Wrap It Up; What I Learned from WGST 111

Throughout this class, I could not help but notice how alienated I felt, not because of my sexual orientation or gender identity, which is usually the case, but rather because of my upbringing and my political beliefs. I fought the urge to defend myself and my viewpoints every class period seeing as it wouldn’t have necessarily enhanced class discussion. From this less than pleasant feeling, the readings and class discussion I have come to the realization that sexual orientation and gender identity are only two very small pieces that fit into an individual’s political identity. Each person’s political identity is a fusion of many different identities that encompass the individual including location, socioeconomic status, age, race, and religion.

This is echoed in the history of the LGBT movements in America. Beginning in the 1950s, there was tension between the assimililationists and “sexual outlaws”. Mattachine exemplifies this division in the 1950s by essentially saying, “gay people are just the same as heterosexuals except for what they do in bed” (Adam 69). Duberman’s Stonewall also shows this divide through his narratives of the six individuals he follows throughout his work. This division is indicative of difference that reaches beyond merely sexual orientation and gender identity. There are many factors that go into how an individual perceives the world and politics.

Another point within LGBT history that highlights the diversity of political identities that permeate the LGBT community lies at the heart of the lesbian sex wars in the 1980s. The division between sex radicals and cultural feminists presents another political rift within the community that is not based solely on sexual orientation. This divide, “reflected the conflicting perceptions of the basic meaning of femaleness and lesbianism” (Faderman 268). This highlights different ways of thinking that extend beyond simply being lesbian identified.

Finally, the diversity of political identities within the LGBT communities is still felt today. Groups such as Queer Nation (Queers Read This; I Hate Straights), the Log Cabin Republicans, sex positivists, defenders of gay marriage, opponents of gay marriage, assimilationists, radicals, and so on continue to show this diversity. We now have groups and sects within the larger LGBT community that are fighting for anarchy opposed to those fighting for tolerance or assimilation. There are those screaming to be different and those not wanting to be seen. How can we even forge a community with all these political differences? How do we, and have we fought for LGBT rights when the rights for which every individual fights are different?

Here is where the concept of community comes into play. The LGBT community has something in common, even though it may simply be based on gender and/or sexual orientation. Even though each individual’s political identity is different, there is one common thread that connects us all and that is the fact that we are all discriminated against. While there has been very little true unity within this movement, I can see two particular instances throughout this community’s short history where true unity shone through, even though it may have only been for a few short days.

One of these moments is the Stonewall riot. In the midst of all the chaos, everyone from queens to bull dykes fought together because of the blatant discrimination and physical abuse endured from a common enemy. The second of these moments is the AIDS crisis. AIDS descended on the community and was hard to ignore. This was something that was so inextricably tied with the LGBT community that it did, and still does, affect everyone within it.

From these two events I can draw a conclusion. When there needs to be unity within the community, it emerges. One cannot expect every LGBT identified person to hold similar political beliefs. Being gay is only a small part of one’s identity. Many other factors go into building an entire individual and an individual’s political identity. After all, diversity in opinion is one reason why the movement has gained so much ground. However, when the circumstances are so dire that unity and mobilization are warranted, I am confident that the community, as it has in the past, will find a way to put aside differences to reach a common goal.

Thomas Szasz said, “The plague of mankind is the fear and rejection of diversity: monotheism, monarchy, monogamy and, in our age, monomedicine. The belief that there is only one right way to live, only one right way to regulate religious, political, sexual, medical affairs is the root cause of the greatest threat to man: members of his own species, bent on ensuring his salvation, security, and sanity.” Diversity is something that we must strive for and embrace. The alienation I felt throughout this class is a good thing. My viewpoints were heard and that was valuable whether or not people agreed with me. I think the biggest lesson that I learned throughout this ten week experience is that voicing your opinion is important, even if you are attacked for believing what you do. The addition of another viewpoint adds to the diversity of political identities within a community. There is more than one way of seeing the world, and each is important to consider.

Adam, Barry D. “The Homophiles Start Over.” The Rise of a Gay and Lesbian Movement. New York: Twayne, 1995. 60-80.

Faderman, Lillian. “Lesbian Sex Wars in the 1980s.” Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers: A History of Lesbian Life in Twentieth-Century America. New York: Columbia UP, 1991. 246-270.