Queer linguistics is a rather recent segment of sociolinguistics that focuses on LGBT language, in a way that, using language as an object of study, allows one to analyze the relation between gender and sexuality, power and oppression.

These studies take into account one aspect of a speech community, which shares certain common social traits, being in this case their identity of sexuality and gender. This will affect the variety of speech they produce, on different levels, phonological, lexical and so on.

As variety (a different form for the standard language), the queer slang is often used within the community as a form of identification. This secretiveness associated to the belonging to the group and excluding outsiders make this variety an argot - a type of "secret" language used by a speech community with the intention of alienating those who do not correspond to it - which can be found in other subcultures.


Make sure you see all our posts:
✫ Around The World
✫ A Brazilian Example
✫ Queer Linguistics and Pop Culture



Sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argot - A more detailed overview of the concept of "argot". 

Theorizing identity in language and sexuality research. BUCHOLTZ, Mary.  - Article about different approaches to the increasing topic of sexuality in studies, focusing on how this is perceived as part of identity and, therefore, how this affects sociocultural studies in different fields. It opposes studies narrowed to gay and lesbian varieties, as manifestations of desire from a psychoanalytical point of view, to studies that treat sexuality as a social construction that composes identity, focusing on how power and oppression build this (and, this way, incorporating feminist perspectives in sexuality studies).

Language and gender research from a queer linguistic perspective: A critical evaluation -Michaela Koch (2008). Review by Shannon Weber. - Review of a work that presents the historical changes in the treatment of sexuality and gender in sociolinguistics studies, and recent queer studies. It highlights how the relationship of power and hegemony delimited early studies, and how they have been questioned and opposed in recent ones.