Architecture, one of the oldest and most conservative of disciplinary traditions, is frequently resistant to creative critique, activism, and subversion of its hegemonies – the very opposite of queer theory, thinking and action. From the outside, Architecture and Queerness are very unlikely bedfellows, binary opposites even. If architecture is to be just, if architecture is to be for humanity, then architecture needs Queer-ing. To dismantle the systemic binaries inherent within the architecture discipline and profession, we must begin with education, and we must look to the future(s). QuEAN[2] was founded to catalyse change within universities and schools, leveraging queerness as a lens to scrutinise and dismantle entrenched and uneven hierarchies within the education of the built environment.

Despite undeniable trends towards a more queer society (regardless of acceptance) and ongoing developments in queer studies, relatively little attention has been paid to queerness within spatial design practices since the 1990s. Recent publications (Jobst & Stead 2023, Furman & Mardell 2022), indicate a revived interest in queer spaces. This trajectory alongside growing percentages of LGBTQ+ youth (Stonewall rainbow Report, 2022[1]) unequivocally tells us that the education of our spatial design students (future practitioners) must sharpen critically, rigorously, and quickly to become more inclusive. Pedagogy within architecture and interior design is well established and often developing, however as yet comparatively underexplored through a queer lens.

Queer-ing is a questioning of categorisation, of normativity, of standardisation. This goes far beyond queer as identity, and leaps into queer as action; into unlearning, disruption, challenge and change - how does one que(e)ry not just the institution, and the curriculum, but the processes and regulations of prescription which are stitched together with red tape? This paper is a provocation, asking how might the body of architectural education be queer-ed and to what end? Where might the responsibility, labour of change, and opportunity lie? What might be the role of the university, the governing bodies (ARB, RIBA), of the School of Architecture, of the educator, of the student(?) in its development and implementation.