Constructions of LGBTQI + rights and claims in lay discourse in Greece

Liberal dilemmas and sexual citizenship boundaries

Bibliographic Data

ID12396790
AuthorsIoannis Michos (0000-0003-1590-7740, School of Psychology Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Thessaloniki Greece, corresponding author), Lia Figgou (0000-0001-5758-6936, School of Psychology Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Thessaloniki Greece), Nikos Bozatzis (0000-0002-5283-5662, Department of Psychology University of Ioannina Ioannina Greece)
Year2021
Volume31
Issue6
Pages768-781
Publication date2021-05-27
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Community & Applied Social Psychology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1052-9284 • E-ISSN: 1099-1298
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/casp.2538
OpenAlexW3167841347
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited37

This study explores ways in which diverse LGBTQI+ claim frames are sedimented in Greek everyday discourse. Specifically, it is interested in the identification of the argumentative resources that inform lay constructions of LGBTQI+ claims and rights, as well as of their potential social implications. The research data are drawn from seven focus groups, conducted in Thessaloniki, Greece and analysed by the conceptual tools of Critical Discursive Social Psychology. According to the analysis, liberal dilemmas over difference, visibility, and equality are mobilized. In particular, when accounting for violence and discriminations against LGBTQI+ community members, participants construct a normative hierarchy of exclusion, based on alleged differences between sexual and gender‐related categories. Notably, in the context of arguing over different claim‐making practices, participants prioritize the projection of uniformity – instead of difference – through non‐provocative, consensual claiming actions. While liberal concepts and subsequent dilemmas inform these constructions, “liberalism” is also represented as the rhetorical other, when participants prioritize intersectional claims over (sexual and gender‐related) identity politics. Finally, participants' discourse is informed by tensions between oriental and occidental ideological patterns. A juxtaposition between Western/European liberalism and Eastern backwardness is used to challenge homonormative perceptions, which are constructed as a means of de‐radicalization

Argumentative · Citizenship · Context (archaeology · Epistemology · Human sexuality · Ideology · Liberalism · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Gender Politics and Representation · Gender Studies · Law · LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy · Migration, Refugees, and Integration