The first LGBT studies* were independent research projects, the first major project of this kind was the work of the Institute of Sexology, led by the German sexologist M. Hirschfeld. In the United States, the first homophile organizations that appeared in the early 50s were the Mattachine Society and the Daughters of Bilitis. Through research and educational activities, homosexuality was gradually decriminalized and depathologized, but this did not significantly improve the situation of the LGBT community* due to the emergence of homophobia at the same time. In parallel with lesbian research, “research on LGBT*” also developed, carried out by scientists in friendly tandem with homophile organizations. In Russia, the situation with LGBT* research is much more complicated. Interest in the LGBT community* and lesbian studies arose only in the 90s. 20th century, but there was only one direction - gender studies, which were entirely based on Western literature, theories and methodology, while the development of such studies was supported by grants from international foundations. This support made it possible to establish research centers, publish journals, and teach gender and queer studies as scientific disciplines. But the passage of the 2015 “undesirable organizations” law forced many organizations that had supported academic and civic projects since 1992 to cease their activities in Russia. Until now, LGBT* and queer studies are not such a popular research topic. This attitude towards such research can be explained by the fact that the Russian LGBT movement* is just going through its stages of formation, so it is difficult to compete with the interest in LGBT research* that currently exists in the West. LGBT studies* in the post-Soviet space never developed on their own; they existed within the framework of gender studies. There are also not enough scientists who are engaged in discussion on this topic - there are no permanent journals, conferences, seminars that would help the development of this topic. Therefore, now in Russia there is no serious development of lesbian theory within the framework of gender studies as a separate discipline (Anthology of gender theory. Collection of translations / Compiled and comments by E.I. Gapova and A.R. Usmanova.) It should be noted that Queer studies, queer theory, and lesbian/gay studies have some differences. Queer studies is more about exploring diversity: a wide range of identities that do not fit into traditional gender dichotomies. Queer theory blurs this spectrum of identities ad infinitum, choosing to undermine the concept of “identity” in general. Lesbian studies is built on the exploration of lesbian identities. In the Western approach, there is a close interweaving of gender, lesbian, and queer studies that they are often impossible to distinguish from each other. Sometimes the term “gender studies” can act as a euphemism for lesbian studies, and there is a danger that the issues of lesbian studies will be lost in the paradigm of gender studies. Queer theory arose at the intersection of lesbian studies, postmodern methodology and feminist theory. The most important theorist of this movement is Judith Butler, whose book “Gender Trouble” is still considered fundamental in the queer movement. The first mention of the word "queer" was the article "Queer Theory: Lesbian and Gay Sexualities", written by Teresa de Lauretis in 1991 (Auslander E. Women's + Feminist + Lesbian-Gay + Queer Studies = Gender Studies?). This theory questions the category "gender identity" as such. It posits identity as a conditional, random phenomenon that is formed under the pressure of society and maintains social order, transferring it to the level of personal identification and political organization. But this does not mean that the real meaning and impact on societyidentity is denied. Therefore, a project of radical deconstruction of identity was created. In this way, queer theory attempts to pay attention to the many other identities and sexualities that find themselves outside of the LGBT community and movement. Identity appears as a myth or cultural illusion. Queer identity is unique not in the nature of one or another component that is included in an individual's identity, but in their unique configuration. The basis is not sexuality, but the gender model, where sexuality appears as one of the significant and visible elements. Let us turn to the term given by T.D. Lauretis, which suggests that queer is used to refer to the plurality of ways that shape sexual subjectivities, as an acknowledgment of the need to talk about homoeroticism within different identities. After this understanding of the term, subsequent interpretations brought “queer” into the problematic field due to conceptual disagreements, where negative interpretations occupied more space, which made one look with caution at the possibility of the very existence of queer identity and queer theory. Many argue that queer identity is a protest identity, a shocking opposition to all other existing identities. The main problem of queer is that it does not seem to have its own face, that is, the main and only criterion for classifying a person into this category is unusualness, non-standardism, comparison with everything legitimate and dominant, because any identity can change, be invented, formulated in a different way. its new bearer. Therefore, some researchers talk about queer as an incomplete, problematic, unformed identity. Another problem of queer theory is that there is a fear of this theory’s attack on the very nature of man, his gender. Queerness may seem to blur or even collapse identity into desires and preferences. But supporters of this theory argue that there is a substitution of concepts. Queer is not that social designation of identity that hides the essence from us and makes us think that behind this name there is no personality, identity, that is, there is nothing. People try to find certainty and concreteness where it does not exist from the point of view of conventional ideas, but it exists for the individual himself. A person may have a stable identity, but it will define it outside the boundaries of the traditional model of gender identity. Queer theory asserts that all possible sexual orientations and genders are equal and have equal rights. This theory insists on the conventions of categorization by gender, sex and sexuality, devaluing classifications and avoiding the creation of categories based on their sexual practices, which helps avoid labeling and labeling, as well as hierarchical relationships between people based on one or another gender. Queer theory insists on the denial of masculinity and femininity as a psychological category that creates a model of hierarchical power relations. The advantage of such a revision will be that each individual will be able to look for the answer to the question (who am I?) in a situation of uncertainty; the individual will be responsible for the qualities he has or lacks. And subsequently this will lead to a revision of the entire structure that supports itself. Queer is not a typology or a new form of gender and sexuality, but rather a different principle of approach, where gender and sexuality are understood as a flexible, diverse system of multifactorial concepts. In queer theory, the main thing is definition, knowledge, understanding of oneself, freedom in self-presentation, and not imitation of social experience, different models that have strict classifications (Auslander E. Women's + feminist + lesbian-gay + queer studies = gender studies?). Thus, we can say that according to queer theory, identity has qualities such as plasticity and they can change throughout life, sometimes even within one day..