Contemporary and historical differences in gay and lesbian issues

Homosexuality Survey

This report on a proposed research project is meant to address the attitudes and perceptions in the gay community among older people in that community compared to younger people in that community, believing that there will be significant differences in what is deemed important by the two groups. An interview method will be used, and the responses then compared.

The Problem and Its Components

The gay and lesbian community has long faced a number of issues peculiar to that community. The status of that community has changed over the last generation or so, becoming more open, more militant, and more visible. Certain problems persist, however, and take up the attention of members of the community. The question raised is whether the issues of paramount importance are different for the current generation than were of import to senior gays and lesbians when they were the same age. If the issues have changed, it could mean that progress has also been made in combating some of the issues given importance in the past, or it could mean that newer problems have developed that have supplanted the older issues.

Problem Background

Homosexuality is certainly nothing new, and homosexual communities have developed for centuries in urban centers. However, most of these communities have remained aloof from the rest of society and often seek to be hidden from view out of fear of persecution. In the U.S., that was the general approach through much of the history of the country, though certain urban centers were less threatening than others, notably in New York and San Francisco. The greater militancy of the 1960s emerged as the counter culture pressed for an expansion of rights for minorities, gays, political dissidents, and others. The Civil Rights Movement also pressured for increased rights for blacks and other racial minorities, and the fervor spread to the gay community and meant that more and more gay people sought

Literature Review

Analysis shows that homosexuality has been condemned since ancient times, as Leiser (1986) shows, starting with the rules against homosexuality in Hebrew tradition. Condemnation of homosexuality is not universal, though, and in some social groups studied by anthropologists, homosexual conduct is in fact expected. In our own society, though, homosexual conduct has long been condemned and has been addressed in law, religion, and social traditions.

Homosexuality is often described as deviant behavior, and the formation of a separate gay community has been a challenge to this idea. The concept of the spoiled identity was developed by Erving Goffman. Goffman (1963) was primarily concerned with how the individual manages his or her "belonging" to the social group, or conversely, how he or she is excluded from the social group. Essentially the spoiled identity is that identity which, for one or more reasons, results in the stigmatization of the individual by the group and the individual's subsequent exclusion or marginalization. There are a number of characteristics that can lead to a spoiled identity and stigmatization, including physical deformity, mental disability, homosexuality, mental illness, and obesity. The society develops a set of social norms and structures to which the individual is expected to conform; this may be an ideal type, but is postulated as normative. The individual who cannot, or will not, conform to those norms communicates to the group that he or she is not interested in belonging or is not qualified to belong. Appearance and behavior signifies group status, and obesity is a disobedience to one of the standards of appearance that is considered normative.

Gay and lesbian identity is not a unitary thing but is mediated by race, gender, economic status history, and other conditions of life (Vaid, 1995, p. 287). This means that those in the gay and lesbian movement have other issues they also need to address in developing a more accepting society, and already the movement is mixed with other political challenges:

Organizing around identity has led us into parallel movements that, in turn, reinforce the particular identity we organize from. Because of identity-based organizing, therefore, we have three separate movements: the civil rights movement, the women's movement, and the gay movement (Vaid, 1995, p. 294).

There has been a further splintering into various ethnic movements and into the larger multicultural movement which presses for the acceptance of people showing many differences from the larger society. Clearly the gay movement has had a role in this development and continues to have a stake in its outcome.

Large segments of society have developed a certain image of the role filled by the gay person, and the reality is not the same as the image. Miller (1989) knows this before he sets out on his journey because he is gay himself. What he finds is that the gay community itself is in the process of changing, a process involving being more open, more militant, more demanding, and at the same time more conservative in terms of conventional living and family arrangements. Gays in America constitute a subculture that is itself divided into smaller units, and the "flaunting" gay lifestyle that frightens so many people when parades and rallies are held is only a small part of the whole. Gays are part of the larger culture in terms of being in nearly ever community and of having jobs like everyone else. They are different at first only because of their sexual orientation, but they are marginalized in American society by laws that outlaw their behavior, discrimination directed against them, and fear engendered in their communities by gay-bashing incidents and a general antagonism.

Miller (1989) delves into the different communities as an observer who has an interest in that community himself. He is not an entirely objective observer, and those he cites for his information are also part of the community. Therefore, his work is limited in scope and application because it is not fully objective as a cultural analysis. As a job of reporting, however, of gathering and presenting facts and issues, it is very well done and can serve as a source for more scientific studies.

Those who favor retaining legislation against homosexual behavior offer a number of reasons for opposing such conduct to the point where they want it criminalized. Some of the reasons offered have a foundation in fact, and others do not. Among the claims made are the following:

1) Homosexuals tend to molest children.

2) When homosexuals do seduce young people, they often initiate those youngsters irreversibly into their way of life and may indeed seek to do so as a matter of policy.

3) Homosexuality is a promiscuous way of life which encourages the spread of disease and which leads to loneliness, misery, and unhappiness for those entangled in it.

4) Homosexuals are afflicted by serious psychological problems, such as feelings of guilt, insecurity, and fear of disgrace and ruin.

5) Homosexuals are unreliable and are poor risks and so should not be given sensitive jobs.

6) Homosexual activity is offensive.

7) Homosexual activity is unnatural.

8) Homosexual activity is dangerous, and if it increased substantially in terms of the numbers of people involved, the future of the human race would be imperilled (Leiser, 1986, p. 37-38).

Many of these "reasons" have force only because homosexuality is proscribed, making this a chicken-or-egg type argument -- if homosexuality were not illegal, these reasons for making it illegal would not exist. Among these is the claim that homosexuals fear disgrace and ruin -- if we did not marginalize homosexual conduct, there would be no reason for the disgrace and ruin. If homosexual conduct were not illegal, there would be no chance for the blackmail of those in sensitive positions. Other reasons offered involve assumptions about homosexuals that may not be based on fact, such as the idea that homosexuals tend to be child molesters.

Arguments against laws proscribing homosexual activity include those offered by a Roman Catholic Advisory Committee formed to study the problems of homosexuality and prostitution in relation to the existing laws in England, which found that such laws:

1) are ineffectual;

2) are inequitable in their incidence;

3) involve severities disproportionate to the offense committed; and 4) give scope for blackmail and other forms of corruption (Leiser, 1986, p. 64).

Certainly, whether such laws are passed and enforced would be a concern to gay people at any time, though they would be more likely to rank this high in a time when such legislation is more likely than they would in times when it ism not likely at all. What sort of laws and restrictions would be considered oppressive, though, might differ among different groups and in the same group over time.

One of the major changes for the younger generation over the generation from the 1960s and 1970s is the spread of AIDS. In many cases, AIDS serves as an impetus and rationale for controlling marginal groups and dangerous behaviors and provides society with the opportunity to expand and rationalize control over a broad range of psychological phenomena and interpersonal behaviors. Social control today involves dispersed centers and agents of surveillance and discipline throughout the whole community (as occurs with workplace drug testing). The control of persons perceived as dangerous is accomplished partly through public psychosocial discourse on AIDS. The reactions evoked by AIDS are determined not only by its biological nature as a disease but also by historically produced meanings attached to sex, health, and disease (Kaplan, 1990, pp. 337-351).

Purpose of the Study

The assumption is that the position of gays in American society has changed over the last three decades or so and that much of the militancy in the gay community has been successful enough to achieve greater acceptance, a reduction in discrimination (at least in most communities), and that the concerns that come to the fore today are different from those that were given most emphasis in the same community in the past. The purpose of this study is to compare points-of-view of the current generation of homosexuals and lesbians with those of the older generation to see what the different concerns may be and to consider why these changes have come to pass.

Research Questions and Hypotheses

Based on a reading of the literature and an analysis of the changes in the gay community over the last three decades or so, certain testable assumptions are made about the changes in concerns that will be seen among the people of the community:

1) AIDS will be a major concern where it was not thirty year ago.

2) Fear about exposure of the fact of being gay will have diminished but not disappeared.

3) Persistent concern about stable relationships and the discrimination against gay partners in terms of insurance, visiting partners in the hospital, inheritance, and so on.

4) Reduced concerns about health services for gay people as a group.

5) Increased willingness to live openly as a gay in the community.

6) Higher aspirations for success in business in the gay community.

7) Increased political involvement.

8) Increased support for gay marriage as a solution to certain issues.

Limitations/Delimitations

The survey comparison will not show how many changes have taken place in American society or in the gay community itself, only how members of that community perceive their situation and what issues they believe remain of import to themselves and their neighbors. The fact that a group perceives an issue to be cogent does not necessarily mean that it is or that they are taking the right position with reference to it, but it is indicative of a concern that likely has some cause.

Definitions

Of necessity, the gay community described herein refers to the openly gay community and not to those who are hiding their sexual preference. For one thing, only those who are open about being gay can be easily reached for such a survey, and of course this also means that what is being tested is the issues of importance to the openly gay community and not to those who do not admit their orientation. The latter might have very different concerns, one clearly being a concern with keeping their orientation secret from others. The younger generation is defined as those 30 years of age and below, while the older generation consists of those over 55. The difference is selected specifically to compare a pre-AIDS to a post-AIDS sample.

Importance of the Study

This study is important first for what it shows about the concerns raised in the homosexual and lesbian communities today. It is important as well to show how the current generation differs from the older generation, which might indicate differences in the problems faced, or differences in how the problems are viewed. The changes might suggest areas where progress is still to be made as well as areas where progress has been made, but it could take more data and more analysis to decide

Chapter Two: Review of Literature

Barak, Flavin, and Leighton (2001) note how anti-gay behavior extends even to the police and is a national problem, and they staste that police officers often tolerate the homophobic attitudes of other offices and of members of the public alike. Even as society began to give more rights to some groups in society, decisions such as that in the case of Bowers v. Hardwick upheld the constitutionality of a Georgia sodomy law that made homosexual sex a crime. Escobar (1988) considers this case and its consequences and sees an erosion of the right of privacy that is intolerable. Escobar finds a new reason to fear the tyranny of the majority in this decision:

the opinion makes clear that the right to privacy is quite narrow and may now be limited to those associations and behaviors of which the majority approve. Since homosexual sodomy is neither an approved association nor behavior, it is not entitled to protection (Escobar, 1988, pp. 161-162).

Justice Blackmun dissented and provided a different view:

It is revolting to have no better reason for a rule of law than that so it was laid down in the time of Henry IV. It is still more revolting if the grounds upon which it was laid down have vanished long since, and the rule simply persists from blind imitation of the past (Escobar, 1988, p. 162).

What is especially troubling about such decisions and about the entire issue of the criminalization of homosexual conduct is that homosexuals as a group are being treated inequitably, as something less than full persons with full rights. This one type of behavior is singled out as so offensive that society has a right to regulate even its private manifestation. Since that time, a rationale for regulating homosexual conduct has been found with the AIDS epidemic, and it is claimed that since homosexual activity is high-risk and spreads the AIDS virus, society has a reason to proscribe that activity. This rationale also falls apart when examined closely. For one thing, in spite of widespread belief to the contrary, AIDS is not a homosexual disease. It may have started in the homosexual population in this country because that population is at higher risk, but it is a sexually transmitted disease that is transmitted by heterosexuals as well as homosexuals. At present, we are being regaled on television and elsewhere with constant reminders that this is so as we are encouraged to use condoms to protect ourselves and are told not to engage in any high-risk sexual activity, of which homosexuality is only one manifestation. Again, though, society is not criminalizing heterosexual behavior because that is the behavior of the majority. Instead, society criminalizes homosexual behavior, the behavior of a minority.

AIDS was first identified in 1981, though transmission may go back further. Because of the fact that the disease was found in the gay community and was identified with homosexual sex first, the disease has been seen as a gay disease, though this is not the case at all. The health costs of AIDS are high, as is the cost in lives lost. There are many hidden costs which affect the public at large, including fear of the disease. Insurance costs have risen because of the number of cases and the expense involved in this type of case. Brostoff (1991) points out that AIDS is an expensive disease and that individual life insurance claims related to the disease reached $273.6 million in 1990, up from $221.7 million in 1989. Group life claims increased even more dramatically, from $253 million in 1989 to $374.8 million in 1990. A contrast is provided by looking at group accident and health claims, which actually dropped in 1990 from the $455 million of 1989 to $439.7 million.

A further cost can be seen in the large number of people affected by the AIDS virus because of friends and relatives who have been infected. Kanouse et al. (1991) report that 86% of their respondents personally knew someone, living or dead, who had AIDS, and among those who knew a least one such person, the median number was seven. This was from a sample of gay and bisexual men and showed that the epidemic has reached deeply into their lives. The researchers state that the experience of loss on such a scale raises the possibility of mental health consequences such as posttraumatic stress and depression for large numbers of men affected by the epidemic. The percentage of people in the population at large who have known at least one person with AIDS has also increased dramatically and is likely to continue to do so as the disease spreads into the heterosexual population.

Henry (1991) emphasizes that there is discrimination against people with AIDS from the industry and from business, calling it a case of redlining such people so that they cannot get any insurance and so that they are frozen out of company insurance plans if possible. Some companies have put ceilings as low as $5,000 on the amount they are willing to pay for treating the disease. Companies that self-insure their employees' medical expenses directly assume the risk of an insurer, although the plans are often administered by insurance companies. A 1990 survey indicates that 73% of large companies are self-insured, as are 44% of businesses with fewer than 1,000 employees. More than half of the companies that converted to self-insurance did so to avoid state mandates for certain types of coverage. Some companies also want to avoid having to pay for AIDS. Some insurers began in the mid-1980s to exclude AIDS from individual health insurance policies. Some companies have in fact denied insurance to single men living in certain ZIP codes or who work in stereotypically gay professions like hairdressing (p. 582).

Sullivan (1991) states that the costs of AIDS is usually estimated in lives and that there had been over 95,000 deaths out of 152,000 reported cases by October 1990, costing the insurance industry $2.38 billion since 1986. However, though the number of cases was expected to increase, it was also believed that the impact on the insurance industry would not be as great as had previously been anticipated. One reason given for this was the fact that the industry had won its battle to make testing for HIV part of the underwriting process. The insurance industry was also spending money on education, prevention, and research into AIDS, and by the end of 1991 the industry had spent some $34 million on such programs (pp. 59-62).

Mulcahy (1991) notes that AIDS has become a legal, ethical, and public relations problem for employers seeking to cap the costs of their self-insured health plans. By making this attempt, these companies are testing vague federal statutes and forcing court cases on the issues involved. Employers risk an explosive political and social reaction if their AIDS restrictions become common knowledge, and it has been suggested that companies follow through with case management, managed care, and home health care approaches as a way of controlling AIDS claims costs instead of trying to limit AIDS benefits. Instead, they should be proactive, develop responsible corporate policy, and educate both employees and supervisors (pp. 17, 51).

Scheper -- 'Hughes and Locke (1991) note that societal and cultural responses to dreaded diseases such as cancer and AIDS create a second illness, or "double," involving layers of stigma, rejection, fear, and exclusion. While the symptoms of the illness are biological entities, they are also coded metaphors that speak to the contradictory aspects of social life, expressing sentiments, feelings, and ideas that must otherwise be kept hidden. The authors feel that this harks back to the 1972 model of T. Parsons of sickness as deviance and to the understanding of Karl Marx of worker alienation as it is expressed covertly and symbolically in religious belief and behavior (pp. 409-432).

Blendon and Donelan (1988) report on an analysis of data from 53 national and international opinion surveys from 1983 to 1988 on attitudes about AIDS and knowledge of its transmission. Results indicate that a majority of respondents saw the AIDS epidemic as leading to increased discrimination and the loss of individual privacy and civil rights. A minority saw AIDS as a deserved punishment and said they would refuse to work alongside an AIDS victim, would remove their child from school to avoid an AIDS victim, or would favor the eviction of AIDS victims from their neighborhoods. Even though the latter views were in the minority, many victims believe that these attitudes are more prevalent than they are and that discrimination would result from any revelation of their affliction (pp. 1022-1026).