Over the past 20 years, sociological research on LGBTQ people and communities has disproportionately studied coastal regions and big cities in the United States. Scholars pay the most attention to queer urban life in "great cities" like New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Chicago and understudy lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) life in the South, rural and suburban areas, and ordinary cities. This research ignores demographic evidence about where LGBTQ people live in the United States. I argue that these geographical choices-born out of convenience or theoretical purpose-shape the approach to studying queer life and the unintentional reproduction of a middle-class, cosmopolitan universal gay subject. I chart a future path for sociology research on LGBTQ life that accounts for geography and moves beyond metronormativity.
Since 1974, the LGBT movement has fought 146 anti-gay ballot initiatives sponsored by the religious right and has developed innovative strategies to oppose these measures.In Gay Rights at the Ballot Box, Amy L. Stone examines how the tactics of LGBT activists have evolved and unravels the complex relationship between ballot measure campaigns and the broader goals of the LGBT movement.The first comprehensive history of anti-gay ballot measures, this book draws on archival research and interviews with more than one hundred LGBT activists to provide a detailed account of the campaigns to stop such ballot measures from passing into law. Stone analyzes how LGBT activists constantly refined their campaign tactics in response to both victories and defeats. She also stresses that such campaigns have played both a complementary and contradictory role within the LGBT movement.With gay rights coming under increasing assault from the religious right, this book is a vital resource for LGBT activists and others working to block their efforts. $22.50 | paper | ISBN 978-0-8166-7548-7 | 272 pageS | 6 B&w photoS | 3 taBleS 2012
Research on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) movements has accelerated in recent years. We take stock of this literature with a focus on the United States. Our review adopts a historical approach, surveying findings on three protest cycles: gay liberation and lesbian feminism, queer activism, and marriage equality. Existing scholarship focuses primarily on oscillations of the movement's collective identity between emphasizing similarities to the heterosexual mainstream and celebrating differences. We contrast earlier movement cycles mobilized around difference with efforts to legalize samesex marriage. Our review highlights the turning points that led to shifts in protest cycles, and we trace the consequences for movement outcomes. Scholarship will advance if researchers recognize the path-dependent nature of social movements and that sameness and difference are not oppositional, static, or discrete choices. We conclude by recommending directions for future research.
This article is an exploration of American lesbian and gay activists' attitudes towards transgender inclusion in the LGBT movement. Lesbian and gay activists articulated different attitudes towards transgender inclusion that were inflected by their different subcultural histories and ability to make connections personally with transgender issues. Through an analysis of 32 semi-structured interviews with Midwestern lesbian and gay activists, this article examines the process by which lesbian and gay activists become transgender allies through making parallels to their own oppression or visible transgender discrimination. This research contributes to the existing literature on both collective identities and ally identities by contextualizing the formation of ally identities within the history of the LGBT movement.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.