Alianças contingentes: identidade, ressentimento e redistribuição no movimento LGBTQIA+

Abstract

This dissertation investigates how the LGBTQIA+ Movement constitutes itself as a collective political subject in the context of the reopening of institutional channels for participation during the third government of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The analysis takes as its empirical object the 4th National Conference on the Rights of LGBTQIA+ People, encompassing its state (São Paulo) and national stages, and combines participant observation with documentary analysis of the proposals approved throughout the conference process. The study is organized around three analytical axes: the forms of political articulation among the different subjects within the movement; the demands directed toward the State; and the internal dynamics of conflict and coalition. The first chapter examines identity as a theoretical problem, drawing on queer theory, debates on identitarianism, and the historical formation of the movement’s subjects. The second chapter analyzes conflicts observed in the field, with emphasis on the expansion of subjects named by the movement, disputes surrounding intersectionality as a political grammar, and resentment as a structuring affect of internal relations, especially between gay men and other political subjects. The third chapter examines the proposals produced at the Conference, mapping demands related to institutional advocacy, labor, education, combating violence, social protection, and health, as well as the tensions and consensuses involved in constructing a common agenda. The findings indicate that the identity politics of the LGBTQIA+ Movement cannot be reduced to a fragmentary dynamic; rather, it constitutes a field of disputes in which demands for recognition and redistribution are articulated in contingent ways. The notion of contingent alliances is proposed to describe coalitions formed not from a pre-existing shared identity, but from situated negotiation among differences and the perception of partially convergent interests. By historicizing the movement’s internal tensions and analyzing how resentment simultaneously fractures and fuels political mobilization, the research contributes to questioning interpretations that associate identity politics with the fragmentation of the progressive political field.