Building a Straight State: Sexuality and Social Citizenship under the 1944 G.I. Bill

The effects of radical prostatectomy on gay and bisexual men's mental health, sexual identity and relationships: qualitative results from the restore study

“…First, the emotional-mental health challenges of our cohort of prostate cancer men may show a greater difficulty for GBM. GBM may experience greater emotional challenges because of the higher prevalence of baseline depression, anxiety and psychological distress in GBM compared to heterosexual men(Cochran et al, 2003); or because they have less familial(Kurdek, 2001, 2004a, 2004b, 2005; Smith et al, 2007) and social support(Kurdek, 2001, 2004b, 2005) (since support has been shown to be predictive of psychological distress in men undergoing prostate cancer treatment (Canaday 2003). Alternatively, GBM may simply be more willing to admit to experiencing emotional challenges than their heterosexual counterparts(Cochran et al, 2003).…”

“…Other studies report an increase in shared meaning (Maliski et al, 2002), and improvement in heterosexual relationships following treatment (Janet Harden et al, 2002; Lavery & Clarke, 1999), attributed to reduced discrepancies in levels of sexual interest. (Canaday, 2003) Still others report both positive and negative effects on primary relationships (Janet Harden et al, 2002), dependent on such factors as dyadic cohesion, the degree of the man's sexual dysfunction, and pre-diagnosis marital satisfaction.…”

Effecting science, affecting medicine: Homosexuality, the Kinsey reports, and the contested boundaries of psychopathology in the United States, 1948–1965

“…Chap. 6);Canaday (2003);Friedman (2005); Stein (2005); Turner (1995). The classic study on how the public ideal of Cold War containment was directly mapped onto the private realm of family life in postwar America is May (1999).…”

Uniform Meets Rhetoric: Excellence through Interaction

“…Of course, the original GI Bill was no panacea, and the processes by which it was dispersed contributed to some forms of social injustice. Beth Bailey argues that over the past few decades historians have "used the GI Bill as a kind of shorthand-almost a deus ex machina-explanation for the emergence of a rapidly growing middle class in the years following WWII" (Bailey 2011, 198), but recent research argues that the GI Bill of 1944 institutionalized, consolidated, and reinforced race, gender, and sexual orientation biases and inequalities (Bérubé 1990;Canaday 2003;Cohen 2003;Frydl 2009;Onkst 1998;Rosales 2011). Exclusions were standard with the GI Bill, which "filtered benefits to male heads of households to the overwhelming exclusion of women" and "left veterans who had been discharged 'undesirably' [code for queerness] .…”