Abstract
‘The authors do not mention Judith Butler and so demonstrate no understanding of queer theory’. MOS journal reviewer rejection of a paper by Saoirse on non-normative sexual practices in works by Eve Kosovsky Sedgwick, Lauren Berlant and others.
This chapter examines how Management and Organisational Studies (MOS) conceives queer theory and queer people. It considers if MOS reasonably reflects queer people and queer theory. We summarise current queer theory and theorists, indicate areas of shared concern with MOS and as a form of displacement (Sedgewick, 2003), we queer the reception and smuggling in of queer narratives into MOS by academics who are often white, cis and heterosexual (Halberstam, 2005) who, whilst sympathetic to queer people and bodies, ‘other’ queer folk (Snorton, 2014). We thus queer the interpretation and use of queer in MOS.
Key Words
Query theory; Management and Organisational Studies; queering academic practice.
This chapter examines how Management and Organisational Studies (MOS) conceives queer theory and queer people. It considers if MOS reasonably reflects queer people and queer theory. We summarise current queer theory and theorists, indicate areas of shared concern with MOS and as a form of displacement (Sedgewick, 2003), we queer the reception and smuggling in of queer narratives into MOS by academics who are often white, cis and heterosexual (Halberstam, 2005) who, whilst sympathetic to queer people and bodies, ‘other’ queer folk (Snorton, 2014). We thus queer the interpretation and use of queer in MOS.
Key Words
Query theory; Management and Organisational Studies; queering academic practice.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Handbook for Feminist Methodologies in Management and Organization Studies |
| Editors | Emma Bell, S. Katila, Susan Merilanen |
| Place of Publication | Cheltenham |
| Publisher | Edward Elgar |
| Chapter | 11 |
| Publication status | Accepted/In press - 30 Mar 2023 |