Vera Chamas Basso
Paulo Antônio Pereira Igreja
Space (Hall, 1977; Bachelard, 1998; Soczka, 2005) and urban porosity (Jeudy, 2002) in the management of public policies in the population’s living territories is a central theme, mainly when demarcated by the experiences of individuals’ intersubjective approaches with them, with others and with ecological-natural universes. The constitution of the Brazilian historical process (Da Matta, 1991) operates a disconnect between the place that people occupy and their rights, installing exclusion and social inequalities (Rizzotti, Cordeiro and Pastor, 2017). In the local sphere, citizenship territoriality is not reduced to geographical space, it refers to the complexity of the psychosocial and cultural dynamics of relationships that establish new meanings of living in different spaces; considering the territories experienced favours creating possibilities for development, sustainability, resistance and resilience in view of the necessary changes to contain the effects of globalization and Its forms of domination (Trindade de Almeida, Figueiredo and Trindade Jr, 2012). In the transdisciplinary perspective (Baêta, 1998), we developed two analysis both of the manifest knowledge and senses of the body (Basso and Pustilnik, 2000) seen through the prism of the identity dimensions of intrinsically ideological impregnations/fragmentations that surround the people of the LGBT+ movement (García and Inácio, 2019) as well as the spontaneous creative potential (Moreno, 1977) to which the architectural project of the Center for Culture and LGBT+ Reception of Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro is inserted (Baptista e Igreja, 2019). We highlight that the following research objects are correlated: the context of the presence-belonging empowerment and inclusion examined from the perspective of humanistic leisure (Cuenca, 2000; Cuenca Cabeza, 2018) and in the wake of the derivations of aesthetic leisure (Arroyabe, 2010) and performance followed in mixologies (Villaça, 2010) and tactility (Frampton, 1996) with regard to architecture (Ando, 2010) and the locus of contemporary culture of an anthropological nature (Laraia, 2007), tension and dilemma ‘erudite-popular culture (Baptista, 2014). The results of this investigation turn their attention first to the movements of potential development, which analyzed in the light of transpersonal psychology where the trajectory is experiential-cognitive, make it possible to overcome the barriers of unidimensional vision to intersexualities (Capra and Luisi, 2014); second, that suppressed expressions of the ego, the Essential Being/Self emerges, in which the body that brings the memories of positive or not lived experiences, appears, the path of unveiling the life drive in terms of thinking-feeling-acting (Azevedo, 2020); third, that beyond the limits of what they believe and understand in the physical-emotional-mental-spiritual dynamics, comes the pain of the impregnations, separations and fragmentation to which they are being stereotyped and discriminated repeaters (Braden, 2008). The words of Bruckner (2009) can be used to conclude this exposition of arguments from the ongoing investigation at the center (…) [of the profound transformation of contemporary social life, of Its values and meanings,] is not a new type of society, but a new type of individual, who cultivates neither the nostalgia for a golden past, nor the hope for a redeeming future, but who, having an ‘inflexibility trained to see the realities of life’, is able to respond ‘to the demands of the day’. Undoubtedly, the current moment is crucial; However, what should perhaps be emphasized is that, unlike what was previously announced as a generalizable condition, after COVID19 the process of individualization/individuation of LGBT+ people will be more accessible to the attributes of meaning and dignity of their lives, as the psychosocial and cultural is a sounding board in which individuals read and interpret space in terms of their relationship with themselves, with others, with groups, with institutions and with the society in which they live.
Keywords: culture; citizenship; genre; sexuality; idleness.