ABSTRACT
It is important to underscore that this is not a discussion of what the concept “queer” might do in studies of gender, sex and sexualities in education. This is surely where concepts associated with queer assemblages are thought to belong. In the “ad hoc groupings of diverse elements, of vibrant materials of all sorts … [that] are living, throbbing confederations” (Bennett, 2010, p. 23), queer assemblages typically comprise certain sexual subjects, and objects, of investigation. We are not surprised that the concept of queer has a habit of sticking to particular identities, politics, and programs. As researchers predominantly recognized for our scholarship in sexualities, and gender education – we are part of the repetition of what the concept of queer can do in education research. But we are also passionate supporters of research in education that can see that concepts like queer are not descriptive – but rather that queer denotes a continuously changing assemblage of ideas that can mutate, renew, and be replaced. Reflections and pronouncements on what queer concepts can do, what they are allowed
to do, and, on what people say or think they cannot do, have caught our attention during our combined histories of working in this field in Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand, and, internationally. Such reflections and pronouncements are various: the musings we have in mind are irreducible to any one person, philosopher, institution, or event.
