![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
abstract
This reportback summarises two workshops held in South Africa, which engaged with lived experiences of homophobia and xenophobia. Partnering with PASSOP and Access Chapter 2, the sessions were open to individuals who felt subjective salience with the broad categories of African, ‘foreign’ in South Africa, male, and experiencing same-sex desire. The guided sessions created temporary spaces which explored what it means to legally and socially belong in South Africa as ‘LGBTI foreigners’. Drawing on the narratives of the participants and the issues shared, the reportback emphasises that the enabling conditions surrounding the Constitution need to be multi-sited. The Constitution and supporting structures are framed as being inaccessible for many, contrasting formal equality with daily experiences in the country. It begins to shape steps towards an intersectional understanding of sexual and national belonging in a context of violent structural and substantive unbelonging and institutionalised homophobia and xenophobia. In framing key experiences, it questions the premise of substantive equality offered by the Constitution of South Africa, focusing on the lack of access to the Constitution experienced by the participants.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Doctoral School of the University of Sussex.
Notes
1. This is a PhD project supervised at the University of Sussex by Dr Sharif Mowlabocus and Dr Paul Boyce. The research here includes reworked extracts from the wider thesis and data from fieldwork which has been ethically approved by the university. This extends to confidentiality clauses assuring the anonymity of participants and the secure storage of transcripts. The identity of participants is protected here through the use of pseudonyms.
2. The scope of the project limited participants to include self-defined “men” only due primarily to research paradigms and time constraints within the PhD. This extended to an ethical consideration of potential participant discomfort in discussing personal accounts of trauma in mixed-gendered ‘safe spaces’. Men were also selected as a demographic out of a recognised need to include understandings of masculinity as a part of intersectional solutions (see Carbado, Citation2013). Fluidity of sexual orientation differs from fluidity in gender identity, and although the project embraces various understandings of masculinity it is limited in its consideration of dynamic gender expressions. The project does, however, remain mindful of the intersectional issues that trans* individuals and women face. Another limitation was that the sessions had to be conducted in English.
3. Participants self-identified as either refugees or migrants. These categories became regarded as secondary to the adopted marker of “foreigners”, indicating a sense of solidarity separate from the nation-state, as discussed.
4. See, for example, Brah and Phoenix (Citation2014: 310); Grzanka (Citation2014b: 302).
5. Various authors have discussed the politics and complications surrounding notions of ‘gay community’. See, for example, Ekine (Citation2013: 85); Steyn and van Zyl (Citation2009).
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Matthew Beetar
MATTHEW BEETAR is a PhD candidate at the University of Sussex, United Kingdom, in the School of Media, Film and Music. From KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) and previously based at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN) Pietermartizburg, his research explores issues of identity, belonging and social justice. He is an active member in and served on the Board of The Mandela Rhodes Community, and has an interest in leadership development.