The Discourse on Gender Identity in Contemporary Russia

Home , Androcentrism, Ani Lorak, Conchita Wurst, Dami Im, Dennis, Dima Bilan

westostpassagen Slawistische THE DISCOURSE Forschungen und Texte ON GENDER IDENTITY 25 IN CONTEMPORARY RUSSIA

An Introduction with a Case Study in Russian Gender Linguistics

Dennis Scheller-Boltz

Olms westostpassagen Slawistische Forschungen und Texte Literatur, Sprache, Kultur

Herausgeber / Editors: Danuta Rytel-Schwarz, Wolfgang F. Schwarz, Hans-Christian Trepte (Leipzig) und Alicja Nagórko (Berlin)

Band 25

Georg Olms Verlag Hildesheim ∙ Zürich ∙ New York 2017 Dennis Scheller-Boltz

The Discourse on Gender Identity in Contemporary Russia

An Introduction with a Case Study in Russian Gender Linguistics

Georg Olms Verlag Hildesheim ∙ Zürich ∙ New York 2017 Umschlagmotiv: „Vielfalt“ von Kerstin Sörensen. Foto: Atelier Beauty Shooter, Marko Bußmann, Berlin.

Das Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen.

Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

© Georg Olms Verlag AG, Hildesheim 2017 www.olms.de E-Book Umschlaggestaltung: Wolfgang F. Schwarz / Barbara Gutjahr (Hamburg) Alle Rechte vorbehalten ISBN 978-3-487-42220-6 “The monograph investigates the discourseontransgender and queeridenti- ties in present-day Russia and offers avaluable contribution to SlavicQueer Linguisticsand Slavic Studies in general. Thebook is an interdisciplinary study that brings together Linguistics, GenderStudies, Queer Studies, and, to acertain degree, Political Science and Cultural Anthropology. Such an inter- disciplinaryapproach is difficult to apply in thecontext of Russian linguistics, which for the most part remains heteronormative and traditionalist when it comes to gender identityand gender expression. This is why Scheller-Boltz’s analysis of the discourse on ConchitaWurstinPutin’s Russiafillsanim- portant gapinRussian Queer Linguistics.” (Alexander Pershái,European HumanitiesUniversity, Vilnius, Lithuania)

“This monographpresents an intriguing and in-depth analysis of thehighly complex and problematic issue of straight andqueer Russian identities and thetensions between thetwo in anation caught between eastern traditionalism and western modernism. The work explores the ever-changingand inter- connectedconceptsofgender, sexuality and national identity through the receptionof2014 Eurovision Song Contest self-proclaimed queer Austrian victor Conchita Wurst by both the Russian public and media. While thevolume may also be regardedasaseminalintroduction to Russianqueer linguistics its findings are those which can be applied to other disciplines concerned with issues of gender, sexuality, and nationality. Amultifaceted work in terms of appeal Scheller-Boltz’s book is amust-read for those interested in perceptions of gender and sexualityinmodern-dayRussia, Slavonic queer linguistics as well as the reception and impact of western popular culture on eastern societies.” (JohnFrancis Eason III, UniversityofAlberta,Edmonton, Canada)

Prefaceand Acknowledgement

This volumerepresentsthe full resultsofascientific project whichwas approved by the Tyrolean ScienceFund(TWF) forthe year 2015.Itis basedonaseries of papers andtalks which have already been published or presentedonthistopicoverthe past three years.Not untilnow, however, hasitbeenpossiblefor me to presentthe complete material thathas been collectedand investigated to analysemycurrent research interestand to presentthe full extent of my research andfindings. So,thisvolume pro- videsmewith theopportunity to bringtogetherall my material andto presentthe finalresultsofmycurrentresearch project.Itisdedicated to the question of theinterconnectionbetween gender, sexual,and national identity.Specifically, Iaddressthe question of how the constructionofgender andsexualidentitiesinfluence theconstruction of national identity andin what ways theseidentityconceptsare intimatelyconnected. My research projectfocusesonRussian discourseonidentity: First, it analyses thedevelopments in therecent past and, in particular, the latest socio-political circumstances andtrendsinthe RussianFederation whichprovidemuchusefuland interesting material forustoexamine the interconnectionbetween thesedifferentidentityconcepts. In otherwords, andtobemoreprecise,the projectfocuses on thecurrent discourseon gender, sexual,and national identityinRussia whichdelivers authenticand illustrative and, hence, extremelytopical material that exemplifies clearly thatgender, sexual,and national identity are closelyinterconnectedand influence oneanother directly. This is aphenomenonwhich can be charac- terisedastypical forRussiainrecent years andwhich hasnoticeably domi- natedRussian discourse,especiallybefore andduring the Winter Olympics in 2014. Second,the projectaimsatanalysing Russia’s ongoing identity crisis.It is very interesting forRussicists – andSlavicists in general – to studyhow this identity crisis is articulated in Russia and, furthermore, what kind of measures andsteps aretaken – this also concerns theRussian media – to strengthenand to rebuild Russia’s identity. In thiscontext, onehas to explorethe role that gender andsexualidentitiesplayhere andtowhat 8 Preface extent theconceptsofgenderand sexuality impact Russia’s national identity. Third, my analysis of discourseongender, sexuality,and nation has, of course,adecidedfocus on Russiansociety.However, Russiandiscourse deliversvery informative andhighly revealingmaterial thatcan also, of course,beappliedtoother societiesand cultures.Inthiscontext, it should be pointed outthatthe analysis of gender, sexuality,and nation is in andof itself averypopular topicirrespectiveofthe discipline. Forthisreason, the material to be analysed formyresearchtopic provides meaningful scienti- ficfindingsthatcan be directly transferredtoand implemented in other non-Slavonicdisciplines.Hence, theexpected results enrich genderand queer linguistic research notonlyinSlavonic (linguistic) studiesbut also in otherlinguisticand non-linguisticdisciplines. *** This volumewould neverhavecomeintoexistence if Ihad nothad people on my side who actively andprofessionallysupportedmeand stood by me with wordsand deeds: Iamdeeply indebted to AllaViktorovnaKirilinaand Ihavetoexpress my gratitudetoher forher immenseinterest in my project,for our discussions, forher absolutelyhelpful remarksaswellasfor heralwaysavailable ear, andfor theresearchpossibilities sheofferedmeinMoscow. Iowe adebtofgratitude to the WirthInstitute andthe Department of Modern Languages andCultural Studiesofthe University of Alberta, especially to Joseph Patrouchand Wacław Osadnik,for supporting my research project,for thepossibilities to presentand discussits main aspects andmyresearch questions,for useful impulses,and forofferingme brilliant researchopportunities. Iwould like to thankIngeborg Ohnheiser forher always helpful remarks andher constructiveinspiration, but, above all, forher open-mindedness, and, especially,for herindescribable expertisewhich is always usefuland inspiringfor me,and whichcan definitely be felt in this volume. Ithank Jiřina vanLeeuwen-Turnovcováfor critical advice andprofessional hints, but,especially,for herinterest in my work. Preface 9

My big thank-yougoestoUrsulaDolechal,Vojko Gorjanc, Roswitha Kersten-Pejanić,Claudia Posch, Simone Rajilić,JanaValdrová, and Andrea Zinkfor excellent cooperation, forsupporting Slavonicgenderand queer linguisticresearch,and forsharing so many discussionswithmeand helping me outfromtimetotime. My gratitude goestoImkeMendoza whohas made this project and, consequently, thisvolumepossible,not leastbecause of theinspiration I gotather conferenceinSalzburgin2014. TheTyrolean ScienceFund(TWF) Ihavetothank forhaving approved my research project,for itsfinancial support, and, in particular, forits trustin the feasibility,the necessity as well as in thesignificance andrelevance of my project. Thankyou to Ann Coadyand SonjaKoroliovfor critical proof-reading. Avery big thank-yougoestoAlexander Persháiand John Francis Eason whotook theirtimetoreviewthe manuscript of this book.Ihighly appreciate theirfeedbackand useful comments andIam very grateful for their interest in this research project and, mainly,inthisbook. My heartfeltgratitude to Dorotheafor always helpingmewith technical questionsand for having aprofessional eyeastolayoutand text design. Thankyou to Kerstin Sörensenfor creating apainting forthe coverofthis book. Last butnot leastImust thankfromthe bottom of my heart theeditors of this bookseries as well as thepublishinghouse GeorgOlmsfor their cooperationand support,but,inparticular, forincluding thecurrentmono- graphintheir series. My special thank-yougoestoStefan foryour absolutelyindescribableand never-ending understanding, foryour time andspare time, forthe discussions with youand your critical remarks, forsupporting genderand queer research as well as my ideas andvisions, and, last butnot least, for your belief in this publication. Thankyou so much to youall! *** 10 Preface

Partsofthismonographare basedoncontributionswhich have been publishedpreviouslyinother books,journals, or volumes. However, it is notonly necessary to include andreproduce partsoftheminorder to guaranteeaprofound andcomplete study, but it is also important to elaborateupon them.Factsand interpretations maychangefromtimeto time, our stance on somephenomena can also undergo changes, new circumstances canchange our livesand,consequently,our perceptionas well as ourresearch findings. Consequently, youwillnot find asimple reproductionand compilation of my work, butanupdated andself- contained study of theconstructionand interconnectionofgender, sexual, andnationalidentity in Russia.Therefore,someresearchfindingsmay differ more or less fromhow Ipresentedand wroteaboutthemin previouslypublished contributions.Yet,the partsorchapters which are basedonpreviously published work or on research findingswhich I describedinadifferent wayinother publications are explicitlymarked by myself (the author)bygivingthe full informationonthe quotation.

Dennis Scheller-Boltz In June2017 Table of Contents

Preface andAcknowledgement...... 7 Introduction 1Onthe Significance of Conchita WurstinRussian Discourse ...... 13 1.1Onthe ContentofThis Volume:Aims, Methods,Results ...... 19 1.2Onthe Structure of This Volume ...... 25 1.3UsefulRemarks...... 28 Part 1: Identity:Concepts, Forms, andDiversity ...... 31 1IntroductoryRemarks...... 31 2InvestigatingIdentity: Aims and Questions...... 34 3Onthe Polydimensionality,Complexity,and Ambiguity of Identity...... 34 3.1Identity Formsand Identity Concepts...... 38 3.2Activeand Passive ConstructionofIdentity...... 40 3.3Individual andCollectiveIdentity...... 41 3.4Identity Diversityand IdentityComplexity ...... 42 3.5Identity and theRelevance of Sex...... 43 3.6Sex andIntersex...... 46 3.7Sex andTrans-Identities...... 47 3.8Onthe Relevance of Sex andthe Third Gender ...... 51 4Sex as aNon-RelevantGenderCategory: SomeFinal Remarks...... 56 5IdentityForms, Identity Concepts,and LinguisticAnalyses...... 57 Part 2: Illusion – Change – Tradition: Identity in Russia...... 63 1IntroductoryRemarks...... 63 2IdentityinSovietand Post-SovietRussia...... 65 3 Russia’s Identity Crisis: Identity Policiesand IdentityRegulation ...... 69 4GenderIdentity:Onthe RelevanceofTraditional Gender Ideas...... 73 5 Masculinity,Heteronormativity,and Biopolitics in Today’sRussia...... 79 6GenderAsymmetry and thePostgenderOption...... 83 7SexualIdentity:Enforcing Heteronormativity...... 87 8QueeringMaleIdentity in Artand Sports Changes RussianReality ...... 97 12 Table of Contents

9Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing RussianNationalIdentity...... 101 Part 3: On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness forImplementing Traditional IdeasofGender, Sex, andNation in Russia.The Case of Conchita Wurst...... 115 1IntroductoryRemarks...... 115 2Queer Europe:The Eurovision Song ContestStrives for Tolerance..... 120 3ConchitaWurst andthe Eurovision Song Contest 2014...... 124 3.1Russian Discourseand theIdeaofFemininity...... 126 3.2Russian Discourseand theIdeaofMasculinity...... 133 3.3Russian Discourseand theIdeaofGenderRolesand Stereotypes..... 138 3.4Russian Discourseand theIncrease of Homophobia...... 143 3.5The Construction of GayEuropeand StraightRussia...... 163 3.6MetaphorisingConchitaWurst – Metaphorising Western Europe .... 167 3.7Denigrating theAlien – Praising One’sOwn ...... 172 3.8 Geiropa:the UseofWordFormationinDiscourse ...... 175 3.9Respecting Diversity: on the Tolerance of RussianPeople...... 178 4Final Remarks...... 187 Part 4: Eurovision Song Contest2016: Russia vs.Ukraine? – theChanges in Discourseafter Conchita’s andJamala’sVictories...... 189 Part 5: Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics: ACritical Introduction in a Difficult Context ...... 203 1General Observationsand CriticalRemarks...... 203 2RussianGenderQueer Linguistics: Challenges andApproaches...... 210 3Queering Linguistic Disciplines ...... 213 Some FinalRemarks insteadofaSummary...... 219 AbbreviationList...... 221 References 1Secondary Works ...... 223 2OnlineSources:Press Material,OnlineTexts,and Online Forums...... 245 Introduction

1Onthe Significance of Conchita WurstinRussianDiscourse

Anyanalysis of identityinpoliticaldiscourse must begin with the acknowledgement thatidentityisaphenomenon which arises in discourse andwhichcan be used by opposing sidesasatool in thestrugglefor power. Theact of declaringwhatone is andwhatone is not is notsimply a statement of membership in acertaingroup.Itisadevice used to regulate one’sown behaviour,tomanipulatethe behaviourofothers, andtoexclude or marginalisethose whorefuse to adapttheir behaviouraccordingly.Itis important to note thatthisprocess is neverfinished.Ironically,identity requires an ongoing confrontationwithother identitiesinorder to serveits functioninthe struggle forpower. Therefore, discoursewillalmost automatically produceinstances which challengeorreaffirmthe identitiesof thoseparticipatinginthe discourse. Onesuchinstanceinthe Russiandis- course on gender andidentitywas thevictory of Austria’s Conchita Wurst at the2014 Eurovision Song ContestinDenmark’s Copenhagen. Howcould Conchita Wurst – “the bearded woman” (borodataia zhenshchina), theman in adress (muzhik viubke), thetransvestite, theartist of an undefinedorevenundefinablegender – inhabitsuchacentral place in the discourse of acountry thousandsofkilometres away?After all, she(or he?) wasonly thewinnerofasong contest, wasn’ts/he? ThedebateaboutConchitaWurst must be seen in thelarger context of Russia’songoing identity crisis.Thisidentitycrisishas been discussed and analysed in Russianstudiesinfulldetailfromdifferent perspectives (e.g. Baer 2009,Chandler2013, Nohejletal. 2013,Riabov2007,Riabov/ Riabova2008, Sperling 2015).1 However, newand decisive discursive moments continue to appear andmeritdiscussion becausetheyredynamise the Russiandiscourse on identity. Oneofthose crucialdiscursivemoments wasthe appearance of ConchitaWurst andher victoryatthe Eurovision Song ContestinDenmark

1 Seealso theanalysesmadebyNohejl et al.(2011, 2010). 14 Introduction

2014.TothosefamiliarwithRussian politics andsociety,itwas not surprisingthatfiercedebates on both,genderidentityand non- heteronormative lifestyleserupted againand intensified immediately after the media-eventinCopenhagen. Thesedebates tied in withother events whichhad caused abig uproar in theRussian – andinternational – media duringpreviousyears: In 2012,for example,there hadbeen acontroversialappealtotradi- tional genderroles andstereotypical,thatmeans sex-basedgenderideas.At the time,politicians andthe RussianOrthodoxChurchpushed foranew familynormpromoting afamily modelwithanaverage of threechildren (trekhdetnaiasem’ia)(cf. URL1,2). This drasticstepwas notonlymeant to raisethe – allegedly declining – birthrate. It wasalsointendedto regulate genderroles andtomaintain traditional gender ideas. Scholars agree that this socio-politicalmeasurewas oneofthe most significantand most important steps in recent years to regulate gender identity perse. In June2013, PresidentVladimirPutin signed theso-called propagandalaw which bans thepublicdistribution of informationabout “non- traditional”sexualrelationsand prevents GayPridesaswellaspublic queer activities (Jefferson Lenskyj2014).This controversiallaw caused quiteastir internationally,mainly because it wasseenasaninfringement upon human rights,inparticular thefreedomofspeech(Kondakov2014, 2012a, Sapper/ Weichsel2013).Inthe Russiancontext,however, thelaw meantmuchmore. Itsintention is to regulatesexualidentitywhich obviouslyincludessexualdesireand behaviour, within a – as Judith Butler (1991)calls it – “heterosexual matrix”. Evidently, this lawwas afurther dramatic step to denyidentitydiversity andtocurtail one’sright to define one’sown identity. Instead, it addedtothe increasing pressure to regulate genderidentity based on the conceptofheteronormativity. Therecentpoliticaldecision to banpeoplewithatrans-identitybecause of an allegedmentaldisorderfrompassingthe drivinglicense andfrom driving at allstandsinline with thesepolitical interventions andcan only be interpretedasanotherefforttoencroachupon sexuality(cf. URL3,4, seealsoKondakov n.d.). Onemay find this surprising butthese legislative activities are only one facet of current Russian identity politics. Therecent media coverage has made it evidentthatthe RussianFederation constantly attempts to maintain andtodemonstrateits power andits internationalinfluence. The On the Significance of ConchitaWurst in Russian Discourse 15 annexation of Crimea by the RussianFederationwithall the political measures,conflicts, andcrisesthathavefollowed from this action as well as theinvolvement of Russia in theconflictinSyria are the latest incidents thatattest to thefactthatRussiaistryingtorebuild anationalidentity basedonpower andsuperiority.Inthiscontext, it is no accident that the Russian presidentappearsinpublicstylisinghimself over andoveragain as areal man, as aso-called nastoiashchii muzhik (Sperling 2015).Itisalso no coincidence that the news coverage andthe presentationofVladimir Putin in themedia mostly overemphasisehis machismoand his – allegedly – manly behaviour. Putin’s self-staging as astrongand decisive leader as well as the patriarchal andprotectiveheadofthe Russiannationgohandinhandwith hisidentity politics.Inthe end, theconstructionofhis identityand his public appearances confirmthe generalpower andsuperiority of Russia in the eyes of his audience. In addition,the current Putin cult (kul’tlichnosti Putina)thatishighly noticeable andwidespreadincontemporary Russia must be interpretedasthe active acceptanceofthe recentidentitypolitics and, in turn,asthe passivereconstructionofthe required identities which shows, on theone hand,the supportfor Vladimir Putinand hispolicies and, on the otherhand, thepower andbeliefthe presidentreceives from the Russian people.Inthissocialand socio-political contextor–more adequately – in this tensesituation,ConchitaWurst enteredthe Russian discourseongenderand sexual identity. Much hasbeensaidabout thenatureofthe EurovisionSongContest (cf. Cassiday2014, Motschenbacher2013,2012).Yet,itisclear that from itsearly beginnings in aEuropewhichhad onlyrecentlyovercomethe ravages of warithas always been apolitical event, too.Onthe night of May 10, 2014,ConchitaWurst showedher awareness of this political dimension when sheshouted: “Weare unstoppable!” (cf. URL5). Notonly didshe expressher support forpeoplewith atrans-identityand forpeople with anon-heteronormativeidentityingeneral. Shealsounderlinedher conviction that thosesharing herbeliefintolerance, respect,and peace within andbeyond Europe wouldprevail in thestruggle againstauthori- tarianism, discrimination, andhatred. With herwords,she addressedall people in Europe whowere in frontofthe television watchingand listening to herspeech. As aconsequence, onecan conclude:ConchitaWurst used 16 Introduction the EurovisionSongContest 2014 as aplatforminorder to appeal to respect. Foralargepart of the Russianpopulation, thevictory of Conchita Wurstcameasablow. It washardfor them to imaginethatthe majority of Europe (and even asubstantial fractionofthe Russian televoters)had voted forsomeone who – in “hir”(cf. King2014)existence – is such a controversialand ambiguouscharacter. To them,itwas difficulttounder- stand that Russia’s TolmachevySisters (Sestry Tolmachevy), these“pure”, “innocent”,and “lovely”beauties, as Vladimir Zhirinovskii describedthem in thetelevision show Priamoi ėfir broadcastonMay 10, 2014 on the Russian televisionchannel Rossiia1,onlytook theseventh placeinthe end (cf. URL6). Immediately after themusiccompetition,Vladimir Zhiri- novskiiblamed(Western)Europe fordisclosing so bluntlyits decadence andperversity.Inhis opinion, ConchitaWurst wasthe directmedium through whichEurope – in this situationmainly understood as the European Union – showed itstruecolours,its main values,its current state, andits future. Zhirinovskiideclared “the endofEurope” anddrewthe picture of “the West”asadecadent space. It wasabsolutely outofthe question to himthatConchitaWurst heraldsthe apocalypse of Europe.Asa consequence, one canconclude: TheEurovisionSongContest in 2014 was usedinRussiaatfirst glanceasaplatform in ordertoappeal to “normalcy”. Thevictory of Conchita Wurstatthe EurovisionSongContest was usedfor propaganda purposesinRussia,tobring ideological ideas forward and, according to thecurrentsocio-political course,toplead foraconser- vativeviewofsociety, gender, andthe role of the individual in general. However, this is notthe only interestingaspectofthe debate.Incontrastto previousdebates,the Russiansociety played ameaningful andperhaps even theleading role thistime. Itsenormous reactiontoConchitaWurst must be characterisedascrucial andrevealingbecause it demonstrates clearly its stanceongenderand sexual identityaswellasthe general perception and, as aresultofthis,ameasureofthe acceptanceornon- acceptanceofidentitydiversityand queerness amongthe Russians.These reactions have dominated andcontinued to influencethe Russiandiscourse on genderand sexuality foralong time. In addition, they reflectthe current discourseonidentityand diversityand,for this reason, shed alight on the ways in whichgenderand societyare conceptualised. On the Significance of ConchitaWurst in Russian Discourse 17

Anotherfactwhich proves that thedebateongenderand sexualityran markedly differently after ConchitaWurst hadenteredthe Russian discourse is theobvious “polydimensionality”(Scheller-Boltz 2015b) andthe revealing interthematic andtransthematic connections whichthe debate assumed: notonly wasthisspecificity akey characteristicofthe debate at the time;ithas also influenced thedebatefor years to come.Inthiscontext, it hastobementionedthatidentitywas notonlythe mere subject of the debate,but it hasalsoservedasaninstrumentwhichwas directly usedin ordertoestablishand stabilise, and, mainly, to evaluate ideologies of identities andtodiscuss andtoevaluateneighbouring topics. Thismeansthat the debate on gender andsexuality affecteddebates on other identityconcepts, in particular – andcertainly duetothe currentpolitical situation – the debate on national identity. In summary,Conchita Wurststirredupthe debatesonidentityinmany ways so that thediscourse on identity wasdistinguished by both,aspecific complexity as well as an interthematic andinterdiscursive dimension. Iwanttomention at this pointthatthe discussion on gender andsexuality is by no meansanovum in Russia andhas always takenplace in Russian society,although this discussion mostly took place behind closed doors, which meansratherinprivate circlesthaninpublic. Thischanged with Conchita Wurst. It washer presence in theRussian media that brought alot of gender-and identity-related aspectsand topics to thesurface. Alot of things that were, till then,unexpressed andmaybe even taboo, finally reached thesurface andwerediscussed in public.Opinionsand ideas were actively put into wordsand articulatedopenly.This gave thediscourseon identitysomecompletely new dynamics. In my opinion,itisnot reallypossibletodetermine exactlywhenthe Russian PresidentVladimirPutinand the Russian politics in general decidedtointroduce the agenda item whichdealssocritically with identity concepts andwhichestablishedsuchastrictand rigidregulation of identity. However, one hastoacknowledge that this item on the political agenda hasobtainedmoreand more priority as time elapsesand canbe characterised today as oneofthe most important tasksinRussian politics. Theextent of these identitypoliticsbecomes increasingly apparentnow. Theregulationofidentity whichleads, on the onehand, to aconsolidation andexpansion of identity (e.g.nationalidentity) andwhich, on theother hand, curtails andlimits the expression of identity(e.g. gender andsexual 18 Introduction identity) hasfar-reaching consequences forthe Russiansociety and, in turn, forRussian politics (Scheller-Boltz2015f, Stella/Nartova2016). Identity concepts still playanimportant role in andfor theRussian society.Therefore, thecriticalanalysis anddetailedexamination of identity concepts continuetobeapromising research fieldwhich hasnot been ex- hausteduptonow.Thisconcernsinparticularlinguisticanalyses. Analyses of identitiesand identity concepts have been conductedsofar mainly within Slavonicsociologyaswellascultural andliterary studies. It has been examinedand demonstrated in detail, howidentitypoliticsaffects Russian society, howsocialand socio-politicalbackgrounds accompany andstimulate politicalmeasures,and how the regulation of identities influencethe societystructure as well as everydaylife. Furthermore, identity politics are embedded in culturaland socio-cultural contexts andare, therefore, discussedagainst theculturalbackground with regard to certain circumstances andincidents. The corresponding investigationsconsider andanalyse,ofcourse, the Russiandiscourse (e.g. Baer 2009,Cook/ Evans 2014,Downing/Gillett2011,Erokhina et al.2009,Franeta2015, Healey 2001,Kay 2007, Kondakov 2014,Petrova 2013, Pilkington 1996,Rab- zhaeva 2005, Ritter 2001, Rotkirch 1996,Scheide 2002,Sozaev 2010, Stella 2015, Štulhofer/ Sandfort2005, Zdravomyslova et al.2009).How- ever, an explicit and, in particular, detailed linguisticdiscourse analysis of the constructionand perception of identity concepts in contemporary Russia, especially of genderand sexual identity is missinguptonow.Also, the influenceofgenderand sexualityonnationalidentityaswellasthe interconnectionbetween theseconcepts must stillberegarded as amarginal research area within linguistics. This volume attendstothe aforementionedresearchgap andaimsat filling anddiminishingitwithnew research findings,especiallyastothe linguistic construction andperception of genderand sexuality in Russia. Some of these findingsmay also proveusefuland promising forother re- searchareas andresearch disciplines.Moreover, this volume intendsto strengthenRussian gender andqueer linguistics andtosupportthe general establishment of this linguisticdisciplinewithin Russianstudiesasthis discipline is stillhardlyvisible within Slavoniclinguistics. On the Significance of ConchitaWurst in Russian Discourse 19

1.1Onthe ContentofThis Volume: Aims,Methods, Results

This volume focusesonthe discourseongenderand sexual identity in contemporary Russia fromalinguistic perspectiveand, aboveall, on the interconnectionbetween gender, sexuality, andnation, as theseconcepts seem to be closelyinterconnectedwitheachother. As akey figure andasakeymoment, Ichoosethe victory of Austrian singer andperformerConchitaWurst at theEurovision Song Contest in Denmark’s Copenhagen in theyear 2014.Her performance andspeech were asignificantdiscursivemomentbecause they relaunchedaheated debate aboutgenderand provided anew andessential stimulus whichgave revealing informationabout the wayinwhich identity is perceivedand constructed. Thecorresponding debatesprovide informativeand interesting linguistic material,whichinvitesustoinvestigate thelinguisticcon- struction of gender identity, gender stereotypes, andgenderroles.Conchita Wurstinfluencedthe debatesonthe conceptofman andwoman as well as on themeaningoffemininity andmasculinityfor theRussiansociety. Furthermore, she fuelledthe discussionabout homosexuality andother sexual identities as well as about homophobia.All of thesetopicsare delicate in today’s Russia andprovide,asone will see, plenty of conver- sationmaterial.Inaddition, thedebatereached anew andunprecedented dimension.Inthe Russiandiscourse on gender identity,Conchita Wurstis notonly an interesting personawho revealsthe thinkingand themeaning of gender identity in andfor theRussian society.She also plays an important role in andfor thecurrent discourse on national identitywhichis highly influencedbynotions of femininity, masculinity, andsexualidentity,asone will seeinthis volume.2 TheappearanceofConchitaWurst wasnot onlyfollowed by political andmedia reactionsand measures.AsIhave alreadymentioned above, the Russian societyalsoplayedanimportant role whichmarkedly enriched the discourseonidentity. Theanalysisofthe reactionof(apartof) the Russian society guarantees acloserlook at theopinionsofordinary Russianpeople. Firstofall, theirverbal acts andutterances,thatmeanstheir verbal performances which were executed in this context, are meaningfuland provide promising examinationmaterial.Itcould be noticedthatthe appearanceof

2 Asimilar investigation hasbeenpresented by Persson (2015). 20 Introduction

ConchitaWurst suddenly providedthe opportunityfor theRussiansociety to addressproblems,toadvance opinions, and, in some respect,toexpress displeasure, allofwhichhad an important influence on the discourseon identity. Secondly,somenon-verbalaswellaspublic, act-basedper- formances of the Russiansociety revealits interesting stanceonthe perception of identity. Consequently,the reactionsofthe Russiansociety stimulatedand shapedthe discourse on identitybyits different performances which need to be investigated in more detail. If oneonlylooked at theidentityregulating measures initiatedbythe Russiangovernment and the Orthodox Church,the focusonthe topicofidentity wouldbenarrowed andthe research questionwould have to be askeddifferently.Political measures frequently have tactic intentions which makestheir evaluation difficult. When examiningpolitical andchurchmeasures,one hastocon- sidertheir plannedimpact on society(allofthese measures are shapedbya certainamount of propaganda). In comparisontothis, one mayhopetofind somemoreauthentic material by analysing thereactionsofordinary citizens. Thesamecan be said aboutmedia coveragesand newspaperreports. Themedia in Russiaare not always objective sources fortheyare often influencedbypolitics.3 They aimatdrawingapicturewhich goes in line with thecurrent political course.Consequently, its contentsare mostly one- sidedand prefabricated. Thereactionsofthe society,instead,contain more spontaneousmoments andmoreauthenticmaterial.Thisisnot to saythat both spheresare separatedfromeach other. Rather, thethoughtsand utterances of ordinary people reflect theinfluence of Russian politics,the Church,and themedia which,inturn, trytoanticipate, manipulate, and shape publicopinion. Theseconsiderations justifythatthe focusofthisre- searchproject is on theopinions whichare part of theRussian mainstream. Forthispurpose, my analysis is basedonreaders’ comments gathered fromthe online issueofthe popular MoskovskiiKomsomolets4 whichdate

3 In thiscontext, theanchorwoman of the TV-channel RussiaToday,Liz Wahl, needs to be remembered who resigned during hershowbecause she“personally[...] cannot be part of networkfundedbythe Russian government that whitewashesthe actions of Putin” (URL 7).Moreover,see the caseofthe correspondent Konstantin Goldenzweig who wasfired for criticising Vladimir Putinand his politics (URL 8). 4 The newspaper Moskovskii Komsomolets is averypopular media sourcefor linguistic investigations (cf. e.g. Kirilina2015). On the Significance of ConchitaWurst in Russian Discourse 21 mainly fromthe period betweenMay 11,2014and July 1, 2014. This period starts immediately after the Austrian singer won thecompetition on May 10,2014and lastsfor sevenweekswhichIconsider as thetimeduring whichthe debate on Conchita WurstpeakedinRussia. In orderto underscore certainaspects, to verify somethesesand explanations,orto falsifytheories, statements, andconclusions, Iwilladd selected readers’ comments postedoutside thisperiod.Moreover, selected articles, docu- mentations, talk shows,and interviews areusedtoprovide the necessary socio-politicalbackdropwhich enablesthe reader to categorise and evaluate theexamination material.Not least, this approach makesit possible to draw attentiontopotential parallelphenomena as well as to alternativeand differinglines of argumentation which maylead to athema- tic neutralisation. Thereaders’commentswillbeanalysedastothe wayinwhichgender identityislinguistically constructed. To this end, word choice,language usage,and argumentation strategies will be considered. Thisapproachwill show how much the politicaland religious discourseshapespublicopinion on gender identity within Russiansociety.Moreover, theinvestigationwill give an insight into theprevalent idea of manand womaninRussian society as well as into thealleged need to maintain theseideas andthe traditional functionsofgender. Thedecisiontoanalyse readers’ comments results from the assumption thatthis text type is found in a(online)mediumtowhich almost everyone can contribute.5 Everyone can post acomment andhelpthe discourse evolve.Sociolectal factors, like age(in most cases), gender, socialstatus, socialbackgroundand so on,cannothinderaperson from taking part in the discourse. Consequently,myanalysis hasanopenapproachand is not limitedtoany specific group.6

5 You canfind the online issue of Moskovskii Komsomolets at:http://www.mk.ru/. 6 Iamaware of the fact,however, that thereare some pertinent factorstobe consideredhere. Namely, one needstohaveaccess to acomputer with an internet connectionand have the necessary literacytouse it.Plus, even thoughonline media arepotentiallyopentoeveryone their readership will vary accordingtocontent and political line (teenagegirls, for instance, will usuallynot participate in discussions in an online forum for engineersand vice versa,eventhoughtheyare potentially able to do so). 22 Introduction

Thediscourse which arisesinthismediumgetsaself-perpetuating dynamic, illustratesprominent assumptions as well as perceptions,and reflects specificviews of theworld andreality.Asthisdiscourse is mainly shapedbythe dominant discourse, readers’comments must be considered explicitly as areflection. This online discourse,inturn, feedsthe dominant discoursewithits substance. Consequently, readers’ comments reflect and constructdiscourseand reality at thesametime. Thetopic of Conchita Wurstisastartingpoint foragroupofpeople(commenters)who leave their comments on thewebsite andwho intend to deal with the same subjectand with thereality with which thissubject is linked.Inthisregard, the reactionsare brought forwardinvariousways. On the onehand, there are commenters who relatetothe subject directly (comments on Conchita Wurst).Onthe otherhand, there are commenters whorelateprimarily to comments of other commentersand, consequently, refer only indirectlyto the actual subject (comments on comments on Conchita Wurst).Asa consequence, the procedurewhichautomatically followsfromthisleads to aconstantly running“process-product-process-(product-process)...-concept” (O’Keeffe 2012: 450). Of course,the selected material is only asmall part of thewhole discourseongender, sexuality, andnationhoodaswellasontheir inter- dependency.However, acloser examination of thelanguageusedinthe readers’ comments to expressand manifestassumptions, ideas, andnorms, concerning man, woman, homosexuality,identity, andnation,reveals some interestinginformation. Here andinthe following,Iwill usethe term discourse with reference to Foucault to denote abstract systems of knowledge. In thissense, discourse refers to any“groupofstatements that belong to asinglesystem of formation“(Foucault 1972: 107).Itisimportant here andfor my analysis that thediscourse contains, according to Foucault (1972), acertain power potential.The discoursecontainspowerand givespower. Theresult of thisisthatitisthe discourse whichestablishes apower relation and, accordingtothis, evaluation factors within the societybased on the axis of good—bad, acceptable—inacceptable, normal—abnormal,punishable— unpunishable andsoon. Thediscourse legitimates, controls, andjustifies at the same time(Foucault 2001). As my analysis focusesonsocialfactors anddrawsattention to socially constructedidentities,itisbased furthermore on theprinciples andmethods of the Critical DiscourseAnalysis On the Significance of ConchitaWurst in Russian Discourse 23 introduced by Jäger(2012)and Wodak(1989a,1989b)whichdeals critically with powerstrategiesand powerrelationsand focusesespecially on thepractices of how power is used andinstrumentalisedinand by society andofhow powersociallycategorisesand organises(cf.Bourdieu 1991). In this context, linguisticactsfunctionassocialpractices and linguistic meansattainasocial andideological significance. Consequently, both,producedactsand used means, marginalise anddiscriminate socially andaim at constructingareality thatis, on theone hand, characterised by power relations and, on theother hand, basedonideologicalassumptions (Jäger 2005:55). Themainobjective of thecurrent analysis is to question how gender identityisperceivedand constructedbyRussiansociety,how thisper- ception andconstructionislinguistically expressedand performed, and what kindofargumentation strategies are broughtforward to justifythis perception of identity. As onewillsee,ideologicalideas (ideology) and mythological beliefs (mythology)playarelevantroleherewhichneedsto be investigated in more detail.Inaddition,itisworth examininghow the linguistic construction of identitycontributes to theactualperformanceof identityand to whatextent thelinguisticperceptionand construction of identityisshapedbydiscourse andconstructsareality thatisassumed as “natural” and “real”.Inthiscontext,the (ideologically justified) assumption of thegenderbinary whichisoften seen as anatural and biologically determinedconstellation, – as well as its(ideologically and mythologically argued) functionfor the Russiansociety – hastobe analysed. In this context, theinterconnectionbetween gender andsexualidentity is an interestingfactor.The awareness thatasocietycan define strict functions of genderand sexualityand thatitmay establishalogical connectionbetween genderand sexualityalmost inevitably leadsustothe question of howsociety deals with identityand identity diversity.Strategies of marginalising andexcluding certain identities are of particularrelevance in this analysis. One mayassume thatthe discourseongenderand sexuality is used to marginalise,discriminate,and,consequentlytoexclude so-called “non-appropriate” identityconceptswhich do notfit intothe generalideas of identity.However,one hastotakeacloserlook at the linguistic mechanismsand strategiesthatmarginalise, discriminate,and exclude identities – this concerns mainly people withanon-heteronormative 24 Introduction identity – fromsociety as well as on thefunctionthatlanguage playsinthis mechanism.This will providethe necessary understanding of how these individualsare actually excluded from the constructedrealityand of how ideologicaland mythologicalideas are usedasajustificationfor this exclusion. This leadsustothe question of national identity. It is interesting to note thatgenderand sexualidentitiesor, more adequately,genderand sexual concepts are instrumentalised to promote andto(re)build national ideologies andmyths,for the concepts of gender andsexuality are markedly involved in theperception, construction,and,aboveall,inthe evaluation of nationand national identity (Riabov 2007, Riabov/ Riabova2008, Riabova 2002,Riabova/ Tsalko 2011).One will seethatthe concepts of genderand sexuality do notonlyinfluence theperceptionand theconstructionof nationalidentity.Theyalso shed asignificant light on theconceptofspace as well as on theunderstandingand the categorisationofterritoriesin general(Stella/Nartova 2016).InRussia, the construction andperception of spaceismainly basedonand definedbyaspecificworldview, the so- called Russian linguisticworldview (iazykovaia kartinamira). This kind of perspectiveisbased on the so-called svoe-chuzhoeconcept by which spaces – includingnations – are categorised,classified, andevaluated.In the following, the linguistic material from the readers’comments willbe analysed in accordance with this theory.Iwill put forward thequestion of how “the self”(svoe), that meansthe Russian(national) identity,iscon- structed andperceivedand howthe “alien”and the“foreign” (chuzhoe), thatmeansthe non-Russian identity,isusedeventoconstruct “the self”. This approach will give thereaderaninsight into thecurrent Russian worldviewastoidentityand society. Furthermore, this approach provides additional information aboutthe linguisticstrategiesofmarginalisation and exclusion because theconcept of svoe and chuzhoe is not only usedina spatial dimension.The conceptof“the self”and the concept“the alien” also play aleadingrole in strict gender andsexualcontextsand are used, above all, to marginaliseand excludepeopleinthose casesinwhich the corresponding contextisnot relatedtogender, sexual,and national concepts. Last but notleast,this volume contributes to theestablishmentand to a higher visibilityofRussian gender and, in particular, queer studies. Queer studiesare currently avery promisingresearch fieldwhich hasevoked On the Significance of ConchitaWurst in Russian Discourse 25 stronginterestduringthe past fewyears.However, thequeer research and the examination of non-heteronormative identities develop – certainlydue to the currentsocio-political circumstances in Russia – very slowly. More- over, alot of worksremainhidden: neitherdotheyreach an international audiencenor can onespeak of theirserious disseminationatanational level(Scheller-Boltz 2015d).Inaddition, most analyses are carried out within sociologyand culturalstudies (e.g. Gradinari2015,Kondakov 2014, Soboleva/ Bakhmetjev2015, Sozaev2010).Queer linguistic studiesare very rare up to now. This volume,consequently, aims at stimulating queer linguistic research in Russian(and, accordingly, Slavonic) studies.Ithighlightsthe significance of queer linguisticquestionswhichneedtobeinvestigated in the future.

1.2Onthe StructureofThisVolume

Part 1has to be understoodasageneral introduction to theconcept of identity. It providesadetailedoverviewofidentity(with an exclusivefocus on gender, sexuality,and nation)inorder to make thereader familiarwith different identity concepts andidentity forms. This seemstobeespecially important forscholarsofRussian andSlavonic studies because identity concepts andidentityforms have been consideredonlymarginally in Sla- vonicresearchuptothispoint – if they areintegratedintoresearch at all. This concerns, in particular, gender linguisticworks. Idonot mean to imply thatsuchresearchdoesnot exist. Yet, it is obvious that theresearch focusisalmost exclusivelyonmen andwomen as preconceivedand un- contested concepts (cf. part 5).Undoubtedly,researchbased on such approaches andassumptions missesthe intended goal of aresearch discipline that shoulddealcriticallywith gender andidentity.Especially in genderand queer linguisticresearch, ignoringidentityconcepts andforms hasfar-reachingconsequences which are actually overseenorevenignored by scholars.Itisthe main function of thefirst part to stress the significance of familiarising oneselfwithdifferent identity concepts andforms.Itwill become clear that thevariety of identities hastobeintegratedintogender andqueer linguistic research in ordertoguarantee innovative andlegi- timateresearchwhich produces solidand reliablefindings. 26 Introduction

Part 2embedsthe conceptofidentityinto theRussian contextand analyses therolethatidentityplays in andfor Russiansociety.After ashort overviewofthe meaningofidentityinSovietand post-SovietRussia, Iwill draw theattention of thereadertothe perception andconstructionof gender, sexual,and national identity in ordertohighlighttheir relevancefor Russian society. Theshort outline of thehistoricaldevelopment of gender andsexuality will make clear how the perception of gender andsexuality haschanged over timeand howitinfluencesthe thinking of gender and sexuality today. Selectedpolitical measures as to theregulation of gender andsexualityare provided.Thiswillgivetopicalinformation on the current perception of the Russiannational identity.Inthe end, the reader will seehow theconcepts of genderand sexualityare instrumentalisedfor constructingaRussiannationalidentityaswellasotheridentities andfor makingthese understandable,reasonable, andpersuasive. Part 3focuses on Conchita Wurst, thekey figure of this analysis.Iwill draw attention to “hir”(cf. King 2014)role in theRussian discourseon gender, sexual,and national identity. Primarily,Iwill examine the ways in whichgender, sexual,and national identity are discursively constructed. Observingthe discoursewhicharose around Conchita Wurst, Iwill provide answerstothe questionofhow we canassessthe perceptionofidentity in contemporary Russia. First, Iwillanalyse each identity conceptseparately. Iwillthenillustratehow theseidentityconceptsare interconnected and how they influenceeach other. Thisanalysisreveals that theseidentity concepts areusedtodenote, to evaluate,and to categorise otherincidents, concepts,and phenomenawhichare only distantly related to identityor even notrelated to thematall. By analysingthese aspectsinthe contextof the linguisticRussian worldview,which is basedonthe conception of the relation between“the self”and “the alien”,one willobtain interesting and innovative informationabout howidentities are stigmatised,marginalised, anddiscriminatedbylanguageuse. Part 4had firstbeenwritten as akindofepilogue. Lateron, however, I decidedtoinsertitdirectly after thethird part,because Ithink it fits in better with thepartondiscourseanalysis than with thelastpartabout issues in queer linguistics. This (very)shortchapterisnot primarily relatedtothe topicaddressed here and, therefore, thefocus must be shiftedalittlebit in ordertointegratethis chapterintothis volume. As one shallsee,itprovides additional and, moreover, highlyrevealing informationastothe discourse On the Significance of ConchitaWurst in Russian Discourse 27 on Russiannationalidentity.The chapterdeals withlast year’sEurovision Song ContestinStockholmwhere it was – of allcountries – Russia and Ukraine that wouldcompete forthe victoryofthismusic competition. Directly after Ukraine hadbeen announced thewinner, adebatestarted in Russia’ssocialmedia,primarily aboutthe newvotingsystem, aboutthe unjustifiedvoting of the national jurieswhicheventually relegated Russia to the thirdplace, andaboutthe fact that the Eurovision Song Contest is – allegedly – amusic competition andshould not be turned into apolitical platform. Thediscussion brings some interestingfacts to light which, above all, offersvaluableclueswith regardtothe perceptionofRussia, to the constructionofRussian nationalidentity and, last butnot least, to the debate on Russia’splace among theleading nations of theworld. Consequently, last year’sdebateabout theEurovisionSongContest re- minds us of thediscussionsin2014 to someextent as it revivesold arguments andopinions. Forthispart,Ihave used the Moskovskii Komsomolets againand take alookatreaders’comments, however, without goinginto greatdetail. Ionlyanalyse readers’comments which were posted theday after Jamala fromUkraine hadwon thecontest. Hence, this part cangive readersonlyageneralideaofthe role last year’s Eurovision Song Contest playedfor thediscourse on Russiannationalidentity. Part 5, finally,drawsattentiontothe general importanceofimproving andconsolidatingqueer linguistic research in Russianand Slavonic Studies.Althoughqueer researchhas appeared only in recentyears andhas producedarangeofimportant queer (related)works,itseemsprematureto speak of theestablishmentorevenofthe generalacceptance of this discipline.Incomparison with otherdisciplines,Russian queerlinguistic research lags behindand needstoreceive astimulus in thefuture. This volume andthe subjectwithwhichthisvolumedealsare meanttofilland, at least, to diminish theobviousgap in currentlinguistic research.Possible research questions in Russianlinguisticsare providedinorder to demonstratehow queerresearchcan be implementedinRussian linguistics andwhichdisciplinesneedtobeorcan be analysed in a“queer light”. Theseideas are mainly basedonand deduced from the internationalqueer (linguistic) research whichhas been developedoverthe past fewdecades. Thetimehas come forRussian linguistics to integrateapoststructuralist approach and postgender ideastodiscloseand to questionheteronormative structures which are established by andproducedthroughoutlanguage. 28 Introduction

Queer linguistic research shedsadifferent andnecessarily newlight on languageand makesusunderstandthatthe “natural”language structures andthe “general”languageuse reflect patriarchaland androcentric concepts of societyand thus reproducetheir inherent discrimination.

1.3UsefulRemarks

In themaintext, allquotations are given in the English original form or in the Englishtranslation. Translations are marked by the addition[transl.] andhavebeenproduced by myself (the author – DSB) exclusively.The corresponding originalquotationsand theoriginaltextsourcesare givenin notesatthe endofapage. Alloriginal text sources that have been gatheredfromthe media and thatare included intothe examination material andthatare,hence, usedin this book are provided in acommunicativetranslation. Consequently, mistakesinthe source text are ignored.However,all originaltextsources will also be providedintheir original form,including allerrors and mistakesmadebytheir authors. Allwords in italicsinthe comments excerpted from onlineforumshave been highlightedbymyself(the author – DSB). Theuseditalics underline their relevancefor thecorresponding analysis part.Furthermore, those lexemesappear in italicswhichare mentionedinthe corresponding part of the analysis. In ordertoguaranteethe transparencyand reader-friendliness of this analysis, Iwill restrictthe useofabbreviations to aminimum.Inparticular, Iwillnot createabbreviations myself.Ifabbreviationsare used, the reader will find theircorresponding full formsinthe listofabbreviations at the endofthisvolume. It is important to note thatthe datesprovidedfor comments from online forums refer to thepublication date of the correspondingsource text (articles) andnot to thedateonwhich thecomments were originally posted. Ihavedecided to structurethisbookinawaywhichallows readersto read only selected partsofitiftheywanttofocus on specific issues,for example,myconclusionsastothe currentstate of gender andqueer linguisticsinSlavonic studies. This decisionhas createdaneed to repeat certaincoreissuessuchasthe descriptionofstereotypical ideasabout On the Significance of ConchitaWurst in Russian Discourse 29 womenand menincontemporary Russia. Theserepetitions mayseem onerous to readers whochoosetoreadthismonographfrombeginning to end, however, they are an inevitable drawback of theconceptualcom- promiseIhadtomakeinwriting this book. This volume hasundergone peer reviewand criticalproof-reading. Nonetheless, it is inevitable that mistakesremain. Forall remaining mistakes, forpossibly missingorincorrect references,and forpotential equivocalitycontainedinthisvolume, theauthor personally assumes responsibility.

Part 1:

Identity: Concepts,Forms,and Diversity

Idomyown laundry. Iclean, ironand cook (occasionally). Ialso like to wear make-up and sometimesashort skirt. Ilove my husbandand hope to havechildren. Iwork full-time andIenjoy teaching my students. Iamamember of afeminist associationand Ihave aweakness forshopping andcelebrity magazines. What does this make me? Ahousewife, narcissist, wife and (potential) mother, worker, feminist, consumer? Aschizophrenic? (Stéphanie Genz 2009: 1)

1IntroductoryRemarks

Dealing withgenderand queerresearch requires aprofoundknowledgeand an awareness of the conceptofidentity. 7 This is true regardless of the academic discipline. Whoeverdives into the worldofidentitiesmust be conscious of the factthattheydeal with acomplexentitywhichcan neither be generalisednor easily definedand staked out. Oneofthe basictenets held by gender andqueer researchersisthe idea thatidentitiesare con- structedconceptswhichmay be or,insomecases,needtobede- constructed. Consequently,genderand queer researchstartswiththe basic premise that identityisadiffuse, multipleand,hence,unstable phenomenon.

7 Parts of thisparthavebeenpublishedinScheller-Boltz, Dennis 2015: “Identität als polydimensionales Selbst. Zu Verständnis und Konstruktion geschlechtlicherund sexuellerIdentität in Russland. Eine allgemeineEinführungfür Slawist_inn_en“, in: Academic Journal of Modern Philology 4, 2015, 89-120. 32 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity

Abandoningthe idea that identity is agiven,ahermetic andfunda- mentallyrigid concept, opensupaspaceofcritical investigation.Itenables us to askquestions about thevery nature of identity: What is identity?How can identity exist andbeexpressed? What does identity,infact, consistof? Howmanyidentitiescan exist?8 What does identity do and/ or intend to do?Whatdopeopledowiththeir ownidentity as well as with theidentities of others?Asaconsequence, what does identity do andintendtodowith people andsocieties?These questionsillustrateclearly the complexity and vagueness of theconcept of identity – characteristicswhichseem to be specificfor identity andwhichare impossible to explainaway. Starting from thisidea, we shouldturnour attention to one of the fundamentaldimensionsofidentity: gender. Traditionalthinking startswith the assumptionthatthere are only twogenderidentities: manand woman. Theseidentitiesare immutable.You areeitheraman or awoman.More- over, eachidentitycomes with amonolithic setofcharacteristics. The quotationfromGenz(2009: 1) at thebeginning of this part questions this idea. Using herown example,Genzunderlinesthe diverseand at times paradoxicaldimensions of herown identity,manyofwhichare in clear oppositiontotraditional gender identities.Considering herstatement, one must ask: is it really justified or true to argue that thereare only twogender identities? And canone lumptogetherall womenand allmen becauseof allegedlycommonfeatures? In light of thesequestions,itwould be difficult to defend the pro- position that aviewofgenderwhich offers onlytwo hermetic andin- herently self-consistent genderidentities whichare exclusively located on the oneoronthe othersideofabinary – male—female – genderaxis providesapossible andusefulapproach to investigate gender-and queer- related linguisticmaterial scientifically. Firstofall,assumingthatthere are twofixed gender identitiesleads in the wrongdirection andmissesthe pointofgenderand queerlinguistic research.Secondly, to assume the existenceofabinary gender axis with twohermetic gender identities on eachsideseriouslyquestions one’s willingnesstodealwiththe basictenetsofone’s ownresearch approach. Consequently, one accepts theriskofone’s ownbiasesshapingthe results

8 SeeKirilina(2015)for some interesting detailsastothe number of different identityconcepts. IntroductoryRemarks 33 of one’sown research.Prefabricatedideas andsuperficiallyestablished stereotypesare notquestioned at allbut confirmedand passed on forever. This wouldbeasad standstill, consideringthatgenderand,particularly, queer linguisticsoffersawayout of thisacademic dead-end.Itisespecially of interesttoquestion, to analyseand,finally,toknow howmanyidentities currently exist. Kirilina(2015)mentions,for example,thatthere seemsto be more than fiftydifferent gender identities. Theideathatidentity is diverse, variable,and fluidisubiquitous and acceptedinRussian sociologicalstudies (sociology) (e.g. Baer 2011,2009, Franeta2015,Healey 2013, 2010, 2001,Kon 2010, 2009,2007, 2005, 2003,1999, 1998, 1995,1989,Kondakov 2014,Sapper/ Weichsel 2013, Sozaev2010, Štulhofer/Sandfort2005), cultural studies(e.g. Cook/ Evans 2014,Zdravomyslova et al.2009), andliterary studies(literature) (e.g. Zink 2015). Onecan find awide andabsolutelydiverserange of workswhich focusonidentity.Theyillustratethe complexity of identityand,moreover, itsrelevance forand itsinfluence on society. However, andthismust be stressed, Russiangenderand queer linguistic research – as farasone can speak of Russianqueer linguisticresearch so far – hasneglected the fluidityofidentityuptothispoint.Indoing so,genderand queerlinguists have ignoredthe fact that identitydiversityand different concepts of identityhaveanenormous influenceonlinguisticstructures andonlan- guageuse as well as on language in general. Furthermore, theyhaveoften ignoredthatlanguagehas an influenceonidentityand on the idea of identityand that languagereflectsdirectly predominant assumptionsabout identitywithin acertain society(Weedon 1996). Russian gender linguisticsisstillmainly basedonthe assumption that there are only twostrictly dividedgenderidentities (e.g. Krongauz 2015, butcf. Scheller-Boltz 2015a, 2015d,2015g).Thisrigid gender binary has ledtoacertain superficialityinRussian genderresearchcharacterised by simplistic generalisations andoverhasty research conclusions.Moreover, this conservatism hashinderedthe evolutionofresearch.Thishas hadfar- reaching consequences forqueer linguisticstudies which are notreally established in Slavonic linguisticsuptonow. 34 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity

2InvestigatingIdentity: Aims andQuestions

This part serves as ageneralintroduction to thewideand complexfield of identity. It hasbeenwritten especially andexplicitly forRussian and Slavonic linguists.Onthe internationallevel,the fieldhas evolved enormously over thepasttwo decades.Therefore,ithas become painfully urgent forgender – andqueer – linguists in Russianand Slavonic studiesto make themselves familiarwithdifferent identityforms andconceptsin ordertoincludethese concepts andforms in gender andqueer linguistic studiesinthe future. Thefollowing overviewofdifferent formsand concepts of identitywith their correspondingspecifics andfunctions will make clear that there arenouniform andhermetic identities andthatwidening one’sfocus is inevitable in linguistics if one wantstodeliver an appropriate andprofound investigationofgenderquestions. My goalisfor readers to understand thatscholarsofRussianand Slavonic gender linguistics have to include identity diversity intotheir research.Theyhavetodosobecausetheir conceptofidentityinfluences the waytheyapproachand analysegenderlinguisticquestions. Gender linguistic researchleads to more promisingand revealing resultsifone rejectsstrictcategories. This mayprovide awelcome stimulustolinguistic research whichcan finallypavethe wayfor theestablishment of queerlinguistics.

3Onthe Polydimensionality, Complexity,and AmbiguityofIdentity

What is identity? Traditionally,identityhas been perceivedasarigid, immutable,and uniformentity.Describingitisalmost amatterofbasic arithmetics: youbelongtogroup X, therefore your looks,sexualidentity, behaviour,language, andsoonwill be X, too. It should have become apparent by now thatIdo notadheretothisconcept of identity as an equation. Such thinkingistoo simplistic andnaїve anddoesnot allowfor the actual reality of contemporary society andsociety structures.InSla- vonicgenderlinguistics, especially Russiangenderlinguistics,thisthinking hasled to an enormous researchbias. Indeed,one mightask:considering this bias,doresearchresults really reflect reality? Or wouldn’titbemore appropriatetosay thatthe results reflect the prefabricatedscheme or frame, On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 35 the overgeneralisedassumptionsand stereotypical categorisationsdictated by heteronormativityand theworldview of cis-identities? It is true:the so-called “Western”world is at an advantagehere.Ithas knownpublicfigures like RuPaul, Dame Edna Everage,ConchitaWurst, Dana International, Andrej Pejić (today:AndrejaPejić), andthe genderless NorrieMay-Welby foralongtime. In Russia,identity concepts andthe corresponding postgender ideaswhichthe – allegedly – “new”identities are basedon, have become publiclyvisibleonly recently.And while, for example,inPoland, anotherpost-Socialistcountry,politicianslikethe transsexualAnnaGrodzka (cf. URL9)andthe homosexual Robert Biedroń (cf. URL10) fulfil thefunctionofrolemodels andstand by their identity, Russian politicspushes fortraditionalgenderideas andgenderroles and supports massivelythe classical gender binary with aseemingly inherent heterosexual orientation.Yet,these policies shouldnot deterusfrom questioning thesuitability of the concepts we choose forscientificin- vestigation andtheir capacitytohelpusdescribe theworld we live in. With this in mind, letusonceagain askthe question: what is identity? It is difficulttoexplain andtodefinewhatidentityexactly is. Onedeals here withaquitebroad andimprecise term. As far as identity is multiple andconsistsofalotofdifferent components – from whichidentity derives itscomplexity – Iproposetocharacterise identity as a“polydimensional self” (Scheller-Boltz 2015b,cf. also Metzeltin/ Wallmann2010: 70)because identity assumes – simultaneously,sequentially, and/ or depending on thesituation – different andsometimes even divergentdimensions. Identity is aconglomerateofspecifics,features,dispositions, andbe- haviourpatternsofapersonwhich,intheir entirety,determine andexpress the self of this person.Identity is distinguished by individualityand sub- jectivity. This indicatesthe many-sidedness andthe existing diversity of the forming andthe appearance of identity.Moreover, this viewonidentity rejectsageneralunambiguousnessand atrans-individual generalisation. Identity as theown self (self-identity)orasagroup of featuresand specifics (self-concept)determinesindividually andsocially the entireselfofaper- son, their being, behaviour, thinking,and perception. Identity,consequently,iswhatmakes apersonrecognisableinthe firstplace becauseit shapesexternal aspects – e.g. look, style,outward appearance – as well as internal aspects – e.g. feeling, thinking (patterns),worldview,experience –, 36 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity visual aspects – e.g. gesture, facialexpression – as well as auditiveaspects – e.g. voice(Mogge-Grotjahn2004). It mightseem trivial, but this definition of identity makesithardor even impossibletospeak of identity in auniversalorinapersonal sense. This hasseriousimplicationsfor research withafocusongender. Tra- ditionally,women,for example,are definedbythe primarysexualcharac- teristicsand secondary sexcharacteristicswhichare classically or prototypically ascribed to womenaswellasby“typical”femalebehaviour and appearance. However, it is oneofthe important findingsofgenderstudies thatcategorising awoman or,moreadequately, womeninthis wayisnot founded in science. Instead, ideological andmythological ideasbased on stereotypesand clichédassumptions which are constantlyreestablished have shaped ourviewofwomen (Butler 2004a,2003, 1997,1991). As a logicalconsequence, scholars arebound to excludethosewomen whodo notcorrespondtothe classical idea of awoman (not to mention thesocio- politicalrepercussionssuchasexclusion,discrimination,and stigmati- sation). Postmodernismoffers away to avoidthe pitfalls of traditionalthinking by taking on thediversity of identitieswhichisvisible in many places today. Fromapostmodern perspective, identityisneither stable nor rigid nor aself-contained accumulationofspecifics.

As aconceptual category, thepostmodern subject is fluid rather than stable, constructed rather than fixed, contested rather than secure, multiple rather than uniform, deconstructed rather than whole (Genz/ Brabon 2009: 107).

Identity is process-related(Hartmann/Becker2002: 2f). It is mutable,ex- pandable, anddynamic andis, furthermore, determinedbyits social and socio-normative context. Consequently, Sunderland andLitosseliti (2002: 7) are rightinassuming thatevery person possessesawide range of identities(cf.alsoWeydt 2008: 91-94). If postmodernismrepresents pluralityand the pluralisationoflifestyles andidentities (Villa 2007: 52f), that means

amultiplication of the notion of difference [...], an expansion of difference towards differences, towards apluralitythat resists anyset identities (Beas- ley2005: 24) On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 37 then it is justifiedtosay that

womandoes notexist in asingular form – neither in an empirical, nor in a theoretical, nor in apolitical way. Theconcrete femininities, the specific ways of existence, andthe respective meanings of gender are embedded sociallytoo rigidly in diverse contexts such as class/stratum, nation, ethnicity/race, age,sexuality,religion andsoon[transl.](Villa 2007: 55).9

Considering postmodern ideaswiththeir focusonplurality,bringsthe conceptofpostgender into play.The conceptofpostgenderisade- constructivistapproachtothinkingidentityand stands forthe blurring and, finally, the elimination of stable gender identitiesand rigidgender boundaries (Scheller-Boltz2015a). Theideaofpostgenderrefers, accordingtoKirilina(2015), to theconcept of thenew human being, of the newindividual.Itisuniversal, foritisneitherlocated in acertain area nor within aspecificsocio-cultural structure. Andasone can definitely see, the universality of postgender is also noticeable within Russiansociety.One couldevoke,for instance, metrosexuality as acurrently prominentand new facet of masculinity.Walking throughMoscow or even smallerRussian cities today,one cannothelpbut notice people exhibiting theambiguityand pluralityand,consequently,the – conscious or unconscious – decon- struction of masculinity whichare thehallmarksofthe metrosexual“male” lifestyle.The conceptofmasculinityisincreasinglytingedbysignals whichrepresent “softness” and“femininity”. This processshows the actual fragmentation of this – once rigid andstrong – identity concept. Advertise- ments,media,and,inparticular, everydaylifedemonstratethatthere is a tendency to abandonthe traditional, powerful, anddominant man, who turns into acreaturewho pays attentiontoaneat appearance,crosses gender-specific dressand style codes, andshowssoftand harmonic characteristics(Kirilina2015, Klingseis 2015). Although allofthese features, specifics,and behaviour patternsare stereotypically associatedwithwomen throughout thedifferent socio-cultures up to now, it is evidentthat, in some

9 Original:“Frau [...] gibt es nicht im Singular – wederempirisch, noch theoretisch nochpolitisch. Dazu sinddie konkreten Weiblichkeiten,die spezifischenExistenz- weisen und die jeweiligenBedeutungendes Geschlechts sozial zu sehr verortet in [...] unterschiedlichenKontexten wie Klasse/Schicht, Nationalstaat;Ethnizität/race, Alter,Sexualität, Religion usw.” 38 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity aspects, theformerrigid differentiation betweenman andwoman has softened. Theseobservationsprovideanecdotic evidence at best, yet, they elucidatethe need to abandon rigidconceptsofgenderidentity. In Slavonic linguistics, onlyaminority of scholarspaysattention to postgender identities andtothe fragmentationofidentity. Thisminority understands therelevance of theplurality of identities forlanguageand languageuse (Althaler2014, Kirilina2015,Scheller-Boltz2015a). These scholarsare aware of thefactthatidentitiesmay appear in andthroughout languagedifferently andthatdefining identity entailsahigh risk that one’s definitions mayinterfere with andencroachuponlinguistic analyses.For the majority,genderidentities are rigidand stable concepts whichshow rigid andstablespecifics in language. Any divergence is ignored; blurred linesare noticeably left out. This is true for trans-identities in particular. However, even cis-identitiesdonot appear in language in auniform way andcannotbegeneralised linguistically – particularly,ifone pays attention to postgender (Motschenbacher 2010). In genderlinguisticstudies,amore differentiatedway of investigation is needed in ordernot to overgeneralise the linguistic behaviourofagender identity andinorder to payattention to the polydimensional appearance andthe complexity of identity.Post- structuralismmay offer somevaluablelessons here. Poststructuralism bringsreality andlanguagetogetherand showstheir direct interconnection. Apoststructuralist approach makesmeaning variable andeverchanging. Thus,final andhermetic definitions become disputableand seem to be escapist andnon-real.

3.1IdentityFormsand Identity Concepts

Before Istart exploringthe fieldofidentity in greaterdetail, Iwould like to make thereaderfamiliarwithtwo termsthatIwilluse in thefollowing. In this volume, Iwill differentiate between identity form and identity concept. Thedifference between both termsmight be very smalland mayseem unnecessary to some readers. However, Ihopethatitwillfacilitatethe understanding of theterm identity. Theterms identityform and identityconcept highlight twodifferent dimensionsofthe phenomenonofidentity. Identityform refers to identity in general, independently of possibleentitieswhich canpossess an identity, whereasthe term identityconcept referstoaconcreteentity which On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 39 possessesanidentity. Thecomparisonmay seem banalbut Iwill useit nevertheless to enhancethe reader’s understanding: when talking about clothes,wecan talk about different categories such as trousers or shirtsand what distinguishesthem: forexample,trousers are alenghty object which consistofapair of tubesunitedatone endand which fitthe legs of a person whereas ashirtconsists of balloon-likepiece of cloth with asmall openingatthe top andalargeopening at the bottom andatubeoneach side which is meanttofit thetorso andarmsofaperson.Orwecan talk aboutitems within acategoryand whattheycan or shouldlooklike: for example,shirts canbemadeofcottonand have abluecolour. Talkingabout identity forms is like talkingabout differentcategoriesof clothing.Identityforms refer to thevery nature of identity. As Ihave pointedout,there is neitherasingle norauniform identity.Identityis always amerger andacombination of identities – or,moreadequately in this context: of identity forms. This is why one findsavarietyofidentity formswhichconvergeinanindividual person: mono-identity, bi-identity, plural identity or multi-identity (Metzeltin/ Wallmann2010).All of these identityforms are created by differentfactorsand circumstances which have an enormous influenceonthe forming of identity. In this context, factorslike individualism/subject (individual identity, personal identity) andcollectivism/ object (collective identity)are relevant factors as well as the active adoption andadaptation of identitybyoneself (active identity)or the passiveconstructionand determination of identitybyothers (passive identity).10 In contrasttothis, talkingabout identityconcepts is liketalking about specificitems withinacategoryofclothing.Justlikeone can discussshirts of adifferent colourorfabricone canexamine the variousconcepts of gen- dersuchasmaleorfemaleorthe characteristicsofmasculinity andfemininity.Consequently,Iusethe term identity concept when Icharacteriseand investigatethe specifics andfeaturesofaspecificidentity. In this volume, this concerns identityconceptssuchasgender (gender identity), sexuality (sexual identity), and nation (nationalidentity). Of course,one canfind otheridentity concepts, forexample, corporateidentity (cf. e.g. Hoffmann 2015,2005, Klingseis 2015,Rathmayr2010). These concepts,however, do notplayarelevantrolehere.

10 Seehereinmoredetail Metzeltin/ Wallmann (2010). 40 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity

In thefollowing, Iwill give ashort overviewonforms of identity. This is important becauseidentityforms have ahighinfluence on identityconcepts. Last but notleast, it is only possible andmeaningfultodealwith identitiesingreaterdetailifone is knowledgeable of different identity formsand if oneisfamiliarwiththe role andfunction which identityforms have forthe construction andperception of identity concepts.

3.2Activeand PassiveConstruction of Identity

People developand find theiridentityconsciouslyand unconsciously.Yet, identityisalwaysthe resultofaprocess of adaptation anddemarcation which, in turn,results fromthe situation,the localand social circumstances.Moreover, an identity (feature) canbetransient while otheridentity features maylast. By answering questions such as a) whoamI?, b) who do Iwanttobe?,c)how do Isee myself?, andd)how am Iseen and perceived by others?, apersonconstructstheir ownself-conceptand be- comesaware of their ownperception of their body(including their sex), their desire (including sexual orientation), theirsocialposition(including socialtasks), theirpattern of thinkingand theirworld view (including formationofopinion) as well as of theirbehaviour (Wippermann et al. 2009:73).The self-positioning of apersonwithin societyalwaysresults fromthemcomparing themselves with their surroundings andfrommecha- nismsofsocialdemarcation, adaptation, andinclusion.Thisconstructionof identitywhichisprimarily motivatedand promotedbyone’s ownselfis calledthe active construction of identity. In contrast, one speaks of a passiveconstruction of identity when external factorsdetermine andinfluence one’sidentity. Apassiveidentity is ascribed to individualsbytheir social environment. Passiveidentityre- fers to theidentity that people seeand realise in otherpeople,and it means the wayhow people perceivetheir identity. This differentiationisimportant insofarasaperson canascribe themselves an identity whichdoesnot have to be accepted, affirmed, or even noticedbytheir contemporaries. Hence, apersoncan seethemselvesina special way, whereastheir environmentperceivesthisperson in adifferent, diverse, or evenfalse way. Theactiveconstructionofidentityand the passiveconstructionof identityare interdependent.One’s own perception and construction of iden- On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 41 tity can be influenced by beingperceivedand categorisedbyotherpeople. Forinstance, thegeneral idea of what aman should be likeoften motivates individualswithamale sextobehavelikewise.However, thetrend towards metrosexuality hasled to achanging idea of manand to achangingper- ception of masculinitywithinsociety.Asaconsequence, somelong- established ideasofmasculinitiesaswellastraditional male behaviour patterns have come undercritical scrutiny today.Sometimes, thesetraditional ideas areevenrejected anddisapproved of.

3.3Individualand Collective Identity

Thedifferentiation betweenindividual identityand collective identity is generally relevant, but it is of critical importancetothe volumeathand, because thedichotomy individual—collective hasalwaysplayedameaning- fulroleinthe history of Socialistcountries andcontinues to do so noticeably.One speaksofindividual identity,orpersonalidentity respectively, when onereferstothe identity whichanindividualascribestothemselves in ordertodemarcatethemselvesfromthe surroundingsand from society. One’sindividualidentity leadstoanactivevaluation,positioning,and de- finitionofoneself.Individual identityisconstructed by comparingoneself with one’ssurroundings.The individual concerneddoesnot pursue an adaptation or inclusion. An adaptation or inclusion takesplace only in thosecases when theindividual is fullyabletoidentifythemselveswith the identityofthe surroundingsand sees theneed to adoptotheridentity characteristics so that in theend newidentity componentspenetrateone’s identityconcept andenrichit. Forexample,amancan acquireabehaviour andoutwardappearancewhich is mainly associatedwith homosexual persons – as in metrosexuality – withoutdeclaring himself as homosexual or even beinghomosexual. In contrast, a collective identity or social identity is asocial, group-,or community-related identity. This identity form has, of course,anindividual character,too, but it is primarily related andalignedtoacertaincommunity (Joseph2004: 5f., cf. also Niethammer 2000).The construction of acollective identityisalsobased on acomparison with one’ssocialsurroundings, buthere thecomparisonisfollowed by an intended adaptation to acertain group or community (in-group identity)and at thesametimebycreatinga 42 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity boundary betweenoneself andindividualswho standoutsideofthis group or community (out-group identity). Thecollectiveorsocialidentityisbased on auniform value system, on acommonworldview,and on common aims within acertain groupor community,but mainly on the belief in this certaingroup or community (Tajfel 1982). However, by appreciatingthe community values,anindividual does notonlyintegrate them in ordertoadoptcollectiveideas.Ifa person assumesacollective identity,theyalsoaffirmtheir membership in a certaingroup or community.Asaresult, theadoption andconstructionofa collective identity by apersonaffirms thecorrespondingcommunity andits values perse.

3.4IdentityDiversityand Identity Complexity

It is falsetoassumethataperson haseither an individual or acollective identity. Aperson is an individualand becauseofthisindividuality a person constructs andhas an individual identity.However, apersonlives within asociety and is surroundedbyother people andother identities.This hasaninevitableimpactonthe construction of acollectiveidentity, too. Theidentityofaperson consists, consequently,ofseparate distinct identities or,moreadequately,identityfeatures (Marco2011: 108).Identities can be integrative, thatmeansthatsingleidentity dimensions, components, or features coalesce andcomplement each other. Yet, identities can also be dualisticwhich meansthataperson possessesdifferent identitiesbut fails at integratingthemwhichmay lead to conflict in that person’slife.The identitydiversityofaperson makesitpossibletoadoptcertain identities differently and, moreover, accordingtothe given situationand circumstances.The construction andperformance of one’sidentityishighlyin- fluenced by the social environmentand serves as ameansofadaptation (integration,acceptance) anddemarcation(isolation, protection) (Metzel- tin/ Wallmann 2010: 70-77). When onedeals with identity,one hastoconsider, of course,further factorsand contexts whichhavearelevantinfluence on theconstruction andthe meaning of identity andwhich make clearthatidentity is amore complexentitythanone generally assumes. In ordertoreally do justice to the complexity of identity,one must consider notonlythoseglobalfactors andcircumstances thatIhave mentioned above. Onemust also examine On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 43 individual factorslike sex, physique,outward appearance, social behaviour, socialstratum (class),socialrole/function, education/ profession,origin etc., because it is precisely these individualfactors andconcepts whichlead to amoredifferentiated analysis of identityand,consequently,toreliable results – thisisnolessnecessary andsignificant forlinguisticanalyses whichfocus on identity. It is, moreover, preciselythese factors which make clearthatidentity dimensionsdonot have to appear congruently.For example,not in every casedoesthe outwardappearance of aperson enable us to draw acon- clusion abouttheir sex; behaviourpatternsofaperson are notalways atrue indication as to theirlevel of education. Certainidentity features are ex- presseddifferently according to thesituationand actual need.However,the identityofaperson is so complexthatthe social environmentmay focuson thoseidentity features whichseem to be significant andhaveagreaterrele- vancefor them but whichthe person concernedcategorises as unnecessary, meaningless, or irrelevant. Thus, abisexualfemalelawyerwho volunteers at ahumanesociety will never show andwill never be able to show herfull identityinevery situation. Thelawyermay consider hersex,sexual orientation,and socialvolunteering irrelevant when sheisinher office. However, hercolleaguescan stress certain identity features such as sexor sexual orientation andmay perceive thiswoman primarily as alesbian,for example,eventhough characteristicslikeher sexual orientationhaveno meaninginthe contextofwork.

3.5Identityand theRelevance of Sex

Formost people,the sexofapersonisthe dominant feature whichinfluences the perception, categorisation,and acceptance of aperson. In comparison to sex, otheridentityfeatures seem to take thebackseat.Ifone takesacloserlook at currentSlavoniclinguisticanalysesastogenderand identity, this claimisobviouslyconfirmed:for most scholars,dealingwith genderand identity meanstodealwithmen and womenintheir strictly hermetic and, moreover, heteronormativeexistence or,moreprecisely,with the conceptofman andthe conceptofwoman.11 In Slavoniclinguistics,the conceptofsex – in itstraditionalbinary form – is so dominant thatitpre-

11 Foranoverview, cf.Scheller-Boltz(2015a). 44 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity determinesinvestigations on identity anddisplaces otheridentityconcepts whichare notlessimportant forlinguisticidentity research. In alot of cultures, it is common practicetofocus on thesex of a person andtocategoriseand to perceive people accordingtotheir sex whichisinmost casesdeterminedshortly after – andsometimes even before – theyare born(cf. here Livia/ Hall 1997). Accordingtothe distinct sexual characteristics (sex organs)and secondary sexcharacteristicswithin the gender binary of man—woman, aperson is definedasamanora woman. Thesex of apersondeterminesand accompaniesthispersonfor their whole life. It is mostly the categoryofsex whichinfluences theidentity of an individual andwhich hasanenormous impact on the activecon- struction of one’sown identity.The biological gender playsahighly important role foraperson becauseeveryone agreesthatitisobvious.The male—femalebinary hasdeveloped historically andsocially within cultures (Laqueur 1992). It serves as asocialmechanism of orientation and showsasocio-conventional andsocio-cognitivestability by whichpeople are categorised as aman or awoman withinasocietybymeans of their outwardappearance andtheir biological gender. Foranindividual perse, being ascribed to acertaingendercategoryisarelevantfactorfor theself- determination,the self-perception,and, as aconsequence, forthe construction andperformanceoftheir (gender) identity (Goffmann2001:107). Consequently, demarcatingwomen as non-menand menasnon-women is an act which createsidentityand hasexclusionary properties(Herma 2003). In general, thecategoryofsex emerges as adualisticconstellation.It hasbeen propagated by medical scientistsfor along time thatsex is a binary concept. Moreover, thedualistic characterofsex is assumedtobe complementary.Sex is solidly embedded within aheterosexual matrix (Butler1991). Theresulting heteronormativitywhichshapesnot only the constructionand perception of identities,but which also influences social structures andthe structuresand organisation of institutions,servesnot only as ameanstothink genderand identity.Itintends,inparticular, to promote reproduction.Consequently,genderidentityisinstrumentalised andobviously based on ideologicalvalues. Thetraditionalideaofgenderidentityhas significantconsequences for the individual andcollectiveeverydaylifeaswellasfor themainstream opinions aboutwhat one’s own societyshouldbelike. It constructs and On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 45 reproducesgenderstereotypesand prejudice directly andinfluencesbe- haviour, appearance, or professional life (Herma 2003).Byrestricting the choicetotwo options,thismatrixforcesindividualstopickone of the two genderidentities – mostly forlife –,toidentifywiththe corresponding gendernorms andgenderidealsand to determine themselvesashetero- sexual withinthe heterosexual matrix (cf. also Rumiantseva2009, Trautner 2006). It is important to notethatnoindividual will succeed in embodying ideal masculinity – andfemininity respectively – allthe time. Hence, this normand idealisconstantlyperformedand constructedbythe societyand the people living in it (Bilden 2006:50). “Gender intelligibility”(Butler1991) is mainly basedonthe idea of manand woman. Both concepts existashermetically closed andisolated ideas which do notseemtooverlap at allbecause of theiropposing characteristics. Moreover, there is an obvious power difference between both concepts becausethe conceptofman is regarded primarily as theideal and perfect concept, whereas theconcept of womanisgenerally seen as somehow flawed:the conceptofwoman is missing or deficientinthose attributes which the conceptofman possesses.Thisassumption leads to the maintenance of genderspecificstereotypes andmyths whichare based, on the onehand, on traditionaland long-establishedidentityconceptsand,on the otherhand, on abiologicaldeterminism whichhighlyinfluencesand justifiesgenderidentities.This becomesevident when people justifytheir outwardappearanceorbehaviour with their sexwhich makesoutward appearanceand behaviouranallegedly naturallyand biologically given phenomenon. In this context, onecan thinkofsentences beginningwith statements such a As awoman,Iwouldsay ... or As aman,Iwould recommend ... whichmakeperformance,behaviour,and opinion biologically determinedphenomena. However, gender is an unstablecategoryofbeing whichbears re- semblancetoacontinuum.Sunderlandand Litosselitiare right in assuming thatmultiplicity,changeability,and continuityare themainfeatures of genderidentitybecause gender identity is neverafinishedand complete process(Sunderland/ Litosseliti2002: 7).Yet,inalotofcultures, this con- cernspost-Socialist countries, too, genders beyond thegenderbinary – whichunderline the multiple andfluid character of gender in themost obviousway – encounteronly little acceptanceormeet outright rejection. 46 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity

3.6Sex andIntersex

Intersex as an innate phenomenon or aphenomenon which occurs after birth is themost obviousand well-known incarnationofthe so-called intermediate gender (e.g. Beasley 2005:152,Dreger2000,Großetal. 2008,Klöppel 2010, Preves 2005). Intersex – sometimesalsocalled intersexuality or hermaphroditism – is a“mixtureof›male‹ and ›female‹ features which aremoreorlessdistinct” (Kroll 2002: 189).12 As Beasley (2005)states, intersex is abodyproblem.Intersex persons are situated within thegenderbinary of manand woman, but, at thesametime, theyfall outofthe gender dichotomy due to theirintermediate or double gender. Intersex peopleare thusforcedtoconstantly constructand reconstructtheir identity. Moreover, they are always forced to define and/ or to redefine their gender withinasociety (Preves 2005). Today, intersex is acceptedina lotofcountries.Consequently,intersex people arenot forcedtoundergo surgery in ordertoartificially constructanunambiguousand intelligible “biological” gender. Nonetheless, theconceptofintersexchallenges alot of societies: socially andlinguistically (Morland 2013).Fromalinguistic perspective, it hastobementioned that formsofaddress like Mr and Mrs (Russ. gospodin, gospozha,Germ. Herr, Frau,Pol. Pan, Pani)orpronouns like he and she (Russ. оn, оnа,Germ. er, sie,Pol. on, ona,cf. here the genderlessSwedishpronoun hen)are basedexclusivelyonabinary system in most languages(seepart5,cf. also King 2014). Also,itseemstobestill unusualtoconceive of gender identities whichare locatedbeyondthe male—femalegenderdichotomy. As aconsequence, people always make theattempt to locate intersex people on abinary axis anddefinethemas either male or female.13 This haslinguistic – amongst others cognitive – as well as social consequences.The case of NorrieMay-Welby from Australia whosuccessfully filedalawsuit againstthe Australianauthoritiesinorder to getanandrogynic gender identity andwhose sexis“not specified” (cf. URL11, 12)anymore is avery prominentand recent example as to gender

12 Original:“[...] Mischformen von ›männlichen‹ und ›weiblichen‹ Merkmalen, die mehr oder wenigerausgeprägt sein können”. 13 In Germany,ElisaBarth (Barth et al.2013) haspublishedabook whichcontains accounts of intersexpersons highlighting thisgenderidentity. Thebook aims at in- creasingawareness of gender identities outside themale—female binaryinorderto strengthen acceptance andtolerance of intersexpersons. On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 47 diffusion andgenderdiversity andtothe fact thatgenderisfluid.Itshows that“another” gender whichmeansinthiscontext aneutergenderis increasingly acceptedinsomesocieties today.

3.7Sex andTrans-Identities

Besidesintersex, onecan find otheridentitieswhich are distinguishedby an intermediate gender(Hall et al.2013). Trans-identities,for instance, are sometimes categorised as an intermediate gender. Onewillquickly realise, however, that the conceptoftrans is neitherahermetic noradefinite concept. Thefield of trans is so diverseand diffuse that it is impossibletogive adetailedand,finally, definiteoverviewontrans-identities.14 Aboveall, it is even more difficult to finallydefine whatatrans-identity actuallyisfor the conceptoftrans is theperfectand primeexample of thefluidity, diversityand multiplicity of identity (Großetal. 2008). Oneofthe firstinstances of trans-identitieswhich comestomind is transsexuality.Beasley(2005:152)writesinthiscontextthatintersexisa “body problem”,whereas transsexualityisa“mind problem”.Transsexual people are “incontradictiontotheir anatomy“ (Kroll 2002:392). They constantly feel thatthe gender identity whichtheyexperience is at odds with theirbiological bodies (Beasley 2005: 152). They feel that they were borninthe wrongbodyand desire abodychangeand, in alot of cases,a sexreassignment therapywhichentails hormone therapy andoften a surgicalprocedure (Barrett1999,Kroll 2002). As part of this therapy, transsexualpeople assume the psychologicalgenderidentityineveryday lifeevenbeforethe medical procedureofsex reassignmenthas begun. This period of intermediate gender extends only to themomentwhenthe surgicalsex reassignmentcreates an unambiguous gender andsex specifi- cation. However, oneshouldnot picturetranssexuality as aclear andun- ambiguous identity.Asone will seebelow, the transsexual identity, too, is polydimensional andblurredand cannotbestakedout so easily. What can be said,though,isthattranssexual people feel that they have been born in the wrongbody andthatthe bodyofthe opposite sexwould be right for them. This psychologicalormentalfactorisone of themainfeatures which distinguish transsexuality from transgender.

14 Fortrans-identities in Russian society, seeKirilina(2015). 48 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity

Theconceptoftranssexuality reveals theblurredlines betweengender andsex.Transsexualityunderscores theideaand thebeliefordraws attention to the factthatsex is notalwaysaninescapable fateastogender identity. Yet, it is not the only varietyoftrans-identities. Forexample,the conceptoftransgendercarries amuchgreater complexity andshowsthe high levelofpossible diffusion andmultiplicity thatidentity can actually assume.Investigating transgenderidentitiesorjustlookingattransgender people in everydaylife, onewill, withoutdoubt, realisethatitisnot always easytoseparate sexand gender identity fromeach otherbecause drawinga strictand unambiguous line of division betweenbothconcepts is not possible as too many diversecriteriawould have to be combinedtothis end. Of course,transgenderidentitiesdemonstratethatgenderidentity is highly uncertain, ambiguous, andunreliable (Mehlmann2006).However, transgenderisnot only characterisedbyindividual features or basedon values which are establishedwithin acertain community.Otherfactorsand criteriamust be considered, too, when onedealswiththe conceptoftransgender. Transgenderidentitiesare embedded in aculturalcontext andhave asocialsignificance. That meansthatthe constructionand performanceof atransgender identity is notonly the result of individualityand,consequently,ofindividual ideas about life, but that theconstructionand performance of atransgender identity is influenced strongly by socio-cultural circumstances.Certain communities make use of theconceptoftrans- genderfor specialpurposes, forexample in ordertomaintainsocialroles, to guarantee social structures or to keep up social orderaccording to the corresponding cultural ideasand social ideals. Consequently,those factors must be explicitly included in analyses (thisalsoconcerns linguistic analyses)ongenderaswellasonidentityingeneral. Theconcept of transgender – which maybeinterpretedasthe prime example of so-called cross-identities – is awide andquite unspecific field whichischaracterisedbyacertaincomplexity,confusion,and equivo- cality.Ingeneral, transgendermeansthataperson hasanunambiguoussex (mostly understood as femaleormale) which,inmost cases, is notand will notbesurgically removed. Nonetheless,people with atransgender identity do notoronlyseldomidentifythemselveswiththeir “naturally given” sex. Some transgenderpeopledonot feellike theybelongtoany specificgen- deratall.Asaconsequence,transgender people mayassumevery specific andcontroversialgenderidentitieswithin asociety (Connell2010,Kroll On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 49

2002). One speaks of transgender or people withatransgenderidentity when onerefers to people whoare, duetonomatterwhatreason,not able to define andtolocatethemselveswithin themale—femalebinary or who do notwanttobecategorised accordingtothe – male—female – gender binary (Kollektiv&Steine 2012:122).

Transgender refers in this case to those who have rejected their gender of social assignment, butrefuse to occupyaninvisible or conformistplace in the men/women gender binary(Beasley2005: 161f).

Hence, polydimensionalityand diffusionare thehallmarksofthe concept of transgender. 15 Some intersexualpeopleidentifythemselvesastrans-

15 It needstobestressed here,that,inthe field of trans-identities, one must distinguish between transvestites and travesty artists, including drag queensand drag kings, on the one hand, andtranssexuals andpeople with atransgender-identity,onthe other hand. Transvestites andtravestyartistsassumeanidentityonlyfor acertain time andincertain situations. Theyassumeanidentityespeciallyfor thestage,asshown in detail by Beasley(2005: 152). In travesty,artists playwith genderroles and gender clichés. However,theydonot identifythemselves with their performed identity. Theyaccepttheir biological genderand interpret their performance exclusively as an art, as demonstrated in Barrett(1999). Transvestitism whichsome- times is also called“dress fetishism” (Silva 2013: 88) needstobedistinguished from this. Transvestitism is mostly“erotically motivated” (Kroll 2002: 392) andis expressed by men mostly as asexualdesire in order to gratifytheir lust by wearing women’s clothes. Genderqueer identities maynot be understood as aconceptof trans-identity, either (Halberstam 2013, Hall et al.2013).People callthemselves genderqueer if they reject (the existence of)the binaryconceptofman—woman andadvocateagenderhybriditywhichtheyconstruct, perform, andliveinevery- daylifebygendermixing, as shown by Connell(2010). This distinction is important in two respects: firstly, apartofthe Russian societyseemstobeunaware of thisdistinction. This leads to alumping together of allnon-heteronormative persons andartistswho perform in anon-heteronormative way. The banoftranssexual people from drivingacar or from passing adriving licenceinRussiaisanexample for thisconfusion. The “banned” group consistsoftranssexuals, transvestites, exhibitionists, andvoyeurs (e.g.online at:http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/gesellsc haft/russland-transsexuelle-sollen-keinen-fuehrerschein-mehr-machen-duerfen-a-10 12038.html[last accessedon1May 2015]). Secondly, the distinction betweenthe two aforementionedgroups is necessarybecause ConchitaWurst, the main figurein this volume, represents the group of dragqueens. Sheisnot arepresentative of the transsexualortransgender identity. Actually, shedoesnot represent agay identity on stage, either.Itisimportant to keep thisinmind, whenanalysingthe discourse of ConchitaWurst. Last but not least, the distinction is significantbecause different 50 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity gender, forexample.Peoplewho have an androgynous appearance (outward appearance, clothes, behaviour) or whoobviouslyplaywithgender ideas – suchasAndrej Pejić who in formertimes,before “hir” surgery, acted like afeMaletopmodel – identify themselvespubliclyastransgender, too. Consequently, onecan seethattransgender is notahermetically closed concept. Transgendershows howblurred genderidentitiesand, moreover, genderdefinitionscan be andthatgenderismorecomplexthanisgenerally assumed. Aprototypical transgenderidentityisthe conceptofthe ladyboy (see Kathoey below) whichiswidespreadinparts of Asiaand LatinAmerica andcan be observed recently in other – forexample,European – areas, too. The“ladyboy identity”makes clearthatgenderidentitiesare notdivided by strictfeatures or only conceivableasconstant oppositesinevery case. It showsinsteadthatgenderidentitiesmay be distinguished by an obviously blurredgendercrossingbecauseofthe possible non-congruency of primary andsecondary sexcharacteristics. Furthermore, it is thevarietyoftrans- genderidentitiesthatillustrates thateventhe transition from transsexuality to transgender becomessignificantly blurredand indistinct,too,sothatthe boundaries betweenthe singleidentitiesare characterisedbydiffusion per se.Inthiscontext,Iwouldliketodraw theattentionofthe reader to the pornstarBuckAngel. He wasbornand raisedasagirl butdecidedsomeday to live as aman.Heiscalledatranssexual in themedia and, moreover, he declareshimself atranssexual in some contexts althoughhehas neverhad genitalsurgery.This wonhim the labelof“the manwith apussy” (cf. URL 13).However, he “feels andlives like aman” (cf. URL14). These circumstances make it actually difficult to callhim atranssexualortheyshow at leastthe difficulty in defining transsexuality.Yet,hehas without doubta trans-identity which, in turn,shows thevariety of trans-identities which people canassume(Connell2010).

research methods must be chosenand research findingswill be differentwhenone dives either into the discourse of drag artistsoraddresses linguistic questions and issueswhichconcernthe linguistic constructionoftranssexuals or transgender people. On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 51

3.8Onthe RelevanceofSex andthe Third Gender

Thehighrelevance of thesocialorsocio-cultural gender andthe,consequently,lesserimportanceofthe (natural-biological)sex come to thefore when oneconsiders the so-called thirdgender or thirdsex whichis sometimes calledthe intermediategender,too (cf. Herdt1994a). People whoassignthemselvestothe third – or intermediate – gender define themselvesexclusivelyaccordingtotheir socialand socio-cultural rolesas well as to theirfunctionwithinasocietyorcommunity.Inthis case, self- identityisconstructed independentofthe actualsex.The third gender is an ambiguous andcomplexconcept. Moreover,the conceptofthe thirdgender is not understoodinauniformway – neitherinresearchnor by the people whoascribe themselves or whocan be ascribedtothe intermediate gender. As one – maybe – knows, people with ahomosexual identity were regardedaspeopleofthe thirdgenderuntilthe 19th century.For example, Karl Heinrich Ulrichsdescribesthe homosexual “urning”asamember of the third gender categorybecause homosexual people supposedly have a femalesoulinamale body (Setz2000,Sigusch2000, cf. also Herdt1994a, Meer 1994:137). Recently, India officially announcedthe acceptanceof the third gender. Now, peoplehavethe opportunity to identify themselves in documents as transgender, forexample,peoplewho belong to the community of the hijras (see below,cf. also URL15).Thisoption also extends to visitors to Indiawho cantickthe box“transgender” when filling in their visa application (Kirilina2015,Scheller-Boltz2013).Asshownby Kirilina (2015), othercountrieshavebecome sensitive to thetopicof genderand identity,too. Shementions thatifone appliesfor avisaatthe Austrian embassy in Russiaone hastodeclare one’ssex in thevisa application. Here,fourpossibleanswersare provided: male,female, not applicable,unknown. As Kirilinastates, Russiansociety is confronted with these newdevelopments.Becauseofthis, it hasbecomemoreaware of a changingworld of identitydiversity. In most cases,itisremarkable that identifying oneselfasamember of the thirdorintermediate gender does notmean that thecorresponding per- sonhas a(biologically)intersex identity.Personscan identify themselves as members of thethirdintermediate gender category or,atleast, of an unspecified category.Asaconsequence, theconcept of thethird gender hasa lotincommonwiththe conceptoftransgender. Quite often, both concepts 52 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity also seem to be identical. However, theterm thirdgender or intermediate gender respectively is today predominantly usedwithcertainidentitiesand communities (Herdt 1994a).Peoplewho consider themselvesasamember of the third gender or whoare assigned to thisgroup by theircommunity adopt, mainly,asocialroleand functionwithinasocietyorcertain community whichdoesnot have to correspond with theiractualassigned sex. Theirgenderidentityisdeterminedbysocialcircumstances.Incon- trasttotranssexual people,peopleofthe thirdgender, usually,donot undergosex reassignmentsurgery in order to getthe sexwhich corresponds to theirsocialrole. Additionally,weneed to stresshere that “members of the thirdgender” do notfeelthattheyhavebeen born in thewrong body andaccepttheir sexasitis. In contrast to alot of transgenderpeople, people of thethirdgenderusuallyadopt an unambiguous gender rolewithin the socio-conventionally givengenderbinary.Theydonot play with genderideas andtypical gender roles(Herdt1994c). Moreover, they do not connect theirsocialgenderrolewithany kind of sexual orientationor sexual desire. Thiscan be observed,incontrast, in transgenderpeoplewho oftenrebel in public against established systems of beliefs andideas which theytry to overthrow (Bucholtz 1999: 14). While transgender people tryto breakgenderboundariesand allegedlytoquestion exactlydelimitedgender identitiesinorder to, finally,criticise directly the currentgenderbinary, people of thethird genderregardthe conventionalgenderbinary as a measureorevenasastandard norm forthe construction of theirgender identity. People of thethird sexusually comply with thetraditionalgender binary.Hence, theysee themselveseitherasawomanorasamanfroma socialperspective andact accordingtotheir role in everydaylife.

[E]ven membersofthese ‘third genders’cannot but construct theiridentities through recourse to dominant discourses of gender binarism, i.e. theyare usuallyjudgedagainst the gender-binary normand resort to practices that are associated with maleness and femaleness, butinagender-incoherent way (Motschenbacher 2010:9).

However, theconceptofthe thirdgendershows clearly blurredlines.This leads, on theone hand,toadiffuse concept. On the otherhand, this blurri- ness makesitdifficult to differentiate transgenderpeoplefrompeopleof the thirdgender(Herdt1994a). On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 53

TheIndian hijras areprobablythe most famous andwell-known re- presentativesofthe thirdgendergroup.16 By majority,theyare male “by nature”, in some cases they are intersexual, however,theylive outafemale identityinsociety whichishighlighted by their feminine outward appearance, performance, andbehaviour. In afew cases, hijras undergosex reassignment surgery.This demonstrates the actual transformationofa usualhomosexual person or atransvestiteintoahijra (Schröter 2002: 147)17.

This operation transforms an impotent man, a“useless creature,” into a powerful person, ahijra, who now becomes avehicle of the power of the Mother Goddesstobless and to curse (Nanda 1994: 383).

Infertile womencan assume the identity of a hijra,too,for they seethem- selves – like biologically male hijras – as imperfect andincomplete (Nanda 1994). In society,hijras take afemalerolewhichveryoften resemblesa genderstereotypical performancebecause their

performancesdonot attemptarealistic imitation of womenbut rather a burlesque, and the very actofdancing in public is contrarytoordinary feminine behavior (Nanda 1994: 382) so that hijrasoften embody an exaggeratedideaofawoman. On theBalkans, in particular in Albania,but also in Bosnia, Macedonia, Montenegro,Serbia, andKosovo,one canstill encounter – almost exclusivelyinremote ruralareas – theidentityofthe swornvirgin (Alban. vajzë ebetuar,Bosn. tobelija ‘person bound by avow’, Croat. zavjetovana djevojka,Montenegr. virgjinéshë or tybelí ‘femalecommitted to virginity’,Serb. muskobanja ‘manlike woman’,‘man-woman’ or ostaj- nica ‘she whostays (unmarried)’). A“swornvirgin” is definedasaperson whosesex is femalebybirth butwho showsasignificant masculine behaviourand lives the role of aman in society(Grémaux1994, Schröter 2002). This identityistotallyacceptedbytheir community (Schröter2002:

16 Foradetailed overviewofthe hijra identity, cf.Herdt (1994c),Nanda (1994), Schröter(2002). 17 Original:“[...] die Transformation eines gewöhnlichenHomosexuellen oder Transvestiten in einen hijra [markiertwird]”. 54 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity

129). It is predominantly due to socialcircumstances that forcewomen to take on the role of asworn virgin. Familieswithamale successorand inheritorenjoy amuchhigherstandingand appreciationthanfamilies withoutsons. This is whyfamilieswho have no male offspring decide to raise oneoftheir daughtersasaboyinorder to have a(albeit non- biological)son. Furthermore, some womenchoosetoliveasamanontheir ownsothat

two main typesofsocial males should be distinguished. The first type comprises the biological female person who is raised as ason from infancy or earlychildhood; thesecond type embraces thebiological female who, later in life, after having been socialized as awoman formanyyears, reconstructs herself as a“social man” (Grémaux 1994: 244).

Asimilaridentityconcept canbefound in Polynesia, mainly in Samoa, where the fa′afafines ‘like awoman’(Samoa. fa′afafine,Tonga. fakaleitī, Tahit./Hawaii. māhū)live(cf. URL122). They are biologically male people who are raised andsocialisedasagirlorawoman respectively becausetheir familiesdonot have enoughorevennodaughters. Traditionally,women are needed to keep houseand to help raise children. Althoughthe fa′afefinesdoexplicitlystereotypical femaleworkand take a traditional femalerolewithin theircommunity,theyare notconsidered womenbut exclusively as athirdgender. Moreover, they are notregarded as homosexuals, drag queens,ortranssexuals, becausetheycan starta familywith women, too(Besnier 2003, 1994). Onecan also find female husbands, femalefathers,and female sons in partsofAfrica (Schröter2002: 115-128). So,the ethnic groups of Fon, Igbo,and Nuer liveaccordingtoastrict binary gender system (man— woman) with aclearly hierarchical power relation.Ifafamily is in need of ason or amaleinheritor,adaughterbecomes a Nhanye ‘maledaughter’ or a igba ohu ‘femalehusband’ andfulfilsthe role of atraditional man. A similarprocedure canbefound withinthe ethnic groupofthe Nandi in Kenya.18 TheNuer, forexample,classify infertile womenasmen as well in ordertomakeitpossiblefor them to marryawomanaccordingtothe gendersystem.

18 Adetailed overview of genderidentities in Africacan be foundinSchröter(2002). On the Polydimensionality, Complexity, and AmbiguityofIdentity 55

As onecan see, the“reinterpretation”and the“transformation”ofa person’s genderidentity as well as theirsocialisation according to an identity ideawhich does notcorrespond to theiractualbiologicalgender, but whichisobviously basedonthe predominant gender binary(man → woman, woman → man),haveasocial function whichishighly important forthe furthermaintenanceofthe correspondingsociety or community. However, onecan find otherculturesand social models in whichthe socialgenderidentity is notmeanttoattainahigher valueand reputation. TheOmani Khanith – or Khaneeth –,for example,are homosexual menor intersex people with atrans-identity whobear the status andthe function of athird gender. Here,itishighlyinterestingtonoticethattheyascribe themselvestothisidentityand make themselves, consequently, amember of this community.While awoman will remainawomanwithin theOmani society,amanhas thechoicewhether he wantstolive as aman with amale genderidentity or whetherhewants to live andperformasawoman, but then – in thelattercase – as aso-called thirdgender.

The Omani societyactuallydifferentiates people according to gender binarity. There are women, meaning people without apenis, and men, people with apenis.This distinction is made at birth. In asecond phase of differen- tiating, which takes place at the beginning of pubertyatthe earliest,men are once more divided into two categories: in those who penetrate and in those who are penetrated. In Oman,adouble classification system exists:adual one which is based exclusivelyonanatomy,that is the sex of aperson [...]. While people with female sexual organs areinvariablydefined as feminine from asexual and social pointofview, peoplewith apenis have the right to decide whether theywant to belong to the male or female gender. This decision can be temporaryordefinite [transl.] (Schröter 2002: 113).19

19 Original:“Die omanische Gesellschaft differenziertdurchaus binär: in Frauen,d.h. Personenohne Penis, und in Männer,Personenmit Penis. Diese Unterscheidung erfolgtbereits beider Geburt. Erst in einem zweitenDifferenzierungsvorgang, der frühestens mitder Pubertäteinsetzt, werdenMännernocheinmal in zwei Kate- gorieneingeteilt:indiejenigen, die penetrieren, und in diejenigen,die penetriert werden. In Omanexistiert eindoppeltes Klassifizierungssystem: einduales, das sich ausschließlich anhand derAnatomie, also des sex,orientiert[...].Während Menschenmit weiblichen Geschlechtsorganensexuell und sozialunverrückbar weiblich definiert werden,besitzenMenschenmit Penis dasRecht, sich temporär oderdauerhaft zwischendem männlichenund demweiblichenGeschlecht zu ent- scheiden.” 56 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity

Alot of peoplewho belongtothe categoryofthe thirdgenderare oftencut offfromthe outsideworld andliveinremote ruralormountainareasina community with like-mindedmembers,although thisisnot theruleas proven by the Indian hijrasfor example.The travestis are anotheridentity group in Brazil, butalsoinother partsofCentral andLatin America. The members of theircommunity have male sexcharacteristics “bynature” but live outafemaleidentitywithin theircommunity.Theydeclinegenital surgery becausetheydonot considerthemselvesastranssexual(Schröter 2002). Similaridentityconceptscan be found among theThai Kathoey (Ladyboy, Shemale), the Mexican Muxes,the Indian Kotis,and the Pakistani Khusra (Nagar 2008). Last butnot least, oneshouldmentionthatpeopleofthe third gender conceptare appreciatedhigher in some cultures andare seen as creatures with specialskillsand extrasensory power as can be observedamong the Berdache or TwoSpirits as well as amongthe hijras (Herdt 1994b,1994d, Roscoe 1994,Schröter2002).

4Sex as aNon-Relevant Gender Category:SomeFinalRemarks

This aforepresentedoverviewongenderand identityshowsthatthe sexof apersonseems very oftentobethe signpost forthe perception of people andfor theconstructionofone’s identity.One’s sexhas an enormous in- fluenceonone’s identity and, consequently,onone’s personality – this concerns both,one’s ownactiveinfluence as well as thepassive influence exertedbyone’s community.Most people act – consciouslyorun- consciously – accordingtotheir “biology”, whichmeansaccordingtotheir sex. Moreover, onejustifiesone’s reactions, performance, thoughts,and behaviour very oftenbyreferring to natural-biological “facts” (e.g. ButI am awoman!, This behaviourdoesnot suitagirl!, So,asaman, Iwould say ...). Consequently,one’s identity seemstoberegulated,controlled, and influencedconstantly by biological determinism. However, one’sidentityisalsoasocio-cultural constructwhichisthe immediate result of education andsocialisation. 20 Identity is basedon

20 As to the relation between gender, education, andsocialisation in Russia, see, for example, Kliuchko/ Shtyleva (2015). IdentityForms, IdentityConcepts,and Linguistic Analyses 57 imitation andreproductionand,moreover, on ideologicalideas as well as on amythological beliefinthe biological determination andthe necessity of agenderclassification.Behaviourpatternscan neverbejustified by one’sanatomy alone; one’sidentityisnotanatural productwhichreflects inevitablyone’s sex. Nevertheless, themajorityofpeople are withoutdoubt convincedthatthe sexofaperson is ahighly influentialfactorfor identity andbeliefs in thesignificantrelevance of thesex forasociety. With regard to theaforementioned aspect as well as to thefactthatsex is actuallymuchlessimportant andsignificantfor one’sidentity, this over- viewmakes clear thatidentity is neither arigidnor astableentityand, consequently, amuchmorecomplexand diffuse categorythanisusually assumed. Usingthe example of anumberofselectedidentityconcepts, I have illustratedthatthisespecially concerns genderidentities. Gender identities arefluid andsignificantlydistinguished by variance and, consequently,byvariety. On theone hand,genderidentities existwhichare located on aman—womanaxis althoughthe corresponding assignment to manorwoman by an individualoracommunity doesnot depend on sex characteristics,thatmeansonbiologicalfeatures (sex)but mainly on social andsocio-cultural factorsfor they oftenfulfilasocialfunction. On the otherhand, thereare identities withhighly blurredlines whichintendto breakthe traditionaldichotomy of manand woman. This makesitdifficult andinalotofcases even impossible to categorisepeoplewithinthe traditional gender binaryasman or woman. Moreover, thoseidentities destroy or,atleast,weaken the conceptofheteronormativityand showthe concepts of hetero-and homosexualityinanother light.

5IdentityForms,IdentityConcepts, andLinguisticAnalyses

This raises thequestion: what hasthisoverviewtodowithlinguistics?Or, more to the point: whyissuchanoverviewnecessary foravolumeon linguistics? First, onehas to keep in mind thatthisvolume explicitlydealswith questionspertaining to gender and, in particular, queer linguistics. Dealing with both theseresearch areasrequiresfamiliarity with different formsof identityand identity concepts and, moreover, an awareness of the fact that identityisfluid andinstable. Identityisbynomeansahermetically closed andinvariantentity. In thiscontext,one must understand how formsof 58 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity identityand identity concepts are intertwinedand howrelevanttheyare for the wholeidentityofaperson because they have astronginfluence on one’sown self andonthe external perceptionofpeople in general.There- fore, formsofidentity andidentity concepts must also be explicitly con- sideredwhenlinguists deal with gender andidentity topics. Onemust not forget thatidentityhas in every senseanimpacton language, linguistic structures,and,finally,onhow onelinguistically constructs one’sidentity (activeidentity)and on how individual identityis linguistically constructed by one’s community (passiveidentity). Here again, identity formsand identity concepts are relevant entitiesbecause theymarkedly navigate people’s perception of identities andregulate how oneconstructs andperformsone’s identity.Hence, identity formsand identity concepts must notonlybeincluded in gender andqueer linguisticresearch. In particular, the question must be examinedinlinguistic studiesto what extent identityforms andconcepts influence thelinguisticcon- struction of identity.Only if linguistsconsiderdifferent identity formsand identityconcepts, theycan investigatequestions of identity more pro- foundly andtheyavoid superficialresearchfindings.Itisfalse or,atleast, highly problematic to deal exclusivelywith menand womenwithingender linguisticsbecause theconceptsoffemininityand masculinityare so diffuse andcomplex(Scheller-Boltz2015d). This factmakes it impossible andevenunjustifiable to lump womenand mentogether in two separate categories. Anywoman’s speech canexhibit identity markers within acon- versationwhichmay disappear totally duringanother actofcommunication simply because circumstances have changed(e.g. topic, communication partner, position,sphere (privacy,public), aimetc.).Ananalysisofmale linguistic behaviourcan lead to different resultsdepending on thesituation – whetherheisalone (individual andcollective identity)orwhether he is interactingwithmembers of hiscommunity (collective andindividual identity).Consequently,one cannotdraw anyconclusionsbased on general linguisticsbyassuming or arguingonthe basisofbiologicaldeterminism or natural genderfeatures.Anobjectofstudy is neithermasculine nor feminine only because aman or awoman is thefocus of thecorresponding research. Second,regarding manand womanassocialorsocio-culturalcon- structs and, furthermore, interpretingmasculinityand femininity as performances andimitations, effectivelydeconstructs thegiven andtra- IdentityForms, IdentityConcepts,and Linguistic Analyses 59 ditionally established concepts of manand womanasabasisfor investigating genderlinguisticquestions. Gender linguistic studies shouldnot focusonthe specificsofman andwoman.Instead,one should approach genderlinguistictopicsbyconsidering different discoursesongenderand identity. Thefocus shouldbemoreonthe wayinwhich people construct a purported femininity andmasculinity by adhering to thetraditional assumptionsaboutgenderwhichmostly reflectthe “heterosexual matrix” (Butler1991).Asaconsequence, ourobjective shouldbetoreach akindof meta-level fromwhere theconstruction of gender canbeobserved more objectively if we intend to deal withgenderlinguistic questions.The questionsthenwould notbehow do womenand menact linguistically,but how do peopleact linguistically in ordertoperform andconstructfemini- nity or masculinityand,inaddition,whatkind of factorsand circumstances lead to thetypeofbehaviourand intention in question. Such an approach wouldmakeitalso possibletoleave theheterosexualperspectiveand norm as well as the heteronormative standard behind andtoconcentratejuston individualsand theirmannerofacting, interacting,and performing according to traditionaland long-timeestablishedgenderideas.This wouldalso guaranteethe considerationand integrationofother“non-traditional” identities.For example,members of the third(intermediate)genderorcertain trans-identities oftenact according to traditional, well-establishedfeminine andmasculine ideasand features.However, up untilnow they have often been excluded fromlinguisticresearchastheydonot exactly fitinto heteronormative ideas or notions of gender.Nevertheless,thoseidentities wouldshednew light, particularly, on Slavonicgenderlinguisticquestions if they were explicitly considered. Third, Iwould like to stress here once more thatthisvolumeisex- plicitly writtenfor Slavicists andRussicistsinparticular. In this dayand age, it is common practicetoilluminate identitiesbeyondthe “traditional” genderbinary in EnglishorGerman genderlinguisticstudies as well as in otherlanguages anddisciplines andtoinclude thosedifferent identities into linguistic research.21 Russian – andalsoother Slavonic – gender linguistics, however, focusesmostly on thetraditionalheteronormative gender binary,

21 Forarepresentativeoverview, seee.g.Bucholtzetal. (1999), Calderón/Marko (2012), Campbell-Kibler et al.(2002), Canakis et al.(2010), Harringtonetal. (2008), Holmes/ Meyerhoff (2003), Hornscheidt (2009,2008, 2006),Motschen- bacher (2013,2012, 2010), Motschenbacher/Stegu (2013). 60 Identity: Concepts, Forms,and Diversity concentratingonman andwoman as uniformbiologically andnaturally predeterminedheterosexualidentities. LookingatrecentRussian gender linguistic research, onecannot help butrealise thatdifferent identityforms andidentityconcepts are mostly ignoredor, at least, consideredonly marginally.Genderisnot assumedassocially constructed, butasnaturally given. Theterm gender is most oftenusedasasynonymfor sex which meansthat gender is used nowmorefrequentlybecause of its alleged popularity (see here part 5for more details).22 Consequently,using the term gender,Russicistsoften have in mind thebiological sexofapersonsothat gender refers neithertothe social construction of identity nor to thesocial gender, that meanstothe gender an individual performs withinsociety. Trans-identities or theconcept of thethirdgenderare rarely acknowledged as possibilitiesofidentity.Genderroleswhich are basedonsocial functions andcultural circumstances andwhichare obviouslyirrespective of thesex of aperson are notstudied within linguistics.The conceptof postgender andthe obviouslyexistingvarietyofidentitiesare, consequently,mostly ignored andexcluded from research (cf. Kirilina 2015). Consequently, thisintroduction aims at familiarising Russicistswith identityforms andidentity concepts,whichmust be takenintogreater consideration andincludedinSlavonic linguistics in thefutureaswell. There is no denyingthat, up to now, many researchers have dealtwith gender- – andalsoevenqueer- – linguisticquestions,however, their research oftenplateausdue to theirrelianceonantiquatedapproaches,ideas andassumptions.23 In addition,itisabundantly clear that many Slavonic genderlinguists obviouslymarginaliseand even ignore different identities, certainly,inorder to maintain traditionalgenderideas and, as aconsequence,establishedresearch traditions.Thisisthe reason why Slavonic genderlinguisticsfocus primarily on traditional identities,thatistosay,on heterosexual menand womenasuniform entities,and thus yieldresults whichare mostly areproductionofwhathas alreadybeen shown to be wrongorinsufficient. However, amoreinnovativeapproachbased on post- structuralistand even deconstructivist ideas as well as on identity variety

22 This canbeobservedinKrongauz(2015). 23 Foracritiqueastothisresearchapproach within Russian andSlavonic gender linguistics, for pleasfor achangingapproach to analyses of gender(andqueer) linguistic questions andfor first poststructuralist approaches to genderand queer linguistics in Russian andSlavonic studies in general, seeScheller-Boltz(2015a). IdentityForms, IdentityConcepts,and Linguistic Analyses 61 wouldpromise newfindings whichwould lead to newquestions,fields, andmethods of research.Inaddition, Slavonic gender linguisticswould not continue to live in the past, as is thecasetoday,but rather by embracing newand current trends, would bring them andtheir practices up to present international standards. Fourth,itwould seem as though Russiangenderlinguistics have fallen into something of routineatthispoint in time. At anyrateitappearsto have come to astandstill.Neither Russiannor Slavonic queer linguistics hasbeendeveloped nor established. Onedefinitelyfindsinitial and diffident attempts to develop andtoestablish queerstudies andalsoqueer linguistic researchinRussianlinguistics. However, most of thesequeer studiesare embedded in asociological,cultural, or literary context, as one will seeinthe last part of this monograph.Currently,queer topicsare studiedparticularlywithregardtopolitical andsocio-politicaldevelop- ments. Thisisprobably duetothe currentpoliticaland socio-political climateinthe Russian Federation,which obviously limits therights andthe wayoflivingfor many “non-traditional” identities (Kondakov2014, Sapper/ Weichsel 2013).Consequently, dealingwithquestions of queerness is in anycasestill asensitive issue, but, in linguistics,itismost assuredlyunderdeveloped. Consequently,thisvolumeaimsatcontributing to thefurther developmentand – hopefully some day – to theestablishment of Russianqueer linguistics andthusshould be regarded as an introduction of sortstoRussianand Slavonic queer linguistics.Ihopethatitwill inspire otherresearchers in this fieldand help promote the developmentofqueer linguistic researchinSlavonicstudies.

Part 2:

Illusion – Change – Tradition: IdentityinRussia

These all-pervasive abstract beliefs about whatisright and legitimate, and thus most appropriate, pervade the discourses of the community; both mainstream and marginalized members of asociety are constrained by dominant ideologies, and the identities of bothgroups are realized in relationtohegemony. (Kathleen M. Wood 1999: 52)

1IntroductoryRemarks

Oneofthe central arguments of this monographisthe understandingthat the current stateofRussian gender linguistic research reflectsthe ways in whichRussianpoliticsand societyhaveconceptualisedgenderand identity throughout time.Itisclear that theperceptionofgenderand theassessment of identitymust change in thefutureifRussian gender – and, aboveall, queer – linguistics is to evolve. In this second part,Iam goingtoargue thatconceptsofgenderand identityare by no meansnatural givens.Theyare subjecttopoliticaland socialdevelopments whichare oftenthe result of thedeliberate application of institutionalisedpower. To this end, this part willshedlight on what theconcept of identity meansinRussiansociety.Itwillshowhow formsand concepts of identity are established within Russian society,how identities persehave con- tinually been socially andpolitically reassessed in thecourseoftime, and, finally, how theactualperceptionofidentitieshas changedinRussiaover the years. 64 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

As an introduction,Iwill provideacompact overviewofthe actual significance of identity in Soviet Russia.Thisisessentialtomytopic as a numberofmyths andstereotypeswhich have come up in recentyears are deeply rooted in theSovietperiod.Itwillbeshown how theconceptsof individualismand collectivism have been influencingidentity policies duringthe Soviet andpost-SovietRussian period as well as the idea of identityitself.Ofcourse,nodiscussion of identity wouldbecomplete withoutanexamination of theso-called Russianidentitycrisis,withthe Russianmale crisis or,respectively, the crisis of Russian masculinity being oneofits most prominent manifestations. Afterthismoregeneralintroduction,Iwillfocus, accordingtothe topic of thismonograph, on theidentityconcepts of gender, sexuality,and nation. Iwillexplain howgenderidentityisconceptualised in Russian society andwhatmeasures are takenonthe part of politicsinorder to constructgenderconcepts, to regulate genderideas andtoupholda gendered societyingeneral. It willbecomeclear that theperception andthe constructionofgenderidentityhaveagreat impact on otheridentity concepts duetothe notion that theconceptofgenderserves as aprism to constructand assess otheridentities. Onewill seethatsexuality is mostly constructedonthe basisofgenderideas andgendernorms.Moreover, the constructionand perception of gender identity influencethe perceptionof nation(s) andthe constructionofnationalidentities. It is very common todaytothink andtoconstruct nations andspaces through agenderprism. As aconsequence, theinterconnection betweengenderand space playsa prominentroleinthischapter. Themainaim of thispartofthe book is notonly to illuminate the concepts of gender, sexual,and nationalidentity.Itisalsomyintentionto revealthatthese identity concepts are tightly linkedwitheachother. This will demonstratethatidentityconceptsare usedtoconstruct otheridentities andthatidentity concepts canbeusedfor propagandistic reasonsinorder to establish ideological ideasand to maintainmythological beliefs.24

24 Seefor the relation betweenideology, heterosexuality, andidentityinfull detail Bucholtzetal. (1999). IdentityinSoviet andPost-Soviet Russia 65

2IdentityinSovietand Post-SovietRussia

During theSovietRussian period,the collectiveplayed – as is generally known – ahighly meaningfulrole.Collective identity maybecharacterised as the condition of solidarity within asocio-culturalcommunity.Group solidarity arisesfromabasisofcommoninterests,ideas,and values which are realisedonacollective andindividuallevel.Onthe collective level, the group experiencesand realises uniformity andidentity. On an individual level, groupmembers act outtheir membershipinthisgroup (Kurnaeva/ Riabov 2006: 240).25 Thecollectiveand individual identitiesare intimately linked with each other, because the collectiveshowsahigh influenceonthe constructionofthe individual identity of aperson.Individuality also plays arelevantrole here, foranindividualaccepts thevaluesand idea(l)sof their community andindoing so makesanimportant contributiontomain- taining thecollective andits identity. However, theindividual, thatmeans the personal identity of an individual,playedonly amarginaland,inparticular, ahiddenand invisiblerole in SovietRussia. Collective ideasand values maydiffer accordingtosocio-culturesasto material,social, ethic, religious, educationaletc.values, foreach socio- culture is basedondifferentvalue systems.Generally,those accepted values andbeliefs are consideredastraditionalvalueswhich are nurtured andfosteredthrough generations andwhich emanateanormative force. There is atendencytoovergeneralise in thisrespect.Itisassumed that values which arerecognisedasbeing characteristic foracertainsocio- culture are sharedand appreciatedbyevery member of this community and thatall members will impart thesetraditionsand traditional idea(l)s to the next generation(s). Collective values contribute to theformation of aspecificand explicitly culture-based perspectiveofacommunity(asocialprogramming, if you will)which produces generalisations that constantly gain momentum and are seen as applicable in every sense. As aresult, specifics of the community are consideredastypical,characteristic,and simply “normal”.Traits of

25 Original:“[...] формирующееся на основе общностиинтересовиценностей со- стояние групповой солидарности, включающееколлективный (осознание и переживание группойсвоейцелостности итождественности) ииндивидуаль- ный (осознаниеипереживание индивидами своейпринадлежностикгруппе) уровни”. 66 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia the community are overemphasisedtoapoint where theillusionofa uniformmassiscreated.Itisexpected andevenassumed without questioning that amemberofthe community exhibits thespecifics and showsthe behaviourand thinking patternswhichseem to be so typical for the community.This processgenerates stereotypeswhichare seen as natural andspecificfor asociety.Stereotypesare maintainedinternally,that meansbythe respective society perse(e.g. (we) Russians are hospitable), as well as externally,thatmeansbysocietiesfromthe outside(e.g. (the) Russians are hospitable). Thevaluesofasociety function as an invisiblepower component becausetheyhaveanexternal effectonaperson andonthe person’s identity andinfluence theconstructionand perception of identity.Conse- quently,itisthisset of values thatgoverns thepassiveidentity of aperson in acentral manner. Peopleare always assessed according to aculture- specificworldview (kartina mira)and on the basis of generallyassumed traditional values andestablishedbeliefs.Thisexternal force whichaffects the individual notonlyreflectsthe expectations directedataperson.Italso regulatesthe behaviour of preciselythatperson. As aconsequence,the identityofaperson is governed andconstructedaccordingtothe stereotypical andovergeneralisedideas of theircommunity without therespective person beingactivelyinvolved in theconstruction of their identity. Affected by the dominant expectationsofsociety,peopleadopt – sometimes consciouslyand in other casesunconsciously – thegenerally acceptedvalues, ideas,and standardsinorder to feelaccepted as amember of theirsociety,toavoid individual discrimination andexclusionfromthe society,and to enjoy most or allofits privileges andadvantages. In theSovietRussian period,identity wasassociatedand definitely linked withcollectivism.Individuality andother identity forms, suchas plural identities, were negated, denied,orevenbanned.

Instead of enabling the overall development of one’s personality, thesocialist model of societyreduced individuals to their role as clients and, in the process of bureaucraticstandardisation, inhibited the differentiation of a pluralityoflifestyles which is based on individual, reflexive norms and values [transl.] (Schmitt1997: 65).26

26 Original:“Statt allseitige Entfaltungder Persönlichkeit zu ermöglichen, reduzierte das[…] staatssozialistische Gesellschaftsmodell dasIndividuum aufseine Rolleals IdentityinSoviet andPost-Soviet Russia 67

While thecollectiveenjoyed ahighstandinginthe society, there wasonly little supportfor andtoleranceofindividualideas andopinions.The reason forthiswas society’sroleasacollective. In this role,society constantly served thestate.Itwas responsiblefor bestowingglory andprestige on the state so that Soviet Russiaor, in general, the SovietUnion respectively couldstylise itself in apositiveand,primarily,powerfulway to theoutside world. The Soviet Russiansociety representedvalues, such as patriotism, the will to defend the home country, andfreedom.Moreover, ideological ideas,likesolidarity, justice, or social responsibility were seen as significantfor theexistenceand continuityofthe SovietRussian collective. Thesevalueswere primarily established, supported,and maintainedinthe microstructureoffamilies. Thefamily playedavery significant role and wasassessed as an overall important unit by the society. Thefamily trans- mittedvaluesand imparted them throughgenerations (Penn/Jill2009, Zdravomyslovaetal. 2009). Work also played ameaningful role because work wasabsolutelynot seen as an individualactivity butasanactivitywhichexplicitly benefited the wholecollectiveand whichwas central to theexistence andcontinuity of thecollectiveand,accordingly, of thenation(Chandler 2013,Penn/ Jill 2009,Scheide 2002). This wasalsothe motivationbehindthe elimination of gender inequalityinthe labourmarket.Women didnot work becauseof individual reasons,for example in ordertofoster personaldevelopmentand self-realisation.Theycollaboratedinthe establishment of socialismand, consequently, in the maintenance of the Soviet Russiancollective. Allofthese valueswere connectedwithcertainideas,expectations, duties,and patternswhichdid notonlymaintainthese values,but which were also significantfor thefurtherexistence of thesociety as acollective. Thetransmissionofboth,traditional SovietRussian values andthe idea of the relevanceofthe collective wasthe primarytaskofthe Soviet state. The state propagated values mainly through itsinstitutions of education. The media were also intensivelyusedasamedium forpropagating ideological ideas andfor creating supportfor political decisions.Bydoingso, thestate wasable to govern andtocontrol certain ideas andvalues(cf. Broszinsky-

Klient bzw. Klientinund blockierte im Zuge bürokratischer Normierungdie Aus- differenzierungeiner – aufindividuellen, reflexiven Normen und Wertungen beruhenden – Pluralitätvon Lebensentwürfen.” 68 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

Schwabe 2011:178f). In addition,the Russian Orthodox Church,the familyaswellaspoliticalorpolitically motivatedinstitutionsand organisations actedincompliancewiththe political course.Theywere no less responsiblefor conveyinggeneralvaluesand ideological ideasofthe Soviet state. Of course,those circumstances ledimmediately to are- ductionand limitation of individualidentity. Afterthe collapse of theSovietUnionand the political breakdownat the endofthe 1980s, Russia hadtodealwithradical changes. The privatisation of theRussian economy andthe introduction of democracy andofdemocratic structures forwhich an appropriate reform processhad to be adoptedbrought alot of challengesand difficulties forboth,the Russian societyand politics.The Russianeconomy entered recession(Sty- kow 2006:esp.68).Internal politicalconflictsand wars,likethe Chechen wars,causeduncertaintyand insecurity in the Russiansociety (Barylski 1998). However, this era wasalsomarked by arise of individualism. Russia’slink to European andworld-widemarkets, itsconnection to Euro- pean andworld-wideinstitutions, like,for example,the CouncilofEurope andthe Organisation forSecurity andCo-operationinEurope, and, finally, itsstrongconvergence with theEuropean UnionaswellasRussia’s general turntoEuropebrought newvalues, newstandards, andnew possibilities into Russiansociety (Bastian2006, cf. also Höhmann/Schröder2001). Europe wasthe goal;Europewas thefocus;Europe wasthe measureand the generalstandard. In this respect,Russiadid notdiffer fromother post- Socialiststates, like Serbia or Croatia.27 As aconsequence, thecollectivelostits essentialmeaning. Traditional values,which hadbeen primarily basedonformercollective ideas,were consideredasobsolete andodd now. Newsocialmodels anddiverse models forliving aroseand were seen as anew andworthwhile possibility forRussian people. In thelate1990s,the situationchanged again. Economic turmoil and socialunrestbegan to cast doubtsonthe capacityofliberal democracyto create stable conditions forbusinessesand communities. An increasing numberofpeoplestarted to blameindividualism andWestern valuesfor

27 In both Balkan states, nationalvalues were very oftendistinguished from European values or from values of the European Union. Croatiaand Serbia were depictedas backward andunderdeveloped, whereas the European Union wascharacterisedas positive with regard to social life,economics,and law (cf. e.g. Rajilić 2015). Russia’s IdentityCrisis:IdentityPolicies andIdentityRegulation 69 the country’sproblems.Intheir opinion,negligence of traditionalvalues hadprovidedafertile ground forcorruption anddecadencewhich

is interpretedasthe result of atransgression of prescribed norms, andcalls forareform of the societyinwhich “dangerous” homosexualslurk (Tin 2008: 136).

Only areturntocollective moral standardswould enable thecountry to overcomeits difficulties.

3 Russia’sIdentityCrisis: IdentityPoliciesand Identity Regulation

In this context, it is important to note that Russianpoliticians have identified theloss of Russia’s national idea as therootcause forits currentsocial andeconomicinstability.This is whytheyhavedirectedtheir efforts at (re)building Russia’s nationalideaand at stabilising itsnational identity. Thequest foranadequateand respected place forthe Russiannation within aglobalised worldforms part of theseefforts(Nohejl2013b,cf. also Persson/ Petersson2014). Onemust interpret the recent politicaldecisions in thecontext of their nationaland international implications in ordertounderstand the full extent andeffect of this political approach.The protractedeconomiccrisisand the dubious(socio-)political decisions, with whichthe countryhas recently shockedthe worldand which are opposed to thevaluesand guidelines of the European Union, have resultedinenormous internationalpressure on Russia. Thearbitrary application of laws,the violationsofhuman rights, the Crimean crisis, andRussia’slatestinvolvementinthe Syrian waras well as Russia’s attemptattalking Serbiaout of strengtheningits relations with theEuropeanUnion (e.g. URL16, 17,18, 123) must be seen as prime examplesofhow Russia constantly triestoregainpower, superiority, and influence, and, in addition,torebuild itsnationalidentity (cf. also Sperling 2015). Thecurrent politicalstrategyseemstobeparticularly successful froma domesticperspectivebecause Russianpeopleare awareofthe enormous pressure on Russia andofthe internationaldemands, sanctions, and restrictions which have been imposedonthe country. This results in a growingfeeling of unease anddiscontentwithinthe Russianpopulation. In 70 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia this situation,the clever public relations tacticsusedbyRussian politicians help to redirectthe rage of theRussianpeople towards “the others”, mainly towards the“West”.The circumstances strengthenthe bonds among Russiansand increase the hostility and aversiontowards “the West”. Seekingfor itsnationalidentity,Russia hasturnedtowards its historical roots (Sperling 2015).Today, the country’spoliticians relyonold traditional values,appealing to old standardsand ratherout-dated models. Traditional symbolsare used in publicand myths are resurrected which testify to “the longingfor an idealworld” (Scherrer 2001:27).28 This longingisexpressed in variousforms such as: a) the generaldesiretoturnbacktothe Soviet era or,moreadequately, to the models,standards, andnorms whichwere generally establishedduring the USSR period (vozvrashchenie kSSSR)

Russians lapse intodepression and want to return to the USSR.29

Iwant to saythattherewill be nothing bad if we take all the goodthings from the USSR, andthere were alot of goodthings back then.More good things thanbad things. [...] We want to go back to normaltimes.To Andropov, to Brezhnev.30 b) thereturntothe traditional rootsofthe Russianpeople(vozvrashchenie kkorniam)

Fuck the West. It’s time to wake up and to go back to the roots.31

28 Original:“Mythen und Symbolebezeugendie Sehnsucht nach einer heilen Welt, nach Geschichte, Geschichten und angenehmen Ortender Erinnerung.” 29 Original:“Россияневпали вдепрессиюихотят назадвСССР” (URL 19). 30 Excerpt from an interviewwith the State Duma DeputyVadim Solovev in August 2014. Original:“Хочусказать, чтоничегоплохого не будет, еслимывозьмем всехорошееизСССР, ахорошего там было много.Больше, чем плохого.[...] Хотимвернуться внормальноевремя.КАндропову, к Брежневу”(URL20). 31 Original:“Нахрен Запад, пора пробуждаться ивозвращатьсяккорням”(URL 21). Russia’s IdentityCrisis:IdentityPolicies andIdentityRegulation 71 c) thewishto(better)returnto“Russia’s stormy 1990s”(Rossiia likhikh 90-kh)32

Whycan’t we go backtothe wild 90s?33

Oh... the 90s... what awonderful period, whenour countrybegan to rebuild... when everything was newand recreated... whenthe legislatorsofpop fashion became incrediblypopular... bandslike Ruki Vverkh, Turbomoda,Demo and others...34

Thesemyths are linkedwithcertainsymbolsorsymbolicideas whichhad a significantmeaningfor theRussian societyand nation in former times.Itis remarkable in this context that thesymbolic ideaswhichare currently used to find andre-establishanational idea arebasically connectedwith questionsthatfocus on gender ideasand sexuality.This includesaprecise socialorder,traditionalgenderroles andideas as well as auniform senseof community.These symbols andmyths are not only resurrected, maintained, andactivelyusedbypoliticiansalthough Russian politiciansmustbeseen as thedriving force fortheir reestablishment andmaintenance. TheRussian Orthodox Church,too,propagatestraditionalvaluesmorethaneverbe- cause theChurchperceivesits values andideas as strongly supported by the currentpoliticalcourse.35 Moreover, it is the Russiansociety itself that

32 Here,Iwould like to expressmygratitude to professor I. M. Dzialoshinskiifor the interesting insights anduseful information whichhesharedwith me at the conference“Mezhkul’turnoe obshchenie: kontaktyikonflikty” in Moscowin October 2015. 33 Original:“Почемунельзя возвращаться к "лихим 90-м"?”(URL22). 34 Original:“Эх...90-е... замечательнаяпора, когда только начинало строится наше государство... когда всёбыло заново ивновь... когда необычайно по- пулярнымистали законодатели попсовой моды... гр.Руки Вверх, Турбомода, Демоидругие...”(URL23). 35 Canakis andKersten-Pejanić (2016:144)demonstrate in their studythatthe Ortho- dox Churchhas an enormous influenceinother post-Socialist countries, too, like, for instance,inSerbia. They arguethat the Serbian Orthodox Churchisnolonger onlyareligious andsocietalinstitution, but it also plays an important andleading role in politics.The Serbian Orthodox Churchhas entered the publicspace along time agoand is visiblysteeringthe discourse in Serbia,appealingtotraditional and moralvalues andexpressing hostilityand intolerance towards sexual minorities as well as towards people andcommunities who or whichdonot follow the traditional wayofliving andthinking. 72 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia adopts thesepoliticallypropagatedsymbols andclings to certainmyths in ordertotakepartinthe reestablishment of theRussian identity. Thepolitical strategytocounterapoliticalcrisiswith areturnto traditional values,particularlyvaluesconcerninggenderand sexuality,can be observedinalotofcountries in recent years,inparticular, in post- Socialistcountries.Canakis andKersten-Pejanić,for example,observe identical tendenciesinSerbia andGreece. Followingearlier scientificre- searchinthisfield andfocussing explicitly on therolethatqueerness plays in timesofapolitical crisis, bothresearchersarriveatthe following conclusion:

Political crisis – acrisisofinstitutions – in Greece and Serbia has been marked by soaring youth unemployment, therise of extremist nationalist groups,and intolerance towards minoritygroups, including the LGBTQ population.Despite thedifferent trajectories of the crisis in Greece and Serbia, local nationalisms found intelligible scapegoats in LGBTQpeople, as members of this grouphave had an international outlook and have often appealed to “Europe” and the “West” forenhanced visibilityand rights in their respective local communities(Canakis/ Kersten-Pejanić 2016: 153).

In Russia,VladimirPutin propagates theideathatonlyaunification and hermetisation of gender andidentityaswellasthe suppression of identity diversitycan guaranteethe rebuildingofauniformnational identity. The politics of Vladimir Putinare basedontraditional andmoral values. Heteronormativity is not only the generally valid conceptfor gender;itpro- videsalso theblueprint forsocialstructures likethe family,society as a whole, and, ultimately, the Russiannation.Thiscan be observed in Putin’s socio-politicalplatformwhichaimsatregulating sexuality andsexual desire. In December2012,the Russian presidentpushedfor anew family normbased on traditionalvaluesand genderideas.HeencouragedRussian familiestohave, at least, an average of three children.The idea was supportednot only by politicians,but also by the RussianOrthodox Church.Its public expression illustratedthe conceptofthe family as a setting of reproduction withatraditional allocation of rolesembeddedina strictgenderbinary.The newnormreflectedthe generalbeliefthatthere are biologically predeterminedstereotypical gender roles. Gender Identity: On theRelevance of Traditional Gender Ideas 73

In June2013,VladimirPutinsignedthe so-called gay propaganda law whichbansthe publicdistribution36 of informationabout non-traditional sexual relations andpreventsGay Pridesand otherpublic queeractivities (Essig 2014,JeffersonLenskyj 2014).Thislaw wasnot only meantto maintaintraditional genderstereotypes.Its goal wastoregulate sexual desire andbehaviour within apredeterminedand rigidgenderframe,the “heterosexual matrix”asButler(1991)calls it. Therecentpoliticaldecision to banpeoplewithatrans-identitybecause of an allegedmentaldisorderfrompassingthe driver’slicense andfrom car-driving at allstandsinline withpreviouspolitical interventions andcan only be interpretedasaradical addition to the propaganda law(Burmakova 2010,Kondakovn.d.,2014, Scheller-Boltz/Althaler2015,Sozaev 2010, cf. also URL26, 27).

The regulations, which affect people deemed to have “sexual disorders”, also affect fetishists, voyeurs, exhibitionists and transvestites, andwere immediatelycondemned by human rights activists as discriminatory(The GuardianOnline, 9January2015, URL 28).

Theobjectiveofthese policies is notonlytomarginalise homosexual individualsand to regulatesexuality andforms of (sexual) desire (Stella/ Nartova2016).The banmust also be explicitly understood as afurther step to encroach uponidentity formsbeyondthe gender dichotomy outsidethe heterosexual andheteronormative matrix andupon identityingeneral. As the readerwillsee below,the concepts of gender andsexualityplayan outstanding role forthe (re)construction of theRussian national identity.

4GenderIdentity: On theRelevanceofTraditional Gender Ideas

Dealing withgenderideas andgenderroles in contemporary Russiaand outlining thedevelopmentthatRussian identitypolicieshaveundergoneis aquite conflicting andambivalent task;itisnot as easy andobviousasit mayseem. Asuperficialanalysisofgenderrelationsinthe Soviet andpost-

36 Following theexampleofRussia, Kazakhstan hasthought for manyyears about introducing abillthat would banthe “propaganda” of homosexuality amongminors (URL 24). However, in 2015, the political institutions decided not to takethiskind of political stepsand rejected the formerlyintendedbill(URL25). 74 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

Soviet periodsmight arrive at theconclusion that the endofcommunism also meantthe endofemancipatorypoliciesand areturntomoretraditional concepts,especiallyduring Putin’spresidencies(Menzel 2013,Nohejl 2013a). Onewould be mistaken, however, to accept official Soviet propaganda at face value. Acloser examination of women’sand men’s rolesinthe Soviet andpost-Soviet periodsrevealsthatthere are more parallelsand continuitiesthanone mightobserveatfirst glance. Officially,Soviet Russia implementedgenderequality andintended to abolishtraditionalgenderideas.Men andwomen were declaredtobe equal. According to communist propaganda,discrimination againstwomen hadended.Itwas also proclaimed thatwomen enjoyedthe same rights as meninthe USSR andthat, forexample,women in Western Europe didnot enjoythe same rightsaswomen in Soviet Russia. However, most scholars agree today thatSoviet propaganda didnot reflectthe everyday realityinthe Soviet society. In fact,the division betweenmen andwomen andideas aboutgenderwhich hadalreadyexisted underthe tsarscontinued to exertits influenceunder thecommunist regime. Chiefly, gender equality meantthatwomen hadthe rightand option to work andthatthisright even extended to trades andindustries whichwere traditionally consideredas“men’swork”.However, in Soviet Russia, thepossibility forwomen to accessthe labourmarket wasnot basedonthe ideathatworkcan be an instrumentofself-realisation or individual autonomy.The workingwoman wasapolitical idea the intention of which wastoincorporatewomen activelyintothe establishmentof socialism.The so-called women’squestion (zhenskii vopros)was declared to be solved.After all, if women’srightsare equatedwiththe righttowork the fact that womenworkmeansthatgenderequality has been achieved. Yet, this circular reasoning fellshort of painting acomplete picture of genderrelations. At home,the traditionaldivisionoflabour remainedintact formanyRussianwomen.Not only were theyworkingpaidjobs, theywere also responsiblefor doinghousehold chores andraising theirchildren. It mayseemodd nowbut official doctrine waspeculiarlylopsided at thetime. It calledfor gender equality andimproving thesituation of women,yet,it always fellshort of acknowledging that true equality wouldhavetoaffect menand theirsituation, too. As aresult,men’s statusremaineduntouched. Men were workersand headsoftheir families.Theywere neither expected nor askedtokeepthe houseand to take care of their children. Moreover, Gender Identity: On theRelevance of Traditional Gender Ideas 75 womenwere mainly employed in theservice sector.Consequently, they were underrepresentedinexecutive andmanagementpositionsand thus excluded from positionsofpower (Zdravomyslova et al.2009). Apart from the fact that womenwere availabletothe labour market and thatpoliticsactively supportedwomen’s inclusioninthe workforce, one mayargue thatthere wasanabsence of genuineand substantialindications of (a real) genderequality in SovietRussia. TheSovietRussiansociety was constructedalongastrictbinary gender axis which consisted of twoher- metically closed gender centresoneachside that,allegedly,did not over- lap. Nothingseemed to be betweenthese centres so that the axis was thoughttobeequilibrated.Bothcentres – meaningthe male centreand the femalecentre – were assumedtobecharacterisedbydifferent andmutually complementary specifics fromwhichthe respectivetasks, responsibilities, anddutiesofmen andwomen were derived. Womenwere primarily seen andtreatedasthe “weaker sex” andconsequentlyassociatedwiththose stereotypesand clichésthatare well-known in other socio-cultures,too. Thesestereotypesrelegated womenamongst otherthingstothe rolesof mothers,childcarers,and housewives. Men, in contrast, were considered andtreatedasthe “strongersex”whichischaracterised by dominanceand superiority. Theman wasthe head of thefamily,the decisionmaker, the main breadwinner, ahardworkeraswellasapowerfuland active creature, equipped withenergy, strength, andasense of responsibility, someone who realises innovative andessential plans. Aboveall,men were seen as non-women (Riabov/ Riabova2008). This is averysignificantfactum because it points us to thedeeply rooted heteronormativity whichpervadedthe Soviet societyinspiteofits pur- portedprogressiveness. Heteronormativity wasahighly important concept forapproachingand thinking gender andidentity in general. Thetwo acceptedgenderidentities – womanand man – were constantly embedded in aheteronormativeframeinwhich attractionwas only conceivable betweenthe polesofthe gender binary.This heterosexual constellationwas neverquestioned.Itwas perceived as naturaland, hence, as biologically determined. At times – andthis mayseem peculiarfor asociety which, officially triedtoabolish religion – gender attributes androles as well as the conceptofheteronormativity were justifiedasparts of God’screation. Consequently, it wasupheld that womenbehave, think,and talk like 76 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia womenbecause they are womenbynatureand that menbehave, think, and talk like menbecause they are menbybiology from birth. As we cansee, gender relations in Soviet Russiawere characterisedby acertainambivalencewhichwas theresultofthe tensionbetween official propaganda andreallife. Certainly,the purportedachievement of gender equalitymust be calledanillusion. Now, it shouldbeasked whetherthe endofcommunism affected these concepts of gender. Whichchanges or continuities canbeobserved in the post-Soviet period?Sincethe early1990s, the RussianFederationhas lived throughaperiod of profound andfar-reaching changesastogenderideas. Recently, an intensiveshift in favour of more traditional gender ideascan be observed. Kirilina (2015)speaksofthe “trendtothe reanimationand strengthening of oldpatriarchal stereotypes”.

On the surface, the tendencydominates to adopt the old Western pragmatic two-gender-model again, after the “all-human” unisex utopiaofthe Soviet Union has failed. One cannot dispute the fact that there are “strong” women under the new regime who make “their waytothe top”. However,the ideal of the hegemonic machoisstill deeply engrained in society, the ideal of the successful“biznesmen”surrounded by femalecreaturesofluxurywho, in contrast to him, have to be beautiful and devoted above all andwhose activities are limited to consumption [transl.] (Nohejl 2013b: 87).37

Womenare increasingly removedfromthe sphere of activity,production, innovation,and creativity. Theconcept of passivefemininity is widely established (Nohejl2013b).Women’s perception is centred on theirout- ward appearance.Men,incontrast, embody mainly puredominanceand have to demonstratepower. They are recognisedbytheir power, activity, andaction(Riabova 2002).

37 Original:“Dabeidominiertander Oberflächedie Tendenz,sich nach denhavarier- ten „allmenschlichen“Unisex-Utopien derSowjetzeitwiederverstärkt daspragma- tische Zweigeschlechtermodell westlicherPrägung zu eigenzumachen. Zwar gibt es auch unter denneuen gesellschaftlichenBedingungen unstreitig „starke“Frauen, die sich ihren„Wegnachoben“ bahnen;dochinsgesamt hatsich tief dasIdeal vom hegemonialen Machoeingeprägt, vomerfolgreichen „biznesmen“,andessenSeite sich weibliche Luxusgeschöpfe tummeln, die in ersterLinieschön und hingabevoll zu sein habenund derenAktivitätensichauf denKonsum beschränken.” Gender Identity: On theRelevance of Traditional Gender Ideas 77

This gendered politicaldrama reinscribes patriarchy – thedominance of perceived masculinityover femininityand therelative empowermentofmen versus women (Sperling2015: 7).

Women are primarilyperceived visually. [...] Awoman is compared to artwork. [...] It is preciselythe imageofawoman which creates the model of pure beauty. [...] The aestheticsofmen is of adifferent nature. Here, it is the aesthetics of power andsuperiority, of fight and victory.Men compete against each other in battle, not in beautypageants. Their handsomeness is dynamic. It appears on the surface in the fight with the enemy – with the warrior or withthe bull. This is another kind of art. The womanisattractive, the man is impressive. [...] The woman inspires, the manacts[transl.] (Arutiunova2002: 483).38

In heranalysis of stereotypesand stereotypical ideaswithinRussian society,Kirilina (1999: 73-77, cf. also 2002)affirms thisconclusion. Today, the womanisgenerally thought of as abeautiful creaturewithsoft features andabigheart.Women are wise,emotional, andwilling to make sacrifices.Theyare seen as wives,mothers,and housewives. In contrastto this, menare associatedprimarily with power. Aman worksphysically,has astrongleaning towardsalcohol andispermanently looking forfun.39 Thesetraditional gender stereotypesand gender ideasare already taught andconveyed by parents in early childhood(Herma2003, Kletsina 2009a, 2009b).

In everysociety, it is expected from childrenwith different genders that they behave differently, communicatedifferently with each other, so that,

38 Original:“Женщины, прежде всего, воспринимаются визуально.[...]Женщина приравнивается кпроизведению искусства.[...] [И]менно образженщины формирует модель чистой красоты.[...]Эстетика мужчин имеет другую при- роду.Это эстетика властиисилы, противоборства ипобеды.Мужчины участ- вуют вконкурсах борьбы, анекрасоты.Ихкрасота динамична.Она про- являетсебявсражении спротивником–воиномили быком.Это искусство другого рода.Женщина привлекательна, мужчина импозантен.[...]Женщина вдохновляет, мужчинадействует.” 39 Formoredetail, cf.also Utrata (2015). 78 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

consequently,boysand girls behave differentlyinevery society [transl.] (Kletsina 2009b: 201).40

Immediatelyafter birth, children generally learn that they are either agirl or aboy andtheylearn moreoverthatall people surroundingthemare constantly classified as male or female(Mogge-Grotjahn2004: 93, cf. also Livia/ Hall 1997). Today, the educationofchildreninRussiaisheavily influencedbythe belief in biological determinism.Asaconsequence,any interestsofchildrenwhichare at odds with their“natural” sexare often ignored. Thisshows that individualitydoesnot always play arelevantrole. Most of thetime, it is more important to fitcollectiveideas:girls aregiven the impression that apersonofthe femalesex must always be dobraia ‘well-tempered’, skromnaia ‘modest’, poslushnaia ‘obedient’, zabotlivaia ‘careful’, umeiushchaia sledit‘zasvoei vneshnost‘iu ‘interestedinher looks’, prilezhnaia ‘diligent’,and trudoliubivaia ‘hard-working’(Semeno- va/Semenova2009:212). In contrasttothis, boysmust learntosmile at girls’and women’sweaknesses,torefusetodowomen’s work,todemon- stratestrengthand dominance, andtosuppresstheir feelings.Theyare consideredasstrong(-willed),brave,decisive, persistent, goal-oriented, self-dependent, principled, andcompetent.Consequently, boysare given the impressionfromanearly agethatamanmust earnmuchmoney,aspire to power, andseektoimprove his position(Semenova/ Semenova 2009: 213f). Outsideofthe family homeand of school, thesegenderideas and genderattributesare emphasisedespeciallyinthe media andinad- vertising.Itisfromthe media andadvertisements that girlsand boyslearn how apersonoftheir sexlooks like,behaves,speaks, andthinks(Mogge- Grotjahn2004: 95). As shownbyKirilina (2015), Russianschoolbooksand textbooksorother learning, teaching,and writingmaterialsaswellastoys and, in particular, their packaginghaveastrictlygender-oriented design today. Theirappearanceischaracterisedbygender-stereotypical colours, figures, andother illustrationswhich make children constantly aware of stereotypical gender ideas.Men are drawnasstrong, dominant,powerful, cool, andcasualcreatures;theyare conquerors andprotectors. Textbooks andschoolbooks forboysare ofteninbluecolour. Cultural representations

40 Original:“Влюбом обществе от разнополых детей ожидают разного поведения ипо-разному обращаются сними, всоответствиисэтим влюбом обществе мальчики идевочки ведутсебяпо-разному.” Masculinity, Heteronormativity, andBiopolitics in Today’sRussia 79 of girlsand womendifferstronglyfromrepresentations of their male counterparts. In thebestcase, as demonstrated by Kirilina(2015), girls, femaleadolescents, or womenare depicted as naїve,submissive, andshy. Thecovers of schoolbooks andtextbooks forgirls are oftenpinkor, at least, shades of red (cf. also Valdrová 2005). In themedia,women are mainly picturedassexualobjects. This is confirmedbySperling(2015: 57):

In Russia, as elsewhere, commercial capitalismcommodified and objectified women’s bodies in particular. Printand television advertisementsbegan regularlytofeature skimpilydressed women, while classified ads for secretarial positionsbegan demanding that applicantssubmit photos of themselves alongwiththeir applications and encouraged only “uninhibited” womentoapply. By theend of the decade, women’s bodies were aregular feature of public advertising and remained so into the Putin era.

5Masculinity,Heteronormativity, and BiopoliticsinToday’sRussia

Thereturntoapatriarchal conceptofsociety with rigidgenderroles also impliesareturn to atraditionalgenderhierarchywith masculinity at its top. Onecan observe, indeed,avirtualcultofmasculinity in Russia. Masculinity is exaggerated andcelebratedinpublic. Theheroic presen- tationofPresident Vladimir Putinand hismachismointhe media may seem odd to aWestern audience;fromaRussianperspective,however, Putin’s appearances reflectthe powerofadecidedly masculinenation(cf. Sperling 2015).Although most mendonot fitthe idealofthe “real man”, theconcept of hegemonicmasculinityhas advanced to apoint where it has become the prototypical masculineideal formanymales (Coates2007:42). TheRussian manisneither awoman,nor achild,nor ahomosexual (Riabov 2007, Riabov/Riabova2008, Riabova/ Tsalko 2011). It is an idea of masculinitybased on misogyny and homophobia (Coates2007: 46-48). It must be notedthatthishas not always been thecase. Theideaof masculinityincontemporary Russia hasundergone asignificantchange sincethe RussianFederationwas founded. It is remarkable thatinthe early 1990s, menwere oftenassociated with stereotypical feminine characteristicsand specifics such as dependency, indecisiveness, passivity, or weakness.Thiskindofattributionisnot surprisingifone considers the 80 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia socio-politicalcontext in whichithappened. Afterthe collapse of the Soviet Union, thepositionand thevalue of menwithinRussian society changedrapidly and, due to thetransformationofthe political andsocial system, menhad to redefine themselvesand find anew role withinRussian society.The so-called demasculinisation of theRussian manand,consequently,the Russiansociety in the1990s,which some scholars called a “crisisofmasculinity”,becamethe focus of researchprojectswhichstudied the change of masculinity andthe “new man”(e.g. Ashwin/ Lytkina 2004, Baer 2009, Maydell 2013,Riabov/ Riabova2008, Riabova2002, Riabova/ Tsalko 2011).

During Perestroika andinthe first yearsafter Perestroika, the manwas blamedfor his dependence, childishness as well as fordependenceonthe state, the society, andthe woman[transl.](Riabova/ Tsalko 2011: 207).41

Sincethe turnofthe millennium, however,one can observethe opposite tendency,namelyanactive remasculinisation of theRussianman andthe Russian society(Riabov/Riabova2008, Riabova/ Tsalko 2011). Once again, societaldiscourse prioritisesthe stereotype of thepowerfulman (nastoiashchii muzhchina ‘real man’, nastoiashchii muzhik ‘real lad’) whichushersinareturntoamore traditionalformofmasculinity (Baer 2009,Riabova 2002). Ihavealreadymentioned thatincontrasttothe widely establishedand propagated ideal of “real”masculinity,men are sometimes drawnas sensitive and, to someextent,weakerand softer creatures.Inmetropoles suchasMoscow or SaintPetersburg, menhaveopeneduptonew concepts of masculinitysuchasmetrosexuality or so-called spornosexuality.Well- groomed, fashionable andintouch withtheir feelings, they breakaway fromthe mainstream ideaofthe qualitiesamanshouldembody.This deviant masculinitycan be observed in everydaylife, forinstancein advertising. It is in this fieldoftensionbetween traditionalismand modernity that Russian menmust come to termswith theirown masculinity. Thepull towards apatriarchal modelofmasculinity is great. Whilearelevantpartof

41 Original:“Мужчина перестроечныхипервыхпостперестроечныхлет обвинял- ся внесостоятельности, инфантильности, зависимостиотгосударства, об- щества иженщины.” Masculinity, Heteronormativity, andBiopolitics in Today’sRussia 81 society triestobreakwithtraditional ideasand rolesortoapproachidentity diversityinadifferent, more tolerant way, politics, theRussianOrthodox Church,and some institutions of educationcombine theirresources in favour of establishing traditionalgendervaluesagain andofre- masculinising theRussian manand theRussian society. It is important to notethatthispatriarchalmodelofmasculinityhas important implications forthe regulation of therelationsbetween the sexes. Man andwoman are concepts infusedwith rigidnorms of sexualdesireand sexual attractiveness. In her theory of theheterosexualmatrix, Judith Butler (1991)theorisesthatthinking gender identity in astrictnormative,heterosexual waymeansthatpeoplebelonging to onecentreofthe gender axis are only attractive to themembers of theoppositecentre. As aconsequence,heterosexuality is crucial forthe existenceand theconsistencyof this binary system. Hence, heterosexualityasthe most importantcompo- nent of the gender binary leadstoageneral heteronormativity whichshapes both,the social micro-and macrostructures.Asawhole,the Russian society obeys to this normative andheterosexualimperativefromwhichit derivesits normalcy(Baer 2009:9). In thiscontext, theheterosexual genderbinary hastoberegardedasthe startingpoint or the basisfor other organisations andinstitutionsaswellasfor certain measures andprojects, suchaspartnership, marriage, family (models),school, church,labour market,sports, art, advertising, society, andthe nation in general.Hetero- normative gender ideas andthe gender balanceaswellasthe binary gender axis aremaintainedbypolitical andsocio-political decisionswhichin- fluencepublicopinionand thedominant discourse. Theaforementioned policies,likethe family with three children or theanti-gaylaws, highlight their politicalenforcement.

Thus, arestrictive discourseongender that insists on the binaryofman and womanasthe exclusive waytounderstand the gender field performs a regulatoryoperationofpower that naturalized the hegemonic instance and forecloses the thinkabilityofits disruption(Butler 2004a: 43).42

In Russia,the wide-spreadbeliefinaheterosexual gender binary is mainly justifiedbyareferencetonature perse.Moreover, institutions, like the

42 Cf.also Butler (2004b: 159). 82 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

Church or schools, have an enormous powerand exertgreatinfluence on thinking andshaping gender andidentitywhose heterosexual orientation is allegedlygivenbyGod becauseGod createdAdamand Eve. Heterosexual identityisvery oftenjustifiedbyquoting andreferring to theBible andits moral values.

But forAdamnosuitable helper was found. So the Lord God causedthe man to fall into adeep sleep;and while he was sleeping, he took one of theman’s ribs and then closedupthe place with flesh.Then the Lord God made a womanfromthe rib he had taken outofthe man, andhebrought hertothe man. The mansaid, “Thisisnow bone of my bones andflesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ forshe was takenout of man.” That is whyamanleaves his father and motherand is united to his wife,and theybecome one flesh. Adamand his wifewereboth naked, and they felt no shame. (Genesis 2:20-25)

This assumption is notonlyarticulated by Patriarch Kirill of Moscow (e.g. URL29),but it is also stated by parts of theRussiansociety.

God made people thisway.And to confront his will means agrave sin. (URL 30)43

And we came into this world onlyinorder to correct God’s mistakes. (URL 31)44

Allofthese influences combined exertenormous pressure on people to live up to thestereotype of their respectivegender. Theinsistent appeal of PresidentVladimirPutin thatevery family shouldhaveanaverage of three childrenismotivatedbynothingmorethanthe intention to resurrectand to strengthenthe traditionalgenderideas andtomaintain thetraditional functions androles of manand womanwithinsociety althoughthe pro-

43 Original:“Бог сделал этих людейтакими.Иидти против еговоли самый тяжкий грех.” 44 Original:“Ипришли мы вэтотмир лишь для того, чтоб исправлять ошибки бога.” Gender Asymmetryand the Postgender Option 83 clamationofthis norm is “officially”motivatedtoraise thebirth rate andto give financialsupport to larger families.

[I]n VladimirPutin’sRussia, genderissueswere raisedinconnection with family and demographicpolicies (Temkina/ Zdravomyslova 2014: 262).

In an interview at the plenary meetingofthe Valdai DiscussionClub in 2013,for example,Putin answeredthe question of Professor Gerhard Mangott fromthe University of Innsbruckabout hisintentionregarding the anti-gay laws.Besides thefact that Putinnegated that thereisoppression of sexual minoritiesinRussiaand that members of sexual minorities are punished becauseoftheir sexual orientation,hejustifiedthe passing of this lawbyreferringtothe country’ssinking birthrateand by painting a scenario of extinction.45 Thetraditional gender orderisthusembeddedin the contextofreproductionand is exclusivelyarticulatedfromthisper- spective. Interestingly, the president’sanalysis, whichisalsoregularly featuredinthe media,isnot supportedbyofficial statistics. Whatever the future mayhold forRussia, demographiccatastrophe is clearly not on this nation’strajectory(cf. URL32, 33, 34).46

6GenderAsymmetryand thePostgender Option

It would be amistake,however, to assumethatthe popularity of traditional genderrolesand ideas affectsthe Russiansociety to thesameextentoris shared by allRussians. Indeed,atendency is visibleincontemporary Russiawhich runs in the oppositedirection andwhich is characterisedbya stark opposition to traditional concepts of gender: the“trendtoeliminate genderasymmetry”(Kirilina 2015). Thistendencyseemstoberatherun- expected,whenone considersthe current politicaland social circum-

45 Seethispartofthe interviewonline at:https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8vWZ4Mb WdYiSW5SSGdCLTEzX0U/edit?pli=1[last accessed on 14 November 2015]. For watchingthe wholeplenary meetingsee online at:www.youtube.com/watch?v=- PtsodE-ZkY [last accessedon14November 2015]. 46 The same argumentation waspresented alreadyinthe 1980s. Seeheree.g.Hauer et al.(1984:13). 84 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia stances.Itseemstobequite irreconcilablewith thegenerallypropagated traditionalism.47 Foralong time,playing withgenderand identityrolesseemedtobe- long primarily to theworld of music,film(e.g. Mrs. Doubtfire, Zdravst- vuite, ia vashatëtia [Hello,I’m your aunt]48, Veselchaki [Gay birds]49)50, theatre (e.g. Beijing Opera51,ballett52), andtothe artscene in general. Blurredidentity lines, homoeroticelements, or undefinable gendercon- cepts were mainly seen as afeatureofartisticexpression or as apartof show business. Russiansingers, likeValerii Leont’ev,Boris Moiseev, FilippKirkorov, andthe well-known VerkaSerdiuchkaaswellasmore bizarre artistslikeSergeiZverevalwayswere andstill areseenaseccentric personas andtheir behaviour andappearance are oftendenouncedas “typical foranartist”.The same appliesfor internationalpopstarslike DavidBowie,Prince, Michael Jackson,Madonna, Lady Gaga,RuPaul, Dana International, EltonJohnand many others.Itisevident thatanun- definableorextravagant appearance hasalsofuelled rumoursastothe sexual identityofthese people. Underthe influenceofglobalisation,new genderand identityconcepts have enteredthe Russiansociety andhavebecomeincreasingly visible in Russia’severydaylife. Trans-peopleorgenderqueersare asignificantpart of today’s media andplay, forexample,animportant role foradvertising as

47 The two contrary tendencies describedbyKirilina – the trend to eliminategender asymmetryand the trendtoreanimateold patriarchal stereotypes – can also be observedinother countries, for example, in France. This is illustrated by the Professor of PhilosophyEstelle Ferraresefromthe UniversityofStrasbourg, online at:IPG – Internationale Politikund Gesellschaft, Vodcast, “Allergisch gegendie Gender-Idee”: www.ipg-journal.de/vodcast/artikel/allergisch-gegen-jede-gender-id ee-593 [last accessed on 14 February2016]. 48 Details of the moviecan be found online at:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Hello,_I'm_Your_Aunt! [last accessedon14November 2015]. 49 Details of the moviecan be found online at:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1505957/ [last accessed on 14 November 2015]. 50 Formore details as to non-heteronormativepersonasinRussian andinternational movies,see Kondakov (2011). 51 At the BeijingOpera,all male andfemale rolesare traditionallyand usuallyplayed by male artists. 52 Cf.the homoerotic elements in Swan Lake,John Neumeier’sproductionand choreographyofThomasMann’s Death in Venice or NachoDuato’s productionof Castrati. Gender Asymmetryand the Postgender Option 85 is shownbyKirilina(2015). Moreover, onecan find elements of campin advertising whichcan create – mainly in thecontext of thenew masculinity – ahomoeroticatmosphere.53 Theexistence of apostgenderoptionisin- creasingly noticeableinRussia’ssociety today. Fromapostgender perspective, identity is seen as ambiguousand blurred. Thepostgenderparadigmpostulates that it is notpossibletodefine apersonaccording to astableand singularidentitybecause people do not have only one identity (cf. Hieber/ Villa 2007). Thepostgenderparadigm aims at deconstructing traditionalgendernorms completely andstressesthe ideathatgenderidentity is aconstantlyand invariantlyinstitutionalised and ritualised concept. It hasstarted to influence Russiansociety andhas triggered – although to alesserdegreeascompared to other countriesand socio-cultures – the formationofanew anddefinitely pluralisticmodelof maninRussia (Genz/ Brabon2009: 28). This does notimply that Russian people,themselves, increasinglyshow apostgenderidentitytoday or tryto eliminate strict genderdefinitions.Althoughone hastoacknowledge that, forexample,sex reassignment surgeries have been successfullycarried out in (Soviet) Russia sincethe 1970sbyViktor Kalnberzs andIrina Golubeva (URL 35,36) andalthough trans-identitiesortransgender cases occasionally do appear in publiclikethe transgenderAlinafromMoscow (URL 37, 38) or thecaseofLGBTrightsactivists Reida Linn andSofiia Grozovskaia54,postgenderisbynomeansamainstream phenomenon.

53 Seeherefor examplethe Germanadvertising of Iglo from 2001, online at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=HegAvwhmoAE. Seealso www.spiegel.de/panorama/ schwule-in-der-tv-werbung-von-schwanensee-zu-fischstaebchen-a-117710.html; w ww.youtube.com/watch?v=ymAeKDtf0K8; www.youtube. com/watch?v=bB90Vk yqrts; www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6aivppmzMo; www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB uKuA9nHsw [all last accessed on 22 February 2016]. 54 In March2016, ReidaLinn marriedher partnerSofiia Grozovskaia in Moscow. This eventcausedfuroreinMoscow andinRussiaingeneral because Reida’spart- neristransgender.The police hadintendedtopress chargesagainst the couple – the police argued that Reida Linn andSofiia Grozovskaia hadcommitted so-called hooliganism (khuliganstvo)and contravenedagainst the Russian LGBT propaganda law.Yet,the marriage hadtoberegistered by theRussian authorities in the end. Reida’spartnerSofiiaidentifiesherself as atransgenderwomanwho is currently transitioning from male to female.However, sinceSofiia’s passport still identifies heras(officially) male, therewerenolegal reasonsfor barringthem from marriage. Cf.online at:www.queer.de/detail.php?article_id=25807 andhttp://moslenta.ru/ 86 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

“Eliminatingstrictgenderdefinitions”rathermeansthatthe Russian society is increasingly confronted with the plurality anddiversity of identity as well as with the factthatidentity offers abroad rangeofinter- pretationillustrated by trans- andother cross-identities (e.g. genderqueer people)which penetrateeverydaylifeascan be seen when examining certainartists, films, or advertising (Genz/ Brabon2009:28, cf. also Hall et al.2013,Hieber/ Villa 2007 and, as to the principleofgenderasper- formance, Butler 1997).Asaconsequence, Russians have become increasingly aware of thefactthattermsand concepts like woman, man,or mother aremoreambiguousand fluidthantheyhaveseemeduptonow. Indeed,itwould be difficult formanyRussianstouphold the ideaoftwo sexesasthe number of peopleincreases whohavebeen exposed to other identitieslike sexnot applicable or sexunknown in themedia,but also in everydaylifeasdescribedbyKirilina (2015) andScheller-Boltz(2013). Nevertheless, trans-identities stillhavea„highpotentialofirritation“ (Kroll 2002: 392),because they fallout of theheteronormative gender dichotomy and do notfit anyofthe generallyacceptedideas of identity. Like in other countries, theemergence of newconceptsofidentity raisesthe question of whetherthe educationalsystemshouldincorporate andreflectthese identities.Contrary to what Western readers mightexpect the debate about theinclusion of otheridentity formshas notbeen suspendedorstopped. Most scholarsstill pleadinfavourofmaintaining traditional values andtraditional genderideas as thebasis forteachinggen- derroles andrelations(cf. also Kliuchko/Shtyleva2015). Others,like Semenova andSemenova(2009:217) reject both, theuniformindividual andthe uniformgendercategoryfor theRussian society.Theyplead,instead,for an exclusive self-realisationofevery individual,irrespectively of their sexaswellasfor thepluralityand diversity of identities as ameansto supporttolerance, to reduce thinking in categories andtoend discrimination.

news/2016/03/19/brak-transgenderov-zaregistrirovali-v-moskve/[both last accessed on 20 March2016]. Sexual Identity: Enforcing Heteronormativity 87

7SexualIdentity: EnforcingHeteronormativity

While amodelofeducation andsociety that is basedonastrictly binary genderdivisionaccording to traditionalgenderideas is sometimes rejected or,atleast, critically questionedinRussianpsychology andpedagogics today, as well as in partsofthe society, such an open-mindedapproach is, in general, not widelyacceptedinthe RussianFederation. In 2013,the Federal lawagainst homosexual propaganda (zakon protiv propagandy gomoseksualizma) – whichisofficially calledthe Russian Federal lawfor the purpose of protectingchildrenfrominformationadvocating adenialof traditional family values(zakon ozapretepropagandynetraditsionnykh seksual’nykh otnoshenii sredinesovershennoletnikh) – enteredintoforce as Article 6.21 of theCodeofAdministrative Offences of the Russian Federation(cf. URL39).The “ban of homosexual propaganda”was established in otherlaws, too: it is incorporated into Article5Point 2.4of the FederalLaw of the RussianFederation “Onthe protection of children frominformationharmful to theirhealth anddevelopment” (О zashchite deteiotinformatsii,prichiniaiushchei vred ikhzdorov’iu irazvitiiu)(cf. URL40) anditisenshrined in Article14Point 1ofthe Federal Law“On the basicguarantees of therightsofthe child in theRussianFederation” (Оbosnovnykh garantiiakh prav rebenkavRossiisskoiFederatsii)(cf. URL41).Consequently,“homosexual propaganda”, “publichomosexuali- ty”, and“publiclyvisible homosexualactivities” have been unlawful for more than twoyears now (Gorbachev 2013,Scheller-Boltz/Althaler 2015). In 2015,itwas additionallyproposedtoban people with atrans-identity fromdrivingcarsand from obtainingadriver’slicence. Trans-people as well as people with adeviant sexual desire (e.g.fetishists, exhibitionist) have been basically equatedwithpeoplewho suffer from amentaldisorder. Thepolitical stepstoregulatesexualityand sexual desire in orderto maintainatraditional societyand identity modelstirred up intensiveinter- nationaldebates,especiallybefore the2014 Olympic GamesinSochi. Manyinternational institutions,organisations,and politiciansinterpreted the attempttoban thevisibilityofhomosexualityasanincreasingre- striction of humanrights (cf. JeffersonLenskyj 2014, Persson/ Petersson 2014). The propaganda laws have curtailedthe freedom of non-heteronormative individualsand provokedmassive doubts internationallythat sexual minoritieswere no longer protectedbythe Russianstate.Lastbut 88 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia notleast,itisstill notreally clearhow thelegal terminology has to be interpreted andhow thelawsare actually applied(Kondakov 2012a). Temkina andZdravomyslova (2014:263), forinstance, arguethatthe propaganda law

suffers from inconsistencies and terminological ambiguity – the term “propaganda” is notdefined, and pedophiles are mixed up with homosexuals.

Definitely, the useofthe term propaganda and, respectively, propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships seemstobequitebroad andun- defined(Scheller-Boltz/Althaler2015).Due to thedefinition of propaganda every actioncould be interpretedaspropagandistic.

Propaganda is the distribution of informationwhich intends to form the non- traditional sexual stanceofminor persons,the attractivityofnon-traditional sexualrelationships, thedistortedidea of the social equalityoftraditional and non-traditional sexual relationships, or which intends to obtrude information on non-traditional sexual relationships thatarouses interestastothose relationships [transl.] (URL 42).55

Second,the protection of minors is not clearlydefined (Gorbachev 2013). Even before theintroductionofthe propagandalaws,minorswere banned fromentering many gayand lesbian venues such as bars andclubs.Itis hard to understand how the shuttingdownofplaceshelps to protect individualswho were not allowedtopatronise them in thefirst place. The connectionbetween banning trans-peoplefromdrivingand protecting minorsisnot obvious or even logical, either. Theoffense of propagating non-traditionalsexualrelationshipsinthe presence of minorsisopentointerpretation.Everythingwhich seemstobe socially non-conforming andoutside theheteronormative frame can be assessed as homosexual propaganda andpunishedaccordingly(although

55 Original:“Пропаганда [...], выразившаясявраспространении информации, на- правленнойнаформирование унесовершеннолетнихнетрадиционных сексуальныхустановок, привлекательностинетрадиционныхсексуальныхот- ношений, искаженного представления осоциальнойравноценноститради- ционных инетрадиционныхсексуальныхотношений, либо навязывание ин- формации онетрадиционныхсексуальныхотношениях, вызывающейинтерес ктакимотношениям.” Sexual Identity: Enforcing Heteronormativity 89 the RussianPresident Vladimir Putinnever tires of repeating andstressing in publicthatqueer people do not face anyoppression56 in Russia andthat homosexuality perseis notacrime in Russia – in comparisontosomeU.S. states, where, according to Vladimir Putin, homosexualityisstill con- sideredacrimeand,consequently, punished accordingly)57.The passing of the anti-propagandalaw strengthens,above all, thesocialexclusion andthe socialpathologisation of identities. Living conditionsfor peoplewho self- identifyashomosexualshavebecomedifficult.The newlaw also promotes homophobiainRussia (Althaler2014,Hauer et al.1984: 22). As aconsequence,the media58 andpartsofthe Russiansociety have joinedstate authorities – among them the Russianpolice, thecompetent authoritiesof the ministry of interior affairs,and othersecurity services – in maintaining the heteronormativeorder. It hasbecomeacceptabletoadvocatethe punishment of non-heteronormativelifestylesortocallfor the liquidation of non-heterosexual people (cf. URL48).The incidenceofverbaland/ or physical attacks – mostly on homosexual men – hasrisen (URL 49, 50, 51, 52, 53).Brutal, dastard,and physically or mentallyharmful attackson homosexualsare notonlycarried outbyindividualsorsmall groupsof individuals. It hasbeenobservedthatpeople join certain unofficial organisations or privategangs which actagainst homosexualsand supporters of sexual minoritiesinanorganised andperfidious way. In SaintPetersburg, forinstance, agroup of so-called gayhunters (gei-khantery)has been

56 In contrasttothis, the Russian politician andmember of the LegislativeAssembly of Saint Petersburgfor the party United Russia (EdinaiaRossiia)Vitalii Milonov hasrepeatedlyvoicedhis opinion that homosexuality is acrime andhas likenedit to an illness (URL 43). 57 See, e.g.,the interviewbyCharlie Rose in 2015 (URL 44), anewscoverageonabc News (URL 45), andthe officialand publictreatment of homosexuals, e.g.,bythe police, demonstratedbythe coverage of dbate (URL 46)orbythe coverage of Vice News “Youngand GayinPutin’s Russia (URL 47). 58 As an example, Iwould like to mention here the Russian journalist Nikolai Troitskii who posted in his private blog:“Ihope andbelieve that thiskind of ugliness will nevercome to Russia. Idonot need thiskind of freedom anddemocracy. No kind of tolerance is enough,against your own will,you think about apowerfulbomb whichwould killonlythe homosexuals. To be honest, if allthese perverted creaturespeggedout, the world would be much cleaner.”For more information on thisstatement andonthe differentreactions to it,cf. the special issue of the television programme Pust’ govoriat [Let them speak]from2012 on this topic, including NikolaiTroitskii andselected guests with adifferentstanceonsexuality andhomosexuality;online at:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLLIPE7iT68& spfreload=10[last accessedon19September2015]. 90 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia established who literally trackdownand hunt homosexualpeople, LGBT activists,and anyoftheir sympathisers in ordertonameand exposethem in public. Themembers of thishomophobic formationbully andblackmail people;theydenouncehomosexualsand LGBT activists at work in order to destroytheir careersand to remove them fromtheir functions and positions.59 “Gay hunters”focus especially onpeopleworking in educa- tional institutions,liketeachers or kindergartenworkers,but also on actresses/actors, singers, politicians, andother officialsand functionaries. They write hate messages andthreatening letters, they postvideos on the Internet,giving namesand showingthe suspected victimdirectly, andthey contact employers andcolleagues. Homosexualsand gayactivists are seen as a“perverse shabbiness”(izvrashchennoe nichtozhestvo)and as “the face shovelsofRussia” (mogil’naia lopata Rossii)because of theirsexual orientation whichissaidtobeasign of their“non-patriotism”(ne- patriotizm). The“gayhunters”see themselves as “creators” (tvortsy). Con- sequently,theyare againstpeoplewho “destroy”(razrushaiut). They in- sinuatethatqueerness or queer activisms aimatweakening thestate andat destroying societyand culture(Ayoub/Paternotte 2014). Despitethese recent developments,itisinterestingtonotethatthe perception of both,sexualityand sexual identity hasundergone deep and profoundchanges during thepastfew decades as well as during thepast few centuries in general (Baer 2009, Healey 2014a, 2013,2001). There was actuallyatime,whensexuality andsexualidentity were more liberated and, moreover, notseen as strictly limitedwithin aheteronormative frame. In thecourse of Russia’s history, there have been periodsoftimewhen non-heteronormativesexualpracticeswere toleratedor, at least, perceived as something that canhappen. Indeed,there have been periods during whichsexualdesirewas notprimarily related to themaleorfemalegender. If one considerssexualidentityasthe connection between

the categories of biological and social gender as well as of sexual desire which functions as certain specifics thatconstruct apersonal and cultural

59 Read andwatch acoverage about “Huntingthe Rainbow” from 19 May2014 on lesbiriu.com; online at:http://lesbiru.com/2014/05/gay-hunters/ [last accessedon17 February2016]. Sexual Identity: Enforcing Heteronormativity 91

identity, increasinglyconsidering sexualityinparticular [transl.] (Kroll 2002: 360)60 thensexualdesireisneither directlynor generally related to abiological gender. Rather, sexual desire must be seen as apartofthe self-conceptofa person so that sexual desire is an essentialpartofthe individualidentity. In addition,thismeansthatthe sexual desire of aperson maydiffer fromthe generalnorm. Foralong time, this awarenessexistedwithinthe Russian society,too. It wasknown that somepeoplehad asexualdesirewhich deviatedfromthe traditional standardwhich meansthattheir sexual desire wasnot accordingtotheir sex. It wasneitherpropernor morally correctto talk in public aboutthose circumstances or to raisethissubjectinany way. This taboo concernedmainly homosexualpracticesbetween men. This does notmean that non-heteronormative sexual practicesand desires were acceptedortolerated by Russiansociety. It rathermeansthatidentity restrictions were not always thatrigid andthatdifferent identity concepts were knownornoticeable. In this context, however, one must notforgetthateventoday,homosexual activitiesand practicesare notunusual in heterosexual groupsin Russia. In particular, same-sex sexualactivitiesare used as an instrument of powerand as ameanstoestablish hierarchieswithinall male groups. This concerns mainly threesituations: First, in the RussianorformerSoviet-Russian armyand military institutionsaswellasinpenal institutions, homosexual practiceswere and continue to be used in thecontext of theso-called dedovshchina (Sperling 2015,Svetlichnaiaetal. 2012, Yusupova 2015). This informal practiceof establishing andmaintaining ahierarchicalorder betweenseniorand junior conscriptsor, respectively,between newand olderprisoners consists of mean-spirited,vile, andinfamous tasksand activitiesprescribedbythe “seniors” in ordertomortify, humiliate,and subduethe newconscriptsor inmates.Often,these practices are accompaniedbybrutalviolenceand sexual abuse, includingsame-sexsexualacts.61

60 Original:“Verbindungender Kategoriendes biologischenund dessozialenGe- schlechts sowie dessexuellen Begehrensals Merkmale, die eine personale und kulturelleIdentitätunter besondererBerücksichtigung derSexualitätkonstruieren.” 61 In alot of prisons, the inmates aredividedintothreegroups: the crimelords, “ordinary criminals”, andhomosexuals as the lowest caste (Yusupova2015: 54). 92 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

Second,especially after thepassingofthe propaganda law – seemingly heterosexual – menhavebegun to occasionally engage in homosexual practices withhomosexualmen in ordertoexposeand humiliate them because of their sexual orientation,using, in addition,fetishrituals whichare well-knownand wide-spreadinthe gayscene. Thesehomophobic and stigmatising criminalactsare notonly thesubjectofinternationalmedia coverage.The perpetratorsthemselvesfilmtheir actions andpostthemon the Internet.While thehomosexualsare publicly exposed, theirabusers themselvesare caughtinanobviouslyhomosexual act. Both examples show that practiceslikerapeare usedtooppresshomosexualsand,moreover, to reinforcethe dominanceofheteronormativity andofthe heterosexual male.Homosexual practicesare used,onthe onehand, as an instrument of demonstratingdominanceand powerand,onthe otherhand, as an instrument to show the weakness andhelplessnessofnon-heteronormativity. Third, it is well-known and generally confirmedintoday’s pedagogy andadolescentpsychologythatmen,maleyouths in particular, engage in homosexual practices of variouskinds in ordertoexperiencetheir own body andtogainsexualexperience. Althoughthiskindofliving out sexuality does notaim at subduing andhumiliating people,acertainkindof competition betweenmen can stillbefound. The20th centurywas theperiodofthe taboo on sexuality whichwas characterised by the strong tendency to declare sexualityasapublic taboo. Moreover, sexualitywas instrumentalised andintentionalised and, above all, it wasembeddedinarigidheterosexual frame. When the Soviet Russian civilrightscampaignerand political activist AlexandraKollontai, talking aboutthe creation of the “new woman” underLeninism,calledfor the liberation of sexuality,free love,and arestructuring of the sexual order so that sex(uality)and sexual practices wouldberegardedasbeing entirely natural, herviews andopinions – knownlater, andstill today, as the“glass of watertheory” (teoriiastakana vody) – were widelycriticisedand condemned as athreattomorality(Hohmann1990).The Sovietsex and

Homosexualsare isolated, whereas the “lords”and the “ordinary criminals” are allowedtomeetand gather.The programme Journal Reporter on the channel Deutsche Welle TV coveredthistopicinanissue about “EverydaylifeinaRussian penalinstitution” datingfrom2008; online at:www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIX 6uHREY2s [last accessedon17February2016]. Sexual Identity: Enforcing Heteronormativity 93 genderresearcherIgorSergeevichKon, oneofthe firstRussianscientists to studyhomosexuality,sexualminorities,and non-heteronormativecon- cepts of identity,was initially only able to have his earlyacademic papers on sexualityand sexual practices publishedabroad, in Europe,until his work waslater also published in (Soviet)Russia (Kon 2010, 1989). In Soviet Russia,sexualitywas ataboo topic rightupuntil thecollapse of socialism in 1989/ 1990.Gendermodels andsexualrelationshipswere ideologisedconstructsdefinedfor specific purposes andnot to be questioned.Publicdebateonthese subjects wasdiscouraged or notpossible at all. Thewell-knownand popularphrase“We do not have sex[in Russia] andweare categorically againstit!” (Nu,seksaunas net, imy kategoricheskiprotiv ėtogo)62 whichwas articulatedontelevisioninthe Soviet-American talk show Telemost Leningrad-Boston“WomenTalkto Women” (Telemost Leningrad-Boston.Zhenshchiny govoriatzzhenshchi- nami)on17July1986 testifiestothisgeneral – albeit naїve andabsolutely false – conviction(cf.URL 54).Bringingsexuality,sexualbehaviour, and sexual practices into the publicdomain, that meanstalking aboutsexuality andsexualpractices, reporting on them,ordiscussingthemopenly,was frownedupon.Sexuality wasmainlykeptbehindcloseddoors in theUSSR andwas entirely controlledbycentralisedinstitutions: theChurch, the school, andthe family.Infact,sex educationand sexual enlightenment as we understand themtodaywere virtuallynon-existent, or were not addressedbythese institutions in theway that might have been expected or as they are today(Kon2010).The regulated, ideologised treatment of sexuality meantthatidealswereprescribedand normsdefined which served to reinforce andperpetuatetraditionalgenderroles,setting up power structures basedonideological concepts andultimately also giving rise to subcultures(Štulhofer/ Sandfort2005).Moral andfamily values andtra- dition were in theinterest of politiciansand society; anylewdbehaviour, active indulgence in sexual relations or anyotherpractices representing not morality andchastity but simply the satisfactionoflust, were shrouded in

62 Today, thisphrase or the shorterversion VSSSR seksanet [There is no sexinthe USSR] is idiomaticallyusedtorefer to anon-objectiveand mythologised thinking, to evidentlyabsurd things, or to unrealisticcontents. These details canbefound on Wikipedia; online at:https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92_%D0%A1%D0%A1 %D0%A1%D0%A0_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0_%D0%BD %D0%B5%D1%82 [last accessed on 14 November 2015]. 94 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia silence – tabootopics. Developingand giving expression to individual identity, includingthe creation of asexualidentity,were notpermittedin public. When,followingPerestroika, post-Socialist Russia embarked on the road towardsdemocracy andpluralism,thisopenedupnew ways and opportunitiesfor the creation of personal identity or,rather, the free expression of individualism. This period can be called the opening up of sexuality.Itled to agradual opening up of public debate aboutgenderand sexuality.The whole subjectofsexuality wasfreed from the vice-like grip of ideologyand moralityand emerged fromthe hidden darkness into the glare of social debate.Talking openly aboutsexuality graduallybecamean acceptedpartofeverydaylife, somethingentirelynormal – even on television (e.g. on Russia’s firstsex talk show AboutThat (Pro ėto – hosted by ElenaAbdulaevna Khanga)(cf. URL55).The prudery whichusedtobeso prevalenthad apparently vanished. Sexualmatters could now be openly discussedoraddressed.Previouslybannedmedia carrying eroticor pornographiccontent(e.g. SPID Info)quickly becamewidespread.From the early 1990s, sexuality becamemorevisible in public,withthe opening of sexshopsand othercorresponding establishments (cf. URL56). Thosewho benefitedmost fromthe lifting of thetaboo on sexualityand especially fromits growingpresenceinRussian societywere sexual minoritiesorindividualswho didnot want to be forced into the clearly definedheteronormative scheme.Gradually, amoreliberal attitude emerged,especially towards homosexuals, whohad long sufferedre- pression,persecution, andexclusion.The emancipationofsexuality that beganinthe early 1990sled in 1993 to the abolition of Article121 which hadmadehomosexualpractices apunishableoffence fordecades. As a resultofthe legalisation of homosexuality – whichcoincidedwithRussia joiningthe CouncilofEurope in 1996 – the publicexpression of this sexual identitywas no longerdiagnosed as psychiatric illness.Thismeantthat people leadingnon-heteronormative lives could graduallyestablish their ownidentity andpubliclyexpress theirsexualinclinations andpre- ferences.63

63 This resulted in thefirst gaymarriageinRussia. In September 2005, Denis Gogolev andMikhailMorozov from Nizhnii Novgorod signedacontract of civilunion in the presenceofanotary(http://www.gay.ru/news/rainbow/2005/09/28-5967.htm). Sexual Identity: Enforcing Heteronormativity 95

Themoreopenapproach to sexualityinevitablylaidthe foundations for the period of sexual deviance anddecadence which beganapproximately fromthe late 1990s. This period wascharacterisedbythe widespread eroticisationand sexualisationofwomen – both in themedia andin everydaylife. Consequently,women emerged as strong, dominant, and self-confidentindividuals, yet, they were at thesametimestereotypedas erotic objects of desire andlust(Menzel 2013,cf. also Kirilina 2015). For men, as alreadyshown above, this meantthe loss of theirposition of dominanceaswellastheir role as protectors. Thesegradual shifts in the relationships betweenmen andwomen andthe changing genderrole models ledtothe aforepresented crisis of masculinity (Baer 2009,Healey 2001,Scholz/Willms 2008, cf. also Connell1995).Moreover, amore differentiatedideaofmasculinity (cf. the tendency of metrosexuality)and otheridentityconceptsliketranssexualityand genderqueer have been showing ahighsocialinfluence andare thereforecontinuously used as productiveand creativeelements especially in themedia which hasled to a visibleirritationamong men(Hall et al.2013). Today, in turn,Russia runs through theperiod of the return to a traditionalmoral valuesystem.Sexuality is locatedinthe fieldoftension between, on theone hand, aliberal, free-thinkingattitudethathas become established in many partsofsociety and, on theother hand,the traditional moral values that are being propagated,primarily in politicaland Church circles, andvigorously promotedtothe general public.Sexualityis positioned on abinaryaxiswithroles traditionally divided. At the same time, the conceptofheteronormativity is now acquiring anew importance. Theideaofthe “three children-marriage” as norm is oneexample of a socio-politicalmeasurewhich aims at preserving thedesired hegemonial andheteronormative structuresfor lifestyleand societyand reviving awarenessofthisway of life. Looking at thecurrent discourse, homosexuality is widelyconsidered as theenemy (formoredetail, see below).Itisseenasaprojection screenfor everythingnegativeaswellas forabnormality,decadence, anddeviancethatenter Russiafromthe Western worlddue to Europeanisationand globalisation.Moreover, it seemstobeabsolutelyout of step with Russiancultureand lifestyle.While

Their churchwedding hadalreadytakenplaceafew yearsbefore (http://www.xs.gay.ru/?id=120255365). 96 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

Western states trytosupport,topositively andefficiently use, and, in particular, to protect identity diversity, Russia is stuckinarigidgender dichotomy andintends to reject anddenynon-heteronormative lifestyles. While Western states trytointegrate non-heteronormative lifestyles andto give sexual minoritiesthe same rights thatheterosexual people enjoy, Russiareliesonconservativeand traditionalvalues, supports the traditional familymodeland appealstothe traditional genderdivision as to ideas, roles, andfunctions.Moreover, theregulationofsexualidentity is used or instrumentalisedinorder to establishanewcollectiveidentity again accordingtowhichpeople of onesex have thesamespecifics.Itis generally assumed that asocio-culture is distinguished by homogeneity whichalsoincludesthe sexual identity of peopleand ignoresthe actually always givenheterogeneityofasociety thisway (Kroll 2002:219). It is interestingtonoticethatitismainly the Russianman whose identityiscurrently discussedinthe fieldofthe globally changing gender orders andgenderideas in Russia.Asone couldalready seeinthe chapters above,itisobviously the Russianman andthe idea of masculinityin generalwhichare at the centreofattention when thequestionofnon- heteronormative lifestyles,patterns, andideas is raised. This might be,to someextent, duetothe currenttendencyto(re-)establish againthe traditional idea of masculinity andthe adequate position of theman within Russian society.And, finally,itisobviously the homosexual manorthe manwith ahomosexual attitudewho is criticised,attacked, andstigmatised in this context. To demonstratethis, Iwouldlike,atthe endofthischapter, to draw the reader’s attentiontosomerecent events which fuelledthe debatespertaining to gender rolesand gender ideasaswellastothe norm of heteronormativity. Thediscussions on theseeventsdemonstrate respectivelythatRussiansociety is highly influencedbythe currentgender policies andthe gender discourseinRussia as well as,ofcourse, by the currently applicable propaganda law. However, it shows aboveall how deeply dividedRussiansociety is today, oscillatingbetween traditionalism andnon-heteronormativity,with apart of theRussiansacknowledgingand appreciatinggenderdiversity andtoleratingaflexible ideaofmasculinity andwithanotherpartrelying on andadheringstrictly to traditional ideasof manand woman. Last but notleast,these events make clear that the idea of homosexuality or of non-heteronormativity respectivelyisnot only usedto stigmatisemaleindividuals, butitisalsoinstrumentalisedinorder to Queering Male Identity in Art and Sports Changes Russian Reality 97 constructeverydaystructures,activities, andphenomena according to traditional gender ideasand to assess andtocategorisethemasmasculine or feminine and, consequently,asacceptable or “normal” or inacceptable or “abnormal” respectively (see also thefollowingchapter on identity, space, andnation).

8QueeringMaleIdentityinArt andSports ChangesRussianReality

In thefollowing, Iwillprovide examplesfromthe art sphere in the widest sense. As theballetchoreographerJohnNeumeiersaidin2013, artand culture maybuild bridgeswithinsociety as well as betweenpeopleand cultures(cf. URL57).Culture andart mayestablishunderstanding and make people thinksothatthese spheres are potentiallycapable of mediating betweenpolitics,everydaylife, andpeople.Nonetheless, the perception andappreciation of artisalways discursivelyshaped. Artis assessed on thebasis of one’s ideas andopinion so that people make demandsonart fortheywish theiropinion andideas to come aliveand to be confirmedinand by art.Consequently,art always takesthe risk of being notappreciated andofbeingrejected. In Russia,somereactions on recent cultural andart events were obviouslymeanttoexpresssomepeople’s attitude visávis thecurrently globally changinggenderordersand thehighly visible identity diversity. So,while in 2012 somepeople in SaintPetersburgleftthe audience becauseofasame-sexmalepas de deux in John Neumeier’schoreography of – ThomasMann’shomoerotic novel – DeathinVenice,interpreting this staging as homosexual propaganda, thebiggerpartofthe audience acclaimedthe ballet performance, showing deep appreciation forits choreography (cf. URL58).Quite apartfromthe factthatthisballetis basedonanoveldealing with ahomosexual theme whichmust be,of course,expressedinthe ballet as well, thepiece takesintoaccount the current ideasofman andwoman in ouractualreality.Ironically, it is the ballet – an art form knownfor giving theillusionofaperfect worldwith traditional gender roleswhere womenare depicted as fragile andweak creaturesand menasleading andstrongcharacters – whichdeals critically with gender rolesand, especially,malenon-compliancewithhetero- 98 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia normativity.One canobserveahomoerotic subjectinSwan Lake64 or in La Peri whereeunuchsasnon-heteronormative characters play an important role in theplay.65 Oftenthese aspectsare consciously – or maybeun- consciously – ignored andsuppressedortheyare not registeredand observed duetoobvious nescience. Currently,the ballet increasingly picks up thechangingideaofmasculinity andstagesdifferent concepts of masculinitywhichbecomes, in addition, visiblelooking at modern ballet pieces,like Five SensitiveMen (cf. URL59), Castrati66, TheDying Swan, performedbyVladimir Malakhov(cf. URL60),orKyliàn/ Duato (cf. URL 61).All thesepiecesshowthatmasculinitycan also be characterised by fragility, weakness,and suffering. In this context, one must notforgetother queer arteventslike the Eurovision Song Contestwhich is thetopic of this volume. TheEurovision Song Contesthas always been knownasastageofqueer popculture and performanceaswellasasettingofqueer identity (Cassiday2014, Motschenbacher2013,2012, cf. also Sullivan 2003). And here, Iwould like to anticipate thefact that Russianpeoplenoticethe queerness of this eventand they obviouslyaccept thisspecificaswellasthe performing queer artists. As to ConchitaWurst,itmustbementioned here that many Russian televoters votedfor thedrag-queen in 2014. According to the telephone vote, Conchita Wurstwould have reachedeight points which wouldhaveactuallymeantthe thirdplace for“hir”inthiscompetition. However, it wasthe official Russiannationaljurywhichboycottedthe singer by giving zeropoints (e.g. URL62, 63, 64,65, 66). Afterthe event, the Russianmedia aimedatincitingantipathy against Conchita Wurstand non-traditional identities, showingmost oftenpeople whoproclaimedtheir negativestanceonnon-traditionalidentities andseemingly hiding, to some

64 Seesome choreographies online at:www.welt.de/print-welt/article522078/Coming- out-am-Schwanensee.html andwww.zeit.de/1976/20/das-leben-der-tanz-traum-ein es-romantischen-prinzen [all last accessed on 16 January 2016]. 65 An interesting interview about masculinityinballet, male diversity, andthe new role of men in ballet andinsocietytodayaswellasonnon-heteronormative male identities wasgiven by male dancersfromthe Berlin State Ballet,in: Bewegte MännerimGespräch [Emotional MeninConversation]:Magazin. Staatsballett Berlin, 4, 2015/ 2016, without page. 66 Seeherethe interviewwithmale dancersfromthe Berlin State Ballet,in: Bewegte MännerimGespräch [Emotional MeninConversation]:Magazin. Staatsballett Berlin, 4, 2015/ 2016, without page. Queering Male Identity in Art and Sports Changes Russian Reality 99 extent,positivereactionsonthe singer. Whileinternationally knowncele- brities likeJennifer Lawrence showedtheir solidarity by wearing abeardin public,Russianmen organised theflash mob Dokazhi, chto ty ne Konchita Vurst [Demonstratethatyou arenot Conchita Wurst].Inthisinitiative, Russian menparticipated who ridthemselvesoftheir beards. Aftershaving theyposted pictures or videosonthe Internet in ordertodemonstratetheir masculinity(e.g. URL67, 68,69).The female equivalent wascharacterised by more toleranceand support.Women drew,stuck,orphotoshopped beards on theirface andpostedtheir “funny” (smeshnye)picturesonthe Internet (c.f. URL70).Asaconsequence, thisevent also showsquite bluntlyhow deeply splitthe Russiansociety is today. Thelastexample,Iwouldlike to mention here is theintroductionofa newruleinsports. It wasRussiawhich organisedthe WorldAquatics Championships in Kazan in 2015,where menwere forthe firsttime allowedtoparticipateinsynchronised swimming. This kind of parti- cipationwhich, of course,could be interpretedasastep forward towards the “feminisationofmasculinity”standsinstrikingcontrasttothe current genderpoliciesinRussia, which wasarticulatedassuchbythe Russian minister of sports Vitalii Mutkoaswellasbyathletes, like thesynchronised swimmers Natal’ia Ishchenko andViktoriia Fadina or theswimmerEvgenii Korotyshkin whoall seesynchronisedswimming as an exclusivelyfemale sportand do notwish to see“hairylegs” in theswimming pool (URL 71, 72, 73). And once again, themedia functionhereasamouthpiece forboth, Russian politics andthe people who affirmand upholdthe current rigid genderpolicies. Underthe authorityofRussian politics,the mediatries to reach andtowin over thoseinRussiansociety whosupports the current politicalcourse, by marginalising and, finally, excluding thosewho actuallydonot sympathise with Putin’sregimeand whoconsequently hinder theexpansion of the nationally andpatriotically orientedgender policies.Insomecases,the media ridicule themales participatinginthis sport, usingsuspect argumentation strategiesand showingdubiousand trivial documentation material (cf. URL74).Theycharacterisesyn- chronised swimming in aheteronormativesense as agracile,aesthetic,and feminine sport, although at the beginning, when this sportcameupinthe 19th century, it wasexclusivelyseen as amalesport.Onthe Internet,one can find many readers’ entrieswhich criticisethe decisiontoallow males to participateinsynchronisedswimming. Malesynchronisedswimmers are 100 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia associated with gaymen (and, thereforenot “real”men)whichisregarded as an embarrassment(nepriiatnost‘)and ashame (pozor)for Russia as this sortofbehaviour generally fails to correspond to both Russianculture and Russian patriotism. In this context, anumberofamateur entrieswere publishedonthe Internet which condemnedmen’s participationinsyn- chronised swimming. They are, forexample,“dedicated to those abnormal things that happen in swimming poolswhenengaging in thesportof synchronised swimming”(posviashchaetsia temrazvratnym otnosheniiam, kotorye tvoriatsia vbasseinakh po povodu sinkhronnogo plavaniia)(URL 75).Yet,itmust be explicitlymentionedthatthere are also positive reactionsastothis novum even thoughthe reasons forthe supportand the affirmationofthe male participation aredifferent. In somecases,the affirmativeattitudeisbased on the basic idea of establishing gender equality. When womenmay officially participate in football or boxing,soit goes to say, thenmen also mayparticipatein, forexample,synchronised swimming. In othercases,the affirmationofmaleparticipationinsyn- chronised swimming is more nationally andpatriotically motivated. For instance, because theRussian duet,comprising AleksandrMaltsev andDa- rina Valitova,has wonlastyear’sWorld Championshipinsynchronised swimming in Kazan, they are immediately seen as molodtsy ‘good guys’ andenjoy ahighersupportand appreciation withinthe Russian society (URL 76,77, 78). Allthese examplesshow thatitisneither fairnor justifiedtogeneralise the perceptionand assessment of thecurrent gender andsexualpoliciesin Russia. While it seems – mostly fromaninternational perspective – that “all Russians” or, at least, themajority of Russiansociety rejectsanew non-heteronormativegenderorder, onemust admitthatthe media play a very important role in creating thisimpression. It is notonlythe current genderpoliciesthattry to regulategenderideas,genderroles,and sexual desire. To agreatextent, it is also themedia whichassumethe role of an identitymodulator. By doingso, themedia have createdasplit in Russian society whichisolates thoseopento“new” genderroles andideas beyond heteronormativity fromthe mainstream. Consequently,generalisations on this topicare notpermitted. With this in mind, Iwillapproach theinvestigation of the discourseongenderand sexualityinthe context of ConchitaWurst andthe EurovisionSongContest, knowingfullwellthat every research findingisonly alittlepiece of thecomplexand confuse Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing Russian National Identity 101

“discoursepuzzle” andthatthese results only illuminate onediscourse among many.

9Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing RussianNational Identity

In recent years,Russiaisseeking forits nationalidentity or,more specifically, it is seeking away of reconstructing, rethinking, andre- definingits national identity.This becomesobvious,whenone takesa closer look at theRussian media andwhenone observes what kind of politicalsteps are takentoreconstruct andmaintain Russian national identity. Currently,two approaches have gained importancefor theRussian discourseonthe (re)constructionofnationalidentity. Firstofall,one observes arisinginfluence of space andspatiality whichplayanin- creasingly relevantrole forthe discourseonnation andnational identity. Secondly,the strategyofrefusaland dissociation hasbecomeverycommon in discussions aboutthe stateand aboutthe developmentofnational identityalthough the use of thesetwo approaches is notatall anew phenomenon. Yet, theyhavebecome very popularinrecentyears probably duetothe current politicalcircumstances.67 Usingaspatialperspectivetofind,construct,and define national identityisanold approach which Russiansaswellasother socio-cultures have been applying forseveralcenturies.68 It is especially the relationship betweenRussia andEuropewhich hasplayedthe leadingroleinthiscon- text.Recently, the interconnection of space(Russia)and nation(Russian/s) hasbeenextendedbytwo additional categories, namely genderand sexuality both of whichhaveanenormous impact on theconstructionof Russiaasastateand the Russians as anation,whereas space andnation have,inturn, agreat influenceonthe constructionofgenderand sexual identity(Baer 2009,Essig1999, JeffersonLenskyj 2014, Nohejl 2013a, Nohejl et al.2013, Riabov 2007, Stella/Nartova2016,cf. also Johnston

67 The same applies to otherpost-Socialist countries. Forinstance, Canakis and Kersten-Pejanić (2016)investigate how nationalidentities andspace in generalare linguisticallyconstructedinthe Balkans, by analysinggraffiti anddrawingson wallsinBelgradeand Athens. 68 An excellent overview on the construction of Russian andSoviet-Russian national identityoverthe centuriesisgiven by Regine Nohejl et al.(2011,2010). 102 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

2005,Persson2015).69 Here, the polydimensionalcharacterofidentity becomesvisible (Scheller-Boltz2015b).Different identity concepts are tightlyconnected with eachotherand are usedtoconstruct,tothink and, as onecan seewith theexample of Russia,toregulate otheridentity concepts.

Diagram1:The polydimensionalityofidentityinthe contextofgender, sexuality, andnation

Investigating theconstruction of gender andidentitybymeansofspatiality and, in turn,the construction of space by meansofgenderand identityisan approach or aperspective known as researchongendergeographies or gen- derspaces(e.g. Binnie 2004,Wastl-Walter2010, cf. also Schor-Tschud- nowskaja2011, Yuval-Davis 1997),gay spaces(e.g. Benwell/Stokoe 2006,Binnie2004, cf.alsoHenshaw 2014), geographies of sexuality (e.g. Binnie/ Valentine 1999,Browneetal. 2007)aswellasonqueer geographies or queer spaces (e.g. Binnie 2004, Browneetal. 2007, Browning 1996,Johnston2010,2005, Wünsch 2005,cf. also Baer 2009, Stella 2013, 2012,Stella/ Nartova 2016) or on “gendered,sexed andsexuallinguistic landscapes”,asCanakis andKersten-Pejanić (2016: 131) putitintheir recent investigation of the linguistic constructionofspace andnationalism in agenderand sexual context in Belgrade andAthens(cf. also Binnie 1997,Edensor 2002, Lembevski 1999, Nagel1998).Inthiscontext,space is notonly considered as amaterial andthree-dimensionalstructure, butit

69 Cf.Nohejl et al.(2011,2010) who analysethe construction of (Russian)national identityinand through space by applying the principleofsvoi—chuzhoi and discussing nationalquestions in the contextofgender. Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing Russian National Identity 103 is also predominantly seen as an abstractfield or an area whichiscon- structedbysocialinteraction (Wastl-Walter2010:28f). Wastl-Walter demonstrates this by using the example of the labour market.

The labour market cannot be measured, mapped, or even illustrated three- dimensionally. Nevertheless, the labour market is aspace of action which is sociallyconstructed andinfluenced by political and economic interests so that it offers some people more flexibilitythanothers [transl.] (Wastl-Walter 2010:29).70

Consequently, regardingthe interconnectionbetween gender identity and space, onecan conclude that in everydaylife, gender andgenderstereo- typesare anchored in aspatialcontext in thesamemannerinwhichspace is gendered andidentified by thepeoplewho actand interactinitaccording to theirgenderidentity(Wastl-Walter2010: 13). Space as an areaofactingand social constructionfunctions a) as a systemoforientation forcategorisingand arrangingthe world, b) as a normative structure whichdeterminesand regulatesactsand patterns of behaviour as well as the expectationsconcerning behaviour, andc)asa symbolic systeminwhichevery actionand performativity is imbuedwith senseand meaning (Wastl-Walter2010:32f). In this context, the entities of genderand gender identityare relevant andinherent featuresofspace and fulfil an influential function foraspace to existand to be recognisedas such. Spacemakes thepeoplewithinit(inter)act andbehaveinaway whichcomplieswith predominant gendernorms.People themselves, in turn, (inter)actwithinaspace in aprescribedway to, finally,makethe space confirmand maintain itsfunctions.

[N]ot onlydopeoplemake spaces, butalso spaces make people, by constrainingthembut also by offering opportunities foridentityconstruction (Benwell/Stokoe 2006:211).

70 Original:“DenArbeitsmarkt kann man nicht vermessen, kartierenodersogar dreidimensionalabbilden. Dennochist derArbeitsmarkt einHandlungsraum, der sozial konstruiert, durchpolitische und ökonomische Interessen beeinflusst wird und somit einigenIndividuenmehr Spielraumlässtals anderen.” 104 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

We noticethe extent to which space determinesidentityand to which identitydeterminesspace, when we look at theconstruction of sexual identityvia spatiality andofspace viasexualityrespectively.For example, the constructionofspace as aheteronormativesystemorasahomophobic area respectively is thereason whyhomosexual people getthe impression of being only amarginal part or,indeed, no part of thecorrespondingspace and, consequently,ofbeing outside of thisspace (Motschenbacher 2010, Wastl-Walter2010).71 This realisation influences non-heterosexuals to behave andtoperform in acertain waywhich, in theend,confirms andmain- tains heterosexualityasanormativeformofexistencewithinthatspace.

For this reason, theydenytheir sexuality. However, that does notfacilitate the realisation of their lifeconcepts of living but makes them invisible. Once again, this stabilises heterosexuality as the normative categoryofsexuality [transl.] (Wastl-Walter 2010: 77).72

If one wantstostudy the conceptofspace in Russian studiesone hasto keep in mind thetraditional divisionbetween svoi ‘own,self’ and chuzhoi ‘alien, other’.These categoriesbelongtothe traditional worldview or worldconcept (kartina mira)ofthe Russianpeoplewhich have an enormous influenceonshapingand constructingtheir collectiveidentity andonwhich theRussian people relieswhendefining theRussiannation and, consequently,the Russianidentity(Schor-Tschudnowskaja2011).The Russian kartina mira contains twospecificparameters:the worldoutside Russiaingeneral (chuzhoi)and Russia on itsown in particular(svoi). Constructingthe ideaof“one’s own” andseparating this identity from“the other” as an alienidentitymeanstoconceptualise theworld exclusively fromthe Russianperspective. Theperceptionofthe world is basedonan egocentric worldviewand is governed by one’s ownvalue system, consisting of cultural,political, legal, andother factors. Thus,“the othernessofthe alien” andits division from “the own” are constructions

71 Seehereadditionallythe works by Baer (2009), Benwell/ Stokoe (2006:esp. 214), Binnie(2004), JeffersonLenskyj (2014), Persson (2015), Persson/ Petersson (2014), Waaldijk/ Clapham(1993). 72 Original:“Aus diesemGrund verleugnensie ihre Sexualität, wodurch jedochdie Lebenskonzepte nicht einfacher realisierbar, sondern unsichtbarwerdenund dies aufs Neuedie Heterosexualität alsnormative Form derSexualitätstabilisiert.” Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing Russian National Identity 105 thatare exclusivelybased on the“construction of one’sown” andmust be interpretedasaresult of thisconstructed “own”identity(Metzeltin/ Wallmann2010:esp.41).However, as Schor-Tschudnowskajanotices,the processofdefining“own” and“other” is asubjectiveprocesswhich has nothinginherentlyuniversal.

To characterise something as “alien”doesnot provide anyrealspecifics about the nature of the “alien object”. To describe something as alien is relative, because the categorisation of something as aliendepends on one’s ownspecific perspective. Something onlybecomes alien by virtue of one’s own definition. Onceagain, this underlineshow strongly the categories of one’s “own” andthe “alien” are intertwined [transl.] (Schor-Tschudnowskaja 2011: 111).73

TheRussian worldmodelasaprocessofperceiving“the self”and “the other” showsthat“theself” and“the other” are intertwined so that “the self”or“the own” inevitablygives birthto“the other”. Consequently, identitycontains“the own”,whichmeans “the I”, “the we”, “the our” whichdirectly includesthe reference to “the other” (Schor-Tschud- nowskaja2011: 68). TheRussian kartina mira with itsexplicitspatial and, therefore, geographical orientationresemblesthe conceptofsocialspace,presented by Bourdieu(1991: esp. 231).Bourdieuhimself alludes to thegeographical perspective, comparing hissocialspace to ageographical one. Both concepts containasocial constituent, focusonidentity fromaspatialper- spective, andhavetobeseenexclusively as constructions.Inasocial space, allactors, groups,orinstitutions exhibitthe more common characteristics the closertheystand to each other. Allactors, participating in asocialspace,formasvoi-communityinwhichtheyshare thesame ideas andtakethe same or,atleast, averysimilarperspective to seeand interpretthe worldsothattheyperceiveand evaluate theirenvironment in almost thesameway (Bourdieu 1989).The spacethat meansthe worldthey

73 Original:“DieZuschreibung ‚fremd‘ stellt keine Information überwahre Eigen- schaften des ‚fremden Objekts‘ zurVerfügung.Fremdheit ist relativ, sieist von einem spezifischenStandpunkt, nämlich demdes ‚Eigenen‘ abhängig;erst die eigene Definitionsleistungmacht etwasfremd – darin kommterneut die enge Verschränkungzwischen ‚Eigenem‘ und ‚Fremden‘ zumAusdruck.” 106 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia know is perceivedand interpretedassomething that is naturaland self- evident(Bourdieu 1989: 19). Yet, it is notonlythe perspectiveonthe worldorthe interpretation of what is perceivedwhichleadtoahomo- genisation of thecommunity.Itisalsothe intention to assimilate andto mergewiththe community.

[A]gents classifythemselves, expose themselves to classification, by choosing, in conformity with their taste, different attributes(clothes, typesof food, drinks, sports,friends) that go welltogether and that go well with them, or, more exactly, suit their position. To be more precise, theychoose, in the space of available goodsand services, goods that occupyapositioninthis space homologous to theposition they themselves occupyinsocialspace. This makesfor the fact that nothing classifies somebodymore than theways he or she classifies (Bourdieu 1989: 19f).

Theperception andinterpretation of what one sees as well as phenomena, objects,or(socially presumed personal)behaviour areexclusivelycon- structedbysociety andtheyall gettheir meaningand importanceonlyin relation to or in comparison with other entities.Consequently,differences do notexist, but are discursivelycreated by relating, comparing,and by realisingthemasbeing different to “one’s own” (Benwell/ Stokoe 2006: 214).Asocial space whichfulfilsthe function of asymbolically arranged systemleadstoanobvious manipulation of “the self”and “the other” by presumed ideas andconstructed perceptions (Bourdieu 1989). Russia’sconstructionofits ownnational identity hasconstantly taken place withinthe conflict betweenEastand West andhas been shaped in dependence of (Western)Europe.

“Europe” – as much as the “West – represents important componentsofthe Russian identity. Overthe centuries, Slavophilesand Westernisers, Bol- sheviks and Eurasians,Liberals and Conservatives questioned the idea of whether Russia is aEuropean countryand whether we ought to intend to become apartofEurope[transl.](Riabova/ Tsalko 2011: 206).74

74 Original:“«Европа», равнокак и«Запад», представляютсобой важные компоненты российскойидентичности; на протяжении столетий отечест- веннаямысль влице славянофилов изападников, большевиковиевразийцев, либералов иконсерваторов задавалась вопросом, является ли Россияевро- пейскойстраной идолжнылимыстремитьсястать частью Запада.” Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing Russian National Identity 107

However, theproblem of regardingand defining Russiaasapart of Europe becomesnot only visible from the Russianperspective, but this seemstobe also challenging from aWestern European pointofview(Krejčí 1959).

Does Russia belong to Europe? Or is it aspecial cultural realmwhich does not onlyfollow its ownspecific historical path, but which pursues its own goals andstrives to liveuptoits own ideals which have nothing in common with the “European” ones? [transl.] (Tschižewskij/ Groh1959: 1).75

Over thecenturies,Russiaand Europe have been regarded andcategorised as differentspaces.Yet,the precise stance on both spaces andtheir evaluation hasalwaysdependedonthe particular group propagatingthis position.Inthe 19th century, the Slavophiles were drawntothe Russian nationand culture whilethe zapadniki ‘Westernisers’supported apro- Western movement with astrongfocus on Europe,wishing Russia to become more like Europe.76 Russia’s attitude towardsEurope hasnot changedmuchinrecentyears.Onthe one hand, we can observepeople whoshowapro-European and, in this regard,ananti-Putin stance. On the otherhand, there is agroup of Putinsupporters who back Putin’spolitics andthe idea of RussiaasaGreatPower in theworld which aboundsin tradition andculture.The recent politicaldecisions andsocio-political measures deepen the splitbetween thesegroups even further. Theanti- European andpro-Europeantendencydemonstrates thefragmentation of

75 Original:“Gehört Rußland zu Europa?oderist es eine besonderekulturelle Welt, die nicht nur ihre eigenen geschichtlichen Wegegeht, sondern dabeiauchihre eigenenZieleverfolgtund ihreneigenen Idealen zustrebt, die mitden „europäi- schen” nichts zu tun haben?” 76 Seeinmore detail Geier(1996)aswellasRiabov/Riabova (2014). Geier (1996: 1) says that relations andperceptions between Russiaand Europe have existed for about half amillennium.Theyhavealmost neverbeenbased on sufficientknow- ledge of each other or on mutualexchange. Rather,theyhavebeenand still are characterised by alackofknowledge concerningthe other,bydistrust andanti- pathy, fear,hostilityand hatredaswellasbyprejudice anddefamation. Original: “Seitetwa einem halben Jahrtausend bestehenBeziehungen und Wahrnehmungen zwischenRußland und Europa.Sie warenund sind kaum durchhinreichende Kenntnisse voneinander,von gegenseitigem Austauschgetragen. Vielmehr waren und sind sie geprägtvon Unwissen überdas Gegenüber,von Mißtrauenund Ab- neigung, Furcht und Angst, Haßund Feindschaft, von Vorurteilen und Nachreden”. 108 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia the Russiannation as well as thedesperate searchand maintenanceof Russia’snational identity. Europe – which is todayrathersynonymouswiththe European Union – stillplays an important role forRussiaaswellasfor Russiannational identity.77 However, if oneconsidersthe currentdiscourse, it becomes clear thatthe generalmood is directedagainstapro-Europeanorientation, with the anti-European voices highlydominating thenational climate. Fromthe Russian perspective, (Western)Europeisseenasun-Russian, whereas RussiaisperceivedasNon-European (Healey2010).Inthis context, it is interestingtonotethatthe construction of Russiannationalidentity is not basedonthe principleofaffirmationinorder to conclude what is Russian todayand whatcan be seen as characteristic forRussia. Rather, theRussian politiciansand agreatpart of theRussian society use astrategyofrefusal anddissociation to construct aRussian national identityonthe basisof what Russia andthe Russian nation are significantly not. The“self”does notplayanimportant role in this discourse. Thefocus is mainly on the “alien” fromwhichone’s ownidentity is deduced. Today, allthings whichare European are, allegedly, unknown and undesirable forRussia.Theyare seen as something that causesworries and danger(Schor-Tschudnowskaja2011: 64).Consequently,Russian, that is to saynon-Europeancharacteristics,are held in higher andmorepositive esteem than European.78

Since individuals strivefor apositive self-imageingeneral, theytend to increase the value of their own social group(s) and to devaluate alien group(s) when making social classifications in order to shed apositive light on their own self-imagebyeither highlighting theiraffiliation with or distance from agroup [transl.] (Schor-Tschudnowskaja2011: 93).79

77 Cf.herethe similar situation in Serbia,asshown by Canakis andKersten-Pejanić (2016). 78 Especiallyinthe 1990s andalso at the beginning of the 21st century, Europehad a highstandingamongRussians. Russiaintendedtoadopt (Western) European values andstandards to demonstrate itsprogress towards amodernand democratic state.Duringthat era, alot of Russianslooked towards Europeand hadthe wish to emulatethe European lifestyle. 79 Original:“Da IndividuenimGroßenund Ganzen einpositivesSelbstbild anstreben, tendierensie daherbei sozialenKlassifizierungen zurAufwertungder Eigen- Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing Russian National Identity 109

Onefeature, whichiscurrentlyatthe core of Russia’s debate over what is Russian or non-Russian, is theconcept of non-heteronormativity. Deeming non-heteronormativity as European andUn-Russianor, respectively,non- homosexuality as un-Europeanand therefore Russianincreasingly advances to ameaningful andinfluential criterion fordistinguishing Russia fromEurope(Baer 2009,JeffersonLenskyj 2014, cf. also Baker2005). Today, more andmoreEuropeancountries give thesameoralmost the same rights to sexual minoritieswhich heterosexual people andcouples have been enjoying foryears.Moreover, somecountries,likeSweden, place great valuetoday on agender-neutral educationofchildrenand young people. This includesusing gender-neutral toys, playing gender- neutral games, andeducatinginsuchawayastoallow children to explore allkinds of gender roles, irrespectiveofsex.Thistendencystands in strikingcontrasttothe generalassumptionsofRussian society. Putin’s currentpolitical course propagates a“traditionalhetero-patriarchalnationa- lism”, as it is called by Aizenstain (2014), whichenshrines themythofthe essential, naturally givenheterosexuality (Healey 2014,cf. also Sullivan 2003:81).InRussia, heterosexuality is appliedasasymbolic assetwhich comeswith “symbolicpower” (Bourdieu1991) andexcludeseveryone who is not heterosexual.The heterosexual family andchildrenare givenahigh statustoday,because theydonot only fosterthe continuation of thefamily, buttheyalso servetoensurethe continualexistence of Russiansociety and the strengtheningofthe Russiannation.

National Identity ↓↓ gender sexuality

-gender identity(ies) -sexual identity(ies) -gender ideas -sexual orientation -gender roles -sexual desire(s) -gender stereotypes → regulationofgender identity(ies) → regulationofsexual identity(ies) Table1:Constructing national identitythrough gender andsexuality

gruppe(n) und Abwertungder Fremdgruppe(n),umdas eigene Selbstbildper Zu- gehörigkeit und/oder Abgrenzung positiverscheinen zu lassen.” 110 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

With regard to homosexuality, it is obvious that Russia useshomo- sexuality,“imaginedintermsofeffeminacy andemasculation”(Baer 2009: 2),for politicalpurposes, especially to pursueits anti-Western political course (Kon 2013).Emancipationaswellasdiscussions on genderand sexuality are interpreted as aWesternimportwhoseonlyaim is “toweaken Russian manhoodand Russia’s power” (JeffersonLenskyj 2014: 13). The discussion surroundingthe rejectionofhomosexuality by the Russian nationfocuses in particular on Russianmasculinity (Kondakov2012b).Itis the manwho playsthe pivotal role in demonstrating strengthand power andwho transfersthese characteristics onto thenation.

The concept of nation is based on theconcept of the gender binary in its diverse, but always hierarchical conditions. [...]The modernnational state is consideredasbeing autonomous,but it is the male citizens who give the powertothe state.Atthe same time,anideaofmasculinityormaleness came up which had to differfrom the idea of femaleness and femininity [transl.] (Eckert 2013: 164f).80

Masculinity becomesthe criterion of Russiannational identityaswellas the factordetermining theplace of Russiansociety in relationtoother societies andtoother spaces such as Western Europe.

Мuzhik – this is asignificant marker of the current Russian identity(Riabov/ Riabova 2008: 254).81

The own men are themost masculine.The own women arethe most feminine (Riabova/ Tsalko 2011: 207).82

TheRussianman functionsasa“symbolic border guard” (Riabova/ Tsalko 2011)who regulatesthe identity of allmales accordingtohis own identity

80 Original:“Das KonzeptNationbasiertauf demKonzeptZweigeschlechtlichkeit in seinen vielfältigenaberimmer hierarchischen Verhältnissen.[...] Dermoderne Na- tionalstaat wird alsautonom verstanden, demdie männlichenBürgerihreMacht übertragen.Zur gleichenZeitentstandein Verständnis von Männlichkeit oder Männlich-Sein, dassich von einem Verständnis von Weiblich-SeinoderWeiblich- keit abgrenzen musste.” 81 Original:“Мужик –это значимая маркировка современнойрусскости.” 82 Original:“Свои мужчины –самыемужественные,Свои женщины–самые женственные.” Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing Russian National Identity 111 andwho keepsthe space free of identities that do notfit thedominant identity in hiszoneofinfluence.83 TheRussianman is neitherawoman nor a homosexual.The Russianman is theprotector of thewoman andofthe Russian nation as it is demonstrated andevenover-demonstrated by the Presidentofthe Russian FederationVladimir Putin. His publicappearances are staged andresemble apublicperformanceofsorts;his masculinity is exaggeratedand comesacrossasaffected.This gave him the generalrepu- tationofamachoman (cf. Sperling2015).

Putin’s varietyofmacho stunts can be read as an ongoing effort to assert political masculinity in this way(Sperling2015: 12).

However, this instrumentalisedmachismomasculinity is continuously pickedupbythe media in ordertopromote the idea of the“real man” who is the protector of societyand the nation.The Russianmedia show him whileheisfishing,hunting,shooting,doingsports, or ridinghorses, motor bikes, or aracing cars. This extremeand completely ideologised ideaofmasculinity is notat allanovum.Toavery largeextent, it couldbeobserved,for example,in the Stalin era.

The official idea of the Soviet bodybrimmedwith power and vigor and this vigorwas presented in parades, pyramids of people, by athletes, and trac- toristsone can see on the photos of Nikolai Kuleshov and IvanShagin. In contrast, everything soft and seductiveincreasinglybecame ataboo [transl.] (Khoroshilov/ Klemp 2003: 5).84

At thetime, perverts – thisincluded homosexuals – were consideredtobe neither patriots nornationalists.

83 In thiscontext, Coates says:“Hegemonicmasculinitymaintains, legitimatesand naturalisesthe interests of powerful men while subordinating the interests of others, notablythe interests of women andgay men” (Coates 2007: 41). 84 Original:“Dasoffizielle Bild dessowjetischenKörpers strotzte vor Kraftund Lebensfreude und die zeigtesich in denParaden,Menschenpyramiden,Sportlern und Traktoristinnen aufden Fotos von Nikolaj Kuleschov und Ivan Schagin. Das Weiche und Betörende aber wurdemehr und mehrtabuisiert.” 112 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

Good citizens – always straight – must control, punish, andeventually eliminate treasonousdesires (Essig1999: 5).

However, onecannotdenythe widespreadmanifestation of homosexuality even in Russia during thepastfew decades. Yet, alifestyle whichislived outbyhomosexuals, is, in general,seenasaresultofanaggressive glo- balisationwhichismainly interpretedas“the Americanizationofsexual culture” (Binnie2004:32) and, consequently,asadevelopmentwitha Western origin that triestooverwhelm standards andideas in thenon- Western world. Europe is associated with aspace of queer identities which follows away of moral incorrectness. Europe heraldsthe fallofculture and civilisation andsymbolisesthe apocalypse.Russia, in striking contrast, embodiesthe norm (Riabov2007,Riabov/ Riabova2008).Homosexuality is associatedwithweakness, femininity,and perversity andisseenasa rejectionofnorms and as aprototype of decadence.

Part of the approach used by homophobes to characterize homosexualityas decadent is to emphasize its fecundityby, on one hand, associatinghomo- sexualitywith aweakening of the people and, on the other, with anegative secondarystage of life(Tin 2008: 136).

Moreover, it is arguedthathomosexualityleads to alesserunderstanding of patriotism, as only aheterosexual person canexudeanappropriate patriotic understanding necessary to protectone’s owncountry. Europe andthe European manare interpreted as weak andfeminine,whereas Russiaand the Russianman are consideredstrongand masculine. Consequently,political andsocialmeasures must be takentokeepRussia free of non-heterosexual identities andlifestyles. This situation leadstoarising spreadof politically motivated homophobia (Soboleva/Bakhmetjev2015)which is stronglyaccompaniedbytraditionalism, authoritarianism,xenophobia, sexism, racism,anti-Western rhetoric andagrowingclericalism,asshown in detail by Igor’Kon (2010:217). As aconsequence, Russia does not see itself as apartofEurope, interpreting Europe as alien(Evropa kakchuzhoi) (Riabova/ Riabov 2013). Identity, Space, Nation:Constructing Russian National Identity 113

There weresignificant changes in the civil identityofthe citizens of the Russian Federation: they stoppedseeing themselves as Europeans andRussia as apart of Europe[transl.] (Riabova/ Riabov2013: 31).85

Duetothe ongoing debatesongendernorms,sexualidentity, andthe allegedfallofculture in Europe,the conceptofhomosexualityisusedin Russiaasareferential entity or areferential stigma.Nowadays, countries, like theUkraine,are describedand interpreted as homosexual in orderto articulatetheir weakness andtheir pro-European tendency (cf. also part 4 of this book). Moreover, people,likepoliticians, are labelled homosexual although this expression hasnothingtodowith sexuality andisnot used in asexualcontext.Rather, it referstothe notionthatthe person in questionis open-minded,tolerant,pro-European, andliberal, supportingEuropeanten- denciesand values,leadingtothe allegedfact that they have an anti-Putin stanceand therefore areunpatriotictowardRussia. In summary, it can be said that Russia uses twoentitiestoagreat extent in ordertoreconstruct andtorefindits nationalidentity:homosexuality and Europe.Thisisillustratedinthe following graphic.

Russia Europe (European Union) heteronormative space queer space space of protection space of evil space of power space of weakness space of morality space of perversity space of norm space of decadence cultural valorisation cultural degradation  protectionofculturalvalues  loss of culturalvalues  protectionofnorms  loss of norms  protectionoftradition  loss of tradition  protectionofmoralvalues  loss of moralvalues Table2:Characteristics of Russiaand theEuropean Unionfromthe Russianperspective

85 Original:“[...] вцивилизационнойидентичностиграждан Российской Феде- рации произошлиощутимыеизменения: ониперестали признавать себя евро- пейцами, а Россию–частью Европы.” 114 Illusion – Change – Tradition:IdentityinRussia

Russiaisstill trying to find its place in relation to the wild Asian East anda decadent, apocalyptic Western Europe.Russiawants to be recognised by the worldasanation which must be reckonedwith andwhosecharacter andidentityare uniquely Russian. Thecurrent,rathertense foreignpolitical situation, whichwas recentlystrainedbythe AnnexationofCrimea, the involvementinthe Syrian war, or theviolationofhuman rightsastothe suppressionofhomosexuality andtrans-identities, is directly related to the constructionand consolidation of its(new) national identity. In this context,Russiareliesontraditionalmoral ideas andvalues. Politiciansappeal to traditional andestablishedgenderideas androles as well as to family values andpoint to historically developed traditions and, moreover, to the continuity of theRussianculture. Russiamarginalises or even excludes alienidentitiesoridentities that are seen andconsidered as alien. Whilenon-heteronormative identity concepts maygenerally be categorised as global or cosmopolitan,Russia (mis)uses them in aspatial andnationalcontext.Homosexuality is stig- matisedasun-Russian, unmanly,and unpatrioticand as something which cannotbetoleratedwithinastrong,dominant, andpowerful society the aim of whichistomaintain theRussian nation. Part 3:

On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness forImplementing TraditionalIdeasofGender, Sex, andNationinRussia

The Case of Conchita Wurst

It sounds very funnynow, but Ithink that Ihave never receivedabiggercompliment. If an entire nation is afraid that ayoung gay manindrag withabeard couldinfluence its public opinion so much thathecould bringabout the collapse of itsentire society, then Ican only take thisasacompliment. (Conchita Wurst 2014)86

1IntroductoryRemarks

On thenightfollowingher victoryatthe 2014 Eurovision Song Contest, the AustriansingerConchitaWurst (akaTom Neuwirth)gaveaninterview on theshow Stern TV broadcastbythe German TV channel RTL. When askedabouthow she feltwhenconfrontedwith negative comments and insulting reactions to herpersonand performance, such as thereaction of the Russianpopulist andright-wing nationalist politician andmemberof

86 Original:“Es hört sich jetztwahnsinnig komischan, aber ich denke,ich habe noch nie eingrößeres Kompliment bekommen.Wenneine ganzeNationdavor Angst hat, dass einjungerschwulerManninDamenklamotten mitBartsomeinungsbildend ist,dassereine ganzeGesellschaftzum Berstenbringt, dann kann ich dasnur als Kompliment sehen”. – Interviewwith ConchitaWurst on the Germantelevision show Stern TV from 22 May2014; online on Youtube at:www.youtube.com/ watch?v=r0h1ViBtMO0 [last accessed on 31 October 2015]. 116 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness the StateDumaVladimir Zhirinovskii87,ConchitaWurst repliedthatshe found it flattering:

If an entire nation is afraid that ayounggay manindrag with abeard could influence its public opinion so much that he could bring about thecollapse of its entire society, then Ican onlytakethis as acompliment.

TheRussian reactiontoConchitaWurst’svictory at the Eurovision Song Contest is astounding even three years afterher rise to fame.Indeed, her performancetriggeredastrong emotionalreaction acrossthe politicaland socialspectrum. To be sure:There were supporters of thesinger, people whoshowedtolerancetoqueerness or whoseemed to have at leastno problemswith non-heteronormative lifestyles.However, such views were mostly not representedinthe media.Itwas theanti-Conchita movement whichdominated thepublic debate on Russiantelevision andinthe news- papers.Judgingbythe media alone,one couldget theimpression that the majority of theRussiansociety wasagainst homosexuals, trans-identities, andany kindofnon-heteronormative“otherness” (e.g. thesurveys Golos Rossiian [The VoiceofRussians] from 2014 (URL 79), Liudigovoriat [Peoplespeak]from2014(URL80),the coverageonthe television programme Rossiia 24 from 2014(URL81) as well as Althaler 2014, Scheller-Boltz/ Althaler2015). The Russian journalistDmitrii Konstan- tinovich Kisselev played aprominent role in this debate.Hewas an active andaffirmativesupporter of Putin’spoliciesand attracted agreat deal of attention internationally due to hishomophobicviews andpropagandistic news coverage (URL 82).Inthe news,healong withother journalists presentedthe picturethatmost Russians considered non-heteronormativity to be completely outoftunewithRussian lifeand Russianculture andthat non-heteronormativepeoplewere generally inacceptableinRussian society. By doingso, themedia coverage reflected thepredominantpolitical course of establishing and maintaining traditionaland rigid genderideas. Howcould Conchita Wurst, ayoungand up to this point ratherun- knownartistfromAustria,playsuchacentral role in the discourseon genderinRussia, acountry thousandsofkilometres away fromher native

87 Sheexpressed thisfeeling in asimilar wayinaninterviewwith Andrew Neil on BBC Newsnight from 23 May2014: “This is averybig honour formebecause they think that I’mthatpowerful to burst awhole country. So,thank you.” IntroductoryRemarks 117 regionofStyria? It ought to be pointed outthatmost of this homophobic propaganda in Russia hadalready been firmly establishedwellbefore Wurst’svictory. Yet, the drag queen’s performanceand overwhelming triumphcreatedaninterestingdiscursivemomentinthe Russiandebate: for the firsttime, Russianpolitics, media,and societyhad aconcretepersona whocouldbeusedand instrumentalisedtojustifythe currentpolitical mainstream andthe socio-politicalmeasures implementedinthe fieldof genderand identity. Amidst theheatedpolitical debatesongenderand identityfollowing the passing of anumberofpolitical measures in Russia whichdrastically limitedthe rightsofcertainminoritiesinboth public andprivate spheres, ConchitaWurst served as aprism forthe discourseongenderand identity. Herappearance andstrong media presence fuelledadebate whichevolved almost explosively.Inparticular, Conchita Wurstbrought to the surface an issuewhich is central to anydiscussion on gender:whatdoRussian men andwomen have,whatdomen andwomen have to be likegenerally in orderfor us to recognisethemasmen andwomen?The discussions that followedwere closely linked to debatesonsexualidentitiesaswellas issues concerning the questionofwhathaving aright or wronggenderand sexual identitymeansfor thenation perse. This thirdpartofthe monographwillgiveaninsight into the central concepts of what it meanstobeamanorwoman in Russiansociety and into thealleged need to upholdthese concepts includingthe traditional functions of gender. Thefocus of this part is Conchita Wurstfollowingher victory at the Eurovision Song Contestin2014aswellasher recent impact on thediscourse of gender, sexuality, andnationalidentity in Russia.88 The basis of my analysis is formed by readers’comments gatheredfromthe online issueofthe popular newspaper Moskovskii Komsomolets primarily duringthe period betweenMay 11, 2014 andJuly1,2014.These comments illustratethe ways in which gender, sexuality, andnation are conceptualised andperceivedincontemporary Russia andthe role which languageplays forthe constructionand perceptionofgender, sexual,and nationalidentity. Theinvestigation will make clearthatpeople’sperception of genderideas as well as of sexual desireand national identity is in-

88 Severalparts of the third part of thismonographhavebeen publishedinScheller- Boltz(2015c,2015e). 118 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness fluenced tremendouslybythe current political course,bythe church’s dogmata, andbytheir fellowcitizens whose viewsand attitudesare constantly andmassively repeated by the media. Especially the media have become ahermetic sphere in whichone opinionechoesand confirms the otheruptoapoint where opinion takesprecedenceoverfacts. Fromalanguage perspective, it is interestingtoobserve thediverse linguistic meanswhich are employed to influenceand manipulateopinion, suchaswordchoice, word formation, metaphorical language as well as linguistic strategiesofargumentationwhichleadtodiscrimination and demarcation. Readerswillnoticeadeep interconnectionbetween gender andsexualidentity.Issuesconcerninggenderidentityare forthe most part embedded in thecontextofsexualidentity. Sexualityplays an important role in defining gender ideas. Consequently,thisanalysisaimsat illustrating howRussian society dealswithidentitydiversity andat describing thestrategieswhich areapplied to marginalise, to discriminate, andtoexclude identities which do notfit theregular andtraditional heteronormative frame. Ihavealready arguedinthe previouspartthatthese strategiesare notrandomly chosen. Gender andsexualidentitiesare used intentionallyfor constructing andmaintaining Russiannationalidentity. Here again, it is mainly the linguisticperformances andthe argumentation strategieswhich shed lightonwhatthisidentityshouldbelikeand how nationalvaluesare presented. Moreover, it is interestingtosee how other nations areassessedand valued againstthisbackdropand how certain assumptionsaboutgenderand sexual identities areinstrumentalisedinthe current conflict between Russia andthe West, andthe European Union in particular. Iwould like to stress here that Idonot intend to make anygenerali- sations.Itisnot fair,accurate, or possibletomakegeneralassumptions or to make an overgeneralisedassessmentofRussian societyfromananalysis basedonreaders’comments. Such an approach would requireamuch more extensive corpus. As one will seebelow,not every member of Russian society reactstoConchita Wurstwithsuspiciousnessand antipathy.More- over, prejudiceagainstidentity diversityand non-heteronormative lifestyles can also be foundinother countriesbesides Russia,for instance, in Western countriesofthe European Union,suchasGermany, Great Britain, France,Ireland, andeveninacountry likeSwedenwhere themainstream supports non-heteronormative people politically,where non-heteronorma- IntroductoryRemarks 119 tive individualsenjoy their full rights as citizensand are guaranteedahigh quality of lifeinarather tolerant atmosphere (cf. Kondakov 2010). Not every citizenofWestern Europe sees Conchita Wurstasasymbol of toleranceoraccepts identities beyond thegenderbinarity.Asanexample,I wouldlike to point outStigGrenov, theleaderofthe Christianparty Kristendemokraterne in Denmark who is critical of non-heteronormative identities.89 AndeveninConchita’shomecountry of Austrianot everyone is open to trans-identities or toleratesnon-heteronormative identityconcepts in general. Austria’s Heinz-Christian Strache,apopulist andrather right-wingnationalist fromthe FreedomPartyofAustria(FPÖ)isknown forhavingmadequite disparaging remarksabout ConchitaWurst.

If someonelike ConchitaWurst does not know if theyare aman or awoman, then theyshould see apsychotherapist insteadofparticipating at the Euro- vision Song Contest. Well,and Iask myself whydoesORF our, or it, well, I don’t know, howI,ifWurst doesn’teven know it herself,then Idonot know it at all. Is it an It now, or aHe, or aShe? [sic!] [transl.] (URL 83).90

In Poland, some reactions to Conchita Wurstreflected anegative attitude towards non-heteronormative people,too (cf. Szulc 2014). Interestingly, many comments showedmanysimilarities to theRussianstatements(e.g. chory świat ‘a sick world’, Co się dziejenatym świecie ‘whatgoesonin this world’, choramodanahomo ‘a sick fashionofhomosexuality’, zresztą bógstworzyłkobietę imężczyznę to niechtak zostanieaniejakieśtransy pedały [...]bojestchore ‘actuallyGod made womanand manand this has to stay like this, notany trans-peopleorfags[...] because this is sick’, Pokazuje upadek idekadencję Europy ‘itshows thedownfalland the decadenceofEurope’;URL 84 andfor detailed information seebelow). However, with alldue caution against generalisations,there are general tendencies in Russiansociety thatconcern theperception of identity

89 Seee.g.the opinion of Stig Grenov, leader of the Christian party Kristen- demokraterne online at:http://cphpost.dk/news14/national-news14/eurovision-too- gay-for-christian-democrats-party.html[last accessedon9August 2015]. 90 Original:“Wenn einerwie die ConchitaWurst nichtweiß, ob‘s aManderl odera Weiberlis, dann brauchatsbesser an Psychotherapeuten alsbeimSongContest aufzutreten. Und ich frag mich ja, warum derORF überhaupt unseren,oderes, ich weiß ja nicht, wie ich, wenn die Wurst desselbernet waß, weiß ich es schon gar nicht. Istesjetztein Es, einEroderSie?[sic!].” 120 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness diversityand widespread ideas that abig part of theRussian societyshares when theytalk, assess,and conceptualisegenderand identity.And although,insomecases,the situationinRussia does notdiffer from placesin Western Europe,one hastoadmit thatpeopleinWestern Europe do not face thesamesocialpressure, restrictions,orinterventions on thepartof their governments (Engel 2002: 50). Last butnot least, the investigation of the discourse on Conchita Wurstdemonstrates more generaland predominant tendencies in Russian society. It confirms assumptions whichare to be expected in thecurrent politicalclimate in Russia,whentakinginto consideration the socio-political measures initiatedbythe Russianlocal and federal governments andlegislatures andthe tenserelationship between Russiaand Europe.

2Queer Europe:The Eurovision Song Contest Strivesfor Tolerance

In ordertounderstandthe RussianreactiontoConchitaWurst, it is necessary to gain an understanding of the competition shewon andits place within theculturalfabricofEurope:the Eurovision Song Contest. TheESC is amusic competition andthe only show on televisionwhich is broadcastsimultaneouslythroughoutEuropeand also in some otherparts of theworld such as Australia,North America, andsomeAsiancountries.91 With some120 to 190 millionviewers,itisnot unreasonable to claimthat the EurovisionSongContest brings Europe and – to some extent – the worldtogether.92 Allparticipating countries presentthemselvesindifferent ways.Theyconveyand expresstheir “culture” mainly through costumes, butespecially through music.Musiciansmix, forexample,ethnicsounds with modern popmusic or performsongs in theirmothertongue. On the nightofthe Eurovision Song Contest, Europedisplaysits diversity. Russia, whichhas been participatinginthismusicfestivalsince 1994, sharesand

91 This information wasobtainedfromthe officialwebsiteofthe Eurovision Song Contest; online at:www.eurovision.tv/page/timelineaswellasat: http://www. telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/eurovision/11405449/If-Australia-is-in-Eurovisi on-whos-next.html andhttp://www.eurovision.de/ [last accessed on 14 November 2015]. 92 Seeheree.g.http://diepresse.com/home/kultur/songcontest/4746241/Song-Contest- in-Wien-hatte-197-Millionen-Zuschauer?_vl_backlink=/home/kultur/songcontest/in dex.do [last accessed on 14 November 2015]. Queer Europe: The Eurovision Song Contest Strives forTolerance 121 supports this Europeanspirityear after year. RussiansingerDimaBilan wasevenable to winthe music competitiononcein2008. As aresult, Russiahostedthe ESCin2009. Despiteits focusbeing on music,the Eurovision Song Contestismuch more thanmere entertainment. Itsoriginscan be foundinthe post-war effort to bring peace andfriendshipbacktothe war-torn countriesof(then Western)Europe. It is probably this matrix of peaceand tolerance through whichthe festivalhas been able to attractasubstantialqueer following. Today, it is especially the queer community whichsupportsand virtually adores thisevent (Cassiday 2014, Motschenbacher 2013,2012, cf. also Sullivan2003).

The flashycostumes, inane lyrics, cheesychoreography, and over-the-top staging thathave come to characterize the contest’s winners over the past twentyyears have increasinglyearnedEurovision the label of camp,aswell as an international following of some 125million viewers, many of whom are gay(Cassiday2014:1f).

This is nottosay that peoplewith aheteronormativeidentitydonot watch andsupport this eventwiththe same interest. They become – at leastfor onemoment – fascinatedand mesmerisedbythe overwhelmingqueerness andopenup–probably ratherunconsciously – to theideaofatolerant Europe andatolerant world. From this perspective, theEurovision Song Contest as aratherqueer eventismorethanashow.Aboveall,itrepresents diversity, understanding,tolerance,and respect.Inother words: without question,the Eurovision Song Contestaccomplishes apolitical mission, too. Thisdoesnot remain withoutrepercussions forthe viewers in the participatingcountries,includingRussians. Russiansociety is very familiar with thequeer andcampcharacterofthe Eurovision Song Contestand has been watching theshowwithenthusiasmfor years. However, alot of people ignore or – maybe – do notrealise thatthe Eurovision Song Contest is andalwayshas been political.The mere fact thatthisevent brings Europe togetheronone eveningpredisposes the Eurovision Song Contest as astage forpoliticalstatements.Thismay be surprising. Afterall,the rulesofthe European BroadcastingUnion,which organises the annual competition,donot permit overtly political lyrics or 122 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness the addressing of ongoing political conflicts(URL85).93 Nevertheless, performers have been known to denouncesocialand political plights, racism,intolerance, or discrimination.Asanexample,one could pointout the contributorfromRomania in theyear 2015,the group Voltaj,who drew attention to the situationofthe so-called euro-orphans in theirsong De La Capat [All Over Again],orthe quarrel within theEuropeanBroadcasting Unionabout theparticipation of theUkrainian singerand Crimean tatar Jamala (akaSusanaIamaladinova), whose song 1944 dealswiththe de- portation of Crimean tatars underStalinbut could also be interpretedasan allusion to the annexionofCrimeain2014(URL86, cf.also part 4inthis monograph).The televote, too, hasbeenrepeatedly interpretedasare- flection of historical culturaland politicalalliances andpresent conflicts, with countriestraditionally giving or withholdingpoints fromtheir neighbours. As Isaid, thesubtle politicalmatrixoftoleranceand diversityhas turnedthe ESCintoastage parexcellence forqueerness andalternative identities. However, acloserlookreveals thatthe EurovisionSongContest is leaningtowards amalequeerness or aqueer maleness (obviously, this assertionmust draw on theclassic distinction betweenmaleand female). Thefact that Iwouldliketopoint outisthatitismoremale-identified performers on stagewho appear in aqueer contextand who aresurrounded by acertainqueer aura. Irrespectiveoftheir socio-cultural background, many male-identifiedartistshaveseemed to enjoyplaying with identities andgenderideas.Alotofthemhaveflauntedthe breakwiththe conventional, meaningheteronormative conceptofmaleidentity – arupture whichhas takenacentral moment in many performances.Their homoerotic and/ or androgynousappearances have blurredidentity lines. In recent years,elements used to produceanambiguousmaleidentity have ranged, among other things,fromthe singingvoice – oneremembers,for example, the extremelyhigh-pitched voiceofRomaniansinger Cezar in 2013 – and elements of campwhichhaveappearedincostumes, in thestage décorand setting andinthe performances in general – as,for example,shown by the Belorusian group3+2 in 2010,byIreland’sJedward in 2011,byBlue from the United Kingdomin2011, or by Moldova’sSunStroke Project &Olia

93 Original:“No lyrics, speeches,gestures of apolitical or similar nature shall be permitted during theEurovision Song Contest.” Queer Europe: The Eurovision Song Contest Strives forTolerance 123

Tira in 2010 – to ambiguoussongtexts where relationships,partners,and the adored person have remainedunspecifiedsothatone couldassumeany gendercontext andany possible identityconstellation – as,for example, shown, by the Azerbaijanianduo Ell&Nikkiin2011 (Motschenbacher 2012). The diverse use of queer andcampelementscreates an aura of metrosexuality andsuggeststhe idea of acontinuumofidentity whichthe performers do notonlyembody on stage butpromote as apossible every- daylifestyle.The aforementioned performances show that this wayof actingisbynomeansspecifictoWestern European artists.Singers from post-Soviet countries,too,haveincorporatedthe idea of gender andidentity playinto their performances.Ironically, thisiseventruefor Russian artistDimaBilan, winnerofthe music festival in 2008,who demonstrated exemplarily the fragility of masculinity. He staged so-called “real masculinity” in hisperformance, markedly emphasising hismachismo. However, by using ahomoeroticsettingand very kitschy elements, he successfully disruptedheteronormativity (Cassiday2014).Yet,itwas probably Ukraine’s VerkaSerdiuchka, the“trashy drag-queen fromUkraine”, who in 2007 – accompaniedbyobviously non-heteronormativebandmembers – gave thebestrenditionofthe spirit of the EurovisionSongContest. Her identityonstage couldbeinterpretedasasymbol of Europe as aplace of tolerancewithregardtogenderand identity diversity (Cassiday 2014). Agreat deal of thequeerness at the Eurovision Song Contest is brought into the showbychoreography andperformances consistingofmaleback- grounddancers. VerkaSerdiuchka’s setting from2007 maybelegitimately characterised as theprototypical queer andcampperformance. Theuse of sciencefiction costumes and thevisibleuse of campelements add, takenall together, ahigh degree of fetishism to theperformance. Thesamecould be said about theperformance of Sweden’s Eric Saadein2011. Hisstage décor, thecostumes thatheand hisdancersworeonstage andthe interactionbetween allthe performers resembledareverieofgay fetishism andclearlyalluded to ahomosexual location. As alastexample,Iwould like to mention here the performanceofAni LorakfromUkraine in 2008 whichdemonstrated ahigh degree of whatcould be readasqueerness by the audience. Themaledancersliterallyradiatedmetrosexuality and created an aura of homoeroticism. Theroleofthe hostsofthe Eurovision Song Contest in breaking heteronormativity hasalso been demonstrated exemplarily by Petra Mede 124 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness in Sweden in 2013who presentedthe nation of Sweden in an interludein whichkissing andmarrying male coupleswere featured,along with female footballplayers andfathers bottle-feedingtheir children.Moreover, a numberofmalehosts have overtly flirted with male artists. In comparison, femaleperformers oftenadhere to traditionalfeminine stereotypesand clichés. Insteadofchallenginganidentitycontinuumand questioning fixedgenderrolesand traditional ideas,theyfrequently opt for the otherextreme. They stage an exaggeratedfemininity andpresent womenassex symbols or sexual objects. Manyfemalesingers performin suchawayinorder to emphasise theirroles as sexualised anderoticised objects of desire (Kirilina2015).Singers like Alena LanskaiafromBelarus, AniLorak from Ukraine,orthe Polish girlbandDonatan &Cleoare strikingexamplesofthisperformancestyle in recentyears.Queer identities suchaslesbianMarija Šerifović from Serbia in 2007(URL87) or transsexual Dana InternationalfromIsrael in 1998 are rare. Thesameistruefor actions which could be describedasqueer such as thelesbian kiss in the performanceofKristaSiegfrids fromFinland in 2013orthe allusion to lesbian desireinthe performanceoft.A.T.u. fromRussia in 2003. In fact, femalesame-sexdesirecan be foundonlyvery sporadically on the stageof the EurovisionSongContest.

3Conchita Wurstand theEurovision Song Contest2014

Theperiod, when Conchita Wurstenteredthe Russiandiscourse on gender, identity, andsexualdesire, wascharacterisedbysignificant change as has been showninthe previouspartofthis monograph.Russia’srigid gender policies andthe ensuinginternationaldebates on thesepolitical measures, in particular, hadcreated atense atmosphere. In general, Conchita Wurst wasgiven abrilliant reception andshe wasreceivedvery well by thepublic andthe media after herESC victory. Even in Russia,the singer hadbeen able to win8points in thetelevote(as opposed to 0points from the jury). Nevertheless, there wasavolley of protest andreproaches. Some viewers were clearlyupset andstarted askingthe question of what hadbecomeof the once ratherpredictable Eurovision GrandPrix. In Russia,aswellasin someotherpost-Socialist countries such as Belarus,the victoryofConchita Wurstatthe Eurovision Song Contestwas used forpropagandapurposes. Ideological ideas were broughtforward propagatingaconservativeviewof Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 125 society,identity, and genderroles. Conchita Wurststirredupthe debateson traditional gender ideasand identity concepts.Onceagain,the media drew attention to traditionalvaluesinorder to stabilise ahomogeneoussociety and, consequently,toprevent theexpressionofaunique personality. Con- sequently,ConchitaWurst wasnolonger thoughtofasthe beardedwoman or agay transvestite.Rather, shefunctioned as aprojection screenfor different discourses on gender andidentityconcepts. Moreover, shewas instrumentalisedtoconfirm Russia’s “own normality”and to decrythe “alienotherness”,the “abnormalperversity” of Europe.94 In recent years,the ideaofman andwoman accordingtotraditional and therebystrictlydividedpatternswithinthe Russiansociety hasbecome visibleinthe Russian performances at theEurovision Song Contest. Cassi- day(2014:17) notesarising rejection of gaycampand homoerotic elements in Russianperformances andasignificantrise of Soviet-style and traditional elements,instead.

Recent Eurovision actsrepresenting Russia confirm that the country’s gay trajectorytoaEurovision win has not merely come to aheteronormative halt, but actuallytaken several homophobic steps backward (Cassiday2014: 21f).

In this vein, onecan interpret theperformanceofthe TolmachevySisters (Sestry Tolmachevy)inthe year 2014.The Russiansingersdisplayed a naїve and, to some extent,submissive cuteness. They embodied aconcept of femininity whichmatches thegeneralideaofaperfect and, consequently,heterosexualRussianwoman. In asimilarway,Russia’s performancebythe Buranovskie Babushkiin 2012 canbeassessed. It showed sixolder womenfromthe Russian RepublicofUdmurtia in theirtraditional clothing who conveyedanimage of awoman whowas somewhat independent andself-confidentbut who also at the same time alludedtothe traditionalfemalerole by including actions depicting kitchenand household scenes in theirperformance andby reproducing stereotypical femalebehaviour on stage. Moreover,one could observehere atightlinkbetween ethnicity,nationalism,and gender ideas.

94 ConchitaWurst is not theonlyandrogynous character with abeard. TheBosnian singer andartist Božo Vrećofromthe group Halkaperforms in asimilar outfit on stage. Afterthe victoryofConchitaWurst, he wascalled“the Bosnian Conchita” (bosanska Končita)inthe Bosnian media. 126 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

In thiscontext,the critical reactions to Conchita Wurstbecomemore comprehensible as she representsaradical departurefromthisconcept of ideal femininity,showing differenceand variety. Furthermore, she con- veyedarepresentation of theindividualasaunique ratherthancollective creature.

3.1RussianDiscourse and theIdeaofFemininity

Despiteits officially apoliticalnature, the Eurovision Song Contest has become an arenafor the clashofdifferentviews andattitudes toward genderand identity. Everything whichhappens at theESC will be interpreted accordingtoand instrumentalisedwithin thespecificdiscourse on gender, identity, andsexualdesire. It is hardly surprisingthatthiswas particularly relevant in thecaseofConchita Wurst. ConchitaWurst stirredupdebates on traditionalnotionsofgenderand concepts of identity.Thisiswhy we shouldtakeacloser lookatthe ways in which herpersona wascontextualisedinrelationtothe overarching concepts of femininityand masculinity. Letmebegin by examining the ways in whichthe singer elicited prevalentideas aboutfemininity95. Thediscourse on Conchita Wurstshowed quitebluntly thatthe majority of Russians stilladheres to theideathatthere are only two genders,

95 Here,itmay appear to be irrelevant whether Iwill talk, in thefollowing,ofthe idea of the womanorofthe idea of femininity.Both concepts sharealot of specificsand associations andtheyseemtoberatherinterchangeable. However, it seemstometo be more appropriate to speak of the idea of femininity in thefollowing.Why?The word woman refers to aconceptwhichismainlyembeddedand interpreted in the contextofbiology. In contrast to this, femininity must be seen in the contextof performativity: femininity points, first of all, to the performative characterofawo- man. In other words: if woman is primarilythe assignment of aperson to abiological – here:female – category, then femininity is primarilythe assignment of certain behaviour andthinking patterns to the categoryoffemalepersons. This includes, for example, typical characteristics suchasvoice,looks,and appearance, as well as specific genderroles suchasgender-specific functions, tasks, andduties.As shown in the first part of thisbook, both, the concepts of the womanand the conceptoffemininity arevisiblyshapedbytheir particularsocio-culturalhistory. As aresult,the concepts of “woman” and“femininity”are embedded andalways interpreted in their socio-culturalcontext. As aconsequence, the respectiveex- pectations of awomanand of the ways how to perform femininity vary in different socio-cultures. Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 127 namely manand woman,each equipped with afixed setofcharacteristics. Consequently, the discussion focusedonthe requirements whichmust be fulfiled by the representatives of the respective biologicalcategory. What can or must be expected particularlyfromawomanintermsofbehaviour? Whichcharacteristics are ultimately associatedwiththe respective biologicalcategory? Andhow shouldthe assignment of apersontoaspecific biological categoryaffecttheir everydayacting if we aretounderstand their gender accordingtothe general socio-cultural normsofgender intelligibility? Foracertainpartofthe Russiansociety,the appearanceof ConchitaWurst provided an opportunitytoquestion thecharacteristicsand attributes a“real”woman should have. Consequently, the discourse on ConchitaWurst wasprimarily guided by twoquestions: a) what is a womanactually andamanrespectively andb)whatkindofspecifics must awoman or aman have as amemberofmodern dayRussian society? Thediscourse on Conchita Wurstshowedclearly thatfor Russians,a womanhas acertainattitude andischaracterisedbyspecificfeatureswhich do not only distinguishher as awoman but which distinguish her, in particular, fromaman. Forthisreason, male andfemaleattitudes, looks, and behaviour patternsneededtobeobservedseparately.However, thegender- queer artist Conchita Wurstchallengedtraditional notions of genderand blurredthe linesseparatingwhatisconsidered male andwhatisconsidered femalebyintentionally intermixingbothmaleand femalecharacteristics andfeatures.Here, it wasmainly herbeardwhich placed herinthe spot- lightand whichwas harshly criticisedbyalargeslice of the Russian people.Fromatraditional perspective, awoman shouldnot be masculine. Herappearanceand behaviourshouldcomply exclusivelywithfemale gendernorms,whichprovide agenerally acceptedframe withinwhich she can actand negotiateher identity. In contrasttothis, Conchita Wurstfell outsidethe feminine normand performed, consequently,outside of the (heteronormative) frame.Asasymbol of masculinity, herbeardhad neither relevance normeaningfor awoman or forbeing awoman,asabeardand a womanare perceivedbymanyasirreconcilableopposites. Consequently, the beardonConchita Wurst’sface caused irritationamong spectatorsand ledtowhatIwould like to describe as apanic caused by symbolic dis- orientation.Spectatorsdid not know what to make of Wurst’sbeard.They insisted on categorisingthe artist either as awoman or as aman but failed to do so in aconsistentmanner. To them,aso-called “intermediate gender” 128 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness wasunacceptable andimpossible to imagine. In an interviewwith the Russian newspaper Moskovskii Komsomolets,politician Vitalii Valentino- vichMilonov fromSaint Petersburg argued that Conchita Wurstshould not be allowedtoenterRussiaunlessshe agreed to visiblydefine hergender accordingtothe traditionalfemale—male axis.

Well,first of all, abeautiful creature should determine who theyare – manor woman. Well, andfrom the point of view of apolitician, Ican saythat we have goodswhoseimport is prohibited. Pork from certain countries, chlorinated chicken legs. Onlybecause this maycause gastrointestinal troubles.Wedonot prohibit the entryofaperson, but of the product Con- chita Wurst, coming from show business. We do not need such anightmare. The RussianFederation does not need to welcome thismonster. If the European establishment which is infused with evil has chosen such asymbol, then thishas absolutelynothing in common with us (MKOnline, 12 May 2014, URL88).96

WhydoIsuggestthe word misunderstanding to describe thereasonwhy so many Russianspectatorswere irritatedbyConchita Wurst’sbeard? The singer herselfhas explained herbeardasasymbol of diversity, ambiguity, andfreedom.Hence, the beardshould be characterisedasanindividual featureofaperson or,inthisparticularcase, as an individual featureofa woman. In combination with an obviouslyfemaleappearance, abeard standsfor individuality as well as forgendermixing or across-gender identity. Thebeard is arejectionofthe conceptofauniformidentity. Identities canchange, theycan be ambiguous andnot as clearly definedas onemight expect.ConchitaWurst’s beard represents that there is a possibility.Apossibility to constructand to live outone’s own identity.

96 Original:“Ну,прекрасное создание должно сначалаопределиться, ктооно такое —мужчина илиженщина.Нуаспозиции государственного человека могу сказать, чтоунасестьтовары, ввоз которых запрещен.Свинины из некоторыхстран, ножек Бушасхлором.Просто потому, чтоэто можетвы- зватькишечные расстройства.Мызапрещаем въезд не человеку, апродукту шоубизнеса Кончите Вурст.Мыненуждаемсявподобного рода кошмарах. Ненужно для Российской Федерации, чтобымыпринималиэто чудовище. Еслиевропейский истэблишмент, которыйпронизанпороком, избрал себе такой символ, то кнам этонеимеетникакого отношения.” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 129

Moreover, thebeard representsablemish of sortsdrawingattention to the notion that identity is an idealwhich can neverbereached andcompleted. Unfortunately,her messagedid notcomeacross as such.The Russian public interpretedthe beardasanaffrontoranact of provocation. It also rejected the implications of thesinger’sperformancefor theconcept of identity. This is reflectedbythe linguisticfindingsusedinthe study:for instance, Conchita Wurstisconstantly categorised as amemberofone of the twogroups, male or female.This becomesobviouswhenone looks at the personal nouns thatare usedtorefer to the artist. However, from analysingthe useofmaleand femalepersonalnouns,two differencescan be observed which seem to be particularly interesting from areferential semanticperspective: firstofall,the female personal nounscarry most oftenaneutral meaningorrathertheyare usedinaneutralcontext, while male personal nouns carry an expressive,mainly pejorative connotation. Second,the male personal nounsusedtendtoemanate andconnotehomo- sexuality and, consequently,theyvery oftenappear in ahomosexual or even homophobic context, while thefemale personal nouns emanatea heteronormative connotation andare instead usedtorefer to aheterosexual woman(cf. Pochemupidora zhenshchinoinazvali? ‘Why didtheycalla fag awoman?’ – MK Online,11May 2014)97. Thefemalepersonal nouns areprimarily usedtomakeclear that ConchitaWurst is recognised andassessedasawoman. In this way, the corresponding nounsexpress,inparticular,femininity.This becomes, for instance, evident, when we lookatagent nouns like pevitsa-transvestit ‘[masc]transvestite [fem]singer’, ispolnitel‘nitsa ‘[fem]singer’, trans-ispolnitel‘nitsa ‘[fem]trans-singer’, avstriiskaia ispolnitel’nitsa ‘[fem]Austrian [fem]singer’, pobeditel’nitsapesennogo konkursa ‘[fem]winner of the song contest’, frauVurst ‘Mrs Wurst’. Most often, Conchita Wurstisreferredtoasdevochka ‘girl’ and zhenshchina ‘woman’. In somecontexts,the pejorative noun baba ‘crone’ is used,too.However,these nounsare oftencoupled with masculinespeci- fics,adiscursive technique which obviously aims at degradingthe femininity of Conchita Wurstdirectly.Consequently, expressions like devochka s borodoi ‘the girlwith thebeard’, zhenshchina sborodoi ‘the womanwith the beard’, borodataia zhenshchina ‘the beardedwoman’, borodataia

97 Original:“Почемупидора женщинойназвали???” 130 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness devochka ‘the bearded girl’are used to make clearthatConchitaWurst is nota“real”woman.98 In this context,the noun boroda ‘beard’standsfor ‘a masculineattitude’or‘amasculine feature’ andisrather used as astigma. It can be interpretedinsuchawayasConchita Wurstis‘awoman whohas amasculine attribute’. In contrasttothe noun,the adjective borodataia ‘bearded’underlines the meaning‘thewoman whoistoo masculine’.Other interestingexpressionsare thewordgroup baba borodataia ‘bearded crone’and thedeadjectivalnoun borodatka ‘beardedwoman’whichare intended to diminish herposition within the femalehierarchy. Thenoun tetka is also worthy of mention here. It hastwo meanings, depending on thecontext, on who usesit, at whomitisdirectedand on the intentionofthe speaker. Theword tetka is primarily usedtorefer to a grumpy,unfriendly,angry,overweightwoman whoexudesamasculine habitus. Consequently, awoman whoisreferredtoastetka is degraded within thefemalehierarchy due to thefact that shedoesnot emanate traditional feminine characteristics.She showsahabituswhich exudes masculinity. Thesecondmeaningoftetka can only be used whenreferring to males. In this sense,the noun refers to aman,mainly but notexclusively to ahomosexualman.Itimpliesthathis behaviouristoo feminine and/ or it alludes to hissexualorientation whichispresumed to be non-heterosexual. It is also occasionally usedasaderogatory term forheterosexualmen who failtoconform to hegemonic notionsofmasculinity in termsofbehaviour or interests (e.g. opinion,look,style,decisionmaking, hobbies...)which can vary,depending on thesituation. Using theword tetka ‘fag, fairy, queen’inreference to amale, aims at diminishinghis position within the male hierarchyand callsinto questionhis genderidentityasaheterosexual. With regardtoConchitaWurst, onecan conclude that theuse of thenoun tetka (e.g. borodataiatetka ‘the beardedgrumpywoman’versus‘the beardedfag’) reveals inevitable doubtsconcerning thefemininity of the artist, whileatthe same time calling into question hermasculinitybased on herfeminine appearance, hereffeminate behaviour,orsimplydue to her perceived sexual orientation as homosexual.

98 The same wordchoice canbeobservedinPolish, althoughtoamuch lesserdegree; cf. baba zbrodą ‘the cronewith the beard’, kobieta zbrodą ‘the womanwith the beard’ at fakt24.pl (URL 89). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 131

Furthermore, Conchita Wurstwas comparedtothe Russian performers, the TolmachevySisters whowere said to embody acorrect femininity. This underscoresthe idea thatone’s ownidentity is always theresultofa comparison to otheridentities,too. In this context,the Russianideaof masculinityand femininityaswellasits evaluationwas influenced by notionsofgenderperceivedasalien.

The ideas of masculinity andfemininityofothers influencethe content and the assessment of the gender modelsinone’sown culture [transl.] (Riabov 2007: 65).99

According to some readers, theappearanceand performance of the Tolma- chevySisters at theEurovisionSongContest comprisedattributes perceived as conventionally andproperlyfeminine.Awomanshould be krasivaia ‘beautiful’, chistaia ‘pure’, prekrasnaia ‘gorgeous’, milaia ‘lovely’, nezhnaia ‘tender’, zhenstvennaia ‘feminine’, dobraia ‘well- tempered’, khoroshaia ‘good’, szhenstvennoifiguroi ‘with a feminine physique’, krashenaia ‘rouged’ (cf. also Kirilina 2002).Women were seen as krasavitsy ‘beauties’100 or angely ‘angels’101.Hence, astrictdivision was drawnbetween menand womendue to their different physical features and behaviour.Awomanwas definedbyboth, womenand men, according to herlooks andtoher otherfeminine attributes.Fromthisperspective, the more feminine attributesawomanpossessed, thehigherthe regard shehad in femalecircles andinRussian society. It wassaidthataRussianwoman wasjudgedespecially in accordance withtraditionaland classicstandards of beauty.Yet,there also seemed to be astark division betweenRussian femininity andEuropeanfemininity,ahierarchy in whichthe Russian womanand Russian femininity were of much highervalue.Inthiscontext, somereaders deducedasimplistic generalisationfromthe performanceof the Russiansingers. Thepurenessand theharmony of the Tolmachevy

99 Original:“Образы мужественностииженственности Чужих оказываютвлия- ние на содержание иоценкугендерных моделейсобственнойкультуры.” 100 Cf.e.g.“Две замечательныедевочки, - НастяиМаша, для меняпредставляют прекрасных русских красавиц.Яза нихголосовал.Счастьявам, двойняшки...” (MK Online, 11.05.2014). 101 Cf.e.g.“Вот именно, что "наши ангелочки", инечегонашим ангелочкам делать вэтом вертепе...”(MK Online,07.05.2014). 132 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

Sisterspurportedly reflectedthe generalcharacteristics of theRussian nation:fromthisperspective,bothgirls representedRussian cultureperceived as homogeneous, uniform, andstandardised. In contrast, European culture wasjudgedasweird,bizarre, andstrange (strannaia)102. It oughttobepointed out here that other,previousartists at the Eurovision Song Contestsuchastranssexual performer Dana International fromIsrael or lesbiansinger Marija Šerifović from Serbia didnot cause a comparable furore or uproarwith theirperformances.Their acts were met with more tolerance. Although bothsingersdid notcorrespond to the heteronormative idea of awoman their physical appearanceonstage embodiedatraditionalfemininity,perceivedasboth naturaland real.

At the contest, menwithafeminine appearancehave already performed alot of times. Dana International from Israel eventook thefirst placeonce. But precisely now, the Russian media caused quiteasuper-mega-stirabout this – well, we don’t have anyother problems to dealwith in ourcountry.103

Well,actuallyDana was beautiful and performed effectivelywith agood song. And she actually looked like an artist. We have always beenloyal with regard to that. One caneven remember Serdiuchka. But here, abogle, complex-ridden, performedwith astupid song and with a miserable beard. Well,itwas all in allabsolutely galling.104

102 Original:“Она не специально ,онанарочно этовсе делает.Пусть увас все женщины такиебудут.Увас странная культура идипломатия 6 никого не уважатьини чьизаконы.Будет стоятьвопрос одальнейшем сотрудничестве и общении с Европой.У настакая культура : вот тебе Бог на небеси ,авот тебе порог”(MK Online, 11.05.2014). 103 Original:“на этом конкурсе ужемного развыступалимужчины вженском обличьи, идажепервое место однажды заняла транссексуалка из Израиля (DanaInternational), но почему то именно сейчас российские сми раздулииз этого какуюсупер-мега сенсацию - ах, ну да унас же встранебольще никаких проблемнету”(MK Online, 15.05.2014). 104 Original:“Данет!Просто Дана красиво иэффектно выступила, исхорошей песней, и, вообще, выглядела как Артистка! - ктакимнарод всегда относился лояльно.МожноиСердючкувспомнить.... А тутвышло снедаемоеком- плексами, чучелко сбездарной песенкой, испоганенькой бородкой (зачем- то). Даивообще, он просто неприятный очень...” (MK Online,15.05.2014). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 133

Yet, one must also considerthe fact that the socio-politicalcircumstances in Russia were differentwhenbothDanaInternationaland Marija Šerifović wonthe Eurovision Song Contestin1998and 2007,respectively.In contrasttoDanaand Marija,Conchita Wurstappeared at atime, when genderand identity policieswere becoming ever-increasingly rigidin Russiaand when Russianpoliticswas starting to actively interveneinthe processofidentityconstruction. Thetimeinwhich Conchitawon theESC wasnot characterisedbyaliberaland democratic political climatebut ratherbyauthoritarianism.

3.2RussianDiscourse and theIdeaofMasculinity

While theexpected performanceoffemininity is mostly reduced to style, appearance, andstereotypical feminine features,suchashavingagentle personalityand an attractiveoutward appearance,the idea of masculinityis discussedindifferent contexts.Debates surrounding femininity focuson superficialcharacteristicsand traits; femininityislocalised andcharac- terisedasaclosed-offsphere which seemstoexist on itsown,without showing anyrelevantand far-reaching internal and, in particular, external effects. In contrast,notions of masculinityand theway of performing it are discussedinamuch more multifaceted manner. Two aspectsthatare of particular interesttomydiscussion of thediscoursesurrounding genderand the impact of Conchita Wurstare outlined as follows: Firstofall, masculinityisalsoassociatedand linked with otheridentity concepts or,tobemoreexact,masculinity seemstohaveasignificant and wide-ranging impact on theconstructionand perceptionofother identity concepts.Thisconcerns, on theone hand, different concepts of individual masculinity(i.e. what it meanstobeaman)and,onthe otherhand, identitieswhich are notrelated to masculinity perse,but whichare associated with being or with having to be masculine. In this context, masculinityisvery ofteninterpreted from aspatial perspective so that masculinityserves as acriterion andanattribute of specialspacesand places.Infact, theconceptofmasculinity is frequently usedtoday as a yardstick when definingand characterising nations. As aresult,the assessment of anational identityisespecially dependent on thefacthow “masculine”anation is (cf. Kondakov 2012b). 134 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

Secondly,masculinity is oftensurprisingly discussedinthe context of homosexuality or non-heteronormativity.These debatesoften deal with the conceptofmalehomosexualityand bringtothe surface issueswhichare closelylinkedtothe gayworld andtothe gaylifestyle.Mostoften,they create or includesomeformofopposition between“real”masculinity and homosexuality or aspectswhichare viewed as markers or signifiers of the gayworld andthe gaylifestyle.One can observehere aclear strategyof demarcationwhich is very oftenbased on spatialargumentation.Asa consequence, masculinityisnot only discussedonits own, butvery often – andobviously more oftenthanfemininity – in relation to otherconcepts. Ihavepointed out that much of thedebatesurroundingConchita Wurst andher gender identityfocused on the artist’sbeard.The beard is amanly featurewhich symbolises real masculinity. Thebeard stands in striking contrasttothe conceptofawomanand of femininity.Consequently, some male readersfeltoffendedbyConchita Wurstand hergender-crossing attire andmake-up.Fromtheir perspective, Conchita Wurstwas awoman whohad transgressedwhatitmeanstobeawoman, as it is impermissible forawoman to have abeard.105 Thesereaders expected ConchitaWurst, a person whom theyrecognisedforemost as awoman to embrace aharmonic reflection of hergenderasawoman – andnot thedisruption of genderbya strikingor, as it wassaid, “brutal” (brutal’naia)106 beard. Andwhile some people such as theactress Jennifer Lawrence (URL 90) or last year’s Miss AustriaAmina Dagi (URL 91) showed theircapabilityfor toleranceto- wardsidentity diversity andexpressed theirsolidarity andsympathywith non-heteronormativepeopleorgenderqueer lifestylesbywearing,amongst otherthings,abeardinpublic, in Russia,men organisedthe flashmob Dokazhi, chto ty ne Konchita Vurst [Demonstratethatyou arenot Conchita Wurst] on Runet(URL92),appealing to Russianmales to shaveoff their beards andrid themselvesofthis “femininity”. This actionwas accompaniedbyastatement by Vladimir Iakunin,the former Presidentof the RussianRailwaysCompany andactivesupporter of Vladimir Putin: “Men,get shaved!Don’tbecomewomen!” (Muzhchiny, breites’! Ne bud’te babami!)(Deutsche Welle Online, 15 May2015, URL93).

105 Original:“впрочем еслибынебыло бороды не было бы столькогневных отзывов, атут действительно непонятно”(MK Online, 14.05.2014). 106 Original:“брутальная мужскаяборода (на уточненномженском лице)” (MK Online, 11.05.2014). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 135

With regard to thedebateonmasculinity,one observesavery frequent use of theword muzhik for‘arealman’, ‘a man’sman’, ‘a real lad’.In former times,the noun muzhik wasprimarily usedtorefer to a‘peasant’ or ‘villager’ (incontrasttogorozhanin ‘townspeople’). Today, muzhik in everydaylanguage generallycarries themeaningof‘man’ andisusedasa synonymofmuzhchina ‘man’although there are seriousdiscrepancies betweenbothnounswithregardtotheir stylistic valueand connotation. While theneutral word muzhchina ‘man’can be usedinevery contextto refer to amaleperson in an objective andstylistically neutralway,the word muzhik is typically usedincolloquiallanguage(razgovornaiarech’) andbelongstoboth,the so-called “low registercolloquial language” (snizhennaia leksika)and theso-called prostorechie as atypical Russian colloquial variant. In principle, thenoun muzhik carries anegative, mainly pejorative andcrude meaningand denotesprimarily alesseducated, ignorant, grubby,rough,and,hence, most oftensocially disadvantaged male (usually fromadolescence onward) (cf. BTSOnline)107.However, in recent years,the noun muzhik hassignificantlygainedinfrequency in languageuse,accompaniedbyanessentialshift in its semantic and, in particular, pragmatic use (Shaburova2002).The useofthe noun highlights the necessity of an explicitly masculinelookand behaviourwhichaman must exhibit in ordertobeaccepted as aman in Russiansociety.Hence, the word muzhik functions as a“positive valenceand [...] the norm of modern Russianmasculinity” (Sperling2015: 36)and refers to theideal Russian manand impliesstrength, power, andsuperiority.Moreover, the Russian muzhik is arepresentativeofastrongnationand embodiesRussia as apowerful, leading,and,above all, traditionalcountry in whichthe man giveshis powertosociety andtothe nation.This is currently demonstrated parexcellence by theRussian PresidentVladimirPutinwho stageshis imageasareal muzhik andwho is considered as such by his people which is substantiatedbythe current PutincultinRussia. Thisincludesevenpop songsbyRussianartists108,whichare dedicatedtothe president(Sperling

107 Online at:http://www.gramota.ru/slovari/info/bts/. 108 Cf.e.g.Mashani: MoiPutin (online at:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=- v6Jw9rsWCE), unknown artist: Deistvui, Putin,Russkii Prezident (online at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl_piRRItmM), Tolibdzhon Kurbankhanov: VVP (online at:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKsAbne393Y),Sasha Chest feat.Timati: Luchshiidrug (online at:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jp9pfv 136 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

2015:esp.36-47). Consequently, the frequent useofthe noun muzhik reflects thetendencyofthe so-called remasculinisation of theRussian man – or,asone can understand from the discourse, of the“male tribe” (muzhskaia plemia)109 – andofRussiaitself.Other spaces,incontrast, are associated withfemininitydue to theirlack of (real) muzhiks (Riabov/ Riabova2008).

One has to keepinmindthat the demasculinisation of othersispartofthe remasculinisationofRussia, i.e. of the identitypolicies whichare characteristic forthe Russian societyinthe 2000s [transl.] (Riabova/ Riabov 2013: 333).110

This does notmean,however, thatRussian societyfails to recognise male typeswho do notadhere to theexpectedidea(l)ofmasculinity. As aprime example,one may, forinstance, consider VerkaSerdiuchka, thedrag artist fromthe Ukraine.Yet,itisveryinterestingtonotethatthischaracter is perceived in amannerwhichdiffers completely fromhow Conchita Wurst is perceived.VerkaSerdiuchka is primarily seen as acomedian(prikolist) with anon-uglylook111,asapersonawho playsonstereotypes (stsenichnyi obraz ‘stage andart character’, obraz byltsel’nyiizabavnyi ‘his character is uniform andfunny’). But, amongstother things, hispurportedhetero- sexuality conjures forththe imageofhim as areal manwho is only “dressedlikeawoman”(pereodetyi vbabumuzhik). Therefore, thepersona VerkaSerdiuchkacan be understoodand explained, whereas Conchita Wurstremains indescribableand unexplainable becauseshe showsher “real style” (pozhiznennyi obraz).112

neKf4), Andrei Gubin: PutinSuperDJ(URL 121) [all last accessedon26April 2016]. 109 Original:“Неунижайте, пожалуйста, мужское племя!” (MK Online, 11.05.2014). 110 Original:“Следует учитывать, чтодемаскулинизация Чужих –частьре- маскулинизации России, т.е. политики идентичности, характерной для российского общества 2000-х.” 111 Original:“Причемтут Сердючка?Данилко приколист он входит вроль и внешнийвид не отвращает... А туттолько можнослушать.Смотретьне приятно”(MK Online, 23.09.2013). 112 Original:“потомучто Сердючка сценический образ, ивсе об этом знали, переодетый вбабу мужик, но образбыл цельный, и забавный.Это же гейи транс - этоего пожизненныйобраз, впрочем еслибынебыло бороды не было Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 137

It wasthe comparisonofConchitaWurst with VerkaSerdiuchka, andthe generalperception of Conchita Wurstwhichpromptedadiscussion about sexual orientation. Upon analysing readers’ comments on masculinity, one noticesimmediately that masculinity is very oftendiscussed in thecontext of sexual orientation anddesire. It becomesobviousthataman, ir- respectiveofhow he looks andofhow he behaves, is aman only if he is heterosexual.Furthermore, amaleisdefined as aman when he hasen- gagedorengagesintypical masculineactivities, forinstance, in marriage (ispolniat’supruzheskiidolg)113 andfulfils responsibilities that arereserved formen suchashavingbeeninthe army(sluzhit’varmii)114.Conchita Wurst, however, is exclusivelydefinedthrough herradiating non-heteronormativity.She is,consequently, assessed as adeviant person.While feminine personal nouns whichare used to refer to Conchita Wurstcan oftenbecharacterised as neutral,the masculinepersonal nouns whichare usedinreferencetothe artist, expressquite bluntlydiscrimination, stigma- tisation, andsocialmarginalisationand are, in most cases, linked with homosexuality as adeviant andperverted sexual orientation.Moreover, most of themasculinepersonal nouns,whichare used whenreferring to ConchitaWurst belongpredominantly to the homophobic lexis115.Among thoseoffensive wordswhich are usedwhenreferring to the Austrian artist are, forinstance, gomosek ‘faggot’, sodomit ‘sodomite’, pederast ‘paederast’, pedik ‘paederast’,orpidor ‘fag’.In1989, Belousova (1989: 156) stillcalledmost of thesewords “words whichrefer to aperson who suffersfromasexualperversion” – including gomoseksualist ‘homo-

бы столько гневныхотзывов, атут действительно непонятно.ОНО.Как ре- бенкуобъяснить, ктоэто?Про Сердючкуможно объяснить, апро Кончиту?” (MK Online, 14.05.2014). 113 Original:“После просмотра конкурса «Евровидения» сегодняночью три раза посыпалсявхолодномпотуоткошмаров, щупаллицо уженыина радостях исполнялсупружеский долг”(MK Online, 11.05.2014). 114 Original:“Всё познается всравнении... Наш Зверев = это ЕЩЁ МУЖИК !!! Даже вармии служил.Что будетдальше - просто непредсказуемо.Аведь люди - не улитки (см. учебник по зоологии)” (MK Online, 11.05.2014). 115 This is irrespectiveofthe fact that some of these words aresometimes usedwith a completelydifferentpragmatic function and, clearly, with adifferentmeaning in a homosexualin-group. By the non-homosexualout-group, thosewords areinten- tionallyusedinordertodeliberatelyand publiclyinsult, degrade, anddiscriminate homosexuals as well as,for example, deviant andweakheterosexuals. 138 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness sexual’, pederast ‘paederast’, sadist ‘sadist’, erotoman ‘erotomaniac’.Re- cently,theyhavegainedinfrequencyinthe course of therecent political measures againstidentity diversityand thepublic debatesonmaintaining traditional lifestylesand genderroles.Moreneutral nouns,like transvestit ‘transvestite’ or ispolnitel’ ‘singer’ are rarely used.

3.3RussianDiscourse and theIdeaofGenderRolesand Stereotypes

It is no exaggeration to statethatatpresent,the predominant view on genderinRussiaischaracterised by traditional andnormative ideas: Russian womenmust in general be attractive,cute, demure, andpure. Russian menmust be virile,strong, anddefinitelynot homosexual;they must fulfil tasksand duties which belong to the“male tribe” (muzhskoe plemia). TheRussiandiscourse on gender identities andgenderroles generally confirms thesecharacteristicsand attitudes towardsmen andwomen. As to Conchita Wurst, thediscourse reinforcedthese gender stereotypesand gender ideasand,thus, strengthenedthe generalparadigm of gender binarity.Astogenderstereotypesand gender roles, oneobserves thatthe gender binarity in the heterosexual matrix is primarily givena socialmeaning: it is of great importancetomarry116 andtogive birth to childreninorder to ensure thecontinuityofapowerful,healthy, and“normal” society and, asalogical consequence, of the Russiannation(zadacha kul’tury zvat’cheloveka krazvitiiu, anenaoborot ‘itisthe task of culture to persuade people to developand notthe otherway round’). Gender roles playanimportant part in influencing individualstomakedecisionswhich are in linewiththese biopoliticalgoals. Theseroles encouragewomen to perceivethemselvesasweakand in need of protection, whereasmen exist to give womenshelter,tosupport andtakecare of them.

In Europe, there are simply no reallads left. All their men have become women. Poor girls from Europe,cometoRussia! We are waiting foryou

116 Original:“Голосование на Евровидении показало, сколько Кончитживет на западе.Практически, каждый второй(ая).Бедныедевки, за кого замуж выходить?” (MK Online, 11.05.2014). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 139

with open arms.Comehere to know what qualitylove from aman feels like [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).117

Thedebates on gender rolesand gender stereotypesare no longer restricted to themicrostructureoffamiliesand everyday relationshipsbetween men andwomen.Recently, theyhavealso entered,for instance, the debateson sports. Thediscussion on men’sinclusion in synchronised swimming offers an interesting insight intothis: on BBC News (URL 94),the Minister of Sports of theRussian FederationVitalii Mutkoargued, forexample,that synchronised swimming is “a purelyfeminine sport”. Other commentators said that thefact thatmen can participateinthissport now,wouldnot affectthe femininityofsynchronisedswimming, butthatmen would have to find an adequate role andfunction in the swimming pool (cf. part 2). What theymeanttosay was: mencannot simply take part in thissport. They have to find away of performingsynchronised swimming in accordance with heteronormative expectations. As aconsequence, they must re-enact abinarygenderorder with theirfemalepartnersduringtheir performances.Inthiscontext,the RussiancompetitorAleksandrMaltsev said in an interview:

Men’s choreographyisdifferent from women’s. It’s acompletely different style. In amixed duet, the man should personifystrength,power. The woman, in contrast,beautyand grace [transl.] (URL 94).

Maltsev’sstatement reflects theviewthatgenderidentitiesare biologically predeterminedcategories(e.g. prirodnaia zhenstvennost’ ‘femininity by nature’)whichshould be reflected by one’s behaviourand even by art. There seemstobenoawarenessthatgenderidentity is constructedand that itsconstruction is conveyed andmaintained by performing it.There are obviouslyonlytwo genderidentitieswhichare distinguished by different anddivergent characteristicsand which when takentogethercomplete each other(e.g. Esli rodilsiamuzhikom,tak soizvol’ suka bud’muzhikom. Ane baboi ‘Ifyou are bornasamale,thenagree with fuckingbeing aman.And

117 Original:“просто в Европенеосталосьмужиков.Все их мужики становятся "женщинами". Бедныеевропейки, приезжайтевРоссию!Мыждем Вас с распростертымиобъятиями.Хоть познаетекачественную мужскуюлюбовь!” 140 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness notawoman!’)118.Hence, there is no openness to theideathatone could performgenderinwayswhich do notcorrespondtoone’s sexor–andthis wouldbeanevenmoreradical position – that there arenofixed charac- teristicsofgender. Questioning his ownpreconceived notions of what a manand awoman should be likeand whythisshould even be relevantin the context of artorsport is clearlyoutsideofMaltsev’s realm of imagi- nation. Maltsevisnot alone in this:the Russian actor Maksim Averinex- pressedhis stanceongenderidentityand thegenderbinary in an interview with Moskovskii Komsomolets on 16 May 2014inthe followingway:

In our times,the terms “man” and “woman” have been leveled downsome- how, theyhavebecome more “light” [i.e. likediet products]. This concerns, oh my God, the feelings, too. Half-living, half-loving... Look, whenpeople begin to live and love, then the words “man” and “woman” take theirplaces. That atermlike “unisex” existsand that the borders of the sexesget blurred, this is abnormal to me. For God’s sake, liveyour life whicheverway you want and have sexwith whomyou want to.But if there is something between the legs of aman ... then he ought to behave accordingly. Idon’t feel comfortable to look at those who behavelike awoman. Theweak sex has the right to be capricious, to have aspeciallogic. Iamatolerant person, but Iamagainst all of us becoming sexless creatures [transl.] (URL95).119

Thegenderbinary supposedlyshapesthe “normal” unitybetween two people,each of whom belongs to onesideofthe gender continuum. The

118 Original:“Еслиродилсямужиком,так соизволь сука будь мужиком.Ане бабай!” (MK Online, 11.05.2014). 119 Original:“Она синтез.Инежная, иподатливая, истрогая, исильная.Все что угодно!Понятия«мужчина» и«женщина» внынешнеевремя как-то нивели- руются, становятся«лайт». И чувства, увы, тоже.Полуживу-полулюблю... Вот когда люди начнут жить илюбить, тогдаслова «женщина» и«мужчина» встанут на свои места.То,чтосейчас естьпонятие «унисекс» играницы между полами стираются, для меня ненормально.Радибога, распоряжайся своейжизнью какхочешьиспи скем хочешь.Ноеслиумужчины междуног естьчто-то… то он долженсоответственно себя ивести.Мне неприятнови- деть тех, ктоведет себякак женщина.Слабый полимеетправо на капризы, на особую логику.Ятолерантный человек, но япротивтого, чтоб мы стано- вились бесполымисуществами.Обэтомвспектакле, кстати, тоже есть”(MK Online,16.05.2014). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 141 main qualityofthisbinarity – andthisisthe basisofheteronormativity – is thateachofthe twopoles is deficientonits own. It needsthe otherpoleto be complete.Thisparadigm almost inevitably leadstothe followingcon- clusion: if sexisbiologically predeterminedthensexualidentity is biologically predetermined, too.Fromthis angle,only heterosexualitycan be consideredasnatural and“normal” (e.g. priroda sozdala ‘madebynature’, zakonyprirody ‘lawsofnature’, estestvennyiotbor Darvina ‘natural selectionbyDarwin’), “sincepeopleare no snails”120.Eventhe use of the colloquial noun natural ‘heterosexualperson; literally: naturalperson’reflects theviewthatheterosexuality is thenatural form of sexual identity. Thegenerally assumed heteronormativity is notonlyreducedtosocietal microcosmssuchasfamily,but it runs through thewhole of Russian society andnation, including every structure, institution,system, and, as hasbeenshownabove,evensportswhich allare generally characterised by their binary andheteronormative order(Sperling 2015).Framing heterosexuality andheterosexual identities as “the norm”and,consequently,as “normal” and“natural”, requiresthe rejectionand marginalisationofother identities. As Judith Butler said:

In this sense,wesee the“norm” as that whichbinds us, but we also see that the “norm” creates unity onlythrough astrategyofexclusion (Butler 2004a: 206).

In contrast to this, non-heterosexualityisassociatedwitha“disbalance” (disbalans), with “a mistake by nature” (oshibkaprirody), and, consequently,with “a mental-health problem”(problemavpsikhike)orageneral “illness”(zabolevanie).121 This is also theviewofsomepoliticians and official representativeslikeVladimirIakunin whodeclared in public that

120 Original:“Аведьлюди - не улитки”(MK Online, 11.05.2014). 121 Original:“вприроде есть исключения. рождаются не только мужчины и женщины, но среднийпол. многие , имея финансовую возможность по дости- жению совершеннолетияпринимаютрешение спомощью медицины устра- нить дисбаланс. живутработают, счастливы. мы можемпроживать рядом и никто никого не смущает. но естьдругое. разрушительнаяполитика цен- ностей. им этипарадынеобходимы, чтобыпостоянно быть на слуху, чтобы привлекать ксебекак можнобольше внимания ичтобызаявлятьвсем, чтопо- роканет. но порок есть. ошибка природы и проблемы впсихике”(MK Online, 14.05.2014). 142 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

“those Russians who votedfor Conchita have an abnormal psychology”(u tekh rossiian,kotoryegolosovali za Konchitu,nevse normal’noc psikhikoi)(URL96, 97).Hence, compliance with heteronormativity is a distinguishing or even themaincharacteristic of ahuman being.

Fags andlesbians make me sick, too, in thetruest sense of the word.Ohmy God, Ifeel pityfor all those children whohaveparents who are bothfemale (so, mamas) or bothmale(it is nonsense to talk aboutthese perverts as if theyhad amale sex) and educate achild (two dads) – this is abnormal [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2014).122

Aheterosexual [literally: anatural man] never becomesgay,and they[homosexuals] never become heterosexual [literally: natural] [transl.] (Newsland Online, 16.02.2013).123

Biology is not theonlydiscipline enlisted in theserviceofhetero- normativity.The heteronormative gender binary is also oneofthe central tenets of Orthodox religion andthe RussianOrthodoxChurch. According to this dogma, atruly religious individual is neveranythingbut heterosexual.Consequently,the Russian nation as areligiouscommunity (my religioznyi ‘weare religious’)124 is distinguished by itsheteronormativity or non-homosexuality.Hence, organisedreligion couldonlyinterpret theperformance of Conchita Wurst – as the“most scandalous person”(samyi skandal’nyi personazh)125 at the Eurovision Song Contest – as “anintended propaganda of sinand sexual deviation” (namerennaiapropaganda grekha iseksual’nykhotklonenii)126. It is justified to saythatheterosexualityisasignificantfeature of a person; yet, it is notthe only fact that makesamanorawoman acceptable

122 Original:“Менятакже впрямом смыслетошнит от педиковилесбиянок. Господи, какжежалко детей, укоторых двеособи женского пола (типа, мамы) илидве особи мужского пола (нонсенс, говорить об этих извращенцах, чтоони мужского пола), воспитывающие ребёнка (двапапы). Это – НЕНОРМАЛЬНО”(MK Online,15.05.2014). 123 Original:“Натурал никогда не станет геем, аимникогда не стать натуралами.” 124 Original:“Мырелигиозны”(MK Online, 11.05.2014). 125 Original:“самыйскандальныйперсонаж”(MK Online, 05.05.2014). 126 Original:“намереннаяпропаганда греха исексуальныхотклонений”(MK Online,11.05.2014). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 143 within society. In the eyes of thepublic, Alisaand Dmitrii,for example, must look likeanordinary heterosexual couple from Moscow. However, Dmitrii is transgender. As abiological male,Dmitrii hasafemaleidentity namedAlina.The couple confused andevenoutraged the recording officialsatthe registerofficewhentheybothappeared at theirwedding in a whitewedding dress. TheauthoritiesarguedthatAlisa andAlina had tarnishedthe ceremonyofmarriageand,moreover, “disgraced the idea of family” (pozorit’poniatieosem’e).127 It is evidentthatgenderqueer identitiesare notacceptableevenifthe biologicalconstellation corresponds to heteronormativeideas.

3.4RussianDiscourse and theIncrease of Homophobia

By appealingtothe abovementioned rigidtraditionaland moral values with particular referencetothe concept(s) of gender andsexuality andby deliberately disadvantagingand virtually discriminating againstnon-conformist societymembers duetotheir non-heteronormative identities, ad- herentsofauniquely Russian identity,inparticular politicians andthe Russian Orthodox Church, trytoredefine Russia’s national idea.128 This processisaccompaniedbythe regulation andbythe marginalisationand exclusion of sub-identities andminorities. It wasalready in theyear 1999, when Vladimir Putinsaidinan interviewthat“our country [Russia]needs areconstruction in ordertohave afuture” (nashastrananuzhdaetsiavrekonstruktsiidliatogochtobyimet’ budushchee).129 Scheller-Boltz(2015f) mentionedinone of hisrecent papers on therelationbetween gender, sexuality,and spacethatitisnot at allclear when exactly Russianpolitics and, in particular, Vladimir Putin decidedtoadd theissue of refindingand redefining Russiannational identitytohis agenda.Maybe it wasasearly as 1999whenVladimir Putin

127 Formoreinformation, cf.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEaX3PaqV0M and https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=hqEikvmyqvQ [both last accessed on 20 April 2016]. 128 As to the idea of the Russian nation andtraditionaswellastothe ideaofthe Russian soul (russkaia dusha); cf.Berdiaev (1990). 129 Cf.online at:http://m.ostro.org/general/world/articles/399754/. Watch thecorresponding video of thisinterviewwhichisavailable on Youtube,online at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWL0x4p-zHs[both last accessedon10March 2015]. 144 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness gave theaforementioned interviewtothe Russiannewsservice OstroV. Whicheverway one maylookatit, onecannotignorethe fact that the processofrebuilding andre-establishingRussian national identity plays a crucial role within Russian politics. Moreover, the re-establishing and strengthening of anationalidentity according to aconservative modelhas been gaininginpopularity within Russian societyingeneral.Inthis context,itisinteresting to note that it is notonlypolitics which is involved in thisprocess.Itissociety persewhichactivelytakes part in the establishment andconsolidationofRussian national identity. Theprocessofestablishingand consolidating nationalidentity is always based on ideologicalprinciplesand ideaswhich

themselves existascultural constructs, subjecttoprocesses of change and revisionbyindividuals and groups (Bucholtz 1999: 14).

Moreover, the construction of anational identity is basedonacertain understanding of nation.Generally,and as Mae (2007:41)130 puts it,the ideaofnationischaracterised by apolitically motivated We-consciousness whichleads to ademarcation of othernations as well as by the will to act together whichforms acommunity based on action andwill. With thisinmind, it is not difficulttoapply thesetheoretical ex- planationstothe situationone observes in Russia today. The desired nationalidentityisbased on myths andideological ideas which are deeply rooted in the former Soviet Union.131 Oneofthe widespreadbeliefs at that timewas:the greaterthe population, thestrongerthe nation.

The SovietUnionlinked its power withits population size, which had to be sufficient to sustain an enormous army andalabour-intensive industry (Attwood 1996:96).

Thesamecan be observed todaybecause

130 Original:“[...] einpolitischausgerichtetesWir-Bewusstsein(in Abgrenzung zu den Anderen) und einen damitverbundenen gemeinsamen Handlungswillen,durchden Menschenzueiner Handlungs- und Willensgemeinschaft integriert werden.” 131 Fordetailed information, cf. Rossiia iEvropa vpoiskakhidentichnosti (2000). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 145

the conservative discourse was particularlypowerful, entailing amobile- zation against gender equalityand demandingareturn to traditionalOrtho- dox values – to the ‘normal’ family, with acorresponding conventional role of women (Temkina/ Zdravomyslova 2014: 263).

It seemsobviousthatsuchanideology whichisbased on heteronormativity turns this precise heteronormativity intoaprototypical socio-cultural construction.However, it is no less evidentthatagender orderisalways understood as beinganessential part of one’sown tradition, of one’s own nation, and, aboveall,asubstantialpillarofone’s culture(Mae/ Saal 2007: 9).Thus,the idea of gender is used as apolitical instrument in orderto legitimise apolitical course (Riabova/Riabov2010, cf. also Sperling2015: 12f). Thesocietaldisplacementofwomen,byreducingthemtore- productionand housekeeping, andthe reinvigoration of men, by recog- nising them as supporters andprotectors, are articulated by the Russian Presidentinthe contextofapowerfuland superior nation.The current politicalregimeinRussiadrawsboth, theRussiannation andthe Russian state,asmasculine entitiesalthoughRussiaisactuallyand traditionally associated with femininity,asitisillustrated by the national andpatriotic personification Rossiia-Matushka ‘MotherRussia’ or Rodina-Mat’ ‘Mother Homeland, Mother Russia’ whichare both frequently usedeventoday. Moreover, it is important to understand that Russianpolitics is highlyin- volved in theprocess of representingand performing this masculinity (Sperling 2015: 37). It is awoman’s duty to give birth to children to maintainand to strengthenthe nation.Onthe contrary,itisaman’sdutyto supportand protectthe nationand to actinapatrioticway anddisplay his prideofRussia – apride whichisconnected,amongst otheraspects, with the armedforcesand military parades which areregularly shown on television (Sperling2015).Consequently, Sperlingspeakshere of a“gendered patriotism” (Sperling 2015:149). Russiaseesitselfas“the last bastionofnormality”(Riabov/ Riabova 2014:6). And according to thisideologyand theideaofsuchagendered nation

anygroup with minorityinterests is unwelcome.[...] Of course, ethnic, religious,sexual, andeven political minorities exist in allcountries. Yet, they are not entitled to make political demands onlydue to this fact. Individualism 146 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

is as suspicious as the standing outfrom the mean mediocrity. [...] And as to homosexuality,this corresponds neither with the “norms of the Socialist society” nor with theirideal of anuclear family which is propagated and pursued even more stronglythaninthe West [transl.] (Hauer et al.1984: 13).132

Consequently, it is only logical that it washomosexualitywhichhas graduallymadeits wayinto debatesconcerninggenderpoliciesinrecent years.However, there is something which is uniquetothe Russiandis- course on homosexuality or non-heteronormativityingeneral. Theregula- tion of gender andsexuality is notthe only motive behind thehomophobic politicalcourse.Publicdisplaysofnon-heteronormativityand non-heteronormative lifestylesalsoserve as ascapegoat forcertain social grievances. In recent years,thislineofargumentation hasmovedtothe foregroundand is now part of open,publicdiscourse.Homosexuality,consequently, is primarily associatedwithscenarios of threat anddanger(Althaler2014: 63, cf. also Scheller-Boltz/Althaler 2015). In this context, theargumentisthat Western Europe is plaguedwith seriousproblemsofwhich includethe onslaughtofanumberofundesirable socialchanges whichstand in stark oppositiontotraditionalism andwill thusinevitably lead to acomplete collapse of bothculture andcivilisation. Russia, in contrast, reliesontra- ditional and“normal” ideaswhich are believed to help buildastrongand powerfulnation.This attitude to gender andthe need to sexualise spacesin ordertoassess nations andpolicieshas been gaining in political popularity. Theother significantfact worthmentioning concerns the Russian people.Toagreat extent,itisRussian society itself whichestablishes, strengthens,and upholdshomophobia.Althoughhomosexuality,homosexual practices, andhomoeroticdesireare by no meansnew phenomena in Russian society andcan be observed throughout Russianhistory (Baer

132 Original:“[...] jeglicheGruppe mitPartikularinteressen alsunerwünscht[...].Es gibt zwar in allenLändern ethnische,religiöse, sexuelle und sogar politische Minderheiten,abersie sind nicht berechtigt,aufgrund dieserTatsache politische Forderungenzustellen. [...] Individualismus ist ebenso suspekt wiedas Heraus- ragenaus dermittelmäßigen Durchschnittlichkeit.[...] Und im Falleder Homo- sexualitätkommtdazu, daßsie wederden ‘Normen dersozialistischenGesell- schaft’ noch derenIdealbild von derKernfamilie entspricht, dasnochstärkerals im Westen propagiertund angestrebtwird.” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 147

2009,Healey 2014b,2001),Russian societytodayishighly influenced by the current identity policy whichisboth homophobic anddiscriminatory.133 People are manipulabletosuchanextent that they embrace without question whatever ideological beliefs politicianshappentopresent to them. TheRussian media play aprominent, leadingroleinthis context, last but notleast duetotheir business modelwhich simultaneously reliesonand is influencedbypolitics (Althaler2014, Scheller-Boltz/ Althaler 2015). The politicalmeasures takentocurtail the rights andlifestylesofnon-heteronormative individuals, as well as theway in whichthese measures are presentedand justifiedpolitically,show,tosomeextent,anindoctrinating effectoncertain individualsand groups in Russiansociety whotake it upon themselvestoprevent public displays of non-heteronormativityand who discriminate,inparticular, againsthomosexual men. In addition,the Russian media focusmainly on homophobic acts carriedout by Russians. By doingso, theyare reinforcing theideathathomosexualityisnot to be acceptedortoleratedinRussia. Theirintentionistoencouragethe nation as awhole to take asimilarhomophobic stance. Thefactthatthisapproach hasprovensosuccessful leadstoanumber of important conclusions.A recent representative surveywithin theRussian society, undertaken by the Russian Public OpinionResearchCentre VTsIOM in 2016,shows that 81 percent of theRussianpopulation judges homosexuality as objectionable, whereasonly 12 percent indicated thattheyhavenoproblems with homosexuals(cf. also Kondakov2013, 2010). It must be addedhere that people in Moscow andSaint Petersburg are more tolerant (21percent indicatedthattheyhavenothing againsthomosexuals) than people in other places in Russia (URL 98, URL99).Somelike AlekseiFelisenko, a Russian lawyer fromRostov-na-Donu, feel theneedtojustifytheir views by denyingthattheyare prejudiced.InAugust 2013,Felisenko postedthe followingcomment on theInternet:

This little legal textisaveryconcise legal document from the perspective of the existing legal norms to which it refers: it concerns the domestic legis- lation of Russia as well as international lawand, in particular, the conventional lawofthe Council of Europe. Moreover, thelaw expresses a

133 Adetailed overviewonhomophobiainRussiaand on the attitude of the Russian societytowards homosexuality, including ahistorical overviewonthe development of homosexuality andhomophobiaispresented by Igor‘Kon (1995). 148 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

merciful attitude towards the participantsoflegal relationships – due to these (and not fortheir sake), this law was passed – i.e. towards LGBT people (this termwas introduced to the legal lexiconbythe Council of Europe). In other words, forpeople with anon-traditional sexual orientation, this law is areal giftfrom the RussianState, and minors (children) are protected by the law from difficult and often incomprehensible information which affects their physiological and psychological development. [...] The unanimous passing of the law justifies the view that in the RussianFederation, there is actuallyno prejudice against LGBT people. Onecan even saythatsuchprejudice definitelydoes not exist. The Russian society, whichisrepresentedbyits legitimate State organs,confirmed by the passing of the lawand enshrined legislativelythat in theterritoryunder therule of Russian law, there are people who – besides other things – areaffected by perverse sexualdesires foreach other, irrespective of their own sex.These people who arecalled LGBT people accordingtothe legal terminologyofthe European Union, are pioneers in the sphere of sexual perversitytosuch an extent that they wish forall other Russians to know about their “uniquelyimpressive” lifestyleand to allythemselves withthem at the first opportunity. Where is the prejudice in this? You cannothideacat in abag (URL100).134

134 Original:“Этотнебольшой по текстузакон является оченьярким правовым документом сточкизрения существующих законодательныхнорм, которых он касается, каквовнутреннемзаконодательстве России, так ивмежду- народном правеивчастностивконвенциальномправе Совета Европы.Более того, впринятом законе заметна егонаправленностьнамилосердное от- ношение кучастникамправоотношений, из-за которых (но не ради которых) этот законипринимался, –лицам ЛГБТ (термин, введенныйвправовой лексикон Советом Европы). Иными словами, для лиц (людей) нетрадицион- нойсексуальнойориентации этот законявляется настоящим подарком от Российского государства, алюдей, не достигшихсовершеннолетия (детей), законзащищает от сложной иневсегда понятной информации, касающейся их физиологического ипсихического развития.[...] единодушноепринятие Законапозволяетсказать отом, чтовРоссийскомобществе предрассудкив отношениилиц ЛГБТ практически отсутствуют, можнодажесказать, чтоих нетвовсе.Российскоеобщество влицесвоихлегитимныхгосударственных органовпринятым Законом подтвердило изафиксировалозаконодательно, чтонатерриториидействияроссийского законодательства проживаютлюди, которые, помимо всегопрочего, увлеченыизвращенными половыми от- ношениями друг сдругом, внезависимости от собственнойполовой при- надлежности.Эти люди, по правовой терминологии Евросоюзаназываемые лицами ЛГБТ, являются до такой степениподвижниками всфере половых извращений, чтожелают, чтобывсе остальныеграждане Россиизнали об их Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 149

Homophobiaiscurrently awidespreadphenomenonwithinRussian society. Forexample,duringaroundoftalks at theRussian Youth Educa- tional Forum Seliger in August 2013 ayoung manpubliclyexpressedhis views on homosexuality andpromisedthe Russian Presidenttosupporthis politicalcourse.

My name is Anton Maramygin. IamaCossack from Iaivinskaia from the Prikamskii separate Cossack District. Our elders and atamans have entrusted me with thanking youfor the course our countryhas taken and foryour policies. We see what youare doing: fighting against the sodomites and not allowingthem to adopt our children.Wesupport youinevery way. We call youbatka [father] and support you. And if it is necessarytodemonstrate to all those Navalnyis[Aleksei Navalnyi is aRussian lawyerand political activist; consequentlyNavalnyismeans ‘dissidents, members of the opposition movement’] that the nation is supporting the course of our president, then we will come outwith our legs and arms, and if it is necessary, we will support the policiesofour president with awhip. We will show themthatthisisour countryand that we make our law. Andthey have toldmetosqueeze the hand of ournational leader on behalf of ourentire Cossack Prikamskii. VladimirVladimirovich, will yougive me permission to do this? [transl.] (URL 101, 102).135

This statementcan be describedasaprimeexample of ahomophobic performance. As onecan clearly see, it is notonlythe propagatedideaof identityingeneralwhichisusedfor homophobicpurposes. It is also the

«уникально-удивительном» образе жизни иприсоединялись кним припервой возможности.Какие тутмогут быть предрассудки?Шилавмешке не утаишь.” 135 Original:“Менязовут Антон Марамыгин, яявляюсь казакомстаницы Яйвинс- кая Прикамского отдельного казачьегоокруга.Нашистарейшины, атаманы поручили мнепоблагодарить васзатот курс, которым идет наша страна, за вашу политику.Мывидим, чтовыделаете: боретесьссодомитами, не даете усыновлять нашихдетей.Мывсяческиподдерживаемвас.Мыназываемвас батькой, поддерживаем.Иеслинадобудет доказатьвсяким овальным [= навальным ←Алексей Навальный], чтонарод поддерживаеткурснашего Президента, мы выйдем своими ногами ируками, аеслипонадобится, нагайкойподдержим политикунашего Президента, покажем, чтоэто наша странаинаши правила.Ионипопросилименяпожать от всегонашего При- камского казачества руку нашему национальному лидеру.Разрешите, по- жалуйста, Владимир Владимирович?” 150 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness language(use) that plays an important role in constructinghomophobia (Baker 2005). Anton Maramygin’snegativeattitude towards non-hetero- normativityis, firstofall,madeobvious by the nounwithwhichherefers to homosexual individuals (sodomit ‘sodomite’).Secondly,hementionsthe current violenceagainst homosexuals(borot’sia ssodomitami ‘tofight against thesodomites’), adding that peoplewillfight againsthomosexual people withtheir “legs, arms, and, if it willbenecessary,their whips” (my vyidemsvoiminogamiirukami, aesliponadobitsia,nagaikoi). Thirdly,he impliesthatheisagainst givinghomosexuals equalrights, saying that it is ajustifieddecisionnot to give Russianchildrentohomosexual couples(ne davat’ usynovliat’ nashikhdetei). Fourthly,his argumentationisinfluenced by aspatial dimension,whenhementionsthatthis is “our country”(nasha strana)and “our laws”(nashipravila). It is not necessary to further examine this dialogue at this point.Whatisimportant here is thefact that these episodes increasedconsiderablyand were reproducedafter Conchita Wursthad wonthe EurovisionSongContest. When analysingthe readers’ comments from Moskovskii Komsomolets, oneought nottobesurprisedtofindastrongantipathy towardshomo- sexuality whichisexpressedindifferent ways andbydifferent means. People show theirstronghomophobicviews by usingpejorative anddiscriminatory nouns (cf.Baer 2015)whentheyrefer to Conchita Wurstorto homosexualsingeneral.136 Theuse of neutralnouns such as theofficial terms gomoseksual and gomoseksualist ‘homosexual man’ or the colloquial expressions goluboi ’gay’ and gei ’gay’israre. Theemphasisison attacking. Hence, insultingand discriminatingwords prevail(e.g. pedik ‘paederast’, pederast ‘paederast’, pedofil ‘paedophile’, gomik ‘fag’, gomosek ‘fruit,poof’, pidaras ‘faggot’, pidar ‘faggot’, pidor ‘faggot’, pedoras ‘paederast’, sodomit ‘sodomite’, sodom ‘sodomite’, debil ‘fuckwit’).

136 Female homosexuality is generallymentionedand talkedabout onlymarginally. Homosexual womenare referred to onlybythe connotativelyneutralnoun lesbiianka ‘lesbian woman’ or by themore colloquial word lesba ‘dyke’.In contrast to homosexualmen, thereare no well-known pejorative or, generally speaking,other terms forlesbianpeople than lesbiianka and lesba.The pejorative andinsulting nouns for male homosexuals cannot be usedtorefer to women. The same disbalancecan be observed, by the way, in other languages, like German, English, or Polish (Haueretal. 1984: 22, cf.also Attwood 1996). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 151

It would be good if it were like this, but actuallythe paederastsare slowly appearing...There is notasingle bank holidaywhich is commemorated without those fags like Moiseev, Zverev... Peskov... [transl.] (Newsland Online, 16.02.2013).137

While heterosexual people are considered as normal beings accordingto tradition (cf. natural ‘heterosexual,literally: natural’, coll. normal’nyeliudi ‘normalpeople’), homosexualsaregenerally called liudi snetraditsionnoi orientatsii ‘people with anon-traditional sexual orientation’, netraditsion- nye ‘non-traditionals’, netraditsional ‘un-traditional person’, nenaturaly ‘unnaturals’,ornenormal’nye ‘abnormals(cf. Sullivan 2003: esp. 84). Again, this exemplifiesthe regulative useorrathermisuse of identities as judginghomosexualityasunnatural andabnormalconfirmsthe definition of heterosexuality as naturaland normal and, consequently, as inevitably correct andnormative.138 Defininghomosexualityasunnatural impliesacertain fluidity of sexuality as thedichotomy between naturaland unnatural behaviourim- plieschange. This implies, in turn,thatpeoplecan easily change froma heterosexual to ahomosexual orientationand,therefore, canswitch identities.Fromthispoint of view,heterosexuality is an identity whichis always at risk andmust be protected – hence, theconstant appealsby members of Russiansociety to save thechildrenand to keep them away fromhomosexuals:

137 Original:”Хорошо бы если так, но на деле, педики потихоньконаступают... Не одинпраздникнеобходится безтаких гомиковкак Моисеев,Зверев... Песков....” 138 Homophobia, however, is not limited to overt intolerance against individuals suspected of being gay. In publicinteractions, people who mightnot think of openlyattackinghomosexuals oftenuse language that denigrateshomosexuality.In alot of cases, those who employ thislanguageinpublicare males, usuallyyoung, andpresumablyheterosexual.For them, it maybeadequate, “normal”, or even cool to use those words without actuallyknowingwhattheyexactly do by using those words. Moreover, theyare,inmost cases,not familiar with the conceptofin-group- language-use.Whenpeople who belong to an in-group usewords like pussy, sissy, or queen,thisdoesnot meanthat people of an out-group areallowedtouse these words, too. Out-group-people oftenhavenoawareness of the different pragmatic values thatwords cancarry(Armstrong1997). 152 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

Misha, let’s hopethat your sonwill not learnfrom this “it”[transl.] (MK Online,11.05.2014).139

Idon’t want to insult you, but youshould notexpose your ten-year-old boy to such glorythatmuch, because he could like it and then youwon’t have anygrandchildren [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).140

Ihope that your children will not see thatinthe future and won’t imitate that [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).141

Onemust always remember thatnot everyone participates actively in discourse andpresents suchviews in public.The discoursealsoservesasa meanstoexpress theopinionofthe sector of thepopulationthatdoesnot speak up andtoregulatewhatcan be said in acertain context(Wengeler 2005:268-270). Consequently,the opinion of this sector of thepopulace andthe waythese people expresstheir attitudeishighly influenced by otherfactors andcircumstances.The predominant discoursehas thepower to regulate identities.Itdirectlyshapesthe behaviourand actionsofpoli- ticians, regulatingauthoritiesand controllinginstitutions such as thepolice as well as partisans of the governinggroups. Consequently, most Russians followthe same idea(l)sand interests whichare stronglylinkedtocurrent policies.Thissector of thepopulation formsahomogeneousgroup which focusesonauniformideology and, moreover, dictateswhatisright and what is wrong, whatisgood andwhatisbad,whatisadequateand what is inadequate, what is naturaland what is unnatural (Bourdieu1989). This fostersasituationinwhichsectorsofthe Russianpopulation appropriate politicaldecisions andstart to actasself-proclaimed vigilantesorguardians of thelaw who must fight the“homosexual monster” duetothe beliefthat it is an evil threattoRussian societyand thenation (see below).Homo- phobia is thus framed as something natural. As aresult, anyhomophobic actsare considered to be justified andinthe interests of the “general public”(Morrish1997:335).Thisbecomesevidentwhenone analyses how

139 Original:“Идай Бох "Миша", чтобы Ваш сынневзялсэтого "оно" пример.” 140 Original:“Нехочу Вас обидеть, но Выбысвоего десятилетнегосынапо- меньшектакомувеликолепию приучайте, атопонравится, так ибез внуков можноостаться.” 141 Original:“желаючто бы вашидетиэто не видели вбудущем инеподражали.” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 153 the generalantipathy towardshomosexualityand identitydiversity is linguistically constructedand expressed. Interjectionsplayavery prominent role here. It is impossibletooverlookthe factthataversion to homosexuality is underpinned throughthe useofinterjections whichare intended to expressnegativeattitudes towardsboththe singerConchita Wurstand homosexualityingeneral. Such interjections have negative connotations andexpressadeep disgust whichisfelttowardsnon-heteronormative individuals. Besides the useofinterjections in their original form (e.g. ne daibog ‘Perish thethought’, tfu ‘ugh,yuck’, fu ‘ugh,yuck’, gadost‘! ‘shit’, uzhas ‘awful’), interjectionsare oftenwritten in the comments in away whichreflectshow they wouldbepronounced in a verbal interaction(e.g. bееееее ‘yuuuuck’, fuuu ‘yuuuck’, breddd!!! ‘bullshit’). Usinginterjections in writtentexts as authentically as possible fromthe perspectiveofphonetics andarticulation is clearly motivatedby the readers’ need to emphasise theirhostile stance with regard to homosexuality. Anotherstrategyusedtodegrade anddiscriminate againstnon-heteronormative people andtoexpress one’s aversiontothese individuals is the use of comparisons. Here, onecan clearly seethathomosexuals who are primarily recognised as “sexualdissidents”(Binnie 2004) sharethe same caste – andthe lowest one at that – withall deviant “characters” who are socially marginalisedorevenrejected by society as awhole(cf. Yusupova 2015).

Soviet societywas generallydistinguished by extreme intolerance of dissi- dent thinkingand uncommon behavior, evenwhen entirelyinnocent. And homosexuals are still the most stigmatized of all social groups,including even prostitutes and drug addicts(with whom homosexuals were frequently associated,owing to tendentious anti-AIDSpropaganda) (Kon 1995: 247f).

However, even this casteseemstohaveahierarchy in which, forinstance, the thiefenjoysahigher standing than the“fag”(vorluchshe gomika ‘a thiefisbetterthanafag’).Moreover, identities beyond thetraditional heteronormative matrix areassociated with otvrashchenie ‘heinousness’ and izvrashchenie ‘perversity’ (cf. also propaganda patologii-izvrashchenii ‘the propaganda of pathologyand perversities’).Homosexuals are seen as being mentallydisturbed:theyare oftencompared to,ifnot equatedwith 154 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness people with mentaldisorder(Scheller-Boltz/ Althaler 2015). This comparison obviouslyreflects theattitudeofpoliticians towardssexualmino- rities,which is frequentlyperpetuatedbythe media:e.g. liudispsikhiches- kimi otkloneniiami ‘peoplewith mentalanomaly’, liudi slegkimpome- shatel’stvom ‘people with alittlementalconfusion’, bol’nyeliudi ‘ill people’, devianty ‘deviants’, mutant ‘mutant’, obdelennye liudi ‘disadvantaged people’, nepolnotsennye liudi ‘non-fullyfledged people’, iz- vrashchennoelitso ‘perverse figure’, izvrashchenets ‘pervert’142, ushcherb- nyeliudi ‘rubbishypeople’, lechit’ ikhvpsikhushke ‘tocurethemina loonybin’, psikhicheskoe rasstroistvo ‘mentaldefect’, otpravit’ vbol’nitsu zakrytogo tipadopolnogo lecheniia ‘put them in aclosedpsychiatric institution untiltheyare completely cured’, nadolechit’ bol’nykh ‘one has to cure theseill people’, lechit’, lechit’, lechit’ ‘curethem, cure them,cure them’, gospitalizatsiia po prichine pomeshatel’stva ‘put theminhospital duetotheir mentalconfusion’, pidarov – ilimochit‘ili lechit‘ ‘fagshaveto be killedorcured’.

But whyshould the president deal with thosequestions? [...] Hey, psycho- logists, where areyou?[transl.](URL 103).143

Furthermore, the associationofhomosexuality with perversity is expressed by localising the non-heterosexualorientation in acontext of zoophilia, necrophilia, and, in particular, of paedophilia (Riabov/ Riabova2014,cf. also Althaler 2014,Attwood 1996, Scheller-Boltz/Althaler 2015). Homo- sexuality is understoodasanessential elementofamodernisation course whichchallenges heteronormative valuesand makesthe pathological the norm. In this context, paedophilia enters the discourse as aparticularlyde-

142 Original:“Да,яхотел сказать ЭТО НОВОЕЛИЦО ЕВРОПЫ, аминусымне накидалиуже новыемордашкипод Европу в России.Вот чем опасныподоб- ныешабаши.Они пробуждают извращенцев.Вчём здесь иможноубедиться” (MK Online,11.05.2014). 143 Original:“Нопочемупрезидентдолжензаниматьсяэтимивопросами.Зачто емубольшое уважение!Аупсихологи, где Вы?Где разъяснения, где из- лечение мышления.Где психологиявзаимодействиямысли, слова идейст- вия?Пороки, анамалии,(чем иявляется гомосексуализм итомуподобное) появляется В нескольких случаях (какбыниопровергали этизаблудившиеся люди, так какони больны, надеюсьпока).” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 155 viant phenomenon whichisvisibly consideredasthe inevitable con- comitant of homosexuality(Scheller-Boltz/Althaler2015).

And do yousupport paederasty? And thesubtext – do yousupportsatanism? And tomorrow this? Media from Hongkong: in continental China, theyeat children andcook soup from placenta [transl.] (NewslandOnline, 16.02.2013).144

70% of paedophiles aregay!So, Iura, thisisabsolutelyscary[transl.] (URL 104).145

And the proud British and the spoiled French as well, let themfuck with dogs. It’s thedecision of these nations to commit suicide. Fuckoff [transl.] (Newsland Online, 16.02.2013).146

Apparently,assigning homosexual menand people with atrans-identityto the groupofperversefigures also serves thegoalofstripping them of their humanity. This dehumanisingeffect is reflectedbyinconcrete nounsor insulting unspecific wordslike sushchestvo ‘creature’, neobychnyi personazh ‘extraordinary figure’,orurodstvo ‘abnormality,abnormal creature’.147 Thediscourse demonstrates in no uncertain termsthatnon-heteronormative identities arenot to be takenseriously.Itiseithertheir assumed mentaldisorderortheir suggestedabnormality in generalthatreduces non- heterosexual people to “creatures”who maybeput on show foramusement or even formockery.Peoplewithanon-traditionalorientation resemble a

144 Original:“авызапедерастию? - аподтекст - вы за сатанизм? азавтраэто? - СМИГонконга: вконтинентальном Китае едят детей иварят супизпла- центы.” 145 Original:“70% педофилов- геи! такчто Юра этовсё страшно.” 146 Original:“Агордые британцы иутонченныефранцузы пустьхоть ссобаками трахаются.Вольно этим нациямзаниматьсясамоубийством - флаг им вруки.” 147 “Я когда "ЭТО" бородатого...или "тую"... не ..."тое" существо увидела, уменя была однареакция "ЁРШ ТВОЮ МАТЬ"! Я хоть илояльна клюдям сне- традиционнойориентацией...но мужикнакрашенныйвженскомплатьеуме- ня вызывает только отвращение!Простите, если кого-то обидела своими сло- вами, но этомоя реакция."Ужас,летящийнакрыльяхночи"))))” (MKOnline, 11.05.2014). 156 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness funnycircusattraction148 andare associated with “circusartists”(artista tsirka)and clowns.149 Thefact that homosexualmen are sometimes regardedasobjectsof amusement andassessedasfunny andcomical againunderscores their generally assumed deviance. However, it is in particular theirnon- heterosexuality persethat pointstotheir allegeddevianceand, most of all, to theirun-Russianness.Theydonot procreateand,therefore, do not supportand maintainthe Russianstate.Fromthis ideologicalperspective, homosexual people do not help to consolidatethe Russiannation. On the contrary, theythreaten thecontinuityofRussia.

Homosexualitydefied all this. It could notbeconfined to marriage, and was clearlynot gearedtowards procreation. It involved sex forits own sake, not forpublic good. It complicated the cosyimage of menand womenastwo indivisible halves of awhole, drawn to each other as opposites.Itwas also a dangerous sign of individualism(Attwood 1996: 102).

Consequently, homosexualsare by sheer nature unpatriotic.Theydonot share thesameideological valuesasheterosexualpeopleand even go so far as to dismiss anddestroy traditionand nationalsymbols. Theso-called femininity of homosexualsisinterpreted as astrategytodemasculiniseand, as aconsequence, to weaken thestate andthe Russian nation (cf. Henshaw 2014). Not least, there is awidespreadbeliefthathomosexuality is an importfromthe West,whichisincreasingly regarded as apowerlessand deviant space (Baer 2009,cf. also Ayoub/Paternotte2014).

Indeed because homosexualitycontinues to be imagined in Russia as foreign and in almost exclusivelygenderedterms – i.e., as afemale soul in amale body – it has become formanyRussians asymbol of the nation’s decline, of Russia’s loss of ‘virility’,and its vulnerabilityvis-à-vis the West (Baer 2011: 183).

148 “Раньшебородатых женщин в цирке показывалиили на ярмарке, атеперьна Евровидении”(MK Online,11.05.2014). 149 The association of “suchbeardedwomen” with acircus artist wasalso presented in the Russianmedia (e.g.URL 105). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 157

Hence, homophobiaisactivelyusedasaninstrumenttodiscredit homosexual mendue to the belief that they are characterisedasbeing in oppositiontothe Russiannationand the unique Russiannationaliden- tity.150 Homosexualsare notregardedasindividualsbut rather as auniform group working towardsthe demise of thenation.

Russia is against gays,gaysare against Russia. Please insert an article into the penal code against perversity[transl.](MK Online, 15.05.2014).151

To be afan of atransvestite means to appreciate neither oneself nor one’s country, norone’s tradition [transl.] (MK Online, 07.05.2014).152

Of course,the propagated deviance andabnormality of non-heteronormative people serveasanargumentative basisfor notgiving them the same rightsasheterosexualpeople or thefreedom to enjoythe privilegesand opportunitiesinlifethatheterosexuals have possessed foralong time.

We need laws thatlimit or prohibit the actions of homosexuals in Russia. We don’t need words [transl.].153

In this context, people’s argumentationisoften basedondisputablesources whichcan hardly be calledscientific or do notreflect thelatestresearch findings.Nevertheless, thesesources are stillusedbecause theyunderpin the opinionwhich thesepeople have.Whathappens nowisthatthe informationwhich some people useasevidence to supporttheir viewsbecomes reputablesimply by virtueofithavingbeen used as evidence. In other words: theinformation Ihavegiven is correct because it hashelpedmeto form my opinion. In thefollowingpassage,Iwill give an illustrative example as to theperception of homosexual coupleswho adopt children:

150 Homophobiaisalso used against men in generalwho seem not to think according to the generalideologicalline, opposing,for example, the currentpolitical course (Sperling 2015: 115-123). 151 Original:“РОССИЯ ПРОТИВГЕЕВ, геипротив РОССИИ!!!Ввестиуголов- нуюстатьюзаизвращения!” 152 Original:“Аза трансвиститов болеть, не уважатьнисебя, ни свою странуи обычаи!” 153 Original:“Нужны законы, ограничивающиеили запрещающиедеятельность гомосексуалистоввРоссии, анеслова”(URL106). 158 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

Scholars from the West confirmed the opinionofthe deputies of the Russian State Duma who have studied the agreements concerning the adoption of Russian children with those countries where civil unionsare legalised. The legalisation of civil unions automaticallyleadstothe possibilityofadoption. Russian orphans face areal danger because they can fall out of the frying pan into the fire: from the orphanage directlytothe perverts. The resultsofthese adoptionsare sad if one takes alook at the research results of the American sociologistMark Regnerus from the University of Austin (Texas),published yesterday. The sample of Mark Regnerusisabsolutelyrepresentative. He interviewedalmost 3000 children who were educated by homosexual couples. Theresults are incredible.12% of the children think about committingsuicide(5% in normal families). 40% tend to infidelity, in comparison to 13%innormalfamilies. But themostshocking fact is that 40% of children, educated by gays and lesbians, havevenereal diseases, whereas the percentage of children from heterosexual families with venereal diseases is less than 8. Moreover, non-traditionallyraised children need to see apsychotherapist twice as often; almost30% of these children are unemployed. After publishing this analysis,the American press immediatelylaunched acam- paign which aimed at discreditingthe scholar. The press which is financed by an influential gay-communitycalled foraremoval of Mark Regnerus. But there is areason whythe UniversityofAustin is ranked on place 67 in the world ranking of the most successfuluniversities. In areview of his analysis, 18 professors assessed the work of the scholarascorrect and “methodologi- callyright”. Thescholars also have enough of the aggressive gayminorities which hystericallycall forequal family rights.Ihope that there will be plenty of interesting discoveries forusinthe future with regard to sexual deviations (MK Online, 10.02.2013).154

154 Original:“Западныеученыеподтвердили мнение депутатов Госдумы, собира- ющихся пересмотреть соглашения об усыновлении российскихдетей стеми странами, где легализованы гей-браки.Легализациягей-браковавтомати- чески подразумеваетвозможность иусыновления детей.Уроссийскихсирот появилась реальнаяопасность попастьизогнявполымя: из приюта, пря- микомкизвращенцам.Последствиятакихусыновлений печальны, еслису- дить по опубликованнымвчераисследованиямамериканского социолога Марка Регнеруса из Университета Остин (Техас). ВыборкауМарка Регнеруса получилась безупречнойпорепрезентативности —онопросил почти 3000 детей, которыхвоспитывалиоднополые пары.Результаты ошеломляют— 12% таких детей думаютосамоубийстве (5% —внормальныхсемьях). К брачной неверности склонны 40%, против 13% внормальныхсемьях.Но самоешокирующее—40% воспитанниковгеевилесбиянокзаражены Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 159

Thedominant discoursepushesnon-heteronormative individuals back to the marginsofRussian society, by stigmatising anddiscriminating against them. However, before Idrawattentiontothe marginalisation and discrimination of non-heteronormative people from alinguistic pointof view, Imust mention that there arecases in which peopleare unaware of the factthattheyare stigmatising anddisadvantaging non-heteronormative identities. They thinktheyare tolerant (and areobviouslymistaken about this)because they do not know exactlywhatdiscrimination meansorto what extent discrimination,including discriminatory language use, actually develops. With regard to homosexual men, there are many readers’ comments in whichthe readers insistthattheyare tolerant toward homosexuality.Itistheir preference, however, that homosexual menact outtheir homosexual feelings andlifestyle at home behind closed doorsand not to show theirsexualorientationinpublic.

Fuck each other, butdonot approach normal people. This is all we want from you. This is so easy [transl.] (Newsland Online, 16.02.2013).155

The societyshows patience forhomosexuals, but paedophiles are arrested [transl.] (Newsland Online,16.02.2013).156

Are you, paederasts,banned from breathing, drinking, eating? Are younot employedorsomehow limited? Are youforced to work on plantations or in

венерическимиболезнями, хотя увыходцев из гетеросексуальныхсемей этот процентнеболее 8. Так же, детям воспитанным«нетрадиционно» в 2 раза чащеприходится прибегатькуслугампсихотерапевта, абезработныхсреди нихпочти 30%.После публикацииэтого исследования, вамериканской прессе сразуженачалась кампания по дискредитации ученого.Оплаченная влиятельнымгей-сообществом пресса потребовала уволить Марка Регнеруса. Но,Университет в Остине, недаром занимает 67 место во всемирномсписке самыхпрестижныхучебных заведений.После внутреннего расследования, котороепровели 18 профессоров, признало работуученого легитимной и «методологически-правильной». Похоже, агрессивные гей-меньшинства ис- теричнотребующиедля себяполноценныхсемейныхправ, серьезнодостали ученых.Надеюсь, теперьнас ждетмножество любопытныхоткрытийиз области сексуальныхдевиаций.” 155 Original:“Долбите вы друг друга, но только не лезьтекнормальнымлюдям. Вот ивсе чтоотвас требуется!Это же такпросто.” 156 Original:“Общество относится терпимокгомосексуалистамапедофилов сажают.” 160 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

uraniummines? None of that! You have the same rights as we, the normal people, have. Youcan vote fordeputies, become mayors of big European metropoles, youhave become priests in many countries, youinfluence politics. What else do youwant? In many societies, youare even allowed to organise your parades which are, to put it mildly,unattractive to others. Here, from the perspective of tolerance, Imust addaphrase like:“Idon’t have anything against peopleofanon-traditional sexual orientation;Ithink they are equal to us...”etc. etc. No, Ihave something against themand Idon’t see themasequaltous. ButIdon’t want to killthemortoarrest them. If you want to be paederasts, then go ahead. You have the right to playwith each other your specific gamesathome(URL 107).157

By fighting for“the rights” forperverts, it is forgotten somehowthat healthy and normalpeople havetheir rights, too. First of all, we have the right to be insulated from the paederast propaganda, theright not to see these gay parades. Idon’t care what two paederasts do with each other at home. But theymust notshow that and, furthermore, propagate their pathologybecause this infringes uponthe rights of normaland healthypeople(URL 108).158

Apart from thefactthatthe readers actinadiscriminatory wayhere, their statements reveal some additional prejudicewhich is oftenvoiced in the

157 Original:“Вам, педерасты, запрещаютдышать, естьпить?Вам не дают ра- ботатьили вчем-то ущемляют?Вас заставляют работатьнаплантацияхи урановыхрудниках?Ничегоподобного.Выобладаететемижеправами, чтои мы, обычныелюди.Выизбираетесьдепутатами, становитесьмэрами крупных европейских мегаполисов, во многихстранах стали священнослужителями, влияете на политику.Чегоеще не хватает?Вам даже во многихобществах позволено устраивать ваши, мягкоговоря, непривлекательныедля других, «парады» и«шествия». Тут, сточкизрения «толерантности», ядолженбы вставитьфразутипа: «Ничегонеимею против лицнетрадиционнойсексуаль- нойориентации, считаюихравными нам….» ит.д.ит.п.Нет, имею ине считаю равными!Нояне призываю их уничтожать илибросатьвтюрьмы. Хотите быть педерастами–будьте.Выимеете правоусебядома заниматься друг сдругомсвоими специфическимииграми.” 158 Original:“Впогонеза«правами» извращенцевкак-то забывается, чтоздоро- выеинормальныелюдитоже имеютправа.Ивпервуюочередь, - правобыть огражденными от педерастической пропаганды, правоневидетьэтих «голу- бых» парадов.Мне всеравно, чтотворят друг сдругом два педерастаусебя дома.Ноони не должны выносить этонавсеобщееобозрение и, темболее, пропагандировать свою патологию, ибоэто уженарушаетправа нормальных издоровыхлюдей!” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 161 context of homosexuality.Homosexualityisassociatedprimarily with sex andpromiscuity as well as with hedonismand exhibitionism. The comments imply thathomosexualsdefinetheir identity mainly by sexuality andthattheyhaveastrongpenchantfor displaying theiridentity andtheir affection foreachother in public. Again, it is thedominant discourse that pushes a“marginal”sexualdesireinto thefocus of an identity whichis perceived as perverse and abnormal (Schößler 2008: 110).

I’m not against individuals with adifferent sexual orientation. Ijustdon’t want themtoforce their sexual orientation on other people. If aman likes to have sex with aman, then theyshould havesex at home.Peoplewith a normalorientation arenot obsessed with their orientation, do not flaunt it and fuck in aclosed room[transl.] (MKOnline, 11.05.2014).159

Onemust emphasise here that these people who wrotethe readers’ comments failtorecognise or to ignore that people with aheterosexual orientation nearly always show affection towardeachother in public.This kind of exhibitionismis, however, legitimisedbybiologicalreasons which must notbechallenged. Moreover, homosexual malesare perpetuallyex- posedtothe ideological myth that homosexuality is nothing butaconstant interest in sexwhereasfor heterosexual people,promiscuity,affairs,and a desire forsexualintercourse seem neithertocomeintoplaynor to be part of aheterosexuallifestyle. Returningtostrategiesusedtodiscriminate andmarginalisehomo- sexual andnon-heteronormativeidentities, onecan observethe tremendous impact that thedimensionofspace has: thosewho make such comments callfor aRussiawhichisfree of homosexuals. They generallyplead for isolatinggays(e.g. Akbudushchemudopuskat’ vsiakikh pidorovnel’zia ‘any fagsare notallowedtoenter thefuture’). Homosexualsshould either be deported to Europe whichissaidtoabound with homosexuals(e.g. otpravit’nazapad ‘deportthemtothe West’, gnat’vsekh geev vEvropu ‘chase allgaystoEurope’)orthey should be sent to placesinRussia, in

159 Original:“Яне противразныхсексуальныхиндивидов.Претензииодни - насаждение своихсексуальныхстереотиповдругимлюдям.Нунравится мужику спатьсмужиком-так спитедома.Нормальнойориентации люди не выставляютнапоказ свою одержимостьксвоейориентацииитрахаются вза- крытом помещении.” 162 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness particular to theNorth, wherenobody livesand where they wouldnot disturbother peoplebyexpressing their identity andlifestyle (e.g. ssylat’ na sever ‘deportthemtothe North[where thepopulation is very small]’). Thehomophobic attitude towards – mainlymale – homosexuals is ex- pressedbycomments that state that homosexualityisacrime or acriminal act whichdemands punishment. Consequently,anumberofthosepeople whoargue against thelegitimisation of non-heteronormative lifestyleseven approve, justify,oradvocateactsofviolenceagainsthomosexuals (e.g. borot’siasmerzotoi sodomskoi nuzhno ‘wehavetofight againstthe sodomite abomination’).

Let the paederasts fuck each other in allholes, if theylove that. Butdon’t touch children. And letthemgoasfar as possible with their rights. Actually, theyhavetosay thank-you because they are given aknuckle sandwich only rarely[transl.](URL 109).160

It would notbebad to re-introduce the penal article forhomosexuality [transl.] (URL 109).161

Furthermore, the opinion is voiced that anynon-heteronormative action or behaviour should be reason enough to punishthe respectiveindividuals accordingly. Commenters wishfor homosexualstobeimprisoned (e.g. posadit’ vsizo ‘put them in prison’)162 andfor thecurrent Russianlaw to be applied(e.g. vvestiugolovnuiustat’iuzaizvrashcheniia ‘apply thelaw relating to perversion’). In this context,itisarguedthathomosexualmales shouldnot be given anyprotectionasthis would allowcitizens to take matters intotheir own handsand “solve thequestion of homosexuality” (i.e. attack them).

One onlyhas to leave the parade on 31 Mayinthe districtwithout forces from the interior ministry. This is absolutelyenough and the question as to

160 Original:“ДаПРАВВВП!!!Тысячураз прав!! Пускайпидоры трахают друг другавовсе дырки, еслиимнравится, но ДЕТЕЙ не трогают!Ипошшли они всеподальше со своими "правами"! Пусть скажут спасибо, чтоимморды редкобьют.” 161 Original:“Ане мешалобывернуть статьювУК за гомосексуализм.” 162 “Они не оставят.Горбатого могила исправит.Поэтомувсехихнадо загнать в психушки и на зону.Ивезде заставитьпахать.Это ещемягко”(URL109). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 163

fags in the Russian Federation would be solvedforever [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2014).163

Ihope that theywon’t be protectedbythe police and thenation will get the opportunitytoshowthemall its love [transl.] (MK Online, 29.05.2014).164

In addition,somereaders’ comments allude to theregimeofthe dedovshchina in Russianprisons. It is not sufficient that homosexualsare seen as criminals andare imprisoned, buttheyshould also be humiliatedand sexually abusedbytheir male inmates.

In jail they will like thatverymuch![transl.] (MKOnline, 18.05.2014).165

In the malecoop, this wonder [i.e. Conchita Wurst] will also be at ease. It [sic!] won’t get anyrest from its [sic!] fans [transl.] (MK Online, 18.05.2014).166

3.5The ConstructionofGay Europe andStraight Russia

In Russiandiscourse,homosexualityisusedfor different reasonsinorder to pursue differentgoals.Homosexualityisassociatedwithweakness, powerlessness, andsubordination. Heterosexualityisthe hallmark of a strong, powerful,and superior identitywhichisnot only normal andnatural butwhichisalsoassociatedwithstrengthand dominance. As Ihaveal- readymentioned,the spatialdimension plays an important role in defining andassessing sexual identity. Discoursetransforms homosexuality – one must keep in mind that we are talkingabout acharacter traitorahuman quality here – into alocalised concept. Onemust considerthe social space as it hasbeendescribed by Bourdieu (1989).Hence, thereisaninsistent request to keep Russian culturefree of European queerness(e.g. zapretit’

163 Original:“Простонадо, чтобы 31 мая врайонепараданебыло сотрудников МВД. Этого будетвполнедостаточно, чтобыраз инавсегда вопрос огомо- секах в РФ был закрыт.” 164 Original:“Налеюсь, чтополиция их охранять не будет, инарод сможетим продемонстрировать всюсвою любовь.” 165 Original:“Втюрячке её ОЧЕНЬ полюбят.” 166 Original:“Намужской зоне этомучудуточнопонравится.Отпоклонниковот- боя не будет.” 164 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness v’’ezd na territoriiu RF ėtomuevropeiskomudebilu ivyrozhdentsu ‘to prohibit theEuropean idiotand degenerate to enterthe territoryofthe Russian Federation’, unas vRossii pidarasy ne prizhivutsia ‘herein Russia, fags will notbecomeaccepted’)167.Itbecomes evidentthatRussian people feelinsultedand offended by queerness168 because theyfeel that it is aEuropeanand, therefore, un-Russian phenomenon.169 Whereas Russia is associated andthoughtofasaheterosexual and thereforepowerful country,Europeisperceivedashomosexual andtherefore deviant, decadent,and perverse (cf. Ayoub/ Paternotte 2014). Thele- galsituation in theEuropeanUnion andthe anti-discriminatory policies in its(Western)Europeanmemberstatesare usedbyalotofRussians as well as by Russianpoliticians to createanimage of Europe as auniformspace – one “unifiedcountry” – where allgaysgatherand wherepeoplecan generally do whatever they fancy.This disproportionalpictureisusedto define Europe as aspace of chaos, disorder, anddysfunctionality which seemsadequatefor homosexual people. Two incidents which tookplace in France exemplifythis: thefirst one happenedafter Conchita Wurstwon the Eurovision Song Contest 2014. France started an experiment – supported by the Frenchgovernment – whichaimed at drawingattention to what sexism anddiscrimination mean. Thegoalwas to fightsexism. Allboysand girlswere told to come to schoolinskirts. Thisinitiativeencounteredenormousresistanceonthe part of theFrench, butitalsoignited adiscussion on gender andsexualidentity in Russia.Someofthe most common responsestothe experiment were along thelines of takoi marazm! ‘this is bullshit!’(URL110). Thesecondincidentconcerns theintroduction of marriagepourtous [marriagefor all] which hasabolishedthe differencebetween heterosexual andhomosexualmarriage – the commonly so-called civilunions.InRussia, the indignationatthis decisionwas intense as Francewas prototypically

167 “Дай Бог чтобыэтоттак званый "закат" не распространился на Россию” (Newsland Online, 16.02.2013). 168 “не оскорбляйте наспоявлением "этого" встолице, да ивообще встране. страждущиемогут ехатьвАвстриюпричаститься ктолерастической заднице” (MKOnline, 16.05.2014). 169 “Сегоднятолерантность ,азавтра этикончиты будутрасхаживать по улицами улыбаться срекламныхщитов.мне кажеться ,Россиидавно уженестоит участвоватьвтакихмероприятиях ,какевровиденье.намсевропой не по пути”(MK Online,11.05.2014). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 165 associated withbeing the country of l’amour, l’érotisme,and le sexe but hadnow become transformedintoa“sickgay”country indicating an ob- viouslossofvaluesand tradition as well as having succumbedtothe will of theEuropeanUnion.

France also doesn’t feel ashamed. France hasalways been the prime-example of relationships betweenman and woman, the prime example forhealthy erotic relationships. Andnow, it has suddenlybecome gay[transl.](URL111).

Theconceptofhomosexualityhas become the distinctive marker in Russia’sseparation from Europe.Russia sees andconstructsitself as a heterosexual space, whereasEurope is definedbyRussians as ahomosexual space. With homosexualityevoking acertainassociative frame,this criterion of sexual orientation also shapes theperceptionofspacesin general. Thus,countries which show aleaning towardEuropean ideology concerning same-sex sexuality or whichhaverecently shownjustageneral pro-European tendency suchasUkraine (Riabov/ Riabova 2014:7)are not only interpretedashomosexual,but arealsoconsidered weak andpower- less and, moreover, headed in thewrong direction.170

I’m proud of Russia. It has been and will always be agreat country. In contrast, Ukraine hasactually shown itself to be anation of barbarsand killers. Well, letEuropesee what youare reallylike [transl.] (MKOnline, 07.05.2014).171

This line of demarcationhad been drawnwellbefore Conchita Wurstwon the EurovisionSongContest. Forinstance, on 10 February 2013the Russian newspaper Moskovskii Komsomolets ran an article called “Weare notEurope? Thank God!”(My ne Evropa?Islavabogu!). Thearticle dealt with “the realwar between Russia andEurope” (mezhduRossiei iZapadom idetvoina[...] nastoiashchaia). Itsauthor arguedthatEuropehad completely resigneditselfto“gayification”,while Russiawas still“one of the

170 “Жаль Украину,европаусиленно затаскиваетеевсвои бородатые объятия...” (MKOnline, 11.05.2014). 171 Original:“Ягоржусь Россией, онабыла ибудет великойстраной, авот дейст- вительно ДИКАРЯМИ ИУБИЙЦАМИ собственного народа показала себя Украина, вот пустьипосмотрит Европа, чтовыестьнасамомделе.” 166 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness last havens forman andfor mankind(Rossiia – odin iz poslednikh oplotov chelovekaichelovechestva)(URL112). Thesestereotypes andmetaphors have resurfacedrepeatedly over the past few years.One of theprominent events which provided astage for themwas the2014Olympic GamesinSochi. Clearly, suchdebates increased both in termsofmomentum andintensity in particular duringthe period immediately following Wurst’svictory at the musicfestival. Oneofthe firstreactions afterthe drag queenclaimed top honours at Europe’s biggest music competition wasacallfor ending Russia’s partici- pationinthe ESC. It wasthe ultra-conservativeValeriiRashkin from the Communist Party of the RussianFederationwho made apleafor Russia’s withdrawal from the Eurovision Song Contestand suggestedinstead that Russiaorganiseits ownmusiccompetition whichwas to be called The VoiceofEurasia (Golos Evrazii)172.His argument wasthat“we cannot stand this endlessmadness anymore” (nel’ziazhe terpet’ ėto beskonechnoe bezumie). Belarus, the host of theannualmusic festival Slavianskii Bazar, refusedtoinviteConchita Wursttoperform on stagedespite thefactthat previous winnersofthe ESC(e.g. Aleksandr Rybak, Loreen, Emmelie de Forest) – nottomention artists or singerswho are said to be gay, like the Russian singersFilippKirkorovand BorisMoiseev – hadalwaysbeen invitedtoperform on thestage of theBelarusianmusic contest whichis oneofthe biggest in Eastern Europe (URL 114).Asaconsequence, some readerssupported theideaofanew Russianmusic festivaland suggested thatRussiamustcease competing in (or boikotirovat’ ‘toboycott’)173 the Eurovision Song Contestinthe future.174

172 “Становится стыдноучаствовать нормальнымлюдям втаком бедламе.Пред- лагаюорганизовать конкурс ЕВРАЗИЯ, где будутвыступать конкурсанты с нормальныммировозрениемиталантом в.ч. исАзии,Китая,Индии,Японии, а те ктооправдывает такое пустьвертятся на своейбороде..” (MK Online, 11.05.2014).This comment, in turn, revealsthe interesting fact that peopledonot seem to be awareofthe situation that in India, forinstance, the existence of aso- called third gender is generallyaccepted. Consequently, the author of theaforementioned commentmay be in for asurprise (URL 113). 173 “А может, лучшепросто бойкотировать такие шоу”(MK Online, 11.05.2014). 174 “Киркорова прописатьвевропе, а Россиивообще перестать участвовать в этом Содоме и Гоморе”(MK Online,11.05.2014). With regard to thiscomment, it is interesting to note that Europe is written in lowercase, whereas Russia is capitalised whichcan have happenedeitherbyaccident or on purpose. Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 167

Thestrategyof“demonisingEurope” and“idealising Russia”(Scheller- Boltz2015f) wasalsoupheld andreinforcedbyRussianpoliticians.Of course,thisstrategyaimed at affirming andstrengtheningthe recent anti- Western political course.“TheWest” wasdepictedaschaotic,discordant, inconsistent,and,consequently, weak.Moreover, non-heterosexualityor the supportand the tolerance of non-heteronormativitywas seen andisstill seen as asignofthreat anddangerdue to thewidespreadbeliefthatthis “alien” identityculturedoesnot existinRussiaasitisincompatible with Russian society.

3.6Metaphorising Conchita Wurst – Metaphorising Western Europe

Russian politicians andvariousTVpersonalitiesportrayed Conchita Wurst as amonster, whoencapsulated andembodiedthe deformity,squalidness, anddecadenceofthe West. Conchita Wurst’s victorypurportedly made it clear once andfor allthatEuropehad turned its back on traditionalvalues, whereasRussiaembodied tradition anddemonstrated – notleast through the performanceofthe TolmachevySisters – the rightway to think, to feel and, in particular, to be.Thisled to newmetaphorswhich emerged in the context of theconstruction of space throughgenderand sexuality. Europe wasnot only characterised as queer,gay,and chaotic, andthus, as aspace subjugated by evil forces.Tothe Russianpublic, Europe became the embodimentofevilitself. Europe wasseenasthe spaceofeviland danger.Likeevery space, Europe wasclassifiedand, consequently,sepa- rated accordingtopresumed identity patterns(Benwell/ Stokoe 2006). Such aspatial approach to gender andidentitycausesmarginalisation and constructs asystemofpower anddominancefromwhichspaces and, in the end, identities derive their meaning. Thediscourse on Conchita Wurst, identities, andnon-heteronormativity focusedprimarily on Europe.Itillustratedthe leadingroleofthe European Unionwithin thedebateonidentities. Forapart of the Russian audience, ConchitaWurst, hailing fromand,hence, representing Europe,embodied the decadence, perversity,and evil of Europe on thestage of theEurovision Song Contest. In this context, theadditionalmetaphor of the fall175 was

175 “А зачем России Евровидение?Ну плохаяЕвропа, загнивающая, зачем туда своихпредставителейотправлять?Вот один сосед, сделал своему соседу 168 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness brought up.ConchitaWurst was seen as thesymbol of “the fallofEurope” (zagnivaiushchii Zapad)(cf. also Riabova/Riabov 2013: 32). Sheem- bodied Europe’s “culturaldegradation”(degradatsiiakul’tury)176 and“loss of culture” (poteriakul’tury)aswellasthe “breakup of Europeanculture” (razlozheniekul’tury)177.178 Homosexuality hasbeenaconstant theme in the “anti-Western discourse”(Riabova/ Riabov 2013)inRussia. In the1990s, the politician Vladimir Zhirinovskii hadalready usedthe discussion on sexual identity as amedium of demarcation(Tuller1996) – arhetoricwhich he hasper- petuated to this date.After Conchita Wurstwon theEurovision Song Con- test,Zhirinovskii – in line withotherpoliticians andauthorities – associated hervictorywith thedeclineofmoral values in theEuropean Union(padenie moral’nykh tsennosteivEvropeiskomSoiuze)aswellas, accordingly, with theend of Western Europe (zakatEvropy)and theruinof itssociety (razval obshchestva). He proclaimed:

Theyhaveaculture with tearsinthe eyes…100 years ago theRussian general Brusilov crushedall Austriandivisions, and 50 years ago theSoviet

гадость, потом пришел кнемувгости.Как этоможнообъяснить?Дурость?” (MKOnline, 07.05.2014). 176 “Нокак бы этонебыло, этовсе оченьпечально ипросто аморально, сплош- ная деградация культуры!!”(MK Online,11.05.2014). 177 “вропазабыла какзакончилась великая Римская империя?Нутак впоруска- зать - мы идём квам. Разложение и загнивание зашло ужедалеко.Обидноза хорошихисполнителейипонятно, чтотудаехать - себенавредить.Ведь историяпоказывает, чтоотбор идёт по национальнымипрочим признакам, а не по голосу.Хотя надо ичерез этопройти, чтобспокойно игнорировать такиешоу”(MK Online,11.05.2014). 178 “Кончита —это пробныйвброс для популяризациитаких образов.Еслиона победит, аона победила, то это показатель разложенияЕвропейской культуры, всамомшироком егопонимании. Европа итак деградирует, про- стоэто будетпоследним егодоказательством для слепых.Отдадимдолжное мировымзаправлялам, - вброс был сделан на высочайшемуровне.Германия или Великобритания, например, на такое бы никогда не пошли.Эксперимент, который был поставленнад маленькойстраной, увенчался успехом.Теперь данзелёный сигнал для более крупныхстран (см. выше). Дальше—более агрессивнаяполитика вэтойобласти.Видимо, до этого более-менее осторож- но распространялосьтакое явление (назовёмэто так). Теперьжедан офи- циальныйзелёный свет от самихевропейцев”(MK Online,11.05.2014). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 169

armyoccupied Austria.Wefreed Austria in vain:wehad to stand there and there would be otherpeople [transl.] (URL 115).179

He expressedhis view that

there [inEurope] theydonot have men and womenanymore, there remains onlyanIt”180.Heconcluded, “This is the fall of Europe”181.

Thesinger andactor Dankoaffirmedthis stanceand introduced another metaphor: thefaceofEurope.Hestatedthatthe European Unionshowed itsrealface throughConchitaWurst.182 SinceConchitaWurst’s victory, the metaphorical expression of the face of Europe (litsoEvropy)has gained quickly in popularity. “The face of Europe”, here, hastwo meanings:firstly, as winner of a pan-European, highly medialisedmusic festival,ConchitaWurst’sface became the sym- bolofEuropeand secondly,the expression face implies asudden realisation of having an identity different from one’s own – afterall, aface im- pliesthatthere is an on-looker whoperceives it.Conchita Wurstwas seen as asymbol of non-heteronormativityand non-conformity in Europe.Asa result, Europe wasunderstood as aspace in which almost everything is acceptedand tolerated andwith no setboundaries. Hence, characterising Europe as adeviant,decadent, andnon-conformist space caused the useof “the face of Europe”inamore metaphorical way, namely:decadence and devianceasthe true face of Europe.

Ionlywant to saythat this is thenew face of Europe! [transl.] (MKOnline, 11.05.2014).183

Like Europe,like itsface [transl.] (MK Online,11.05.2014).184

179 Original:“Уних культура со слезами на глазах […]100 летназад русский генерал Брусилов разгромил всеавстрийские дивизии, а 50 летназад совет- ская армияоккупировала Австрию.[...]Мызря освободили Австрию: мы должныбыли там стоятьитам были бы другие люди.” 180 Original:“Уних нетбольшемужчиниженщин, толькооно.” 181 Original:“Это закат Европы!” 182 Formoredetail, cf.URL 116. 183 Original:“явсего лишь хотел сказать, что ЭТО НОВОЕЛИЦОЕВРОПЫ!” 184 Original:“Какова Европа таково илицо.” 170 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

How Europe, so theface of Europe [transl.] (MKOnline, 11.05.2014).185

Vladimir Zhirinovskii opened the door forsuchopinions,suggestions,and, finally, comments. Hispolarising expressions,which were supportedbya numberofother politicians, by members of Russiansociety,and,lastbut notleast, by the media,werebased on ideologicalassumptionsaboutthe structure of society. In thiscontext, we seehow language contributestothe constructionofspace(s) (Gu2012). Anothermetaphor, Iwould like to addressisthe metaphor of the apocalypse.Thismetaphorand therationalebehind it couldbesummedupas follows: queer is bad, queer is athreat,queer is adanger, andqueer is death; therefore, queernessisthe omen of theapocalypse.Thisradical conclusion is drawnfrommyanalysis of readers’ comments,particularlythose fromthe MoskovskiiKomsomolets.These comments illustrate theequating of queerness withthe endofEuropeaswellaswiththe endofculture in general. Non-conformist masculinityappears as asignofthe apocalypse andhomosexuality and non-heteronormativitypersonify theapocalypse par excellence.

And we – apocalypse, apocalypse...What arewewaiting for? There it [the apocalypse] is. It is not standing at the threshold. It is alreadyinthe house. [...] It’s frightening [...] [transl.] (MK Online,15.05.2014).186

So, here it is.Soon,there will be theapocalypsefor sure. Where does the world drift? [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).187

In many comments,the“apocalypse”metaphor is not expressedinexplicit terms, but ratherisimpliedbythe useofspecificverbs whichrefer to an endorwhichindicatethatthe endisnear. Oneparticular verb worth

185 Original:“Какова Европа,таково илицо уевропы.” 186 Original:“Амы - апокалипсис, апокалипсис... Дачегоего ждать, вот он, даже не упорога стоит, авдом вошел.Ужине знаюсколько Лотов найдется в нашемсодоме игоморре.Страшно.Иприэтомстолько защитников "толе- рантности"..Содом он иестьсодом. самый чтонинаестьгреховный грех.Не отмолитесь, толерантщики.” 187 Original:“Нувсе!!!скороточноапокалипсис будет!!куда катится мир...” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 171 mentioning in this context,iskatit’sia ‘togo, to drift, to tend’188 whichis oftenusedincombination with mir ‘world’.

Damnation. Thecrone with the beard. Where does the world go to? [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).189

Where does Europe drift to? [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).190

There are other expressions which also refer to theupcoming apocalypse like perevernut’sia ‘tooverthrow,tooverturn, to tumble’191, ne spasti ‘not to rescue’192,orpriekhat’ na konechnuiustantsiiu ‘to arriveatthe last station’193. In some cases mythological andreligious metaphorsare used to express the endofthe world, e.g. satana ‘the Satan’.

This wasthe message that Satanisalready standing behind the door [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).194

This is the victoryofthe demon[transl.](MK Online, 11.05.2014).195

188 “Что за убожество? ачто этотакое!? Я удивляюсь миру,живу 19 лет,ис каждым годом паражаюсьлюдьмы.Как этот срам,истыд можнобыло пустить на евровидиние?Ведьэто смотрят идетиот8-14 лет.Что онискажут?Спро- сят? -Мам,мамапочему удевушки борода?да ничегоособенного Сын или дочка.Это всеголиш Трансвистит.Мужик баба.Еслиродилсямужиком,так соизволь сука будь мужиком.Ане бабай!Стрёмно,ужастно стрёмно.Я просто вшоке от такихлюдей!Кудамир катиться”(MK Online, 11.05.2014). 189 Original:“Трындец.,,Баба,, сбородой.Кудакатится мир./.” 190 Original:“куда укатиласьевропа?” 191 “Ужас.Мир перевернулся”(MK Online, 11.05.2014). 192 “Европу уженеспасти”(MK Online,11.05.2014). 193 “Участие втакихшоу - позорище!Европа приехала на свою конечную станцию...” (MKOnline, 11.05.2014). 194 Original:“Это было послание, что Сатанауже за дверью(((.” 195 Original:“Европейские ценности-баба сбородой исусами ивголове пустота. Победа беса.” 172 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

3.7Denigrating theAlien – PraisingOne’s Own

Strategiesshaping theimage of spacesalsoplayanimportant role forthe Russian discourseongenderand identity.Ihave already pointed out that in this discourse, Europe is equatedwithaspace of weakness anddecay, whereasRussiaisequated with aspace of power andvitality.Europe serves as anegativeblueprint to remind Russians of whatmight become of their nation if they adopt the “European” modeloforganisingsociety.The main function of this discursivetechniqueistoincite hatred againstEurope in ordertodetract from the shortcomings of Putinism:afailing economy, corruption,aninefficient bureaucracy,risinginequality, andadys- functionaljudiciary system. This techniqueiseffective becauseitleverages homosexuality in order to manipulate.Europeisnot depictedasaspace of weakness because of its liberalattitude towardssexual“immorality” and“perversion” (i.e.homosexuality). Rather, homosexualityisseen as ageneral disorder andasign of the disintegration of space itself.Thus, by excludingalternativeidentities fromits space, Russianpoliticsworktoupholdthe status quo andthereby the integrity of Russia as aspace. This discursivetechnique hascontributed to thechanging perception of Europe by Russians.After the collapse of Communism,Russians soughtto adoptso-called European values. European qualityand lifestyle were tremendously popularinthe early 1990s.Today,Europeisperceived negatively. European societal structures, social security,and the freedom of self-determination arefrequently criticised.Old stereotypes arereignited andnegative generalisations areconcoctedinanefforttodepictEuropeas achaotic space.196 Consequently, many plead forthe boycott of Europe as a place forstudy,work, andtravel:

After this, Ideclare...Iwon’t go to Austriafor a[...] trainee programme [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).197

196 “Чушь.ВГермании действительно пока чисто, но мояродственница 2 недели назадбыла в Париже.Сказала, чтомусор лежитгрудамдаженаЕлисейских полях.Везде вонь игрязныебомжи.Забудьпро чистую гейропу.Это сейчас рассадник всей мерзости”(Newsland Online, 16.02.2013). 197 Original:“После такого, заявляю...Я не поедунапреддипломную практикув Австрию!!!” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 173

Don’t go to Europe this summer! Don’t spend your moneythere. Let them think how theycan isolate Russia. There are alot of other nice places for tourism. Let Europe pull the short straw. Iwould like to go to Spain or Portugal. NowIwon’t go on principle. Iwill survive this decisiontoignore Europe [transl.] (MKOnline, 07.05.2014).198

The more Iknow about Europe, the more distant Iwant to stayfromit [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2014).199

ThenegativegeneralisationsmadeEuropeinevitably lead to adecidedly positive butnolessgeneraliseddepiction of Russia.Russia is praiseddue to thebeliefthatitpreserves traditionalvalues, asense of community (collectiveidentity), andahomogeneousnationalidentity.Thisratherun- critical view encourages asense of patriotism among Russiancitizens. Russiaisperceived as “being right” (Rossiia prava)and “super”(Rossiia super). Presenting Russia as aplace of orderisaccompaniedbyareframing of political termssuchasfreedom and democracy.Itisoften said that Russiais“afree anddemocratic country” (Rossiia svobodnaia idemo- kraticheskaia strana)oreventhe prototypical democracy with “Vladimir Zhirinovskiiasthe face of Russia”(Zhirinovskii, ėto litsoRossii). Commenters at Moskovskii Komsomolets statedthattheywere “proud of Russia” (gorzhus’Rossiei)and believed in Russia as a“world power” (velikaiaderzhava).200 With Russia depicted as aparagonofuniformity,morale, and discipline,itremains abit unclear,however,why some readers’comments conceded that thereputation of theRussian Federationwas notatits best at presentorwhy it wasnecessary to “reconstruct theimage of Russia” in the

198 Original:“Неездитеэтимлетом в Европу!Нетратьте там свои деньги, пусть подумаюткак Россиюосвистывать!Естьмного других замечательныхмест для туризма, а Европа пустьобломается!Яхотел ехатьвИспанию и Порту- галию, теперьфигупоеду из принципа, обойдусь, переживу!!!” 199 Original:“Чем больше узнаю Явропу,тем дальше хочу от неёбыть.” 200 “А ятак думаю, чтопора Россииуже завязыватьсЕвровидением, участиев подобного рода мероприятиях не достойно великойстраны, какой Россия является, тем более чтосейчас онастремительно возвращает себебылую мощь истатус первой мировой державы.Даиденьгиможнопотратить на на- шу культуру иорганизацию конкурса талантов из стран СНГ, анеучастиев демонстрации европейскойраспущенности”(MK Online, 07.05.2014). 174 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness world(vosstanovit’ imidzh Rossii). In comparison, callsfor aRussian occupation of Europe,whichwould help re-establish order, were more consistent in this respect.201 Theconstruction of the segregationbetween Europe andRussia, in whichbothspacesare representedasbeing in directoppositiontoeach other, is supportedbythe useofspecial deicticpronouns, whichshow different pragmatic andconnotative values,depending on theiruse and, in particular, on thespace to which they refer. Pronounsplayanimportant role in theconstructionofidentity andgive hintstothe actual perceptionof spaces.For instance, pronouns such as tam ‘there’, oni ‘they’,orcombi- nations like tamunikh ‘there in theirarea’alwaysrefer to Europe andare usedalmost exclusively in apejorativecontext. This pejorativetonebe- comesnoticeable notonlybecause of the context in which thesepronouns appear, butalsobecause of theirindefinite characterwhichsuggeststhata concrete referenceornaming is notnecessary.Moreover, context, syntacti- cal position, andexperience combined allowustoinfer which part of their statement thosecommenting would have stressediftheir statement had been an act of oral speech. Thereisanelement of speculationand inter- pretationinthis, of course,but it would notbehardtoimaginethatthe em- phasis wouldbeonthe pronouns whichproduce distance andsegregation. In contrast to theuse of pronounswhich refer to Europe,pronouns that refer to Russia mostly evokeapositivetone. Further, they arecombined with concrete nouns whichspecify the referential object,like unas vRossii ‘here in Russia’and my vRossii ‘weRussians,weinRussia’.However, the use of pronouns in aRussian context is relatively infrequent in comparison to theiruse in aEuropeancontext. As is usuallythe case,areferenceis established by using concrete nouns, like russkie ‘Russians’, Rossiia ‘Russia’, or nasha strana ‘our country’.

201 “После этого (всмысле "оно") ужесовсемсвыкшиеся европейцы пишут в своихблогахпросьбы, чтобы Россияпоскорееихоккупировала.Оказалось, чтодажевнасквозьтолерастной игеелюбивой Европе мозгиеще отбилида- леко не всемунаселению, чтобытакое люди воспринимализанорму”(MK Online,11.05.2014). Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 175

3.8Geiropa:the UseofWordFormation in Discourse

Theperception of Europeasaspace that is disintegratedbyhomosexuality hasshapednew termsand wordcreations. Avery prominentnounwhichis frequently usedtoday in themedia as well as by the public in generalisthe blend word Geiropa (‘Gayrope’ – from Gay+[Eu]rope)202.Not only is this noun used to refer to aspace, it also functions as asymbol andasan ideologicalconcept.The merger of thetwo words gay and Europe reflects the symbolicmerger of Europe with thequeer identity andits disintegrative properties.The noun Geiropa is used pejoratively andexpressesthe speaker’sintolerancefor individualswitha“non-traditional sexual orientation” andfor alegal andsocialsystemwhichisbased on acceptanceand equalprotectionunderthe lawfor allidentities(symbolised, forinstance, by institutions such as same-sex marriageorcivil unionsorbysame-sex couplesbeing giventhe righttoadopt children in some countries) (Ria- bova/Riabov2013, cf. also Persson 2015). Thepersonal noun usedfor a person from Geiropa is geiropeets ‘Gayropean man’ or geiropeitsy ‘Gayro- pean men, Gayropeanpeople’inpluralrespectively(Riabova/ Riabov 2013:32). Word creations like Geiropa mirrorthe ongoingand oftentense relationship betweenRussia andEurope. Formuchofits history, Russia hasdiscussed itsidentityinthe context of itsrelations with Europe. Starting with thequestionofwhetherRussia belongstoEuropeorisapart of Europe, every Russiangeneration andregime – fromthe tsars of the Renaissance to Peterthe Great, from theBolsheviksand theUSSR to Yeltsin’sand Putin’sRussia – haslookedacrossthe BalticSea andthe Ukrainian plains to theWestinorder to find an answer to thequestion of what it meanstobeRussian andun-Russian. Thedebates on Russian and European identity increased after thefallofthe iron curtaininthe late 1980s(RossiiaiEvropa 2000).Tobefair, Russianand European identity have been discussedinthe contextofsexualityfor many years in both places.AsBaer (2011:173)states: „Russia hasservedasthe sexual other of theWest“.

202 It is interesting to notethat the noun Geimerika (‘Gaymerica’ – from Gay + [A]merica]whichestablishesasimilar connotative andassociative dimension with regard to the United States of America, is used only rarely. 176 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

Obviously, Geiropa signifiesanewera of estrangement between Russiaand itsWestern neighbours.AsRiabova andRiabovargue,this estrangement hasapoliticalpurpose:the conceptofGeiropa helpsto supportand to strengthenthe collectiveidentityofthe Russianpopulation (Riabov/ Riabova2014: 3).The word containsanewnational ideathatis usedtoovercomeRussia’scrisis of collective identityand to position Putin’s “new Russia”inthe larger contextofworld history (Riabova/ Riabov 2013,cf. also Riabov/ Riabova2014: 4).Onthe onehand, thenoun Geiropa points to theactualand upcoming declineofEurope, on theother hand, it emphasisesRussia’sidentity as astrongand therefore non-homosexual countrywhichsees itself as thesaviour of the world(Riabov/ Riabo- va 2014). Geiropa functions as apersonificationofthe evil of theWestand implies, in turn,the need forRussia’straditionalism and support.203 Wordslike Geiropa are used to open awiderassociative space which helps to framerealityaccording to one’sown discursive goals. Recently, Russiahas triedtoliberateitselffromthe role of being both,the victim and the accused by using Europe as its negative“other” because avery “negative assessmentofEuropehelps to give apositivesense of one’s[i.e. Russia’s] own identity”(Riabov/ Riabova 2014:4). Hence, the perception of issueswhicharise in theEuropeansphere is always shaped by thepredominant discursive frames.Criticalissuessuch as thefinancial crisis, terrorism,ormigration are interpreted as conse- quencesofEurope’sheterogeneity,the failureofits multicultural social modeland itsabandonment of traditional “mores andvalues”.Furthermore, whilemanyEuropeancountries have adoptedasupranationalorientation forsolving internationalproblems, Russia aims strictlyatbeing anational formationwithanational tendencywhich onlyforms an alliancewith countrieslikeBelarus andKazakhstan whichshare its ideological perspective (Metzeltin/ Wallmann 2010).The propaganda againstEuropewhich is widely spreadbypoliticians andthe mediaseems to be embraced by the Russian population.

203 The metaphor of thedeclineofEuropeisnot anew phenomenon. In his book The Fall of the Occident [DerUntergangdes Abendlandes],first publishedin1922/ 1923, the author OswaldSpengler (theedition usedheredates from 1963) conjured up the endofEurope as well as of parts of the Occident in general. He wasone of the first authors to do so.Inaddition, he statedthatevery cultureexistsonlyfor a certain amount of time. Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 177

Wordslike Geiropa whichshow the deep division betweenRussiaand Europe reflect this associative frame(cf. also thetitle of an articleonthe Internet “Goluboi”zakat Evropy.Pederasticheskaia ėpidemiia nastupaet [The “Gay”FallofEurope. TheEpidemicofPaederastyBegins](URL 117) or “golubaia” chuma [The GayPlague])(URL117).Considering this, it is no surprise that current European values andthe European understanding of democracyare on occasion referred to as gomokratiia ‘homocracy’ (Riabova/ Riabov 2013). Theconvictionthatthe current climateoftoleranceinEuropewill lead to itscertaindownfallisexpressedbycompoundnouns such as evrosodom ‘eurosodom’and evrosodomiia ‘eurosodomy’. Here, the determinatum signalises astrongaversion to queerness whichisperceiveddeviant and pervertedand which is oftendenounced as “sodomy”.This is in line with the useofthe derogatory noun sodomit ‘sodomite’whichreferstoaperson with ahomosexual or non-heteronormative sexualorientation. TheEurovision Song Contestisalsomentioned in this context,withthe analogous word formation being geirovidenie (‘Gayrovision’ – from Gay+ [Eu]rovision). Theassociationofthe Eurovision Song Contest with gay performers,gay audiences, andasagayevent as well as its classificationas aEuropean music festival hascontributedtothe creation of this blend word. In conclusion,one couldclaim thatthe currentconflict betweenEurope andRussiaisdominated by thequestionofwho is gayand therefore deviant andwho is notgay and, therefore,not deviant. The useofthe word gay (Russ. gei)doesnot mean thatone hasexclusivelyasexualorientation or acertain kind of sexual identity or desire in mind. Thelexical unit gay- can expand itsassociative scopemeaningthatsomething corresponds neither to thenormnor to thetraditionaland well-orderedway of life (cf. gei-politika – literally:‘gaypolitics’,often used as:‘badpolitics, weak politicalcourse’, gei-strana – literally: ‘gay country’,often used as:‘weak country, countrywithout atraditionalpolitical course,country without norms,(mostly aWestern or Western-oriented)country whichiscom- pletely differenttoRussia’, gei-soobshchestvo – literally: ‘gay community’, oftenusedas: ‘non-traditionalcommunity, weak community,community whichhas nothing in common with Russian people’).The element gei expressesageneralrejection,antipathy,weakness,and subordination and, hence, hasavery pejorative connotation. 178 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

Negationplays an important role in this context. Theprinciple of negationisarecurring themethroughout the entire Russiandiscourseon gender, sexuality,and nation.Ashas been previously mentioned,Russia definesits national identity accordingtowhatRussiaisexplicitlynot.As Alicja Pstyga (2010) states, anegationalways impliesthatanon-negated form existswhichgivesaclear idea of what the non-negated form or conceptlooks like or of howthe non-negated conceptcan be imagined.The non-negatedand therefore affirmative form is always seen as theprototype. So, gay is thedeviant conceptwhichfunctionsasanegation of the norm, whereas non-gay andtherefore heteronormativeisthe prototypethatisthe actualand “normal” concept(Schor-Tschudnowskaja2011). Returning once againtothe elaborationofRiabova andRiabov(2013, 2008), we can saythatRussiagains its powerand constructs itsnationalidentity on the basis of masculinity. Andtobemasculine meanstonegateeverything feminine,which includes (male) homosexuality.

3.9RespectingDiversity:onthe ToleranceofRussianPeople

Up to now,Ihave describedthe mechanisms andstrategiesofhow Russia attempts to refind andrebuild itsnationalidentity.Usingthe concepts of genderand sexualityand instrumentalising them forpropagandapurposes in ordertowin thetrust andthe affirmation of theRussian people has proven enormously successful. This propaganda strategy whichismainly basedonthe reinterpretation of facts andthe conscious useorevenabuse of identityconceptsseemstobepaying off. It cannot be deniedthatat present, theRussian society seemstobeswayedeasilybypropagandistic measures andideological beliefs basedonnationaldemarcation. The perception of gender, sexual,and national identityissignificantly influenced by the Russian media whichplayavery important andhegemonic role in this discourseand whichabigpart of the Russiansociety uncritically accepts. As aresult,political measures andmedia contents are notonly acceptedand affirmed.Russian people also adoptthe precisemeaningof propaganda andcirculate it.Bydoing so,theyincreasingly contributetothe spreadingand establishmentofideas whichare in linewiththe official propagandistic measures andideological beliefs.Asaconsequence, the spreadingofideological ideasgathers astrongmomentum whichisfuelled Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 179 chieflybyanuncritical worldviewwhich ignores therisksofforegoing democratic andsocialstructures anddestroying ahumanesocialclimate. Ihavealready alludedtothe fact that it is neitherjustified norfairto draw an over-generalisedimage of thesituationinRussia. Theattitude of Russian society towards the currentpolitical climateisnot as homogeneous as it mayseem.Not allRussiansstand by these recent political andideo- logicalmeasures with regard to identity policies or share thesameopinion as to what gender, sexual,and national identitiesare “correct”. In orderto take diversitywithinRussian societyintoaccount andtoshow thatthere are, indeed,varyingopinions as to issues of identity, Iwish to devote the last part of this chaptertoideas andopinions whichdiffer from the mainstream. Onemust keep in mind thatidentity is primarily constructedand perceived according to thepredominant discourseand that it is thepredominant discourse whichhas thegreatestimpact on our respective ideas of howweassessgender, sexual,and national identity.Nonetheless, it must be consideredthatthere are Russians who are open to different typesof identitiesand who do notcategorisepeople accordingtotraditional standards, ideas, or preconceivednotions. Consequently,there are people whodid like theperformanceand the song of theAustrian singeraswellas the characteroreventhe performer Conchita Wurst perse.Theyevaluated the performanceand song exclusively on thebasis of talent,music,voice, andshow.

An unbelievable success, brilliantlycontrived. Abearded ladysings about love.Acharming,gracile, unbelievablysensitive woman. [...] Such apower of art. You see abearded manwho is absolutelynot awoman, but you believe that it is ashe. The music absolutelyfills everycell of your soul and forces youtorememberthis painful thing which seemedtobeforgotten fora long time.Amazing[transl.](MK Online, 11.05.2014).204

204 Original:“Невероятный успех, гениально задумано!!!Бородатая дама поёт о любви!Изящная, грациозная, удивительно-чувственнаяженщина!Ноненет, не женщина это.Таковасилаискусства: вы видите бородатого мужичонку, который вовсе даже инеженщина, аверите, чтоэто ОНА. Музыка полностью заполняетвсе клетки вашейдуши, заставляя вспомнитьтобольное, чтоуже, какказалось, давнозабыто.Изумительно!!!” 180 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

All these worries here that – God forbid – your children maysee this. But the carousals, rapes, andmurders on TV everyday,theydon’t worry you? Worried that theycould see that aman in adress has won? So what? Where’s the problem?Look at Verka Serdiuchka before youtalk about thefall of Europe. The song, Ilikeverymuch. Anditwas superwith thefire wings as show effects [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).205

Awesome,Conchita Wurst. You’ve earned it! Aworthyvictory. From the bottomofmyheart:Congrats! [transl.] (MKOnline, 11.05.2014).206

Iabsolutelyloved theperformance [transl.] (MKOnline, 11.05.2014).207

Great job, Conchita. Bravo. Super voice. And so is the song. So much femininity, vanity,positivity,positive energy, andall combined in oneper- formance[transl.](MK Online, 11.05.2014).208

Even thoughIlive in Russia, Idonot sharethe overall enthusiasmabout these girls [the TolmachevySisters]. Ididn’t like the performance very much. The song was abit boring. The performance is nothing special. It was like the rest of the dull mainstream. Even Ukraine, Iliked more. But actually, Iamafanofthe Austrian. Ithink he will be aworthycompetitor forArme- nia in the final [transl.] (MK Online, 07.05.2014).209

205 Original:“какие заботытут насчёт того что "нидайбог" увидят дети.. аточто в телике каждый день пьянки, насилияиубийства- не заботит? подумаешь увидят чтомужик вюбкевыиграл. ичто стого? где проблема? на Верку сердючкупосмотрите прежде чем разглагольствовать о "загнивании eвропы". песняпонравилась иещё особенно классно вышло оформление согненными крыльями...” 206 Original:“Молодец Кончита Вурст,заслуженнаяидостойная победа!Ис- кренне поздравляю!” 207 Original:“Мне безумнопонравилосьвыступление!” 208 Original:“МОЛОДЕЦ,КОНЧИТА! БРАВО! Голос суперипеснятоже. Столько женственности, кокетства, позитива, положительнойэнергии иэто всеводном образе.” 209 Original:“Хотя яживувРоссии,янеразделяют всеобщейлюбви кэтимде- вочкам.Мне выступление не оченьпонравилось,песнянудновата, ивысту- пление не выделяется,сливалосьсовсейсерой массой, даже Украина понра- вилась больше *.* А вообще яболею за австрийца) думаю,он составит до- стойнуюконкуренцию Армении вфинале :D.” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 181

Such atalent like Conchita has is veryhardtofind. But it’s not onlythe talent, it’s also the courage [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).210

Well,Iliked Conchita Wurst. Wonderful feminine physique, nice voice and musicality, unforgettable eyes andhair. Okay, the beard should go, but it is not important. Our Netrebko alsohas abeard. Ienjoyedwatching theact and my ten year old sonquite liked the wonderful diva, too [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).211

Thesecomments show thatthere arepassionate appealsinfavourofmore toleranceand acceptancefor non-heteronormative people as well as in favour of adiverse societyingeneral.

Iamheterosexual and,nevertheless,Iamnot homophobic and Iamnot a barbarian. The reason of your phobia results, first of all, from your repulsive education at home andinschool and, secondly, from your latenthomo- sexuality[transl.](Newsland Online, 16.02.2013).212

The Eurovision 2014 was won by the transvestite Conchita Wurst, the Austrian singer TomNeuwirth, who has become the European symbol of tolerance and patience [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).213

It’s aman in adress – sounds like agreatanswer forachild. Consider furthermore that in reallifeThomas doesn’t seehimself as awoman.And as to the questionabout aman wearing adress, youcould saythat the world is diverse andthat this rare incidence in ourworld has aright to exist. So, if everyone explained that to children this way, this homophobic hysteria

210 Original:“Авот талантакак у Кончиты раз, два иобчелся.Ине только талантаноисмелости!” 211 Original:“Амнепонравилась Кончита Вурст.Великолепнаяженская фигура , приятный голос имузыкальность, незабываемые глаза иволосы.Борода , правда, лишнее, но ничегоособенного.Наша Нетребкотожевбороде.Смо- трел судовольствием, да имоему десятилетнемусынуэта великолепнаядива весьма понравилась.” 212 Original:“Я-гетеросексуал, ипри этом - не гомофоб, иневарвар.Причина Ваших фобий, прежде всего, отвратительноевоспитание иобразование, и, скореевсего, латентная гомосексуальность.” 213 Original:“Авыиграл "Евровидение-2014" трансвестит Кончита Вурст – австрийский певец Том Нойвирт, который стал европейским символом толе- рантностиитерпимости.” 182 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

would endaswell as making funofpeople who do not obeythe rules which youhavecreated yourselves and which youintend to foist on everybody [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).214

In thiscontext, people take into account theconstantconstructionand performanceofidentityand point to ablurringofboundarieswhichmakes it impossible to define andtothinkidentity in ahermetic way. Moreover, somecomments challengestereotypesand show that masculinity andfemininity are concepts whichundergo changesand neverremainstable.

Well,doweactuallyneed this misbelief?Actuallyyourbrain seems to be parched. You need to develop, to think, if possible, in alogical way. The norms which are made up limit your wayofthinking. Youdon’t seemore than your own nose andyou don’t think about where all this comes from. Everylimitation in the world is made up by people themselves [transl.] (MK Online, 26.05.2014).215

First, the song canbetranslated as Rise like aphoenix [...]. Second,all the anchormenonRussian tv-channelswear lipstick, half of them have artificial hair, and they are powdered. This doesn’t mean that theyare gay. Third, it is obvious that Thomasisagreat actor. Moreover, all Russian tsars wore dresses, caftans, that meansArabian dresses.And the idea of atransvestite with abeard hasalready existed foraverylongtime, approximatelysince the 1990s. Even if theyare not gay, but simplywearwomen’sdresses, they paint beards on their faces. Thomashas at least areal one [...] [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).216

214 Original:“Мужчина вплатье, - прекрасный ответдля ребенка!Еслиучесть, чтовобычнойжизни Томас не считаетсебяженщиной.)Ана вопрос о платье на мужчинеможноответить, чтомир многообразен, ичто эторедкое явление внашем мире имеет правонасуществование.Вот когда всеначнут так этообъяснять детям, тогдаизакончатся этагомофобнаяистерияииз- девательства надлюдьми, которые не вписываются врамки, которыевысебе сами установили ипытаетесьнавязатьвсем!...” 215 Original:“Охеп)) надо же какаяересь.Как разтаки ваши мозгиивысохшие. Развивайтесь, размышляйте, желательно логически.Придуманныенормы ограничиливашемышление.Выневидитедальшесобственного носа ине задумываетесьоткудавсе изначально пришло.Все ограничения вмирепри- думано самими людьми.” 216 Original:“Попервыхпеснюможноперевести Воскресникак феникс (ане словнофеникс). Второе всеведушие российкие каналов мужщины - с Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 183

Looking andanalysing the“pro-gay-discourse” – obviously a“marginal discourse” as to identitydiversity –,one cannothelpbut notice the interestingfact thatidentity anddiversity do notplaythe majorrole in this context.Apparently,equal treatmentand respect forall people,regardless of theirparticular identity,seem to be self-evident valuestothese readers. Consequently, theyhaveturnedawayfromthe debatesonidentityconcepts andgenderideas andtowards thestrategieswhichare usedtoinfluenceand shape publicopinion or,moreadequately,the public’s negative stance on identitydiversity.Somepeoplerealise that thenegativeviews on diversity andnon-heteronormativity are manipulated by the media.People virtually attack journalists, commenters,and themedia in generalfor demonising thosewho do notconform to heteronormativenorms.Theysee the media as perpetuating thecurrent propagandistic politicalcourseand aspire to debunk thepropagandawhich is thebasis formost media coverage.

Such ashit, Ihaven’t read foralong time. Either the authordoesnot know Europe and has asuperficial opinion whichhehas maybeformed from scandalous media coverage, or this is acommissioned piece. Butplease, do not think that we are all idiots. It is enough that the politicians think of us like that [transl.] (MKOnline, 10.02.2013).217

In this context, partsofthe Russian society criticise in particular the strategyofoverall generalisation.

Albania and Switzerland – this is Europeorwhat?And whatabout Norway and Greece? England andRomania? Polandand Austria? Europeisso different. It is more diverse than Russia. Dagestan and Yakutia or Tuva and Ingushetia.The aimofthis article is to make Russia be at oddswithEurope

накращенымигубами, половина впариках инапудренные - этонезначитчто онигеи. втретих видночто Томас превосходный актер .Далее - всецари русские ходили вплатьях, кафтан - платье по арабски,Ауж образтранс- веститасбородой этоуже давногде то с1990 годов , - даже еслинегеи - а просто вженское платье переодеваются -онирусуютсебебородууТомаса хоть настоящая -то наложены черныетенинабороду - так такая мода уже 40 леткак.” 217 Original:“Большейерундыдавно не читал.Либоавтор не знает Европыи составляетмнение поверхностно ипоскандальным медийных фактам, либо ... этозаказнаястатья.Ноненадонас приниматьзаполныхдураков (до- статочно, чтоэто этоделаютвласти).” 184 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

and to persuade the Russian citizens of distancing themselves from the European culture and to let themselves fall into the arms of the spiritual masters of the author. You must decide whatisbetter foryou.Beethoven and Rembrandt, Newton andShakespeare or... or... [...] As if there is nothing in Europe but fags218 [transl.] (MK Online, 10.02.2013).219

Moreover, people unmask andevenmockthe strategy of dramatising and exaggerating theidentityissue.

Oh, what astupidarticle... There are not that many fags and lesbians in Europe [transl.] (Newsland Online, 16.02.2013).220

Thestrategyofexaggeration is hardly subtle andmanypeoplesee through the persistent repetitionofhyperbolesrighttoits core of propagandistic intentions andideological objectives.Consequently,somereaders do not take articlesand theircontentsseriouslyand ridicule the respective authors.

Oh, what awise author. Knows everything about America. He has been everywhere, he hasseen everything.[...] [transl.] (MK Online, 11.02.2013).221

218 One hastoadmitthat this commentishighlyambivalent andconflicted: on the one hand, the useofthe noun gomiki ‘fags’ indicates the possible stanceofthe commenters on homosexualpeople andidentity diversity. Obviously, thecomment contains homophobiatoacertain degree andcan be interpreted as ahomophobic, yet, at least as an impolite anddiscriminatoryact.Onthe otherhand, however, the commenter expresses acriticalappraisal of the Russian societyand of the role and function of the media forthe politicalcourse of theRussian president. 219 Original:“Албания и Щвейцария, это Европа иликак?АНорвегия и Греция? АнглияиРумыния?Польша и Австрия?Разнаяона,Европа.Более разная, чем Россия.Дагестан и Якутияили ТуваиИнгушетия.Цельэтойстатьи - поссорить РоссиюсЕвропой иубедить граждан Россииотвернутьсяотевро- пейскойкультурыиброситьсявобъятиякдуховным наставникамавтора. Решайте сами, чтовам ближе.БетховениРембрандт,НьютониШекспир или... или... Даженезнаюкого иназвать кроме Омара Хайама.Икогда это было?Ох,ихитер же этот Щевченко.Будто кромегомиковвЕвропе инет ничего.” 220 Original:“Ох.какаяжетупая статья...педиковилезбинетак имного в Европе...” 221 Original:“какойумный.Все про Америкузнает.Везде был, всевидел (с работывыгоняли за критику). Молодец...., ну просто усраца.” Conchita Wurst andthe EurovisionSongContest 2014 185

There is also criticism of the current RussianPresident Vladimir Putin and of his political course.Itisknownthathis politicalgoals form the basisfor therespective media coverage.

Ican’t understand our politicians. Whyall thiswickedness? Whydon’t you accept Conchita with humour and just see her talent?Why did they keep silent when Tatu Frenchkissed each other on stage in front of the whole of Europe? Our limited mentalitymakes me puke [transl.] (MK Online, 11.05.2014).222

Ididn’t understand what this is? Akind of satire? Icannot believe that the author of the article reallybelieves in whathehas written? Thewhole countryissurroundedbybarbarism,boorishness, bawdiness, thievery, corruption, ignorance and decadencelike thelast bastionofmanhood. You, my dear, just go to Europe more often and seehow people live there.Inany case, youwon’t see anyfat popes driving aMercedes with flashing lights, youwon’t see anygangsters in the parliaments, youwon’tsee policemen who are more afraid than the criminals, youwon’t see authorities whoaccept bribery, youwon’t see ostentatiousfunerals of thieves in law andpresidential carousels. But well, if Europe is so bad why, out of nine million Russian people whohaveemigrated to Europe, onlysomehundredshave come back? Don’t youthink thatyou will feel embarrassed about your article five years from now, Mr Author? [transl.] (MK Online, 11.02.2013).223

222 Original:“Янемогу понять понять нашихполитиков.Откудастолькозлобы? ПочемубынеотнестиськКончите сюмором, ипросто увидетьееталант? Почемужеони молчали втряпочку, когда Татуцеловались взасоснасценах всей европы?Противноотнашегонедалекого менталитета.” 223 Original:“Яне понял, эточто, сатира?Немогуповерить вто,чтоавтордейст- вительно веритвто, чтонаписал.Погрязшаявбескультурье, хамстве, раз- врате, воровстве, коррупции, невежестве, развалевсего ивсеястранакак по- следний оплот человечества..,,Вы, господин, просто почащеездитевЕвропу и посмотрите кактам люди живут.Вовсякомслучае нигде вы не увидитетол- стопузых поповнамерседесах смигалками, гангстеров впарламентах, поли- цейскихкоторыхбоятьсябольше чембандитов, чиновниковработающихза откаты, помпезныепохороныворов взаконеипрезидентскиекарусели.Нуа потом, если Европа так плоха, то почемуиздевяти миллионоврусскоязычных иммигрантов в Европу вернулисьназад наверное пара сотен человек?Небу- детливам стыднозавашустатьюлет черезпять, господинавтор?” 186 On the Instrumentalisation of Queerness

Nevertheless – Asia! Onlythe Asians truckle to the people whohavepower. No European countrywould stand such apresident,such aprime minister, and such aparliament forone second. And we are delighted, lick the arse, saying „Who if not he“?[transl.] (MK Online, 11.02.2013).224

Last butnot least, onecan observe that Russian societyiscriticisedin general – mainly due to how Russians behave andtheir uncriticalmindset. Russian societyisseenasbackward, tootraditional, andnot at allopenfor changesortransformations.

Ihave been living in Canada for14yearsand Idon’t regret that.Here, there are people, butinRussia not really. Here, youcan find tremendous discounts on products during bankholidays,but in Russia, the prices rise increasingly. Here, charityishighly developed and people are uncomfortable with showing all their wealth, but in Russia, people must spit on trampsand demonstrate their diamonds on the hub caps. Here, the police fines the minister when he drives the car and exceedes the speed limitand the police- manwill not be fired foritatall. So,whereare the slaves? There arealot of Russians here, Ukrainian, Georgian, Armenian and so on. And everyone feels like aperson withdignity. Not everything is as great as peoplewould like it to be. Butit’s more quiet hereand more just [transl.] (MKOnline, 11.02.2013).225

You just make aremarkable act of self-display when writing such agitational comments? “Theyare ill”, “Normal peopledon’t need to show of”, “Ko-ko- ko”. [...] You are such beauties, youprotect your tribe. But youare not ill yourselves, if youagitate against them? It is such amania to insult people of

224 Original:“Авсёже-Азия!Только азиаты пресмыкаются передвласть имущими.Влюбом европейскмгосударстве ТАКОГО президента,ТАКОГО премьера,ТАКОЙ парламент не потерпелибынисекунды.Амы вос- хищаемся, лижемзад, приговаривая "ктож,какнеон?"” 225 Original:“ЖивувКанаде 14 летинежалею.Это здесь люди-авРоссиине совсем.Здесь кпраздникамделаютогромныескидки на продукты, авРоссии задирают цены.Здесь развитаблаготворительностьистыднокичитьсябо- гатством, авРоссиинадоплевать на нищих ивставлятьалмазы вдиски ко- лес.Здесь полицияштрафуетминистра когда он за рулемипревысилско- рость иполицейского никтонеувольняет.Так где рабы?Нас тутмного- русских, украинцев,грузин,армянитд. ивсе чувствуютсебялюдьмисдо- стоинством.Невсе такпрекраснокак хотелосьбы,но гораздоспокойнееи справедливее.” Final Remarks 187

anon-traditional orientation. This is alsoapsychicdeviation. You must also be cured in aclosed hospital till the end of your lives, and this is painful, you are aggressive [transl.] (MK Online, 29.05.2014).226

4Final Remarks

As asummary,Iwouldliketoreiterate my admonitionthatitisbyno meansasimple task to draw anydefinite conclusions on thecurrent situation in Russia withregardtoissues of gender, sexual,ornational identity. On thesurface, Russia,indeed, comesacross as asociety which rejects diversity, insistsonadheringtotraditional values,promotesageneral homophobia, allthe whileembracing ageneralcriticalstancetoward globalisationand allthatwhichisassociatedwiththe West. Analyses of the readers’ comments takenfromthe online issueofthe newspaper Mos- kovskiiKomsomolets make clear that this is the predominant climatein Russian society. Onemust refrainfromovergeneralising,however, fortwo significantreasons:firstly,one must considerthe tremendous influenceof the politicalcourseand of themedia whichare heavily influencedbythe governingRussianpartiesand thestate whichcreate theimpression of a uniformpublicopinion simply by virtueofmarginalising or ignoring opposing views. Secondly, one must take thoseRussiansintoaccount who do notadheretomainstream opinion, whotry to preservetheir autonomy andregularly repudiatethe different phobiasaccordingly. Time will show in what direction Russianidentitypolicieswillevolve, what furthermeasures will be takenonthe part of politicsinorder to recreate Russiannationalidentityand to establishRussia’s“new” position in theworld and, finally,how Russiansociety will developand how it will deal with concepts of identity andthe ideaofidentity diversityinthe future.

226 Original:“Авы сами-то не показушничаете, печатая такиехейтерские коммен- тарии?:)"Они больные", "Нормальныхлюдей кпоказухенетянет", "Ко-ко- ко". А единственному разумномучеловеку (Екатерине) наставилиминусов. Нуда,ну да.Какие же вы всекрасавцы, защищайтесвой род.)) А сами-то вы не больные, разтак хейтерски кним относитесь?Знаете, такая мания оскор- бить людейснетрадиционнойориентацией - тоже психическое отклонение. Вас бы вклинике закрытой запереть до концажизни илечить от этого, ато больно вы агрессивные.:))”

Part 4:

EurovisionSongContest 2016

Russia vs.Ukraine? – the Changes in Discourse after Conchita’s andJamala’sVictories

Why, in the whole world, don’tpeople like Russia at all?[...] And for what reasons should Europe like us? (Moskovskii Komsomolets Online, 15 May 2016)227

To date,relations betweenRussiaand Ukraine remaintense with no prospectofthawinthe shortterm.Against thisbackdrop, thefinaleofthe 2016 EurovisionSongContest in Stockholmprovidedanimportant dis- cursivemomentwhenUkraine beat Russia by 43 points in thelastminutes of themusic festival andtook victory. In theend,Russia wasrelegated to the thirdplace becauseits resultswere notasgoodasthose of Australian singer Dami Im,who cameinsecond. Having remainedquite impassive aboutthe ESCin2015, the Russianmedia once againexplodedwithout- rageatthisturnofeventsand rekindled the discourseabout nation and identity. To be sure: this time,genderand sexuality were given amuchless prominentspotinthe debate.Yet,one is justified in asking thequestion: are there anyparallels betweenthisyear andthe year 2014whenConchita Wurstwon theESC forAustria? In hersong 1944,Ukrainian singer Jamala told the storyofthe depor- tationofher great-grandmother, aCrimean tatar, whomStalinhad deported to CentralAsia. Thesong hadalready stirred adebateinthe run-up to the ESC, with somepartiesarguing that thetruemotive behind the song was

227 Original:“Почемувовсеммиретак не любят Россию?[...]Аза что Европе нас любить?”; online at:www.mk.ru/culture/2016/05/15/itogi-evrovideniya-politichesk iy-zakaz-ili-publikadura.html#loaded-132 [last accessed on 28 July 2016]. 190 Eurovision Song Contest 2016 criticismofRussia’sannexationofCrimea. Accordingtothem, the Ukrainian entryhad to be excluded from the contestasthe statutesofthe Eurovision Song Contest prohibitany form of political partisanship on stage.

We won’taccount fortaste, even though Lazarev is abrilliant singer. But his song is bad. But themost important fact is that Jamala’s song is apolitical one and thiscontradicts the conditions of this competition. Consequently, one shouldnot onlyhaverefused to giveher thefirst place, but also to let her compete in this competition. Here, we talk about politics again. Another fact is that the whole contest is bad. There are no good songs [transl.] (MKOn- line, 15.05.2016).

Theballadwas reviewedand eventually receivedclearanceafter thecompetent board of theEuropeanBroadcasting Union (EBU), whichorganises the EurovisionSongContest,had notbeenable to find anyevidenceto supportthe viewsofJamala’scritics.228 In contrast to Jamala,Russian singer SergeyLazarev didnot shyaway fromappealing to the mainstream. He deliveredabombastic show with impressive special effects. Lazarev made suretostage his body andmale identitywith an assured senseofstyle,combining stereotypical manhood with metrosexuality.Clearly, his performanceand thesong Youare the Only One were geared to attractafan base as broadaspossible.229 His actingonstage wassopowerful andenchantingthatitdrowned outthe kitschylyricsand shallowmusic.Inthe end, thestage with its über- sophisticateddesign andthe breath-taking effects producedbytechnology were therealstars of the Russianperformance.

It is as usual: Lazarev is nothing. There are onlyspecialeffects and even they wouldbefustyinanyone’s performance. Jamala – this is somethingelse!

228 The performance of the winning song at the Eurovision Song Contest can be found on the Internet, for example, on Youtube at:www.youtube.com/watch?v= VCG2rw4ZXTY [last accessed on 28 July 2016]. 229 The performanceofSergeyLazarev at thisyear’sESC can be watched on the Internet, for instance, on Youtube at:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e94ds t20C9Y [last accessed on 28 July 2016]. Changes in Discourse after Conchita’s and Jamala’s Victories 191

Her voice,her performance. The showeffects were only apleasant extra to her performance![transl.] (MK Online, 15 May2016).230

Oneissafeinassuming that the nationaljurieshad noticed thequestionable quality of Lazarev’sperformancewhentheyawarded thesecondplace to Jamala,aprofessional singer with asong shehad composed herself(Dami Im fromAustralia wasgiven firstplace by the juries). Hereducation and talent were also appreciatedbysomecommenters.

Jamala’s voice and her song are more professional. If one ignoresthe furore which was caused by themedia, then it will become clear that this result was predictable. It is not possible that moneybuystalent [transl.] (MKOnline, 15.05.2016).231

Lazarev,incontrasttothis, cameinfifth in the jury vote.The newvoting system, whichwas introduced last year,led to somesuspensefulfinal minuteswhenthe resultsfromthe national televotes were addedtothe points thenationaljurieshad awarded.Under thenew voting system, the points fromthe national juries andfromthe national televoteare no longer averagedinorder to determine thenationalvote. Instead, the juries announce theirresults to which theresults of thetelevoteare addedduring asecondround. Inthe end, this ledtoLazarev’sdefeateventhough the Russian singer hadbeen thefavouriteoftelevoters whorankedhim first with 361points. Jamala,onthe contrary,cameinsecond at 323points. Soon afterthe European Broadcasting Union haddeclaredUkraine’s victory,somesuspectedaconspiracy.Participantsinonlineforums, for example,arguedthatthe decisionsofthe national juries hadbeenpoli- tically motivatedand thatitwas them whohad deprived Sergey Lazarev of hisrightful victory.

The most important voice is the voice of the audience. Due to theresults of the audience’s televote,Lazarev has won, Russia has won. The professional

230 Original:“Лазарев каквсегда - никакой, только спецэффектынорм итоукого- то спертые.Джамала -вот этодругое дело!Иголос иисполнение!Эффекты были толькоприятным дополнениемкее выступлению!” 231 Original:“Голос ипесня Джамалыболее профессиональны.Еслиубратьшу- миху, организованную СМИ, результат предсказуем.Заденьгикупитьталант невозможно.” 192 Eurovision Song Contest 2016

juryisonlyabunch of political prostitutes: theywere told forwhomthey have to vote and theyvoted accordingly[transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).232

The audience chose Russia. This is avictory. The professional jury – thisis politics [transl.] (MKOnline, 15.05.2016).233

According to this lineofreasoning,ifthe televoters givethe firstplace to a Russian singer andthe juries don’t,thenthe motive behind the juries’de- cisionmust be adesiretoboycott Russia (apparently,aesthetic considera- tionsofprofessionalartists do notcount in this context). As aconsequence,the newspaper Moskovskii Komsomolets ranthe followingheadline on 15 May 2016: Grandioznyiparadoks Evrovideniia: Pochemupobedila Dzhamala [the grandioseparadox of theEurovisionSongContest:why Ja- mala haswon].234 Anotherop-ed askedthe question: Politicheskii zakaz ili publika-dura? [Political orderorastupidaudience?].235 Andthe Komso- mol’skaiaPravda published areportonthe ESCinwhich the editorsmade no efforttohidetheir stance on theissue: Kakevropeiskoe zhiuri ukralo u Lazarevapobedu [How theEuropeanjury stoleLazarev’svictory].236 In comparison with2014,itisinteresting to note that themedia discussed andreported on Jamala’s performance andher victoryinamore objective andhighly fair-minded way; the readers’comments (here:inthe online issueofthe Moskovskii Komsomolets), too, reflected amuchhigher diversityofopinion than afterConchitaWurst’s victoryin2014. This runs contrarytoexpectations that,due to thecurrent tensesituation between Russiaand Ukraine,the news coverageand thereaders’comments respectivelywouldhavebeenmoresubjective andone-sided thaninthe caseofConchitaWurst’s triumph.After thevictory of Jamala,many

232 Original:“Главныеголоса - голосазрителей.Порезультатам голосования зрителейпобедил Лазарев, победила Россия.Профессиональноежюри - кучка политическихпроституток, за кого им сказали, за того ипроголосовали.” 233 Original:“Зрители выбрали Россию.Это победа.ПрофессиАнальноежюри - этополитика.” 234 Online at:www.mk.ru/culture/2016/05/15/grandioznyy-paradoks-evrovideniya-poc hemu-pobedila-dzhamala.html[last accessed on 28 July 2016]. 235 Online at:www.mk.ru/culture/2016/05/15/itogi-evrovideniya-politicheskiy-zakaz- ili-publikadura.html[last accessed on 26 July 2016]. 236 Online at:www.kp.ru/daily/26529.7/3545977/ [last accessedon28July2016]. Changes in Discourse after Conchita’s and Jamala’s Victories 193 readersdeclaredthattheywere happywith theresultand said thatJamala deserved winning thecompetition.

ATatar has wonand Icongratulate her[transl.] (MK Online, 15 May 2016).237

To substantiate this point, readers frequently pointedout thequalityof Jamala’s talent as asingerand composer. They praisedher performance as elaborateand impressive,yet also modest.Moreover, many readersjudged the resentment voiced in thecomments’sectionofnewswebsiteswithre- gard to Jamala as areactiontothe conflictbetween Russia andUkraine.To them, politics – andnot aestheticquality – wasthe true motive behind the oppositionagainst theUkrainian singer. However, themoreobjective news coverageand themorebalanced readers’ comments stirredupdebatesonpatriotismbecause someRussians feltoffendedbythe lack of support forSergeyLazarev,bythe insufficient supportfor Russia and, in particular, by those who argued that Ukraine and even Australiaperformedbetteratthe ESCand that thethirdplace of Russiawas justified.The author of thearticle ItogiEvrovideniia:politi- cheskiizakaz ili publika-dura? [The resultsofthe Eurovision Song Contest:Political orderorastupid audience]238 from15May 2016 hadto deal with alot of criticism fromreadersmotivatedbyher balanced and definitely provokingnewscoverage.

Dear Mrs Fedoktina! Have youactuallyreadyour ownwords?[...] My godness! You are absolutelycrazy! [...] [transl.] (MKOnline, 15 May 2016)239

The author of this report is either stupid or provocative. In both cases, she has no businesswriting foranewspaper. She has written such nonsense. Last

237 Original:“ПОБЕДИЛА ТАТАРКА ВОТЕЁИПОЗДРАВЛЯЮ!!!!!!!” 238 Online at:http://www.mk.ru/culture/2016/05/15/itogi-evrovideniya-politicheskiy- zakaz-ili-publikadura.html#loaded-132 [last accessed on 17 July 2016]. 239 Original:“Товарищ Федоткина!Тысама-то хоть прочла то, чтонаписала? "Бессмертный полк", Вторая Мироваявойна,"Деньпобеды"... ивсе этов статьеоконкурсе Евровидения!Мама дорогая!Совсем опупела!Есликого-то где-то не любят, нафигтудапереться, апотом, сопеть, пыхтетьинадувать щёки?!” 194 Eurovision Song Contest 2016

year,theyinsulted Gagarina and this year – Lazarev. You are politicising yourself,but youblame others [transl.] (MKOnline, 15 May2016).240

Fedotkina has written such crazystuff [transl.] (MK Online, 15 May2016)241

Tanya,tell us: what do yousmoke [transl.] (MKOnline, 15 May2016)242

Consequently, someofthe arguments whichwere brought forward during the debate about Jamala tieinseamlessly with thediscourse on nationand identitywhichsurroundedConchitaWurst’sperformancein2014.Once again, thefinal resultwas said to be motivatedbypolitics. Readersde- plored that theESC wasnolonger aboutmusic,songs, andentertainment. In theiropinion,the competitionhad ceased to be an entertainmentpro- gramme andhad transformedintoastagefor politics.

In anycase, Lazarevwas the best singer. Yet, politics won [transl.] (MK Online, 15 May2016).243

Oneshould take note of thefact, however, that much of thepraiseand supportJamalareceivedinonlineforumswas notonlymotivated by the quality of hersongbut also by suspicionsthatRussia’s actions during the ESCwere also motivatedbypoliticalconsiderations.Severalreaders of the Moskovskii Komsomolets speculated that people in Russia hadbeenquick to denounce apoliticalboycott againstSergeyLazarev butwereblindto the factthatthe Russianjuryhad delivered apartisanvote,too, by boycotting Jamala.

Russians gave Ukraine and, therefore, its singer Jamala awesome tenpoints. But the juriesofboth states gave zero pointstoeach other!Draw your own conclusion as to this![transl.] (MKOnline,15May 2016).244

240 Original:“Автор статъи, толидура, толиправокатор ивтом итом случае ,ей нечегоделатъвгазете, такой бреднаписала. впрошлом годуобидели Гага- рину,вэтом Лазарева. вы сами всеполитизируете, авинитедругих.” 241 Original: “Какой бредуэтой федоткиной.” 242 Original:“Таня, поделись тем чтокуришь.” 243 Original:“Лазарев конечно спел лучше, но победила политика.” Changes in Discourse after Conchita’s and Jamala’s Victories 195

Of all countries, Russiaistalkingaboutjustice? Larisa Rubalskaia, member of the Russian juryand aso-called ‘expert’, ranked Ukraine as 26th (!)inthe competitionand Australia as 25 th!!!! [transl.] (MKOnline, 15 May2016).245

Overall, readers’comments appear to be more thoughtful andbalanced thantwo years ago. Hence, it wouldbeunjustified to saythatone position hasbeenparticularlyprominent this year or that onesidewas predominant. Evidently, readers’were dividedastoJamala’svictory whichisdemon- strated by the succession of argument andcounter-argument, opinionand opposition. In contrasttothis, readers’condemnation of Conchita Wurst seemed to be more uniform, with only afew exceptions amongreaders supporting theAustrian performer. Nevertheless, some readersusedJamala’s victoryasanoccasion to addresstopicsand aspectswhich have almost nothing to do with theEuro- vision Song Contestand have almost everythingtodowithRussia’scurrent nationaland internationalsituation. Again, the Eurovision Song Contest serves as adiscursivemomenttovoiceone’s owndiscontent.Somereaders sawaconnection between theESC andRussia’scurrent disadvantaged position in bothEuropeand theworld in general. From their point of view, the contesthad become ametaphorfor Russia’s place in the world.

Jamala makes politics, she doesn’t have ahit. [...] And no one reallydoubted that politicswill definitelywin andthat they shoot against Russia [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).246

However, the same issue, this meansdefiningRussia’sposition in the world, can also be observed from adifferentangle as it is shownbythe next reader’scomment.

244 Original:“Граждане Россиипоставили Украине иеепевице Джамалевысокие 10 баллов, ажюри обеих стран выставилодругдругу нули!Выводы делайте сами!” 245 Original:“Иэто Россияговоритосправедливости?Лариса Рубальская, член российского жюри, якобы,"профессионал", ставит Украину на 26(!) место, а Австралию - на 25!!!!” 246 Original:“[...] У джамалыполитика анехит.[...] А чтопобедитименно поли- тика ивыстрелитпротив Россиивэтом никтонесомневался [...].” 196 Eurovision Song Contest 2016

Everything is clear without words. Europeans voted against thecursed empire of evil. Russia has always beenevil. And it remainsevil.Bythe way, Russia is typically Asian, but there are alot of Asian countries which live in averyhuman way. ButRussiameans evil andenvytowardsall humanity. Although Iamborn in this Russia, Ihate this countryfromthe bottomofmy heart [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).247

This statement – andthe division betweenAsia andEurope it contains – leadsusdirectly to another familiaraspect. This aspect,which hasnever been central to theEurovision Song Contest butwhich wasmentioned (again) nevertheless,was thequestion of what Europe is andwhatEurope is not.Thisquestion hadalready been discussed when Conchita Wurstwon the ESCand returnedtothe foreground when Jamala won. On the one hand, many readers argue in theircomments that Europe is apurelygeo- graphicalspace. It is hardly surprising that from this perspective Australia’s entryinthe contest irritatedmanyreadersand thatmanywere ignorant of the reasonsbehindthe EBU’sdecisiontolet Dami Im participateeven though theEBU hadpublishedthemrepeatedly.

What astrange competition. In the eyes of the juries, the Australiansinger has won (where is Europe here?!). The majorityofthe audience voted for Lazarev. And Jamala (!) has won. Onecan organisethis kind of “competition” in [the Ukrainian city] Berdychiv, where Ipropose to organise it in 2017. By the way, as to music,Jamalas song is such shit that youcannot listen to it without harming your ownbody! [transl.] (MKOnline, 15.05.2016).248

This definitionofEuropeasahermetic anduniform geographical space betraysaworldviewbased on svoë-chuzhoe-thinking whichdraws aclear

247 Original:“Все ясно безслов.Европейцы проголосовали противпроклятой империи Зла.Россиявсегда былазлом.Излом остается.Кстати Россияэто типичная азиатчина, но естьмасса азиатских стран, которые живуткак люди. АРоссияэто злоиненавистьковсему человеческому.Хоть яиродилсяв этой России, но ненавижу ее всем сердцем.” 248 Original:“Странныйконкурс.Помнению жури победила австралийка (при чём тут Европа?!), большинство зрителейпроголосовало за Лазарева, апобе- дила Джамала(!). Такому "конкурсу" место в Бердичеве, где ипредлагаю его провестив17 году.Кстати, песня Джамалы, вмузыкальном отгошении - такое дерьмо, котороебез насилиянад организмом, невозможнослушать!” Changes in Discourse after Conchita’s and Jamala’s Victories 197 line betweenwhatshouldberegardedasEuropean andwhatshouldbe regardedasun-European.

Soon,Congo,Angola,China,and Chile willalso belong to Europe. One should no longer call it the Eurovision Song Contest then, but theGlobal- vision Song Contest [transl.] (MK Online 15 May2016).249

On theother hand, andasone could seelooking at somecomments above, Europe is onceagain conceptualised as acognitiveand associative construct. Europe is not viewedasageographical space – as this wouldimply thatRussia(or at leastapart of it)isEuropean. Instead, it is seen as a sphere with itsown values andstereotypeswhich differ fromthe values andstandards upheld in Russia.

And this is the European democracy.And theEuropean values are the same [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).250

Fromthispoint of view, Europe is primarily synonymous with the European Union and, moreover, with countrieswhich feelattracted to the European Unionand have turned theirbacks on Russia.The EU hasshown an increasing interest in Ukraine foralongtimeand continues to punish Russiawithsanctions. In theopinion of many readers of theRussian news websites Ihavestudied, theEUand Ukrainehavemuchmoreincommon with eachother than with Russia.Jamala’svictory is nothing butafurther metaphor reflectingthe presentsituation. Like in 2014, some readers consequentlypleaded forRussianot to take part in next year’scompetition. Some commenters said, that this wouldturnthe ESCintoa“moldy and boringevent”(tukhloeiskuchnoemeropriiatie)because it would be missingRussia’senergy, innovative spirit,and creativity – qualities which the EU seemed to be increasinglylacking. As aconcept, Europe is increasingly challenged,withsomereadersevendoubting that Europe still existsorthatone canstill speakofEurope.

249 Original:“Скоро, наверно, и Конго с Анголой,Китай и Чилипризнают Евро- пой.Тогда конкурснадоназвать не Евровидение, а Глобалвидение.” 250 Original:“Аэтоиестьевропейская демократия, такая же какевропейские ценности ;-)” 198 Eurovision Song Contest 2016

Yet, many so-called European countries have demonstrated their lackofpro- fessionalityand shown to the world that this song contest is extremelypoli- ticised. It is not that Ukraine has won, it is that all of Europe has lost. And if Russia still has some self-respect,itshould stoptaking partinthis displayof shame and politicastersand its big TV-channels shouldstop broadcasting it. Europe ceased to existalong time ago. ThereisonlyRussia, the USA and their willingminion Turkey. [transl.] (MK Online 15.05.2015).251

While Ukraineisregarded as apartofEurope – apartwhichissupported by the EU – Russia is apparentlyviewedasacountrywhichdoesnot and does not want to belong to Europe. In this context, it is oftensaidthat Russiaisahomogeneoussociety whichmaintains itstraditionsand values andinwhich thereisnoplace forall those whodonot wish to respect these values andtraditions. Attributes like un-Russian andanti-Russian – and their mirrorimagesEuropeanand pro-European – are assumed to signify thatsomething is dangerous to thecontinuity of Russian societyand that effective counter-measures must be putinto place to protectsociety against their harmfulinfluence.

The show of Lazarev is veryexpensive. Thesong will be playedfor years, and the singer Jamala will be forgotten in aweek. It was not successful to bite Russia,wedonot need this contest in Russia, and acitizen of Russia with an African look has to be sent to Ukraine in 2017 with asongabout slaves who were deported to America in thousands in themiddleages. But we can doubt that thecontest will be organised in Ukraine, it’sdangerous, because it is not clear, what it will be like overthere in half ayear. [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).252

251 Original:“Однакоряд так называемых европейских стран не только проявили свой непрофессионализм, но ипродемонстрировали всемумиру, чтоданный конкурссильно политизирован.Так чтотут не Украина победила, апроиграла вся Европа.Иесли Россиясебяуважает, то онавообще должнаотказаться участвоватьвэтом зрелищепозора иполитиканства, какипоказыватьэтот конкурспоцентральнымканалам.Европы ужедавно нет, есть Россия,США и приткнувшаякним шестерка - Турция.” 252 Original:“Номер Лазареваоченьдорого стоитвпланеденег.Еёбудут крутить годами, апевицу Джамалузабудут через неделю.Аукусить Россиюнеуда- лось, намэтотконкурс в Россииненужен, авот гражданина Россиисафри- канскойвнешность послатьнаУкраину в 2017 годунадо, спеснейпро рабов, которых тысячами вывозиливАмерикувсредние века.Ноестьсомнения, что Changes in Discourse after Conchita’s and Jamala’s Victories 199

Europe continuestobeassociatedwithaloss of values.Its critics concede thatitmay be ahighly advanced andinnovativeregion. Yet, itsdefining characteristics aredecadence, deviance, andweakness. Many readersargue in theirposts that Europelacks inner strength andpower andisstill on a slopetowards itsown declinebecauseofthislack. Again, theconcept of a gayEurope(geiropa) is called upon by many whothink that Europe’s gaynessisasymptomofits lack of power, energy,discipline,and order. Consequently, the blend words geiropa ‘Gayrope’and geiropeitsy ‘Gay- ropean people’ or – more colloquial – geiropovtsy ‘Gayropean people’ respectivelyenteredthe discourseonceagain afterJamala’svictory.253 In this context, it is worthwhile to take noteofthe phenomenon thatSergey Lazarev himselfwas also ridiculedasarepresentative of “Gayrope”. The singer’splaywith metrosexuality wasclearly interpretedand denouncedas European.

At the bottomofhis heart, SergeyLazarev is – due to hislooks andhis music – atypical representative of decadent Gayropeand it is reallyweird to read all this praise honouringhim here. But maybeitisnot really that weirdifone remembers the lesbiansofTatu or the cute Bilan and other stars of our show businesswho have nothing trulyRussianintheir soul. Nevertheless, they have always been able to capture the attention of their Russian audience, who [...] were always prepared to virtuallylick no matter what disgusting singer from head to toe, if only he was able to winfirst place in thisGayropean competitionand gives themanew excusetospeak of the „gloryofRussia“ [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).254

конкурса на Украине можетине быть, опасно, да инеизвестно, чтобудет там через полгода.” 253 Seefor example: “Украина уверенно побеждает за голосами публики, а Россия –заоценками жюри.Комментариироссийскихпатриотов.Мыеще в 2014 годуговорили, чтоголосование публики –это поддержкаразлагающейся Европойартистов-извращенцев.Пример этому–Кончите Вурст гейроповцы отдали 311 баллов, а Сестрам Толмачевым (Россия) – 132. Совпадение?Не думаю.Потомуподдержкапубликой–показатель, чтоартист скрытый из- вращенец (или явный). А вот поддержка Лазаревапрофессиональнымжюри – этореальныйпоказатель.Они реально оцениваютталант человека.Итого. Настоящий победитель–Лазарев.” (MK Online,15.05.2016). 254 “Сергей Лазарев - иподухуипо внешностиипо музыке - типичный представитель разлагающейся Гейропыиввысшей степенистранно читать хвалебныеотзывывегочесть.Аможетинеттут никакойстранности, если 200 Eurovision Song Contest 2016

Whodecided to send Lazarev to the Eurovision Song Contest? How can one send someonelike this?!Heisabsolutelynothing! He is tooplain andhas no balls! [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).255

Discourseafter Jamala’s victory also revealedaparadoxicalunderstanding of the conceptofdemocracy.Inprinciple,democracy is notunderstood as a fixedconcept.Rather, itsdefinition is flexible andcan be adaptedtothe requirements of thesituation.WhenConchitaWurst wonthe ESCin2014, readersofthe news sites includedinthisstudy considered Russiaasa democratic country, governed by democratic politicianswho make democratic decisionsfor thebenefit of thepeople – aclaim whicheventoday wouldbeworthwhile debating.After Jamala’s victory, readers denounced the democracy (orratherlackthereof)atthe ESC, with someofthemcom- paring thevoting system of thesong contest to thestate of democracyin Russia. Formanyreaders, thejuryvoteatthe ESC2016 correspondstothe decisions made by politicians, whereasthe televoteisframed as thevoice of the“common people”.

But where is democracy here? The people voted forone, but thepublic servants voted foranother? [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).256

Thus,the respective comments do not only convey frustrationwiththe outcomeofasong contest. They also imply dissatisfaction withapolitical systeminwhichthe elitemakes decisions andenforces them withthe help of powerful propaganda without ever listening to theopinionsofordinary citizens.

вспомнитьлесбиянок "Тату", смазливого "Билана" ипрочих звезднашего шоу-бизнеса, которые не имея за душой ничегорусского-национального, тем не менее неизменно вызывалиажиотажуроссийскойпублики, которая на словахратуетзаскрепыидуховность, анаделеготова облизать любого са- мого непристойного исполнителя, лишь бы он занялпервое место на гей- ропском конкурсе идал новыйповод говоритьо"величие России".” 255 Original:“Кто выбрал ЛазареванаЕвровидение?Как такое можнопосылать?! Онвообще никакой!Никожи, ни рожи!” 256 Original:“Агдежедемократия - народ выбралодного, ачиновники - другого?” Changes in Discourse after Conchita’s and Jamala’s Victories 201

Well,this is likeinRussia. The people vote forsomeone, butinthe Duma there are others. This is Russian democracy. Whyare yousurprised?[transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016).257

Normalpeople weremorebenevolent andjust than politicians. It is very good that this is like thisuptonow.[transl.] (MKOnline, 15.05.2016).258

Thereluctancetoquestiondemocratic structuresintheir owncountry and politicalsystemfinds an oddmirrorimage in an energeticdrive to challengethe democratic procedures at theESC whichisthenprojected onto Russia andthe readers’themselves. This means: on the onehand, readerswelcome undemocratic structures andpseudo-democratic measures, becausetheybenefit the people. On theother hand,theyreject thesame structures as undemocratic in adifferent context. This paradoxwas notthat obviousafter Conchita Wurst’sperformancein2014. In May 2016, however, these voices hadbecomeconsiderably more vocal.

Iknow forsure that everything Russia is proudofthese days is what remains of its Soviet legacywhich was created in theUSSR and has somehow been lost and been repainted with importedvarnish. Even the immortal regimentis alegacyofStalin and Molotov. Apart from good-for-nothing drunkards and aKiselev with yachts at the Côte d’Azur nothing has been accomplished in the past 25 years. Watered downvodka, cheese with butter,drugaddiction and hundreds of thousands of HIV infected people in 2015 do not count. [transl.] (MK Online, 15.05.2016)259

257 Original:“Нуэто каквРоссии,Народ голосуетзаодних,апроходят в Госдуму_другие!!Демократияпороссийски!!Чемуудивляетесь?” 258 Original:“обычныелюдиоказались добрее исправедливееполитиков, как хорошо, чтоэто всееще так!” 259 Original:“Нознаюточно, чтовсе, чем сейчас такгордится Россия-этоостанки советского наследия, созданного СССР, где-то потерянное, где-то подкра- шенноеимпортной краской.Даже Бессмертный полк- наследие Сталина и Молотова.КромепоющихтрусовикиселевасяхтаминаЛазурномберегуза 25 летничегосоздано не было.Паленая водка, сырсмаслом, наркомания и стотысяч заболевших СПИД в 2015 годунесчитается.” 202 Eurovision Song Contest 2016

AfterJamala’svictory,manyreadersdeclared theirsolidarity with Ukraine as acountry andwithJamalaasasinger.Nexttothe solidaryreaders’ comments, however, statements canbefoundwhich remind us of thestate- ments publishedin2014 after Conchita Wurst’svictory. Geiropa ‘Gay- rope’isresuscitatedand turnedintoarelevantentity.Due to itsstrongtra- ditionsand normativeway of dealingwith life, Russia does notbelongto Europe according to somereaders.Countries which feel attractedtothe European Union andcovet membershipare automatically definedasweak, decadent, andhence gay. As aconcept, “gay”still playsarole whenit comestosignifying the deviationand otherness which are central to the Russian definition of Europe.Insummary,readers’ comments cannot be read in thesamemannerascomments posted in 2014, despitesomeob- viousparallels. Yet, it is clear that events in Europe arenever interpreted in isolation. Instead,their meaningisalwaysestablished againstthe backdrop of current European andglobalaffairs. We couldsee thisinthe discourse surrounding Conchita Wurstin2014and in thediscoursesurrounding Jamala in 2016. Analysingthe readers’ comments and, therefore, thedimension the discourseonidentityhas takenafter thevictory of Jamala needsamuch closer look as Ihavedoneithere. It wasmysole intention to give afew insights into thediscourse on identity today andtomakeclear thatsome factsand dimensionshavechanged overtime. Iwantedtoshowsome connections betweenthe discourse on identityafter ConchitaWurst had wonthe competition andafter thevictory of Jamala becausehere again, somevery interestingand highly promisingparallelsbecomevisible which invite us to analysetheminmoredetailinthe future.Consequently, amore detailed andprofoundinvestigation is needed here in ordertogivewell- grounded, profound, and, in particular, reliable results. Part 5:

RussianGender andQueer Linguistics:

ACritical Introduction in aDifficult Context

To clarify – academics can’t walk away from achance to talk about definitions – this is all about sex. Gender is something else: the propertyofnouns in many languages to belong to classes that look like sex butaren’t. [...] Sex is part of the real world, as are maleorfemale, or – now –“non-specific”.260

1General Observationsand Critical Remarks

Central to this bookisthe conceptofidentity as an essentialpartofour reality.Realityconstructs our identity.And identity,inturn, constructs our reality.Identityand thediversityofidentitieshaveatremendous effect on society andsocialstructures. Concepts of identity shape significantlythe ideaofsociety andlead to altered or modifiedsocialstructures. Identities exertinfluence on politics andpolitical measures;theychallenge the imple- mentation of social policies,and they affect cultural lifeinmultipleways. Identity diversitycan broadenour horizon, contributetoamore profound understanding of what it meanstobehuman andthus, make us aware of the many facetsofequalityand inequality.Lastbut not least, concepts of identity affect language andlanguageaffectsidentity concepts perse.

260 Takenfromthe article “Our linguistic lagonall thingssex”,in: TheDrum,9April 2014; online at:http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-09/sussex-our-linguistic-lag- on-all-things-sex/5376756[last accessed on 14 April 2016]. 204 Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics

Forovertwo decades,the identity structureofRussiansociety has undergonesignificant changesthe most important catalyst of whichhas been the ongoingglobalisation of itsbusinessand society. Newidentity concepts have entered Russiansociety andtherefore theRussianreality (one mayquestionwhether these concepts are really neworhavesimply returned) andchallenge Russianpoliticsand societymarkedly.Non-heteronormativity in particularhas attractedmuchattentioninthiscontext. The pan-European spreading of diversenon-heteronormative identityconcepts as reflectedbysomepoliticalmeasures of theEuropeanUnion hasnot stoppedatthe Russianborders andhas affectedRussiansociety as well (Kirilina2015). This trendhas also affected academiclifeand researchinRussia: identitydiversity,non-heteronormativity,and queernesshavebeen studied in Russianculturalstudies,literary studies, or sociologyand continue to be an objectofstudy (e.g. Baer 2009,Healey2014, 2010,2001,Kon 2010, 2009,2007, 2003,1998,1995, Kondakov2014, Scheller-Boltz 2015, Sozaev2010,Zink2015).However,effortstodevelop gender-queer linguistics – meaningthe processofimplementing queerness in linguistic research – areconsiderably less pronouncedinRussian academiaalthough the relationbetween queernessand language contains enormous research potentialfor Russianlinguistics. Thelastpartofthismonographaimsatencouraginglinguists to focus more on developingand establishing thedisciplineofRussian queer linguistics.261 At least, it aims at encouraginglinguists to consider that linguistic issuescan be addressedfromdifferent perspectives andthata different (i.e. queer) focusonlanguagecan enrich studiesoflinguistic issues,inparticular with regard to gender linguistic research. Queer linguisticresearch must firstand foremost be adequately under- stoodinlinewiththe poststructuralistassumption that realityand language are closelylinkedund influencedbydiscourse (Weedon 1996):fromthis perspective, language contributes to thereflection andthe construction of our reality and, in turn,our realityinfluencesthe ways in whichpeopleuse languageand perceive linguisticexpressions.

261 Parts of thispartofthe monograph have been published in Scheller-Boltz(2015d, 2014). General Observations andCritical Remarks 205

Unfortunately,there is widespreadconfusion andmisuseofthe word queer (probably due to itsuse in everydaylanguage) which hasled to misunderstandings andinaccurateinterpretationsofqueer linguistics and, especially,ofthe aims andissues which characterise queer linguisticresearch. Queerlinguistics must notbeequated with linguistic studieson homosexuality or gaylanguage, as alreadystatedbyMotschenbacher (2011). The focusofqueer linguisticresearch is on deconstructinghetero- normative language useand heteronormative structures in language andon exploringtheir effects on non-heteronormativeidentities. Aqueer per- spectiveonlinguisticstructuresaimsatdisclosing traditionally established androcentric andwiththatpatriarchal andheteronormativestructuresand attempts to make clearhow thesestructuresaffectlanguageand language use andhow they shapeacertain consciousnesswhich is reflected in and by language.Aqueerlinguisticperspective makesclear that language has the power to excludepeople, in particularpeoplewithanon-heteronormative identity,ortomakeitdifficult forthosepeopletoexpress themselves, to refer to themselves,and to give themselves an identity through language,because theheteronormativesystemoflanguagemay notcomprise thenecessary optionsfor usinglanguageinanon-heteronormative context. Sexualidentity, sexual orientation,and sexual normativityplayamore important role in language than is usuallyassumed.Due to thepervasive influence of heteronormativity,heterosexuality is theidentityconcept whichisconstantlyreconstructedinand by language.Therefore, heterosexuality or heteronormativitymust also be discussedfromaqueer linguistic point of view:firstly,one cannotseparateheterosexuality fromhomo- sexuality or,moreprecisely,heteronormativity fromnon-heteronormativity so easily as thelines betweenheterosexualityand heteronormativity are oftenblurredand cannot be regardedasauniformand hermetic identity conceptinwhichall individuals share the same characteristicsand be- haviourpatterns(Motschenbacher2010).Secondly, analysing heteronormative structures against thebackgroundofthe existing non-heteronormative realities is necessary in ordertounderstand, forinstance, how heterosexualitydistinguishesitselflinguistically from non-heterosexuality. Queer linguisticresearchisstrictlybased on adeconstructivist approach.Ittakes heteronormativityorthe criticism of heteronormativity as astartingpointasitisheteronormativity whichdominatesour societies 206 Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics andlives.Hence, it is heteronormativitywhichisthe lynchpin of queer linguistics, anditisthe linguistic construction of heteronormativitywhich is opposedtothe linguisticconstructionofnon-heteronormativity. By now it hashopefully been made clearthatitisnecessary to study the construction andperception of identityfromadiscourse linguisticperspective. Discourseanalysesare helpfulwhenitcomes to investigating the mechanisms, strategies, andcircumstances whichgovernthe ways in which we createand performour identityand the wayweconstruct ourgender(as shownhere,mainly,withregardtothe discourseonConchita Wurst).Also, the perception andacceptanceofgenderand identity in general canbe made visiblebyanalysing discourses. Discourses influenceand affectus andour understanding of identity.Heteronormative frames which are very common andseemingly necessary in almost allsocio-cultures, make it interestingtoanalyse queer identities, theirconstruction andperception (cf. part 2).However, queer linguisticresearchdoesnot or shouldnot tackle discourselinguisticproblemsexclusivelybecauseitisnot only discourse persewhich offers interestingand highlyrelevantresearchopportunities as to language andlanguageuse.Itisalso promisingtoshift theperspective on anotheraspectofdiscourse,namelyonhow discourse influences and shapescertainlinguistic phenomenaand structures.Languageplays a majorrole in constructing,performing, andperceiving identity – and language – especially language use,but also language norms – is always the resultofdiscourses. We cannotestablishlanguagenorms without being influencedbythe discourse becauselanguagenorms are neverobjective andfree of adiscursiveimpact.Thus, it is essentialfor queerlinguistic research to consider themaindiscourseonidentityasitcontains necessary backgroundinformation whichmust be takenintoaccountinorder forthe respectivelinguistic research questionstorevealsignificant results. Letmebegin withsomecriticalremarksastothe current state of Russian gender linguistics as this is useful withregard to my upcoming comments on queer linguisticresearch. Generally, it is very gratifying to state that Russiangenderlinguisticshas developedrapidly duringthe past 25 years.Itisalsopleasingtoobserve thatgenderlinguistic research today is more differentiatedthanever. However, scholars of Slavonic gender linguisticswillneedtotakeacloser and, in particular, amorecriticallook at this researchfield (cf. Scheller-Boltz2015dfor more details).Ifthey wish to study certainissuesand aspectsinmoredetail, theywill need to General Observations andCritical Remarks 207 shifttheir researchperspectiveand to diversifytheir approaches when investigatingissuespertaining to gender linguistics. Today, new, innovative, andfruitfulfindingscan onlyarise from amergingofdifferent approaches to research. Butabove all,the latest theories must be effectively appliedinorder to produce reliableresearch results (see here Gradinari 2015). Oneofthe observations whichare addressedinthiscontextisthe common practiceofusingthe terms sex (Russ. rod)and gender (Russ. gender)interchangeably forthe sake of research.Itjustseems to be de rigueur now to avoid theuse of sex (commonly understood as biological gender)and to usethe term gender (known as socio-culturalgender) instead. Seen from thisangle,itissimply fashionable to replace theterm sex withthe term gender.Thisisadisturbingtrend as it suggests alackof understanding concerning thedifferencebetween gender and sex (cf. Robinson/Richardson2015 formoredetail).The useofthe term gender seemshardly more thanachange of labels forafter closer analysis it be- comesabundantlyclear that theterm gender oftenreferstothe (biological) sexofaperson and/ or thatthe term is usedwiththe rigidand invariant categoriesofthe biologicalmaleand thebiologicalfemaleinmind. Conse- quently,itisusefultotakeacloser look at the actual usageofthe termsand at theapplication of theconceptofgender in Russia. Thegeneral assessment andassumptionofwhat gender really meansin Russia, hasagreatimpact on theuse of this conceptinRussian linguistic research.Debates in the Russianmedia andwithin Russiansociety begin with the implicitorexplicitnotionthat gender exists as astable and – biologically or naturally – (pre)determinedconcept which is immune to change,variance, andcontinuity.Indeed, if onedefines gender as an

aspect of the self-concept of aperson whichdescribes the self-awareness of this personasamember and arepresentative of acertain sex [transl.] (Kletsina 2009b: 201)262 or as “the firstcategoryinwhich achild experiencestheir ownI”(Kletsina 2009b: 201)263,one canonlyconcludethatthe conceptofgenderconsists

262 Original:“аспектсамосознания, описывающийпереживание человекомсебя какпредставителя определенного пола”. Foramore criticalstance, seeherealso Rumiantseva (2009). 208 Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics exclusively of strict categoriesand mainlyofthe categoriesofman and woman. This kind of assumption locatesgenderinanessentialist context andpresentsitasanaturaland predeterminedconcept.Consequently, genderisneither associatedwithperforming identity nor with (re)pro- ducing and(re)imitating identity. Hence, gender is notseenasacon- struction.Thisbasic hypothesisstandsinstrikingcontrasttonotions of genderwidelyaccepted by the internationalacademiccommunity today. Moreover, it raisesthe question:isthere adifferencebetween sex and gender,ifgender is used andthought of in this traditional way? Last but notleast, it must be mentioned thatRussian gender (linguistic) research focusesprimarily on womenand on women’ssituationina cultural, social,orevenlinguistic context. However, gender (linguistic) research does notaim at investigating onlywomen andfemininity,because genderresearchisnot at all women’sstudies. Gender (linguistic)studies go far beyond this research topicalthoughfocussing (primarily)onwomen is undoubtedly anecessary research approach as it formsthe basisfor further areas of research andleads directly to newresearch fields. Russia’sapproachtogenderisgearedtowardsthe experience of so- called cis-people who accept andlive theirgenderinaccordancewith the sextheywere assigned at birth. However, this assumption of two hermetic concepts – namely womanand man – whichare characterisedbytraditional ideas,stereotypical generalisations, and, mainly,bytheir heterosexual orientation (Kletsina2009a) ignoresother, that is to say, non-heteronormative identities,whichare no less important forgenderlinguistic research(Mehlmann2006: 350).For example,intersex people,ingeneral, do notidentifywithacertainsex or gender. Trans-people cannot so easilybe located withinthe binary gender system, either. Members of thethirdsex “whose gender identities andenactments falloutsideofsocio-cultural norms forwomen andmen” (Zimman/ Hall 2010: 166) fulfil asocialrole andidentifythemselveswith theirsociallydeterminedassignmenttoa certaingenderalthough theyobviouslyhaveadiffering sex. This highlights thenotion that identitycan be multiple,variable,and unambiguous. What asocio-culturalcommunity perceives anddefinesasmasculineor

263 Original:“первая категория, вкоторой ребенокосмысливаетсвоесобственное Я.” General Observations andCritical Remarks 209 feminine is always theresult of interpretive ascriptions andcan neverbe definedinauniversalsense (Kroll 2002:357). Non-heteronormativeidentitiesplayavery marginalrole in current Russian gender linguistics, if they playany role at all. Although Temkina (2009:34) hintsat“something” whichmight exist beyondthe dichotomyof manand woman, this “something”isnot addressedinresearch.Thisun- critical approach to gender and identity stymiesresearchadvancements.It assumesthatman and womanare fixedconcepts and, as aresult, it does not callintoquestionhow genderisconstructed,performed,and perceived in andthrough language as well as withinand by society.Consequently, gen- derlinguistsrun the risk of overlooking the fact that thegenderofaperson can actually differfromtheir sexdue to thefact that people canbeassigned to acertain sexbut construct andperformtheir gender in ways whichoften resisttraditionaldivisons betweenmen and women.

Moving from sex to gender can make theinvestigation more subtle:gender categoriesare not restrictedtothe male/femaledichotomy,females need not be feminine, and femininitycan be amatter of degree [or, as Imight now put it, take many different forms] (McConnell-Ginet 2011: 41).

Thus,amore modern approach to genderlinguisticswould be to avoid usingresearchmethods whichrelyontraditional heterosexualityand the genderbinary.Focussing exclusivelyonman andwoman meansto consciously ignore “intermediate”, that is to saynon-heteronormativeidentities.Rather, amodern approach woulddealwithidentityingeneraland with theway in whichidentityisconstructed (Butler1998, 1997,1991). Consequently, the differentiationbetween gender and sex is essentialand formsthe basis notonly forgenderlinguistics, but also forqueer linguistic research.Alla Kirilina (2015) is rightinappealingtoRussianlinguists to take poststructuralistapproachesmoreintoaccountand to stress theim- portanceofincluding otherconceptsofgenderintheir research.Itisnot surprisingthatRussiangenderlinguistics is baseditselfpredominantly on heteronormative assumptionsgiventhe current socio-political climatein the RussianFederationwhich hasbeen describedinthe previous partsof this book.However, there are also other factorswhich seem to hinder a more detailedgenderlinguistics line of research and, in particular, the establishment of queer linguistics.For instance, awareness of political 210 Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics correctness and, in particular,politically correct languageuse hasnot taken foothold in Russia as of yet. Consequently, an awarenessoflanguageuse whichissensitive to individuals’ gender,identity and ethnic origins is neither widespreadnor understood.

2Russian Gender QueerLinguistics:Challengesand Approaches

When ProfessorLannHornscheidt from the Centre forTransdisciplinary Gender Studiesofthe Humboldt University in Berlin presentedthe – as I callit–x-theory in the media in 2014,Hornscheidtcausedageneral uproar andcomplete bewilderment(URL118).LannHornscheidt suggested that, in German,all gender-specificendings could be replacedbyanx.The theoryisstrictlybased on adeconstructivist approach whichbasically abolishesgendercategoriesand rejectsthe existenceofaheteronormative binary gender division. Hornscheidtcritically questioned whetherthere really were different gender identities. According to Hornscheidt, gender identitieswere merelyconstructedbyallocating specific meaningstothe respectiveidentity,aprocesswhich leadstodemarcationand exclusion. With referencetoJudithButler’s (1998, 1991)deconstructionofgender, Lann Hornscheidttried to deconstructgenderfromalinguistic perspective anddrew attentiontopersonal appellations whichconstantly construct genderaccordingtoexistingbinary categories (Hornscheidt 2009,2006). In ordertoavoid theprocess of categorising people according to agender binary,LannHornscheidt argued with regard to theGerman language that it waslogical to eliminate gender-specificendings in personal nouns andto replace them with agender-unspecific x.Thisway,the noun couldkeepits essenceand functionality andcontinuetorefer to aperson, whereasthe genderofthe person to whomthe nounreferredwould remainunspecific. Afterall, thegenderofaperson wasmostly unnecessary andirrelevantso thatthere seemstobenoneedtoexhibitand “mark”gender.According to Lann Hornscheidt,thislinguisticstrategyrequired acertain kindof creativity as no concrete or generalwordformationrules couldbegiven for applyingthisapproachdue to thecomplex anddiverseprocess of word formationinGerman.Selectedexampleswhich illustrate Hornscheidt’s approach canbefound below. Russian Gender QueerLinguistics: Challenges and Approaches 211

Examples: Schül er ‘male pupil’ → Schülx ‘gender unspecified pupil’ Schül erin ‘female pupil’ → Schülx ‘gender unspecified pupil’ Profess or ‘male professor’ → Professx ‘genderunspecified professor’ Studierend er ‘male student’ → Studierx‘gender unspecified student’

On hirofficialwebsite,LannHornscheidt explicitly drawsattention to the necessityofavoidinggendercategoriesinspoken andwrittenlanguage in the following statement:

If youwrite to Lann Hornscheidt, please userespectful formsofaddress which do not evoke thegender binary. Pleasedoavoid gender binary forms of address, such as “Herr ___” [Mr], “Frau ___” [Mrs], “Lieber ___” [Dear.Masc], or “Liebe___” [Dear.Fem]. There is not the one andonly correctand good form of address. Instead, newrespectful formsofaddress are needed – Iamlooking forward to your creative non-discriminatoryideas. If youdon’t want to communicate, butjustthrow all your irritationatme, instead of using it as anew impulse to rethink your own norms andyour world view, then youhave the opportunitytosend this to the following e- mail address: [email protected]. Or use your timefor writing something niceand respectful to aperson of your choice – and seewhat such an activityfeels like [transl.].264

This is notthe placetodiscuss Lann Hornscheidt’s approach or to explore hir theory andits practical realisation. What Iwanttopoint outhere, instead,isthe fact that German linguistics hasalready takendeconstructivist approaches into account (Motschenbacher2014a). Moreover, theaware-

264 Original:“Wenn Siemit Lann Hornscheidt Kontakt aufnehmen wollen, verwenden Siebitte respektvolle Anreden, dienicht Zweigeschlechtlichkeit aufrufen.Bitte vermeiden Siezweigendernde Ansprachenwie "Herr___","Frau ___", "Lieber ___",oder"Liebe___". Es gibt nichtdie eine richtige und gute Anrede, sondern es bedarf respektvoller neuerAnredeformen – ichfreue mich aufIhre kreativen antidiskriminierendenIdeen.Falls Sienicht kommunizieren,sondern nur Ihre Irritation zurückwerfen wollen, statt sie alsImpuls für sich zu benutzen über eigene Normen und Weltbildernachzudenken, dann schickenSie dies bitte an folgende Mail-Adresse: [email protected]. Oder – Sienehmen sich die Zeit,umwas Nettes undRespektvolles stattdessenaneine Person IhrerWahlzu schreiben – und schauenmal, wie sich eine solche Handlunganfühlenwürde” (URL 119). 212 Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics ness of apolitically correct language useiswidelyestablished although possibilities which guaranteeapolitically correct language usevary depending on thecontext.One canobserve thesamewith regard to the Englishlanguage (Motschenbacher2014a).Here, an increasing useof gender-neutralconstructions canbeobserved(e.g. if someonewould like to join the party theycan come around,*thechairman → but: thechair)as well as theuse of “innovative”pronoun forms(e.g. the – more occasionally used – possessive pronoun ze, zir, hir (King2014). And moreover, the x- form,aspresentedbyHornscheidt,has been also introducedtothe English language. Onecan observeatendencytouse thepronoun Mx as aformof addressinstead of Mr and Mrs in ordertomakeareferenceand address possible,but to avoidthisway asex-based classification. In Swedish,a gender-neutralperson pronounisalsohighly used: hen.Itwas especially – andartificially – createdand introduced to the Swedishlexis andiswidely and, in particular, officially used today. As alreadymentioned,inRussia, the general awarenessthatlanguage maydiscriminate andmarginalisepeople due to theirgenderand sexual orientation is notasdeveloped.Official initiativestoimplement apolitically correct language use are still absent.Obviously, there must be an increased awarenessthatlanguage

is aformofideological practice that mediates, influences and even constructs our experiences, identities and ways of viewing the world (Benwell/Stokoe 2006: 44).

Moreover, Russiangenderlinguistics is noticeablylackingpoststructuralist anddeconstructivistapproaches to theadequate analysis of identity, as statedbyKirilina(2015) andScheller-Boltz (2015a). Although researchers oftendroptermslike gender, postgender,orpoststructuralism,most of themactuallydonot apply thesetermsmeaningfully or sensibly,ifthey apply them at all(Scheller-Boltz2015e). Theissue of gender offers avariety of areas of research andissues whichhavenot beendealt with up to now. Including aqueer perspectiveon genderissues willinevitablylead to furtherunderstandingsofhow gender andidentityare constructed. Consequently, Nina Degele (2008) is right when sheusesthe term gender-queer research to clarifythe ideathat research on gender identities cannot be separatedsoeasily fromsexual Queering LinguisticDisciplines 213 identityorsexualdesireand that sexuality cannotbeinvestigated without takinggenderidentities intoaccount.The concepts of non-heteronormativity andsexualidentityplaysuchanimportant role even forthe Russian societythatitwouldbeunjustifiable nottoinclude such phenomena in this sortofresearch. Russiangenderlinguists are invitedtoexplore genderlinguistic questions in more detail andinamore differentiatedway. They will find abroad range of instrumentsand approaches availablein international queer academia.This wouldalsohelptoestablish solid approaches to queer linguistic research in thefuture.

3QueeringLinguistic Disciplines

According to Motschenbacher(2011:149)queer linguistics wantsto“provide acriticalinvestigationofthe discursive formationofhetero- normativity”. Queer linguistic researchtakes allsexualities intoaccount, includingheterosexuality sincethisidentity concept, too, is constructed against thebackgroundofheteronormativity andits rigid separationfrom non-heteronormativities (cf. Motschenbacher 2014b).The aimofqueer linguistic researchisnot to criticisethe established androcentrismin language. Rather, queer linguisticschallenges theissue of gender-marking itself andasks thequestionwhy it is necessary to make gender andidentity visibleatall.Consequently,itseems more appropriatetosay thatqueer linguisticsintends to deconstructgenderand identityand advocates strategiestoneutralise andavoid genderand identity. In thefollowingsection,Iwillpresent anumberofimportant issues worthexploringfromaqueer linguisticperspective. Of course,itisnot possible to give acomplete overview here (foravery detailedand profound overview, seeMotschenbacher 2010 as well as Scheller-Boltz2014for Russian). That is why Iwill limitmyselftosomeofthe most important linguistic issues. The aimofthischapter is to show that linguistic questions maybeexploredusing other, more contemporary methodsofresearch, whichare more in step with themodern world. Interestingand highly promising questionsarise,for example,when shedding aqueer lightonthe morphological system. With referenceto Lann Hornscheidt, onecould examine the inventoryofgender-specific or gender-relatedmorphemes forthe construction of gender andidentity.For this purpose, onewould have to analysehow speakers make use of this 214 Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics inventoryinorder to mark andconstructgenderand how this inventorycan be used to construct identity in general, includingnon-heteronormative identities. Morpho-pragmatic factorsare importantinthiscontext, too, as theyillustratethe actualuse of morphemesorthe intention of their use. Morpho-cognitivefactors can be studied in ordertoanalyse mentalpro- cessesthatshowfactors,structures, andprocessesofperception, data processing,and understanding,which occurwhenamorpheme is activated. Interestingresults can also be expected with regard to queeranalysesof pronouns whichare said to be gender-neutral,yet mayturnout to be gender-specific andare thus caught in thefield of tension between structuralistand poststructuralist tendencies. As forwordformation,itremains yettobeseenifitwillbepossibleto create or to usenew termsorwordforms whichavoid astrictgender marking.265 Of course,usingthe masculinegenericforms when referringto people in general – even when onemightbetalking aboutwomen – is still awidespread practiceincontemporary Russian. Acognitive investigation of this practicecould lead to results whichcould help us understand to what extent the useofmasculineforms as genericexpressionscan really include allgenderand identity concepts. 266 Moreover – andlooking at inter- nationalstandardsinthiscontext which arewidespread andappliedtoday – it couldbeauseful exercisetoanalyse – or even to create – spellingswhich avoidarigid gender-marking andfocus more on helping to ensure a gender-neutrallanguage. In many languages, there existspecial language guides whichoffer variants foragender-neutraland therefore non- discriminatory language use. Such guides providesuggestions foralter- nativeterms, word forms, or spellings.Abroadrange of such guidescan be found,for instance, in German or English.

Examples: Spieler/in ‘playerm/f’ (gender binary)

Lehrer/innen ‘teachersm/f’ (gender binary)

265 Seeherethe creation of the Swedish person pronoun hen andits official introduction to language (system anduse). 266 Forotherlanguages,similar studies indicatethat the genericmasculine form may not be so generic afterall.Inother words: using masculine forms does not accomplish theobjective of including womenand other identities. Queering LinguisticDisciplines 215

mitden Spieler/inne/n ‘with the players m/f’ (gender binary)

Lehrer(innen)‘teachersm(f)’ (gender binary)

Spieler_in ‘playerm_f’(gender gap,diversity)

Spie_lerin ‘playerm_f_o’ (gender gap, diversity)

Lehrer*innen‘teachersm*f’ (asterisk, diversity)

Spielende ‘a group of players /playing x’ (participle, gender not specified)

Lehrende ‘a group of teachers /teaching x’ (participle, gender not specified)

Spielx, Lehrx, Profx ‘player, teacher, professor’ (“x-theory”,gender not specified)

Similarideas have been voiced by other Slavoniclinguisticssuchas Serbian (Rajilić 2015),Croatian(Kersten-Pejanić 2015, Motschenbacher 2015), andPolish(URL120). An increasing number of scholars argue that it is necessary todaytocompile such language guides in ordertoraise awarenessfor gender-neutral languageand to change androcentric languagenorms.New language policy issueschallenge thosenorms which are generally basedonstructuralist approaches.Theydraw attentiontothe everydayconstruction of sexism,discrimination, andthe marginalisationof people as well as to ways in whichlinguisticsexismand discrimination can be avoided. Theexploration of theprocesses by whichwords are formed andof optionswithinwordformationfalls in line with ageneral analysis of the lexis from aqueer linguistic point of view.Itisstillunclear whichlexical unitsofdesignation are actuallyavailable forreferringtopeopleofall identitiesand forconstructinggenderand identity in general. We need to analysehow people usually go aboutreferringtoindividuals, in particular to individualswith anon-heteronormative identity.For instance,personal nounswhich refer to homosexual menare widely usedand generally well- known(Baer 2015). Nounsthatrefer to lesbians are lesser known andseem to be available to alesserdegree(Baer 2011). Furthermore, we must look into thequestion of howpersonalnouns canbeassessed andcategorised.In 216 Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics this context, it is notonlynecessary to challengethe sexist, discriminatory, or marginalisingpotential of lexicalunits,but also to call intoquestion the generalcognitive potentialoflexical unitsinagender or identity context. This leadsusdirectly to the question of whythe Russiannoun donzhuan ‘womaniser’ hasa(relatively) positivemeaning – it is at anyrate notcategorically negative –,whereas the feminine counterpart(e.g. shliukha ‘slut’), considering thesame(situationaland contextual)factors and(social)circumstances,isalwayscategorically negative, pejorative, and excluding.Semanticanalysescan help to resolve this contractionand ob- viousdoublestandard. It is worthinvestigating – especially in aqueer- linguistic context – to what extent meanings,traditionally embeddedina heteronormative context, mayreveal themselves as variable andfluid(e.g. sem’ia ‘family’, muzh ‘husband’, zhena ‘wife’), or,respectively, to what extent non-heteronormativelifestylesrequirenew meanings whichcould lead to semantic differentiation or semantic diversity(e.g. soius ‘connection’ → soius ‘union, cf. civil union’≠brak ‘marriage’). In this sense, queering semanticsmeanstochallenge the arbitrariness andcon- ventionality of meaningand to pointtothe fact that meaningand seme structures are discursively constructedand can, consequently,bede- constructedagain. As to pragmatics, in-group-and out-group-perspectives canreveal contrasts in theperceptionand understandingofgenderand identity.What do menexpress, when they use theRussian noun baba ‘chick’?(cf. Zaitseva 2006). Howdowomen or homosexual menuse this noun in an in- group-conversation? What do people do, when they use theword sodomity ‘sodomites’ in Russiantorefer to thehomosexual community?(cf. part 3 of thismonograph).And what effectsdoesthe useoftetka ‘fairy,fag, queen’ produce when it is used to refer to an effeminate man? In the context of gender andidentity, intentionalspeechorintentionsofspeakers, influencedbythe discourseofgenderand identity, playanimportant role. Consequently, more studiesare requiredthatfocus on pragmatic factors. In this context, it is also highlyrelevanttoanalyse how word choiceorinto- nationcan influencethe performanceand theconstruction of gender and identityduringatalk or aconversation. Moreover, pragmatic factorsoften give ahintastohow theperformed identity is perceived by agroup.Thisis avery important issueinaqueer context, too, forexample,whencon- sidering trans-identities, intersex people, or bisexuals. Consequently,there Queering LinguisticDisciplines 217 is aclose connection with sociolinguistic research. Analysingdiscursive elements, investigations of pragmatic and, furthermore, sociolinguistic factorsinspoken language andconversationsfromaqueer linguistics perspectivewillnot only enrich researchonconversation analysis, butalso research on pragmatics andsocio-linguistics whichhavehithertoignored the construction of non-heteronormative identities in andthrough spoken language. Anotherissue which hasbeenignored in linguistics thus faristhe relationship betweenidentityand lexicography.Here, an initial questionto consider mightbewhether we can find andapply criteriatodescribeand define wordsthatmakeitpossibletoovercomethe principle of andro- centrismindictionaries?Todate, it is stillverycommonfor descriptions anddefinitions foundindictionaries to be basedonthe principle of heteronormativity.Anewapproach,which would more adequately reflectthe realitiesofaheterogeneoussociety,might be to createdictionary entries explicitly basedonahetero-deconstructivistapproach.Afew wordssuch as theprototypical svad’ba ‘wedding’, flirtovat’ ‘to flirt’, muzh ‘husband’, sem’ia ‘family’ couldbeaccompanied by queer-orienteddefinitions. Dictionaries are mostly understood as amediumthatonlyreflects thelexis of alanguageormerelygives equivalentsinthe target language.Aqueer- oriented stance could expand this narrowapproachand couldbeseen as usefulespecially with regard to bilingualdictionaries. Language is acomplex,multifaceted, and, most of all, multi-layered mediumwhichprovides different inherent strategies, functions, andmeans to constructidentity. By challenging androcentrisminlanguageand by followingadeconstructivistapproachwith regard to gender andidentity, almost every linguisticdiscipline offers the possibilityfor queer linguistic research.Tothisend,acombination of interdisciplinary approaches is unavoidable. Starting withananalysisofdiscourse,different linguistic disciplinesand meanscouldbeincludedinone study.This would not only illustrate thewaysinwhichthe morphological systemisdiscursively shaped, in which newlexical units or wordsingeneralare formed or in whichwords are finally used,but also such investigationswould make clear howweunderstandwords, howwords should be understood, howwe use wordsinorder to meet our goals andhow wordsshould be used. Queer linguistic researchnot only disclosesthe strategies andmechanismswhich determinehow language is actually applied, butitcan also challengethe 218 Russian Gender andQueer Linguistics established mechanismsand in particular the uncritical automatism which visiblygoverns thewaysinwhich language is generally used. Russian queerlinguistics is in itsinfancy.Verylittleworkhas been done;very littleprogresshas been made.There remains awiderange of research options forthe inquisitivescholar. To what extent queerlinguistic issues will be addressedinthe future or how longitwill take queer linguisticsinRussian studies to catch up with international queer linguistic standards,remains to be seen. Some Final Remarks insteadofaSummary

Ourreality offersmuchmoreopportunities forlinguistic – including,in particular, gender andqueer linguistic – research than onemight have assumeduptonow. At this point, Ihope thatithas become clear to the readerthatgender linguistic questions as well as questions concerning therelationbetween languageand identity in generalmust not be limitedtoresearchquestions which – only – deal with manand woman, especially with manand woman in aheteronormative constellation.Genderlinguisticquestionsmust be askedinabroadersense,which integrates non-heteronormative identities, too. Only by adopting thisapproachcan we hopetoarriveatmoreprofound andmeaningful findings in theend. Ihavestressedthroughout this bookthatthere is adeepconnection betweengenderand queer linguisticstudies – as shown,e.g., by Nina Degele (2008). Due to this connection,itisusefultointegrate bothdisciplinesinto research on language andidentity andtoexamine questions of identityin general. In doing so,weshould avoidseparatingheteronormativeand non- heteronormative perspectives.Weactually live in anon-heteronormative world. Thisreality must be integrated in linguistic research, too. We cannot look at languagesonlyfromapatriarchaland heteronormative perspective. If we did, we would failtorecognise thediversity of andinour lives. This wouldinevitablylead to prefabricated research findings. It must be stressedthatgenderisnot thesameassex andthatsex must notbeequated with gender. Of course,one canask about theinfluence of sexand thebodyonlanguage behaviourand language perception.However, onecannotlimit gender andqueer linguistic questionsonlytothis approach. Gender andqueer linguisticsismainlyabout identityand identity construction. Hence, researchers who deal with gender andqueer linguistic questionshaveprimarily to askthe questionofhow our identity influences both,our ownlanguageuse andthatofothers,and what we actually do and perceivebyusing language.Moreover, andasshowninthismonograph, sex is notthatclear, separable, andmonolithic as mostly assumed. 220 Some FinalRemarks instead of aSummary

Hopefully,the readerhas understood that it is neitherusefulnor fruitful to investigategenderand queer linguisticquestionsjustfromastrict languagesystemicand normative perspective – not least, as normativityis indisputably aclear discursive construct andthe resultofsocialagreement. Consequently, it is more promisingtointegrategenderand identitydis- coursesintoresearchand to askgenderand queer linguisticquestions against the backdrop of those discourses.Thenone will inevitably seethatitis, on the onehand, authorities,like politics, church,educationalinstitutions,and, of course,the microcosm of the family,whichhavegreatinfluence on gender andqueer questions as well as on theperception of identities and, on the otherhand, thatitisthe discursivelyshapedcommon-sense understanding thathas an impact on howwesee andinterpretgender, identitiesand,inthe end, ourreality.Asaconsequence, it willbecome obvious that language and the discursively shapedlanguageuse andunderstanding have asignificant impact on howwe–actively and passively – constructidentities. It is worthtostudyhow gender andsexuality are furtherusedtoconstruct otheridentities. As showninthe studyathand, gender andsexuality are used – andtosomeextent misused – to constructother identityconceptsand, furthermore, to constructspaces. As onecan observe in today’sRussia, there are twocontrary tendencies:onthe onehandand accordingtoanunder- standing of reality whichisbased on apostgenderapproach, there is an obvioustendencytoeliminate thegenderbinary in aheteronormative frame. On theother hand,one canobservethe tendency of reinforcingthe gender binary with thetraditionalideaofgenderroles at its core. Thishas been demonstrated by Kirilina (2015) andher ideashavebeenfurther developed in the studyIhave presentedinthismonograph. It is interestingtonoticethat the traditional gender modelisusedtocharacteriseastrongsociety,astrong nation, andahealthy state, whereas anon-heteronormativeconstruction is interpretedasdeviant, decaying, andweak.Constructing genderedand sexualised spacesthisway,has an enormous impact on theconstructionof the Russiannationalidentityaswellasonthe self-conceptthatRussians should have of theirown culture, nation,and country. It would be interesting to analysehow gender andsexualidentitiesare furtherusedinorder to praise Russiaand to degradeother spaces. Abbreviation List

Alban. Albanian Bosn.Bosnian cf. compare to this coll.colloquial Croat.Croatian EBUEuropeanBroadcastingUnion ESCEurovision Song Contest esp. especially etc. et cetera EU European Union ffemale fem feminine (grammatical gender) Germ.German Hawaii. Hawaiian mmale masc masculine(grammatical gender) MK Moskovskii Komsomolets Montenegr.Montenegrinian oother gender identities (beyondheteronormativity) Pol. Polish Russ.Russian Samoa.Samoan Serb.Serbian Tahit. Tahitian Tonga. Tongan transl.translation (bythe author) VTsIOMRussian Public OpinionResearchCentre

References

1SecondaryWorks

Aizenstain, Zilla2014: “Natsionalizmigomofobiia vsovremennoi Rossii”, in: Aleksandr Kondakov, ed., Napereput’e: metodologiia, teoriia ipraktika LGBT ikvir-issledovanii,Sankt-Peterburg, 183-188. Althaler, Mathias2014: Von nichttraditionellen sexuellen Beziehungen – eine Analyse zur diskursivenKonstruktion von Homosexualität in Russland,Inns- bruck [diploma thesis, manuscript]. Armstrong,James D. 1997: “Homophobic Slang as Coercive Discourse among College Students”, in:Anna Livia/KiraHall, eds., Queerly phrased. Language,Gender, and Sexuality,New York/Oxford (Oxford Studies in Sociolinguistics),326-334. Arutiunova,Nina Davidovna 2002: “Muzhchiny izhenshchiny: konkurs kra- soty”, in: Jiřina van Leeuwen-Turnovcová/Karin Wullenweber/Ursula Doleschal/ Franz Schindler, eds., Gender-Forschunginder Slawistik. Beiträge der KonferenzGender – Sprache – Kommunikation – Kultur, 28. April bis 1. Mai2001, Institut fürSlawistik, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena,Wien (Wiener Slawistischer Almanach, 55),483-499. Ashwin, Sarah/Lytkina, Tatyana 2004:“MeninCrisis in Russia. The Role of Domestic Marginalization”,in: Gender &Society 18(2), 2004, 189-206. Attwood, Lynne1996: “Young people, sex and sexual identity”, in: Hilary Pilkington, ed., Gender, Generation and Identity in Contemporary Russia, London/ NewYork, 95-120. Ayoub, Phillip M./ Paternotte, David,eds. 2014: LGBT Activism andthe Making of Europe. ARainbow Europe?,Basingstoke (Gender and Politicsseries). Baer, Brian James2015: “Let’s Talk about Sex. Mapping (Homo)Sexual Discourse in Post-Soviet Russia”, in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz,ed.: New ApproachestoGenderand QueerResearch in Slavonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “LanguageasaConstitutive Element of a GenderedSociety – Developments, Perspectives, and Possibilities in the Slavonic Languages” (Innsbruck,1-4 October2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 59),173-184. Baer, BrianJames 2011: “Queer in Russia: Othering the Other of the West”, in: Lisa Downing/Robert Gillett, eds.: Queer in Europe. Contemporary Case Studies,Farnham/ Burlington (Queer Interventions),173-188. Baer, BrianJames 2009: Other Russias. Homosexuality and the Crisis of Post- Soviet Identity,New York. 224 References

Baker,Paul 2005: Public Discourses of GayMen,London/ NewYork (Rout- ledge advances in corpus linguistics, 8). Barrett, Rusty 1999: “Indexing Polyphonous Identityinthe SpeechofAfrican American DragQueens”, in:MaryBucholtz/ A. C. Liang/ Laurel A. Sutton, eds., Reinventing identities. Thegendered self in discourse,New York/ Oxford (Studies in Language and Gender, 1),313-331. Barth, Elisa/ Böttger, Ben/ Ghattas, DanChristian/Schneider, Ina, eds. 2013: Inter. Erfahrungen intergeschlechtlicher Menschen in der Welt der zwei Ge- schlechter,Berlin. Barylski, Robert V. 1998: The Soldier in Russian Politics. Duty, Dictatorship, and Democracy Under Gorbachev and Yeltsin,New Brunswick/London. Bastian, Katrin 2006: Die Europäische Unionund Russland. Multilateraleund bilaterale Dimensionen in der europäischenAußenpolitik,Wiesbaden. Beasley, Chris2005: Gender &Sexuality. Critical theories, critical thinkers. London/ ThousandOaks/ New Delhi. Belousova, Anna Sergeevna 1989: “Imena litsiikh sintaksicheskie svoistva”, in: Nataliia Iul’evna Shvedova/ VladimirVladimirovich Lopatin, eds., Slovo i grammaticheskie zakonyiazyka. Imia,Moskva,131-205. Benwell, Bethan/Stokoe, Elizabeth2006: Discourse and Identity,Edinburgh. Berdiaev, Nikolai 1990: Sud‘ba Rossii,Moskva. Besnier, Niko 2003: “CrossingGenders, Mixing Languages: TheLinguistic Construction of TransgenderisminTonga”, in: Janet Holmes/ Miriam Meyerhoff, eds., The Handbook of Language and Gender,Malden (BlackwellHandbooks in Linguistics, 13),279-301. Besnier,Niko 1994: “Polynesian Gender LiminalityThrough Time and Space”, in: Gilbert Herdt, ed., Third Sex, Third Gender. Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Cultureand History,New York, 285-328. Bilden, Helga 2006: “Sozialisation in der Dynamikvon Geschlechter-und anderen Machtverhältnissen”, in: HelgaBilden/BettinaDausien, eds., So- zialisationund Geschlecht. Theoretische und methodologische Aspekte, Opladen/ Farmington Hills, 45-70. Binnie, Jon2004: The Globalization of Sexuality,London. Binnie, Jon 1997: “Comingout of Geography: Towards aQueer Epistemology?”, in: Environment andPlanning D: Society and Space 15(2),1997, 223-237. Binnie, Jon/ Valentine, Gill 1999: “Geographies of sexuality – areview of progress”, in: Progress in Human Geography 23(2), 1999, 175-187. Bourdieu, Pierre 1991: Language andSymbolicPower,Cambridge. SecondaryWorks 225

Bourdieu, Pierre 1989: “Social Space and Symbolic Power”, in: Sociological Theory 7(1),1989, 14-25; online at:www.soc.ucsb.edu/ct/pages/JWM/Syllab i/Bourdieu/SocSpaceSPowr.pdf [last accessed on 5September 2015]. Broszinsky-Schwabe,Edith 2011: Interkulturelle Kommunikation. Missverständ- nisse – Verständigung,Wiesbaden. Browne, Kate/Brown,Gavin/ Lim, Jason 2007: GeographiesofSexualities. Theory, Practices andPolitics,Aldershot. Browning, Frank 1996: AQueer Geography:journeys toward asexualself,New York, BTS Online [Bol’shoi Tolkovyi Slovar’ Russkogo Iazyka]; online at: http://gramota.ru /slovari/dic/?word=%D0%BC%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B8 %D0%BA&all=x [last accessed on 12 March2016]. Bucholtz, Mary1999: “Bad examples. Transgression and Progress in Language and Gender Studies”, in: MaryBucholtz/A.C.Liang/ Laurel A. Sutton, eds., Reinventing identities.The gendered self in discourse,New York/Oxford (Studies in Language andGender, 1),3-24. Bucholtz, Mary/ Liang,A.C./ Sutton, Laurel A.,eds. 1999: Reinventing identities. The gendered self in discourse New York/ Oxford (Studies in Languageand Gender, 1). Burmakova,Ol’ga 2010: “Kvir-Lego: konstruirovanie genderno-seksual’noi identichnosti”, in: Valerii Sozaev, ed., Vozmozhen li «kvir» po-russki? LGBTK issledovaniia,Sankt-Peterburg, 116-121. Butler, Judith 2004a: Undoing Gender,New York. Butler, Judith2004b: “Zwischen den Geschlechtern. Eine Kritik der Gender- normen”, in: HildegardMogge-Grotjahn, ed., Gender,Sex und Gender Stu- dies. Eine Einführung,Freiburg, 157-162. Butler,Judith2003: “Imitation unddie Aufsässigkeit der Geschlechtsidentität”, in: Andreas Kraß,ed., Queer denken. Gegendie Ordnung der Sexualität (Queer Studies),Frankfurt a.M. (edition suhrkamp, 2248),144-168. Butler, Judith 1998: Haß spricht.Zur Politik des Performativen [Excitable speech:apoliticsofthe performative], Berlin. Butler, Judith 1997: Körper vonGewicht. Die diskursiven Grenzen des Ge- schlechts [Bodies that matter], Frankfurt a.M. (editionsuhrkamp,1737). Butler, Judith1991: Das Unbehagen derGeschlechter [Gender Trouble], Frankfurt a.M. (GenderStudies.Vom Unterschied der Geschlechter;edition suhrkamp,1722). Calderón, Marietta/ Marko, Georg, eds. 2012: Let’s Talk About (Texts About) Sex. Sexualität und Sprache. Sexand Language,Frankfurt a.M. (sprache im kontext, 39). 226 References

Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn/Podesva, Robert J./Roberts, Sarah J./Wong, Andrew, eds. 2002: Language and Sexuality. Contesting MeaninginTheory and Practice,Stanford. Canakis, Costas/ Kantsa, Venetia/Yannakopoulos, Kostas,eds. 2010: Language and Sexuality (Through and)BeyondGender,Cambridge. Canakis, Costas/ Kersten-Pejanić,Roswitha 2016: “Spray-CannedDiscourses. Reimagining Gender, Sexuality, and Citizenship Through LinguisticLand- scapes in theBalkans”, in:Sebastian Goll/Martin Mlinarić/Johannes Gold, eds., Minorities underAttack:Othering and Right-Wing Extremism in South- east European Societies,Wiesbaden (Forschungen zu Südosteuropa. Sprache – Kultur – Literatur,13),129-159. Cassiday, JulieA.2014: “Post-Soviet Pop Goes Gay: Russia’s Trajectoryto Eurovision Victory”, in: The Russian Review 73,2014, 1-23. Chandler, Andrea 2013: Democracy,Gender, and Social Policy in Russia. A Wayward Society,Basingstoke/New York. Coates, Jennifer 2007: “‘Everyone Was Convinced that We Were Closet Fags’: the Role of Heterosexualityinthe ConstructionofHegemonic Masculinity”, in: Helen Sauntson/Sakis Kyratzis,eds., Language, Sexualities andDesires. Cross-Cultural Perspectives,Basingstoke,41-67. Connell, Catherine 2010: “Doing, Undoing, or Redoing Gender? Learning from the Workplace Experiences of Transpeople”, in: Gender&Society 24,2010, 31-55. Connell, Robert W. 1995: Masculinities,Cambridge. Cook,Matt/ Evans, Jennifer V.,eds. 2014: Queer Cities, Queer Cultures. Europe since 1945,London/ NewYork. Degele, Nina 2008: Gender/Queer Studies,Paderborn (Basiswissen Soziologie. UTB,2986). Downing, Lisa/ Gillett,Robert,eds. 2011: Queer in Europe. Contemporary Case Studies,Farnham/ Burlington (Queer Interventions). Dreger, Alice Domurat 2000: Hermaphroditesand the Medical Invention of Sex, Cambridge. Eckert, Lena2013: “Intersexualisierung. Sportliche Gesellschaften,gender tests und Graswurzelbewegung”,in: Christian Schmelzer, ed., Gender Turn. Ge- sellschaftjenseits der Geschlechternorm,Bielefeld, 143-172. Edensor, Tim2002: National Identity,Popular Culture and EverydayLife, Oxford/New York. Engel, Antke 2002: Wider die Eindeutigkeit.Sexualität undGeschlecht im Fokus queerer Politik der Repräsentation,Frankfurt a.M./ NewYork (Politik der Geschlechterverhältnisse, 20). SecondaryWorks 227

Erokhina, Liudmila Dmitrievna/Erokhin, Aleksei Konstantinovich/Kovalenko, SvetlanaVital’evna/ Mitina, Natal’iaGeorgievna/ Sazonova, Liudmila Alekseevna/ Sokolova,Irina Aleksandrovna/Sokoliuk,Nadezhda Vladi- mirovna/Tsareva, Nadezhda Aleksandrovna 2009: Genderologiia ifeminologiia,Moskva. Essig, Laurie 2014: “«Serdtsa geevnado zaryvat’vzemliu»: razmyshleniia ob okhote na gomoseksualov vRossii”, in: Aleksandr Kondakov, ed., Na pereput’e: metodologiia, teoriia ipraktika LGBT ikvir-issledovanii,Sankt- Peterburg, 3-23. Essig, Laurie 1999: Queer in Russia. AStoryofSex, Self, and the Other,Dur- ham/ London. Foucault, Michel 2001: The Order of Things. Archaeologyofthe Human Sciences,London/ NewYork. Foucault, Michel 1972: The Archaeology of Knowledge,London. Franeta, Sonja 2015: My Pink Road to Russia. Tales of Amazons Peasants, and Queers,Oakland. Geier, Wolfgang 1996: Rußlandund Europa. Skizzen zu einem schwierigen Ver- hältnis,Wiesbaden (Studien der Forschungsstelle Ostmitteleuropaander Universität Dortmund, 20). Genz, Stéphanie 2009: Postfemininities in popular culture,Basingstoke/New York. Genz, Stéphanie/Brabon, BenjaminA.2009: Postfeminism. Cultural Texts and Theories,Edinburgh. Goffman, Erving 22001[1994]: Interaktion undGeschlecht,Frankfurta.M./New York. Gorbachev,Nikolai 2013: “Spasaia detei ot 'propagandygomoseksualizma‘”,in: Aleksandr Iu. Pershai/ Evgeniia M. Ivanova, red., Zhenshchiny vpolitike: no- vye podkhody kpoliticheskomu. Feministskii obrazovatel’nyi al’manakh, Praga (Vyp.III: Publichnoe: Privatizatsiia privatnogo), 72-78. Gradinari, Irina 2015: Tekhnika “kosogovzgliada”. Kritika geteronormativnogo poriadka,Moskva. Grémaux, René 1994: “WomanBecomes Maninthe Balkans”, In: GilbertHerdt, ed., Third Sex, Third Gender. Beyond SexualDimorphisminCulture and History,New York, 241-281. Groß, Dominik/Neuschaefer-Rube, Christiane/Steinmetzer, Jan, eds. 2008: Transsexualität und Intersexualität. Medizinische, ethische, soziale undjuris- tische Aspekte,Berlin (Humandiskurs. Medizinische Herausforderungen in Geschichte und Gegenwart). 228 References

Gu, Yueguo 2012: “Discourse geography”, in: James Paul Gee/Michael Hand- ford, eds., TheRoutledge HandbookofDiscourse Analysis,London/ New York, 541-557. Halberstam, Judith 2013: “Transgender butch: butch/FTMborder wars and the masculine continuum”, in: Donald Eugene Hall/ AnnamarieJagose/Andrea Bebell/ Susan Potter, eds., TheRoutledge Queer Studies Reader,London/ New York, 464-487. Hall, Donald Eugene/ Jagose,Annamarie/ Bebell, Andrea/ Potter,Susan,eds. 2013, TheRoutledge Queer StudiesReader,London/ NewYork. Halperin, DavidM.2003: “Ein Wegweiser zur Geschichtsschreibung der männlichen Homosexualität”, in: Andreas Kraß, ed., Queer denken. Gegen die Ordnung der Sexualität(QueerStudies),Frankfurt a.M. (edition suhrkamp,2248),171-220. Harrington, Kate/Litosseliti, Lia/ Sauntson, Helen/Sunderland, Jane, eds. 2008: Gender andLanguage Research Methodologies,Basingstoke/ NewYork. Hartmann, Uwe/ Becker, Hinnerk 2002: Störungen der Geschlechtsidentität. Ur- sachen, Verlauf, Therapie,Wien/ New York. Hauer, Gudrun/ Krickler, Kurt/ Marek/Schmutzer, Dieter [Homosexuelle Initiative (HOSI)Wien/ Auslandsgruppe],eds. 1984: Rosa Liebe unterm roten Stern. Zur Lage der Lesben und Schwulen in Osteuropa,Hamburg (Frühlings Erwachen, 7). Healey, Dan 2014a: “Chto takoe «traditsionnyeseksual’nye otnosheniia»?”, in: Aleksandr Kondakov, ed., Na pereput’e: metodologiia, teoriia ipraktika LGBT ikvir-issledovanii,Sankt-Peterburg, 55-67. Healey, Dan2014b: “FromStalinist pariahstosubjects of ‘Managed Demo- cracy’:Queers in Moscow 1945 to the present”, in: Matt Cook/Jennifer V. Evans, eds., Queer Cities, Queer Cultures. Europe since 1945,London/New York, 95-117. Healey, Dan 2013: “Beredtes Schweigen. Skizzen zurGeschichte der Homo- sexualität in Russland”, in: Manfred Sapper/Volker Weichsel, eds., Spektral- analyse. Homosexualität und ihre Feinde,Berlin (Osteuropa, 10), 5-16. Healey, Dan 2010: “Active,Passive, and Russian: The National Idea in Gay Men’s Pornography”, in: The Russian Review 69, 2010, 210-230. Healey, Dan2001: Homosexual Desire in Revolutionary Russia. The Regulation of Sexual andGender Dissent,Chicago/London. Henshaw, Alexis Leanna 2014: “Geographies of Tolerance: Human Develop- ment, Heteronormativity,and Religion”, in: Sexuality &Culture 18,2014, 959-976. SecondaryWorks 229

Herdt, Gilbert,ed. 1994a: Third Sex, Third Gender. Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Cultureand History,New York. Herdt, Gilbert1994b: “Preface”, in: Gilbert Herdt, ed., Third Sex, Third Gender. Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Culture andHistory,New York, 11-20. Herdt, Gilbert 1994c: “Introduction:Third Sexes and Third Genders”, in: Gilbert Herdt, ed., Third Sex, Third Gender. BeyondSexual Dimorphism in Culture and History,New York,21-81. Herdt, Gilbert 1994d: “Mistaken Sex: Culture, Biologyand the ThirdSex in New Guinea”, in:Gilbert Herdt, ed., Third Sex, Third Gender. BeyondSexual Dimorphism in Culture and History,New York, 419-445. Herma,Holger 2003: “GeschlechtsidentitätinZweierbeziehungen. Eine Diskurs- analyseanhand populärer Musiktexte”, in: Karl Lenz, ed., Frauen und Männer. Zur Geschlechtstypik persönlicher Beziehungen,Weinheim/ Mün- chen, 139-160. Hieber,Lutz/Villa, Paula-Irene, eds. 2007: Images von Gewicht. Soziale Be- wegungen, Queer Theory und Kunst in denUSA,Bielefeld. Hoffmann, Edgar 2015: “Rossiiskaianatsional’naia identichnost‘ iimena sobstvennye vbiznes-kommunikatsii”, in: Elena L. Berezovich, ed., Ėtno- lingvistika. Onomastika. Ėtimologiia,Moskva,292-295. Hoffmann, Edgar 2005: “Identitätskonstruktionen durch Werbung in Russland”, in: Katrin Berwanger/Peter Kosta, eds., Stereotyp und Geschichtsmythos in Kunst undSprache. DieKultur Ostmitteleuropas in Beiträgenzur Potsdamer Tagung,16.-18. Januar2003,Frankfurt a.M. (Vergleichende Studien zu den Slavischen Sprachen undLiteraturen, 11),273-292. Hohmann, JoachimS., ed. 1990: Sexualforschung und-politik in der Sowjetunion seit 1917. Eine Bestandsaufnahme in Kommentaren undhistorischen Texten. Mit einer Bilddokumentation undeiner Auswahlbibliographie1896-1989, Frankfurt a.M. Höhmann, Hans-Hermann/ Schröder, Hans-Henning,eds. 2001: Russland unter neuer Führung. Politik, Wirtschaft undGesellschaftamBeginn des 21. Jahrhunderts,Münster. Holmes, Janet/Meyerhoff,Miriam, eds.2003: The HandbookofLanguage and Gender,Malden (Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics, 13). Hornscheidt, Antje 2009: “Sprache /Semiotik”, in: Christina von Braun/ Inge Stephan, eds., Gender@Wissen. Ein Handbuch der Gender-Theorien,Köln/ Weimar/ Wien (UTB, 2584),243-262. Hornscheidt, Antje 2008: Gender resignifiziert. Schwedische (Aus)Handlungen in und um Sprache,Berlin (Berliner Beiträge zur Skandinavistik,14). 230 References

Hornscheidt,Antje 2006: Die sprachliche Benennung von Personenaus kons- truktivistischer Sicht. Genderspezifizierung undihre diskursive Verhandlung im heutigen Schwedisch,Berlin/ New York(Linguistik – Impulse &Ten- denzen, 15). Jäger, Siegfried 62012 [1993]: Kritische Diskursanalyse.Eine Einführung,Müns- ter. Jäger, Siegfried 2005: “Diskursals „Fluß von Wissen durch die Zeit“. Ein transdisziplinäres politisches Konzept”, in: Aptum. Zeitschrift fürSprach- kritik und Sprachkultur 1(1), 2005,52-72. Jefferson Lenskyj,Helen 2014: Sexual Diversity and the Sochi 2014 Olympics. No More Rainbows,Basingstoke/ New York. Johnston, Lynda 2010: Space, Place, andSex. Geographies of Sexualities, Lanham. Johnston, Lynda2005: Queering Tourism. Paradoxicalperformances at gay pride parades,London/ New York (RoutledgeStudies in HumanGeography, 11). Joseph, John E. 2004: Language and Identity. National, Ethnic, Religious, Houndmills. Kay, Rebecca,ed. 2007: Gender, Equality andDifference During AndAfter State Socialism,Basingstoke (Studies in Centraland Eastern Europe). Kendall,Lori 2000: ““OH NO!I’M ANERD!” HegemonicMasculinityonan Online Forum”, in: Gender &Society 14, 2000, 256-274. Kersten-Pejanić,Roswitha 2015: “„Imenicemuškog roda imenice su općeg roda…”.Why Questioning Androgendering Naming Practices forPeople Is Still Worth the(Slavicist’s) While”, in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz, ed., New ApproachestoGenderand QueerResearch in Slavonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “LanguageasaConstitutive Element of a GenderedSociety – Developments, Perspectives, and Possibilities in the Slavonic Languages” (Innsbruck, 1-4 October2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 59), 129-147. Khoroshilov, Pavel/Klemp, Klaus,eds.2003: Nackt fürStalin. Körperbilder in der russischen Fotografie der 20er und 30er Jahre,Frankfurt a.M. King, Brian W. 2014: “Reclaiming Masculinity in an Account of Lived Intersex Experience: Language, Desire, and Embodied Knowledge”, in: TommasoM. Milani, ed., Languageand Masculinities. Performances, Intersections, Dis- locations,New York (Routledge Critical Studies in Discourse), 220-242. SecondaryWorks 231

Kirilina, Alla Viktorovna 2015: “Semioticheskie osobennosti gendernykhre- prezentatsii vpostsovetskoi Rossii”, in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz, ed., New ApproachestoGenderand QueerResearch in Slavonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “LanguageasaConstitutive Element of a GenderedSociety – Developments, Perspectives, and Possibilities in the Slavonic Languages” (Innsbruck, 1-4 October2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 59), 33-49. Kirilina, Alla Viktorovna 2002: “Manifestatsiia gendernykh stereotipov v rossiiskoi presse: zhurnalistskaia ichitatel’skaia perspektivy”,in:Jiřina van Leeuwen-Turnovcová/ Karin Wullenweber/ Ursula Doleschal/ Franz Schind- ler, eds., Gender-Forschung in der Slawistik. Beiträge derKonferenz Gender – Sprache – Kommunikation – Kultur,28. April bis 1. Mai 2001, Institut für Slawistik,Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Wien (Wiener Slawistischer Almanach, 55),121-134. Kirilina, Alla Viktorovna 1999: Gender: Lingvisticheskie aspekty,Moskva. Kletsina, Irina Sergeevna, ed. 22009a [2003]: Gendernaia psikhologiia,Sankt- Peterburg (Praktikumpopsikhologii). Kletsina, Irina Sergeevna 22009b: “Gendernaiaavtobiografiia kak metod izuche- niia mekhanizmov gendernoi sotsializatsii”, in: Irina Sergeevna Kletsina, ed., Gendernaia psikhologiia,Sankt-Peterburg (Praktikumpopsikhologii),201- 210. Klingseis, Katharina 2015: “Die Kostüme des Geschlechterspektakels”,in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz,ed., New Approaches to Gender and QueerResearch in Slavonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “Language as aConstitutive Element of aGendered Society – Developments, Perspec- tives, and Possibilitiesinthe Slavonic Languages” (Innsbruck, 1-4 October 2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 59), 243-268. Kliuchko, Ol’gaIvanovna/Shtyleva, Liubov‘Vasil’evna 2015: “Traditsionnye tsennosti igendernaia sotsializatsiia vsovremennomrusskomobrazovanii”, in: DennisScheller-Boltz, ed., New Approaches to Gender and Queer Re- search in Slavonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “Language as aConstitutive Element of aGendered Society – Develop- ments, Perspectives, andPossibilitiesinthe SlavonicLanguages” (Inns- bruck, 1-4October 2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 59), 363-378. Klöppel, Ulrike 2010: XXOXY ungelöst. Hermaphroditismus, Sex undGender in der deutschen Medizin. Eine historische Studiezur Intersexualität,Bielefeld (GenderCodes. Transkriptionenzwischen Wissen und Geschlecht, 12). 232 References

Kollektiv&Steine, ed. 2012: Begegnungenauf der Trans*fläche – reflektiert 76 queere Momente des transnormalen Alltags,Münster. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich2013: “Lackmustest. Homophobie und Demokratie in Russland”, in: ManfredSapper/ Volker Weichsel, eds., Spektralanalyse. Homosexualität undihreFeinde,Berlin (Osteuropa, 10), 49-67. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich2010: Klubnichka na berezke. Seksual’naiakul’turav Rossii,Moskva Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich 2009: Muzhchina vmeniaiushchemsia mire,Moskva. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich 2007: “Gomofobiia kak lakmusovaia bumazhka rossiiskoi demokratii”, in: Vestnik obshchestvennogo mneniia. Dannye. Analiz. Diskussii 90, 2007, 59-69. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich2005: “Sexual Culture and PoliticsinContemporary Russia”, in: Aleksandar Štulhofer/Theo Sandfort, eds., Sexuality and Gender in Postcommunist Eastern Europe and Russia,New York/ London/ Oxford, 111-123. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich 2003: Muzhskoe telo vistorii kul’tury,Moskva. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich 1999: “Sexualityand politics in Russia, 1700-2000”, in: Franz X. Eder/ Lesley Hall/ Gert Hekma, eds., Sexual Cultures in Europe. National Histories,Manchester, 197-218; online at: sexology.narod.ru/publ 012.html [last accessed on 7May 2015]. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich 1998: Lunnyi svet na zare. Liki imaski odnopoloi liubvi, Moskva. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich1995: TheSexual Revolution in Russia. Fromthe Age of the Czars to Today,New York. Kon, Igor‘ Semenovich 1989: Vvedenie vseksologiiu,Moskva. Kondakov, Aleksandr,ed. 2014: Na pereput’e: metodologiia, teoriia ipraktika LGBT ikvir-issledovanii,Sankt-Peterburg. Kondakov, Aleksandr 2013: “Gomoseksual’nost’ iobshchestvennoe mnenie v Rossii: ot negativnykh otsenok do bezrazlichiia”, in: Demoskop Weekly 565- 566,2-15Sentiabria2013; online at: http://demoscope.ru/weekly/2013/0565/ analit05.php[last accessed on 27 April 2016]. Kondakov,Aleksandr 2012a: “Pravovye rany:znachenie prav cheloveka dlia geev ilesbiianok vRossii”, in: Laboratorium 4(3), 2012, 84-104. Kondakov, Aleksandr 2012b: “Chelovek igrazhdanin. Seksual’nost’ kak sposob konstruirovaniia grazhdanstvennosti vRossii”, in: NeprikosnovennyiZapas 85(5), 2012, 249-258. Kondakov, Aleksandr 2011: “Poriadok diskursov vformirovanii deviantnykh chert gomoseksual’noi sub’’ektivnosti”, in: Paradigma 16,2011,65-74. SecondaryWorks 233

Kondakov, Aleksandr 2010: “Odnopolyi brak vRossii: «TemnoeProshloe», Serye Budni i«Svetloe»Poslezavtra”, in: Gendernye Issledovaniia 20, 2010, 51-71. Kondakov, Aleksandr(Pri uchastii:Kassandra Khartblėi, Ekaterina Ivanova, Aleksandra Dmitrieva n.d.: “LGBTIK sinvalidnost’iu vRossii”; online at: https://lgbtnet.org/sites/default/files/otchet_lgbt-s-invalidnostyu_kondakov.p df [last accessed on 11 June 2017]. Krejčí,Rudolf 1959: Rußlandund Europa. Einblicke undBetrachtungen, Innsbruck. Kroll, Renate, ed. 2002: Metzler Lexikon Gender Studies/Geschlechterforschung. Ansätze – Personen – Grundbegriffe,Stuttgart/ Weimar. Krongauz, Maksim2015: “Gendernaia paradigmanazvanii liudei”, in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz, ed., NewApproaches to Genderand Queer ResearchinSla- vonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “Language as a Constitutive Element of aGendered Society – Developments, Perspectives, and Possibilitiesinthe Slavonic Languages”(Innsbruck, 1-4 October2014), Wiesbaden (Die Welt derSlaven. Sammelbände, 59), 165-171. Kurnaeva, Natal’ia Aleksandrovna/Riabov, Oleg Viacheslavovich 2006: “„Gusary deneg ne berut”: Svoiichuzhie vgendernomdiskurse kollektivnoi identichnosti”, in: Gender: Iazyk, Kul’tura,Kommunikatsiia. Materialy Tret’ei Mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii (27–28 noiabria 2003 g.),Moskva (Vestnik MGLU, 518, Seriia Lingvistika),239-246; online at: https://riabov. wordpress.com/2003/11/15/svoi-i-chuzhie-gender/ [last accessed on 25 April 2016]. Laqueur, ThomasWalter 1992: Making sex. Body and gender from theGreeksto Freud,Cambridge/ Massachusetts/London. Lembevski, Sasho A. 1999: “SuckMyNation – Masculinity, Ethnicityand the Politics of (Homo)sex”, in: Sexualities 2(4), 1999, 397-419. Livia, Anna/ Hall, Kira1997: ““It’sagirl!” Bringing PerformativityBackto Linguistics”, in: Anna Livia/ Kira Hall, eds., Queerly phrased. Language, Gender, andSexuality,New York/ Oxford(Oxford StudiesinSocio- linguistics), 3-18. Luserke-Jaqui, Matthias2002: “»Dieses grausame, entartete, wilde Geschlecht«. Über die literarische Darstellung der Schuleals Ort männlicher Soziali- sation”, in:KarinTebben, ed., Abschied vomMythos Mann. Kulturelle Konzepte derModerne,Göttingen,49-64. Mae, Michiko2007: “Auf dem Wegzueiner transkulturellenGenderforschung”, in: Michiko Mae/Britta Saal, eds., Transkulturelle Genderforschung. Ein Studienbuchzum Verhältnis von Kultur undGeschlecht,Wiesbaden (Ge- schlecht &Gesellschaft, 9), 37-51. 234 References

Mae, Michiko/Saal,Britta 2007: “Einleitung”, in: Michiko Mae/Britta Saal, eds., Transkulturelle Genderforschung. EinStudienbuch zum Verhältnis von Kultur undGeschlecht,Wiesbaden (Geschlecht&Gesellschaft, 9), 9-17. Marco, Anna de 2011: “Gender and Politeness: an InvestigationonDimi- nutives”, in: Eleonora Federici, ed., Translating Gender,Bern (IRIS – For- schungen zureuropäischen Kultur, 25), 105-116. Maydell, Renatavon 2013: “Von Bären und Fäusten. Zur Aktualität traditioneller MännlichkeitsentwürfeinRussland”,in: Regine Nohejl/ Olga Gorfinkel/ Friederike Carl/ Elisabeth Cheauré, eds., Genderdiskurseund nationale Iden- tität in Russland. Sowjetische und postsowjetische Zeit,München (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 51), 71-85. McConnell-Ginet, Sally 2011: Gender, Sexuality, andMeaning.Linguistic Practice andPolitics,Oxford. Meer, Theo van der 1994: “Sodomy and thePursuit of aThird Sex in the Early Modern Period”, in: Gilbert Herdt, ed., Third Sex, Third Gender.Beyond Sexual DimorphisminCulture andHistory,New York,137-212. Mehlmann, Sabine 2006: Unzuverlässige Körper. Zur Diskursgeschichtedes Konzepts geschlechtlicher Identität,Königstein/Taunus. Menzel, Birgit 2013: “Glamouröse Amazonen? Frauen in Russlands Medien heute”, in:Regine Nohejl/ OlgaGorfinkel/Friederike Carl/Elisabeth Cheauré, eds., Genderdiskurse und nationale Identität in Russland. Sowjeti- sche und postsowjetische Zeit,München (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammel- bände, 51), 235-250. Metzeltin, Michael/Wallmann, Thomas2010: Wege zur Europäischen Identität. Individuelle, nationalstaatliche undsupranationale Identitätskonstrukte,Ber- lin (Forum: Rumänien, 7). Mogge-Grotjahn, Hildegard 2004: “Geschlecht, Identität undSozialisation”, in: Hildegard Mogge-Grotjahn, ed., Gender, Sexund Gender Studies. Eine Einführung,Freiburg i.Br., 93-102. Morland, Iain 2013: “What canqueer theory do forintersex?”, in: Donald Eugene Hall/ Annamarie Jagose/ AndreaBebell/SusanPotter, eds., The Routledge Queer Studies Reader,London/ NewYork,445-463. Morrish, Elizabeth 1997: ““Falling Short of God’s Ideal”.Public Discourse about Lesbians andGays”, in:Anna Livia/ Kira Hall, eds., Queerly phrased. Language,Gender, and Sexuality,New York/Oxford (Oxford Studies in Sociolinguistics),335-345. SecondaryWorks 235

Motschenbacher, Heiko2015: “Structuralgender linguisticsand de-essentiali- sation: Astudy of Croatian personalnouns”,in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz, ed., New ApproachestoGender andQueer Research in Slavonic Studies. Pro- ceedings of the International Conference “Language as aConstitutive Ele- ment of aGendered Society – Developments,Perspectives, and Possibilities in the Slavonic Languages” (Innsbruck, 1-4 October 2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 59), 51-69. Motschenbacher, Heiko2014a: “Grammatical gender as achallengefor language policy: The (im)possibilityofnon-heteronormative language use in German vs. English”, in: Language Policy 13(3), 2014, 243-261. Motschenbacher, Heiko 2014b: “Focusingonnormativityinlanguageand sexua- litystudies: Insights from conversationsonobjectophilia”, in: Critical Dis- course Studies 11(1), 2014, 49-70. Motschenbacher, Heiko2013: “‘Now everybody can wear askirt’: Linguistic constructions of non-heteronormativityatEurovision Song Contest press conferences”, in: Discourse &Society 24(5), 2013, 590-614. Motschenbacher, Heiko2012: “‘I think Houston wants akiss right?’ Linguistic constructions of heterosexualitiesatEurovision Song Contest press conferences”, in: JournalofLanguageand Sexuality 1:2, 2012, 127-150. Motschenbacher, Heiko 2011: “Taking Queer Linguistics further: Socio- linguistics andcritical heteronormativityresearch”, in: International Journal of the Sociology of Language 212, 2011, 149-179. Motschenbacher, Heiko2010: Language, Gender andSexualIdentity. Poststructuralist perspectives,Amsterdam/ Philadelphia (Impact: Studies in Language andSociety,29). Motschenbacher, Heiko/ Stegu, Martin2013: “Queer Linguistic approaches to discourse”, in: Discourse &Society 24, 2013, 519-535. Nagar, Ila 2008: Language, Gender andIdentity. The Case of Kotis in Lucknow- India,Ohio; online at: https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=osu 1222102359&disposition=inline [last accessedon1April 2015]. Nagel, Joane1998: “Masculinityand nationalism: genderand sexualityinthe making of nations”, in: Ethnic and Racial Studies 21(2), 1998, 242-269. Nanda, Serena 1994: “Hijras: An Alternative Sex andGender Role in India”, in: GilbertHerdt,ed., Third Sex, Third Gender. Beyond SexualDimorphism in Culture andHistory,New York,373-417. Niethammer,Lutz 2000: Kollektive Identität. HeimlicheQuellen einer unheim- lichen Konjunktur,Reinbek. 236 References

Nohejl,Regina 2013a: “Einführung. Nationund Gender in derrussischen Kultur”, in: Regine Nohejl/ Olga Gorfinkel/Friederike Carl/Elisabeth Cheauré, eds., Genderdiskurse und nationale Identität in Russland. Sowjeti- sche und postsowjetische Zeit,München (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammel- bände, 51), 7-15. Nohejl,Regine2013b: “Ėto ja –Ėdička.Die seltsame Karriere des Ėduard Limonov oder Das russische Problemmit der Männlichkeit”, in: Regine No- hejl/ Olga Gorfinkel/Friederike Carl/Elisabeth Cheauré, eds., Gender- diskurse und nationale Identität in Russland. Sowjetischeund postsowjetische Zeit,München (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 51), 87-126. Nohejl,Regine/Carl, Friederike/Cheauré, Elisabeth, eds. 2011: Konstrukty natsional’noi identichnosti vrusskoi kul’ture: vtoraia polovina XIX stoletiia – Serebrianyi vek. (Materialykonferentsii, Iiun’ 2009 g., Tiumen‘/Tobol’sk), Moskva. Nohejl, Regine/ Carl, Friederike/Cheauré, Elisabeth, eds. 2010: Konstrukty natsional’noi identichnosti vrusskoi kul’tureXVIII–XIXvekov. (Materialy konferentsii, Aprel‘ 2008 g., Tver‘),Moskva. Nohejl, Regine/ Gorfinkel, Olga/Carl, Friederike/ Cheauré,Elisabeth,eds.2013: Genderdiskurse und nationale Identität in Russland. Sowjetische undpost- sowjetische Zeit,München (Die Welt der Slaven, Sammelbände, 51). O’Keeffe,Anne 2012: “Mediaand discourse analysis”, in: JamesPaul Gee/ Michael Handford, eds., The Routledge HandbookofDiscourse Analysis, London/ NewYork, 441-454. Penn, Shana/ Massino, Jill,eds. 2009: Gender Politics andEverydayLife in State Socialist Eastern and Central Europe,New York. Persson, Emil 2015: “Banning“Homosexual Propaganda”:Belonging and Visibility in ContemporaryRussian Media”, in: Sexuality &Culture 19, 2015, 256-274. Persson, Emil/Petersson, Bo 2014: “Politicalmythmaking and the2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi: Olympism and the Russiangreat power myth”, in: East European Politics 30(2), 2014, 192-209. Petrova,Rasilia Galiakhmetovna 62013 [2007]: Genderologiia ifeminologiia. Uchebnoe posobie, Moskva. Pilkington,Hilary, ed. 1996: Gender,Generation and Identity in Contemporary Russia,London/New York. Preves, Sharon E. 22005[2003]: Intersex and Identity. TheContestedSelf,New Brunswick. SecondaryWorks 237

Pstyga, Alicja 2010: Słowotwórcza kategorianegacji. Prefiksalnenegatywa rzeczownikowe we współczesnym języku polskim irosyjskim, Gdańsk. Rabzhaeva, Marina Viktorovna,ed. 2005: Gendernye raznochteniia. Materialy IV mezhvuzovskoi konferentsii molodykh issledovatelei «Gendernye otnosheniia vsovremennomobshchestve: global’noe ilokal’noe», 22-23oktiabria 2004 g,Sankt-Peterburg(Gendernye issledovaniia). Rajilić,Simone 2015: “Feministische Perspektivenauf (nicht)diskriminierende Sprachpraktiken in Serbien”, in: DennisScheller-Boltz,ed., New Approa- ches to Gender and Queer ResearchinSlavonic Studies. Proceedings of the InternationalConference “Language as aConstitutive Element of aGen- dered Society – Developments, Perspectives, andPossibilities in the Slavonic Languages” (Innsbruck, 1-4 October 2014),Wiesbaden (DieWelt der Sla- ven. Sammelbände, 59),109-127. Rathmayr,Renate 2010: “Das idealisierte Selbstporträt? Selbstdarstellung in russischen Bewerbungsgesprächen”, in: Wiener SlawistischerAlmanach 65, 2010, 141-161. Riabov, Oleg Viacheslavovich 2007: «Rossiia-Matushka».Natsionalizm, gender ivoina vRossii XX veka. Spredisloviem Eleny Goshchilo,Stuttgart (Soviet and Post-Soviet Politicsand Society,60). Riabov, Oleg Viacheslavovich/Riabova, Tat’iana Borisovna 2014: “The decline of Gayropa? How Russia intends to savethe world”, in: Eurozine 2014, 1-9; online at: http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2014-02-05-riabova-en.html [last accessed on 14 September 2015]. Riabov,OlegViacheslavovich/Riabova, Tat’iana Borisovna 2008: “«Rossiia podnimaetsia skolen»?:remaskulinizatsiia inovaia rossiiskaia identichnost‘”, in: Lichnost‘. Kul’tura. Obshchestvo 3-4, 2008, 250-257; online at: https://riabova.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/rossiya-podnimaetsya-s-kolen[last accessed on 24 April2016]. Riabova, Tat’iana Borisovna 2002: “Maskulinnost’ kakfaktor rossiiskogo poli- ticheskogo diskursa”, in: Jiřina vanLeeuwen-Turnovcová/Karin Wullen- weber/ Ursula Doleschal/ Franz Schindler, eds., Gender-Forschung in der Slawistik. Beiträge derKonferenzGender – Sprache – Kommunikation – Kultur,28. April bis 1. Mai 2001, Institut fürSlawistik, Friedrich-Schiller- Universität Jena,Wien (WienerSlawistischer Almanach, 55), 441-450. Riabova, Tat’iana Borisovna/Riabov, Oleg Viacheslavovich 2013: “«Gejropa»: Gendernoe izmerenie obraza Evropyvpraktikach politicheskoi mobilizatsii”, in: Zhenshchina vrossiiskom obshchestve 3, 2013, 31-39. 238 References

Riabova, Tat’ianaBorisovna/Tsalko, EkaterinaO.2011: “«Russkii muzhik»: O roli gendernykh markerov vnatsional’noi identifikatsii”, in: Irina Novikova, ed., Europe-Russia: Contexts, Discourses, Images,Riga, 206-220; online at: https://riabova.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/riabova_tzalko_russkiy_muzhik .pdf [last accessed on 24 April 2016]. Ritter,Martina,ed. 2001, Zivilgesellschaft und Gender-Politik in Rußland, Frankfurt/ New York. Robinson,Victoria/ Richardson, Diane,eds. 42015 [1993]: Introducing Gender and Women’s Studies,London. Roscoe, Will 1994: “HowtoBecome aBerdache: Toward aUnified Analysis of Gender Diversity”, in:Gilbert Herdt, ed. 1994: Third Sex, Third Gender. Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Culture andHistory,New York, 329-372. Rossiia iEvropa: Vpoiskach identichnosti. Mezhdunarodnyi simpozium, Moskva, 9-11 dekabria 1998,Moskva,2000. Rotkirch, Anna/ Haavio-Mannila, Elina,eds.1996: Women’s Voices in Russia Today,Aldershot. Rubin, GayleS.2003: “Sex denken: Anmerkungen zu einer radikalen Theorie der sexuellenPolitik”, in: AndreasKraß, ed. 2003, Queer denken. Gegen die Ordnung der Sexualität(Queer Studies),Frankfurt a.M. (edition suhrkamp, 2248), 31-79. Rumiantseva, Polina Vital’evna 2009: “Gendernaia identichnost‘”, in: Irina Ser- geevna Kletsina, ed. 22009 [2003], Gendernaiapsikhologiia,Sankt-Peterburg (Praktikumpopsikhologii),248-255. Sapper, Manfred/Weichsel, Volker, eds. 2013: Spektralanalyse. Homosexualität und ihre Feinde,Berlin (Osteuropa,10). Scheide,Carmen2002: Kinder,Küche, Kommunismus.Das Wechselverhältnis zwischen sowjetischem Frauenalltagund Frauenpolitik von1921 bis 1930 am BeispielMoskauer Arbeiterinnen,Zürich(Basler Studien zur Kultur- geschichte Osteuropas, 3). Scheller-Boltz, Dennis,ed. 2015a: NewApproaches to Genderand QueerRe- searchinSlavonic Studies. Proceedings of theInternational Conference “Lan- guageasaConstitutive Element of aGenderedSociety – Developments, Perspectives,and Possibilitiesinthe SlavonicLanguages” (Innsbruck, 1-4 October 2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt derSlaven. Sammelbände, 59). Scheller-Boltz, Dennis 2015b: “Identität als polydimensionales Selbst. Zu Ver- ständnis undKonstruktion geschlechtlicherund sexueller Identität in Russ- land. Eine allgemeine Einführung fürSlawist_inn_en”, in: AcademicJournal of Modern Philology 4, 2015, 89-120. SecondaryWorks 239

Scheller-Boltz, Dennis 2015c:“The VictoryofConchita Wurst Is the End of Europe” – or: BlueEurope vs Black-White Russia. Constructing Nation by Constructing Gender and SexualityinRussian Discourse”,in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz, ed., NewApproaches to Genderand Queer ResearchinSla- vonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “Language as a Constitutive Element of aGendered Society – Developments, Perspectives, and Possibilitiesinthe Slavonic Languages”(Innsbruck, 1-4 October2014), Wiesbaden (Die Welt derSlaven. Sammelbände, 59), 201-241. Scheller-Boltz, Dennis 2015d: „From IsolationtoIntegration. Genderand Queer Research in Slavonic Linguistics: Challenges, Approaches, Perspectives. An Introduction”, in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz, ed., New Approaches to Gender and Queer Research in Slavonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “LanguageasaConstitutive Element of aGendered Society – Developments, Perspectives, and Possibilitiesinthe Slavonic Languages” (Innsbruck, 1-4October2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammel- bände, 59), 15-31. Scheller-Boltz, Dennis 2015e: “DekadentesEuropa – normales Russland? Con- chita Wurst und der Identitätendiskurs in Russland”, in Erna Appelt/Elisa- beth Grabner-Niel/Marion, Jarosch/ Michaela Ralser, eds.,Identitäten verhandeln – Identitäten de/konstruieren, Innsbruck (Innsbrucker Gender Lectures III), 55-73. Scheller-Boltz, Dennis2015f: “Demonizatsiia Zapada iIdealizatsiia Rossii. Staroe vino vnovykhmekhakh? ili: Novoevino vstarykhmifakh?”, in: Alla Viktorovna Kirilina/ Ol’ga Veniaminovna Baljasnikova/Anna Aleksan- drovna Stepanova, eds., Mezhkul’turnoe obshchenie:kontakty ikonflikty. Materialymezhdunarodnoi nauchnoikonferentsii. 21-23 oktiabria 2015, Moskva, 23-24. Scheller-Boltz, Dennis 2015g: “Russian Gender Linguistics Forced to Respond – Can WomenBeMadeVisible in Communication?”, in: Olena Petrivna Levchenko, ed., Liudina. Komp’iuter. Komunikatsiia. Zbirnik naukovikh prac‘,Lviv,95-102. Scheller-Boltz, Dennis2014: “On Gender Awareness in German, Russian, and Polish”, in: Przegląd Rusycystyczny 4, 2014, 80-105. Scheller-Boltz, Dennis 2013: “Politische Korrektheit undTranslationimLichte des postcolonial turn (andeutschem, polnischem und russischemMaterial)”, in: KatarzynaLukas/Izabela Olszewska/Marta Turska,eds., Translation im Spannungsfeld der cultural turns,Frankfurt a.M.(Studien zur Germanistik, Skandinavistik undÜbersetzungskultur, 7),167-182. 240 References

Scheller-Boltz,Dennis/Althaler, Mathias 2015: “Die Konstruktion von Homo- sexualitätimrussischen Mediendiskurs”, in:Dennis Scheller-Boltz, ed., New ApproachestoGenderand QueerResearch in Slavonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “LanguageasaConstitutive Element of a GenderedSociety – Developments, Perspectives, and Possibilities in the Sla- vonic Languages” (Innsbruck, 1-4 October2014),Wiesbaden (Die Welt der Slaven. Sammelbände, 59), 185-200. Scherrer, Jutta 2001: “Das Erbe: Geschichte und Gesellschaftskultur”, in: Hans- Hermann Höhmann/ Hans-Henning Schröder, ed., Russland unter neuer Führung. Politik, Wirtschaft undGesellschaft am Beginn des 21.Jahr- hunderts,Münster (Agenda Zeitlupe, 18), 21-31. Schmitt, Britta 1997: Zivilgesellschaft, Frauenpolitik und Frauenbewegung in Rußland. Von 1917 bis zur Gegenwart,Königstein/Taunus (aktuelle frauen- forschung). Scholz, Sylka/ Willms,Weertje,eds. 2008: Postsozialistische Männlichkeiten in einer globalisiertenWelt,Berlin(Focus Gender, 9). Schor-Tschudnowskaja,Anna 2011: Gesellschaftliches Selbstbewusstsein und politische Kultur im postsowjetischen Russland. Eine Studie zu den Deutungsmustern „eigen“, „unser“und „fremd“,Baden-Baden (Studien der Hessischen Stiftung Friedens-und Konfliktforschung, 14). Schößler, Franziska 2008: Einführung in die Gender Studies,Berlin. Schröter, Susanne 2002:FeMale. Über Grenzverläufe zwischenden Ge- schlechtern,Frankfurt a.M. Semenova, Lidiia Eduardovna/ Semenova, Vera Eduardovna 22009 [2003]: “Vospitanie sovremennykh devochek imal’chikov spozitsii gendernogo podkhoda”, in: Irina Sergeevna Kletsina, ed., Gendernaia psikhologiia, Sankt-Peterburg (Praktikumpopsikhologii),211-234. Setz, Wolfram, ed. 2000: Die Geschichte der Homosexualitäten und die schwule Identität an der Jahrhundertwende. Eine Vortragsreiheaus Anlaß des 175. Geburtstags von Karl Heinrich Ulrichs,Berlin(Bibliothek rosa Winkel, 25). Shaburova, Ol’ga2005: “«Muzhik»kak konstrukt russkoi muzhestvennosti iego reprezentatsiia vrossiiskoi massovoikul’ture”, in: Elisabeth Cheauré/Regine Nohejl/ Antonia Napp,eds., Vater Rhein undMutter Wolga. Diskurse um Nation und Gender in Deutschlandund Russland,Würzburg (Identitäten und Alteritäten, 20), 485-495. Shaburova, Ol’ga 2002: “Muzhik ne suetitsia ili Pivo skharakterom”, in: Sergei Ushakin, ed., Omuzhe(N)stvennosti,Moskva,532-556. Sigusch, Volkmar2000, Karl Heinrich Ulrichs. Der erste Schwuleder Welt- geschichte,Berlin (Bibliothek rosa Winkel,21). SecondaryWorks 241

Silva, Adriande2013: “Trans*. In Sexualwissenschaftund Recht vor Inkraft- treten des Transsexuellengesetzes”, in: Christian Schmelzer, ed., Gender Turn.Gesellschaftjenseits der Geschlechternorm,Bielefeld, 81-103. Soboleva, IrinaV./ Bakhmetjev, Yaroslav A. 2015: “Political Awareness and Self-Blameinthe ExplanatoryNarratives of LGBT People Amid theAnti- LGBT Campaign in Russia”, in: Sexuality &Culture 19, 2015, 275-296. Sozaev, Valerii, ed. 2010: Vozmozhenli«kvir» po-russki? LGBTK issledovaniia, Sankt-Peterburg. Spengler, Oswald 1963 [1922/1923]: Der Untergang desAbendlandes. Umrisse einer Morphologieder Weltgeschichte,München. Sperling,Valerie 2015: Sex, Politics, and Putin. Political LegitimacyinRussia, Oxford/ New York. Stella, Francesca 2015: Lesbian Lives in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia. Post/Socialism andGendered Sexualities,Basingstoke (Gender andSexua- lities in the Social Sciences). Stella, Francesca 2013: “QueerSpace, Pride, and Shame in Moscow”, in: Slavic Review 72, 2013, 458-480. Stella, Francesca 2012: “The Politics of In/Visibility: CarvingOut Queer Space in Ul’yanovsk”, in: Europe-Asia Studies 64,2012, 1822-1846. Stella, Francesca/Nartova, Nadya 2016: “Sexual Citizenship, Nationalismand Biopolitics in Putin’s Russia”, in: Francesca Stella/ Yvette Taylor/Tracey Reynolds/ Antoine Rogers,eds., Sexuality,Citizenshipand Belonging: Trans-National and Intersectional Perspectives,Routledge (Routledge advances in critical diversities,1), 17-36. Stykow, Petra 2006: Staat und Wirtschaft in Russland. Interessenvermittlung zwischen Korruption undKonzertierung,Wiesbaden. Sullivan, Nikki 2003: ACritical Introduction to Queer Theory,Edinburgh/New York. Sunderland,Jane/Litosseliti, Lia2002: “Gender identity and discourse analysis. Theoretical and empirical considerations”, in: Lia Litosseliti/JaneSunder- land, eds., Gender identity and discourse analysis,Amsterdam/ Philadelphia (Discourse Approaches to Politics, Societyand Culture, 2), 1-39. Svetlichnaia, Tat’iana Gennad’evna/ Mosiagin, Igor’ Gennad’evich/Guber- nitskaia, Svetlana Vladimirovna 2012: “Kharakteristika seksual’noi kul’tury voennykhmoriakov”,in: Sotsiologicheskiizhurnal 3, 2012, 112-128. Szulc, Łukasz 2014: Conchita’s Europe: Eurovision, homonationalismand the politics of sexuality;online at: http://notchesblog.com/2014/05/19/conchitas- europe-eurovision-homonationalism-and-the-politics-of-sexuality/[last accessed on 27 April2016]. 242 References

Štulhofer, Aleksandar/Sandfort, Theo,eds. 2005: Sexuality and Gender in Post- communist EasternEurope and Russia,New York/London/ Oxford. Tajfel, Henri, ed.1982: Social Identity and Intergroup Relations,Cambridge. Temkina, Anna 2009: “Novyi byt, seksual’naiazhizn’ igendernaia revoliutsiia”, in: Elena Zdravomyslova/ Anna Rotkirkh/ Anna Temkina, eds., Novyi byt v sovremennoiRossii: gendernye issledovaniia povsednevnosti,Sankt-Peter- burg (Trudyfakul’teta politicheskikh naukisotsiologii, 17), 33-67. Temkina, Anna/ Zdravomyslova, Elena 2014: “Gender’s crooked path: Feminism confronts Russian patriarchy”, in: Current Sociology 62(2), 2014, 253-270. Tin, Louis-Georges, ed.2008: The Dictionary of Homophobia. AGlobal History of Gay &Lesbian Experience,Vancouver. Trautner, Hanns Martin2006: “Sozialisation und Geschlecht. Die entwicklungs- psychologische Perspektive”, in: Helga Bilden/ Bettina Dausien, ed., Sozia- lisation und Geschlecht. Theoretische und methodologische Aspekte,Opla- den/Farmington Hills, 103-120. Tschižewskij, Dmytro/Groh, Dieter 1959: Europa und Russland.Texte zum Pro- blem des westeuropäischen und russischenSelbstverständnisses,Darmstadt. Tuller, David 1996: Cracks in theIron Closet. Travels in Gay &Lesbian Russia, Boston/ London. Utrata, Jennifer 2015: Women without Men. Single Mothers and Family Change in the New Russia,Ithaca/London. Valdrová,Jana 2005: “Tschechische Lehrbücher des Deutschen. EinBlick aus der Gender-Perspektive”, in: Jiřina van Leeuwen-Turnovcová/NicoleRich- ter, eds., Mediale Welten in Tschechien nach 1989: Genderprojektionen und Codes des Plebejismus,München (Specimina PhilologiaeSlavicae, 142),87- 116. Villa, Paula-Irene 2007: “Postmoderne Geschlechter – Feminismusinder Post- moderne”, in: Lutz Hieber/Paula-Irene Villa, eds., Imagesvon Gewicht. So- ziale Bewegungen, Queer Theory und Kunst in den USA,Bielefeld,47-79. Waaldijk, Kees/Clapham,Andrew, eds. 1993: Homosexuality: AEuropean CommunityIssue. Essays on Lesbian andGay RightsinEuropean Law and Policy,Dordrecht/ Boston/ London (International Studies in HumanRights, 26). Wastl-Walter, Doris 2010: Gender Geographien. Geschlechtund Raum als soziale Konstruktionen,Stuttgart (Sozialgeographie kompakt, 2). Weedon, Chris 1996: Feminist Practiceand Poststructuralist Theory,Cambridge. SecondaryWorks 243

Wengeler, Martin 2005: “Das Szenariodes kollektiven Wissens einer Diskurs- gemeinschaftentwerfen.Historische Diskurssemantik als „kritische Linguis- tik“”, in: Aptum. Zeitschrift fürSprachkritik und Sprachkultur 3, 2005, 262- 282. West, Candace/Fenstermaker, Sarah 1997: “Doing Difference”, in: MaryRoth Walsh, ed. 1997: Women, men, andgender. Ongoing debates,New Haven/ London, 58-72. Weydt, Harald 2008: “Complex Ethnic Identities andlanguage”, in: Kirsten Süselbeck/ Ulrike Mühlschlegel/ Peter Masson, eds., Lengua, Nacióne Identidad. La regulacióndel plurilingüismoenEspañayAméricaLatina, Madrid/ Frankfurt a.M.,89-98. Wippermann,Carsten/Calmbach, Marc/ Wippermann, Katja 2009: Männer: Rolle vorwärts, Rolle rückwärts?Identitätenund Verhalten vontraditio- nellen, modernen undpostmodernen Männern,Opladen/ Farmington Hills. Wodak, Ruth 1989a: Language,power,and ideology.Studies in politicaldis- course,Amsterdam. Wodak, Ruth 1989b: Sprache und Macht – Sprache und Politik,Wien. Wood, KathleenM.1999: “CoherentIdentities amid Heterosexist Ideologies. Deaf and Hearing Lesbian Coming-Out Stories”, in: MaryBucholtz/ A. C. Liang/ Laurel A. Sutton, eds., Reinventing identities. The genderedself in discourse,New York/ Oxford (Studies in Language and Gender, 1),46-63. Wünsch, Michaela 2005: “Die Politik queerer Räume”, in: Elahe Haschemi Yekani/ Beatrice Michaelis, eds., Quer durch die Geisteswissenschaften. Perspektiven der QueerTheory,Berlin, 31-39. Yusupova, Marina 2015: “Masculinity, Criminality, andRussian Men”, in: Mascu- linities in Russia andEast CentralEurope (Sextures3(3), 2015),46-61. Yuval-Davis,Nira 1997: Gender &Nation,London (Politics and Culture. A Theory, Culture &Societyseries). Zaitseva, Valentina 2006: “National, Cultural, and Gender Identityinthe Russian Language”, in: Helena Goscilo/ Andrea Lanoux, eds., Gender andNational IdentityinTwentieth-Century Russian Culture,DeKalb, 30-54. Zdravomyslova, Elena/Rotkirkh, Anna/Temkina, Anna,eds. 2009: Novyi byt v sovremennoi Rossii: gendernye issledovaniia povsednevnosti,Sankt-Peter- burg (Trudyfakul’teta politicheskikh naukisotsiologii, 17). Zimman, Lal/ Hall, Kira 2010: “Language, Embodiment,and the “Third Sex””, in Dominic Watt/CarmenLlamas, eds., Language andIdentities,Edinburgh, 166-178. 244 References

Zink, Andrea2015: “Nikolai Gogol’s Subversive Male Worlds”, in: Dennis Scheller-Boltz, ed., NewApproaches to Genderand Queer ResearchinSla- vonic Studies. Proceedings of the International Conference “Language as a Constitutive Element of aGendered Society – Developments, Perspectives, and Possibilitiesinthe Slavonic Languages”(Innsbruck, 1-4 October2014), Wiesbaden (Die Welt derSlaven. Sammelbände, 59), 421-436. Zwicky, Arnold M. 1997: “TwoLavenderIssues forLinguists”, in: Anna Livia/ Kira Hall, eds., Queerly phrased. Language, Gender, andSexuality,New York/ Oxford (Oxford Studies in Sociolinguistics),21-34. Online Sources 245

2Online Sources: PressMaterial, Online Texts, and Online Forums

URL 1: www.thejournal.ie/putin-russia-three-children-712802-Dec2012 [last accessed on 15 April2016]. URL2:www.izvestiaur.ru/society/6997501.html [last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL 3: www.novayagazeta.ru/news/1690684.html[last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL 4: www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/09/transgender-people-russia-ban ned-driving-legal-amendment-dmitry-medvedev[last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL 5: www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-27358560 [last accessed on 15 January2016]. URL 6: www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFN3DZMjnsU [last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL 7: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/06/russia-today-anchor-liz- wahl-resigns-on-air-ukraine [last accessed on 15 March 2016]. URL 8: www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/vladimir-putin/11678629/Russia n-state-TV-reporter-fired-after-criticising-Vladimir-Putin.html [last accessed on 15 March2016]. URL 9: http://www.fakt.pl/tag/anna-grodzka[last accessed on 15 April2016]. URL 10: http://robertbiedron.pl/ [last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL11: www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/03/19/australian-government-withdraws-no n-specified-gender-status/ [last accessed on 1June 2014]. URL12: www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zeitgeschehen/2010-03/geschlecht-adrogyn[last accessedon1June2014]. URL 13: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_Angel [last accessed on 1March 2016]. URL 14: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life/i-dont-need-a-penis-to-feel-like-a- dude-20140205-321gp.html [last accessed on 10 April 2016]. URL 15: www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/menschen/transgender-in-indien-wede r-er-noch-sie-12965125.html [last accessedon10June 2014]. URL 16: www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/russlands-werben-um-serbien-vergeblich es-trommeln-gegen-europa-1.2255958 [last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL 17: www.economist.com/news/europe/21625793-vladimir-putins-visit-and- footb all-match-rekindle-rows-serbia-europe-or-russia [last accessedon15 April 2016]. URL 18: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/16/vladimir-putin-russia- serbia-alliance-military-parade [last accessed on 15 April2016]. 246 References

URL 19:www.znak.com/2016-02-04/sociologi_rossiyane_vpali_v_depressiyu_i _hotyat_nazad_v_sssr [last accessed on 11 April 2016]. URL 20: https://lenta.ru/articles/2014/08/19/politnifo/ [last accessed on 13 My 2016]. URL 21: www.yaplakal.com/forum7/st/25/topic1248202.html [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL22: http://forum.electrostal.com/index.php?topic=188277.5;imode[last accessed on 12 April2016]. URL 23: http://www.kp.ru/daily/26435.7/3306394/ [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 24: www.thinkoutsideyourbox.net/?p=32479 [last accessed on 1January 2016]. URL 25: http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/kazakhstan-shuts-down-gay-propagan da-law [last accessed on 1January2016]. URL 26: http://russian.rt.com/article/68801 [last accessed on 20 September 2015]. URL27: www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30735673 [last accessed on 20 October 2015]. URL 28: www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/09/transgender-people-russia-ba nned-driving-legal-amendment-dmitry-medvedev [last accessed on 10 Fe- bruary2016]. URL 29: www.mk.ru/social/2016/01/29/patriarkh-kirill-vyrazil-ozabochennost- legalizaciey-geybrakov-i-problemami-zhkkh.html[last accessed on 31 March 2016]. URL 30: www.mk.ru/social/2016/03/21/geyskandal-na-ukraine-glavnyy-narko policeyskiy-grozit-seksmenshinstvam-karoy-nebesnoy.html [last accessed on 2May 2016]. URL 31: www.mk.ru/social/2016/03/21/geyskandal-na-ukraine-glavnyy-narkopo liceyskiy-grozit-seksmenshinstvam-karoy-nebesnoy.html [last accessed on 2 May2016]. URL 32: www.deutschlandfunk.de/demografie-babyboom-in-russland.795.de.ht ml?dram:articleid=291094 [last accessed on 22 August 2015]. URL 33: http://de.sputniknews.com/german.ruvr.ru/2014_07_07/Geburtenrate-R ussland-ist-auf-dem-richtigen-Weg-6257 [last accessed on 22 August 2015]. URL 34: http://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/171392/umfrage/fertilitaetsra te-in-russland [last accessed on 22 August 2015]. URL 35: https://vk.com/wall-59729457_2775[last accessed on 22 February 2016]. Online Sources 247

URL 36: http://rbth.com/society/2014/01/20/a_soviet_doctor_pioneered_the_first _sex_change_operation_33351.html [last accessed on 22 February2016]. URL 37: www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqEikvmyqvQ[last accessedon22May 2016]. URL 38: http://lifenews.ru/news/138796 [last accessed on 22 February2016]. URL 39: www.zakonrf.info/koap/6.21 [last accessed on 17 September2015]. URL 40:www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_108808/9083b03e61777 d3fe172fb3ef707a10e10688262 [last accessed on 17 September 2015]. URL 41: www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_19558/c1969317a1e0e4 abc2eb9cf23dcf4c9f72e6c764 [last accessed on 17 September 2015]. URL42: www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_34661/f385ab5d34de90 1b2e5f3d08ac0b454481377d6a/ [last accessed on 17 September 2015]. URL 43: www.youtube.com/watch?v=guam16BPXPY [last accessedon17Sep- tember 2015]. URL 44: www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvTYMhbMbQ0 [last accessed on 17 September 2015]. URL 45: www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3OaYh8agE4 [last accessed on 17 Sep- tember 2015]. URL 46: www.youtube.com/watch?v=srPwrVdT2_8 [last accessed on 17 Sep- tember 2015]. URL 47: www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZ_aSl3ktjg [last accessedon17Sep- tember 2015]. URL 48:Spiegel Online on 11 June 2013, online at: www.spiegel.de/panorama /justiz/russland-duma-gesetz-gegen-homosexuellen-propaganda-a-905108.ht ml [last accessed on 17 February2016]. URL 49:SpiegelTVon22March 2013, online at: www.youtube. com/watch?v=yXMrcM4Qs20 [last accessed on 19 February2016]. URL 50: dbate: “Mein Leben unter Putin – Homosexualität in Russland” on 1 December 2014, online at: www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbNyby3Q84M[last accessed on 19 February2016]. URL51: Euronews on 30 September 2013, online at: www.youtube.com /watch?v=tjGy4fdFxhQ[last accessed on 19 February2016]. URL 52: Human Rights Watch on 5February2014, online at: www.youtube .com/watch?v=F-Qm-gFrCuk [last accessedon19February2016]. URL53: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJlvc0dgfGU[last accessed on 19 February 2016]. 248 References

URL 54:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EuHZBg_0gQ (cf.herealsohttps:/ /ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92_%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0_ %D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1 %82) [both last accessedon7January2016]. URL 55: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yelena_Khanga [lastaccessed on 8May 2014]. URL 56: www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EuHZBg_0gQ [last accessed on 14 November 2015]. URL 57: Deutsche Welle Online on 25 September 2013: “Noimaier raskritikoval rossiiskiizakon ozaprete gei-propagandy”;online at: www.dw.com/ru [last accessed on 15 January2016]. URL58: www.nzz.ch/feuilleton/als-schwuler-kuenstler-haelt-man-hier-jetzt-bess er-den-mund-1.18177745 [last accessed on 16 January2016]. URL 59:www.landestheater.at/info/stueck/five-sensitive-men-860 (cf. also www .landestheater.at/wo_files/files/PM_Five_sensitive_Men_-_EA-UA.pdf)[last accessed on 12 April2016]. URL60: www.berlin1.de/berliner-ideen/berliner-kpfe/vladimir-malakhov-verab schiedet-sich-von-berlin-mit-einer-ballett-gala [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 61:http://ballett-journal.de/staatsballett-berlin-nacho-duato-interview-castrati [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 62: www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/conchita-wurst-beim-esc-abstim mung-von-jury-und-zuschauern-a-968858.html[last accessedon12April 2016]. URL63: www.rp-online.de/kultur/musik/conchita-wurst-beim-eurovision-song-cont est-russische-politiker-poebeln-gegen-siegerin-aid-1.4231911[lastaccessedon 8May 2016]. URL 64: www.rp-online.de/kultur/musik/eurovision/conchita-wurst-null-punkte- von-der-deutschen-jury-aid-1.4234265 [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 65: Bild Online on 13 May2014. URL 66: MK Online on 11 May2014. URL 67: www.mgpublications.com/news/51610 [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 68: www.kp.ru/daily/26229.5/3112252/ [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 69:www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAknoWMSKo8 [last accessed on 2May 2016]. URL 70: www.kp.ru/daily/26229.5/3112252/ [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 71: BBCNews;online at: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33566335 [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. Online Sources 249

URL72: Rossiia Segodnia;online at:http://inosmi.ru/russia/20150727/229293728.ht ml [last accessedon12April 2016]. URL 73:Rossiia-24;onlineonYoutube at: www.youtube.com/watch?v= ZZBU1n6K344 [lastaccessedon12April 2016]. URL 74: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pc9vj_9uo8o [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 75:www.youtube.com/watch?v=I29Lfv1cn4A [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 76: http://rbth.com/sport/2015/02/19/first_male_synchronized_swimmer_a_ mixed_duet_is_the_epitome_of_harmony_43841.html [last accessedon12 April 2016]. URL 77: www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRAjtajf8ZI (cf.also www.bbc.com/ news/magazine-33566335)[last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 78: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Maltsev_%28synchronised_ swimmer%29 [last accessed on 12 April 2016]. URL 79: www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFuMa0Tv058 [last accessedon14May 2016]. URL 80: www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKlb_MmzDow[last accessed on 14 May2016]. URL 81: www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3_6SYcMP1g [last accessedon14May 2016]. URL 82: www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkmqWdPljzg [last accessedon14May 2016]. URL 83: http://derstandard.at/1399507336722/Strache-vs-Conchita-Wurst-statt- falscher-Normen[last accessed on 14 November 2015]. URL 84: www.fakt.pl/polacy-mowia-o-conchicie-wurst-co-sadza-polacy-o-babie -z-broda,artykuly,460874,1.html [last accessedon14April 2016]. URL 85: www.eurovision.tv/page/about/rules [last accessed on 14 April 2016]. URL 86: http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-ukraine-picks-crimean-tatar-for-eur ovision-singing-contest-2016-2?IR=T [last accessed on 14 November 2015]. URL 87: http://inserbia.info/today/2013/11/i-am-a-lesbian-marija-serifovic-open s-herself-completely-in-her-film-confession/ [last accessed on 14 April 2016]. URL 88: www.mk.ru/politics/2014/05/12/vitaliy-milonov-obeschaet-konchite-vu rst-polnuyu-depilyatsiyu.html [last accessedon24April 2016]. URL 89: www.fakt.pl/polacy-mowia-o-conchicie-wurst-co-sadza-polacy-o-babi e-z-broda,artykuly,460874,1.html [last accessed on 14 November 2015]. 250 References

URL90: www.dailystar.co.uk/showbiz/379309/Jennifer-Lawrence-dons-a-blonde- beard-for-appearance-on-The-Tonight-Show-with-Jimmy-Fallon [last accessed on 21 November2015]. URL 91:http://kurier.at/menschen/oesterreich/miss-universe-wahl-amina-dagi- traegt-bart/169.954.620 [last accessed on 31 March 2016]. URL 92: www.metronews.ru/novosti/fleshmob-dokazhi-chto-ty-ne-konchita-zna menitosti-massovo-sbrivajut-borody/Tponel---R2VWuur3FUF4o/ [lastaccessed on 21 November 2015]. URL 93: Deutsche Welle Onlineon15May 2014; online at: www.dw.com/ru/ %D1%8F%D0%BA%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BD-%D0%B7%D 0%B0%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%BB-%D0%B2-%D0%B1%D0%B 5%D1%80%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B5-%D0%B2-%D1%82% D1%83%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%BA/a-17639298 [last accessed on 12 March 2016]. URL 94: www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33566335 [last accessed on 20 April 2016]. URL 95: www.mk.ru/culture/2014/05/16/maksim-averin-vot-kogda-lyudi-nachn ut-zhit-i-lyubit-togda-slova-zhenschina-i-muzhchina-vstanut-na-svoi-mesta. html [last accessed on 20 November 2015]. URL 96:https://russian.rt.com/inotv/2014-05-16/YAkunin-obvinil-Evropu-v-tan cah [last accessed on 20 April 2016]. URL 97:https://louisproyect.org/category/homophobia/[last accessed on 20 April 2016]. URL 98: www.queer.de/detail.php?article_id=25572 [last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL 99: www.mk.ru/social/2016/02/12/vciom-rossiyane-stali-menshe-lyubit-su pruzheskie-izmeny-i-gomoseksualizm.html [last accessed on 15 April2016]. URL 100: www.pravoslavie.ru/jurnal/63614.htm[last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL 101: http://www.gayrussia.eu/world/7366/ [last accessed on 15 April 2016]. URL 102: www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2RpF63_o8U[last accessed on 5May 2016]. URL 103: http://вперёдроссия.рф/blog/43671234136/Putin-velel-geyam-otstat- ot-detey[last accessedon15April2016]. URL 104: http://вперёдроссия.рф/blog/43671234136/Putin-velel-geyam-otstat- ot-detey?page=1#42039861021 [last accessed on 19 March 2016]. URL 105:www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1BBZ9lBcg8 [last accessed on 8May 2016]. Online Sources 251

URL 106: http://вперёдроссия.рф/blog/43671234136/Putin-velel-geyam-otstat- ot-detey?page=1#42039861021 [last accessed on 18 March 2016]. URL 107:http://aloban75.livejournal.com/145667.html [last accessed on 8May 2016]. URL 108:http://aloban75.livejournal.com/145667.html [last accessed on 8May 2016]. URL 109: http://вперёдроссия.рф/blog/43671234136/Putin-velel-geyam-otstat- ot-detey[last accessedon24April2016]. URL 110: http://lifenews.ru/news/133221[last accessed on 24 April 2016]. URL 111:http://aloban75.livejournal.com/145667.html [last accessed on 8May 2016]. URL 112: http://www.mk.ru/politics/2013/02/10/810258-myi-ne-evropa-i-slava- bogu.html [last accessedon25September 2015]. URL 113: www.vz.ru/news/2014/5/12/686346.html [last accessed on 25 Sep- tember 2015]. URL 114: http://www.bild.de/politik/ausland/weissrussland/weissrussland-will- conchita-wurst-nicht-36350296.bild.html [last accessed on 24 April 2016]. URL 115: https://news.pn/en/public/103800 [last accessed on 24 April2016]. URL116: www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ldiGK8PwOqM/ maxr esdefault.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v%3DldiGK 8PwOqM&h=720&w=1280&tbnid=Y-Ee7YGEA4r-AM:&zoom=1&tbnh=9 0&tbnw=160&usg=__b3SJqAONfLqaNn4LrdJVPGOtYF8=&docid=XzxZ2 RXB2QbLIM [last accessed on 1April 2015]. URL 117: http://aloban75.livejournal.com/145667.html [last accessed on 24 August 2016]. URL 118: www.spiegel.de/unispiegel/wunderbar/gendertheorie-studierx-lann-ho rnscheidt-ueber-gerechte-sprache-a-965843.html [last accessed on 1April 2016]. URL 119: www.gender.hu-berlin.de/de/zentrum/personen/ma/1682130 [last accessed on 26 April2016]. URL120:www.akademiagender.cba.pl/gm1.html [last accessedon14April 2016]. URL 121: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%B8 %D0%BD,_%D0%90%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B9_% D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B 2%D0%B8%D1%87 [last accessed on 26 April2016]. URL 122: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fa'afafine [last accessed on 2June 2016]. URL 123: http://www.n-tv.de/politik/Moskau-koedert-Serbien-mit-Geld-article1 3358066.html[last accessed on 15 April 2016].