer Activism in the Context of EU Integration
Name: Joep Kies
Student ID: 10506802
Supervisor: dr. P. Pallister-Wilkins
Second Reader: dr. M. Dekker
University: University of Amsterdam
Department: Graduate School of Social Sciences
Programme: Conflict Resolution and Governance
Assignment: Research Project
Date: 10-07-2020
Word count: 22448
Abstract
The European Union integration process, and by extension EU conditionality in EU-seeking countries, is entrenched with a belief that rights enhancement will increase equality. When deconstructing this ‘rights myth’, it becomes apparent that it in fact does not serve equality, but maintains or enhances EU superiority, and decreases the chances of queer activists to organize their work. Furthermore, this research reveals how notions of ‘progress’ seduce the Georgian government and queer activists alike, but hinders an authentic and homegrown path to queer equality and justice. Queer activism in Georgia is therefore restraint by a discourse that pushes them in collaborating with a hegemonic power. Moreover, the analysis suggests that the Western narratives provided by the EU dictate queer activist organizing. In order to truly be a ‘beacon of hope’ to queer people, the EU should revise its strategy towards a more gendered aware, and inclusive alternative.
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements 4
List of Abbreviations 5
1. Introduction 6
2. Theoretical Framework 10
2.1 Queer International Relations: An Analytical Tool 10
2.2 Queer IR and EU Integration 13
3. Methodology 19
3.1 Feminist Research Ethics 19
3.2 Method Application 20
4. Setting the Stage 24
4.1 International Alliances, Local Impacts 24
4.2 Georgian Queer Activism: The Actors 27
4.3 Selection of Events 29
5. The Main Act 33
5.1 Mechanisms of Empowerment 33
5.2 Limiting Factors 38
6. Behind the Scenes: Deconstructing Visions of Integration 47
6.1 The Rights Myth Myth 47
6.2 The Progress Discourse 54
6.3 DeWesternize, DeColonize, DeEuropeanize 58
7. Conclusion 61
7.1 Summary 61
7.2 Conclusions 62
7.3 Contributions to Literature 63
7.4 Reflections and Limitations 64
8. Bibliography 65
9. Appendices 69
Acknowledgements
This thesis took so much time writing alone that I might as well thank my second self for his witty asides and flowing supply of campari. But seriously, since I did not manage to fully realize my alter ego, and he would probably deny it all if I asked, I thank my other campari-providing friends and colleagues with whom I have spent the last couple of months in sterile university libraries and crammed living rooms.
First of all, I would like to thank the eight participants of this research that have told me their stories, and trusted me to share their experiences with injustice and opportunities. I have learned so much from you, and wish upon you many successes in the bumpy roads ahead. Also, I would like to especially express my gratitude to my supervisor Polly Pallister-Wilkins, for her enthusiastic engagement throughout this research project, and pulling me through self-isolation with zoom sessions and meme stuffed emails. Furthermore, I would like to thank Martijn Dekker for being the second reader of this thesis, and a teacher that teaches, rather than lectures.
Then, I would like to thank my partner Tal, for motivating me from actual social distance, and pulling me through these difficult times that we have spent apart from each other. I am thrilled to end this thesis as I am flying to meet him the day after the deadline of this thesis. And lastly, I would like to thank all my friends, roommates and family, who have enlightened my days with rainy adventures in the park, tasty dinners and plenty of laughter.
List of Abbreviations
EU European Union
IDAHOT International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia INGO International Non-Governmental Organisation
IR International Relations
LGBT Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender
LGBTQ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer
LGBTQI Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Intersex NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
1. Introduction
‘Up until very recently,’ Suliko argued, ‘I thought that the language of human rights, the language of democratization, the language that the West provides, was an ultimate truth, something that does not have an alternative. I did not question that it could be problematic, because it is provided as something, you know, as a standard.’ While the Georgian government intends to attain a closer relationship with the 1 European Union (EU), queer activists in the country experience the painful discrepancy between Western pro-queer agendas and improving the lives of the communities they represent. Over the years, the European Union has taken aboard elements from queer activism in its external policy areas, projecting a ‘tolerant’ stance towards sexual minority issues. The adoption of the queer agenda by the EU, however, should be critically examined, for it result from a specific understanding of sexual minority politics within which the hegemonic position of the EU is bound. In this thesis, I analyse how Georgian queer activists experience and organize their work in the context of EU integration. I am particularly interested in the underlying notion of progress within the EU integration process, and the ways in which it influences queer activism in membership-seeking countries.
Although the notions of ‘LGBT collective identities’ and ‘LGBT rights as human rights’ can and should 2 3
be problematised, the ensuing literature provides a convenient entrance into the issues I want to discuss. Of course, the effects of standardizing and universalizing queer activism on increasing tolerance need to be acknowledged. Or, as Suzanna D. Walters puts it: ‘normal and tolerated looks pretty good compared to weird and excluded!’ However, I aim to address the limitational factors of such thinking. This thesis is4 not meant to discredit or desert the advantages these notions have brought to progressing sexual minority activism in Western countries. Rather, I stand behind Momin Rahman’s intention, ‘to ask whether the assumptions of exporting or diffusing that model can really deliver effective sexual freedom.’ By 5
engaging this literature within broader debates in Queer International Relations (IR) scholarship, I take EU integration as the point of entry. EU integration is the quintessential process within which eurocentric standards hinder the emergence of an inclusive and truly equal politics to address sexual minority issues. The context of EU integration does not only reveal how the European Union conditions relationships with
1 Suliko, interview, 05-05-2020
2 Peterson, A., Wahlström, M., & Wennerhag, M., Pride Parades and LGBT Movements, p. 5.
3 Swiebel, J., “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Human Rights: the Search For an International Strategy”. 4 Walters, S. D., The Tolerance Trap, p. 229.
EU-seeking states from a position of hegemony. It also shows how these conditions are painted by particular understandings of sexual minority activism and ‘progress’. Therefore, I believe that EU integration is the perfect process to study the ways in which Georgian queer activists organize and experience their work accordingly.
Although the majority of the literature on queer activism and EU integration focusses on the backlash of pro-queer policies in new member states, or candidate countries in the Balkans, this thesis does an 6 7 inquiry into queer activists organizing in a country that experiences EU integration but is not an official candidate member state. Such analysis is guided and inspired by previous work on discursive politics in Georgia, by Tamar Tskhadadze, and decolonial encounters in Eastern Europe, by Marina Gržinić, Tjaša 8 Kancler, and Piro Rexhepi, and the link between ‘Europeanisation’ and ‘gay emancipation’ by Bojan9
Bilić. Additionally, the contributions of Koen Slootmaeckers, regarding the processes of ‘Othering’ , in10 11 which the EU creates an inferior ‘other’ as to which it opposes its own hegemonic identity, as well by critical research provided by Phillip Ayoub and David Paternotte on the exportation of the Western queer experiences. While examining the ways in which EU integration influences Georgian queer activist12 work, I am motivated by what their findings contribute to knowledge production.
I have multiple motivations for engaging in this research project. For one, I miss important conversations about queer injustice taking place in the place where I reside, Amsterdam. To my opinion, the discourses on gender and sexuality in the Netherlands are blinded by a distorted understanding of equality and tolernace, fed by a repeatedly exploited we-were-the-first-country-with-gay-marriage-argument. By means of engaging in aforementioned literature, but more importantly, queer activists in spaces that succesfully find ways of contestation, I feel inspired and humbled. As such, this research challenges my own situatedness in the issues addressed, and teaches me about the ways in which to foster bottom-up approaches.
6 Ayoub, P., When States Come Out.
7 Bilić, B., “Europe♥ gays? Europeanisation and pride parades in Serbia”. 8 Tskhadadze, T., ‘“The West” and Georgian “Difference”’.
9 Gržinić, M., Kancler T., Rexhepi, P., Decolonial Encounters and the Geopolitics of Racial Capitalism. 10Bilić, B., LGBT activism and Europeanisation in the post-Yugoslav space: On the rainbow way to Europe. 11 Slootmaeckers, K., “Constructing European Union Identity through LGBT Equality Promotion: Crises and
Shifting Othering Processes in the European Union Enlargement”.
In order to address the aforementioned puzzles, I present my research under guidance of the following research question:
In what ways do Georgian queer activists experience and organize their work, in the context of EU integration?
Framing the research question as such, has helped me to approach the data gathering process in a clear and informative manner, and assists me in addressing my findings constructively in this thesis. Moreover, it centers queer activists within the knowledge production space this thesis provides.
As this thesis deals with persons that are often subjected to mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion, I deem it important to elaborate upon the conceptualisation that I adhered to throughout this research process. First of all, I use the terms ‘queer’ or ‘sexual minority’ interchangeable. Amongst that, I understand gender non-conforming, and non-heterosexual people. As I will address in the theoretical framework (see §2), there is a discrepancy between what is being used in the literature, amongst academics, in activism, and in ‘reality-out-there’. I interpret terms like LGBT or LGBTI as not inclusive 13 enough of the wide range of sexual minorities, and I think it further enhances the categorization of a group of marginalized people. As such, I will only use such terms when quoting others, or when such a statement can only be spoken of with regards to this group exclusively. In all other cases, and by default, I speak of my research participants as sexual minorities, or queer people. Also, within the data gathering process, I adhered to a similar conceptualisation (see §3.2.1).
The argument of this research project derives from a wider research agenda that questions the promotion of queer friendliness within the EU integration framework. Furthermore, it is relevant for it answers several calls by scholars that stressed the lack of qualitative research on queer people and individuals. Because this thesis approaches activism, and by extension activists, as its main focus, the lives and experiences of individual queer people are outside of this thesis’ scope. However, the gathered data brought forward issues such as queer refugees, queer brain drain and the impacts of activism on individual activist’s lifes, that deserve further exploring in future research.
The thesis proceeds as follows. First, it theorises EU integration and queer activism based on Queer Interational Relations scholarship perspective. Secondly, I describe the methodology that is employed in this research. In the following chapter, I will construct the stage upon which Georgian queer activists perform their work. Thereafter, I will discuss the ways in which Georgian queer activists organize their work in the context of EU integration. Then, I will deconstruct a number of underlying notions in EU integration that influence Georgian queer activist organizing. At last, I conclude my thesis by summary, and discussion of its findings.
2. Theoretical Framework
In this chapter, I situate my research in a wider academic debate on the impact of European Union integration on sexual minority activism. The understandings that inform the construction of these spaces derive from political processes that allow, and demand, a critical research approach. Again and again, I find myself returning to theories deriving from Queer International Relations (IR) scholarship, and consider it as the most suitable informational base to explore the issues of this research project. Furthermore, I believe Queer IR best facilitates a learning process about Georgian queer activists in the context of EU integration, as it reveals seemingly hidden hierarchical power structures, while at the same time acknowledges the agency of sexual minorities and queer activists.
As such, I proceed with an introduction to Queer IR scholarship (§2.1), by touching upon its origins, and explaining its analytical lenses. Thereafter (§2.2), I will elaborate upon the ways in which the academic field has come to findings with regard to EU integration and queer activism.
2.1 Queer International Relations: An Analytical Tool
In this section, I will introduce Queer International Relations scholarship by means of addressing its reactionary establishment, and analytical lens. In addition, I will elaborate upon the different approaches within the field, and explain the ways they come to their findings.
First of all, Queer IR must be understood as a means to criqitue traditional scholarship of International Relations. As such, it is part of a bigger academic movement that deems it necessary to supplement, and most certainly contest, dominant views by creating spaces for non-Western, non-heterosexual, non-white, non-cisgender and non-male voices to be heard. In addition, it is influenced by the increased internationalization of sexual minority politics during the past decades. Once at the margins of political contestation, queer issues have entered and defined contemporary international and European politics.14
Furthermore, Queer IR is inspired by (traditional) feminist approaches, for focus on studying systems of oppression in knowledge production. However, it offers a new set of questions that better articulate contemporary issues on gender and sexuality in international politics. Thus, as a result of Queer IR, knowledge production in International Relations has became increasingly representational, and an improved reflection of contemporary international politics.
The main characteristics of Queer IR are inspired by its foundation on intersectionality: the notion that individuals experience discrimination and oppression on the basis of a multide of factors. Consequently, Queer IR addresses the oppressing factors in society and knowledge production spaces that are especially blind issues of sexuality, sexual orientation and gender. As a result, it critically approaches the notions of
heteronormativity, which takes heterosexuality as the default sexuality and family norm, and cissexism,
for its binary explanatory model of gender positions. Amongst others, it addresses issues that involve 15 sexual minorities and their ways of contesting in international politics, but also utilizes the understandings, concepts and experiences that derive from sexual minority in knowledge production.
However, there are different understandings within Queer IR that contest, supplement and challenge each other. Rahul Rao illustrates this variety within Queer IR scholarship, stating:
‘For many, queer international relations [..] entails investigating the ways in which rights claims in
respect of sexual orientation and gender identity are articulated, contested, realized, and thwarted in international politics. For others, queer IR enables the use of concepts from queer theory to illuminate
aspects of international politics not immediately related to gender and sexuality.’ 16
Therefore, Queer IR must not be understood as an approach within International Relations that is solely based on the concepts of Queer Theory, nor exclusively focusses on the politics of sexual minorities. In fact, within this variety are reflected the broader academic tensions between Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Studies and Queer Theory. In line with Rao’s argumentation, the field of Queer IR can therefore typically be assorted into two distinct research viewpoints that either derive from LGBT Studies, or Queer Theory. The LGBT and the Queer-turn in Queer Interational Relations scholarship are distinct approaches, and resultantly, have characteristic manners in doing research.
Such dichotomous thinking, in a field concerned with boundary breaking is, to say the least, unfortunate. Queer IR scholarship presents the aforementioned approaches in an opposing manner, which should be criticized when working in a field that aims to surpass binaries and boundaries. However, I am encouraged to see Queer IR scholars transcend such reasoning, by engaging in cooperation with
15 Richter-Montpetit, M., Weber, C., Queer International Relations, p. 224. 16 Rao, R., “The State of" Queer IR", p. 141.
alternative theories, such as Transgender Theory , and Critical Disability Theory. Consequently, I 17 18 believe that adhering to the principles of diversity and boundary-breaking in knowledge production is the strength of working on the issues addressed in this thesis, and allow for a constructive partnership between flexibility and self-reflexivity.
Nevertheless, the Queer- and LGBT-turn within Queer IR reveal important reasons of queer injustice in contenporary international politics. As mentioned before, they do this in a profoundly distinctive manner. When it comes to research subjects, the LGBT-turned researcher engages specifically with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender perspectives and struggles. As such, it studies the practices and identities of the main non-normative communities. Historically, many sexual minority activism surrounded the issues of LGBT people specifically. As such, LGBT gained visibility and resonance over time. Whereas more19
recently the abbreviation has come to include more sexual minority identities, which has further expanded the LGBT approach’s vision, discussions on inclusion and exclusion prevail.
Contrarily, the Queer-turned researcher understands ‘LGBT’, and by extension (research) subject-making, as a political process in itself, that is based on political formations and the power of normalisation of sexuality and gender systems. Rather than assuming a stable, demarcated LGBT referent, and potentially20 creating and justifying hierarchies within sexual minority politics, the Queer approach refuses to limit itself to any defined identity collective. As a matter of fact, the referent object within the Queer approach is induced by a commitment to the radical meaning of the term ‘queer’, and therefore sets out to overcome, and purposely blur, such identification lines. Furthermore, it views LGBT research as a21 socially constructed group that carefully serves a newly introduced hierarchical system.
Additionally, the Queer approach sets out to open up for discussion dimensions of international politics that are perhaps not directly related to gender and sexuality. In doing research, it investigates how dominant structures of international power are shaped by sexual norms and logics. It approaches existing 22 political structures with the aim to identify how such structures can be de-sexualized, and de-dominated. The LGBT approach operates in already present structures within international politics, and rather than
17 Sjoberg, L., “Toward Trans-gendering International Relations?”.
18 Howell, A., Madness in International Relations: Psychology, Security, and the Global Governance of Mental
Health.
19 Ayoub, P., Paternotte, D., “Europe and LGBT Rights: A Conflicted Relationship”, p.5. 20Richter-Montpetit, M., Weber, C., Queer International Relations, p. 224.
21Ibidem, pp. 222-223. 22 Ibidem, p. 222.
deconstructing it, aims to supplement them with sexual minority attachments, which reflects the approach’s more liberal stance by advocating for inclusion. 23
Furthermore, the LGBT turn finds much resonance within the discourse on human rights, which functions as a base to advance on LGBT issues. While operating within existing political structures, the LGBT approach advocates for LGBT people’s rights claims in citizenship legislation. In contrast, the Queer 24 Theory-inspired researcher does not assume such ‘pregiven rights-seeking subjects who enter a political field in order to seek those rights.’ They set out with an aim to open up, and deconstruct spaces for 25 non-conforming people for equal access.
In sum, Queer IR has contributed to studying sexual minority politics within international politics and International Relations scholarship. Queer IR scholars have opened up a process that enables research to critically approach a politics that is informed by systems of oppression. As such, it is a framework in which my research can be placed.
2.2 Queer IR and EU Integration
In the previous section I explained how Queer IR anlysis sheds light on gendered and sexualised structures and belief systems in society. In this section, I will address the contributions Queer IR has made on knowledge production surrounding European Union integration. Doing so, enables me to ground the inquiry of this thesis onto a strong theoretical foundation in the subsequent chapters. Consequently, such positioning improves the quality of the conclusions of this analysis, and helps to critically assess the ways in which the EU integration process obstructs sexual minority activists in organizing their work.
First of all, Queer IR scholars have demonstrated how the European Union and sexual minority activism have intertwined during the last decades as a result of specific European opportunities and broader international developments. Of crucial importance in this process, Joke Swiebel argues, was the presence of ‘friendly elites, possibilities for issue linkage, opportunities afforded by the rise of racist incidents in the early 1990s, the greater resonance of human rights rhetoric, and massive international expansion in the mid-1990s.’ In addition, David Patternotte explains that putting sexual minority issues on the EU agenda26
23 Ibidem, pp. 222-223. 24 Ibidem, p. 222 25Ibidem, p. 224.
26 Swiebel, J., “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Human Rights: the Search For an International Strategy”, p.
was a result of the dynamics of NGOization, institutionalization, and professionalization of sexual minority activism. 27
Additionally, EU support for the sexual minority agenda was the result of activists framing issues in such a way that it could be seen as a part of the European values paradigm. As such, sexual minority issues are argued to be presented in multiple ways, to make them fit in other EU roadmaps: first as an internal market issue, then as a social issue, and consequently as a question of human rights. With regard to the 28 latter, Philip Ayoub and Patternotte argue that sexual minority activism had increasingly become an element of a fundamental rights myth at the European Union. Consequently, 29 the assimilation of queer issues in international human rights law established a rights discourse within which activists and international actors alike find an international platform for advocacy. This has resulted in regional legislative reforms in favor of same-sex partnership and anti-discrimination laws.
As such, Slootmaeckers argues, the EU sees itself ‘as a beacon of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trandgender friendliness and seeks to promote these norms in its external relations.’ Resultantly, the EU adopted a 30 number of ‘pro-queer’ legislation. In 1997, the European Union expanded the concept of fundamental rights, and introduced Article 13 to equip itself with legislative competences that could be used as a tool in combating discrimination, including on the grounds of sexual orientation. In the following years, 31 these competences were further developed by Directive 2000/78, which established a framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, and the ‘Toolkit to Promote and Protect the Enjoyment of all Human Rights by Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People’ in 2010, which emphasized the protection of LGBT rights in EU external relations. 32
Furthermore, Slootmaeckers, Touquet and Vermeersch argue, with the evolution of taking aboard queer activist agenda points, ‘the EU’s Enlargement policy has become an important mechanism of transforming candidate member states into countries ready (and worthy) to become a member of the EU
27Paternotte, D., “The NGOization of LGBT activism: ILGA-Europe and the Treaty of Amsterdam”, p. 389. 28 Swiebel, J., “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Human Rights: the Search For an International Strategy”, p.
28.
29 Ayoub, P., Paternotte, D., LGBT activism and the making of Europe: a rainbow Europe?, p. 3
30Slootmaeckers, K., “Constructing European Union Identity through LGBT Equality Promotion: Crises and
Shifting Othering Processes in the European Union Enlargement”, p.1.
31 O’Dwyer, C., “The benefits of backlash: EU accession and the organization of LGBT activism in postcommunist
Poland and the Czech Republic”.
and take up the responsibilities of such membership, including being LGBT friendly.’ Consequently, the 33
EU integration context is influenced by notions deriving from queer activism. Especially, the authors continue, ‘the emphasis on pride parades in particular has garnered a lot of media attention and has made the holding of pride parades a litmus test for readiness for EU membership.’ 34
However, Queer IR scholars have addressed how the EU’s pro-queer agenda is not so ‘pro queer’ in reality. One of the reasons for this is that its agenda is based on a specific narrative of sexual minority activism. Scholars argue that EU policy is aimed at reaching sexual minority inclusion within the existing structures by means of generating tolerance, rather than deconstructing and rebuilding a system that enables sexual minorities to be truly equal. This ‘tolerance trap’, as Suzanna Danuta Walters calls it, reminds queers that their legitimacy, or acceptability, depends on someone else deeming it so. Walters 35
argues that this granter of legitimacy is ‘someone else that needs no accepting, whose moral certitude needs no certification, someone whose citizenship [..] precedes and excludes gayness because gayness is something that they can decide whether or not to accept, whether or not to tolerate.’ Additionally, 36
Walters believes that one does not need to be tolerated in order to ‘live freely and fully’, instead argues that ‘the ethical alternative to discrimination and bigotry is not tolerance but rational thought and a commitment to equality.’ Ultimately, this links to what Jasbir Puar argues is the ‘folding’ of sexual 37 minorities into heteronormativity, and ‘modes of reproductive respectability’. As such, both Puar and 38
Walters question whether the pursuit of tolerance and equal rights in the forms of same-sex marriage, adoption, military service and pride parades, can truly bring about inclusivity and equality.
For instance, Joke Swiebel explains how such understandings lead to an ‘equality hierarchy’ that allows the EU to discriminate between multiple grounds for discrimination. She argues how ‘new’ forms of discrimination, such as religion, disability, age or sexual orientation, are only covered by anti-discrimination legislation aimed at the labour market. Furthermore, such uninformed selectivity can 39
also be seen when looking at the term ‘LGBTI’ deployed in official EU documents on sexual minorities.
33 Slootmaeckers, K., Touquet, H., Vermeersch, P., “The co-evolution of EU’s Eastern enlargement and LGBT
politics: An ever gayer union?”, pp. 22-23.
34 Ibidem, pp. 31-22.
35 Walters, S. D., The Tolerance Trap: How God, Genes, and Good intentions are Sabotaging Gay Equality, pp.
248-249.
36 Ibidem. 37 Ibidem, p. 13.
38 Puar, J. K., “Homonationalism as assemblage: Viral travels, affective sexualities”.
39Swiebel, J., “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Human Rights: the Search For an International Strategy”, p.
Up until recently, the EU did not include intersex people (I) to the LGBT abbreviation in its official documents, which demonstrates the mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion the use of ‘LGBTI’ brings about. Additionally, the LGBTI abbreviation excludes forms of sexual minorities not recognized by the40 EU, which diminishes alternative forms of sexual minorities and, in turn, affects (prospective) candidate member states’ understanding of queer issues through conditionality.
As such, Queer IR scholars revealed the ways in which sexual minority considerations within EU integration are influenced by Western experiences of and ideas around sexual minority liberation. As a result of Western dominance in international relations, eurocentric queer activism is exported globally and produces a sense of universality and standardizing. As such, Raewyn W. Connel argues that European and American gender orders have been imposed on non-Western countries for centuries, affecting local belief systems. The spread of eurocentric queer activism is not limited to the field of international politics, but41 through processes of globalisation, technological advances and capitalism, extends to a variety of systems ranging from ‘corporations, state bureaucracies, armies and mass education systems’. Consequently,42
Ayoub and Patternotte argue that the model promoted in EU integration ‘expands an understanding of LGBT rights that was consolidated in the Western experience.’ 43
Additionally, Momin Rahman advocates for a reconstruction of these EU-promoted models in order ‘to resist their deployment within a homocolonialist dialectic’. Rahman argues that Western models take 44
secularism and the application of rights as a norm in sexual minority activism, and suggests that the ‘unthinking extension of that principle to all technologies and practices of multiculturalism is a problem that needs to be explored.’ Furthermore, Ayoub argues that EU consideration of sexual minorities relies 45 on a specific experience ‘which is often reduced to one of white and middle-class gay men and reinforces the tendency to extrapolate the unique experiences of this subgroup as a universal norm.’ This can be 46 seen, for example, by centralizing coming out as a compulsory experience and idealizing Pride parades as the ultimate road to queer liberation.
40Kies, J. (2020). “Shantay You Stay”: A critical discussion on ‘progress’ of the LGBTQ+ community in relation to
EU conditionality in Serbia.
41 Connell, R. W., Masculinities, p. 199. 42Ibidem.
43 Ayoub, P., Paternotte, D., LGBT activism and the making of Europe: a rainbow Europe?, pp. 248-249. 44 Rahman, M., “Queer Rights and the Triangulation of Western Exceptionalism”. p. 280.
45Ibidem, p. 282.
As a consequence of universalizing Western sexual minority activism, Anna Rekhviashvili argues that ‘Westerness’ has been positioned as a ‘signifier of progress’, vesting within the West the power to define the terms that construct sexual citizenship, superiority and subordination. As a consequence, the level of47 ‘Europeanness’ or ‘Westerness’ can be translated to a measurement of ‘progressiveness’. In contrast, Rahman argues, the attempts to resist that model are seen as ‘not democratic’ (enough) or ‘lacking progress’.48
The instrumentalization of sexual minority politics as a means of projecting ‘progressiveness’, also brings about processes in which the EU, or Europe, constructs its own identity by juxtaposing its values against an inferior other. Such process of ‘othering’ has been explored by Koen Slootmaeckers, who researched how the EU constructs its own identity through the EU enlargement context. He argues that EU integration is better conceived as a ‘normative Othering process through which the EU’s borders were redrawn to define both inferior Others within (a kind of second-tier member state) and universal norm-violating Others outside the EU.’ Such geopolitical considerations have also been noticed in49 prioritising regional security over issues of the sexual minorities agenda. As such, Slootmaeckers argues that the ‘prioritisation of LGBT in the Enlargement process remains subject to the developments on the main driver of this Enlargement round, i.e. regional stability.’50 In addition, queer politics are instrumentalized as a means of statecraft. By state and non-state actors alike, the endorsement of sexual minority politics is used as a mobilisational tool under the practices of homonormativity, homonationalism, pinkwashing, and homocolonialism. Consequently, the increased visibility of sexual51 minority activism in international politics have increased international opposition, in the forms of homo- and transphobia.
Moreover, scholars argue that there is a certain level of disregard of local communities of sexual minorities affected by the EU integration process. As put in words by Rahman: ‘We have to query whether actual reductions in general aid monies or the accession of states to these demands around queer issues (usually ‘tested’ by formal rights) actually have any chance of enhancing equality resources for
47 Rekhviashvili, A., “Tracing the LGBT Movement in the Republic of Georgia”, p. 208 48 Rahman, M., “Queer Rights and the Triangulation of Western Exceptionalism”. p. 274.
49Slootmaeckers, K., “Constructing European Union Identity through LGBT Equality Promotion: Crises and
Shifting Othering Processes in the European Union Enlargement”, p. 9.
50 Slootmaeckers, K., Touquet, H., Vermeersch, P., “The co-evolution of EU’s Eastern enlargement and LGBT
politics: An ever gayer union?”, p. 42.
local queer groups’. In the case of Serbia,52 Bojan Bilić has shown how conditionality regarding sexual minorities has actually generated an increase of local stigmatization, as queer people were framed as a culprit of society, and the reason why no advances were being made towards EU membership. This 53
top-down approach of the EU, Daniel Bell and Jean-Marc Coicaud argue, also impacts relationships with non-governmental organizations as funding is based on unequal power relations, and is significantly challenging ‘when the values or funding requirements [..] do not match those of the community they are hoping to assist.’ As a reaction, Queer IR scholars have increasingly explored non-Western sexual 54 minority conceptualizations, norms, understanding and politics. As such, a call in which sexual minority55 politics can become truly diverse and international has emerged that influences and challenges the EU’s pro-queer agenda.
At last, it is argued that the EU’s heterogeneity and lack of expertise and standards on sexual minority issues disables effectively addressing the issues it aims to achieve. In a previous research on an analysis 56 of the EU’s country report on Serbia, it is argued that EU commission’s reports on conditionality of the candidates tate of Serbia, there is ‘an exclusive focus on the adoption and implementation of EU legislation’, and that ‘no attention is paid to LGBTQ+ persons in relation to disciplines outside of the legal reform framework.’57 Additionally, when the report addresses those advances made within the judiciary system, it does not prove ‘the ability to approach this is an inclusive manner.’ 58
In sum, the contributions Queer IR scholars have made to opening up carefully preserved power hierarchies are plenty. As a consequence, I believe Queer IR scholarship provides the most suitable theoretical framework in which to situate this inquiry about Georgian queer activism in the context of EU integration.
52 Rahman, M., “Queer Rights and the Triangulation of Western Exceptionalism”. p. 281. 53 Bilić, B., “Europe♥ gays? Europeanisation and pride parades in Serbia”.
54 Bell, D.A. & Coicaud, M., Ethics in Action.
55 For example: Picq, M. L, Decolonizing Indigenous Sexualities: Between Erasure and Resurgence.
56 Slootmaeckers, K., Touquet, H., Vermeersch, P., “The co-evolution of EU’s Eastern enlargement and LGBT
politics: An ever gayer union?”, p. 33.
57Kies, J. (2020). “Shantay You Stay”: A critical discussion on ‘progress’ of the LGBTQ+ community in relation to
EU conditionality in Serbia, p. 12.
3. Methodology
In order to create an understanding of the organisation and experiences of Georgian queer activists in the context of EU integration, I deem it important, beneficial, and ethical to adhere to a feminist-informed research process. First of all, I think that research based on critical feminist thinking is in many cases crucial in producing reflexive and fair knowledge, which should become a standard and guide in contemporary academia. Therefore, by means of adapting feminist inspired methods in this thesis, I want to use the opportunity to propagate this school of research and contribute to its position in knowledge producing spaces. Indeed, the topic of this thesis also deals with questions of power, hierarchy, queer politics, and gender, which asks for a research process that suits to the ethical considerations that derive from feminist theory.
In this section, I will further elaborate and justify why the methods I am using will address the research
question in the best way possible. First (§3.1), I will elaborate upon the femimist ethical considerations I adhered to in doing this research. Then (§3.2), I will explain what method I applied within this research project, and how they reflect the ethical principles.
3.1 Feminist Research Ethics
As described by Ackerly and True, a feminist research ethic is concerned with ‘being attentive to (1) the power of knowledge, and more profoundly, of epistemology [..], (2) boundaries, marginalization, and silences, (3) relationships and their power differentials, and (4) our own situatedness as researchers.’ 59
These ethical considerations have guided me in doing an feminist-informed inquiry for this study, in combination to a general intuitive approach.
In doing research, feminist reflection on epistemology notices the power in (the production of) knowledge structures. In particular, a feminist research ethic creates awareness around oppressing forces in privileged belief systems that constitute knowledge. By doing so, it challenges traditional, western scientific research, and contributes to transforming disciplines and the world that we study. As a consequence, the aim is to destabilize dominant epistemologies in order to advance critical thinking and reveal power dynamics to which science was previously blind. This also extends to reflecting on feminist epistemology itself. For instance, I am aware that I am doing research in spaces that are perhaps more often explored
59 Ackerly, B., True, J., “Reflexivity in Practice: Power and Ethics in Feminist Research on International Relations”,
and inspired by feminist thinking, though I do so in an interdisciplinary manner by combining it with the field of International Relations.
Furthermore, feminist research ethics identifies and critically approaches existing boundaries, in order to reveal its power to marginalize communitites and silence voices. Without doing so, research could potentially exclude actors caused by hegemonically defined, but disputed demarcations. Hence, I critically approach terms such as ‘LGBT’ as to clarify its mechanisms of ex- and inclusivity. Moreover, feminist-informed research processes aim to surpass limitations of disciplinary boundaries by revealing political structures that might incline researchers from inclusive, interdisciplinary knowledge production.
A feminist research ethic also compels researchers to be attentive to relationships that imbed power dynamics. Such attentiveness to interconnections require reflection on identities, and allows for a recognition that goes beyond queer’s (and women’s) experiences. Therefore, I adhere to an anti-essentialist interpretation with the aim to overcome a gender identity politics that confines our construction of conceptions, and does not do justice to the pluralistic forms of oppression that exist around us.
Lastly, the principle of reflecting on the researcher’s own position within the former three elements is an imperative component of feminist research ethics. The commitment to reflection, however, is not limited to merely reflecting on my own identity, but rather invites me to reflect on how my belief system affects research. I identify myself as a queer man and as a European, which enables me to understand, to an extent, the social and political context. Simultaneously, it may partially explain my chain of thought. Ultimately, attentiveness to the hierarchy between researcher and respondents should dismantle unequal power relations.
3.2 Method Application
By adapting to a feminist research ethic, the methods to acquire the data necessary for this thesis had to commit to ‘exploring absence, silence, difference, oppression and the power of epistemology.’ So, a 60 critical inquiry into the role of EU integration on queer activism, compelled me to consciously look for missing voices in science. Based on these principles, and answering to various calls for inquiry in existing
60 Ackerly, B., True, J., “Reflexivity in Practice: Power and Ethics in Feminist Research on International Relations”,
literature , I set out to look for the best way possible in which queer activists’ perspectives would be61 centered. As such, I deemed undertaking open and semi-structured interviews the best way to honour that approach. Furthermore, the data collection process reflected the ethical considerations that I wanted to adhere to. I will now discuss the conceptualisation of my research respondents, the data gathering process, considerations regarding privacy and the impact of Covid-19 and further limitations.
3.2.1 Case conceptualisation
As stated above, I set out to center the voices of Georgian queer activists within this research project. Consequently, all interviews have been conducted with people based on a number of defining characteristics. I think it is important to clarify, and justify upon what I based my understanding of queer,
activism andGeorgian. To start with the latter, due to travel restrictions at the time of writing this thesis,
but also complying to an approach that acknowledged the dispersed distribution of relevant actors, I opened up respondent selection to persons whom not always resided within Georgia at the time of interviewing. Nevertheless, the interviewees that live outside of Georgia are still, or have been, operating in Georgian queer activism. With regards to the conceptualisation of activists, I adhered to a case selection process that acknowledged the actor’s potential to contribute to advancing the cause of Georgian queers. I am aware that the concept of activism extends much wider, upon which I will not further elaborate due to the scope of this research. As a consequence of this understanding, it must be stressed that not all respondents considered themselves activists from their personal perspective. Lastly, I approached selecting queer respondents from an inclusive perspective, respecting the respondents’ agency. As elaborated upon in the introduction, there is a discrepancy between the use of ‘queer’ in academic literature, in activism and in the community of sexual minorities itself. Resultingly, I was guided by the respondents’ own identification with queer, or with their cause.
3.2.2 Data collection process
The data gathering process started at the beginning of April, and lasted until the middle of May 2020. For this research, I have collected total of eight interviews with Georgian queer activists, out of whom two came from my social circle, and six were approached either through online contact information pages, or by means of other respondent’s networks. Furthermore, all interviews have been recorded after explicit consent and communicating the aim of the research. The programs used for interviewing were Skype and Zoom, because they allowed for virtual face-to-face conversations and recording. The respondents were
61 For example: Slootmaeckers, K., “Constructing European Union Identity through LGBT Equality Promotion:
comfortable with meeting on such platforms. In addition, all interviews have been conducted in English and, as such, the data may be limited by possible mazes in translation, as well as by portraying a particular group of actors that possess English speaking skills. Furthermore, during the interviews I aimed to dismantle possible power hierarchies between me and the interviewees by means of using neutral probes, asking open-ended questions and sharing personal experiences when relevant. During the interviews, neither the names of respondents, nor the content of the interviews, have been shared with other respondents. The only occasion that names were mentioned during the interviews was in case contact was established through another participants’ network.
After the interviews were done, they were stored on a password-secured, online database. The recordings were then transcribed, and coded for analysis. Throughout the research process, and the presentation thereof in this thesis, the interviewees have been anonymized. When referring to them, the respondents have been linked to pseudonyms based on a selection of Georgian gender neutral names. A list of these can be found in the appendix of this thesis.
3.2.4 The Impact of COVID-19 and further limitations
At the time of preparing this research, the corona pandemic crisis started to unfold itself. Soon after, it became clear that the initial data collection process had to be revised. For instance, as a direct consequence of the coronavirus outbreak, international air travel was put on hold as of mid-March 2020. As a consequence, it was impossible to collect the data within Georgia, which, to a certain extent, disabled the feminist-informed interview method that I had envisioned. As a consequence of accelerated global security concerns, the guiding principles around positionality, relationships and boundaries all of a sudden became sharply exposed. At the same time, the crisis fostered a sense of commonality around the world and a general move to ‘online’.
A result of the revised data gathering process, several concerns and limitations need to be addressed. As a consequence of the global pandemic, all interviews have been done virtual. As such, previous considerations regarding providing protected physical spaces, moved towards thinking about ethically responsible managing of online meetings. Consequently, the data may be distorted by the fact that not all approached activists may have been able to provide for their own (safe) space for having private conversation, and were therefore reluctant to participate. Additionally, it may have been the case that the data collection process was hindered by approached respondents not possessing the necessary equipment in order to set up a virtual meeting. By extension of that, the data could potentially miss important voices
of Georgian queer activists that are affected mostly by hierachical structures in society. Another limitation of the revised data gathering process may be a respondent’s discomfort with using either Skype or Zoom as a means of communication, taking into account data leaks or general concerns about the accumulation of personal data at such companies.
Additionally, the availability of respondents to participate in the research was further limited by the societal effects of the pandemic crisis. The general chaos around COVID-19, as well as the need for many activists to address necessary demands by their communities in these circumstances need to be acknowledged. Oftentimes, respondents provided crucial support to marginalized communities most severely affected in general, and especially in the context of the national and international lock down measures. This was especially the case when respondents worked for organisations focussing on aid-providing.
4. Setting The Stage
The interviews I conducted resulted in an extensive qualitative data collection on Georgian queer activism. As such, a contextual landscape can be drawn from the data itself. I choose to shape the context based on the input of the interviewees, for it allows placing this thesis’ argumentation in the framework of the respondents’ understanding. So, the content of this chapter largely emanates from the interviews, but is occasionally supplemented with references to academic literature.
In this chapter I create an understanding of Georgian queer activistm in the context of EU integration. First (§4.1), I will explain the impact of Georgia-Europe relations on Georgian queer activism. To a large extent, interviewees argued, the discursive and political landscapes connected this relationship have shaped local forms of activism. Consequently (§4.2), I will give an overview of how Georgian queer activists organize themselves. The last section (§4.3), addresses two moments in the history of Georgian queer activism that have been of particular importance.
4.1 International Alliances, Local Impacts
As interviewees suggested, Georgia’s ties with the European Union has a profound impact on their work. Amongst others, Queer IR deals with boundaries and misunderstandings between international relations and local concepts. As such, the connection between the EU and Georgia deserves a closer look. In line with Queer IR perspectives, the concept of ‘Europe’, should be critically approached, for they raise questions about its difference to the European Union, and ‘Europeanness’.
In this section, I will demonstrate how Georgia’s relationship with the European Union, and by extension the ‘West’, influence the landscape in which Georgian queer activists organize and experience their work. I will do so, by first (§4.1.1) explaining how Georgia’s political history, and contemporary geopolitical position influence the context in which local queer activism operate. Consequently (§4.1.2), I elaborate upon the position of Georgia within the EU integration framework.
4.1.1. East, West, Georgia Best
Amongst others, interviewees argued how Georgia’s position between the ‘East’ and the ‘West’ determines their work landscape. As such, its geopolitical position, and political maneuvering will be addressed.
The geopolitical position of Georgia is defined by historical developments. In 1800, Georgia became part of the Russian empire. After the 1918 Bolshevik revolution in Moscow offered an opportunity to gain independence, Georgia shortly experienced a moment of sovereignty. When in 1921 the Red Army advanced into Georgia, it was swallowed into the Soviet Union for the next seventy years. In 1991, Georgia gained its independence again, and consequently, as Giuli mentioned, wanted to leave behind the memories of ‘massive purges’, ‘sending people to Siberia’ and ‘infringing on human rights.’ After 62
several governments pursuing a nationalist politics, neoliberal reforms, and movements towards democratic governance, the ‘Rose Revolution’ of 2003 signaled an era guided by a clearly proclaimed geopolitical choice for the ‘West’.63 Michael Saakashvili, one of the revolutionary leaders and president-to-be, discursively connected Georgia with Europe, as he stated in his inauguration speech: ‘We are not just old Europeans, we are the oldest Europeans, and, therefore, Georgia holds a special position in European Civilization.’ Consequently, his government made various fruitful and failed attempts to join64 Western political, economic and security structures. Nowadays, the position of Georgia is perceived as65 one in between two blocks, as Suliko argued, stating that Georgia is ‘not cool enough to be European, but also not as ‘behind’ as the whole East’. 66
Consequently, such geopoitical positioning has impacted Georgian queer activism. Due to its Soviet past, and more recent conflicts over the self-declared independent territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia since 2008, Suliko explained that within the Georgian narrative, Russia is seen as an ‘occupier’, and that ‘you are either pro-Russian or pro-European’.67 Within this dichotomy, a number of interviewees considered Europe a ‘direction’, ‘helping hand’ or ‘salvation’. As a consequence, interviewees argued 68 that Georgian queer activists seek their support at the European Union. Buba, for example, mentioned that ‘the NGO sector is vastly pro-EU’ and ‘the human rights field is very much anti-Russia’. This was 69
feeded by the development that the European Union started to actively support NGOs in the late 1990s. 70
As such, the East-West dichotomy often stands for the contraposition of Russia-EU in contemporary Georgia.
62 Giuli, interview, 16-05-2020.
63 Jones, S. H., Georgia: A political history since independence, p. 107.
64 Beraia, A., “Hegemony in Post-Soviet Georgia: Types of Nationalisms and Masculinities”. 65 Jones, S. H., Georgia: A political history since independence, p. 252.
66 Suliko, interview, 05-05-2020. 67 Suliko, interview, 05-05-2020.
68 Suliko, interview, 05-05-2020; Shura, interview, 17-05-2020. 69 Buba, interview, 04-05-2020.
Additionally, interviewees argued how this discourse is reflected in EU and Russian politics, who are waging a rat race in Georgian society. With regard to queer issues, it is argued that Russia uses sot power in which it aims to position itself as an alternative to the Western world, by responding to Georgian (cultural and religious) concerns over queer topics. Interviewees confirm that these tactics are being71
deployed by Russia, stating that it alludes to the EU being ‘pro-sodomites’, spreading ‘propaganda’ or 72 73 of having a ‘decadent and perverse kind of culture.’ With regard to the EU’s geopolitical concerns, 74 Shura spoke about how the hesitancy at the EU for campaigning its pro-queer agenda too openly, stating: ‘by promoting LGBT rights in a very blunt way, in the countries where the conservative values are very strong, then you also endanger the reputation of the EU.’ 75
In sum, geopolitical considerations have extensively shaped societal discourses in Georgian, and international politics. The East versus West struggle, or EU-Russia tensions, are played out in Georgia and on the backs of Georgian queer activists.
4.1.2 On the Road to Integration?
In addition to, and as a consequence of the aforementioned geopolitical considerations, the institutional relationship between Georgia and the European Union has been a defining factor in setting the stage for Georgian queer activism. Over the years, Georgia has intensified its ties with the European Union. On the background of this process of integration, the EU’s pro-queer agenda influences Georgian queer activism.
Whether or not Georgia can be seen as integrating into the European Union deserves deliberation. On one side, EU integration can be understood as the procedures countries go through in order to attain full union membership. The set of requirements that a (prospective) candidate member state has to fulfill are stipulated in the Copenhagen Criteria and later additives, and include political, economic and legal elements. As of yet, Georgia is not an official candidate member state of the European Union, but has expressed its willingness to attain such status. However, Georgia is engaged with the EU through other 76 institutional relationships, such as the Stabilization and Association Agreements, the European
71Mestvirishvili, M., Zurabishvili, T., Iakobidze, T., & Mestvirishvili, N., “Exploring Homophobia in Tbilisi” p.
1277.
72 Giuli, interview, 16-05-2020. 73 Shura, interview, 17-04-2020. 74 Giuli, interview, 16-05-2020. 75 Shura, interview, 17-04-2020.
Neighbourhood Policy, and Generalised System of Preferences ‘plus’ (GSP+) arrangements. As such, Georgia is under the influence of EU external policies, and ‘integrates’ into the EU by taking aboard conditionality clauses.
As stressed before (see §2.2), the EU’s pro-queer agenda influences the context of integration. In the case of Georgia, this is most notable through the EU Association Agreement, which was ratified in 2014 and entered into force two years later. As a condition for signing, the ‘Law on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination’ was adopted, an increased attention to the freedoms of assembly, manifestation and speech was paid, and homophobic and transphobic bias was covered as an ‘aggrevating circumstance’ in the Criminal Code of Georgia. In return, Georgia gained visa free travel within the Schengen area. This 77 piece of anti-discrimination legisaltion was understood, by Nukri, as ‘part of the EU cooperation and visa liberalisation process’. The ways in which this piece of legislation is used by Georgian queer activists78 will be discussed in the next chaper (see §5.1.2).
Conclusively, it can be argued that the landscape of Georgian queer activism is influenced by EU integration. Georgia is bound to EU conditionality not through official candidate membership procedures, but through other institutional relationships. Such conditionality includes anti-discrimination legislation, and prioritizing the implementation of the freedoms of assembly, manifestation and speech.
4.2 Georgian Queer Activism: The Actors
The data offers a valuable insight into the actors involved in organised queer activism in Georgia. As such, an overview will be created needed of the organizational structure of Georgian queer activism in this section.
First of all, the data collection process suggests that Georgian queer activists work in a variety of bodies, including non-governmental organisations, political parties, international organisations and in freelancing. In order to safeguard the interviewees’ privacy (see §3.2), I will not disclose the specific names of the organisations the interviewees of this research work. However, it demonstrates queer activists’ wide spread over areas within civil society.
77 Gvianishvili, N., “Being Transgender in Georgia”, p. 195. 78 Nukri, interview, 13-04-2020.
Consequently, activists engage in a variety of activities. Several interviewees mentioned providing services to the queer community, including mental and sexual health care, legal assistance, psychological help, and translating queer literature. Others mentioned working in advocacy, campaigning, human rights and lobbying. Furthermore, outreach to vulnerable members of the queer community and community mobilisation included the interviewees’ activities. Characteristically, however, many queer activists operate in a combination of these fields, as Buba suggested: ‘I did everything, from like community mobilization related activities, to trainings, to advocacy and lobbying, to representation in media, fundraising, project management, you name it, just a regular multi-tasking NGO person.’ 79
Although a number of organisations have offices in Tbilisi, Kutaisi and Batumi, the interviewees for this research who resided in Georgia at the time of interviewing all worked in the capital city. On the matter of regional offices, however, Suliko argued: ‘The way they function is so much different rom the organisational structure that we have here in Tbilisi, [..] because it is in the peripheries, like outside, and it’s more homophobic, more difficult, but the communty that they managed to built is much stronger and they are more radical.’ 80
Lastly, of great importance in organizing queer activism, interviewees mentioned, is the collaboration with ‘non-formal’ actors and spaces, such as the club scene. Suliko spoke about looking for spaces for different types of activism, stating: ‘Like, with my friends I started organising the queer party series ‘Horoom’, in the club Basiani.’ Additionally, Cezari said that ‘nowadays, you have at least three or four 81 bars, which are openly, like almost, queer bars, and maybe they don't hang the flag in front of the club, but like everyone knows that, and like also you have clubs where you have queer nights, so in that sense you have more spaces created nowadays then it was five or ten years ago. And this club culture has become kind of a partner of the queer community.’ Also Nino mentioned: ‘once in a month we are doing 82 the biggest queer night here, we call it ‘Kiki night’. So, my interest in this night is to do as much tests as I can, and of course, we try to create a safe space in order for everybody to feel good. Thre is not many of these spaces in Tbilisi, so Kiki night is like one of the really really top queer events in Tbilisi.’ These 83
statements suggests the ways in which Georgian queer activists find alternative spaces for activism, and invent different ways of sharing their message.
79 Buba, interview, 04-05-2020. 80 Suliko, interview, 05-05-2020. 81 Suliko, interview, 05-05-2020. 82 Cezari, interview, 04-04-2020. 83 Nino, interview 15-04-2020.
In short, the organizational landscape of Georgian queer activism is diverse, and represented in a variety of bodies. As a consequence of different starting points and mandates, a variety of activities is covered within the field Georgian queer activism. Activism also spreads to areas outside of Tbilisi, which deals with different circumstances. Furthermore, partnerships with the party scene are a defining component of queer organising in Georgia.
4.3 Selection of Events
In the last section of this chapter, I will continue to set the scene by means of elaborating upon a selection of events that played important roles in queer activism in Georgia. During the interviews, respondents mentioned two occasions repeatedly: the events around the International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHOT) in 2013, and the Pride Week of 2019. Besides being defining moments in queer activist history in Georgia, they reflect particularly well the difficulties surrounding activist work in this context.
As such, I will first discuss how IDAHOT in 2013 shaped Georgian queer activism (§4.3.1). Thereafter (§4.3.2), I will do the same in relation to Pride 2019.
4.3.1. International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia 2013
‘When you are talking about the whole history of the queer movement in Georgia, 2013 was like
the key point, in the history of queer movement, when you had that May 17, IDAHOT day.’ 84
By all interviewees, IDAHOT 2013 was considered a key date in queer activism in Georgia. Although seven years later some interviewees mentioned wanting to ‘drift away from the narrative,’ and ‘create 85
something new that would elevate our fight for equality,’ the events that occurred around and on that86 date still shape Georgian queer activism.
On 17 May 2013, a group of Georgian queer activists informed the public that a rally was to be held in downtown Tbilisi in order to publicly address sexual minority discrimination. A few days earlier, the head
84 Cezari, interview, 04-04-2020. 85Shura, interview, 17-04-2020. 86Shura, interview, 17-04-2020.
of the Georgian Orthodox Church had spoken against homosexuality by calling it an ‘anomaly and disease’, and called upon the government to prohibit the manifestation from taking place. However, the 87
Prime Minister announced the event was allowed to proceed, stating that sexual minorities ‘have the same rights as any other social groups’ in Georgia. 88
On the day itself, a dozen queer activists gathered in the city center when thousands of counter protestors, consisting mainly of members of the Georgian Orthodox Church, met them in the streets. With the increased possibility of a violent eruption, the police decided to evacuate the queer activists by bus, in order to deescalate the situation. ‘I would say that it was the key date when queer people became the enemies,’ Cezari argued about the church’s scapegoating campaign, continuing: ‘but it was also the date89 that a lot of people started awaking, and they started hating the church, because they saw what they were capable of, like stoning people, and killing people, almost.’ 90
Furthermore, Nukri argued the anti-queer movement, rounded up by the church, was a reflection of deeper societal dissatisfaction with the political elite, arguing:
‘I truly believe that the people who were in the counter-demonstration, these 40.000 people, I really believe that they were out not only because they were homophobes. Of course, there were also many internalised homophobes, but they were out because they found someone weaker than them, and they
were fighting because the government was actually oppressing them during the many years that
Sakashvili made people poorer and poorer [..] So, there were also socioeconomic reasons why people
became so mad.’ 91
Anna Rekhviashvili, having researched the event, stated that May 17 ‘reflects the articulation of [..] three forces operating in larger Georgian politics.’ The three groups, she argues, consisted of queer activists, 92 ‘which had “come out of the closet” to be on public display as a statement indicating the growing strength of the movement,’ the Georgian political leadership, advancing to a closer relationship with the West93
87 McGuinness, D., "Georgian Orthodox Church Leader Calls For Gay-Rights Rally Ban". 88 Ibidem.
89Cezari, interview, 04-04-2020. 90Cezari, interview, 04-04-2020. 91Nukri, interview, 13-04-2020.
92 Rekhviashvili, A., “Tracing the LGBT Movement in the Republic of Georgia”, p. 218. 93Ibidem..
