Summary was created by
Queering Women, Peace and Security
- For policymakers
- Summary created: 2021
This work considers how the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda can better include LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender and queer) voices in gender, peace and security initiatives. Central to including lesbian, bisexual and transgender women in WPS is confronting heteronormativity and cisprivilege.
After 20 years of advocacy and policy action related to the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) architecture, the continued silence about homophobic and transphobic violence targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) individuals in conflict-related environments is alarming.
Those vulnerable to insecurity and violence because of their sexual orientation or gender identity remain largely neglected by the international peace and security community. This neglect is in part the result of heteronormative assumptions in the framing of the WPS agenda.
The goal of this article and ongoing research agenda is not only to point out this silence but also to propose ways in which a queer security analysis can address and redress these silences in policy through paying attention to the damaging role heteronormativity and cisprivilege play in sustaining the current gap in analysis of gendered violence.
Insights
A queer theory analysis reveals a wide spectrum of identities that do not fit neatly into a binary conception of gender restricted to exclusive categories of male/female or man/woman.
What it means
This article reviews the policy implications of excluding sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) against LGBTQ individuals from policy implementation and NGO monitoring of the WPS agenda.
Because LGBTQ individuals are under constant threat in many places, viewing the shifts in insecurity for this population in conflict-related environments through a gender lens offers a significant contribution to how policy-makers understand human security more broadly. Understanding what drives violence against individuals marginalised for their sexual orientation and gender identity will also shed light on the larger question of how SGBV operates in conflict.
NGOs should be wary of cissexism and heteronormative assumptions in their crucial monitoring work on the implementation of the WPS documents. One way to address this would be to invite LGBTQ organisations to the table to help develop indicators in a way that also captures homophobic and transphobic violence, in order to meet the security needs of all of those most vulnerable to SGBV.
Suggested next steps
Include LGBTQ people in developing, implementing and monitoring Women, Peace and Security projects
Define women and gender as two distinct terms
Expand indicators monitoring WPS implementation to also include attention to sexual orientation and gender identity
Collect disaggregated data about LGBTQ individuals living in conflict
Are you a researcher looking to make a real-world impact? Join Acume and transform your research into a practical summary.