Pride, social psychology and the contested politics of identity
Thursday, 3 Aug 2017, 16:41
Visible to anyone in the world
This week's blog for Advancing social psychology, DD317, by
Eleni Andreouli, discusses the politics of Pride and some of the questions that
social psychologists bring to LGBTQ issues and contested identities.
Since June, hundreds of Pride events have been taking place across
the UK (see
Stonewall’s website for information). These events commemorate the
Stonewall riots of 1969 in New York City, which were incited by a police raid
of Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in New York’s Greenwich Village, and which until
today serve as a symbol in the LGBTQ rights movement. This year, Pride also
coincides with the 50-year anniversary of the decriminalisation of
homosexuality in Britain.
Pride is a celebration of difference, as is evidenced in the
party atmosphere and the colourful rainbow flags of these events. More
importantly, Pride is a loud call for social recognition. It makes otherwise
minoritized identities (gay, trans, bi etc.) visible and present. The parades
in central public spaces and streets (such as London’s Oxford Street) are an
example of this increased, albeit brief, visibility.
The politics of Pride are, however, more complicated than
what a simple minority/majority schema suggests. While Pride has gone a long
way to bring LGBTQ issues to the mainstream, critics argue that it promotes a
narrow vision of liberal tolerance and that it commercialises and, ultimately,
de-politicises struggles for recognition and equality.
Pride is clearly an example of the contested politics of
identity; a politics, that is, of making rights claims on the basis of a shared
identity which has been historically oppressed. Identity is of course a central
social psychological concept and many social psychologists have studied how
identities become the source for political action. Social psychologists have
also alerted us to the danger of essentialising identities, that is,
approaching identities as fixed, singular and mutually exclusive. Taking what
is called an ‘intersectionality’ approach, social psychologists have studied
not only how groups act on the basis of a shared identity, but also how
identities mutually constitute each other to produce complex subjectivities and
intermingling communities.
Pride, social psychology and the contested politics of identity
This week's blog for Advancing social psychology, DD317, by Eleni Andreouli, discusses the politics of Pride and some of the questions that social psychologists bring to LGBTQ issues and contested identities.
Since June, hundreds of Pride events have been taking place across the UK (see Stonewall’s website for information). These events commemorate the Stonewall riots of 1969 in New York City, which were incited by a police raid of Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in New York’s Greenwich Village, and which until today serve as a symbol in the LGBTQ rights movement. This year, Pride also coincides with the 50-year anniversary of the decriminalisation of homosexuality in Britain.
Pride is a celebration of difference, as is evidenced in the party atmosphere and the colourful rainbow flags of these events. More importantly, Pride is a loud call for social recognition. It makes otherwise minoritized identities (gay, trans, bi etc.) visible and present. The parades in central public spaces and streets (such as London’s Oxford Street) are an example of this increased, albeit brief, visibility.
The politics of Pride are, however, more complicated than what a simple minority/majority schema suggests. While Pride has gone a long way to bring LGBTQ issues to the mainstream, critics argue that it promotes a narrow vision of liberal tolerance and that it commercialises and, ultimately, de-politicises struggles for recognition and equality.
Pride is clearly an example of the contested politics of identity; a politics, that is, of making rights claims on the basis of a shared identity which has been historically oppressed. Identity is of course a central social psychological concept and many social psychologists have studied how identities become the source for political action. Social psychologists have also alerted us to the danger of essentialising identities, that is, approaching identities as fixed, singular and mutually exclusive. Taking what is called an ‘intersectionality’ approach, social psychologists have studied not only how groups act on the basis of a shared identity, but also how identities mutually constitute each other to produce complex subjectivities and intermingling communities.
The concepts discussed in this week's blog are explored in our new module DD317 Advancing Social Psychology. To learn more about the module, you can watch a video here https://youtu.be/dbzF4hBeBkk You can also look at the new Open Learn course course DD317_1 Social psychology and politics: http://www.open.edu/openlearn/health-sports-psychology/social-psychology-and-politics/content-section-0