Queer Marxism and the task of contemporary queer social critique “Despite its buttoned-up appearance, the linen recognizes in [the coat] a splendid kindred soul, the soul of value” (Marx 1990: 143). Our current historical moment has seen both the increasing bestowal of LGBT My use of the acronym LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and gender non-conforming) varies across this work – sometimes letters will be omitted as the groups of persons they describe are omitted from the considerations addressed. rights and the consolidation of neoliberal capitalism by Western states. As objectives for equality set out by mainstream LGBT movements reach fruition in the forms of marriage rights, domestic partner benefits, anti-discrimination and hate crime laws, legal gender recognition of gender-normative trans subjects, etc., and overtly positive representations of some LGBT persons in media and culture, we are also witness to a disenfranchisement of LGBTQ subjects through the state and financial institutions of neoliberalism, along intersecting lines of race, class, gender & gender non-conformity, nationality and/or immigration status. Given the length of this paper, I do not have the opportunity to address the specific details of these factors. This paper will address the recent Marxian interventions into queer theory, alongside queer theory’s critique of queer liberalism, to theorise the social legitimisation of LGBT subjects in relation to neoliberal hegemony. By addressing LGBT enfranchisement through a critique of neoliberal capitalism and austerity, it becomes clear that such enfranchisement is tied to contemporary forms of capitalist reproduction and accumulation. Beside the significant positive impacts of social enfranchisement on the lives of LGBT people and ‘communities’, we see the naturalisation of capital’s survival through its incorporation of difference. Queer Marxism The relationship between queer studies and Marxism has evolved significantly across the past 15 years, concurrent with the rise of a strong critique of neoliberalism. While the roots of early queer theory may have been embedded in poststructuralism and psychoanalysis, the recent turn “towards a queer Marxism” To quote the subtitle of Kevin Floyd’s The Reification of Desire (2009). suggests that the theoretical project connecting queer sexualities to the reproduction and accumulation of capital is beginning to formulate. While this body of work remains largely removed from liberation-era gay left critique Such as that of Mario Mieli, Guy Hocquenghem, Dennis Altman and the journal Gay Left. Herbert Marcuse’s Eros and Civilization and Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia form important primary texts for such work - for a consideration of the former, see Floyd (2009: 120-143)., it joins work by queer historians operating through a materialist frame, which has been more attentive to class relations and political economy than much of queer studies. Queer Marxist work includes, among others Other Marxist inventions include the work of Donald Morton (Ed., 1996), Matthew Tinkcom (2002), Jordana Rosenberg (2011), Eliza Glick (2009) and that represented in recent special issues of GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies (Vol. 18, No.1, 2012 and Rethinking Marxism (Vol. 18, Issue 3, 2006). Materialist and leftist critical inventions include the work of Michael Warner (1999), Lisa Duggan (2003), Jasbir Puar (2006), Lauren Berlant (2011, 1997), Eric O. Clarke (2000), Amy Villarejo (2003), Dean Spade (2011), David Eng (2010), Guy Davidson (2012), Lisa Henderson (2013) and that of Radical History Review (Issue 100, Winter 2008)., that of Rosemary Hennessy, who critiques the bourgeois character of poststructuralist theories of sex and desire, and historicises the development of new desiring subjects across late 19th and early 20th centuries to consider how desires are mediated in late capitalist commodity culture (2000); that of Kevin Floyd, who reformulates the concepts of totality and reification, considering Lukács’ thesis on reification alongside Foucault’s History of Sexuality to argue that the rise of psychoanalytic knowledges, concurrent with Fordism, produced a deskilling and reification of sexual knowledge (2009); that of Miranda Joseph, who has critiqued liberal conceptions of community to theorise the supplementary relation between community and capital (2002); and that of José Esteban Muñoz, who critiques gay pragmatism and the negative turn in queer theory, arguing through the work of Bloch the need to locate concrete utopian moments within queer lives (2009). Rosenberg and Villarejo emphasise that such work has “interrogated the historical lapses of political economy and Marxism in thinking gender, race, and sexuality … through readings of cultural texts marked by neoliberalism’s inception and rise” (2012: 2). Thus queer Marxism shows much theoretical promise. Roderick Ferguson in particular highlights the importance of developing a critical method (which he names ‘queer of colour critique’) that “disidentifies Muñoz theorises disindentification as “the hermeneutical performance of decoding mass, high, or any cultural field from the perspective of a minority subject who is disempowered in a representational hierarchy” (Muñoz 1999: 25, quoted in Ferguson 2004: 4). Ferguson emphasises the immanent character of such critique, as such cultural “fields account for the queer of colour subject’s historicity” (2004: 4). with historical materialism to rethink its categories and how they might conceal the materiality of race, gender and sexuality” to “determine the silences that reside with its critical terrains” (2004: 5). Highlighting the limitations of merely recognising queer of colour subjects and emphasising the need to “approach these subjects as sites of knowledge”, Ferguson argues that “[w]ithin this historic moment characterized by the normalization of racialized class formations, we need modes of analysis that can address normativity as an object of inquiry and critique” (148). We can add that our historical moment is also intent on the normalisation of queerness, transgender experience, and the experience of disability into bourgeois liberal forms (see Susan Stryker and Robert McRuer’s work) Stryker argues that the concept of homonormativity, as described by Duggan (2003), erases the history of its usage by trans persons and activists to identify the gender-normative tendencies of gay and lesbian 1990s activism (Stryker 2008). McRuer discusses the disability and neoliberalism at length (2011/12), (2006). , through limited social inclusions and the incorporation of difference under the guise of multiculturalism. A queer theory grounded in Marxism must critique the contradictions of such experience. In the manner that queer theory has “consistently maintained that any representation of sexuality in isolation from … other dimensions of the social, … as always already localized, particularized, or privatized, is a misrepresentation of the social as well as the sexual” (Floyd 2009: 8) Floyd emphasises the importance of queer theory’s resistance to a logic of minoritisation (in the work of Warner (1993), Sedgwick (1988) and Edelman (2004)) and its similarity to Marxism in providing a particular vantage for the theorisation of social totalities (2009: 7-9)., a queer Marxism must make the fundamental claim that the isolation of capital and the economic sphere from contemporary epistemologies of the social and the sexual is also a misrepresentation of their existence. While queer Marxist work has begun to explore concepts such as value and labour to consider the (re)production of queerness For queer conceptions of value, see Wesling (2012), Villarejo (2003: 30-36); for queered conceptions and analysis of labour, see Tinkcom (2002: 1-34), Bérubé (2011: 259-269) and Sears (2005). – which I can’t address here but am considering at length in my work – queer Marxism is yet to emerge as a discipline grounded in a Marxian critique of political economy, and remains a mostly literary and somewhat disparate field. Neoliberalism, austerity, disinvestment LGBT enfranchisement is inextricable from the cultural politics and institutional transformations of neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is “a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating the individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade” (Harvey 2005: 2). Such ideas have been pushed into practice on a global scale, trumpeted through the deregulation of global trade. Neoliberal economic hegemony appeared to have been shaken by the 2008 financial crisis; however the aftermath of the crisis has further enabled the centralisation of capital with the wealthiest Rosenberg and Villarejo (2012: 1).. We’ve since seen the implementation of austerity measures and international debt agreements in nations across the globe. The resulting alterations and developments in social and material conditions involve increased unemployment and reduced welfare or social support (provided these existed in the first place, which disproportionately impact on disabled people); cuts to public sector jobs (which have often provided stable employment to women, and are often the site of LGBT employment protections); declining real terms wages for workers, an increase in precarious labour (such as ‘zero hours’ contracts) and pay freezes for those in the public sector; and increased costs for healthcare, education, child care, adult social care alongside a corresponding decrease in public provision for such services – which are in turn increasingly run for-profit, and rationalised according to the neoliberal logic of meeting targets, at the expense of the quality of services. Nationalised industry has long since been privatised and/or demolished. We also see increased policing and control of populations through incarceration and violence, distributed according to race, material impoverishment and immigration status, including the extraction of hyper-exploitative labour from such persons. Given – in the UK – provisions for LBGTQ people such as health, legal, housing, hate crime and support services are publically funded, funding cuts and austerity disproportionately impact on LGBTQ people For example, Conservative party plans to cut housing benefit completely and to limit Jobseeker’s allowance to six months followed by forced workfare for 18-21 year olds will compound problems of LGBTQ homeless – around 25% of all homeless youth identifying as LGBTQ. . Another recent study into the effects of welfare cuts also noted an increase in homophobia and transphobia Martin Mitchell et al. (2013) ‘Implications of austerity on LGBT people in public services’ (NatCen Social Research), online at http://www.natcen.ac.uk/media/205545/unison-lgbt-austerity-final-report.pdf (accessed 31st March 2014).. While the decline of wages and production of a surplus population are characteristics of capitalism in general, the above conditions are coupled with an ideological ethos that promotes the privatisation of the costs of social reproduction […] through personal responsibility exercised in the family and in civil society – thus shifting costs from state agencies to individuals and households (Duggan 2003: 14) There is a much wider discourse addressing the reorganisation of social reproduction with capitalist crises which I cannot address here.. Behind the thin veil of austerity is the systematic disinvestment of public capital in the reproduction of populations; and the transformation of public resources and services into new markets for multinational, private capital and the accumulation of profits. As Harvey argues, such transformations are the means whereby neoliberal states develop and reproduce an “institutional framework” to support their economic and political practices, “that improve[s their] competitive position as an entity vis-à-vis other states in the global market” (2005: 65). Queer Liberalism In the face of the rich history of LGBTQ activism and life which has challenged the dominant cultural norms of sexuality and gender, we have witnessed the political ascendency of queer liberalism, institutionalised through the struggle for rights. David Eng describes queer liberalism as a contemporary confluence of the political and economic spheres that forms the basis for the liberal inclusion of particular gay and lesbian […] citizen subjects petitioning for rights and recognition (2010: 3) Eng focuses on the formation of queer liberalism in the U.S.. Reading the 2003 Lawrence vs. Texas case that decriminalised sodomy in the U.S. between consenting adults in private, Eng emphasises that such political recognition privileges domestic intimacy, the monogamous couple and ‘good citizenship’ (25). Lisa Duggan influentially describes this political formation as one of homonormativity, “a politics that does not contest dominant heteronormative assumptions and institutions, but upholds and sustains them” (2003: 50). For instance, gay marriage reasserts the private property relations that cohere around the monogamous couple as site of political recognition and economic privilege. Hence the challenges against the nuclear family and the state made by the gay liberation movement have been negated and queer politics redefined – although it should be noted that socially conservative gay political tendencies have existed since the Mattachine society. Homonormativity promises “a demobilized gay constituency and a privatised, depoliticized gay culture anchored in domesticity and consumption” (Duggan 2003: 50). Queer liberalism wins its enfranchisement reasserting neoliberal private forms, fit for an economically empowered middle-class. Furthermore, while employment protections – such as the Equality Act (2010) The Employment Non-Discrimination Act in the U.S. still remains contested.– have challenged decades of queer employment discrimination, the protections come at a time where workers’ rights and union powers are diminished, threatened or laughable (although struggles for a living wage from bottom-up unions show promise For example, see the struggles of the 3 Cosas campaign by outsourced cleaners at Senate House, University of London; and the struggles for a living wage by workers at the Curzon Soho, London and The Ritzy, Brixton, London cinemas.). Employment protections in the private sector vary significantly, and are often most limited for those on precarious contracts and outsourced workers who may be unable to unionise. There’s also a wider question of enforcement, for example with illegal discrimination in hiring practices. We also see companies and the state promoting themselves as good gay employers, pinkwashing the fact that they might be paying minimum wage, profiting of highly-exploitative labour in the global south, or destroying racialised and migratory persons within national borders. For example, Stonewall UK’s list of the top 100 LGB employers features major banks, 5 police forces, the Home Office, the Department for Work and Pensions and the Ministry of Defence ‘Stonewall Top 100 Employers 2014’ – online at http://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_work/stonewall_top_100_employers/default.asp?fontsize=large (accessed 31st March 2014).. Meanwhile, queer consumer cultures have been developing since the 1990s. As Alexandra Chasin suggests, addressing the role of advertising as a tool for national assimilation (particularly of immigrant populations in the U.S.), there has been an increasing demand since the 1970s to create niche consumer groups, where “‘diversity’ … become[s] both a social value (however superficial) and an economic imperative” (2000: 107). The 1990s saw the rise of the ‘gay marketing moment’ that, through partial market research of upper-middle class gay men, falsely characterised gay and lesbians in general as an untapped source of high disposable income. The address as a niche market by advertising coincides with the increasing production of commodities aimed at queer subjects, giving rise to phenomena such as multi-billion dollar gay and lesbian tourism industries See Alexander (2005: 81-103), Puar (2006: 61-66) and Boyd (2008). and highly lucrative gay pride events – predominately located in the West – sponsored by banks and multinational businesses (who often aren’t into workers rights) For instance, Pride in London 2014 received an income of £309,921 from sponsorship and grants. The main and highly visible sponsor for the event was Barclays bank. Other sponsors included ASDA (part of the Wal-Mart group), Tesco, Starbucks and Citibank (Pride in London, 2014 Finances – online at http://prideinlondon.org/about/2014-finances/, accessed 20th October 2014). While Wal-Mart have a bad reputation for worker’s rights, Tesco have been highly criticised for their involved in the UK Government’s Workfare scheme, where people on benefits are forced to work for zero wages, at the threat of losing their benefits. This undermines the labour of paid workers, who have often been replaced by the free, Government subsidised labour of those on workfare, where the amount of money in benefits they receive for working 35 hour weeks is less than on minimum wage.. As Ann Pellegrini (2002) and Lisa Peñaloza among others have argued, the address of gays and lesbians in their sexual specificity and as ‘consuming subjects’ has produced a “profound sense of social validation and legitimation” (Peñaloza 2008: 306), asserting the neoliberal rhetoric of the market and private consumption as sites of democratic empowerment. The address and incorporation of queerness has thus become a lucrative site for capital’s reproduction, especially when pursuing profits proves difficult Puar discusses how the gay and lesbian tourism industry in the US claimed to weather the economic difficulties that faced the U.S. tourist industry in general following 9/11 (2006: 61-66).. Market address, aimed at predominantly white, gender-normative, able-bodied, middle class queer subjects (i.e. the monied ones), has produced a myth that such subjects are dominant within LGBTQ communities by increasing the visibility of these subjects. Queer liberalism is indeed built upon such myths, naturalising what Floyd calls “capital-intensive forms of visibility” (2009: 200) as a form of neoliberal multiculturalism – i.e. an official, state-recognised form of diversity which reduces race, class, nationality and (dis)ability to ‘cultural issues’ Jodi Melamed theorises neoliberal multiculturalism as the “contemporary incorporation of U.S. multiculturalism into the legitimating and operating procedures of neoliberalism, conceived as a world-historic organisation of economy, governance, and social and biological life” (2006: 15). “Neoliberal multiculturalism revises racial liberal reference and logic. Like racial liberalism, contemporary neoliberal multiculturalism sutures official antiracism to state policy in a manner that prevents the calling into question of global capitalism. However, it deracializes official antiracism to an unprecedented degree, turning (deracialized) racial reference into a series of rhetorical gestures of ethical right and certainty. Concepts previously associated with 1980s and 1990s liberal multiculturalism — “openness,” “diversity,” and “freedom” — are recycled such that “open societies” and “economic freedoms” (shibboleths for neoliberal measures) come to signify human rights that the United States has a duty to secure for the world” (16).. As Eng argues, addressing the racially-motivated police trespass incited the Lawrence vs. Texas case (Lawrence’s partner Garner was black and reported to have a weapon), queer liberalism’s conditions of possibility collaborate with Western liberalism’s ongoing reproduction of racial hierarchies (through a privileged norm in the law of whiteness as property) This argument has been developed within critical race theory – see Eng’s reading of Cheryl I. Harris’ ‘Whiteness as property’ (1993) in Eng (2010: 46-47).. Furthermore, in her influential conception of homonationalism, Jasbir Puar argues that the “alliance” of homosexuality and the “global dominant ascendency of whiteness” through the imperialist war on terror entails a folding into life of homosexual subjects regulated according to racial and national norms. This operates through the construction of an ‘Orientalist’, ‘Muslim sexuality’ as other, which is attached to the figure of the terrorist; and the positing of universalised American gay and lesbian subjects as exceptional, to be bought into the fold of mass-mediated patriotism, with which LGBTQ subjects collude (2006: 39). Queer liberalism thus asserts the ideological cover for the material reality of neoliberal capitalism – that white, gender-normative, able, middle+ class subjects are socially valued; that racialised, working-class and/or migrant populations are a cheap and readily available source of labour. Queer liberalism’s conditions of possibility involve the economic freedoms and private property rights characteristic of neoliberalism, married to white yet multicultural, nationalist cultural politics. LGBT rights are thus instrumentalised as an institutional framework for neoliberal capitalism and the production of its material hegemony by neoliberal institutions. An exemplary case: in February 2014 the World Bank withdrew a $90 million loan to Uganda for healthcare, due to the Ugandan Government’s Anti Homosexuality Act and healthcare discrimination. This was received as good news by LGBT activists in the West. The World Bank explicitly claimed that institutionalised discrimination is bad for societies and economies – President Jim Kim stated that “when societies enact laws that prevent productive people from fully participating in the workforce, economies suffer"; furthermore, “[l]egislation restricting sexual rights, for instance, can hurt a country’s competitiveness by discouraging multinational companies from investing or locating their activities in those nations" Jim Yong Kim (2014) ‘The high costs of institutional discrimination’. Washington Post (27th February 2014) – online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/jim-yong-kim-the-high-costs-of-institutional-discrimination/2014/02/27/8cd37ad0-9fc5-11e3-b8d8-94577ff66b28_story.html (accessed 20th October 2014). The World Bank are doing further research into the economic costs of homophobia.. While Kim thanked gay and lesbian HIV/AIDS activists for the worldwide legacy of their work, financing Ugandan healthcare becomes ethical collateral. Not to forget the role of loans in consolidating neoliberal hegemony. The financial withdrawal may be the ‘high cost of institutional discrimination’ to Ugandans, LGBT or otherwise, in need of healthcare; the ‘cost’ in the long run, according to the World Bank, is of a potential Ugandan market for international capital. However, the fact that the World Bank has more than tripled their lending to Uganda from last year, approving $838 million loans in 2014 (primarily for infrastructure, but also renewable energy and education) Projects and costs: UGANDA North Eastern Road-corridor Asset Management Project (NERAMP) - $243.8mil; Second Kampala Institutional and Infrastructure Development Project - $175.0mil; IDA Guarantee for Renewable Energy Development Program - $160.0mil; Uganda: Albertine Region Sustainable Development Project - $145.0mil; UG Teacher and School Effectiveness Project - $100.0mil. Information from the World Bank’s website – online at http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/uganda/projects/all?qterm=&strdate=07-01-2013&enddate=06-30-2014&srt=totalcommamt_srt and http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/uganda (accessed 3rd November 2014)., affirms they’re not willing to forgo this cost. LGBT rights are posited as necessary for the participation in civil societies and national economies through wage labour, and instrumentalised for the expansion of international capital through such economies. Furthermore, since the Anti Homosexuality Act was ruled void in August, the World Bank has been pressured by Ugandan and International organisations to only fund the loan with anti-discrimination agreements ‘Joint CSO Letter to World Bank on Discrimination in Uganda's Health Sector’ (2014, 24th September), online at http://www.hrw.org/node/129329 (accessed 3rd November 2014). See also ‘World Bank: Safeguards Essential for Uganda Loan’, Human Rights Watch (2014, 24th September), online at http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/09/23/world-bank-safeguards-essential-uganda-loan (accessed 3rd November 2014)., positing the World Bank as an authority on human rights as public financier in the global South. (There’s also a much wider question about LGBT rights as a form or Western imperialism that I can’t go into here). The neoliberal incorporation of difference LGBT social inclusion thus becomes an exemplary tool of capitalist innovation, capital’s “quest for the new through a modernizing impulse that is in many ways quite liberatory” (Hennessy 2000: 29). Reading The Communist Manifesto, Hennessy emphasises that capital’s expansion of markets and exploitation of ‘free’ human individuals also produces “new social relations”, “new forms of consciousness and identity”, that “close off the emancipatory possibilities of its revolutionary drive” (29-30). As Stuart Hall argues in an influential lecture on globalisation, neoliberal capital in its expansion has “had to incorporate and reflect the difference it was trying to overcome”; the logic of capital has engaged with and ‘woven in’ forms of particularity (1997: 32, 29). This has given rise to forms of ‘global mass culture’, located in the West, that recognise and absorb cultural differences and homogenize their representations; yet do not homogenize them completely, for these forms “do not work for completeness” (28) Culture is here figured as a form of capital itself, increasing concentrated and privileging a Western conception of the world.. As Ferguson claims in his reading of Hall’s essay, it is the critical potential of cultures and differences that drive global capital to inhabit them (2008: 161). Through its recognition of our cultural difference, neoliberal capital commodifies and circulates a normative queerness; the use-values of our subcultural commodities are overdetermined and reproduced for capitalist accumulation, which in turn circulate partial representations of queerness as synonymous with whiteness and class privilege For a study of the classed character of queer cultural production, see Henderson (2013).. In his dialectic of the value form and natural form of the commodity in Capital, Marx emphasises that the abstraction of value posits an identity between two qualitatively different things (commodities, labour power, capital) (1990: 138-163). Value’s expression necessarily depends on the concrete use-values embodied in these things. In capital’s contemporary moment, capital recognises its kindred soul of value in limited, socially normative forms of queer life and commodity cultures. Our enfranchisement through rights operates in the spheres of the market and the workplace, the privileged and exploitative positions of capitalist society, reasserting hierarchies of private property and propriety, suturing our enfranchisement to our positions as value producers and consumers. Our qualitative difference as queer subjects (our ‘natural form’) is recognised only as we are rendered identical as producers of value (of abstract labour) and consumers of commodity capital (commodities produced for accumulation). Queer liberalism feeds our mythic sameness as LGBT subjects, which is subsumed under the general equivalence of classless, multicultural diversity, as rights-bearing subjects under capitalism. Meanwhile, neoliberal states disinvest and disenfranchise populations surplus to their requirements, cutting jobs and benefits for the disabled and working poor, reproducing racialised and gendered poverty, unemployment Youth (16-24) Unemployment statistics, January – December 2013: Black youth 44% unemployed; South Asian youth 34%; ‘Other Ethnic Background’ (defined as “Chinese, multiple ethnic or any other ethnic background”) youth 30%; White youth 19%. 30% of youth unemployed are BAME. House of Commons Library, ‘Unemployment by ethnic background’ (2014). Online at http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn06385.pdf (accessed 7th November 2014). This is after the coalition government has altered the categories of unemployed and underemployed persons, so the reality of the situation is underplayed. and incarceration, promoting a moralising, xenophobic rhetoric that erases the global economic histories behind these classed positions. As David Cameron stated, referring to gay and lesbian schoolchildren and the Same-Sex Marriage Act (2013), “[b]y making this change they will be able to see that Parliament believes their love is the same as anyone else’s love and that we believe in equality” Pink News, ‘David Cameron: “I am proud of what this government has done on equal marriage”’ (2013, 26th June) – online at http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/06/28/david-cameron-i-am-proud-of-what-this-government-has-done-on-equal-marriage/ (accessed 3rd November 2014).. The future according to queer neoliberalism promises the queer child freedom, equivalence, material contradiction and/or dispossession. Bibliography Alexander, M. Jacqui. Pedagogies of Crossing: Mediations on Feminism, Sexual Politics, Memory and the Sacred. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2005. Berlant, Lauren. Cruel Optimism. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2011. —. The Queen of America goes to Washington City. Durham, N.C.; London: Duke University Press, 1997. Bérubé, Allan, and (eds) John D'Emilio and Estelle B. Freedman. My Desire for History: Essays in Gay, Community and Labor History. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2011. Boyd, Nan Alamilla. "Sex and Tourism: The Economic Implications of the Gay Marriage Movement." Radical History Review (Issue 100, Winter 2008), 2008: 223-235. Chasin, Alexandra. Selling Out: The Gay and Lesbian Movement goes to Market. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2000. Clarke, Eric O. Virtuous Vice: homoeroticism and the public sphere. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2000. Davidson, Guy. Queer Commodities: contemporary US fiction, consumer capitalism, and gay and lesbian subcultures. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. Duggan, Lisa. The Twilight of Equality: Neoliberalism, Cultural Politics, and the Attack on Democracy. Boston, MA: The Beacon Press, 2003. Edelman, Lee. No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2004. Eng, David L. The feeling of kinship: Queer liberalism and the racialisation of intimacy. Durham & London: Duke University Press, 2010. Ferguson, Roderick. Aberrations in Black: Toward a Queer of Colour Critique. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 2004. Ferguson, Roderick. "Adminstering Sexuality: or, The Will to Institutionality." Radical History Review 1000, Winter 2008: 158-170. Floyd, Kevin. The Reification of Desire: Towards a Queer Marxism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009. Glick, Elisa. Materialising Queer Desire: Oscar Wilde to Andy Warhol. New York: SUNY Press, 2009. Hall, Stuart. "The Local and the Global: Globalization and Ethnicity." In Culture, Globalization and the World-System: Contemporary conditions for the representation of Identity, by Anthony D. (Ed.) King, 19-39. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997. Harvey, David. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Henderson, Lisa. Love and Money: Queers, Class and Cultural Production. New York and London: New York University Press, 2013. Hennessy, Rosemary. Profit and Pleasure: Sexual Identities in Late Capitalism. London: Routledge, 2000. Joseph, Miranda. Against the Romance of Community. Minneapolis, Minn.; London: University of Minnesota Press, 2002. Marx, Karl. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Volume 1. London: Penguin Books, 1990. McRuer, Robert. Crip theory: cultural signs of queerness and disability. New York and London: New York University Press, 2006. McRuer, Robert. "Cripping Queer Politics, or the Dangers of Neoliberalism." S&F Online (Issue 10.1-10.2, Fall 2011/Spring 2012, 2011/2012: Online at http://sfonline.barnard.edu/a-new-queer-agenda/cripping-queer-politics-or-the-dangers-of-neoliberalism (accessed March 31st 2014). Melamed, Jodi. "The Spirit of Neoliberalism: From Racial Liberalism to Neoliberal Multiculturalism." Social Text (89, Vol. 24, No.4, Winter 2006), 2006: 1-24. Morton, Donald (ed.). The Material Queer. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1996. Muñoz, José Esteban. Cruising Utopia: The Then and There of Queer Futurity. New York: NYU Press, 2009. —. Disidentifications: Queers of Color and the Performance of Politics. Minnaepolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1999. Pellegrini, Ann. "Consuming Lifestyle: Commodity Capitalism and Transformations in Gay Identity." In Queer Globalisations: Citizenship and the Afterlife of Colonialism, by Annaldo and Martin F. Maralansen IV (eds) Cruz-Malame, 134-145. New York: NYU Press, 2002. Peñaloza, Lisa. "We're here, we're queer and we're going shopping! A critical perspective on the accomodation of gays and lesbians in the U.S. marketplace (1996)." In Queer Economics, by Joyce & Adam Zeller (eds) Jacobsen, 304-329. Abingdon: Routledge, 2008. Puar, Jasbir. Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times. Duke University Press, 2007. Rosenberg, Jordana and Amy Villarejo (eds). GLQ (Vol. 18, No. 1): Queer Studies and the Crises of Capitalism. 2012. Sears, Alan. "Queer Anti-Capitalism: What's Left of Lesbian and Gay Liberation." Science & Society, 2005: 92-112. Sedgwick, Eve. Epistemology of the Closet. London: Penguin Books [1994 edition], 1988. Spade, Dean. Normal Life: Administrative Violence, Critical Trans Politics and the Limits of the Law. Brookyln, NY: South End Press, 2011. Stryker, Susan. "Transgender History, Homonormativity, and Disciplinarity." Radical History Review, Issue 100, 2008: 144-157. Tinkcom, Matthew. Working like a homosexual: camp, capital, cinema. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2002. Villarejo, Amy. Lesbian Rule: Cultural Criticism and the Value of Desire. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2003. Warner, Michael. The trouble with normal : sex, politics and the ethics of queer life. New York: Free Press, 1999. Wesling, Meg. "Queer Value." GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies (Vol.18, No. 1), 2012: 107-126. 17