Abstract
The term “queer criminology” is increasingly being used in criminological discussions, though there remains little consistency with regard to how it is used and to what it refers. It has been used broadly to describe criminological research on LGBTQ people and their interactions with the justice system, more specifically to describe those analyses that identify and critique the heteronormative knowledges or binarized understandings of gender and sexuality within criminal justice research, and also to label theoretical and conceptual pieces that argue for a greater connection between queer theory and criminology. However, there are some important distinctions between “queer criminology” and “queer theory” more widely, particularly the deconstructive approaches of the latter. This chapter explores the engagements between queer theory and “queer criminology,” specifically focusing on whether “queer criminology” adopts an understanding of “queer” as an attitude, and as signifying a deconstructive project—a position that features in many strands of queer theoretical work. It will argue that while there are different ways of engaging with “queer” as a concept, and that each of these engagements produces different kinds of “queer” projects, “queer criminology” does not always engage with the deconstructive approaches drawn from queer theory. Ultimately, this can limit the ways that “queer criminologists” are able to address injustice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
“Queer theory” is a contested term, particularly as “queer theory” does not offer a theory of anything in particular, nor does such research have a stable referent. “Queer studies” and “queer commentary” have been suggested as more effective terms to use when referring to the studies discussed here. (See, for example, Berlant and Warner 1995, pp. 344, 348; Wiegman 2012, p. 305.) Notwithstanding those debates, the term “queer theory” is used throughout this discussion because it is that which most often features in the criminological discussions canvassed.
- 2.
The following analysis (drawing on and developing Ball, 2013b) provides an in-depth discussion of key works in this area, and, importantly, does not engage with all works that explore sexuality and criminology. While those works are often focused on LGBT people, they do not engage with the notion of “queer.” It is the engagement with “queer” (and the way the term is mobilized, and their effects) that is of interest here.
- 3.
It ought to be noted that many of the following issues or approaches are not unique to “queer criminology,” nor have they originated in queer theoretical work. For example, the examination of essentialized identities and a concern with their regulation has been central to a variety of feminist criminologies (Carrington 2002, pp. 119–120, 130), as well as other critical perspectives including post- or counter-colonial criminologies (Cunneen 2011, pp. 261–262), and work on victims of crime (Walklate 2011, pp. 54–58). This should not cause us to question whether “queer criminology” can make a contribution at all, but rather reiterates the importance of identifying precisely the original contribution that “queer criminology” might make.
- 4.
- 5.
The recognition that injustices are intersectional is explored in much feminist research (Crenshaw 2000), including within criminology, and also other queer theoretical work.
- 6.
There have been other calls for a “queer criminology”, or for the “queering” of criminology (Ferrell and Sanders 1995, pp. 318–319; Sorainen 2003), however the authors discussed here offer the most extensive and detailed articulation of how this might proceed and thus constitute the focus of discussion.
- 7.
Feminist research (including feminist criminologies) have also engaged with such questions, when seeking to move away from the category of “woman” as the object of study and towards exploring the ways that knowledges and social institutions privilege masculinity and reinforce patriarchal power (Carrington 2002). This is also present in feminist challenges to the heteronormativity of liberal feminism, which was central to the development of queer theory (Jagose 1996, p. 44).
- 8.
This is a different kind of discursive reversal to that which is discussed by Groombridge, Tomsen, and Narrain, where the criminological gaze shifts from viewing the “homosexual” as deviant towards seeing the homophobe as deviant (Groombridge 1999, p. 540, 541; Narrain 2008, p. 49; Tomsen 2009, pp. 137–138).
- 9.
In a similar way, struggles to achieve marriage equality or to allow LGBTQ people to serve openly in the military legitimate marriage and the military as social institutions, respectively.
- 10.
“Beat” is a term used in Australia as a substitute for “cottage” or “tearoom,” and generally refers to venues in public places where (usually) men meet to engage in anonymous sexual activity with other men.
- 11.
Importantly, I do not want to suggest that Woods argues against these deconstructive approaches in “queer criminology” completely. His work has been quoted here simply because he draws attention to these concerns.
References
Backus, M. G. (2009). “Things that have the potential to go terribly wrong”: Homosexuality, pedophilia and the Kincora Boys' Home scandal. In N. Giffney & M. O’Rourke (Eds.), The Ashgate research companion to queer theory (pp. 237–253). Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.
Ball, M. (2013a). Heteronormativity, homonormativity and violence. In K. Carrington, M. Ball, E. O’Brien, & J. Tauri (Eds.), Crime, justice and social democracy: International perspectives (pp. 186–199). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ball, M. (2013b). The use of “queer” in criminal justice discourses. In K. Richards & J. Tauri (Eds.), Crime, justice and social democracy: Proceedings of the 2 nd international conference, 2013 (Vol. 1, pp. 1–9). Brisbane, QLD: Crime and Justice Research Center, QUT.
Ball, M. (2014). Queer criminology, critique, and the ‘art of not being governed’. Critical Criminology: An International Journal, 22.
Berlant, L., & Warner, M. (1995). What does queer theory teach us about X? PMLA, 110, 343–349.
Brown, W. (1995). States of injury: Power and freedom in late modernity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Browne, K. (2008). Selling my queer soul or queerying quantitative research? Sociological Research Online, 13(1), 11. http://www.socresonline.org.uk/13/1/11.html.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge.
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex”. New York, NY: Routledge.
Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York, NY: Routledge.
Carlen, P. (2011). Against evangelism in academic criminology: For criminology as a scientific art. In M. Bosworth & C. Hoyle (Eds.), What is criminology? (pp. 95–108). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Carline, A. (2006). Resignifications and subversive transformations: Judith Butler’s queer theory and women who kill. Liverpool Law Review, 27, 303–335.
Carrington, K. (2002). Feminism and critical criminology: Confronting genealogies. In K. Carrington & R. Hogg (Eds.), Critical criminology: Issues, debates, challenges (pp. 114–142). Devon, UK: Willan Publishing.
Chakraborti, N., & Garland, J. (2009). Hate crime: Impact, causes, and responses. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Conrad, K. (2009). Nothing to hide… nothing to fear: Discriminatory surveillance and queer visibility in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In N. Giffney & M. O’Rourke (Eds.), The Ashgate research companion to queer theory (pp. 329–346). Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.
Corber, R., & Valocchi, S. (2003). Introduction. In R. Corber & S. Valocchi (Eds.), Queer studies: An interdisciplinary reader (pp. 1–19). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Crenshaw, K. (2000). Demarginalizing the intersections of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. In J. James & T. Sharpley-Whiting (Eds.), The black feminist reader (pp. 208–238). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Cunneen, C. (2011). Postcolonial perspectives for criminology. In M. Bosworth & C. Hoyle (Eds.), What is criminology? (pp. 249–266). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Dalton, D. (2006). Surveying deviance, figuring disgust: Locating the homocriminal body in time and space. Social and Legal Studies, 15(2), 277–299.
Dalton, D. (2007). Genealogy of the Australian homocriminal subject: A study of two explanatory models of deviance. Griffith Law Review, 16(1), 83–106.
Douglas, S., Jivraj, S., & Lamble, S. (2011). Liabilities of queer anti-racist critique. Feminist Legal Studies, 19, 107–118.
Duggan, L. (1993). The trials of Alice Mitchell: Sensationalism, sexology, and the lesbian subject in turn-of-the-century America. In R. Corber & S. Valocchi (Eds.), Queer studies: An interdisciplinary reader (pp. 73–87). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Duggan, L. (2001). Making it perfectly queer. In A. Herrmann & A. J. Stewart (Eds.), Theorising feminism: Parallel trends in the humanities and social sciences (2nd ed., pp. 215–231). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Duggan, L. (2003). The twilight of equality? Neoliberalism, cultural politics, and the attack on democracy. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Duggan, M. (2012). Queering conflict: Examining lesbian and gay experiences of homophobia in Northern Ireland. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.
Dwyer, A. (2008). Policing queer bodies: Focusing on queer embodiment in policing research as an ethical question. Queensland University of Technology Law and Justice Journal, 8(2), 414–428.
Dwyer, A. (2011). Policing lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender young people: A gap in the research literature. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 22(3), 415–433.
Dwyer, A. (2012). Policing visible sexual/gender diversity as a program of governance. International Journal for Crime and Justice, 1(1), 17–34.
Eng, D., Halberstam, J., & Muñoz, J. E. (2005). Introduction: What’s queer about queer studies now? Social Text, 23(3–4), 1–17.
Ferrell, J., & Sanders, C. R. (1995). Toward a cultural criminology. In J. Ferrell & C. R. Sanders (Eds.), Cultural criminology (pp. 297–326). Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
Foucault, M. (1983). On the genealogy of ethics: An overview of work in progress. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), Ethics: Subjectivity and truth. essential works of Foucault 1954–1984: Volume 1 (2000) (pp. 253–280). London, UK: Penguin Books.
Foucault, M. (1998). The will to knowledge: The history of sexuality volume 1. London, UK: Penguin Books.
Giffney, N. (2004). Denormatizing queer theory: More than (simply) lesbian and gay studies. Feminist Theory, 5(1), 73–78.
Giffney, N. (2009). Introduction: The “q” word. In N. Giffney & M. O’Rourke (Eds.), The Ashgate research companion to queer theory (pp. 1–13). Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.
Groombridge, N. (1998). Letter to the editor. Theoretical Criminology, 2, 119–120.
Groombridge, N. (1999). Perverse criminologies: The closet of Doctor Lombroso. Social and Legal Studies, 8, 531–548.
Halperin, D. (1995). Saint Foucault: Towards a gay hagiography. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Himmelstein, K., & Brückner, H. (2011). Criminal-justice and school sanctions against nonheterosexual youth: A national longitudinal study. Pediatrics, 127(1), 49–57.
Jagose, A. (1996). Queer theory. Melbourne, VIC: Melbourne University Press.
Johnson, P., & Dalton, D. (Eds.). (2012). Policing sex. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Kemp, J. (2009). Queer past, queer present, queer future. Graduate Journal of Social Science, 6(1), 3–23.
Lamble, S. (2008). Retelling racialized violence, remaking white innocence: The politics of interlocking oppressions in transgender day of remembrance. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 5(1), 24–42.
Lamble, S. (2009). Unknowable bodies, unthinkable sexualities: Lesbian and transgender legal invisibility in the Toronto women’s bathhouse raid. Social and Legal Studies, 18(1), 111–130.
Lance, M. N., & Tanesini, A. (2000). Identity judgments, queer politics. In I. Morland & A. Willox (Eds.), Queer theory (2005) (pp. 171–186). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Mason, G. (2001a). Body maps: Envisaging homophobia, violence, and safety. Social and Legal Studies, 10(1), 23–44.
Mason, G. (2001b). Not our kind of hate crime. Law and Critique, 12, 253–278.
McLaughlin, J. (2006). The return of the material: Cycles of theoretical fashion in Lesbian, Gay and Queer Studies. In D. Richardson, J. McLaughlin, & M. E. Casey (Eds.), Intersections between feminism and queer theory (pp. 59–77). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.
Mogul, J. L., Ritchie, A. J., & Whitlock, K. (2011). Queer (in)justice: The criminalization of LGBT people in the United States. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
Moran, L. J. (2009). What kind of field is “law, gender and sexuality”? Achievements, concerns and possible futures. Feminist Legal Studies, 17, 309–313.
Moran, L. J., Monk, D., & Beresford, S. (1998). Legal queeries: Lesbian, gay, and transgender legal studies. London, UK: Cassell.
Narrain, A. (2008). “That despicable specimen of humanity”: Policing of homosexuality in India. In K. Kananbiran & R. Singh (Eds.), Challenging the rule(s) of law: Colonialism, criminology, and human rights in India (pp. 48–77). New Delhi, India: Sage Publications.
Puar, J. K. (2007). Terrorist assemblages: Homonationalism in queer times. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Ristock, J. (Ed.). (2011). Intimate partner violence in LGBTQ lives. New York, NY: Routledge.
Robson, R. (Ed.). (2011). Sexuality and law. Volume II: Crime and punishment. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.
Sedgwick, E. K. (2011). The weather in Proust. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Sorainen, A. (2003). Queering criminology. Paper presented at Crime and Control in an Integrating Europe: 3 rd Annual Conference of the European Society of Criminology, Helsinki, Finland.
Stychin, C. (1995). Law’s desire: Sexuality and the limits of justice. London, UK: Routledge.
Sullivan, N. (2003). A critical introduction to queer theory. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Tomsen, S. (1997). Was Lombroso a queer? Criminology, criminal justice, and the heterosexual imaginary. In G. Mason & S. Tomsen (Eds.), Homophobic violence (pp. 33–45). Annandale, NSW: Hawkins Press.
Tomsen, S. (2006). Homophobic violence, cultural essentialism and shifting sexual identities. Social and Legal Studies, 15, 389–407.
Tomsen, S. (2009). Violence, prejudice, and sexuality. New York, NY: Routledge.
Umphrey, M. (1995). The trouble with Harry Thaw. In R. Corber & S. Valocchi (Eds.), Queer studies: An interdisciplinary reader (pp. 21–30). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Walklate, S. (2011). Gender, crime and criminal justice (3rd ed.). Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Warner, M. (1999). The trouble with normal: Sex, politics, and the ethics of queer life. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wiegman, R. (2012). Object lessons. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank the following people for their insightful comments on this chapter: Christian Callisen, Belinda Carpenter, Jo Phoenix, Jordan Blair Woods, Juan Tauri, Liz Morrish, Peter O’Brien, Angela Dwyer, Sharon Hayes, Vanessa R. Panfil, and Dana Peterson.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ball, M. (2014). What’s Queer About Queer Criminology?. In: Peterson, D., Panfil, V. (eds) Handbook of LGBT Communities, Crime, and Justice. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9188-0_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9188-0_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-9187-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-9188-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)