Abstract only

Intersex Association argue that this action served to end more than a century of medical homophobia and constitutes a historic date and a powerful symbol for members of the GLBTIQ community. Therefore, on 17 May 242 Epilogue every year, this decision is remembered when ‘The International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia’ is celebrated.10 Notes  1 Cook, A Gay History of Britain, p. 195.   2 Drescher and Merlino, American Psychiatry and Homosexuality, p. 127; Bayer, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry, p. 204.  3 Jivani, It’s not Unusual, p. 189.   4 ‘Andy

in ‘Curing queers’
Abstract only
Fields of understanding and political action

level, the answer to this appears straightforward: demonstrating that laws against sex between men in developing countries such as Zimbabwe, Jamaica and India originate either in colonial statutes or in broadly colonial attitudes, activists and critics such as Tatchell and Seabrook argue the need to recognise and eradicate legacies of colonial homophobia. The straightforward liberation suggested in calls to eradicate offending remnants of colonial legislation is complicated, however, by Foucault’s convincing argument that

in Sex, politics and empire
Abstract only

Rementería y Fica, El hombre fino al gusto del día, manual completo de urbanidad, cortesía y buen tono, 3rd edn (Madrid: Colegio de Sordo-Mudos, 1837), 1.  4 R.W. Connell, Masculinities, 2nd edn (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005); Michael Kimmel, ‘Masculinity as Homophobia: Fear, Shame, and Silence in the Construction of Gender Identity’, in Men and Masculinity: A Text Reader, ed. Theodore Cohen (Toronto: Wadsworth, 2001), 29–41.  5 My use of this term is informed by Eva Copeland’s excellent article ‘Galdós’s El amigo Manso: Masculinity, Respectability, and

in Spain in the nineteenth century
Abstract only

besides his sex. Over the centuries he has implicitly been white, heterosexual, middle class, affluent, able–bodied, and young to middle–aged. The unacknowledged assumption in much of Irigaray’s writing, including Elemental Passions, is that all these implicit characteristics are shared by the man and the woman of its drama; the only significant difference between them being sexual difference. But why make this assumption? What forms of racism, homophobia, and prejudices of class, age and ability are left unchallenged or even covertly reinscribed if these alterities are

in Forever fluid
Society gossip, homosexuality and the logic of revelation in the interwar popular press

unproblematic on Fleet Street. For all the well-­known debauches of newspapermen, homosexuality was a highly fraught subject, and Fleet Street social life was marred by an often-­intense homophobia, which persisted throughout most of the twentieth century. The journalist Peter Wildeblood (who would, during his 1954 trial for engaging in homosexual acts, feel the wrath of the tabloids’ commitment to scandalous exposure) remarked, ‘I could hardly have chosen a profession in which being a homosexual was more of a handicap than it was in Fleet Street…. Its morality was that of

in British queer history
Abstract only
The London Missionary Society in Polynesia and Australia, 1800–50

the missionaries and attracted their attention. Narratives of discovery and exploration of the South Pacific had conditioned Europeans to anticipate the physical beauty of many of the Islanders 6 and the missionaries’ narratives of their Pacific residences continued this fetishisation of Polynesian bodies. Surprisingly, considering the homophobia evident in representations

in Colonial frontiers

policies of the Students’ Union and the NUS and the activities of Community Action. Sexism, aggressive heterosexuality and homophobia were all fiercely attacked during the 1980s. The conflict between the two cultures became acute in the 1980s over the issue, not so much of women’s rights, as of respect and consideration for women. Old-fashioned chivalry and gentlemanly behaviour had expired of their own accord or been dismissed as a veneer which concealed a deep-seated sense of male superiority. But some substitute for these was badly needed, some antidote for the

in A history of the University of Manchester 1973–90
Irigaray and Hegel

her approach, but that other readings – such as a lesbian one – of her work are possible (1998b: 28–32).41 Such is the harsh tone of Irigaray’s anti-lesbian language, however, that at times her work borders on homophobia. As a consequence, Irigaray’s quest for a ‘felicity within history’ (the subtitle of I Love to You) would appear to be compromised by her restrictive model of relationship to the ‘fecundity of the couple’. Her depiction of this new community in I Love to You, which is a rejoinder to Hegel’s idea of community that she criticized in her essay ‘The

in Divine love
Abstract only

and Society, 36:4 (2007), p. 379. Contemporary interviews with adolescent boys about their difficulties ‘expressing emotions’ have highlighted homophobia as a major obstacle in developing ‘more nurturing and expressive relationships with each other’: Martino and PallottaChiarolli So What’s a Boy? p. 195. J. Stevenson, British Society, 1914–45 (London: Penguin Books, 1984: 1990), p. 17. J. Richards and D. Sheridan (eds), Mass-Observation at the Movies (London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1987), pp. 48, 51, 89. C. Madge, A. W. Coysh, G. Dixon and I. Madge

in Being boys
Domesticity in postwar lesbian oral history

biggest thing … Eh, because, eh, it was such a no-­no. […] But the, the, this fear of being shunned and, thought of until you almost thought of yourself as something unworthy, and ought not to have been born type of thing. Eh, just kept you, eh, very much closeted.’ Her response to this extreme fear and internalised homophobia was to seek refuge and cover behind convention: ‘I tried my hardest to conform, being sure I would … I’d grow out of it. […] I conformed; I got married. It seemed like a good idea at the time.’ The veil of pretended heterosexuality did not last

in British queer history