Abstract
This paper examines the politics of pleasure at the site of the carnival. Carnival spaces have long been celebrated as subversive where both sexualized and gender boundaries are contested and rendered contingent. The place and performance of ‘party’ in the spaces of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer (LGBTQ) Prides in Dublin and Brighton and Hove are the focus. Specifically, I address the parade through each city and the ‘party’ after this parade. Drawing on empirical research (221 self-reporting questionnaires undertaken by non-heterosexual women and qualitative research with forty-nine women) the paper examines the messy (re)constitution of Pride spaces through politics, fun and commercialization. I argue that the tensions between politics, the party and payment offer nuanced conceptualizations of Pride spaces in ‘liberal’ societies. Hedonistic Pride spaces, whilst challenging heteronormativity, are sites of fun. I argue they are best conceptualized as ‘parties with politics’, once again moving discussions of political action between the politics–party binary. In conclusion, I suggest that, alongside discussions of discriminations, abuse and prejudices, examinations of ‘sexual deviancy’ should include fun and partying in the performance of politics. Here, hedonism and enjoyment are read as central to a party with politics and thus the (re)constitution of sexed spaces, bodies and identities.
Cet article étudie les politiques de la jouissance dans le site sur lequel le carnaval se déroule. Les espaces du carnaval ont longtemps été fêtés pour leur qualité subversive dont les frontières sexualisées et différenciées selon le genre sont remises en question et deviennent arbitraires. Le lieu et la performance de la «fête» dans les espaces des Prides pour lesbiennes, homosexuels, bisexuels, trans et queer à Dublin, Brighton et Hove sont mis en évidence. J'aborde plus concrètement le déroulement du défilé dans chacune des villes ainsi que la fête qui le clôture. À partir d'une enquête empirique (questionnaires d'auto-évaluation distribués à 221 femmes non hétérosexuelles et une recherche qualitative menée auprès de 49 femmes), l'article examine la (re)constitution complexe des espaces Pride à travers les politiques, l'amusement et les affaires commerciales. Je soutiens que les tensions entre les politiques, la fête et le règlement de la facture permettent d'apporter des nuances aux conceptualisation des espaces Pride au sein de sociétés «libérales». Hédonistes, les espaces Pride mettent en cause l'hétéronormativité tout en étant des sites d'amusement. Je maintiens que «fêtes avec la politique» est la meilleure façon de les conceptualiser afin de déplacer les discussions sur l'action politique vers le couple politique/fête. Pour conclure, je suggère que l'étude des «déviances sexuelles» devrait non seulement donner lieu à des discussions au sujet des discriminations, de l'abus et des préjugés, mais inclure aussi l'amusement et la fête au sein de la performance de la politique. L'hédonisme et le plaisir sont placés au cœur de la fête à caractère politique et ainsi la (re)constitution d'espaces, de corps et d'identités sexués.
Este artículo examina la política del placer en el sitio de carnaval. Los espacios de carnaval han sido considerados como subversivos desde hace mucho tiempo; espacios donde se cuestiona y hace contingentes tanto los límites generizados como los límites sexualizados. El artículo centra en el lugar y la interpretación de ‘fiesta’ en los espacios del Orgullo lésbico, gay, bisexual, trans y queer de Dublin y Brighton and Hove. Trato, en particular, los desfiles por las dos ciudades y las ‘fiestas’ después de los desfiles. Recurriendo a investigaciones empíricas (221 cuestionarios completados por mujeres no heterosexuales y una investigación cualitativa realizada con 49 mujeres) el artículo examina la desordenada (re)constitución de los espacios del Orgullo por la política, la diversión y la comercialización. Sugiero que las tensiones entre la política, la fiesta, y el pago nos ofrecen diferentes conceptualizaciones de espacios del Orgullo en sociedades ‘liberales’. Espacios del Orgullo Hedonista, mientras desafían la heteronormatividad, todavía son sitios de diversión. Sugiero que es mejor conceptualizarlos como ‘fiestas con la política’ lo cual, una vez más, coloca los debates sobre acción política entre el binario política/fiesta. Para concluir, sugiero que, junto a los debates sobre discriminación, abusos y prejuicios, un estudio de la desviación sexual debería incluir la diversión y la celebración en el ‘performance’ de la política. Aquí el hedonismo y el placer son interpretados como centrales a la fiesta con la política y, por consiguiente, la (re)constitución de espacios, cuerpos e identidades sexualizados.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank all the women who participated in this research, Andrew Church, Lynda Johnston, Liz James and the three anonymous referees for their comments on earlier versions of this paper, and Michael Brown for his support and encouragement.
Notes
1 The origins of Pride marches and festivals is usually attributed to the New York Stonewall riots of 1969 where drag queens ‘rioted’ for three days following a police raid of the Stonewall pub in New York (Johnston Citation2002, Citation2005). Pride marches commemorate these riots. Initially they demanded equal rights and an end to discrimination on the basis of sexuality. These histories Americanize transnational LGBT rights (Bacchetta Citation2002), suggesting that all gay movements began at Stonewall particularly where the riots are seen as the beginning of the ‘gay rights movement’. The history of Pride is often written from the 1969 ‘riots’. However, as Bacchetta (Citation2002) suggests, these are not only Americanized they are also gay male and drag queen histories of Pride.
2 Both terms were used to describe those who live outside heterosexuality but not within the category/label lesbian and those who actively seek to claim this identity. The term lesbian will be used throughout the paper for brevity and ease, recognizing the difficulties and tensions of this term.
3 In exploring non-heterosexual women/lesbians this paper does not seek to fix this category, nor will it examine gender transgressions, including trans issues and concerns. It begins from the premise that ‘woman’ and ‘man’ are contingent and performative categories (see Browne Citation2004).
4 ‘Party’ and ‘fun’ are used here to refer to hedonistic enjoyment. The term party is used to specifically refer to the gathering of people for the purposes of ‘fun’. The terms are however loosely employed as it is impossible to discern the multiple (conscious and unconscious) meanings and practices associated with these words.
5 Brighton and Hove is located in the South East of England and has recently earned the title ‘city of Brighton and Hove’ (for ease this city will be referred to here as Brighton). The city has been billed the ‘gay capital’ of England and has an estimated population of 300,000. It is represented as a tolerant city which celebrates its history of sexual dissidents. The city's Our Story project traces the history of ‘sexual deviants’ in the city to the 1800s when soldiers were garrisoned at Brighton (see < http://www.brightonourstory.co.uk>). Since then Brighton has retained its reputation as a hedonistic, sexually promiscuous, ‘pleasure resort’ with a young population and a large volume of weekend and holiday tourism (see Binnie Citation1997; Shields Citation1991).
6 Dublin is the capital of the Republic of Ireland, it has a population of 1.5 million, a total which has recently (within the last 10 years) increased dramatically. Ireland has undergone considerable economic, cultural and social change and diversification in the 1990s (Kitchin and Lysaght Citation2004; Slater and Peillon Citation2000). The Equal Status Act 2000, which banned discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and equalized the age of consent, closely followed the decriminalization of homosexuality in 1993. Dublin is billed as a newly cosmopolitan city and one aspect of this is the establishment of ‘gay venues’ (see Rushbrook Citation2002). Anecdotally, Dublin used to be a site of ‘freedom’ for Irish migrants who wished to express alternative sexualities that were not allowed in ‘rural’ Ireland (see O'Carroll and Collins Citation1995; Weston Citation1995). Therefore, Dublin's new overt ‘tolerance’, and covert reputation, offers an interesting juxtaposition to Brighton's established reputation of the ‘gay capital’ of England.
7 In 2003 Pride in Brighton and Hove ran from 3 to 10 August and Dublin Pride ran from 9 June to 6 July. This paper, however, will focus on the parade and the post-parade festival/party on 9 August and 5 July 2003. During these days Brighton and Hove and Dublin Prides moved through the main streets of Brighton and Dublin and ended in parks with an after-parade event or ‘party’. The focus is on these aspects because these events attracted the greatest volume of attendees and the parades have been commented on in the literature to date. Pride in Brighton and Hove differs dramatically from Dublin Pride in terms of the volume of people (100,000 compared to 3,000), the size of venues and actual the events staged. Dublin Pride had one stage; Brighton had four large dance tents, a circus, fairground, beer tents and a marketplace.
8 For example, Pride celebrations in Ireland in 1992 were specifically related to the decriminalization of male homosexuality, but this bill introduced further restrictions on sex workers. Crone (Citation1995) noted that, for Irish lesbian feminists, this was a bitter sweet day.
9 The questionnaire specifically asked for: biographical details and self-identified sexuality; Pride events attended in Dublin and Brighton and Hove, and motivations for attending these events; respondents views on the Pride event, on how Brighton/Dublin reacted to the event; any problems they had encountered; concerns about being seen at Pride events; the importance of Dublin/Brighton as a place to hold Pride and the importance of where Pride is located in these cities.
10 Sexuality was defined through self-reported answers to the question ‘Please describe/define your sexuality?’ Those who indicated they were heterosexual were not given questionnaires and, because of this, responses from women who defined themselves as heterosexual were not included in the data set.
11 < http://Prideinbrightonandhove.users.btopenworld.com/faq_frame.htm> (accessed 8 March 2004, web page now removed).
12 In Figure 2, answers contained more than one theme and these were given multiple codes. This accounts for total percentages over 100 per cent. However, rather than working percentages from the number of codes, the multiple codes indicate multiple significant reasons for attending Pride (however, the true percentages are included in Table for reference). The differing depth in the answers between Dublin and Brighton is indicated in the coding where Dublin-coded responses totalled 101 (seventy-four respondents answering this question in a way that could be coded). In Brighton there were 138 coded responses out of 133 respondents whose answers were coded. Thus, rather than offering comparisons between places this form of coding and tabulation seeks to compare motivations for attending Pride within places, and in this way explore the salience of party/politics for those that attend.
13 All the interview data are from Dublin.
14 The category ‘politics’ was used to code answers where the term ‘political’ was used or participants mentioned making a change/statement/stand in relation to LGBTQ issues.
15 The depth of feeling is illustrated by the presence of this issue (which was not directly mentioned on the questionnaire).
16 There is of course a complex argument to be made around the heterosexualization of gay times, however, this is beyond the scope of this paper.
![Sample our Urban Studies journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110826/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Urban-Studies.jpg"})