Queering International Law: Possibilities, Alliances, Complicities, Risks

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

1 As demonstrated, for example, in the many authors’ affiliations with law schools, the publisher’s classification of the book as one of international law and an assumed familiarity with central international legal instruments and concepts.

2 This is also seen in the recurring references to ‘standards’ within queer theory, and the absence of some newer sources, as pointed out in Teemu Ruskola, ‘Review of Queering International Law: Alliances, Complicities, Risks’ (2018) 112(3) AJIL 540.

3 Accordingly, ‘the terminology of queer signals a curiosity about the conceptual and analytical underpinnings of international law’s adjudication of the normal’ (1).

4 Here, particularly Rahul Rao’s chapter on postcolonial British engagement with colonial criminalisation of same-sex sexual acts, is enlightening.

5 Namely, the duties of friendship and hospitality and the allegory of Sodom and Gomorrah in the work of Francisco de Vittoria, as interpreted in Nan Seuffert’s chapter.

6 While no chapter specifically addresses intersex people, the ‘I’ is included by some authors.

7 Otto emphasises this at the outset of the book, describing ‘queering’ as ‘a hope for change that is far more ambitious than LGBTI normative inclusion’ (2).

8 Particularly the chapter by Vanja Hamsić is intriguing in terms of advocating for a move away from law.

9 Carol Smart, Feminism and the Power of Law (Routledge 1989); Carol Smart, ‘Preface’ in Adrian Howe and Daniela Alaattinoğlu (eds), Contesting Femicide: Feminism and the Power of Law Revisited (Routledge 2019).

10 Particularly in the United Kingdom and the United States, but also elsewhere.

11 I would like to thank Kristina Cufar, Jayani Nadarajalingam and Joanna Nicholson for comments and corrections.