Lesbians in U.S. History Sexuality

lesbians in U.S. history

Sexuality must not be thought of as a kind of a natural given power which tries to hold in check, or as an obscure domain which knowledge tries gradually to uncover. It is the name that can be given to a historical construct." (Foucault 1979:105 in Weeks: 16). Foucault's historical approach to sexuality gave rise to a series of questions regarding this notion, such as the connection between sexuality and power, its role in Western society, as well as how it is socially constructed (Ibid). This paper investigates into the historical development of the concept of lesbianism in the United States. Furthermore, the present research looks into how political conflicts and confrontations were echoed into the cultural expressions of homosexuality in general, and lesbianism in particular. In America, similarly to most countries, the history of homosexuality was directly influenced by political and economic changes that affected the American population in its entirety. Thesis: This paper argues that although lesbianism emerged at the same time as the American people, it was not until the 1950s that it was treated as a social phenomenon rather than a psychiatric deviation. In this sense, one can argue that lesbianism stepped into the light thanks to the social movements of the 1960s.

The discourse of American politics is focused on individual rights, action and identity. This trait was developed as a result of the social movements that took place during the 1960s and 1970s. American social changes have been correlated with the so-called 'voice of the people' which in turn, is directly linked to social identity. In this sense, the 1960s highly contributed to the birth and development of a common identity for individuals who shared a particular characteristic, be it ethnic origin, sex, religion, etc. This shared identity enabled their voices to be heard more loudly and clearly, and their discontents to be expressed as a coherent common pain; this pain was no longer restricted to individual life, but transformed into a discontent that was publicly voiced and widely shared. Consequently, this feeling of release and public expression had beneficial effects in terms of the individual who ceased to feel isolated and found comfort in knowing others shared the same identity and thus the same problems.

Historical background is perhaps the key to the analysis of the birth of collective identity. The American Revolution was synonymous to a period of unrest and upheaval which also generated the emergence of new ideas and philosophies. The total population in 1783 was 3.25 million (Tully 25) and industrialism was beginning. This was also the time of the development of the American democracy and its federal government. By the middle of the 19th century, the union encompassed 36 states. Also, significant industrial progress had been made: there was now a railroad which connected most of the country, industrialism was advancing, and there was also a great movement of people towards the west of the union. However, it was again time for war. The civil war was based on the differences between Northern and Southern states as far as the industrial revolution and slavery. The end of the Civil War in 1865 was marked by terrible statistics, with over one-fifth of the total male population killed, and the economy of the South in complete disarray (Smith and Smith 1980; Trattner 1994 in Tully 26). However, between 1865 and the beginning of the 20th century there was an enormous increase in population, with 75 million persons by 1900.

The 19th century was also incredibly relevant as far as the history of gays and lesbians in America. It was during this century that the concept of reproductive responsibility slowly started to change and transform into two completely different concepts, i.e. romanticism and erotic love (Tully: 27). Nonetheless, this change in public perception was not without consequences. A more profound understanding of the nature of human emotions, behavior and expression led to an increase in the number of people who sought romantic and sexual pleasure outside the boundaries of marriage. The newly found sexual liberation was the perfect setting for the development of the notion of free love which did not exclude polygamy and a variety of sexual relationships. However, even during this period of great sexual freedom, same-sex couples were looked down on, and considered immoral. Of course, these views did not directly influence the existence of relationships between men, or women. Industrial development brought about an evolution in social order. Middle-class, as well as upper-class families sent their children to sexually segregated schools. This, twined with the fact that the ideals of 19th century America encouraged the romantic idea that men and women could express their feelings for one another in a myriad of ways which had been frowned upon until that time, led to the development of same-sex sexual expression. The latter emerged and developed in parallel with heterosexual expression, and was also fueled by the fact that in newly developing western towns men worked hard in coal mines with virtually no women around for long periods of time. World War I saw the emergence of the United States as a world power. At the domestic level, this generated migration from rural areas to cities, as well as the birth of the first gay subcultures which appeared in cities. Increasing educational and economic opportunities allowed women to gain independence in relation to men, and to feel free to explore their sexuality. Same-sex unions became more and more frequent in urban areas with the middle-class holding on to the ideal of romantic friendships that had appeared in the 19th century, and the working class where the idea of "Boston marriages" emerged. These unions of two women were based on the idea that one woman assumed the role of the man in the relationship. The 1920s and 1930s brought about the Great Depression and the New Deal. Unemployment rose tremendously with more than 12 million people unemployed in the early 1930s. This was a period of hardships also for the gay and lesbian communities; however, homosexual subculture survived the Great Depression, and became stronger with the economic recovery of the country. However, economic improvement did not come with any kind of change as far as popular mentality. The general belief remained unchanged with most heterosexuals blaming homosexuality on psychiatric disorders which required medical treatment (Altman 1982; Bullough and Bullough 1977 in Tully: 36). However, despite slow, there was a historical transformation of the perception of homosexuality in America. In the beginning of the 1900s, homosexuality was viewed as a temporary affliction whose 'victims' could, at least in theory, recover. Towards the 1930s, homosexuality became to be regarded as a lifelong condition which demanded medical intervention. It was these two beliefs that triggered the changed of the decades to come. The 1940s and World War II helped American economy and generated jobs for large demographics who had been unemployed. During WWII, women took on previously male jobs. America needed the female part of the population to enlist for employment, and support the war industry. Women started working in factories building planes, tanks and ships as World War II was a war deeply based on production. The U.S. government realized the contribution that American women could bring to America's war effort; thus the War Manpower Commission started working closely with the media and women's organizations in a collective effort to convince women to join the labor force.

The image of the woman worker was important during the war, but the prewar image of women had not disappeared. On the contrary, women were still seen as wives and mothers, and not as factory workers. American society handled the change in their status during the war because necessity was placed above prejudice. Nonetheless, as soon as the war was over, women were expected to return to their lives and previous social status. In this sense they were undesirable as permanent employees (Kessler-Harris: 277). This assumption can be explained if one considers the social stigma that career women carried. They were supposedly unfit to take care of their homes and were thus destined never to marry or have a family. This social perception of women was widespread, and can account for the negative connotations of the 'working woman.'

The development of wartime industry had allowed women to gain more independence and even though they faced discrimination, their situation was far better than before the war started. The immediate post-war period was the first time women were able to benefit from a considerable degree of financial and social mobility. The implications and effects of World War II would be felt for years to come. Aside from the economic and social changes, the role of women in society would never be the same again. The war meant new opportunities for women, as well as a newly gained sense of independence and individuality. Moreover, the war was an opportunity for women to claim, and consequently, fight for their rights. In fact, the discriminatory working conditions following WWII represented the origins of the many strong civil rights movements that took place starting with the 1950s. In other words, World War II produced an important shift in both mentality and reality. Although many of the women who had been employed during the war returned to being homemakers, there was also a significant percentage which managed to reconcile being a mother and a wife with work. Also, despite the fact that their wages were far from being equal to those of men, their contribution to the income of the household was welcome and in most cases, made a real difference as far as the economic demands of the family (Kessler-Harris: 280). Moreover this shift paved the way for the 1950s when a new set of ideas entered American society and seriously challenged both the labor market and social conventions. Gay bars started to appear, and although they were underground and hard to find even for members of the homosexual community, their emergence favored freedom of expression even if mainstream acceptance of gays and lesbians was still unconceivable. Everything was to change for both women and minorities in the 1950s and 1960s. In order to fully understand the importance of 1960s as far as the development of social movements, it is very important to look at the definition of identity as a sociological concept: "meanings a person attributes to the self as an object in a social situation or social role" (Burke 1980, p. 18 in Demo; Hughes: 364). From a historical standpoint, gays and lesbians have been treated differently by mass culture in the sense that they have related to television, music, film, fashion etc. through an alternative channel which operates within what we refer to as "mass culture." This special interaction generated a rather logical consequence; gay and lesbian culture producers and consumers alike started to wonder how they could access mainstream culture without losing their sense of identity which, in turn, created an opposition between their minority and everything that mainstream culture stood for. At the heart of this opposition lies a more profound one that has been coined and reaffirmed in relation to the public space. In this sense, there is a philosophical question to consider when referring to the interaction between heterosexuality and homosexuality; this question related to the manner of expression of a heterosexual couple as opposed to a homosexual one. Diana Fuss argues that, "like so many other conventional binaries, has always been constructed on the foundations of another related opposition: the couple 'inside' and 'outside.'" (Fuss in Creekmure: 2) However, these initially clearly defined social boundaries have been challenged and redesigned by the participation of both gays and lesbians in mainstream culture. These boundaries were truly challenged for the first time in the 1960s when the influence of the civil rights movement triggered a women's liberation movement. Moreover, gay politics - as the movement for sexual freedom was called - centered on revealing what had been hidden for so many decades, and assuming one's identity. In turn, this also meant that light was being shed on the relationship between sexual minorities and mass culture. When referring to this issue, one cannot overlook several extremely significant critics, such as Robin Wood, Caroline Sheldon and Richard Dyer, who largely contributed to the birth and development of gay and lesbian press in the United States, England and Canada. These people were keen on showing that gay and lesbian writers had the responsibility of assuming their sexual identities, as well as the way in which their sexual orientation had influenced their critical perspective. This resulted into more autobiographical works such as music, film, books, etc. which now included openly erotic descriptions of their authors' personal experience. The beginning of the 1950s saw little change as far as the perception of women. Women's movement was becoming more and more active, but this decade was full of contradictions for homosexuals because they were still labeled as mentally ill. However, things would change as the gay and lesbian communities alike were much stronger thanks to their ability to mobilize and form organizations to promote their rights. The Daughters of Bilitis was an organization for lesbians which was founded in 1955. They published the Ladder, a magazine whose existence spanned from 1956 until 1972, aiming at offering a feminine outlook on issues relevant to the gay community. The rebirth of the Feminist Movement of the 1950s was attributed to a great extent to the publication of Betty Friedan's "The Feminine Mistique" (Freeman: 798), a book which encouraged women to liberate themselves from the social conventions which kept them confined to the domestic space and role. The main goal of Feminism, at least during its early stages, was to seek equality between men and women. The existing inequalities were assessed in a report issued by the Commission on the Status of Women - that had been created by President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - which presented the inequalities in the American workforce that were based on sex discrimination (Freeman: 797). Also, it is very important to note that the Feminist Movement was developed by women who had been involved in antiwar or civil rights movements; since discrimination employs the same tactics irrespective of its nature - based on sex, race etc. - these women employed the same strategies as in the case of the Civil Rights Movement (Freeman: 806).

Women's concerns were represented on two levels. First, their cause needed to be heard at a higher level, i.e. At the level of decision making where legislation could be passed to improve the condition of women. To this aim, the National Organization for Women was founded in 1966 whose leaders pressured politicians to work on legislation that would decrease inequalities between men and women. Secondly, women needed support as far as their main causes were concerned; issues like abortion, employment and domestic violence became the focus of numerous organizations such as the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, Women Organized for Employment, and Women Office Workers. These organizations advocated personal change as a means of understanding the political change needed and desired by Feminists. Their activity was extremely important, and the result was a huge improvement in the quality of women's life; the best example is that by 1970, around 40% of women worked outside the domestic space.

The Gay Movement was born in the 1960s and followed the pattern of the civil rights and feminist movements that marked the same decade. Although a civil rights agenda concerning gay rights was deeply needed, it took several years until all the necessary elements were joined together so that a proper civil rights agenda could penetrate national politics. Similarly to women and racial minorities, gays and lesbians felt the need to understand social misconceptions of homosexuality which were nothing but the result of heterosexual domination. Once understood, these misconceptions could be dealt with and ultimately destroyed.

The 1970s were defined by rapid development as far as a homosexual community throughout the United States. This community was endowed with a few very important characteristics: it was visible, bold and revolutionary as its main goal was to redefine gender roles. However, it was during this particular decade that the lesbian community was faced with another kind of confrontation. Feminist organizations were now frowning upon lesbians, and were more than reluctant to accept them as members. This was explained by the fact that the leaders of women's organizations believed that heterosexual women's battle for equal treatment as men was hindered by the lesbians' own struggle for equal rights as the heterosexual majority. However, this state of affairs had one positive consequence, i.e. lesbians were now able to define themselves. They were free from the "mentally ill" label, so they could now choose how they wanted to live as far as family units.

Nonetheless, this freedom came at a cost. Lesbian self-determination generated a severe split between the lesbian and gay communities. This split was also caused by the fact that their apparent unity was solely based on a common cause. By the 1970s it became obvious that homosexuality could not unify a heterogeneous group with virtually nothing in common. The two communities were separated in terms of ideals as well as a set of concerns such as "pornography, pederasty, equal rights for women, sexism and public sex" (Tully: 40). Moreover, the early gay movement was led by gay men who did not concern themselves with the issues that lesbians were faced with, and this lack of interest and attention only increased the gap between gays and lesbians as sexual minorities. In fact, this split has not been resolved up to the present.