Got Pride? Out Members of the Austrian Parliament and their framing of LGBTQ+ issues on social media

Amidst the growing support and success of European value conservatism and populism, which are significantly influencing contemporary European culture and politics, it becomes imperative to delve into LGBTQ+ perspectives and environments. These facets serve as a crucial focus for understanding the current struggle and polarisation around gender and sexuality issues in Europe (Mudde 2017; Hunklinger/ Ajanovic 2022; Graff/ Korolczuk 2022). Contrary to the common association of LGBTQ+ individuals with liberal and progressive values, the landscape is nuanced. Within sexual and gender minorities, there are liberal, progressive, and value-conservative individuals (Hunklinger 2021). Some LGBTQ+ individuals reject prevailing notions of 'woke' and 'gender ideology,' perceiving them as agendas of the political left, while others openly fight for a more liberal and progressive notion of LGBTQ+ politics. Against this background, this paper sets out to investigate online communication of members of the Austrian parliament that openly identify as LGBTQ+. A special focus lies on the ways they discuss and frame LGBTQ+ issues on social media. This paper undertakes an analysis of this dilemma, offering explanations for the intricate dynamics at play. We investigate oppositions, tensions, and overlaps in anti-gender politics with its anti-queer stances and progressive LGBTQ+ politics. In our paper we seek to explain how out LGBTQ+ politicians frame gender and sexuality issues on the social media platforms Instagram and TikTok. In our analysis, we rely on the method of critical frame analysis (Verloo 2016). Critical frame analysis is a discourse analytical approach to the study of meaning-making regarding a phenomenon discussed in among others texts, speeches, policies or in our case social media content. The Critical frame analysis is concerned with identifying frames or the framing, meaning-making process, within texts (Verloo 2016). We additionally emphasize the normative and affective dimension of framing practices (Bargetz/ Sauer 2010).