In what Amitav Acharya has called a ‘multiplex world,’ the dominance of the liberal international order is increasingly challenged both from within and without by the presence of multiple and crosscutting scripts of what Europe and the world are and should be. In response to such multiplexity, the European Union needs to adapt in a way that acknowledges ‘European values’ as one normative vision on offer among many, while also aiming to subvert contemporary ‘culture war’ antagonisms. This is especially relevant in the promotion and enforcement of LGBTI equality. In a time when transnational anti-gender politics is becoming increasingly consequential, both within and beyond the Union as well as among its Western allies, the future of LGBTI equality promotion may rightfully focus energies on safeguarding existing achievements. While important, such a strategy risks reproducing homonormative divisions between those who are for and those who are against sexual and gender diversity, rather than offering a way out of the trenches. This paper therefore identifies two, at times conflicting, normative visions for the EU’s internal and global LGBTI equality promotion that the Union needs to pursue and navigate. Drawing on queer theories of temporality, Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction of futurity, and the work of agonistic theorist Bonnie Honig, the paper conceptualizes this as a tension between protecting ‘what remains’ (of LGBTI equality and its support) and striving for the ‘queer remainder’ (visions of European and global sexual integration that break with existing notions of what is possible). While the current challenges to what remains posed by anti-gender politics are well-documented, the paper discusses potential ‘queer remainders.’ It does so by identifying and rearticulating the justifications most prevalently used by the European Commission and the External Action Service to legitimize the rightfulness of European and global integration on questions of sexual and gender diversity, such as ‘values,’ ‘diversity,’ the need for ‘progress,’ and the protection of the ‘most vulnerable.’ Put into practice, the European Union would participate in actively shaping a vision of global sexual and gender diversity to come, rather than merely safeguarding a future of the liberal international order of the past.

The European Union (EU) defines its identity and boundaries of belonging through commitments to European values like equality, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. LGBTIQ+ rights have increasingly become central to the EU’s internal and external legitimization narratives, shaping boundaries of inclusion and exclusion. However, these rights are also contentious, highlighting tensions in the EU’s legitimization, supranational governance, and member states' varying levels of receptiveness to their incorporation into policies.

The 2020 Union of Equality (UoE) initiative, particularly the LGBTIQ Strategy 2020-2025, institutionalizes LGBTIQ+ rights as core European values. Yet, backlash from conservative and far-right actors underscores the fragility of this narrative, as exemplified by Hungary’s 2021 anti-LGBTIQ+ law, which sparked debates over European values and belonging. While Hungary framed the law as aligned with traditional values, EU actors opposed it, intensifying disputes over belonging.

This research examines how LGBTIQ+ rights function as narrative resources for the EU in routine and crisis legitimization. Through qualitative narrative analysis, it investigates the UoE's LGBTIQ 2020-2025 Strategy as routine legitimization and Hungary’s 2021 anti-LGBTIQ+ law as a crisis case. Using the concepts of Rainbow and Freezer Europe - juxtaposing tolerance with regression - it explores how EU narratives mediate tensions between values, governance, and contested belonging. The research addresses gaps in understanding the use of LGBTIQ+ rights in the EU's narrative legitimization.

This paper focuses on the relationship between the Czech Republic and LGBT+ rights, with particular attention to the challenges and violations associated with their enforcement. It explores the current social climate in the country and examines how the position of sexual minorities impacts the Czech Republic’s regional as well as international image.

The paper also discusses the ongoing ideological pushback in post-communist countries, where LGBT+ rights are more often restricted than in the Western Europe. In this context, the Czech Republic is seen relatively as an exception within Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), demonstrating a higher degree of acceptance of LGBT+ rights compared to other Visegrad Group countries (V4 countries), particularly Hungary and Poland. Nevertheless, significant barriers still exist in the Czech Republic, including the lack of legal recognition for same-sex marriages, which reflects the deeper social attitudes that resist full equality for LGBT+ individuals.

The aim of this work is to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of LGBT+ rights in the Czech Republic. It analyses the country's legislative framework and evaluates how discriminatory policies impact its reputation. The research examines the period from the Czech Republic's accession to the European Union (in 2004) up to the present day, exploring whether and how the treatment of LGBT+ rights has influenced the country’s position and its image. In addition, the paper investigates how the main decision-makers as well as the public respond to pressure from internal and international institutions responsible for monitoring human rights and whether the mechanisms in place are effective in promoting and protecting the rights of LGBT+ individuals.

After a brief description of the European Union’s 2020-2025 LGBTIQ equality strategy and the implementing measures adopted, the paper examines the specific actions aimed at combating discrimination against LGBTIQ people when exercising the right to free movement and residence in the EU.

To this end, it first discusses the proposal for a Regulation on private international law issues of parenthood, presented by the Commission on 7 December 2022, and its (potential) suitability to facilitate the recognition of legal ties among the members of “rainbow” families when they move within the EU.

Secondly, it will analyse the objective of the strategy to improve the recognition of the personal status and gender identity of trans, non-binary and intersex people between Member States, focusing on the compatibility of the existing legal framework with the fundamental rights of the persons concerned, in the light of the case law of the ECJ and the ECtHR.

The paper aims to identify the main obstacles to the implementation of the EU strategy on LGBTIQ equality, which are related to the conflict of interests at stake: on the one hand, the need to ensure the free movement and residence of LGBTIQ persons without discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and on the other hand, the concern of Member States to preserve their competence in matters of family and status, as well as their cultural traditions and national identities.

How do we know whether LGBTI rights have turned into international norms? Conventionally, scholars find evidence of a norm in its institutionalisation: the adoption of anti-discrimination law, the decriminalisation of homosexuality and the legalisation of same-sex marriage. Importantly, however, norms also have implications for discourse: they restrict the way in which actors may legitimately discuss an issue. This paper argues that we can use changing patterns of legitimation to capture norm robustness. Once LGBTI rights are well established, it is no longer socially acceptable to deny their validity and to use discriminatory language. Their opponents must consequently adjust their rhetoric or risk losing face. The paper examines this argument through a qualitative discourse analysis of all debates on sexual orientation and gender identity in the European Parliament between 1984, when it first adopted a report on sexual orientation, and 2020. The analysis reveals three main findings. First, the percentage of speeches that express disapproval of LGBTI rights decreased over time. Second, overtly homophobic arguments were common early on. Over time, however, this rhetoric became the exclusive province of far-right representatives. Third, MEPs increasingly rely on a combination of two discursive strategies to express their opposition: (1) a disclaiming strategy is used to argue that opposition to specific measures did not make MEPs into bigots, and (2) the strategy of competence contestation sees MEPs arguing that the EU lacked the authority to act on LGBTI rights. These findings demonstrate that LGBTI rights have become a well-established norm within the European Parliament.