There’s a new sexual orientation category called heteroflexible.

And it brings health issues that need to be addressed.

By

Labels, categorization, boxes. There are some, if not many, who don’t want any part of identifying themselves by others’ characterizations.

But, according to Nicole Legate, an assistant professor of psychology at the Illinois Institute of Technology, some categorization is vital when it comes to addressing health disparities in sexual minority groups (groups other than heterosexuals), including higher levels of distress, lower levels of self-esteem, and unprotected sex.

It was while looking for those health disparities between heterosexuals and sexual minorities that Legate, with co-author Ronald Rogge of the University of Rochester, found a new sexual orientation category that they believe should be considered alongside heterosexuals, bisexuals and homosexuals. That category is heteroflexibles — men and women who identify as heterosexual but who are strongly attracted to or engage in sex with people of the same sex. Legate said this group does not identify as bisexual, which is why these individuals should be in their own unique category.

Heteroflexibles are much less out about their orientation, according to Legate, so they don’t talk about it to other people nearly as much as bisexuals or gay and lesbian individuals. And not offering that bit of information to a health provider could prevent a physician, for instance, from recommending getting tested or talking about PrEP, pre-exposure prophylaxis, to prevent against HIV since same-sex partners (regardless of how one identifies) tend to have greater risk for sexually transmitted infections.

Legate and Rogge discussed heteroflexibles in a 2016 study where they created an algorithm that looks at survey participants’ identity, behavior and attraction to produce a more data-driven look at sexual orientation. The study included over 3,000 people in the U.S. and took about two years to complete. In the study, 56% of bisexuals said they had had a same sex partner in the previous year, and for heteroflexibles, it was 42%, Legate said. She estimates that up to 15% of the general population may identify as heteroflexible but that a larger representative sample is needed for more research.

“Against heterosexuals, they (heteroflexibles) showed higher rates of different kinds of risks and worse psychological functioning,” Legate said. “The risk behaviors they showed in our study were things like problematic drinking, condom-less sex — so greater levels of sexually transmitted infections. There are so few studies out there about this group, and we have not yet uncovered the reasons why they might show this higher level of risk.”

Next steps, Legate said, include nailing down why heteroflexibles might engage in same-sex activity versus opposite sex activity, how many heteroflexibles there are and why this group shows certain health disparities.

The more accurate estimates are of sexual minorities in the population, the better prepared researchers and health care providers interested in studying health, epidemiological and psychology issues related to sexual orientation can be when addressing their needs.

“When you go to the doctor’s office, they don’t ask you for your sexual orientation,” Legate said. “I think educating providers about the fact that it’s OK to ask and that it is relevant in many cases just like knowing race and age — these are standard demographic questions that can give us a little extra health information or help us understand what groups may be at elevated risks for different things.”

Complete Article HERE!

7 myths about queer sex you should stop believing now

By

  • While sex in general has been misrepresented in popular media and porn, LGBTQ sex, in particular, tends to be exaggerated. 
  • Less than 6% of teens reported that they received sex education with any mention of LGBTQ-related topics, making it easy to believe some of the most popular myths. 
  • Here are 7 things you may have gotten wrong about queer sex. 

While almost teens in the US get some form of sex education, fewer than 6% had sex education classes included LGBTQ-related topics as of 2015, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

This lack of formal education paired with the overall misrepresentation of LGBTQ sex in mainstream media and porn makes it easy for myths about queer sex to circulate.

Here are 8 things you may have gotten wrong about LGBTQ sex, from scissoring to STIs.

Myth: “Scissoring” is real.

“Scissoring” is not a thing. At least, not in the way that most porn portrays it. 

For those unfamiliar with the concept, “scissoring” is when two people with vaginas touch clitorises in order to stimulate each other. It is one of the most common ways queer people with vaginas — typically cisgender lesbians — are shown having sex.

While a realistic version of scissoring called “tribbing” is actually used, the way porn portrays it is typically wrong, with a lot of forceful slamming of genitals and awkward positions that can’t be comfortable for anyone.

Myth: Penetration happens with no preparation.

Porn portraying queer men often fails to show the preparation involved in anal sex, such as cleaning the area, using lube, and foreplay. 

According to Dr. Joseph Terlizzi, a colon and rectal surgeon, people who are bottoming — or being penetrated during anal sex — oftentimes need to prepare their bodies before sex to make sure they don’t get hurt. 

“If your anus is too tightly contracted when you are first penetrated, you’ll run the risk of tearing skin or damaging your sphincter,” Terlizzi told Lighthouse: LGBTQ+ affirming care. “That’s why it’s important to relax your anus before penetration using various foreplay techniques and to keep your anus relaxed and well-lubricated while bottoming.”

In real life, not preparing adequately can lead to an uncomfortable and painful experience for those bottoming.

Myth: Bisexual people are just going through a phase.

The idea that bisexual people are just going through a phrase is one of the most common misconceptions around bisexuality, according to the Human Rights Campaign.

This kind of statement implies that you don’t believe their sexuality exists. Experts acknowledge that sexuality is a spectrum, just like gender, and people can be attracted to people of all genders, one gender, or no gender at all.

Myth: Women having sex with women must use a strap-on.

Porn, television, and movies that show queer women having sex often focus heavily on penetration, specifically with a strap-on — or a sex toy that attaches a dildo to a harness so that people can engage in hands-free penetration. 

But the idea that strap-ons are a part of sex every single time is inaccurate, and frames queer sex in a heteronormative way.

In reality, sex can look lots of different ways for queer people with vaginas, and not all of them revolve around penetration. Oral sex, clitoral stimulation, dry humping, nipple play, and tribbing are just a few of the ways that queer people can get it on without penetration.

Myth: People with vaginas can’t give each other STIs.

While the use of dental dams — or latex sheets designed to be put on the vagina during oral sex — is sometimes seen as a joke among queer people, the idea that two people with vaginas can’t transmit STIs to each other is far from true.

Queer people with vaginas are at risk for the same types of STIs as cisgender or straight people and sex should still be approached with caution. STIs can be transmitted from skin to skin contact, oral-genital stimulation, and contaminated toys, so safe sex practices are important.

Myth: You can guess who’s a top and who’s a bottom.

A consistent theme in media featuring queer people is the masc-femme, top-bottom dichotomy. Think Shane Mccutcheon on the original “The L Word” being the ultimate top heartbreaker while sporting her iconic androgynous rocker aesthetic.

Essentially, feminine-presenting people are framed as being the “bottom,” or the person the sex is done to, and masculine-presenting people are framed as being the “top,” or the person being assertive during sex.   

In reality, people can be tops, bottoms, or switches — or people who are versatile in their sexual preferences — regardless of gender presentation. 

Myth: Having preferences that exclude people based on whether they are cisgender or a certain racial group isn’t problematic.

Queer men often list “preferences” on dating apps like “no blacks, no femmes, no fatties.” Sometimes, these preferences really just act as thinly veiled guises for racism, transphobia, and fatphobia.

Research released earlier this year on sexual racism illustrated the negative impacts this kind of dating exclusion can have on queer men of color.

In addition to racial preferences, a significant number of dating app users exclude transgender people from their dating pool.

These kinds of identity-based preferences lead to feelings of low self-esteem and marginalization among those excluded, and can contribute to disproportionately high rates of poor mental health and even suicide among these groups.

Complete Article HERE!

Is Same-Sex Behavior Hardwired in Animals from the Beginning?

Same-sex sexual behavior might have started out on an equal footing with different-sex sex.

Evolutionary scientists have been thinking about same-sex sexual behavior all wrong.

That’s the implication of a new study on same-sex behavior in animals. Instead of asking why animals engage in same-sex behavior (SSB), researchers should be asking, “Why not?” the authors said. 

If they’re right, same-sex sex may not have evolved independently in different animals for adpative reasons. Instead, same-sex sex may have emerged very early in time and could persist simply because engaging in it doesn’t cost animals much, evolutionarily speaking.

“Usually, when evolutionary biologists see a trait that’s really widespread across evolutionary lineages, we at least consider the idea that the trait is ancestral and was preserved in all those lineages,” said Julia Monk, a doctoral candidate at Yale University, who co-authored the new research. “So why hadn’t people considered that hypothesis for SSB?”

In evolutionary science, same-sex sexual behavior has long been viewed as a conundrum: Why would animals spend time and energy doing something sexual that won’t pass along their genes to the next generation? And yet, same-sex sexual behavior has been observed in at least 1,500 species, ranging from lowly squash bugs to humans.

(To avoid anthropomorphizing, the researchers don’t use the terms “homosexual,” “heterosexual,” “gay” or “straight” to refer to animal behavior.)

“We can’t assign sexuality to animals — we’re trying our best to learn about them by observing their behaviors,” Monk told Live Science. “And those behaviors shouldn’t be mapped onto human cultural and societal contexts.”

The assumption that there must be an evolutionary reason for all this same-sex sex has led researchers to search for possible benefits to same-sex behavior. For example, in humans, researchers have found that having a gay son or brother seems to be associated with a woman having more offspring in total. Other studies have posited that same-sex sexual behavior is a side effect of other genes that have reproductive benefits. 

In evolutionary biology, the ability of an animal to reproduce given its environment is called fitness. It’s entirely possible that in some species, same-sex sex could have fitness benefits, Monk and her colleagues wrote in their paper, published Nov. 18 in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution. But these evolutionary benefits may not be required for same-sex sexual behavior to exist. 

Imagine, instead, that the earliest sexually reproducing animals simply tried to mate with any and all members of their species — regardless of sex. This might have been a logical pathway for evolution, because all the bells and whistles that distinguish males from females are energetically costly to evolve. So any effort expended on mating with the same sex would be compensated for by not spending energy evolving and maintaining distinctive secondary sex characteristics, like differing colors, scents and behaviors. Those sex-distinguishing traits may have all come later in the evolutionary chain, the authors argued.

In this formulation, same-sex and different-sex sexual behavior would have started out on an equal footing, early in animal evolution. This could explain why same-sex sex is so common throughout the animal kingdom: It didn’t evolve multiple times independently, but was instead part of the fabric of animal evolution from the start.

Same-sex penguin couples keep adopting eggs, and the Berlin Zoo is celebrating

The new hypothesis undercuts old assumptions about same-sex behaviors, said Caitlin McDonough, a doctoral candidate at Syracuse University and a study co-author. Much of the research done on these sexual behaviors assumes that same-sex sex is costly for animals and that different-sex sex is not costly, she said.

“You really need to go through those assumptions and test the costs and benefits of both behaviors in a system,” McDonough said.

If same-sex behaviors go back to the roots of animal evolution, the fact that these behaviors are so common today makes sense, Monk said.

“If you assume a trait like SSB is a new development and has high costs, it’s going to be really hard to understand how it could become more and more common from those low initial frequencies,” she said. “It would have to have really large fitness benefits, or be otherwise impervious to natural selection, for that outcome to be probable.

“On the other hand, if you assume a trait is ancestral and was originally common, and it has low costs, it’s much more likely that it would remain widespread to this day, even if it doesn’t seem to contribute much to fitness.”

One piece of evidence supporting this hypothesis is that some echinoderms, including sea stars and sea urchins, engage in same-sex sexual behavior. Echinoderms evolved early in the history of life, likely in the Precambrian period more than 541 million years ago.

But other evidence is slim, largely because scientists haven’t systematically studied same-sex sexual behavior in animals. Most observations have been accidental, and biologists have often viewed sex between two animals of the same sex as irrelevant or improper to note, Monk said. Sometimes, researchers automatically assume that same-sex behavior isn’t really about sex but instead is about dominance or bonding. And often, if two animals are observed having sex, they’re assumed to be male and female without any confirmatory evidence, McDonough said.

“The science that we do is really informed and influenced by cultural biases,” she said.

Thinking of same-sex sexual behavior as a standard part of the animal repertoire would change how researchers approach the study of the evolution of these behaviors. The next step, Monk said, would be to gather more data on the prevalence of same-sex behavior in animals. Then, researchers could compare species from across the tree of life to determine if all linages show same-sex behavior. If so, it would strengthen the argument that same-sex sexuality was part of life for the ancestors of all of today’s sexually reproducing animals.

Complete Article HERE!

Survey sheds light on fluid teen sexual orientation

At least one in five teenagers reports some change in sexual orientation during adolescence, according to new research.

by

“This work highlights the fluidity that many adolescents experience in terms of how they label their sexuality and who they feel sexually attracted to,” says lead author J. Stewart, a PhD student at North Carolina State University.

For this study, researchers looked at data from 744 students from rural high schools in the southeastern United States; 54% of the students were girls, 46% were boys. Students filled out surveys each year for three years, spanning either their freshman through junior years or their sophomore through senior years. Researchers collected the data between 2014 and 2016.

The researchers found that at some point during the three-year period, 19% of students reported at least one change in their self-labeled sexual identity—for example, classifying themselves as heterosexual in year one and as bisexual in year two. Some students reported multiple changes, such as switching from heterosexual to bisexual between years one and two, and then back to heterosexual in year three.

There were also notable differences between male and female students, with 26% of girls reporting some change in sexual identity over the three-year study period, compared to 11% of boys.

In addition to how teens labeled their sexualities, researchers looked at the extent to which teens reported being romantically attracted to boys and/or girls. The study found that 21% of students reported changes in who they were attracted to over the course of the study. As with sexual identity, some students reported changes in romantic attraction between years one and two, and again between years two and three.

Again, there were notable differences between boys and girls, with 31% of girls reporting changes in romantic attraction, compared to 10% of boys.

“Some adolescents shifted between sexual minority identities and/or attractions—gay or lesbian, bisexual, etc. as well as varying degrees of same-sex attractions—across all three years,” Stewart says. “Others fluctuated between heterosexual and sexual minority groups. And when we looked at the extent to which sexual identity, attraction, and sexual behavior aligned, we saw some interesting trends.”

The researchers found that the majority of people who identified as sexual minorities also reported some degree of same-sex attraction—and most had engaged in some form of sexual behavior with a person of the same sex.

However, there was more variability among students who identified themselves as heterosexual—particularly for girls.

For example, 9% of all female students labeled themselves as both heterosexual and having at least some attraction to girls. And 12% of girls who reported being both heterosexual and having no sexual attraction toward girls also reported engaging in same-sex sexual behavior.

“The results for boys mirrored those for girls, albeit to a lesser degree,” Stewart says.

“Adolescence is a time of identity exploration, and sexual orientation is one aspect of that. One takeaway here is that the process of sexual identity development is quite nuanced for a lot of teens. And based on research with young adults, we expect these patterns will continue for many people into their late 20s and even beyond.

“To be clear, we’re talking about internally driven changes in sexual orientation,” Stewart says. “This research does not suggest these changes can be imposed on an individual and does not support the idea of conversion therapy. There’s ample evidence that conversion therapy is harmful and does not influence anyone’s sexual orientation.”

The researchers are already considering future directions for the work.

“The data in this study comes from kids growing up in the rural South,” Stewart says. “It would be interesting to see if these numbers vary across different sociopolitical environments. Additionally, we weren’t able to identify how these patterns looked among trans and other gender minority adolescents. That would be an important direction for future work.”

Complete Article HERE!

The Evolution of a Bisexual

My Road to Embracing Sexual Fluidity

by

“Now, I’m far more attracted to men than women, but who’s to say my sexual preference won’t sway again?”

I’ve identified as straight, I’ve identified as gay, and I’ve identified—and still identify—as bi. My sexual identity is something of a shapeshifting mass that I can never quite firmly grasp. In the minds of many, I’m confused. But I don’t see it that way. I’ve always been confident in my sexual orientation; it’s just changed over time. For the majority of my life, I was solely romantically and sexually linked to women. But in my late 20s, I started to experiment with men (something I’ve wanted to do for a long, long time) and really liked it. Now, I’m far more attracted to men than women, but who’s to say my sexual preference won’t sway again?

“It’s not uncommon for people’s sexual identities to change,” sex educator Erica Smith, M.Ed, tells NewNowNext. “I know this as a sexuality educator and because I’ve experienced it firsthand. I’ve identified as bisexual, lesbian, queer, and straight (when I was very young). It wasn’t until I was in my mid-30s that I relaxed into the knowledge that my sexual attractions are probably going to keep changing and shifting my whole life.”

According to Alisa Swindell, Ph.D. candidate and bisexual activist, it is not always our sexuality that changes. Usually, it’s our understanding of our sexuality that evolves when we explore what feels right to us. “Our understanding of gender and how it is expressed has been evolving at a rate that has not previously been known (or studied) and that is changing how we understand our own desires and responses to others,” she says.

Many outside factors can influence our sexuality. For instance, Swindell thinks many bisexuals are playing against a numbers game. “There are more people with other gender attractions than same-gender, so more often bisexual people end up in relationships with people of another gender and find it easier to pursue those relationships,” she says.

In her opinion, this sentiment is especially true for women, as there is still a lot of stigma toward bi women within lesbian communities. Men, however, experience a different set of challenges.

“Once [men] start dating [other] men, they often find themselves in social situations that are almost exclusively male and so meeting women becomes harder,” she adds, effectively summarizing my lived experience as a sexually active bisexual man. “Also, those men, like all of us, were socialized to respond to heterosexual norms. So many men who enjoy the queerness of the male spaces are still often attracted to heteronormative women who do not always respond to male bisexuality due to continuing stigma.”

The continuing stigma often pressures bisexuals to adopt a monosexual identity. Take Leslie, a “not super out” bisexual, as an example. Leslie dated a woman from her late teens to early 20s, keeping her sexual orientation a secret because her parents were conservative and she didn’t want to ruffle any feathers. As she revisits her past same-sex relationship with me, she has a realization: “In reflecting on all of that, I think deep down I thought that being with a man would just be easier.”

The bisexual Pride flag

Now married to a man, Leslie feels like she’s lost her bi identity, though she’s still attracted to different genders. “When I see people I follow online and find out they are bisexual I usually reach out and say, ‘I am, too!’ so I can collect sisters and brothers where I can,” she adds. “Otherwise, as I am cisgender-presenting I often feel like I don’t really have a say but I offer my support.”

This loss of identity is all too common. “Maintaining a recognized bisexual identity can be difficult as monosexuality is still the assumed norm,” Swindell says, noting that showing support—whether that looks like keeping up with issues that affect bisexuals, correcting people who mistakenly call bisexuals gay or straight, or encouraging our partners to not let that slide when it comes up with friends and family are all important for maintaining an identity—as Leslie has, is important to maintaining a bi identity. Smith adds this loss of identity may be attributed to a person’s own internalized biphobia, too.

“When it comes to sexuality in particular, there is rightfully a lot of autonomy given to people to self-identify. If someone self-identifies as queer or bisexual, none of their sexual or relational behavior, in of itself, alters that,” psychotherapist Daniel Olavarria, LCSW, tells NewNowNext. “Of course, there is also a recognition that by marrying someone of the opposite sex, for example, that this queer person is exercising a level of privilege that may alter their external experience in the world. As a result, this may have implications for how that person is perceived among queer and non-queer communities.”

Jodi’s experience as a bisexual person is more reflective of my own: She shares that she’s gone through stages where she only dates men, and others where she only dates women. Available studies suggest that only a minority of bisexuals maintain simultaneous relationships with both genders. In one report, self-identified bisexuals were asked if they had been sexually involved with both men and women in the past 12 months. Two-thirds said yes, and only one-third has been simultaneously involved with both genders.

As for a possible explanation? “It can be really difficult for us to find partners who are comfortable with us dating other genders at the same time,” Smith offers up as a theory.

“If I’m in a situation where I have to be exhibiting a lot of ‘masculine’ energy (running projects, being very in charge of things at work, etc.), then I tend to want to be able to be in more ‘feminine’ energy at home,” Jodi adds, clarifying that people of any gender identity can boast masculine and feminine energy. “Likewise, if my work life looks quieter and focused on more ‘feminine’ aspects such as nurturing and caregiving, I tend to want to exhibit a stronger more masculine presence while at home.”

Bisexuality is, in many ways, a label that can accommodate one’s experience on a sexuality spectrum. This allows for shifts based on a person’s needs or interests at any given point in their life. Perhaps “The Bisexual Manifesto,” published in 1990 from the Bay Area Bisexual Network, says it best:

Bisexuality is a whole, fluid identity. Do not assume that bisexuality is binary or duogamous in nature: that we have “two” sides or that we must be involved simultaneously with both genders to be fulfilled human beings. In fact, don’t assume that there are only two genders.

Sexuality is complicated, and how we experience it throughout our lives is informed by a multitude of different factors—the exploration of power dynamics, craving certain types of sexual experiences, and social expectations can all influence our gender preferences at any given time, to name just a few. Much like our own bodies, our understanding of our sexual orientation will continue to grow.

I’ve come to accept this ongoing evolution as a wonderful and inevitable thing. Imagine having a completely static sexual orientation your entire life? Boring! Being able to explore your sexuality with wonderful people of all genders is intensely satisfying and uniquely insightful, no matter how many others try to denounce what you feel in your heart or your loins.

I didn’t choose the bi life; the bi life chose me. And I am grateful.

Complete Article HERE!

Am I Queer?

Here’s How To Tell

By Caroline Colvin

So, you’re not sure if you’re “bisexual,” “pansexual,” or “lesbian” to be exact, but you have an inkling you’re not strictly straight. If you’ve been wondering, “Am I queer?”, there is no simple answer to that question. On one hand, you might be able to pinpoint exactly which childhood female celebrity crush sparked a sexual awakening. Or maybe you distinctly remember a K-12 Valentine made with extra special care for a girl in your class. On the other hand, maybe you’ve shared a curious, impulsive kiss with a girl. Or maybe you’ve hooked up with another woman, either one-on-one or in a threesome, and have elected to ignore those implications. Whatever your case may be, there are def some aspects of your sexual and romantic attractions you can reflect on to answer that question.

Data from the Pew Research Center shows that more and more Americans are identifying as members of the LGBTQ+ community. As of 2017, a little more than 10 million people in the U.S. or 4.1% of Americans identified as LGBTQ+. That’s up from 8.3 million people or 3.5% of Americans in 2012, according to the same researchers. Interestingly enough, millennials lead the pack when it comes to identifying as queer. In 2017, LGBTQ media organization GLAAD found that 20% of 18- to 34-year-olds identify as LGBTQ+ in the U.S.

If you’re curious about whether you’re queer, here are some aspects of your desires to consider.

“Queer” can be how you identify

It’s important to know that “queer” can be an umbrella term. For example, you’ve possibly heard people use “the queer community” and “the LGBTQ+ community” interchangeably. It’s also important to know that “queer” can be the specific label you identify with — that’s the “Q” in “LGBTQ+!” The queer community includes people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and pansexual — so, anyone who isn’t straight. (This also includes folks who are transgender, non-binary, or two-spirit, so anyone who isn’t cisgender or the gender they were assigned at birth. But for the purposes of this article, we’re just going to focus on sexuality, which is separate from gender.)

When it comes to using “queer” as your label, sex and relationships therapist Courtney Watson, whose practice works specifically with LGBTQ+ people of color, says, “‘Queer is a term that offers the most fluidity in definition. [It also] allows for a sexuality identity that transcends discreet gender and sexual orientation categories.”

What you’ll notice romantically is…

One thing sexuality educator Jamie J. LeClaire emphasizes is that there isn’t just one way to be queer, especially when it comes to romantic orientation. You might be:

  • aromantic, which means you lack of romantic attraction completely,
  • biromantic or panromantic, meaning you feel romantically attracted to more than one gender,
  • or homorantic, meaning you feel romantically attracted to people of the same binary gender that you identify as.

Do you have warm and fuzzy feelings for a woman at work? Has romance just never been your jam? Do you dwell on how nice it would be to cuddle, hold hands with, and raise a dog with one your hot, charming non-binary friends? Queerness looks different for everyone, but LeClaire says, “If you find yourself developing romantically-fueled, crush-type feelings outside of the scope of heteroromanticism, you might be queer!”

What you might notice sexually is…

As LeClaire puts it, one of the main signs you might be queer is you catch yourself “fantasizing or desiring sexual intimacy, in any way outside of strict heterosexuality.” You might be:

  • asexual, meaning you lack sexual attraction completely,
  • bisexual or pansexual, meaning you’re sexually attracted to two or more genders,
  • or lesbian or gay, meaning you’re sexually attracted to people of the same or similar gender as you.

This might look like an interest in lesbian porn, or sexual fantasies with people of the same gender or similar genders. It could be as tame as daydreams of kissing a cute someone of the same gender (or a similar gender presentation) from one of your classes. This might be having zero or only a passing interest in sex at all. Queerness differs from person-to-person, but these are some things to consider about your sexual desires.

And don’t feel pressure to come out

“Generally speaking, ‘coming out’ is a never-ending process in today’s world, where people are harmfully assumed to be cisgender and heterosexual/allosexual,” LeClaire says.(Allosexual is term for folks who experience sexual attraction, unlike asexual folks.) “Do what is right and feels comfortable for you and your situation.”

Especially if you feel like your parents, guardians, or community will react badly (or even violently) to your newly acknowledged queerness, wait until you feel safe to do so.

“If you have the financial privilege to go to therapy, it can be an incredible tool for navigating the coming-out process,” LeClaire suggests. Cultivate a support system of friends or “chosen family” to have your back as you figure your queerness out. “Support can very well come from online queer communities if that’s all you can access, which are incredible resources as well.”

Whatever the case may be, don’t stress about labels

No matter what label you end up sticking with, Watson explains, “It’s also important to know that your attractions and identities can be fluid and change.” It’s why Alfred Kinsey, a famous sexologist, invented the Kinsey scale — a numbered spectrum between completely homosexual and completely heterosexual — to help queer people express how they felt. Because even in 1948, people were realizing that no two bisexuals loved and desired people in the same exact way, and that sexuality evolves.

“As for how to find a label that works for you, think about what you feel most deeply resonates for you right now,” Watson says. You can identify as bisexual today, but pansexual a year from now. You might feel comfortable with the lesbian label at first, but then realize you’re also asexual — so then you feel good about “gay and asexual” or “homoromantic asexual,” or no labels at all.

The word you pick for you identity is not a “life-long stamp.” Keeping that in mind can help take the pressure off.

What’s more, Watson says, “You can have an identity regardless of your current partner’s gender/sexual orientation.” You might be dating a man and still have sexual desires for women. You might be dating a lesbian woman and feel genderqueer. Who you’re dating at any given time doesn’t take away from who you are and how you feel comfortable identifying.

At the end of the day, LeClaire says, “Gender and sexuality are more than a spectrum. They are a universe of opportunities to live, love, and be loved.” Keeping this in mind can help you embrace and celebrate your queerness in a positive, reaffirming way.

Complete Article HERE!

‘Gay gene’ theories belong in the past – now we know sexuality is far more fluid

Gender norms imprison us all, dictating our behaviour for fear of abuse – and that extends to who we sleep or fall in love with

By

It turns out that genetics is almost as complicated as love and sex. New research has shown that the long fabled “gay gene” does not exist; that a variety of different genes contribute to same-sex attraction, and that several other factors are in the mix too.

For many LGBTQ people – myself included – the very notion of this study sets off big queer alarm bells, though it should be noted researchers worked closely with LGBTQ groups. As early as 1993, the Daily Mail – and mock it all you like, it’s one of the country’s main newspapers – published an article under the headline “Abortion hope after ‘gay genes’ findings”. In the age of supposed “designer babies”, what if the hatefully inclined chose to make sure their unborn child wasn’t gay or bisexual?

Then there’s the old homophobic trope that people “choose” to be gay, and that falling in love with someone of the same gender is a “lifestyle choice” – a perverse myth long used to punish LGBTQ people and fuel the horror of so-called gay conversion therapy. It is reassuring, then, that the study isn’t suggesting that how children are raised by their parents determines their sexuality: one environmental factor that’s been previously researched is that foetal development in the womb may have a significant impact, for instance.

But while the research may be interesting, it is surely irrelevant. Believing that LGBTQ people choose their sexuality belongs in the same bin as flat-Earthism and climate emergency denial. All LGBTQ people grow up in homophobic societies, whether that bigotry is imposed by coercive social attitudes or by the state. Almost all of us endure agonising periods marked by fear and shame, and struggled to come out to ourselves, let alone our family, friends and society: the idea we opted out of heterosexuality for a bit of a laugh is clearly fantasy.

What is more interesting is that we will not know how fluid sexuality truly is until homophobia – and its parent, sexism, because it’s really about enforcing gender norms – is vanquished. Of course there are many who believe their sexuality is effectively fixed as straight or gay. Not so for bisexuals – and for others, their sexuality is more fluid still. The experiences of men and women differ markedly here. Although younger men are more comfortable showing feelings for each other, many men still fear that even expressing affection for another guy will have them pejoratively labelled as exclusively gay. Women who have attraction towards other women, meanwhile, are objectified and sexualised: it’s a crude sexual fantasy for men.

The polling shows that younger people are increasingly less likely to identify as heterosexual, a symptom of growing emancipation. According to YouGuv survey this year, while 83% of 18 to 24-year-olds in Britain identified as heterosexual just four years ago, now only 75% do, with 16% now self-describing as bisexual, an astonishing 14 points higher than 2015.

Sexual and gender norms imprison us all, dictating our behaviour for fear of reprisal – abuse or even violence – and that extends to who we sleep with or fall in love with. When the struggle for freedom succeeds, those boundaries will finally be overcome.

Complete Article HERE!

What straight people need to know about going to gay bars

It’s great you want to support your queer friend, but all those looking for a GBF: listen up.

By Grace Walsh

As a gay person, knowing my straight friends want to come to LGBTQ+ bars and spaces fills my heart with joy. I appreciate the accepting atmosphere that these spaces create, and I love that my friends want to show their support of me and my community so openly in them.

I came out just before starting university, having made wonderful (and very straight) friends during my time at college. I was worried they would treat me differently after I came out, or be freaked out thinking I either hated men or fancied one of them. Luckily, neither one of those age-old stereotypes came true, and actually I didn’t give them enough credit. It turned out most of them knew I was gay long before I did.

But recently, when I took a group of them to Soho in London for a night out, I realised even the most well-intentioned, supportive straight/cis friends can miss the mark entirely. One of my male friends came back from the bar carrying drinks and a phone number, written on a napkin. He loudly demanded to know why the bartender had thought he’d be interested because after all, he didn’t “look gay”. Sigh.

Later on, we went to dance at another bar. On a small side stage, men in cowboy costumes were dancing. Before I knew it, another friend was dancing between them and trying to take a hat from one of their heads. Awkward side glances and a request for her to get down followed.

After another friend who was feeling queasy and asked me (the only actual LGBTQ+ person in the group) to go outside with her, I left feeling let down and a little pissed off. They’d been so supportive of me for so many years, yet they’d made me – and others around us – feel uncomfortable, in a space that I had invited them into.

I could go to “straight” bars with my friends, and I often do. But there’s something quite special about being able to hold my girlfriend’s hand or kiss her without double takes from passers-by (or the horrifying offer of a ménage à trois). That’s why queer spaces and bars are important to me and many other members of the LGBTQ+ community. It’s where we can be in the majority for once, where we can feel the most comfortable and protected, and where we have the most access to music by early noughties queer icons – an integral element for survival. These spaces give people who can’t be “out” publicly for whatever reason somewhere they can truly be themselves. These are places where trans and gender nonconforming folk can hopefully feel physically safe and recognised, away from a world that isn’t always so accepting.

For Meg-John Barker, author of Life Isn’t Binary and expert on gender, sex and relationships, queer spaces are vital. “LGBTQ+ people often become used to having to come out repeatedly, to being asked intrusive questions about their bodies and sex lives and being treated as an object for people (the weird one in the office, or the gay best friend, for example). It’s understandable that they might want some spaces where they don’t have to worry about that stuff. Where they can assume that everyone will ‘get it’, relax and breathe easy,” they say.

How to behave as a straight person in an LGBTQ+ space

So, you want to support your queer friend in the space they love and have a boogie to Whitney Houston? That’s fabulous. But here’s how to do it while being respectful and considerate of the space you’re in.

Think about your motivations for going

If you’re there on safari and looking “to see something strange and exotic to you or you’re there to exploit the coolness of LGBTQ+ culture in some way” as Meg-John puts it, then maybe take your night out down the road instead.

“I’ve tried to buy a drink for/ask for a number from several women in queer spaces, who have turned out to be straight. Instead of politely declining, I’ve often been made to feel like a gross pervert for even suggesting they might be queer and interested,” says 22-year-old Becca, a bisexual student from Oxford. “I’ve also taken straight friends to queer clubs and been horrified and embarrassed when they react inappropriately when someone has assumed they’re queer

Meg-John says your reason for wanting to go to a queer space should be to “support your LGBTQ+ friend who is keen for you to go along.” They add it’s fine “if you want to learn something, or it’s an event that’s particularly looking for allies to support it and the people going.

Check whether you’re actually welcome there

For straight, cis people, the world really is your oyster! You can pretty much go anywhere and everywhere without worrying that you’ll be physically or verbally assaulted because of your sexual or gender orientation. Meg-John explains, “Don’t go to [a queer space] with your straight, cis partner and get off together very publicly. Remember that everyday spaces are safe for you in a way they aren’t for the rest of the people there.”

Luke, a 27-year-old gay writer, says queer spaces have become somewhat of a tourist attraction for hen dos. And this can cause a lot of problems. “If you’re thinking of going to a queer space as a primarily straight, cis hen do – just don’t do it,” he says. “I’ve been to numerous nights were a group of be-sashed, wasted white chicks show up and start shrieking. It really changes the vibe. Having a hen party there makes everyone feel that they’re a spectacle on display for someone else’s enjoyment and entertainment, which isn’t much fun

When hen parties invade queer spaces, they bring the gaze of the outside world with them. This means we have to go back to monitoring the way we behave, in spaces that are supposed to belong to us.”

Educate yourself before you go

Even if you think you know everything about every identity under the LGBTQ+ acronym, do your homework Meg-John says. “There are plenty of videos out there about things LGBTQ+ people are sick of hearing, or what not to ask them, as well as easy 101 introductions to language,” they add.

There’s no shame in not knowing something about a community unfamiliar to you, but there’s plenty of shame in asking a same-sex couple an ignorant question steeped in stereotypes like, “Who’s the man in the relationship?” Believe me, it still happens.

“I was once at a gay club with some straight friends celebrating our friend’s 21st. Perhaps trying to be supportive and ‘in touch’ with the birthday boy’s sexuality, they started throwing phrases like ‘Yaaaaaas queen’ around to all the camp men, assuming they’d respond positively,” says Ellen, a recent graduate who identifies as bisexual. While you may think this referencing of queer culture by straight people is totally harmless, not all LGBTQ+ people agree.

“Many queer folk are tired of hearing such over-used drag queen lingo,” Ellen adds. “And they don’t owe it to you to respond if they aren’t comfortable, especially in their own safe spaces.”

Treat people queer people like you would anyone else

Meg-John says you should avoid going to queer bars if your intention is “to flirt or get off with somebody LGBTQ+ because you’re curious, or want to have a story to tell. This involves treating people as objects for your pleasure, not full human beings.”

Ed, a 22-year-old bisexual teacher, has experienced this kind of behaviour first hand. “I have experienced problems with straight women using me a bit like a shiny new handbag. They just pull me over and are very tactile. They randomly dance with me before ushering friends to take pictures of us dancing without asking me. Then they can get frustrated when I try to walk away!”

Pansexual sex educator Topher, 30, agrees that although this behaviours is common, it can be really harmful. “I was in a very famous gay pub in Soho, resting on my boyfriend’s chest when a drunk, straight-presenting lady informed us of how attractive we were as a couple,” he says. “I said, ‘Thank you’, and turned my head away back to him.

“This is when I felt her hand run up the back of my T-shirt and down my back, before attempting to squeeze my bum. We shoved her off, and she acted very shocked to have been corrected while sexually assaulting me in public. I felt invaded and we left. One of my biggest issues with it, other than the assault, was that this was my boyfriend’s first experience of a proper gay bar and what he’d witnessed was unpleasant.”

Don’t take over the space

“Don’t go with your straight, cis mates and take up a lot room in the venue with your bodies or your noise,” Meg-John says. “Many people will feel less safe if you’re doing that. Be considerate of places with a maximum capacity that are already pretty full, too. It’s better to let LGBTQ+ people be the people who get to use the space,” they add.

So, maybe trying to get you and six of your friends into G-A-Y on Pride weekend is an idea to rethink

The morning after my night out I was presented with a bacon sandwich and some sheepish looks. Hopefully my next trip to Soho will be more successful, with a lot less eye rolling and quick escapes out of the side exit

Complete Article HERE!

Why it’s dangerous to treat gay and bi men’s sexual health in the same way

Bisexual men’s sexual health is at risk, Lewis Oakley says, because researchers treat gay and bi men the same way

by

One of my biggest issues as a bisexual campaigner is to tackle how we conduct sexual health research.

Last week’s Public Health England report demonstrated an issue we face again and again.

Their latest study found gonorrhea and syphilis cases are surging among gay and bisexual men.

Research like this classify gay and bisexual men as the same thing. But even though other studies have found bi men are more at risk of STIs, their public health needs are often unmet.

Why is treating gay and bi men’s sexual health the same an issue? 

It’s so basic, it’s baffling but here we go. Gay men only have sex with men and bisexual men could be having sex with men or/ and women. How can you not assess these two forms of sexuality separately when looking at sexually transmitted infections?

I do understand the perspective that what they are really doing is grouping together ‘men who have sex with men’ because they have unique health risks.

But from a practical point of view, that simply doesn’t work. You are only taking in to account part of a bi man’s sex life. It is the most obvious form of bi erasure. ‘We are only going to take in to account the sex you have with men. The fact you have sex with women will be omitted from the research.’

Limited studies that do look at gay and bi men differently have found startling results.

One study argued rates of HIV in bisexual men is closer to those of heterosexual men than gay men.

The truth is, this is a large scale failing on the part of sexual health research. It endangers bisexual men like myself.

Sexual health issues unique to bisexual men are ignored because it doesn’t correlate with what gay men are dealing with.

For example, no sexual health research has ever surveyed bisexual men to see if they are more or less likely to use a condom with a man or a woman. From my own interactions with other bi men, I’ve long suspected there could be a discrepancy in condom use. However, because such an issue doesn’t impact gay men, I have no research to prove this point. As a consequence, if I am right it means no effort is being put in to improving condom use by bisexuals.

Bisexual sexual health impact

If we wanted to play the discrimination card, you could argue an unintentional consequence of all this research encourages bi men to see sex with men as too dangerous. It may push them to be more comfortable with women.

For gay men, highlighting specific risks they are more susceptible too is good practice. But for bisexual men who have the option of sex with men and women only showing them negative realities of having sex with men could be off-putting. Obviously, no research has ever asked bisexual men if sexual health reporting makes them more cautious about having sex with men than they are women, so we will just leave that as wild speculation at this point.

More insidiously, the overall consequence is that bisexual men are being disenfranchised from the conversation about safe sex.

London Assembly Health committee found that bisexual people, and those who come under the + category, report that their identity is frequently misunderstood or simply erased by health professionals.

As a consequence, another study found there is a substantial gap in knowledge specifically on bisexual health needs still remains.

Feeling their bisexuality won’t be taken seriously, only 33% of bisexuals feeling comfortable sharing their sexual orientation with their general practitioner.

If we want to change this, we need to make the effort to bring bi men in to the sexual health conversation.

Time to take bisexuals seriously

What we need to see is research that reflects bi men’s experience. Statistics should be available on issues such as condom use, unplanned pregnancy and the most common STIs.

We then need targeted health campaigns telling bisexual men how to protect themselves.

From my own experience, we need to do a better job educating sexual health professionals. Doctors must know bisexuality exists and be educated on their sexual health risks.

As the American Journal of Preventive Medicine reported, men who have sex with men and women — regardless of whether they identify as bisexual — have distinct health care needs.

They could also do more to target bisexuals. I’m not tooting my own horn here but I’m pretty well known for being bisexual. I’ve written for most major sites, appeared across TV and radio and have a weekly column. You would think organizations might reach out to ask me to help promote their bisexual survey/ service – but no.

All I’m asking for is some specific research to help bi men make informed decisions about their sexual health. It’s not unreasonable to ask that bisexual men be looked at separately to gay men.

And until that becomes the new way of working, this bisexual activist will continue to say: the majority of sexual health research is fake news.

Complete Article HERE!

Pride Month Too Often Overlooks LGBTQ Members With Disabilities

Why we need to make Pride Month celebrations inclusive of people with disabilities.

By Sarah Kim

This month marks the 50th anniversary of the 1969 Stonewall Inn riots. Since then, June has been recognized as Pride Month, dedicated to celebrating the resilience, perseverance and unity of the LGBTQ community.

During a time when diversity and inclusion are the main pillars of Pride, people with disabilities are still left out in the discussion and celebration of sexual and gender diversity. Just last year, the historic Stonewall Inn bar denied entrance to a blind queer person because they didn’t provide paperwork for their service dog — a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which states no paperwork is needed for the entrance of a service animal.

That is only one of many examples of how Pride remains mostly inaccessible to the disabled, deaf or hard-of-hearing, blind and people with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities. Accessibility issues are present in gay bars, parties, big parades, as well as protests and rallies.

The physical spaces of many of these events present obstacles for people with physical disabilities or with sensory sensitivities. For example, parades can often be difficult for people with mobility issues because of uneven, long routes, extreme heat and tight, narrow spaces. Even if there is a designated wheelchair path, often times the parade coordinators underestimate the amount of space needed, or the path becomes overcrowded.

Even intimate gatherings often lack disability accommodations. Events with speakers, more often than not, do not have accompanying ASL interpretation, film screenings do not have closed captioning and spaces do not account for participants with noise or light sensitivity or who are on the autism spectrum.

However, these physical barriers and obstacles have a more significant implication. People with disabilities have been viewed as asexual beings, or incapable of having other identities other than being disabled. The mainstream population too often feels squeamish about someone who might need help in the bathroom, also having a fulfilling sex life.

Activist points out that Pride is too often inaccessible.

The Atlantic recently released a short documentary following the hurdles a married couple had to face when trying to convince a group home to allow them to live together. They both have intellectual disabilities, but that doesn’t mean that they are incapable of understanding their sexuality or of being in a marital relationship. The couple had to legally prove that they can consent to their sexual relationship, and thereby earning their right to live together. The mere fact that the couple had to go through this process speaks volumes on the social and cultural perception on the sexuality of people with disabilities.

The fundamental meaning behind Pride is for everyone to be proud of their bodies, sexuality and physical appearances. However, the same invitation is too often denied to LGBTQ folks with disabilities. Instead, they are reminded that they don’t belong in such spaces and that they can’t have sexual or gender identities. They want the exact same things that non-disabled LGBTQ people want in life: acceptance and not being “othered.”

People have multiple facets of their identities — a concept that is often referred to as intersectionality in academic and research settings. To ignore, or not account for, one aspect of a person’s identify — say, their disability — penetrates the notions of exclusion and discrimination. In turn, this can eradicate the histories of members of the LGBTQ community with disabilities.

Disability accommodations and inclusivity should not be an afterthought, but rather a priority when planning LGBTQ events and celebrations. Pride should strive to honor and recognize the lives of all people who identify as LGBTQ, and that certainly includes people with disabilities.

“As long as trans disabled people like me exist, disability issues are trans issues, and trans issues are disability issues,” Dominick Evans told them. Evans is trans, queer and disabled filmmaker and advocate.

Living and dying in the shadows

Louis Kenneth Neu, 26-year-old cabaret singer of Savannah, Ga., left, is pictured on trial, Dec. 15, 1933, in New Orleans for the slaying of Sheffield Clark Sr., a Nashville, Tenn., businessman, in a New Orleans hotel. His attorneys set up an insanity plea for defense but Neu, claiming to be “perfectly sane”, has repeatedly expressed the wish that “they would hang me quick and get it over with.” He confessed to beating Clark to death just a week after he had similarly killed Lawrence Shead, a theater manager of Paterson, N.J. Others are unidentified.

By

The world treated them like criminals. And that made them victims.

In an America where their very existence was illegal, gays were forced into dangerous shadows. At a time when being out meant being arrested, lonely men looked for love in dark parks, public bathrooms, and Times Square bars.

Often, they only met their murderers.

James Polchin’s “Indecent Advances” tells the grim tale. Advertised as “A Hidden History of True Crime and Prejudice Before Stonewall,” it focuses on what it meant to be a gay man in the first half of the 20th century: A target.

Polchin begins his story after World War I, as millions of American soldiers and sailors returned home, ready to celebrate. The Jazz Age was starting, and young men were eager to join the party.

Author, James Polchin

Having defeated a foreign threat, though, the American establishment now turned its attention to domestic ones. While the government hunted down political subversives, police departments and the armed forces searched for “sexual deviants.”

That crusade pushed the propaganda that gay men were dangerous perverts, eager to molest children and recruit innocent youths. It fed a paranoia that justified almost any action against them, from legal entrapment to brutal vigilantism.

In 1919, worried about corrupting influences, the Navy asked sailors to catch off-base seducers by going undercover. Some were even urged to go under the covers. In Newport, R.I., sailors were told that just going home with a man wasn’t enough. Only a “full act” would guarantee a conviction.

The practice was eventually dropped, but only because of public outrage at what good clean American boys were being asked to do. Ridding the streets of homosexuals was still seen as a moral crusade.

Ernest Kehler, right, 24, Canadian-born boxer, is shown as he was brought to New York police headquarters from Toronto, Dec. 20, 1939, to face charges in of slaying Dr. Walter Engelberg, first secretary of the German consulate in New York. Man at left is an unidentified police officer.

It was a growing one, too. In New York in 1918, there were 238 arrests for homosexual solicitation. Within two years, that number more than tripled. Police regularly raided bars in Greenwich Village. Sweeps of Bryant Park, a popular cruising spot, were common.

Being gay in public was a crime. But being gay in private could be fatal.

The stories were grisly. In 1933 in Paterson, N.J., Lawrence Shead, a movie-theater manager, was found in his apartment, beaten to death with an electric iron. When the killer was nabbed, he claimed self-defense. Shead had made a pass, the killer explained.

New Jersey declined to prosecute, allowing the suspect to be extradited to Louisiana, where he was wanted for killing a wealthy businessman. In that case, though, robbery, not sexuality, was seen as the motive. The suspect was convicted and hung for that crime. Getting away with murder was possible.

The message was clear: Gay lives don’t matter.

In 1945, ballroom dancer Burt Harger disappeared from his Manhattan apartment. Then his body started showing up, in pieces. Police arrested his roommate, who confessed to killing Harger with a hammer and cutting him up in the bathtub. He said he’d just thrown the last piece, the torso, off the Staten Island ferry.

The reason for this gruesome crime? Harger came on to him, the roommate said. Convicted of manslaughter, his sentence was 10 to 20 years.

It practically became a pattern. In 1948, there was a rash of hotel room murders in New York: a merchant seaman in Times Square, an NBC executive in Albany and a Canadian businessman in the Waldorf-Astoria. Nothing connected the crimes, except the perpetrators’ excuse: Self-defense. The other guy made a pass.

Some prosecutors pushed back, insisting these were premeditated crimes. Robbery was the underlying crime; smart thieves knew that gay men were reluctant to go to the police. Prosecutors argued that these were cold-hearted killers, taking advantage of their victims’ own isolation.

Yet juries sympathized with the killers.

For example, the victim at the Waldorf-Astoria, Colin MacKellar, always stayed at the posh hotel when he was in town. He also always drank at the bar, known as a discreet pick-up joint. One night the middle-aged MacKellar befriended a hunky 19-year-old patron. After several rounds, the older man invited the younger one to his room.

The teenager beat MacKellar to death. Then he went to the movies.

When arrested, the suspect’s defense was the older man propositioned him. He was just protecting himself, the teen insisted. That might have gotten him released, too, if the prosecutors didn’t discover the kid had a long history of haunting bars, meeting older men, and robbing them.

Even then, he, too, was only convicted of manslaughter.

The homophobia grew, convincing many Americans that the scariest problem wasn’t gay bashing, but gays. In 1954, a handsome airline steward, William Simpson, was found in a lover’s lane in North Miami, shot to death. His wallet was missing. Police eventually arrested two young men.

They admitted to “rolling” gay men, first hitchhiking along Biscayne Boulevard, then robbing whoever gave them a lift. “Getting money from perverts,” they called it. The defendant who shot Simpson said he panicked, thinking the man was going to rape him.

The press and public couldn’t help but sympathize – with the defendants.

“Third Sex Plague Spreads Anew,” Brevities (November 2, 1931)

“Good Guys – Not Toughs” the Miami Daily News editorialized. “5,000 Here Perverts, Police Say” the Miami Herald reported. Other stories warned of a secret colony of sexual deviants. Politicians vowed to “run them out of town.”

Once again, the defendants were convicted only of manslaughter.

Even when people worried about crimes against gay men, they weren’t concerned about the victims. No, people were far more concerned with gays in the neighborhoods bringing down property values. And they feared how homosexuals endangered heterosexuals.

In 1955, in his syndicated column “Dream Street,” Robert Sylvester churned out hard-boiled prose about a rapidly decaying Times Square, home to sleazy bars and short-stay hotels. “The Bird Circuit,” he called it, were gay hangouts where thugs waited for gay men to pick them up, go back to their rooms and rob them.

It was a terrible thing, Sylvester wrote because it put truly innocent people at risk. “It probably isn’t important if a homo is roughed up by some hoodlum,” he concluded. “The important thing is that when there are no available homos, any unprotected citizen makes a satisfactory substitute.”

By the ’50s, some gay activists, notably the members of the Mattachine Society, began to push for acceptance. The movement


Illustration from Psychopathology by Edward Kempf (C.V. Mosby Company: St. Louis, 1920)

grew. In 1967, after the police raided the Black Cat Tavern in San Francisco, supporters politely protested. Two years later, when cops tried the same thuggish tactics at the Stonewall Inn, patrons fought back in the streets.

Times were changing. When the Supreme Court ruled, in 1972, that state governments could refuse to employ homosexuals, a Daily News editorial agreed but made a modest plea for tolerance from private employers. “Fairies, nancies, swishes, fags, lezzes – call ’em what you please – should of course be permitted to earn an honest living,” the editorial stated.


Ralph Edward Barrows, 20, formerly of Grand Rapids, Mich., smiles and waves his hand, which is handcuffed to that of another prisoner, in a train at Hoboken, N.J., March 7, 1950, as he leaves for the state prison at Elmira, N.Y. Barrows was sentenced to 40 years on a manslaughter conviction for killing wealthy Canadian businessman, Colin Cameron MacKellar of Montreal. MacKellar was found dead in his Waldorf Astoria suite on Nov. 5, 1948.

Compared to some attitudes, this was practically liberal.

The cries for real liberation were growing louder. As Stonewall proved, gay people were no longer worried about what was permitted. Instead, they were intent on what was owed.

They were no longer going to be quiet and ashamed, they were determined to be loud and proud. And that pride, already on display, will be on the march next Sunday.

Complete Article HERE!

If your sexual orientation is accepted by society you will be happier and more satisfied with your life

Lesbian women are mostly happier with their lives than straight women.

By

In recent years LGBT+ rights have improved dramatically. Same-sex marriage is now legally performed and recognised in 28 countries. Equality laws protect LGBT+ people at work and increased media coverage is improving knowledge and awareness of sexual orientations. More to be done, however, to ensure equality for all, and researchers have been looking into how different factors like these contribute to the happiness and life satisfaction of people with minority sexual identities.

Studies have shown that, on average, homosexuals and bisexuals report lower levels of life satisfaction than heterosexuals. This has been linked to homosexuals and bisexuals experiencing heteronormativity (the assumption that heterosexual orientation and binary gender identity are “normal”, which has led to the world being built to cater to the needs and desires of heterosexual life), which leads to stigmatisation. For our new study we looked deeper into the links between sexuality and life satisfaction, and found that people with an “other” sexual identity – such as pansexual, demisexual, or asexual – also experience lower levels of life satisfaction than heterosexuals.

Well-being differences

Using 150,000 responses collected over five years as part of the Understanding Society survey, we analysed whether the happiest heterosexuals are happier than the happiest sexual minorities, and if the least happy sexual minorities are less happy than the least happy heterosexuals. When looking at the data, we controlled for a number of things – such as age, employment, personality, and location – to make sure our results focused solely on sexual identity.

While other studies have looked at the “average” effect of sexual identity on happiness (where it has been shown that sexual minorities report lower levels of life satisfaction), my colleagues and I considered the whole well-being distribution. That is, we looked at the differences between heterosexuals and sexual minorities at the lowest, average, and highest levels of self-reported life satisfaction.

Our results are clear that sexual identity is correlated with life satisfaction, but it is a nuanced picture. We found that homosexual males are less happy with their lives than heterosexual males, except for at the very top of the well-being distribution (where they are happiest). We also saw that homosexual females are happier with their lives than heterosexual females. Although interestingly that is except for at the lowest levels of well-being.

Facing ostracisation on the basis of your sexual identity has a large negative impact on how satisfied you are with your life.

Bisexuals – irrespective of gender – report the lowest levels of life satisfaction, and the loss to well-being associated with being bisexual (rather than heterosexual) is at least comparable to the effect of being unemployed or having ill-health. In fact, out of all the sexual identities analysed we found that bisexuals are the least satisfied with their lives.

“Other” sexual identities are associated with lower levels of life satisfaction in the bottom half of the distribution, but higher life satisfaction in the top half. This means that the least happy people with an other sexual identity are less happy than their heterosexual counterparts. But the happiest people with an other sex identity are actually happier than their heterosexual counterparts.

While our findings highlight the importance of gender (or more precisely its interaction with sexual identity), this is only relevant for homosexuals. As noted above, the results for homosexual males and homosexual females are drastically different This makes sense considering that other research has highlighted that societal attitudes towards lesbians are more preferential than to gay males. So it is likely that the higher life satisfaction reported by lesbians (compared to heterosexual women) is associated with these more positive societal attitudes.

Identity and acceptance

Looking to our findings for other sexual identities, we believe that growing awareness (for example due to increased representation on television) is likely to have reduced the need for some people to “explain” their identity to others. This will have made reaffirming the validity of their sexuality to themselves easier too. If we couple this with increasing self-awareness of an identity that gives meaning to attractions (or lack thereof), the positive well-being identified for this group is understandable.

While it could be argued that the same should be true of bisexuals, there is a significant difference between bisexuality and “other” identities. Bisexuality is an identity that has existed significantly longer and was part of the original LGBT movement. And yet the greater minority stress experienced by bisexuals is likely a reflection of how they experience stigmatisation from both heterosexual and homosexual communities through bi-erasure and lack of acceptance of bisexuality.

Overall our research shows that people with a minority sexual identity are on average less satisfied with their lives, but across the distribution of well-being a more positive picture emerges. If we look at other research into the different societal attitudes and growing acceptance towards certain sexual identities, it is clear that being accepted is important. Facing ostracisation on the basis of your sexual identity has a large negative impact on how satisfied you are with your life.

Complete Article HERE!

How the Nazis destroyed the first gay rights movement

By

In 2017, Germany’s Cabinet approved a bill that will expunge the convictions of tens of thousands of German men for “homosexual acts” under that country’s anti-gay law known as “Paragraph 175.” That law dates back to 1871, when modern Germany’s first legal code was created.

It was repealed in 1994. But there was a serious movement to repeal the law in 1929 as part of a wider LGBTQ rights movement. That was just before the Nazis came to power, magnified the anti-gay law, then sought to annihilate gay and transgender Europeans.

The story of how close Germany – and much of Europe – came to liberating its LGBTQ people before violently reversing that trend under new authoritarian regimes is an object lesson showing that the history of LGBTQ rights is not a record of constant progress.

The first LGBTQ liberation movement

In the 1920s, Berlin had nearly 100 gay and lesbian bars or cafes. Vienna had about a dozen gay cafes, clubs and bookstores. In Paris, certain quarters were renowned for open displays of gay and trans nightlife. Even Florence, Italy, had its own gay district, as did many smaller European cities.

Films began depicting sympathetic gay characters. Protests were organized against offensive depictions of LGBTQ people in print or on stage. And media entrepreneurs realized there was a middle-class gay and trans readership to whom they could cater.

Partly driving this new era of tolerance were the doctors and scientists who started looking at homosexuality and “transvestism” (a word of that era that encompassed transgender people) as a natural characteristic with which some were born, and not a “derangement.” The story of Lili Elbe and the first modern sex change, made famous in the recent film “The Danish Girl,” reflected these trends.

For example, Berlin opened its Institute for Sexual Research in 1919, the place where the word “transsexual” was coined, and where people could receive counseling and other services. Its lead doctor, Magnus Hirschfeld, also consulted on the Lili Elbe sex change.

Connected to this institute was an organization called the “Scientific-Humanitarian Committee.” With the motto “justice through science,” this group of scientists and LGBTQ people promoted equal rights, arguing that LGBTQ people were not aberrations of nature.

Most European capitals hosted a branch of the group, which sponsored talks and sought the repeal of Germany’s “Paragraph 175.” Combining with other liberal groups and politicians, it succeeded in influencing a German parliamentary committee to recommend the repeal to the wider government in 1929.

The backlash

While these developments didn’t mean the end of centuries of intolerance, the 1920s and early ‘30s certainly looked like the beginning of the end. On the other hand, the greater “out-ness” of gay and trans people provoked their opponents.

A French reporter, bemoaning the sight of uncloseted LGBTQ people in public, complained, “the contagion … is corrupting every milieu.” The Berlin police grumbled that magazines aimed at gay men – which they called “obscene press materials” – were proliferating. In Vienna, lectures of the “Scientific Humanitarian Committee” might be packed with supporters, but one was attacked by young men hurling stink bombs. A Parisian town councilor in 1933 called it “a moral crisis” that gay people, known as “inverts” at that time, could be seen in public.

“Far be it from me to want to turn to fascism,” the councilor said, “but all the same, we have to agree that in some things those regimes have sometimes done good… One day Hitler and Mussolini woke up and said, ‘Honestly, the scandal has gone on long enough’ … And … the inverts … were chased out of Germany and Italy the very next day.”

The ascent of Fascism

It’s this willingness to make a blood sacrifice of minorities in exchange for “normalcy” or prosperity that has observers drawing uncomfortable comparisons between then and now.

In the 1930s, the Depression spread economic anxiety, while political fights in European parliaments tended to spill outside into actual street fights between Left and Right. Fascist parties offered Europeans a choice of stability at the price of democracy. Tolerance of minorities was destabilizing, they said. Expanding liberties gave “undesirable” people the liberty to undermine security and threaten traditional “moral” culture. Gay and trans people were an obvious target.

What happened next shows the whiplash speed with which the progress of a generation can be thrown into reverse.

The nightmare

One day in May 1933, pristine white-shirted students marched in front of Berlin’s Institute for Sexual Research – that safe haven for LGBTQ people – calling it “Un-German.” Later, a mob hauled out its library to be burned. Later still, its acting head was arrested.

When Nazi leader Adolph Hitler needed to justify arresting and murdering former political allies in 1934, he said they were gay. This fanned anti-gay zealotry by the Gestapo, which opened a special anti-gay branch. During the following year alone, the Gestapo arrested more than 8,500 gay men, quite possibly using a list of names and addresses seized at the Institute for Sexual Research. Not only was Paragraph 175 not erased, as a parliamentary committee had recommended just a few years before, it was amended to be more expansive and punitive.

As the Gestapo spread throughout Europe, it expanded the hunt. In Vienna, it hauled in every gay man on police lists and questioned them, trying to get them to name others. The fortunate ones went to jail. The less fortunate went to Buchenwald and Dachau. In conquered France, Alsace police worked with the Gestapo to arrest at least 200 men and send them to concentration camps. Italy, with a fascist regime obsessed with virility, sent at least 300 gay men to brutal camps during the war period, declaring them “dangerous for the integrity of the race.”

The total number of Europeans arrested for being LGBTQ under fascism is impossible to know because of the lack of reliable records. But a conservative estimate is that there were many tens of thousands to one hundred thousand arrests during the war period alone.

Under these nightmare conditions, far more LGBTQ people in Europe painstakingly hid their genuine sexuality to avoid suspicion, marrying members of the opposite sex, for example. Still, if they had been prominent members of the gay and trans community before the fascists came to power, as Berlin lesbian club owner Lotte Hahm was, it was too late to hide. She was sent to a concentration camp.

In those camps, gay men were marked with a pink triangle. In these places of horror, men with pink triangles were singled out for particular abuse. They were mechanically raped, castrated, favored for medical experiments and murdered for guards’ sadistic pleasure even when they were not sentenced for “liquidation.” One gay man attributed his survival to swapping his pink triangle for a red one – indicating he was merely a Communist. They were ostracized and tormented by their fellow inmates, too.

The looming danger of a backslide

This isn’t 1930s Europe. And making superficial comparisons between then and now can only yield superficial conclusions.

But with new forms of authoritarianism entrenched and seeking to expand in Europe and beyond, it’s worth thinking about the fate of Europe’s LGBTQ community in the 1930s and ‘40s – a timely note from history as Germany approves same-sex marriage and on this first anniversary of Obergefell v. Hodges.

In 1929, Germany came close to erasing its anti-gay law, only to see it strengthened soon thereafter. Only now, after a gap of 88 years, are convictions under that law being annulled.

Complete Article HERE!