How might future legal regimes for LGBT rights globally anticipate emergent identities, techâ€'mediated relationalities, augmented embodiment, and what role will activism play in shaping future pathways of recognition, rights and community belonging?
Lawmakers around the world are grappling with how to respond to new developments in society that have implications for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBT) communities. The recent Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage in the United States is just one example of this trend. In many parts of the world, however, there is still widespread discrimination against LGBT people, including in criminal laws that punish homosexuality as a crime. As technology continues to shape our lives, it also has the potential to change the way we think about sexuality and gender identity. This essay explores some of these changes and their implications for future legal regimes for LGBT rights.
Let's consider the idea of "emergent" or fluid identities. In the past, people tended to identify with one of two genders - male or female - and then choose whether they were straight or gay/lesbian. But nowadays, many people are rejecting those binary categories altogether and instead defining themselves by their own terms. Some people may identify as non-binary, meaning they do not fit neatly into either category; others may identify as pansexual, which means they are attracted to all kinds of people regardless of gender. These emerging identities can be difficult to define legally because they often defy traditional definitions of sex and gender.
What happens when someone who was born a man but identifies as a woman wants to get married? How would the law treat them if they were denied the right to marry due to their birth certificate?
Tech-mediated relationalities are becoming more commonplace. With apps like Grindr and Tinder, people can connect with others based on sexual preferences without ever meeting in person. This opens up new possibilities for relationships, but it also raises questions about how best to protect privacy and safety online. What kind of laws should govern these interactions? Should there be special protections for people who meet online? Or is this simply an extension of existing relationship norms that need no additional regulation?
Augmented embodiment refers to the ways technology can enhance our physical bodies. Some LGBT activists argue that transgender individuals should have access to medical interventions that allow them to change their appearance. Others argue that these interventions go too far and threaten to erase unique physical characteristics associated with each gender. How might future legal regimes address issues related to augmented embodiment? Will there be limits on what types of surgeries or procedures can be performed? Who decides those limits - doctors, religious leaders, or lawmakers?
Activism will continue to play a role in shaping future pathways of recognition, rights, and community belonging. As LGBT communities become more vocal and visible, politicians will feel pressure to respond by enacting laws that protect them from discrimination. But activism is not just about demanding rights; it's also about creating alternative models of social organization and culture.
Some activists have argued for "queer space" where LGBT people can come together and form their own communities apart from mainstream society. Others have advocated for "radical visibility," which challenges dominant narratives about sexuality and gender through artistic expression and public demonstrations. These approaches may clash with traditional views about marriage and family life, but they could also offer new possibilities for understanding what constitutes a healthy and fulfilling relationship.
As technology shapes our lives and LGBT communities continue to challenge traditional norms, future legal regimes for LGBT rights will need to grapple with how to define and protect identity, privacy, safety, and community. Activism will continue to play an important role in shaping these pathways, but so too will lawmakers who must balance competing interests and values in order to create fair and equitable laws.