Behavior, and Not a Person

Before Homosexuality: Sodomy

Larry Houston — 2011-12-12T18:18:51Z

Before Homosexuality: Sodomy

Sodomy/sodomite were the words used to define and describe same-sex sexual acts or behavior before the words homosexuality/homosexual. Sodomy was at first a generally specific act, a sexual one, which became more broadly used as an ecclesiastical offence, a category covering a wide range of transgressive acts that was any activity that challenged the ‘Nature' of the church-state authority. Many authors have claimed that the model of sodomy as a sinful act was replaced by a model of the sodomite as a sexual identity in the eighteen century. Traditional male sodomy was the anal penetration of a young boy by an adult man; the new sodomites were men of equal age. The traditional sodomite seduced both women and boys, and was considered to be masculine. The new sodomites had an exclusive interest in their own sex, and were considered to be effeminate Sodomy became under secular state control in England under the Buggery Act of 1533. The English monarchy in a struggle with the Papacy of the Roman Catholic Church created their own state religion, the Church of England and also started taking legal jurisdiction of individuals and their behavior. With sodomy, it become under secular state control in 1533 through the Buggery Act of 1533.

Sodomy: What one does, Behavior

“ ‘Sodomy' was a massively meaningful category in medieval culture, but partly to the extent that it was not clearly defined – it was not consistently or inevitably associated with a distinct configuration of sexual partners, or even with a particular kind of sexual act.” (Cook, A Gay History of Britain Love and Sex Between Men Since the Middle Ages, p. 23)

“Sodomy was the name, taken from the Bible, for an unmentionable sin that was defined as any lustful act which could not result in procreation within marriage. From the thirteen century, it was not only a sin, but also a capital crime. Sodomy included extramarital heterosexuality, non-vaginal sexual acts, all forms of same-sex behaviour, bestiality, masturbation and so forth. The best-known examples of persecution of sodomy were directed against males having anal sex with other males.” (Hekma, Same-sex relations among men in Europe, 1700-1990, p.79 in Sexual Cultures in Europe Themes in Sexuality editors Franz X. Eder, Lesley A. Hall, and Gert Hekma)

“Sexual acts not geared toward procreation were commonly referred to as sodomy. In addition to homosexual intercourse, this term might cover anal contact between man and woman, coritus interruptus, bestiality, and even sexual intercourse between Christians and non-Christians (Greenberg 1988, 274-275; Gilbert 1985).” (Oosterhuis, Stepchildren of Nature Kraft-Ebing, Psychiatry, and the Making of Sexual Identities, p. 21)

“Sodomy was an act, defined either as any sexual act outside of marriage, which did not lead to procreation or as anal penetration, with males, females, or beasts. It had nothing to do with sexual identities.” (Eder, Hall, and Hekma, Sexual Cultures in Europe Natural Histories, p.11)

“In general usage, ‘sodomy' was not an exact term and did not merely refer to a specific sexual act. Rather, it described the whole range of homosexual behavior, sexual or otherwise, which belonged, as one Regency pamphlet put it, to ‘the ancient lechers of Sodom and Gomorrah. This Biblical idiom was as commonplace in the nineteenth century as it had been in the previous ones. It implied that ‘sodomites' shared both the practices and the fate of the inhabitants of that mythical city and that ‘sodomy' represented all that was terrible, nameless and immoral about them.” (Cocks, Secrets, Crimes, and Diseases, 1800-1914, p. 111 in A Gay History of Britain Love and Sex Between Men Since the Middle Ages, editor Matt Cook.)

“Initially, sodomy was a theological construct, serving only intermittently to refer to a clear variety of sexual activity or to bring into focus the behaviour of a particular kind of person." (Mills, “Male-Male Love and Sex in the Middle Ages, 1000-1500, p. 14 in A Gay History of Britain Love and Sex Between Men Since the Middle Ages editor Matt Cook)

“Furthermore, the prevalence of homosexual conduct is attested by the fact that sodomy was regarded from early times as an ecclesiastical offence, although it did not become a felony and thus subject to ordinary criminal jurisdiction until the reign of Henry VIII.” (Hyde, The Trials of Oscar Wilde, p. 349)

“In the early modern phase (here roughly before 1688), the term sodomy covered any activity that challenged the ‘Nature' of the church-state authority. The logic of sodomy's deviation from the feudal order was precise but the category covered a wide range of transgressive acts: witchcraft, usury, political dissent, nonconformity, any kind of nonreproductive, non-matrimonial sexuality, and exogamous social relations, for example with Jews or Muslims (Bredbeck, pp. 2-23). By the late eighteen –century, ‘sodomy', more or less, narrowed to mean a male-male erotics typified by anal penetration (buggery).” (Shapiro, “Of Mollies: Class and same-Sex Sexualities in the Eighteen Century, p. 159 in In a Queer Place Sexuality and Belonging in British and European Contexts, editors Kate Chedgzoy. Emma Francis, and Murray Pratt.)

v Sodomite: Who one is, Person

“Homosexuals had always existed in England, though the word ‘homosexual' was not current until the nineteenth century. They were called sodomites, a term which emphasized the biblical injunction against them because it reminded everyone of God's destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.” (Goldsmith, The Worst of Crimes Homosexuality and the Law in Eighteenth-Century London, p.5-6)

“The sodomite of the traditional European culture which existed between the 12th and 17th centuries had been a man who had sex with both boys and women.” (Trumbach, “Gender and the homosexual Role in Modern Western Culture: The 18th and 19th Centuries Compared, in Homosexuality, Which Homosexuality by Dennis Altman, p.153)

“Although the legal and religious definition of sodomy referred only to certain sexual acts, especially anal intercourse, of which anyone, in theory, was regarded as being capable, within urban subculture in Britain France, and the Netherlands, a more specific sodomitical role evolved as early as the first half of the eighteenth century.” (Oosterhuis, Stepchildren of Nature Kraft-Ebing, Psychiatry, and the Making of Sexual Identities, p. 241)

“Sodomy, again, followed a traditional pattern of periods of toleration interspersed with vicious persecution and moral panics. The change during the eighteen century, from the image of the foppish but still, even hyper-, masculine bisexual libertine to that of the effeminate sodomite, was influenced by the hardening of categories already mentioned, concurrent with the emergence of a visible homosexual subculture in large cities such as London.” (Hall, Sexual cultures in Britain: some persisting themes, p. 33 in Sexual Cultures in Europe National Histories edited by Franz X. Eder, Lesley A. Hall and Gert Kekma.)

“There has been a spirited discussion on the history of sodomy, especially concerning the eighteen century, to explain the rise of the prosecutions and changes in representations. Many authors have claimed that the model of sodomy as a sinful act was replaced by a model of the sodomite as a sexual identity at that time. Traditional male sodomy was the anal penetration of a young boy by an adult man; the new sodomites were men of equal age. The traditional sodomite seduced both women and boys, and was considered to be masculine. The new sodomites had an exclusive interest in their own sex, and were considered to be effeminate. As the ‘fop', the promiscuous womanizer, had been the example of the feminine man before 1700, the sodomite replaced him as deviant in gender and sexual roles. A concept of sexual identity replaced a concept of unbridled lust and unmentionable sin. In the major cities of north-western Europe, this sexual identity expressed itself in subcultures with their own meeting places, languages, customs, and so forth. The ‘model' of the queen as a sexual identity, it is argued, took over from the model of sodomy as sexual act.” (Hekma, Same-sex relations among men in Europe, 1700-1990, p.80 in Sexual Cultures in Europe Themes in Sexuality editors Franz X. Eder, Lesley A. Hall, and Gert Hekma)

Buggery Act of 1533: Secular State Control The Buggery Act of 1533, formally An Act for the punysshement of the vice of Buggerie (25 Hen. 8 c. 6), was an Act of the Parliament of England that was passed during the reign of Henry VIII. It was the country's first civil sodomy law, such offences having previously been dealt with by the eccleiastical courts. The Act defined buggery as an unnatural sexual act against the will of God and man. This was later defined by the courts to include only anal penetration and bestality.

“As we have seen, sodomy had been made a civil offence in 1533 by Henry VIII, a law confirmed during the reign of Elizabeth I. Although the 1533 Act did not attempt to define what was meant by ‘buggery', later jurists attempted to specify what the act of sodomy actually described in law.” (Cocks, Nameless Offences Homosexual Desire in the Nineteenth Century, p. 32)

“It was a short piece of legislation, which originated in the House of Lords, declaring the ‘detestable and abominable Vice of Buggery committed with mankind or beast' to be a felony subject to the penalties of death and loss of property customarily suffered by felons, without the benefits of clergy, which meant that offenders in holy orders could not claim to be tried in ecclesiastical courts.” (Hyde, The Other Love An Historical and Contemporary Survey of Homosexuality in Britain, p.39)

“The Act (25 Henry VIII, c. 6) was repealed in 1547 by Edward VI, along with other legislation passed in his father's time, but it was re-enacted in 1562 (5 Elizabeth c. 17), when Parliament ordained that it was to be perpetual. It remained a capital offence until the beginning of the nineteenth century, when the death penalty was abolished for this as for many other offences at the instigation of Sir Robert Peel, then Home Secretary.” (Hyde, The Trials of Oscar Wilde, p. 350)

“The Buggery Act remained the basis of legislation for prosecuting acts of anal sex between men until 1967. When sex between two men in private was decriminalised for men over 21, the Sexual Offenses Act of 1967 did not distinguish between anal sex and other forms of sexual contact between men. It is arguable that this legislation, in 1967, was the first English law to distinguish a ‘class' of men who sex with other men. The 1967 legislation accommodated the sexual lifestyles of men who, as long as they conducted their various and consenting sexual acts in private and the sexual encounter numbered no more than two persons, would not be prosecuted.” (Brady, Masculinity and Male Homosexuality in Britain 1861-1913, p. 94)

Bibliography

Altman, Dennis, Carole Vance, Martha Vicinus, Jeffrey Weeks and others. Homosexuality, Which Homosexuality? GMP Publishers. London, 1989.

Brady, Sean. Masculinity and Male Homosexuality in Britian, 1861-1913. Palgrave Macmillan. Basingstoke, England & New York, 2005.

Chedgzoy, Kate, Emma Francis, and Murray Pratt editors. In a Queer Place Sexuality and Belonging in British and European Contexts. Ashgate. Aldershot, Hampshire, England and Burlington, VT, 2002.

Cocks, H G. Nameless Offences Homosexual Desire in the Nineteenth Century. I.B. Tauris Publishers. London and New York, 2003.

Cook, Matt editor. A Gay History of Britain Love and Sex Between Men Since the Middle Ages. Greenwood World Publishing. Oxford/Westport Connecticut, 2007.

Eder, Franz X., Lesley A. Hall, and Gert Hekma editors. Sexual Cultures in Europe Natural Histories. Manchester University Press. Manchester and New York, 1999.

Eder, Franz X., Lesley A. Hall, and Gert Hekma editors. Sexual Cultures in Europe Themes in sexuality. Manchester University Press. Manchester and New York, 1999.

Hyde, H Montgomery. The Trials of Oscar Wilde. Dover Publications, INC. New York, 1962.

Hyde, H Montgomery. The Other Love An Historical and Contemporary Survey of Homosexuality in Britain. Heineman. London, 1970.

Oosterhuis, Harry. Stepchildren of Nature: Kraft-Ebing, Psychiatry, and the Making of Sexual Identity. Univernisty of Chicago Press. Chicago, 2000.

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece

Larry Houston — 2011-11-20T14:32:54Z

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece

Although this article is included in the section of age-structured homosexuality, its scope is broader in that it addresses more than Greek pederasty. It discusses Greek sexuality in general, adult homosexual, and compares our modern western society to that of ancient Greece. What, then, can we conclude about homosexuality in the modern American culture if one only listens to those on the political left, from those on the political right, or from the various court cases? One may find a fourth view when the issue of homosexuality is on a ballot up for vote. Two contradictory outcomes have been the result depending on whether the question has been an issue of discrimination or the definition of marriage. In an overwhelming majority of times when the vote has been to change the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples the results have been not to change the historical definition of marriage of one man and one woman. There have been more favorable outcomes when the question is discrimination against homosexuals. So then our modern American culture view of homosexuality is very similar to that of ancient Greece as seen in the following quotes by historians David Cohen and Bruce Thornton.

“What, then, is one to conclude about a culture whose laws expressed a deep-rooted anxiety about pederasty while not altogether forbidding it? A culture in which attitudes and values ranged from the differing modes of approbation represented in Plato's Symposium to the stark realism of Aristophanes and the judgment of Aristotle that homosexuality is a diseased or morbid state acquired by habit and comparable to biting fingernails or habitually eating earth or ashes? A culture is not a homogeneous unity; there was no one "Athenian attitude" towards homoeroticism. The widely differing attitudes and conflicting norms and practices which have been discussed above represent the disagreements, contradictions and anxieties which make up the patterned chaos of a complex culture. They should not be rationalized away. To make them over into a neatly coherent and internally consistent system would only serve to diminish our understanding of the "many-hued" nature of Athenian homosexuality.” (Cohen, Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens, p. 21)

“What, then, is one to conclude about a culture whose laws expressed a deep rooted anxiety about pederasty while not altogether forbidding it. A culture in which attitudes and values range from the differing modes of approbation represented in Plato's Symposium to the stark realism of Aristophanes and the judgment of Aristotle, that in a man, the capacity to feel pleasure in a passive sexual role is a diseased or morbid state, acquired by habit, and comparable to biting fingernails or habitually eating earth or ashes. A culture is not a homogeneous unity; there was no one “Athenian attitude” towards homoeroticism. The widely differing attitudes and conflicting norms and practices which have been discussed above represent the disagreements, contradictions, and anxieties which make up the patterned chaos of a complex culture. They should not be rationalized away. To make them over into a nearly coherent and internally consistent system would only serve to diminish our understanding of the “many-hued” nature of Athenian homosexuality.” (Cohen, Law, Sexuality, and Society The Enforcement of Morals in Classical Athens, p. 201-202).

“First, most of the writing on ancient sexuality these days grinds the evidence in the mill of an “advocacy agenda” supported by some fashionable theory that says more about the crisis of Western rationalism than it does about ancient Greece. Thus we are told that the Greeks saw nothing inherently wrong with sodomy between males as long as certain “protocols” of age, social status, and position were honored, an interpretation maintained despite the abundance of evidence, detailed below in Chapter 4, that the Greeks-including pederastic apologists like Plato-were horrified and disgusted by the idea of male being anal ling penetrated by another male and called such behavior “against nature.” One purpose here is to get back to what the Greeks actually say without burying it in polysyllabic sludge.” (Thornton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p. xiii)

Sex was viewed as directional, and having two roles active and passive

While this article is written to discuss the homosexuality, specifically Greek pederasty, a discussion of how the Greek's saw sexuality must be understood. In our modern understanding of sexuality, except in cases of abuse such as rape, the partners are equals. But this was not the case in ancient Greece. First there was a fundamental inequity in favor of the free male in relationship to boys, women and slaves. Secondly this resulted in sex having a directional quality, with an anatomic imperative, again in favor of the free male. Sex was something he did to someone else and what he used to do it with, his male sex organ, the penis. Thirdly, sex had active/passive roles, one partner was the penetrator and the second partner was penetrated. Thus the ancient Greeks may be seen as having a greater acceptance for bisexuality.

“For the ancients, many historians agree, sexuality was not a separate realm of experience, the core of private life; instead it was directly linked to social power and status. People were judged by public behavior, for which there were clear roles; marriage, for instance, was a duty that bore no necessary relationship to erotic satisfaction. Socially powerful males (citizens) enjoyed sexual access to almost all other members of the society (including, in Greece, enslaved males, younger free males, foreigners, and women of all classes).” (Clausen, Beyond Gay or Straight, p. 51)

“First, the expression of sexuality was centered on a fundamental inequity, not only in male-female relationships, but also between male partners in a homosexual relationship.” (King, “Sowing the Field: Greek and Roman Sexology, p. 29 in Sexual Knowledge Sexual Science: The History of the Attitudes in Sexuality editors Roy Porter and Mikulas Teich)

“In Greece the sexual relationship was assumed to be a power relationship, where one participant is dominate and the other inferior. On one side stands the free adult male; on the other, women, slaves, and boys. Sexual roles are isomorphic with social roles; indeed, sexual behavior is seen as a reflection of social relationship not as itself the dominant theme. Thus it is important for us to remember that for the Greeks it was one's role, not one's gender, that was salient. Sexual objects come in two different kinds – not male and female but active and passive.” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p.135-136)

“In the late twentieth century it became fashionable to assume that penile penetration expressed the power of the penetrator and subordination of the penetrated (Foucault 1976/80-1984/6; Keuls 1985; Parker 1992). Many studies then concluded, rightly I feel, that men had sexual access to all those beneath them in society (unmarried females, non-citizen males, slaves; Richlin 1992: xviii; Sutton 1992; 5); only proper women and citizen males were off limits.” (Younger, Sex in the Ancient World From A to Z, p. xiv)

“Although sexual pleasure and marriage were not necessarily linked, sexuality and domination most certainly were. Far from being a mutual experience, sexual activity always had a directional quality for the Greeks. Sex was something one “did” to someone, and anatomic imperative dictated that it was a man (or more precisely the penis) that did the doing.” (Mondimore, A Natural History of Homosexuality, p. 7)

“In both Greece and Rome, as the most recent studies have correctly argued, the fundamental opposition between different types of sexual behaviour was not the heterosex/homosexual contrast, but the active/passive contrast, the former category – activity – being characteristic of the adult male, while the latter – passivity – was reserved for women and boys.” (Cantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World, p. x)

“The ancient world, both Greek and Roman, did not base its classification on gender, but on a completely different axis, that of active versus passive. This has one immediate and important consequence, which we must face in the beginning. Simply put, there was no such emic, cultural abstraction as “homosexuality” in the ancient world. The fact that a man had sex with other men did not determine his sexual category. Equally, it must be emphasized, there was no such concept as “heterosexuality”. The application of these terms to the ancient world is anachronistic and can lead to serious misunderstandings. By the fifth time one has made the qualification, “The passive homosexual was not rejected for his homosexuality but for his passivity,” it ought to become clear that we are talking not about “homosexuality” but about passivity.” (Parker, The Teratogenic Grid, p.47-48 in Roman Sexualities editors Judith P. Hallett and Marilyn B. Skinner)

“As we remarked earlier, the Greeks showed a pronounced tendency to attach greatest importance to (indeed, to glorify) the sexual instinct itself rather than the particular object; consequently they were much freer than modern men to vary sexual objects on their relative merits. Greek culture, unlike modern cultures, imposed on adult males no limitations as to the choice of sexual objects per se, and the only “perversions” remarked by the comic poets (reflecting, we may be sure, community opinion) are cases in which sexual acts other than vaginal intercourse, otherwise perfectly acceptable, are pursed to excess (see Cratin. 152, for example) or practiced in an inappropriate setting.” (Henderson, The Maculate Muse, p.205)

“The third, closely related, feature is the importance of penetration; the main distinction in all sexual encounters, heter- or homosexual, was presented as being between penetrator and penetrated.” (King, “Sowing the Field: Greek and Roman Sexology” p.30 in Sexual Knowledge, Sexual Science: The History of the Attitudes to Sexuality editors Roy Porter and Mikulas Teich p. 30)

“The Greeks associated sexual desire closely with other human appetites – the desire for food, drink, and sleep – and saw all these appetites as entailing the same moral problem, the problem of avoiding excess.” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p.134)

“The Greek sexual ethic emphasized not what one did but how one did it; it involved not an index of particular forbidden acts but an inculcation to act with moderation.” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p.135)

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece

“The ancient Greek and Latin languages have no word that can be translated as homosexual, largely because these societies did not have the same sexual categories that we do. Our concepts and categories of sexual expression are based on the genders of the two partners involved: heterosexuality when the partners are of the opposite sex, and homosexuality when the partner are of the same sex. In other times and among other peoples, this way of thinking about people simply doesn't seem to apply-anthropologists, historians, and sociologists have described many cultures in which same-sex eroticism occupies a very different place than it does in our own.” (Mondimore, A Natural History of Homosexuality, p. 3-4)

“Both of these explanations for homosexuality-as either an “unnatural” perversion of sex and an excessive expression of its essential nature-can be found in ancient Greek literary remains. Choosing one of the two to the exclusion of the other, which is often the practice among modern scholars, oversimplifies the complexity of the attitudes attested in the evidence.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p. 101)

“Ancient Greece is often cited as an example of a civilization in which homosexuality was accepted as normal, even encouraged. This is not quite true. All males were expected to make love to women, to marry, and to sire a family, whether or they had a male lover or not. Moreover, love and sex between adult males was thought to be a bit ridiculous. The norm was for an adult male to have a relationship that lasted several years with an adolescent boy. When the boy reached maturity, he, then, was also expected to take a young lover.” (Goode, Deviant Behavior, p.193-194)

“Homosexuality was a universally recognized sexual option throughout the ancient world, particularly in Dorian areas, where it seems to have had a religious, ethical, and legal sanction and to have been more a part of man's everyday public life than was the case in Athens.” (Henderson, The Maculate Muse, p.204)

“The second feature is more applicable to classical Greece culture. Male homosexual activity was, to some extent, seen as normal, but only if it was kept within certain clearly defined social parameters. Relationships between equals in age were frown upon. In classical Athens, homosexual relationships ideally had some features of an initiation rite, between a young, beardless boy and an older mentor. However, even such relationships were hedged round with etiquette regarding the process of courtship and the giving and receiving of gifts and other signals, while a ‘deep-rooted anxiety' about pederasty was expressed in classical Athenian law. Aristotle argues that any enjoyment of what he saw as the subordinate, defeated role of the passive partner in a homoerotic relationship was unnatural; on Athenian vase-paintings, the passive partner is never showed with an erection. The Athenian figure of the kinaidos, the man who actually enjoys the passive role, is presented as a ‘scare-figure', both socially and sexually deviant.” (King, “Sowing the Field: Greek and Roman Sexology” p. 30 in Sexual Knowledge, Sexual Science: The History of the Attitudes to Sexuality editors Roy Porter and Mikulas Teich)

“Both of these explanations of homosexuality-as either an “unnatural” perversion of sex or an excessive expression of its essential nature-can be found in ancient Greek literary remains. Choosing one of the two to the exclusion of the other, which is often the practice among modern scholars, oversimplifies the complexity of attitudes attested in the evidence.” Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.101)

“The ambiguity and complexity of Greek attitudes toward homosexuality can be seen first in the various speculations about its origins, which oscillate between the poles of culture and nature. Whatever its source, though, habitual, passive homosexuality is clearly considered an aberration, a disorder linked to violence and disease, even the supposedly accepted institution of pederasty.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p. 101-102)

“Whether the origins of homosexuality are to be found in nature or history, though, it clearly is problematic, even in its presumably accepted forms of pederasty, a phenomenon needing to be accounted for mythically in the crime of Laius.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p. 103)

“One of our difficulties when reading about ancient Greece is that the most common manifestation of homosexuality in the evidence concerns pederasty, the quasi-ritualized, transient, physical and emotional relationship between an older male and a youth, an activity we view as criminal. Very little, if any, evidence from ancient Greece survives that shows adult males (or females) as “couples” involved in an ongoing, reciprocal sexual and emotional relationship in which sex with women (or men) is moot and the age difference is no more significant than it is in heterosexual relationships. Thus the evidence from ancient Greece involves either man-youth homosexuality (the idealized social relationship we will discuss in Chapter 8), or more precisely defined passive homosexual or kinaidos, the adult male who perversely enjoys being penetrated by other males and who has sex with women only because of societal pressure. These two categories, as we will see, are not as mutually exclusive as they might appear, which accounts for the anxiety tingeing even the most enthusiastic ancient celebrators of pederasty.” Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.100

“In the first place it appears extremely likely that homosexuality of any kind was confined to prosperous and aristocratic levels of ancient society. The masses of peasants and artisans were probably scarcely affected by habits of this kind, which seem to have been associated with a sort of snobbery.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.62)

“In Athens, for a boy to have a homosexual relationship with an adult was considered not only acceptable, but also, under certain conditions, socially approved.” (Cantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World, p. 17)

“By the time Athens entered period of her greatest power in 480 B.C., male homosexual practices were undoubtedly common and socially tolerated, but were they sanctioned? The age of pederastic innocence was over and a certain anxiety about the subject can be traced in art and literature. The misgivings expressed over male homosexuality usually concerned either homosexual prostitution or the possibility of homoerotic relations between peers.” (Keuls, The Reign of the Phallus Sexual Politics in Ancient Greece, p. 287)

“The above outline of the homosexual ethos in Athens shows that it underwent a fundamental change between the Archaic and the Classical ages. The archetypal homosexual relationship was that between a childlike or prepubescent boy and a mature man. The contact had strong paternal overtones, and it involved affectionate response from the child partner and mild sexual response from the pubescent partner. The original image of the ideal “beloved” did not include any feminine traits. In general, the sexual approach was frontal and the copulation intracrural. The period when this pattern took shape was the Archaic age of Athens, before the greatest flowering of Attic culture. During the fifth and fourth centuries this patterned became compromised and led to male prostitution by citizens and to adult male love affairs; both of these practices were consistently stigmatized as socially unacceptable. Anal sex, generally associated with obscenity and coarse behavior, were the common form these discredited types of homosexual contact.” (Keuls, The Reign of the Phallus Sexual Politics in Ancient Greece, p.298-299)

“This was especially so if the youth allowed himself to be penetrated, an act considered unworthy of a man and a free citizen, and one which could threaten his citizenship.” (Bishop and Osthelder, Sexualia From Prehistory to Cyberspace, p.208)

“The situation was totally different in the case of grown equals, however. Whereas the Dorian boy would attain manhood through his submission, the grown man who submitted to another man would lose his manliness and become effeminate, exposed to shame and scorn.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 89)

“Regardless of actual behavior patterns, anal copulation between two males was equated with sex between two adults, not between a mature man and a young boy, and it was obviously not approved” (Keuls, The Reign of the Phallus Sexual Politics in Ancient Greece, p. 291)

“Homosexuality, then, to the Greeks is a historical innovation, a result of the depraved human imagination and vulnerability to pleasure.” Thornton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.102)

“Already in 1964 Dover sounded the themes of his later publications: the centrality of Athenian law-court speeches; due attention to painted pottery; distinctions of genre, context, class, between beliefs and behaviors; the tendentious use of terms of personal abuse (such as “prostitute”) in political propaganda; and above all, the contrast between the older, active erastes and his passive junior partner in a homosexual pair, the eromenos. These Dover saw as essentially two stages in the social development of a Greek citizen rather than as life-long identities.” (Golden and Toohey, editors, Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, p. 6-7)

Kinaidos

In ancient Greece there is one particular adult male who is identified with homosexual behavior. The Greeks had a name for this individual, “kinaidos'. This individual was the one who took the passive receptive role in the male homosexual behavior of anal intercourse. In doing so by being willing to take the passive, submissive role he was seen as unworthy to be a free man, and more like a male prostitute. As a result forfeited his right as a citizen to hold office. The man who would allow himself to be anally penetrated it was thought would also subject himself to the abuse of alcohol, eating, money, or power.

“Another male image, the kinaidos, was totally negative. This was the man who was represented as acting in an effeminate fashion, by implication taking the passive role in sex because he could not control his appetites. The male prostitute or kinaidos was very different from our modern notion of the homosexual. The male prostitute was not expelled from society because, like the female prostitute, he provided a sexual service, albeit a shameful one. A man was not seen as born a kinaidos or male prostitute-it was a role he acquired.” (Clark, Desire A History of European Sexuality, p. 22)

“What we find is the kinaidos as emblem of unrestrained compulsive sexual appetite, of surrender to the chaos of natural passion that threatens civilized order, a traitor to his sex, a particularity offensive manifestation of eros's power over the masculine mind that is responsible for creating and maintaining that order in the face of nature's chaos.” Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.101)

“But in nearly every genre of Greek literature the kinaidos's appetite is sterile, useless, good only for pleasure, rendering the male prone to other appetites, for money or power, that also threaten culture and its discriminating categories, particularly if he is a citizen responsible in some measure for the political functioning of the city.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.101)

“Once we have accepted the universality of homosexual relations in Greek society as a fact, it surprises us to learn that if a man had at any time in his life prostituted himself to another man for money he was debarred from exercising his political rights.” (Dover, Classical Greek Attitudes to Sexual Behavior, p.122-123 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey.)

“In so far as the “passive partner” in a homosexual act takes upon himself the role of a woman, he was open to the suspicion, like the male prostitute, that he abjured his prescribed role as a future solider and defender of the community.” (Dover, Classical Greek Attitudes to Sexual Behavior, p.125 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey.

“As a rule, the only sexual practice attacked as a demeaning perversity is passive anal sex by men¸ the “wide-asses” (euryproktoi) who willingly submit to another man's assertiveness. In this society, any form of submissiveness was considered unworthy of a free man. While all understood that a woman is naturally to be penetrated by a man, it was considered only for a slave or male prostitute to submit in this way to another male.” (Garrison, Sexual Culture in Ancient Greece, p.161)

“A man who enjoys playing the receptive partner is derogated as a prostitute and as having forfeited his right as a citizen to hold office. The assumption is that a man who would willingly make himself available would do anything! Only slaves, women, and foreigners would willingly choose to be treated as objects” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p. 139)

“Whether created by history or nature, childhood sexual abuse or deformed seminal ducts, the man who enjoys anal penetration by another man is an aberration, a volatile locus of potential social disorder that like the woman he resemble must be dealt with.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.105)

“The protocols explain why. Since sexual activity is symbolic of (or constructed as) zero-sum competition and the restless conjunction of win, the kinaidos is a man who desires to lose. Contrary to all social junctions prescribing the necessity of men to exercise their desires in a way that shows mastery over self and others, the kinaidos simply and directly desires to be mastered.” (Winkler, “Laying Now the Law: The Oversight of Men's Sexual Behavior in Classical Athens”. p. 186 in Before Sexuality The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World editors David M. Halperin, John J. Winkler and Froma I. Zeitlin)

Pederasty

After discussing how the Greek's viewed sex in general, and specifically homosexuality, along with the ‘kinaidos', the man who is the passive receptive partner in anal intercourse we now will discuss the Greek practice of pederastry,' the love of boys'. Ideally pederasty did not have a sexual component, but was a rite of passage and an educational mode for an adult male (not a biological father) to take on the role of mentor for a young male entering puberty, growing and maturing into an adult male, who as a free male citizen was to be a political leader in the Greek city-state. Pederasty served the role for the moral and political formation of young men. More importantly it was not a private affair between two individuals but was a public affair for the benefit of all.

“The word pederasty is derived from the Greek paiderasteia, literally meaning the love of boys. In English pederasty has come to signify almost exclusively the practice of sexual inversion. But in Greek literature paiderasteia is used to refer to both to pure, disinterested affection and to physical homosexual relations.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.62)

“In the Greek language the word “paederasty” had not this ugly sound it has for us to-day, since it was regarded simply as an expression for one variety of love, and had no sort of defamatory meaning attached to it.” (Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece, p.413)

“I hope that sufficient documentary evidence has been given to show that paiderasty was cultivated by heterosexually normal men in ancient Greece, where it did not presuppose an inversely homosexual type of personality. It was not considered a transgression, to be tolerated, nor was it felt to betoken to any laxity in moral standards; it was a natural part of the life-style of the best of men, reflected in the stories of the gods and heroes of the people.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 32)

“Paiderasty served the highest goal – education (paideia). Eros was the medium of paideia, uniting tutor and pupil. The boy submitted and let himself be taken in the possession of the man.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 87) “But it was only after the formation of the city that the Greeks took to loving other men, and more particularly boys? Male homosexuality in Greece, in fact – or at least its most socially and culturally significant forms – was, in practice, pederasty, and was extremely widespread. The problem if its ‘origins' remains open.” (Cantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World, p. 4)

“In Athens, homosexuality (which as we know was really pederasty, in the sense the sexual relationship between and adult and a young boy) held an important position in the moral and political formation of young men, who learned from their adult lovers the virtues of a citizen.” (Cantarella, Bisexuality in the Ancient World, p. viii)

“Such pederasty was supposed to transmit manly virtues of mind and body from nobleman to young lover (Vangaard, 1972).” (Karlen, “Homosexuality in History,” p.79 in Homosexual Behavior: A Modern Reappraisal, editor Judd Marmor)

“For instance, in ancient Greece, homosexual relationships between older men and younger men were commonly accepted as pedagogic. Within the context of an erotic relation, the older man taught the younger one military, intellectual, and political skills. The older men, however, were also often husbands and fathers. Neither sexual relationship excluded the other. Thus, although ancient Greek society recognized male homosexual activity, the men in these relationships rarely defined themselves as primarily “homosexual.” (Escoffier, American Homo: Community and Perversity, p. 37)

“So these love relationships were not private erotic enterprises. They took place openly before the eyes of the public, were regarded as of great importance by the state, and were supervised by its responsible authorities.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 39)

“They were tied together in a pact equally compelling for both. It was the obligation of the erastes always to be an outstanding and impeccable example to the boy. He should not commit any deed that would shame the boy. His total responsibility to the boy made him dependent on the boy in ways far beyond the purely erotic. He was judged by the development and conduct of the boy. Even in regards to the bodily aspect of the relationship the boy could assert himself against his tutor.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 88)

“Many scholars have written much about early paiderastra-since Homer does not mention it, some scholars argue that it must be an innovation of the later Iron Age. Scholars than looked for causes (population control [Percy 1996], or a byproduct of athletic nudity [Scanlon 2002]. Paiderastra, however, is not homosexuality; it is a coming-of-age rite, and as such it has anthropological parallels that situate it in a stage of state-formation, at the tribal level. In that case, paiderastria should originate in the Bronze Age (Cantarella, 1992; 5), and I myself would put its development no later than the Middle Bronze Age (ca. 1900- 1600 BCE).” (Younger, Sex in the Ancient World From A to Z, p. xv)

“The practice born in the Greek gymnasium to which Cicero refers to is not homosexuality but paiderastia, the courtship of free youths by older males, and the central issue was status rather than gender.” (Williams, Roman Homosexuality Ideologies of Masculinity in Classical Antiquity, p.64)

“The abundant surviving literature composed by the ancients in praise of pederasty always assumes it to be an affair of minds, not bodies, a pure, ‘Platonic' love, as still call it today, from which carnality is excluded. It was declared that Eros in such cases would not tolerate the presence of his mother Aphrodite. For Eos, as we have already suggested, symbolized the passion of the soul, and Aphrodite fleshly unions, whether homosexual or not.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.67)

“Instead the homosexual connection favored by the Greeks was not so much homoerotic as pederastic; the archetypal relationship was between a mature man at the height of his sexual power and need and a young, erotically underdeveloped boy just before puberty. The standard Greek nomenclature gives the older, aggressive partner the title of the “lover” (erastes) and the young, passive male that of the “beloved” (eromenos).” (Keuls, The Reign of the Phallus Sexual Politics in Ancient Greece, p.275)

“The model of socially validated homosexuality was paiderastia (following Thorkil Vanggaard I will use this form to avoid identifying the Greek practice with the associations “pederasty” has in our world), the love of an older man for a youth (By older man here we mean mostly men in their twenties, while youths were adolescents.) The context was the gymnasium, where youths went to exercise (and display) their physical gifts, and the older men went to watch, appreciate and select. The arena was an upper-class one paiderastia was essentially an aspect of the paideia, the training for citizenship of aristocratic youths. (That same-sex love tended to be mocked in comedy, an art form that attracted the masse may indicate it played a less focal role in their lives.” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p. 137)

“To facilitate the understanding of the Hellenic love of boys, it will be as well to say something about the Greek ideal of beauty. The most fundamental difference between ancient and modern culture is that ancient is throughout male and that the woman only comes into the scheme of the Greek man as mother of his children and as manager of household matters. Antiquity treated the man, and the man only, as the focus of all intellectual life. This explains why the bringing up and development of girls was neglected in a way we can hardly understand; but boys, on the other hand, were supposed to continue their education much later than is usual with us. The most peculiar custom, according to our ideas, was that every man attracted to him some boy or youth and, in the intimacy of daily life, acted as his counselor, guardian, and friend, and prompted him in all manly virtues. It was especially in the Doric states that this custom prevailed, and it was recognized so much as a matter of course by the State that it was considered a violation of duty by the man, if he did not draw one younger to him, and a disgrace to the boy if he was not honoured by the friendship of a man. The senior was responsible for the manner of life of his young comrade, and shared with him blame and praise.” (Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece, p.418)

“It is beyond dispute, therefore, shocking as the fact may appear, that ‘homosexuality contributed to the formation of the moral ideal which underlies the whole practice of Greek education. The desire in the older lover to assert himself in the presence of the younger, to dazzle him, and the reciprocal desire of the latter to appear worthy of his senior's affection necessarily reinforced in both persons that love of glory which always appealed to the competitive spirit of mankind. Love-affairs accordingly provided the finest opportunities for noble rivalry. From another point of view the ideal of comradeship in battle reflects the entire system of ethics implied in chivalry, which is founded on the sentiment of honour. (H.-I.Marrou, Histoire de l' Education dans l' Antiquite, pp. 58-59) But the apprenticeship to courage and the love of honour and glory, important as they were to the Greeks, comprised only a part of Greek education. For lovers claimed that they participated actively in all the moral and intellectual development of their loved ones.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.87)

“Basic to the understanding of the nature, meaning, and importance of paiderasty is the following: Firstly, the age difference between the erastes and his eromenos was always considerable. The eraste was a grown man, the eromenos still an immature boy or youth.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p.43)

“Secondly, as has been demonstrated, an ethical basis was essential for the Dorian relationship.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 43)

“Thirdly, the homosexuality of the paidersty relationship had nothing to do with effeminacy. On the contrary, among the Dorians the obvious aim of education was manliness in its most pronounced forms. Refinement in the manner of dressing and in regards to food, house, furniture, or other circumstances of daily life was looked upon with contempt. Contemporary as well as later sources agree in stressing that it was among the warlike Dorians in particular that paidersty flourished.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 44)

“Fourthly, Dorian paiderasty was something entirely different from homosexuality in the usual sense in which we use the term, as inversion (see definition on page 17). We have repeatedly pointed out that ordinary men regularly cultivated paiderasty and active heterosexuality at the same time. Men who stuck exclusively to boys and did not marry were punished, scorned, and ridiculed by the Spartan authorities, and treated disrespectfully by the young men.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 44)

“From the point of view of many older male lovers, boys and girls were equally desirable, but elite girls were secluded at home, while boys went to school and exercised nude at the gymnasium. Teenage male youths were seen as the most beautiful objects of desire, muscular yet, still hairless, smooth-skinned, with the small, delicate penises adult Greek men regarded as erotic. Since they were young they did not have the status of adult males and could be seen as somewhat feminine. When boys reached the age where they began to sprout beards and public hair, when their skin grew coarse they seemed much less desirable; they acquired the status of citizens, and might pursue their own young male lovers before they married.” (Clark, Desire A History of European Sexuality, p. 23)

“If we are to draw conclusions from what has been said as to the ethics of Greek love of boys, the following emerges as an undeniable fact: The Greek love of boys is a peculiarity of character, based upon an aesthetic and religious foundation. Its object is, with the assistance of the State, to arrive at the power to maintain the same and at the fountain-head of civic and personal virtue. It is not hostile to marriage, but supplements it as an important factor in education.” (Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece, p.445)

“Although the Greeks believed that the same desire attracted one to whatever was desirable, they nonetheless thought this desire entailed particular problems when it arose in a relationship between two males of distinct age cohorts, one of whom had not received yet achieved the status of adult citizen. The disparity was what gave the relationship its value-and what made it morally problematical. An elaborate ritualization of appropriate conduct on the part of both participates was designed to give such relationships a “beautiful” form, one that would honor the youth's ambiguous status. As not yet a free adult male, he was an appropriate object of masculine desire; as already potentially a free citizen, his future subjectively must be honored. The active role can only be played by the older partner, but the younger partner must be treated as free to accept or reject his suitor. Thus the Greeks believed that the relationship should be designed so as to provide an opportunity for the younger to begin to learn the self-mastery that would be expected of him as an adult. The older man's desire was seen as unproblematic; what was difficult was how to live that desire in such a way that its object might in turn become a subject.” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p. 138)

“The truth is that pederasty is a vice encouraged by abnormal social conditions, such as life in military camps or purely masculine communities. Society was essentially masculine in the classical period of Greek civilisation, even outside of Sparta. Homosexuality in fact develops wherever men and women live separate lives and differences in education and refinement between the sexes militate against normal sexual attraction. The more uncompromising such separation and diversity become, more widespread homosexuality will be.” (Flaceleitere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.215-216)

erastes and eromenos

In a pederastic relationship there were two partners, the older one was called the erastes and the younger was the eromenos. The relationship was to end when the younger one was around 18 years of age, when he started growing facial hair. While the relationship begin about the time the younger one started puberty. After the relationship ended the younger, eromenos, was expected to marry, and then he could then become the erastes to a younger partner. The relationship was based a mutual liking of both partners towards one another. Ideally, more importantly the older, erastes, was always to have the best interest of the younger, eromenos, in mind. Thus this was not a sexual relationship, but one of educating and training the younger by the older to be a successful adult male in Greek society.

“In Athens, the adult man socialized the boy into adult male society and the adolescent expressed his gratitude by granting his erasted (favor” (kharis), sexual license, even intercrural intercourse. Only the erastes was meant to experience Love (eros); the eromenos should experience “friendship” (philia; but see Johns 1982: 101; DeVires 1997; Halperin 1997: 45-54).” (Younger, Sex in the Ancient World From A to Z, p. 92)

“The erastes, adult male lover, would offer gifts, such as the apple (with its erotic significance) or a rooster, or more extravagantly, a horse or chariot to his young male beloved, the eromenos. In vessels probably intended for symposia, painters depicted sex between men and youths as “intercrural” intercourse, the man's penis inserted between the boy's thighs'. It would have been shameful for the boy to submit to anal sex. This behavior continued in classical fifth- and fourth- century Athens, but it had to be carefully modulated. A man gained honor by aggressively pursuing and conquering a boy, but if the boy surrendered for money, than he would lose honor. It was shameful for a father or guardian to prostitute his own son, and if he did so, the boy had no obligation to support him in his old age.” (Clark, Desire A History of European Sexuality, p. 23)

“Furthermore, it is only the desire to play the active role that is regarded as “natural”. The younger male yields to the older's importunities out of admiration, compassion, or gratitude but is expected to feel neither desire or enjoyment.” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p. 139)

“It is important to remember that the erastes/eromenos relationship was an idealized model for sexual contact between males and that the realities of passions may have more closely resembled the lusty comedies of Aristophanes. It is probably erroneous to assume that intracrural intercourse the exclusive form of intimacy between males among the ancient Greeks.” (Mondimore, A Natural History of Homosexuality, p. 9)

“Among ancient Greeks, sexual contact between males of the same social group was scrupulously concerned with status and was played out according to rules that assured neither party was degraded or open to accusations of licentiousness. The idealized sexual partnership between men consisted of an active older and a passive younger partner. While the older took pleasure in the sexual act, the younger partner was not expected to. The two roles were distinguished by having different labels; the older partner was called the erastes and the younger the eromenos.” (Mondimore, A Natural History of Homosexuality, p. 8)

“Though youths were taught to resist, they were also taught that it was acceptable to yield to the worthy eremenos. They could take it for granted that their taking on the roles of erastes and later eromenos would be acceptable to their fathers and uncles-as long as they followed the rules for playing those roles, played their assigned role within the highly stylized pursuit-and-flight pattern” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p. 139)

“The age of a beloved boy seems always to have been between 12 and twenty.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.68)

“As a rule the first sign of down on the chin of the beloved deprived him of his lover.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.68)

“As a rule the lover in these associations was a mature man less than forty years of age.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.68)

“When discussing the Greek love of boys, one thing especially must not be forgotten: that it is never a question of boys (as we mostly use the word), that is, of children of tender age, but always of boys who are sexually mature, that is, who have reached the age of puberty.” (Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece, p.416)

“Paiderastia, the eroticized socialization of an adolescent boy into Greek male society by an adult man (contrast Roman boy-love), especially in the sixth and fifth century BCE (Aristophanes; Homoeroticism; Sexual Attitudes). The adolescent (11-18) was the eromenos (beloved, or paidika, “kid”); the man (late 20s-early 30s) was the erastes (lover) perhaps the boy's maternal uncle (Bremmer 1983; Iolaus).” (Younger, Sex in the Ancient World From A to Z, p. 91)

“The relationship would continue from its inception when the boy was young (eleven years old, Straton) to the time when he begins to get facial hair (Plutarch, Erotikos 770b-c) and is inducted into the military, at age eighteen.” (Younger, Sex in the Ancient World From A to Z, p. 92)

“However much the Greeks at all times approved of the relation between man and youth that rested upon mutual liking, they in the same manner rejected it if the boy sold himself for money.” (Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece, p.437)

“As we have seen in chapter 4, the most celebrated variety of homoeroticism was a traditional social construct long before the Classical period began. It was something men of the better class did together apart from women of the better class. As often in sexual relationships, there was an understood distinction of roles; the older partner, the initiator and aggressor, the active “lover,” or erastes, dominated the younger, passive, modest eromenos. The role of the erastes was to comport himself with moderation and restraint, whereas the young eromenos was to display no sexual desire of his own, reciprocating his lover's eros with simple goodwill, philia. If he accepted a lover's attention he was perceived to “grafify” (kharizesthai) his suitor out of gratitude (kharis) rather than sexual desire, but the gratitude was less for love of gives (never for money) than for the older man's time and attention. In return for being “gratified” through intercrural sex (as in fig. 5.12), the older man would introduce the younger boy to adult society and social skills; through this means the eromenos would take his place in the male world of wellborn aristocrats, the “beautiful and good” kalokagathoi. For the adolescent boy, it was both an education in the customs of his class and a rite passage to privileged society.” (Garrison, Sexual Culture in Ancient Greece, p.157)

“The relationship between erastes and eromenos was seen as having an educational and moral function, to be apart the youth's initiation into full manhood. Therefore, it was a disgrace not to be wooed -although also a shame to yield to easily. The lover became responsible for the youth's development and honor. Because the more mature partner was assumed to be motivated by true regard his beloved's well-being, and because what was wanted was love and consent not simply sexual satisfaction, rape, fraud, or intimidation were disallowed (indeed proof of coercion was grounds for banishment). The two shared fame and shame.” (Downing, Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love, p. 139)

“The relationship rarely continued (Male Homosexuality). Both partners were expected to marry, the erastes soon after his paiderastic relationship ceased. The eromenos thus could be the erastes of another eromenos (Peisistratos).” (Younger, Sex in the Ancient World From A to Z, p. 92)

Greek Philosophers

A review of the surviving historical written records from the three greatest philosophers, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle will show that they regarded homosexual conduct as intrinsically immoral. Therefore they would have rejected the “idea of a modern gay identity”.

“All three of the greatest Greek philosophers, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, regarded homosexual conduct intrinsically immoral. All three rejected the linchpin of modern “gay” ideology and lifestyle. At the heart of the Platonic-Aristotelian and later ancient philosophical rejections of all homosexual conduct, and thus of the modern “gay” ideology, are three fundamental theses: (1) The commitment of a man and a woman to each other in the sexual union of marriage is intrinsically good and reasonable, and is incompatible with sexual relations outside of marriage. (2) Homosexual acts are radically and peculiarly non-martial, and for that reason intrinsically unreasonable and unnatural. (3) Furthermore, according to Plato, if not Aristolte, homosexual acts have a special similarity to solitary masturbation, and both types of radically non-martial act are manifestly unworthy of the human being and immoral.” (Finnis, “Law, Morality, and Sexual Orientation”, p.33)

“Philosophers such as Xenophon, Plato, and Aristotle expressed this attitude in a more radical form, and consequently were only prepared to accept pederastic relationships in their nonsexual form. Thus they attempted at least theoretically to put an end to the ancient tendency to sexually abuse boys and youths.” (Detel, Translated by David Wigg-Wolf. Foucault and Classical Antiquity Power, Ethics and Knowledge, p. 135)

Plato

“But Plato at least understood the myth to finger Liaus as the inventor of homosexuality. In the Laws, the Athenian Stranger, tacking the difficult problem of regulating sexual passion, “the cause of myriad evils both for the individual and whole states,” says that “following nature” legislators should make the law as was “before Liaus,” when sex with men and youths as though they were women (a reference no doubt to sodomy) was forbidden on the model of animals, which Plato mistakenly believed restricted sex to procreation. Plato sees the state of nature as one where homosexuality does not exist, sex between males thus being an unnatural invocation whose origin is Laius. This would be consistent with Peisandros, who calls Laius's passion a “lawless eros”, “lawless in the sense of “contrary to natural law,” an interpretation supported by another epithet Peisandros uses, atheniton, which means “lawless” in the sense of “contrary to established customs,” the unwritten laws handed down by the gods before history, not those legislated by men. Nor is Plato's view of homosexuality as “unnatural” merely a consequence of his old age. In the earlier Phadrus, one of the great encomia to pederasty, he likewise calls same-sex gratification “lawless” and criticizies the lesser soul that cannot see the form of beauty in a handsome boy and so “is not ashamed to pursue pleasure against nature.” Homosexuality, then, to the Greeks is a historical invocation, a result of the depraved human imagination and vulnerability to pleasure.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.102)

“The pederastic milieu of the gymnasium, where young men exercised naked, was considered a Spartan invention, along with the innovation of rubbing olive oil on the body before exercising, to protect the skin but also no doubt to increase the athlete's erotic allure. Plato's Athenian Stranger indulges these culture stereotypes when he holds the Dorians responsible for “corrupt[ing] the pleasures of sex which are according to nature, not just for men but for beasts”. Again Plato see homosexuality as a historical phenomenon, an “enormity” arising out of the “inability to control a pleasure defined as “against nature” because it is its own end rather than serving the goal of procreation. Later in the Laws he again condemns homosexuality, along with adultery and heterosexual sodomy, on the grounds of being “not according to nature” because it does not lead to procreation.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.103)

“ Plato's distaste for homosexuality is shared by his contemporary Xenophen, a great admirer of the Spartans who is anxious to resolve them of their traditional responsibility for legitimizing homosexuality. The mythical lawgiver of Sparta, Lcyurgus, Xenophon tells us, forbade physical intimacy between the boy and his admirer, categorizing homosexuality with other crimes like incest. Like Plato, Xenophon considers sexual relations between men a depravity that all right-thinking men should abhor as much as they would incest.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.103)

Aristotle

“Although Aristotle, as we saw, implies the Dorians invented homosexuality, elsewhere he recognizes that homosexuals can be born as well as made. Either way, though, they are a deviation from the norm. While discussing the Nichomachean Ethics why some unpleasant or disgusting practices are pleasurable, he says that some “diseased things” result from “nature” or “habit,” and he instances pulling out one's hair, nailbiting, eating coals or earth, and “sex between males.” The latter, he notes, often results from childhood sexual abuse. Such persons are no more “unrestrained” in their sexual behavior, than a woman, whether they are made that way by nature or the “disease” of habit. Despite Aristotle's tolerant and objective tone, homosexuality is still characterized as a “disease” (nosematodie), a compulsive, unpleasant, and destructive behavior akin to manias like eating dirt or chewing one's fingernails. Even pederasty, that supposedly accepted institution of the city-state, is here seen as possibly contributing to what Aristotle considers a morbid condition. Today's kinaidos is yesterday's eromenos or “boy-favorite.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.104)

“The Aristotelian corpus offers other evidence for the belief that homosexuality results from a physiological deformity brought about by either nature or habit. A bizarre passage from the Problems explains why a man would find pleasure in being anally penetrated-obviously in the Greek mind a disturbing anomaly, needing some explanation. Starting from the assumption that every form of excretion has a region in the body from which it is secreted, the write explains that the passive homosexual, due to some damage to the ducts that take semen to the testicles and penis, is “unnaturally constituted” and so has semen collect in his anus. This damage could be a result of an inborn deformity or childhood sexual abuse. The collected fluid caused by desire, a desire that cannot be gratified because there is no way to discharged the accumulated semen. Hence the catamite seeks out anal intercourse in order to relieve the swelling. The writer goes on to note that boys subjected to anal intercourse will become habituated to it, thus associating pleasure with the act. Environment and childhood experience play a major role in creating the passive homosexual by deforming the body.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.104-105)

Books

Larry Houston — 2011-11-20T07:00:00Z

Books

Aardweg, Gerard J.M. van den Ph.D. The Battle For Normality. Ignatius Press. San Francisco, 1997.

Abelove, Henry, Michele Aine Barale and David M. Halprin. The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. Routledge. New York and London, 1993.

Adams, Jad. AIDS: The HIV Myth. MacMillian London, Inc., London, 1989.

Adams, Mary Louise. The Trouble with Normal: Postwar Youth and the Making of Heterosexuality. University of Toronto Press. Toronto, 1997.

Alcoff, Linda Martin, Michael Hames-Garcia, Satya P. Mohanty, and Paula M.L. Moya. Editors. Identity Politics Reconsidered. Palgrave MacMillan. New York, 2006.

Aldrich, Robert & Garry Wotherspoon, editors. Who's Who in Gay and Lesbian History From Antiquity to World War II. Routledge. London & New York, 2001.

Allen, David. Make Love Not War: The Sexual Revolution An Unfettered History. Little, Brown, and Company. Boston, New York, and London, 2000

Allen, Peter Lewis. The Wages of Sin: Sex and Disease, Past and Present. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 2000.

Altman, Dennis. The Homosexualization of America, The Americanization of the Homosexual. St. Martin's Press. New York, 1982.

Altman, Dennis. AIDS in the Mind of America. Anchor Books. Garden City, New York, 1987.

Altman, Dennis, Carole Vance, Martha Vicinus, Jeffrey Weeks and others. Homosexuality, Which Homosexuality? GMP Publishers. London, 1989.

Altman, Dennis. Homosexual: Oppression or Liberation. New York University Press. New York and London, 1993.

Altman, Dennis. Defying Gravity: A Political Life. Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd. St Leonards, Australia. 1997.

Andriote, John-Manuel. Victory Deferred: How AIDS Changed Gay Life in America. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1999.

Appleby, George Alan and Jeane W. Anastas. Not Just a Passing Phase. Columbia University Press. New York, 1998.

Archer, Bert. The End of Gay (and the death of heterosexuality). Thunder's Mouth Press. New York, 2002.

Aries, Philippe and Andre Bejin, editors. Western Sexuality Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times. Basil Blackwell Ltd. Oxford,UK, 1985.

Armstrong, Elizabeth A. Forging Gay Identitities Organizing Sexuality in San Francisco, 1950-1994. The university of Chicago Press. Chicago & London, 2002.

Baird, Robert M. and Stuart E. Rosebaum, editors. Same Sex Marriage The moral and Legal Debate. Prometheus Books. Amherst, New York, 1996.

Baird, Robert M. and Stuart E. Rosebaum, editors. Same Sex Marriage The moral and Legal Debate Second Edition. Prometheus Books. Amherst, New York, 2004.

Bancroft, John editor. Researching Sexual Behavior: Methodological Issues. Indiana University Press. Bloomington and Indianapolis, 1997.

Bawer, Bruce editor. Beyond Queer: Challenging Gay Left Orthodoxy. The Free Press. New York, 1996.

Bayer, Ronald. Homosexuality and the American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis. Basic Books. New York, 1981.

Beach, F.A. editor. Human Sexuality in Four Perspectives. John Hopkins Press. Baltimore and London, 1977.

Becker, Howard S., Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. The Free Press. New York, 1991.

Bernauer, James, W. Michel Focault's Force of Flight: Toward an Ethics for Thought. Humanities Press International, Inc. New Jersey and London, 1990.

Berauer, James and Jeremy Carrette editors. Michel Foucault and Theology The Politics of Religious Experience. Ashgate. Hampshire, EN and Burlington, VT, 2004.

Berube, Allan. Coming Out Under Fire: The History of Gay Men and Women in World war Two. The Free Press/Macmillan, Inc. New York, 1990.

Birken, Lawrence. Consuming Desire Sexual Science and the Emergence of a Culture of Abundance, 1871-1914.Cornell University Press. Ithaca and London, 1988

Bishop, Clifford and Osthelder, Xenia. Sexualia From Prehistory to Cyberspace. KonemannVerlagsgesellschaft mbH. Cologne,Germany, 2001.

Blackwood, Evelyn, editor. The Many faces of Homosexuality: Anthropological Approaches to Homosexual Behavior. Harrington Park Press. New York and London, 1986.

Blankenhorn, David. The Future of Marriage. Encounter Books. New York, 2007.

Bohan, Janis S. Psychology and Sexual Orientation Coming to Terms. Routledge. New York & London, 1996. Bohan, Janis S and Glenda M. Russell. Conversations About Psychology and Sexual Orientation. New York University Press. New York and London, 1999.

Bolin, Anne and Patricia Whelehan. Perspectives on Human Sexuality. State University of New York Press. Albany, New York, 1999.

Bornstein, Kate. Gender Outlaw On Men, Women, and the Rest of Us. Vintage Books. New York, 1995.

Bradshaw, Timothy editor. The Way Forward. Hodder & Stoughton. London, 1997.

Bradstock, Andrew, SeanGill, Anne Hogan, and Sue Morgan editors.Masculinity and Spirituality in Victorian Culture. St. Martin's Press, LLC., New York, 2000.

Brady, Sean. Masculinity and Male Homosexuality in Britian, 1861-1913. Palgrave Macmillan. Basingstoke, England & New York, 2005.

Bray, Alan. Homosexuality in Renaissance England. Alyson Publications Inc. Boston, 1988.

Brod, Harry editor. The Making of Masculinities The New Men's Studies. Routledge. New York and London, 1992.

Bronski, Michael. The Pleasure Principle: Sex, Backlash, and the Struggle for Gay Freedom. St. Martin's Press. New York, 1998.

Brookey, Robert Alan. Reinventing the Male Homosexual: The Rhetoric and Power of the Gay Gene. Indiana University Press. Bloomington & Indianapolis, 2002.

Browning, Frank. A Queer Geography Journeys Toward a Sexual Self. Crown Publishers, Inc. New York, 1996.

Brummelhuis, Hans ten & Gilbert Herdt editors. Culture and Sexual Risk: Anthropological Perspectives on AIDS. Gordon and Beach Publishers. United States, 1995.

Bullough, Vern L & Bonnie. Sin, Sickness & Sanity. Garland Publishing. New York, 1977.

Bullough, Vern L. Sexual Variance in Society and History. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, 1976.

Bullough, Vern L. Science in the Bedroom. Basic Books. New York, 1994.

Burns, Kate. Editor. Gay Rights. Greenhaven Press/Thompson Gale. Farmington Hills, MI, 2006.

Burr, Chandler. A Separate Creation: The Search for Biological Origins of Sexual Orientation. Hyperion. New York, 1996.

Cain, Patricia A. Rainbow Rights: The Role of Lawyers and Courts in the Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights Movement. Westview Press.Boulder, CO, 2000.

Cahill, Sean PhD. Same-Sex Marriage in the United States Focus on the Facts. Lexington Books. New York, Toronto, Oxford, 2004.

Callen, Michael. Surving AIDS. HarperCollins Publishers. New York, 1990.

Canady, Margot. The Straight State Sexuality and Citizenship in Twentieth-Century America. Princeton University Press. Princeton and Oxford, 2009.

Cantor, Donald J., Elizabeth Cantor, James C. Black and Campbell D. Barrett. Same-Sex Marriage The Legal and Psychological Evolution in American. Wesleyan University Press. Middletown, Connecticut, 2006.

Cantwell, Jr., M. D. Alan. AIDS: The Mystery and the Solution. Aries Rising Press. Los Angeles, 1986.

Caplan, Pat editor. The Cultural Construction of Sexuality. Tavistock Publications. London & New York, 1987.

Caton, Hiram. The AIDS Mirage. Univesity of New South Wales Press LTD., Sydney, Australia, 1994.

Chauncey, George. Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today's Debate Over Gay Equality. Basic Books/Perseus Books Group. New York, 2004.

Chedgzoy, Kate, Emma Francis, and Murray Pratt. In a Queer Place Sexuality and Belonging in British and European Contexts. Ashgate Publishing Company. Burlington, VT, 2002.

Chin, James MD MPH. The AIDS Pandemic The Collision of Epidemiology with Political Correctness. Radcliffe Publishing. Oxford and Seattle, 2007.

Christenson, Cornelia V. Kinsey: A Biography. Indiana University Press. Bloomington and London, 1971.

Clark, Anna. The Struggle for Breeches Gender and the Making of the British Working Class. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London, 1995.

Clark, Anna. Desire A History of European Sexuality. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. New York and London, 2008.

Clark, M. D. Charles F. AIDS and the Arrows of Pestilence. Fulcrum Publishing. Golden, CO, 1994.

Clausen, Jan. Beyond Gay or Straight: Understanding Sexual Orientation. Chelsa House Publishers. Philadelphia, 1997.

Clausen, Jan. Apples and Oranges: My Journey Through Sexual Identity. Houghton Milton. Boston, 1999.

Clendinen, Dudley and Adam Nagourne. Out for Good: The Struggle to Build a Gay Rights Movement in America. Simon and Schuster. New York, 1990.

Cochran, William G., Frederick Mosteller, John H. Tukey and W. O. Jenkins. Statistical Problems of the Kinsey Report on Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. The American Statistical Association. Washington D.C., 1954.

Cochrane, Michelle. When AIDS Began: San Francisco and the Making of an Epidemic. Routledge. New York and London, 2004.

Cocks, H G. Nameless Offences Homosexual Desire in the Nineteenth Century. I.B. Tauris Publishers. London and New York, 2003.

Cocks, H. G. and Matt Houlbrook editors. Palgrave Advances in the Modern History of Sexuality. Palgrave MacMillian. New York, 2006.

Cohen, David. Law, Sexuality, and Society The Enforcement of Morals in Classical Athens. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England, 1991.

Cohen, M. D., Ph.D., P. T., Merle A Sande, M. D., and Paul A. Volberding, M. D. The AIDS Knowledge Base: A Textbook on HIV Disease from the University of California, San Francisco, and the San Francisco General Hospital. The Medical Publishing Group. Waltham, Massachusetts, 1990.

Cohler, Bertram J. and Robert M. Galatzer-Levy. The Course of Gay and Lesbian Lives: Social and Psychoanalytic Perspectives. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 2000.

Cook, Andrew. Prince Eddy The King Britain Never Had. Tempus. Stroud, Gloucestershire Great Britain, 2006.

Cook, Matt. London and the Culture of Homosexuality, 1885-1914. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, and Cape Town, 2003.

Cook, Matt editor. A Gay History of Britain Love and Sex Between Men Since the Middle Ages. Greenwood World Publishing. Oxford/Westport Connecticut, 2007.

Connell, R. W. Masculinities. University California Press. Berkley and Los Angeles, 1995.

Connell, R. W. The Men and The Boys. Allen and Unwin. St. Leonards, Australia, 2000.

Connell, R. W. and G. W. Dowsett. Rethinking Sex :Social Theory and Sexuality Research. Melbourne University Press. Melbourne, 1992.

Covino, John. Editor. Same Sex Debating the Ethics, Science and Culture of Homosexuality. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Lanham, Maryland, 1997.

Crimp, Douglas, editor. AIDS: Cultural Analysis Cultural Activism. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA and London, England, 1988.

Crompton, Louis. Homosexuality and Civilization. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA and London 2003.

Cruikshank, Margaret. The Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement. Roultledge. New York, 1992.

D'Augelli, Anthony R. & Charlotte J. Patterson. Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identities over the Lifespan. Oxford University Press. New York & Oxford, 1995.

D'Augelli, Anthony R. & Charlotte J. Patterson. Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identities and Youth: Psychological Perspectives. Oxford University Press. Oxford and New York, 2001.

Dalbey, Gordon. Healing the Masculine Soul. Word Publishing. Dallas, 1988.

Davidson, James. The Greeks and Greek Love. Random House. New York, 2007.

Dean, Carolyn J. Sexuality and Modern Western Culture. Twayne Publishers. New York, 1996.

De Cecco, John P. PhD, and Michael G. Shively, MA, editors. Bisexual and Homosexual Identities: Critical Theoretical Issues. The Haworth Press. New York, 1984.

DeCecco, PhD, John and John P. Elia, PhD (cand.) editors. If You Seduce a Straight Person, Can You Make Them Gay? Issues in Biological Essentialism versus Social Constructionism in Gay and Lesbian Identities. The Hawthrone Press, Inc. New York, London and Norwood (Australial), 1993.

De Cecco, John P. PhD, and David Allen Parker, MA editors. Sex, Cells, and Same-Sex Desire: The Biology of Sexual Preference. Harrington Park Press, New York, 1995.

D'Emilio, John. Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States 1940-1970. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1988.

D'Emilio, John D. Making Trouble Essays on Gay History, Politics, and the University. Routledge. New York & London, 1992.

D'Emilio, John & Estelle B. Freedman. Intimate Matters A History of Sexuality in America. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago & London, 1997.

D'Emilio, John. The World Turned: Essays on Gay History, Politics, and Culture. Duke University Press. Durham and London, 2002.

Detel, Wolfgang. Translated by David Wigg-Wolf. Foucault and Classical Antiquity Power, Ethics and Knowledge. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Diamant, Louis and Richard D. McAnulty, editors. The Psychology of Sexual Orientation, Behavior, and Identity A Handbook. Greenwood Press. Westport, Connecticut, 1995.

Doe, Michael. Seeking the Truth in Love. Darton, Longman & Todd Ltd. London, 2000.

Doka, Kenneth J. AIDS, Fear, and Society. Taylor & Francis. Washington D.C., 1997.

Donovan, Mark C. Taking AIM: Target Populations and the Wars on AIDS and drugs. Georgetown University Press. Washington, D.C., 2001.

Downing, Christine. Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love. Continuum Publishing Company. New York, 1989.

Drescher, Jack. M.D. Psychoanalytic Therapy and the Gay Man. The Analytic Press. Hillsdale, NJ, 1998.

Drescher, MD, Jack and Kenneth J. Zucker, PhD. Editors. Ex-Gay Research: Analyzing the Spitzer Study and Its Relation to Science, Religion, Politics, and Culture. Harrington Park Press, An Imprint of the Haworth Press, Inc. New York, London, and Oxford, 2006.

DuBay, William H. Gay Identity The Self Under Ban. McFarland & Company, Inc. Publishers. Jefferson ,NC and London, 1987.

Duberman, Martin, Martha Vicinus & George Chauncey, Jr. Hidden From History Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past. Meridan. New York, 1990.

Duberman, Martin. Editor. A Queer World: The Center for Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. New York University Press. New York and London, 1997.

Duberman, Martin. Left Out. South End Press. Cambridge, MA, 2002.

Duesburg, Peter H. Infectious AIDS: Have We Been Misled? North Atlantic Books. Berkeley, CA, 1995.

Duesberg, Peter H., AIDS: Virus- or Drug Induced? Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht, Boston, and London, 1996.

Duesburg Dr., Peter. Inventing the AIDS Virus. Regnery Publishing, Inc., Washington, D.C., 1996.

Duggan, Lisa & Nan D. Hunter. Sex Wars: Sexual Dissent and Political Culture. Routledge. New York & London, 1995.

Dynes, Wayne R. Editor. Encyclopedia of Homosexuality Volume 1 A-L. Garland Publishing, Inc. New York, 1990.

Dynes, Wayne R. Editor. Encyclopedia of Homosexuality Volume 2 M - Index. Garland Publishing, Inc. New York, 1990.

Eder, Franz X., Lesley A. Hall, and Gert Hekma editors. Sexual Cultures in Europe Natural histories. Manchester University Press. Manchester and New York, 1999.

Eder, Franz X., Lesley A. Hall, and Gert Hekma editors. Sexual Cultures in Europe Themes in sexuality. Manchester University Press. Manchester and New York, 1999.

Edsall, Nicholas. Toward Stonewall: Homosexuality and Society in the Modern Western World. University of Virginia Press. Charlottersville & London, 2003.

Edwards, Tim.Erotics and Politics Gay Male Sexuality, Masculinity and Feminism. Routledge. London and New York, 1994.

Ellis, Albert & Albert Abarbanel. The Encyclopedia of Sexual Behavior. Hawthorn Books, Inc. New York, 1967.

Ellis, Lee and Linda Ebertz. Sexual Orientation Toward Biological Understanding. Praeger. Westport, Connecticut and London, 1997.

Ellis, Heather & Jessica Meyer Editors. Masculinity and the Other: Historical Perspectives.Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, 2009.

Ellison, George, Melissa Parker, and Catherine Campbell, Editors. Learning From HIV and AIDS. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2003.

Engel, Stephen M. The Unfinished Revolution: Social Movement Theory and the Gay and Lesbian Movement. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK, 2001.

Epstein, Steven. Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and New York, 1996.

Eribon, Didier. Translated by Betsy Wing. Michel Foucault. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA, 1991.

Escoffier, Jeffery. American Homo: Community and Perversity. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London, 1998.

Esdall, Nicholas C. Toward Stonewall: Homosexuality and Society in the Modern Western World. University of Virginia Press. Charlottesville and London, 2003.

Evans, David T. Sexual Citizenship The Material Construction of Sexualities. Routledge. London and New York, 1993.

Fan, Hung, Ross F. Conner, Luis P. Villarreal. The Biology of AIDS. Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Boston, 1991.

Fan, Hung Y., Ross F. Conner, Luis P. Villarreal. AIDS: Science and Society 4th Edition. Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Boston, 2004.

Fee, Elizabeth and Daniel M. Fox. AIDS: The Making of a Chronic Disease. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and Oxford, 1992.

Feldman,Douglas A., and Julia Wang Miller, Editors The AIDS Crisis A Documentary History. Greenwood Press. Westport, Connecticut and London, 1998.

Fettner, Ann Guidici and Wiliam A Check Ph.D. The Truth About AIDS: Evolution of an Epidemic. Henry Holt and Company. New York, 1985.

Flaceleliere, Robert. Love in Ancient Greece. Greenwood Press Publishers. Westport, Connecticut, 1973.

Fone, Bryne. Homophobia A History. Metropolitan Books. New York, 2000.

Fradenburg, Louise, and Carla Lavezzo editors. Premodern Sexualities. Routledge. New York and London, 1996.

Francoeur, Robert T. editor. The Complete Dictionary of Sexology. Continum. Publishing Company. New York, 1995.

Friedman, Lauri, S. Book Editor. Gay Marriage. Thompson Gale. New York, London, Munich, 2006.

Friedman, M.D. Richard C. Male Homosexuality A Contemporary Psychoanalytic Perspective. Yale University Press. New Haven and London, 1988.

Fumento, Michael. The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS. Basic Books. New York, 1990.

Gagnon, John H. and William Simon. Sexual Conduct: The Social Sources of Human Sexuality. Hutchinson of London. London, 1974.

Gagnon, John H. and William Simon. Sexual Conduct: The Social Sources of Human Sexuality. Second Edition. AldineTransaction. New Brunswick (U.S.A.) and London (U.K.), 2005.

Gallagher, John and Chris Bull. Perfect Enemies: The Religious Right, the Gay Movement and polticis of the 1990s. Crown Publishers, Inc. New York, 1996.

Garner, Abigail. Families Like Mine: Children of Gay Parents Tell It Like It Is. HarperCollins Publishers. New York, 2004.

Garnets, Linda D. and Douglas C. Kimmel. editors. Psychological Perspectives on Lesbian and Gay Male Experiences. Columbia University Press. New York, 1993.

Garnets, Linda D. and Douglas C. Kimmel. editors. Psychological Perspectives on Lesbian and Gay Male Experiences Second Edition. Columbia University Press. New York, 2003.

Garrison, Daniel H. Sexual Culture in Ancient Greece. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman OK, 2000.

Gathorne-Hardy, Jonathan. Alfred C. Kinsey Sex the Measure of All Things. Chatto & Windus. London, 1998.

Garton, Stephen. Histories of Sexuality. Equinox Publishing Ltd. London, 2004.

Gebhard, Paul H. & Alan B. Johnson. The Kinsey Data: Marginal Tabulations of the 1938-1963 Interviews Conducted by the Institute for Sex Research. Indiana University Press. Bloomington & Indianapolis, 1998.

Gerard, Kent and Gert Hekma Editors. The Pursut of Sodomy: Male homosexuality in Renaissance and Enlightenment Europe. Harrington Park Press. New York and London, 1989.

Goldberg-Hiller, Jonathan. The Limits to Union Same-Sex Marriage and the Politics of Civil Rights. The University of Michigan Press. Ann Arbor, 2002.

Golden, Mark and Peter Toohey Editors. Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh, 2003.

Goldsmith, Netta Murray. The Worst of Crimes Homosexuality and the Law in Eighteenth-Century London. Ashgate. Aldershot, Brookfield, USA, Singapore & Sydney, 1998.

Goldstein, Jan, Editor. Foucault and the Writing of History. Blackwell. Oxford UK and Cambridge, USA, 1994.

Goode, Erich. Deviant Behavior. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1984.

Goodfield, June. Quest for the Killers. Birkhauser. Boston, Basel, Stuttgart, 1985.

Gould, Peter. The Slow Plague. Blackwell. Oxford UK and Cambridge USA, 1993.

Greenberg, David F. The Construction of Homosexuality. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1988.

Geer, James H. and William T. O'Donohue editors. Theories of Human Sexuality. Plenum Press. New York, 1987.

Grmek, Mirko D. History of AIDS. Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ, 1990.

Hallet, Judith P. and Marilyn B. Skinner. Roman Sexualities. Priceton University Press. Princeton, NJ, 1997.

Halperin, David M, John J Winkler, and Froma I Zeitlin, Editors. Before Sexuality The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World. Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ, 1990.

Halperin, David M. One Hundred Years of Homosexuality and Other essays on Greek Love. Routledge. New York and London, 1990.

Halperin, David M. How to Do the History of Homosexuality. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 2002.

Hamer DH and Copeland P. The Science of Desire. Simon and Schuster. New York, 1994.

Hart, John and Diane Richardson. The Theory and Practice of Homosexuality. Routledge and Kegan Paul. London, 1981.

Harvey O.S.F.S., John F. The Truth About Homosexuality: The Cry of the Faithful. Ignatius Press. San Francisco, 1996.

Heller, Thomas C., Morton Sosna, and David E. Wellberry editors. Reconstructing Individualism Autonomy, Individuality, and the Self in Western Thought. Stanford University Press. Stanford, California, 1986.

Henderson, Jeffery. The Maculate Muse. Yale University Press. New Haven, 1975.

Herdt, Gilbert and Shirley Lindenbaum. The Time of AIDS: Social Analysis, Theory, and Method. Sage Publications. Newby Park, London, and New Delhi, 1992.

Herdt, Gilbert editor. Gay Culture in America: Essays from the Field. Beacon Press. Boston, 1992.

Herdt, Gilbert. Same Sex, Different Cultures: Gays and Lesbians Across Cultures. WestviewPress. 1997.

Herman, Didi. The Antigay Agenda. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1997.

Herman, Ellen. Psychiatry, Psychology, and Homosexuality. Chelsea House Publishers. New York and Philadelphia, 1995.

Hodgkinson, Neville. AIDS: the Failure of Contemporary Science. How a Virus That Never Was Decieved the World. Fourth Estate. London, 1996.

Holben, L. R. What Christians Think About Homosexuality. BIBAL Press. N. Richland Hills, TX, 1999.

Holmberg, Carl B. Sexualities and Popular Culture. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA, 1998.

Hooper, Edward. The River A Journey Back to the Source of HIV and AIDS. Allen Lane The Penguin Press. London, 1999.

Houlbrook, Matt. Queer London Perils and Pleasures in the Sexual Metropolis, 1918-1957. The University Press. Chicago and London, 2005.

Hoy, David Couzens, editor. Foucault: A Critical Reader. Blackwell. Oxford UK and Cambridge USA, 1986.

Hubbard, Thomas K. Editor. Homosexuality in Greece and Rome: A Sourcebook of Basic Documents. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 2003.

Hudson, Jr. David L. Gay Rights. Chelsea House Publishers. Philadelphia, 2005.

Hull, Kathleen E. Same-Sex Marriage The Cultural Politics of Love and law. Cambridge University Press. New York and Cambridge, England, 2006.

Hunt, Ronald J. Historical Dictionary of the Gay and Lesbian Movement. The Scarecrow Press, Inc. Lanham, Maryland, and London, 1999.

Hunter, Ski, Coleen Shannon, Jo Knox and James I. Martin. Lesbian, Gay, and BisexualYouths and Adults: Knowledge for Humans Services Practice. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA, 1998.

Hyde, H Montgomery. The Trials of Oscar Wilde. Dover Publications, INC. New York, 1962.

Hyde, H Montgomery. The Other Love An Historical and Contemporary Survey of Homosexuality in Britain. Heineman. London, 1970.

Hyde, H Montgomery. Oscar Wilde A Biography. Farrar, Staus and Giroux. New York, 1975.

Hyde, H Montgomery. The Cleveland Street Scandal. W. H. Allen. London, 1976.

Hyde, H Montgomery. Lord Alfred Douglas A Biography. Methuen. London, 1984.

Hyde, H Montgomery. A Tangled Web Sex Scandals in British Politics and Society. Constable. London, 1986.

Irvine, Janice M. Disorders of Desire: Sex and Gender in Modern American Sexology. Temple University Press. Philadelphia, 1990.

Jagose, Annamarie. Queer Theory. Melbourne University Press, 1996.

Johnston, William B. and Kevin R. Hopkins. The Catastrophe Ahead: AIDS and the Case for a New Public Policy. Praeger. New York, 1990.

Jones, James H. Alfred C. Kinsey A Public/Private Life. W. W. Norton & Company. New York, 1997.

Jones, Stanton L. & Yarhouse, Mark A. Homosexuality The Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate. InterVarsity Press. Downers Grove, 2000.

Jonsen, Albert R. and Jeff Stryker. The Social Impact of AIDS in the United States. National Academy Press. Washington D.C., 1993.

Jordan, Mark D. The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago & London, 1997.

Kalichman, Seth C. Understanding AIDS: advances in research and treatment. America Psychology. Washington, DC. 1998.

Kantor, Martin. Homophobia Description, Development, and Dynamics of Gay Bashing. Praeger. Westport, Connecticut and London, 1998.

Kaplan, Morris B. Sexual Justice Democratic Citizenship and the Politics of Desire. Routledge. New York and London, 1997.

Kaslow, M.D., M.P.H., Richard A. and Donald P. Francis, M.D., D.Sc., editors. The Epidemiology of AIDS: Expression, Occurrence and Control of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1 Infection. Oxford University Press. New York and Oxford, 1989.

Katz, Jonathan Ned. The Invention of Heterosexuality. Dutten. New York, 1995.

Kauth, Michael R. True Nature A Theory of Sexual Attraction. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, 2000.

Kelly, Gary F., editor. Sources: Notable Selections in Human Sexuality. Dushkin/McGaw-Hill. Guilford, Connecticut, 1998.

King, Edward. Safety in Numbers: Safe Sex and Gay Men. Cassell. New York and London, 1993.

Kinsey, Alfred C., Warren B. Pomeroy, and Clyde E. Martin. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. W. B. Saunders Company. Philadelphia and London, 1968.

Kinsey, Alfred C., Warren B. Pomeroy, Clyde E. Martin and Paul H. Gebhard. Sexual Behavior in the Human Female. Indiana University Press. Bloomington & Indianapolis, 1998.

Kirk, Marshall and Hunter Madsen Ph.D. After the Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay's in the 90s. Double Day. New York, 1989.

Klitzum, M.D., Robert. Being Positive The Lives of Men and Women with HIV. Ivan R. Dee. Chicago, 1997.

Kon, Igor S. “A Socicultural Approach” in Theories of Human Sexuality”, editors James H. Geer and William T. O'Donohue. Plenum Press. New York and London, 1987.

Kranz, Rachel and Tom Cusick. Gay Rights. Facts on File, Inc. New York, 2000.

Kranz, Rachel and Tim Cusick. Gay Right: Revised Edition. Facts on File, Inc. New York, 2005.

Kritzman, Lawrence D. Editor. Translated by Alan Sheridan and Others. Ichel Foucault Politics Philosophy Culture Interviews and other Writings 1977-1984. Routledge. New York and London, 1988.

Kronemeyer, Robert. Overcoming Homosexuality. Macmillan. New York, 1980.

Labacqz, Karen edited with David Sincore-Guinn. Sexuality A Reader. The Pilgrim Press, Cleveland, OH, 1999.

Lanning, Cynthia editor. Answers to Your Questions About Homosexuality. Bristol Books. Wilmore, KY, 1988.

Larmour, David H. J., Paul Allen Miller, and Charles Platter, editors. Rethinking Sexuality Foucault and Classical Antiquity. Princenton University Press. Princeton, NJ, 1998.

Laumann, Edward, Oo, John N. Gagnon, Robert T. Micheal, and Stuart Michaels. The Social Organization Of Sexuality Sexual Practices of the United States. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago & London, 1994.

Laumann, Edward O. & Robert T. Michael editors. Sex, Love, and Health in America. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago & London, 2001.

Laumann, Edward O., Stephen Ellingson, Jenna Mahay, Anthony Paik, and Yoosik Youm editors. The Sexual Organization of the City. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 2004.

Lauritsen, AB, John. “Political-Economic Construction of Gay Male Clone Identity.” in If You Seduce a Straight Person, Can You Make The Gay? The Haworth Press, Inc. New York, 1993.

Lauritsen, John and David Thorstad. The Early Homosexual Rights Movement (1864-1935). Times Change Press. New York, 1974.

Lauritsen, John. Poison by Prescription The AZT Story. Asklepios. New York, 1990.

Lauritsen, John. The AIDS War. Asklepios. New York, 1990.

Lear, Andrew and Eva Cantarella. Images of Ancient Greek Pederasty Boys were their gods. Routledge Taylor and Francs Group. London and New York, 2008.

Lehman, Jennifer M., Editor. The Gay & Lesbian Marriage & Family Reader: Analyses of Problems and Prospects for the 21st Century. Gordian Knot Books. Lincoln, Nebraska, 2001.

Leone, Daniel A.. editor. The Spread of AIDS. Greenhaven Press, Inc. San Diego, CA, 1987.

Lerner, Eric K. and Mary Ellen Hombs. AIDS Crisis in America: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara, CA, 1998.

LeVay, Simon. Queer Science. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA, 1996.

LeVay, Simon and Elisabeth Nonas. City of Friends. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA 1995.

Levine, Martin P. editor. Gay Men: The Sociology of Male Homosexuality. Harper & Row, Publishers. New York, 1979.

Levine, Martin P. Gay Macho: The Life and Death of the Homosexual Clone. New York University Press. New York and London, 1998.

Levine, Martin P., Peter M. Nardi, and John H.Gagnon editors. In Changing Times: Gay Men and Lesbians Encounter HIV/AIDS. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1997.

Lewes, Ph.D., Kenneth. The Psychoanalytic Theory of Male Homosexuality. Simon and Schuster. New York, 1988.

Lewes, Ph.D., Kenneth. Psychoanalysis and Male Homosexuality. Jason Aronson Inc. Northvale, New Jersey and London, 1995.

Lewis, Lynette A. and Michael W. Ross. A Select Body: The Gay Dance Party Subculture and the HIV/AIDS Pandemic. Cassell London and New York, 1995.

Licata, Salvatore J. PhD and Robert P Petersen. Historical Perspectives on Homosexuality. The Haworth Press, Inc. and Stein and Day/Publishers. New York, 1981.

Licht, Hans. Sexual Life in Ancient Greece. Constable and Company Limited. London, 1994.

Lipkin, Arthur. Understanding Homosexuality, Changing Schools A Text for Teachers, Counselors, and Adminstrators. Westview Press, 1999.

Loraine, Dr J A. Understanding Homosexuality: Its Biological and Psychological Bases. American Elsevier Publishing Co., Inc. New York, 1974.

Loughery, John. The Other Side of Silence. Henry Holt and Company. New York, 1998.

Lowenthal, Michael editor. Gay Men at the Millennium: Sex, Spirit, Community. Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam Inc. New York, 1997. Macy, David. The Lives of Michel Foucault. Hutchinson. London, 1993.

Mahmoud, Dr. Fahmi M. AIDS The Untold Story. Aldurar Distributor & Book Sellars. Amman, Jordan, 1995.

Marmor, Judd editor. Sexual Inversion. Basic Books, Inc. New York, 1965.

Marmor, Judd editor. Homosexual Behavior: A Modern Reappraisal. Basic Book Publishers. New York, 1980.

Marotta, Toby. The Politics of Homosexuality. Houghton Mifflin. Boston, 1981.

Matthews, Dawn D. editor. AIDS Sourcebook: Health Reference Series, Third Edition. Omnigraphics. Detroit, MI, 2003.

Maxwell, Kenneth. A Sexual Odyssey: From Forbidden Fruit to Cybersex. Plenum Press. New York, 1996.

Mayer, Kenneth H. and HF Pizer. The AIDS Pandemic: Impact of Science and Society. Elsevier Academic Press. London, 2005.

Mazzalongo, Michael editor. Gay Rights or Wrongs. College Press Publishing Company. Jolpin, MS , 1995.

McCafrey, Joseph A. editor. The Homosexual Dialectic. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1972.

McElrath, Karen, Editor. HIV and AIDS: A Global View. Greenwood Press. Westport, Connecticut and London, 2002.

McKinney, Kathleen and Susan Sprecher editors. Human Sexuality: The Societal and Interpersonal Context. Ablex Publishing Corporation. Norwood, New Jersey, 1989.

McKnight, Jim. Straight Science? Homosexuality, Evolution and Adaptation. Routledge. London and New York, 1997.

McLaren, Angus. The Trials of Masculinity Policing Sexual Boundaries 1870-1930. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago & London, 1997.

McLaren, Angus. Twentieth-century Sexuality A History. Blackwell Publishers. Malden, Massachusetts and Oxford, Uk, 1999.

McLaren, Angus. Sexual Blackmail A Modern History. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England, 2002.

McLure, Laura K. editor. Sexuality and Gender in The Classic World. Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Oxford WK, 2002.

McWhirter, M.D., David P. and Andrew M. Mattison, M.S. W., PhD. The Male Couple How Relationships Develop. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1984.

McWhirter, David P.M.D., Stephanie A. Sanders Ph.D., and June Machover Reinisch, Ph.D. Homosexuality/Heterosexuality Concepts of Sexual Orientation. Oxford University Press. New York and London, 1990.

Meeker, Martin. Contacts Desired Gay and Lesbian Communications and Community, 1940s-1970s. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 2006.

Michael, Robert T., John H. Gagne, Edward O. Laumann, & Gina Kolata. Sex in America. Little, Brown, and Company. Boston, New York, Toronto, London, 1994.

Miller, Heather G., Charles F. Turner, and Lincoln E. Moses, Editors. AIDS The Second Decade. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C., 1990.

Miller, James. The Passion of Michel Foucault. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA, 1993.

Minton, Henry L. Departing From Deviance. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 2002.

Mohler, Marie MA. Homosexual Rites of Passage. Harrington Park Press. New York, 2000.

Mohr, Richard D. Gay Ideas: Outing and other Controversies. Beacon Press. Boston, 1992.

Mondimore, Francis Mark. A Natural History of Homosexuality. The John Hopkins University Press. Baltimore and London, 1996.

Moose, George. The Image of Man: The Creation of Modern Masculinity. Oxford University. New York and Oxford, 1996.

Moratto, Toby. The Politics of Homosexuality. Houghton Mifflin. Boston, 1981.

Morris, Desmond. Patterns of Reproductive Behaviour. McGraw-Hill Book Company. New York, 1970.

Mort, Frank. Capital Affairs London and the Making of the Permissive Society. Yale University Press. New Haven and London, 2010.

Murphy FRCPI, Siobhamn M., Gary Brook MD, FRCP, and Martin A. Birchall MD(Contab), FRCS , FRCS(Otol). HIV Infection and AIDS. Churchill Livingstone. London, 2000.

Murphy, Timothy F. Gay Science The Ethics of Sexual Orientation Research. Columbia University Press. New York, 1997.

Murphy, Timothy F. Readers Guide to Lesbian and Gay Studies. Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers. Chicago & London, 2000.

Murray, David B. editor. Homophobias Lust and Loathing Across Time and Space. Duke University Press. Durham and London, 2009.

Nava, Michael & Robert Dawidoff. Created Equal: Why Gay Rights Matter to America. St. Martin's Press. New York, 1994.

Nardi, Peter M. Gay Men's Friendships. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1999.

Neill, James. The Origins and Role of Same-Sex Relations in Human Societies. McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers. Jefferson, North Carolina and London, 2009.

Nola, Robert, editor. Foucault. Frank Cass. London and Portland, OR, 1998.

Norton, Rictor. Mother Clap's Molly House The Gay Subculture in England 1700-1830. The Chalford Press. Gloucestershire, England, 2006.

Norton, Rictor. The Myth of the Modern Homosexual. Cassell. London and Washington, 1997.

Null, Ph.D. Gary with James Feast. AIDS: A Second Opinion. Seven Stories Press. New York, Toronto, London, and Sydney, 2002.

Nungessor, Lon G. Homosexual Acts, Actors, and Identities. Praeger. New York, 1983.

Nussabaum, Martha C. and Juha Sihvola. The Sleep of Reason Erotic Experience and Sexual Ethics in Ancient Greece and Rome. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 2002.

Nye, Robert A., Editor. Sexuality. Oxford University Press. New York, 1999.

Omoto, Allen M. and Howard S. Kurtzman editors. Sexual orientation and Mental Health: Examining Identity Development in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People. American Psychological Association. Washington, DC, 2006.

Oosterhuis, Harry. Stepchildren of Nature: Kraft-Ebing, Psychiatry, and the Making of Sexual Identity. Univernisty of Chicago Press. Chicago, 2000.

Oppenheimer, Joshua and Helena Reckitt editors. Acting on AIDS: Sex, Drugs, and Politics. Serpent's Tail. London and New York, 1997.

Paigila, Camille. Vamps & Tramps. Vintage Books. New York, 1994.

Panem, Sandra. The AIDS Bureaucracy. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA and London, England, 1988.

Patton, Cindy. Fatal Advice: How Safe-Sex Education Went Wrong. Duke University Press. Durham & London, 1996.

Patton, Cindy. Inventing AIDS. Routledge. New York & London, 1990.

Patten, Cindy. Globalizing AIDS. University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis and London, 2002.

Paul, William Ed.D, James D. Weinrich Ph.D., John C. Consiorek Ph.D., and Mary E. Hotvedt Ph.D. Homosexuality Social, Psychological, and Biological Issues. Sage Publications. Beverly Hills, 1982.

Percy III, William Armstrong. Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece. University of Illinois Press. Urbana and Chicago, 1996.

Peddicord, O.C., Richard. Gay and Lesbian Rights: A Question of Sexual Ethics or Social Justice. Sheed & Ward. Kansas City, 1996

Perow, Charles and Mauro F. Guillen. The AIDS Disaster: The Failure of Organizations in New York and the Nation. Yale University Press. New Haven and London, 1990.

Phelan, Shane. Sexual Strangers: Gays, Lesbians, and Dilemmas of Citizenship. Temple University Press. Philadelphia, 2001.

Phillips, Kim M. and Barry Reay. Sexualities in History. Routledge. New York and London, 2002.

Plummer, PhD, David. One of the Boys Masculinity, Homophobia, and Modern Manhood. Harrington Park Press. New York, London and Oxford, 1999.

Plummer, Kenneth, editor. The Making of the Modern Homosexual. Hutchinson. London, 1981.

Plummer, Ken editor. Modern Homosexualities Fragments of Lesbian and Gay experience. Routledge. London & New York, 1992.

Plummer, Ken, Editor. Sexualities: Critical Concepts in Sociology. Volume I Making a Sociology of Sexualities. Routledge. London & New York, 2002.

Plummer, Ken, Editor. Sexualities: Critical Concepts in Sociology. Volume II Some Elements for an Account of the Social Organization of Sexualities. Routledge. London & New York, 2002.

Plummer, Ken, Editor. Sexualities: Critical Concepts in Sociology. Volume III Difference and Diversity of Sexualities. Routledge. London & New York, 2002.

Plummer, Ken, Editor. Sexualities: Critical Concepts in Sociology. Volume IV Sexualities and Their Future. Routledge. London & New York, 2002.

Pomeroy, Wardell B. Dr. Kinsey And The Institute For Sex Research. Yale University Press. New Haven, 1972.

Porter, Roy and Lesley Hall. The Facts of Life The Creation of Sexual Knowledge in Britain, 1650-1950. Yale University Press. New Haven and London, 1995.

Porter, Roy and Mikulas Teich, editors. Sexual Knowledge, Sexual Science: The History of Attitudes to Sexuality. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK, 1994.

Potts, Malcom and Roger Short. Ever Since Adam and Eve. CambridgeUniversity Press. Cambridge, UK, 1999.

Queen, Carol and Lawrence Schimel. PoMoSexuals Challenging Assumptions About Gender and Sexuality. Cleis Press. San Francisco, 1997.

Racevskis, Karlis, editor. Critical Essays on Michel Focault. G. K. Hall and Co. New York, 1999.

Rechy, John. Numbers. Grove Press, Inc. New York, 1967.

Rechy, John. The Sexual Outlaw. Grove Weidenfeld. New York, 1977.

Richards, David A. J. Women, Gays, and the Constitution: The Grounds for Feminism and Gay Rights in Culture and Law. University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1998.

Richards, David, J. Identity and the Case for Gay Rights. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1999.

Ridinger, Robert B. Marks. The Gay and Lesbian Movement: References and Resources. G. K. Hall and Co. New York, 1996.

Rimmerman, Craig A. From Identity to Politics: The Lesbian and Gay Movements in the United States. Temple University Press. Philadelphia, 2002.

Robb, Graham. Strangers Homosexual Love in the Nineteenth Century. W. W. Norton & Company. New York and London, 2003.

Robertson, Jennifer, editor. Same-Sex Cultures and Sexualities: An Anthropological Reader. Blackwell Publishing. Malden, MA, Oxford, UK, & Carlton, AU, 2005.

Robinson, Paul. The Modernization of Sex: Havelock Ellis, Alfred Kinsey, William Masters and Virginia Johnson. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, New York, 1989.

Rocke, Michael. Forbidden Friendships Homosexuality and Male Culture in Renaissance Florence. Oxford University Press. New York and Oxford, 1996.

Rofes, Eric. Dry Bones Breathe Gay men Creating Post-AIDS Identities and Cultures. Harrington Press. New York and London, 1998.

Root-Berstein, Robert S. Rethinking AIDS: The Tragic Cost of Premature Consensus. The Free Press. New York, 1993.

Rosario, Vernon A. editor. Science and Homosexualities. Routledge. New York and London, 1997.

Rosario, Vernon A. Homosexuality and Science A Guide to the Debates. ABC-CLIO. Santa Barbara, CA, Denver, CO & Oxford, England, 2002.

Rosen, Ismond, Editor. Sexual Deviation. Oxford University Press. Oxford and New York, 1996.

Rotello, Gabriel. Sexual Ecology: AIDS and the Destiny of Gay Men. A Dutton Book. New York, 1997.

Rothblum, Esther D. and Lynne A. Bond editors. Preventing Heterosexism and Homophobia. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA, 1996.

Ruse, Michael. Homosexuality: A Philosophical Inquiry. Blackwell. Oxford & Cambridge, MA, 1990.

Rushing, William A. The AIDS Epidemic: Social Dimensions of an Infectious Disease. WestviewPress. Boulder, CO, 1995.

Ryan, Catlin, and Donna Futterman. Lesbian and Gay Youth. Columbia University Press. New York, 1998.

Sadownick, Douglas. Sex Between Men: An Intimate History of the Sex Lives of Men Postwar to Present. HarperSanFrancisco. San Francisco, 1996.

Savin-Williams, Ritch C. Mom, Dad. I'm Gay: How Families Negotiate Coming Out. American Psychological Association. Washington DC, 2001.

Savin-Williams, Ritch C. & Kenneth M. Cohen. The Lives of Lesbians, Gays, and Bisexuals Children to Adults. Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Fort Worth, 1996.

Savin-Williams, Ritch C. The New Gay Teenager. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA, 2005.

Schmidt, Thomas E. Straight and Narrow? InterVarsity Press. Downers Grove, IL, 1995.

Seidman, Steven. Embattled Eros: Sexual Politics and Ethnics in Contemporary America. Routledge. New York, 1992.

Seidman, Steven editor. Queer Theory/Sociology. Blackwell Publishers. Cambridge, MA, 1996.

Shenton, Joan. Positively False: Exposing the Myths Around HIV and AIDS. I. B. Tauris. London and New York, 1998.

Shernoff, Michael. without condoms: unprotected sex, gay men & backbaring. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. New York, 2006.

Siegal, MD, Frederick P. and Marta Siegal. AIDS: The Medical Mystery. Grove press, Inc. New York, 1983.

Signorile, Michelangelo. Life Outside. HarperCollins Publishers. New York, 1997.

Signorile, Michelangelo. Hitting Hard. Carroll & Graf Publishers. New York, 2005.

Siker, Jeffery S. editor. Homosexuality in the Church. Westminster John Knox Press. Louisville, KY, 1994.

Sissa, Giulia. Translated by George Staunton. Sex and Sensuality in the Ancient World. Yale University Press. New Haven and London, 2008.

Skinner, Marilyn B. Sexually in Greek and Roman Culture. Blackwell Publishing. Malden, MA; Oxford, UK; and Victoria, Australia, 2005.

Snitow, Ann, Christine Stansell, and Sharon Thompson. Powers of Desire The Politics of Sexuality. Monthly Review Press. New York, 1983.

Snyder, R. Claire. Gay Marriage and Democracy Equality for All. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc. New York, Toronto, Oxford, 2006

Socarides, Charles W., Homosexuality. Jason Aronson. New York and London, 1978.

Spargo, Tamsin. Foucault and Queer Theory. Icon Books Uk and Totem Books USA, 1999.

Spencer, Colin. Homosexuality in History. Harcourt Brace & Company. New York, 1995.

Stanton, Glen, T. and Bill Maier. Marriage on Trial: the Case Against Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting. Intervarsity Press. Downers Grove, 2004.

Stearns, Peter N. Sexuality in World History. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. London & New York, 2009.

Stein, Edward. The Mismeasure of Desire. Oxford University Press. Oxford, 1999.

Stevenson, Ph.D., Michael R. & Jeanine C. Cogan Ph.D. Everyday Activism: A Handbook for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People and Their Allies. Routledge. New York & London, 2003.

Strasser, Mark editor. Defending Same-Sex Marriage Volume 1 “Separate But Equal” No More A Guide to the Legal Status of Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, and Other Partnerships. Praeger. Westport, Connecticut & London, 2007.

Strommen, Merton P. The Church and Homosexuality Searching for a Middle Ground. Kirk House Publishers. Minneapolis, MN, 2001.

Stott, John. Same Sex Partnerships? Fleming H Revell. Grand Rapids, 1998.

Sullivan, Andrew. Same – Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. Vintage Books. New York, 1997.

Sullivan, PhD., Michael, K. Sexual Minorities: Discrimination, Challenges, and Development in America. The Haworth Social Work Practice Press. New York, 2003.

Szasz M. D., Thomas, S. The Manufacture of Madness. Harper and Row Publishers. New York, Evanston, and London, 1970.

Szasz, Thomas. Sex by Prescription: The Startling Truth about Today's Sex Therapy. Syracuse University Press. Syracuse, New York, 1990.

Tamagne, Florence. A History of Homosexuality in Europe Berlin, London, Paris 1919-1939. Algora Publishing. New York, 2004.

Terry, Jennifer. An American Obession Science, Medicine, and Homosexuality in Modern Society. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 1999.

Thorton, Bruse S. Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality. Westview Press. Boulder, CO, 1997.

Trumbach, Randolph. “Modern Sodomy: The Origins of Homosexuality, 1700-1800” in A Gay History of Britain Love and Sex Between Men Since the Middle Ages editor Matt Cook.

Trumbach, Randolph. Sex and the Gender Revolution Volume One Heterosexuality and the Third Gender in Enlightenment London. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago & London, 1998.

Turner, Charles F., Heather G. Miller, and Lincoln E. Moses, Editors. AIDS Sexual Behavior and Intravenous Drug Use. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C., 1989.

Vanggard, Thorkil. Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World. International Universities Press, Inc. New York, 1972.

Vasey, Michael. Strangers and Friends. Hodder & Stroughton. London, 1995.

Wardle, Lynn D., Mark stressor, William C. Duncan, and David Orgon Coolidge editors. Marriage and Same-Sex Unions A Debate. Praeger. Wesport, Connecticut and London, 2003.

Wardle, Lynn, D. What's the Harm? Does Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage really Harm Individuals, Families or Society? University Press of America, Inc. Lanham, Boulder, New York, Toronto, Plymouth, UK, 2008.

Watney, Simon. Practices of Freedom: Selected Writings on HIV/AIDS. Duke University Press. Durham, 1994.

Weeks, Jeffrey. The World We Have Won: The Remaking of Erotic and Intimate Life. Routledge. London and New York, 2007

Weeks, Jeffrey. Coming Out: Homosexual Politics in Britain, from the Nineteenth Century to the Present. Quartet Books. London, Melbourne, & New York, 1977.

Weeks, Jeffrey. Making Sexual History. Polity Press, 2000.

Weeks, Jeffery. Sexuality and Its Discontents Meanings, Myths and Modern Sexualities. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1988.

Weeks, Jeffery and Janet Holland editors. Sexual Cultures Communities, Values, and Intimacy. Macmillan. London, 1996.

Weeks, Jeffery, Brian Heaphy and Catherine Donovan. Same Sex Intimacies Families of Choice and Other Life Experiments. Routledge. London and New York, 2001.

Weeks, Jeffery. Sex, Politics and Society The regulation of sexuality since 1800. Longman, Inc. New York, 1981.

West, D. J. Homosexuality Re-Exaimed. The University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis, 1977.

West, Donald J and Richard Green, editors. Sociolegal Control of Homosexuality A Multi-Nation Comparison. Plenum Press. New York and London, 1997.

White, John. Sexual Liberation or Sexual License? The American Revolt Against Victorianism. Ivan R. Dee Publisher, Chicago, 2000.

White, John. Eros Redeemed Breaking the Stranglehold of Sexual Sin. InterVarsity Press. Downers Grove, IL, 1993.

White, Todd, C. Pre-Gay L.A. A Social History of the Movements for Homosexual Rights. University of Illinois Press. Urbana and Chicago, 2009.

Wickler, Wolfgang. The Sexual Code: The Social Behavior of Animals and Men. Doubleday & Company, Inc. Garden City, NY, 1972.

Wiederman, and Whitley editors. Handbook for Conducting Sex Research on Human Sexually. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Mahwah, NJ and London, 2002.

Wilson, Glenn and Qazi Rahman. Born Gay: The Psychobiology of Sex Orientation. Peter Owen Publishers. London and Chester Springs, 2005.

Windybank, Susan. Wild Sex: Way beyond the Birds and Bees. St. Martin's Press. New York, 1991.

Wold, Donald J. Out of Order. Baker Books. Grand Rapids, MI, 1998.

Wolfe, Christopher editor. Homosexuality and American Public Life. Spence Publishing Company. Dallas, 1999.

Wolman, Benjamin B. Handbook of Sexuality. Prentice-Hall, Inc.Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1980.

Wright, Rogers H. and Nicolas A. Cummings. Destructive Trends in Mental Health: The Well-Intentioned Path to Harm. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. New York and Hove, 2005.

Yarhouse, Mark, A. and Lori A. Burkett. Sexual Identity: A Guide to Living in the Time Between the Times. University Press of America, Inc. New York, 2003.

Yarhouse, Mark, A. and Erica S. N. Tan. Sexual Identity Synthesis: Attributions, Meaning-Making, and Search for Congruence. University Press of America, Inc. New York, 2004.

Young – Bruehl, Elisabeth. The Anatomy of Prejudices. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1996.

Younger, John G. Sex in the Ancient World From A to Z. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. London and New York, 2005.

Zucker Ph.D., Kenneth J. & Bradley M.D., Susan J. Gender Identity Disorder and Psychosexual Problems in Children and Adolescents. The Guilford Press. New York & London, 1995.

Chapter Five: Types of Homosexualities / Age-Structured

Larry Houston — 2011-09-03T20:18:26Z

Chapter Five Age-Structured Homosexuality

3. Age Structured Homosexuality: Greek Pederasty

Sex was viewed as directional, and having two roles active and passive

Homosexuality in Ancient Greece

Kinaidos

Pederasty

“Secondly, as has been demonstrated, an ethical basis was essential for the Dorian relationship.” (Vanggard, Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World, p. 43)

erastes and eromenos

“The age of a beloved boy seems always to have been between 12 and twenty.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.68)

“As a rule the first sign of down on the chin of the beloved deprived him of his lover.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.68)

“As a rule the lover in these associations was a mature man less than forty years of age.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.68)

Greek Philosophers

Plato

Aristotle

Physiognomy

“The pseudo-Aristotelian Physiognomy similarly describes the effects of passive homosexuality on the body: The effeminate man is drooping-eyed, knock=kneed, his head hanging on one shoulder, his hands carried upturned and flabby. He wriggles his loins as he walks, or tries not to, and he looks furtively. Both these passages, like the ones in Plato, see homosexuality as a deformed condition brought about by a natural disorder or by habit-something, in short, “abnormal,” not quite the practice “accepted by and fully integrated into society” that some modern scholars believe it to be.” (Thorton, Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality, p.105)

Greek Laws

Also there are written records of legal provisions regulating various forms of homoerotic behavior. These legal provisions may be may be grouped into three categories. The first group has been mentioned before, legal provisions surrounding male prostitution. The male lost the right to address the Assembly and to participate in other areas of civil life if he engaged in homosexual intercourse for gain. These legal provisions against male prostitution also applied to pederasty. A second group addressed laws relating to education and courtship. General provisions concerning sexual assault comprised the third group of laws that may apply to all sexual behavior, whether it was heterosexual or homosexual in nature. Concerning pederasty itself, numerous laws addressed it, and in various ways throughout Greece. Because it was mostly limited to the ruling class and therefore for the most part socially acceptable in practical terms the laws were rarely enforced. Except in cases where within the ruling class they were used to gain political advantage in disputes.

“But in Greece, though pederasty was forbidden by law in most cities, it had become so fashionable that no one troubled to conceal it. On the contrary, such tendencies were respected and even approved.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.63)

“We are clearly in a different realm from the romantic pursuit of young men in their teens by young men in their twenties known as paederasty, an activity well illustrated on Athenian vases of the late sixth and early fifth centuries B.C.E. and portrayed in Plato's dialogues as an experience sometimes heartbreaking, sometimes delicious, but always of general interest and approval. In paederasty, as Dover, Golden, and Foucault have carefully demonstrated, a variety of conventions combined to protect the junior partner from the stigma of effeminacy, of being a kinaidos. (Winkler, “Laying Now the Law: The Oversight of Men's Sexual Behavior in Classical Athens”. p. 186 in Before Sexuality The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World editors David M. Halperin, John J. Winkler and Froma I. Zeitlin)

“As Dover has aptly observed (1978, 88 f.), the same kind of two-faced morality must have governed homosexual seduction that controls heterosexual relations in most societies; pursuit and seduction are sanctioned, the yielding to seduction is not. Athens went to great lengths to protect its handsome young sons from men preying on their beauty; stringent measures were built into the legal system to prevent boys from falling into prostitution. However since love gifts and social favors were part of the pederastic pattern, it must have been difficult to determine exactly at which point prostitution began.” (Keuls, The Reign of the Phallus Sexual Politics in Ancient Greece, p. 296

“All the same, at Athens, a whole body of laws existed for the purpose of restraining the spread of pederasty. This legislation probably dated back to the time of Solon. It aimed among many other things at keeping male lovers out the schools and exercising arenas so far as possible. (See Aeschines, Against Timarchus, 9-11.) But laws can do very little to suppress widely disseminated and inveterate habits.” (Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece, p.67)

“The available evidence points to a certain Athenian nervousness regarding all types of homosexual encounters. Solon's laws concerning homosexuality, for which our chief source is Aeschines' speech Against Timarchus, attempted to regulate its practice and to protect Athenian citizens from sexual abuses: slaves could not indulge in homosexuality willingly or unwillingly or frequent the palaestras; free persons could not be prostituted or violated; and fathers were encouraged to protect their sons from seduction by employing guardians to watch out for their best interests, at least until they reached an age at which they could make intelligent decisions regarding the conduct of their lives.” (Henderson, The Maculate Muse, p.204-205)

“From Aeschines' speech it is possible to perceive something of the code of behavior that surrounded the carrying out of such affairs. Love affairs between men and boys or between grown men could, depending on the circumstances, be licentious and depraved or noble and chaste. If a man conducted the affair high-mindedly, without any kind of payment and out of proper regard for his lover's beauty and -----, then no one could blame him for satisfying his desires. But if a man prostituted himself for payment or made a habit of surrendering his body or pursuing young men for purely sensual purposes, than he could legitimately be called to account for lewdness.” (Henderson, The Maculate Muse, p.205)

“An important turning-point is indicated by the name of Solon (Aeschine, Tim., 138; Charicles, ii, 262 ff.), who, himself a homosexual, issues important laws for the regulation of paederasty, providing in the first place, especially, that a slave might not have connection with a free-born boy. This shows two things: first, that paedophilla was recognized in Athens by the legislator, and secondly that the legislator did not consider the feeling of superiority of the free born to be diminished by intimate relations with a slaves. Further, laws were issued (Aeschines, Tim., 13-15) which were intended to protect free-born youths from abuse during their minority. Another law deprived those of their civic rights who incited free boys to offer their charms for sale professionally; for prostitution has nothing to do with paedophilla, of which we are speaking here, and in which we must rather think always only of a voluntary relationship that is based upon mutual affection.” (Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece, p. 452-453) “Solon, the famous lawgiver and chief archon at Athens in 594/3 B.C., is alleged to have instituted two pieces of moral legislation in Athens pertaining to homosexuality in the gymnasium. The first prohibits slaves from activities of the gymnasium and from having freeborn slaves as lovers:” (Scanlon, Eros and Greek Athletics, p. 212)

“A second “Solonian” law, this probably dating to the late fifth century, prescribes hours for opening and closing schools and palaestrae to discourage homosexual liaisons from taking place there in the dark or without the presence of the proper supervisors:” (Scanlon, Eros and Greek Athletics, p. 213)

“The Athenians themselves were not unaware of these ambiguities and contradictions. To begin with: according to the Xenophon, Greeks were well aware of that laws and customs regarding pederasty varied widely between different states. Some prohibited it outright, others explicitly permitted it. In the Symposium Plato put into the mouth of Pausanias an econcomium of love which explicitly addresses the conflicts within Athenian norms and customs pertaining to pederasty. Whereas for the rest of Greece these laws and customs are clear and well defined, explains Pausanias, those of Sparta are “poikilos”-intricate, complicated, subtle. He comments that Athenian legislation in this are is admirable, but difficult to understand; the difficulty consists in the simultaneous approbation and censure which social norms and legal rules attach to the pursuit of a pederastic courtship.” (Cohen, Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens, p. 152 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey)

“The legal provisions regulating various forms of homoerotic behaviour may be grouped in three categories: laws relating to prostitution; laws relating to education and courtship; and finally, general provision concerning sexual assault. These are only categories of convenience, however, and there can be considerable overlap between them. The laws concerning male prostitution may be considered first. One statue partially disenfranchised any Athenian citizen who prostituted himself, whether as a boy or as an adult; he lost his right to address the Assembly and to participate in other important areas of civic life. Secondly, if a boy was hired out for sexual services by his father, brother, uncle or guardian, they were subject to a public action, as was the man who hired him. Thirdly, a general statue prohibit procuring and applied any free-born child or woman.” (Cohen, Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens, p. 153 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey)

“The second category of laws pertained to education and set out a series of detailed prohibitions designed, among other things, to protect schoolboys from erotic attentions of older males. These laws regulated all the contacts which boys had with adult males during the period at school, and provided for an appointment of public officials to ensure that proper order was maintained. According to Aeschines, the law forbade the schools to open before sunrise or to stay open after dark, and strictly regulated who might enter and under what circumstances. Finally, another law prohibited slaves from courting free boys.” (Cohen, Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens, p. 153-154 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey)

“The third kind of statutory prohibition is rather more problematical than the first two and has received scant attention in regard to regulation of homoerotic conduct. Here I referto the law of hubris (outrage or abuse). Current scholarship on pederasty commonly asserts that there was no law prohibiting an Athenian male from consummating a sexual relationship with a free boy without using force or payment. This point is usually adduced as the cornerstone of the standard interpretation. This interpretation ignores, however, a series of questions concerning the legal context of pederastic sexuality which, to my knowledge has never been asked. Did the Athenian law acknowledge an age of consent in its conceptualization of sexual assault and seduction? If the consent of the boy was not a bar to prosecution, did any consummated sexual relationship with a boy fulfill the required elements of the offence? Did Athenian law have some notion equivalent to statutory rape in modern legal systems, where consent is the crucial issue in definition of rape offenses? An affirmative answer to any of these questions would require one to reassess the standard view that the active role in pederastic relationships was absolutely free from any taint of disapprobation. (Cohen, Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens, p. 154 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey)

“The set of legal norms embodied in these statues reflects a social order which encompassed a profound ambivalence and anxiety in regard to male-male sexuality; a social order which recognized the existence and persistence of such behaviour, but was deeply concerned about the dangers which it represented. The chief of these dangers was the corruption of the future of the polis, represented by the male, participated in sexual intercourse with men were believed to have pros children of citizen families. Boys who, under certain circumstances participated in sexual intercourse with men were believed to have acted for gain and to have adopted a submissive role which disqualified them as potential citizens. Likewise, adult citizens who prostituted themselves were subject to the same civic disabilities and opprobrium. These laws represented one of the severest sanctions which such a society could impose, and they reflect the level of concern for the preservation of the citizen body.” (Cohen, Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens, p. 156-157 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey)

“Scholars usually do not refer to hubris in connection with pederasty because they believe hubris to require violent insult and outrage. They have not paid sufficient attention, however, to the way in which the law of hubris may have provided for the principle criminal penalties for rape. But although rape is often characterized as hubris, so is seduction. Euphiletus, foe example, refers to the hubris which the lover of his wife has committed against him (Lysias 1.4, 17, 25) and an oration of Demosthenes involves a prosecution for hubris (hubreos graphe) brought by a son on account of the seduction of his mother. Such contexts perfectly match Aristotle's definition of hubris as any behaviors which dishonors and shames the victim for the pleasure or gratification of the offender (Rhetoric 1387b). Indeed, it is in this connection that Aeschines introduced the law of hubris into the catalogue of statutes which he enumerated as regulating paederasty in Athens in the fourth century B.C. In fact, when he first refers to the law of hubris he characterizes it as the statute which includes all such conduct in one summary prohibition: “If anyone conmmits hubris against a child or man or woman or anyone free or slave . . .” (Aeschines 1, 15). Accordingly, Athenian sources qualify both rape and seduction of women and children as acts of hubris, for both violate the sexual integrity and honor of the family.” (Cohen, Law, Sexuality, and Society The Enforcement of Morals in Classical Athens, p.178-179)

“The violation of a free boy was hubris, or wanton disregard of the rights of another, and could lead to the death penalty. Apparently fathers scolded and schoolmates teased boys who had lovers. But we do not know how often these relationships were sexual; they might have been twilight moments, frequently occurring yet rarely acknowledged.” (Clark, Desire A History of European Sexuality, p. 23)

We can now in conclusion say homoerotic behavior in ancient Greece and our modern western culture has much more in common and for the most part it is in agreement. There is great confusion and disagreement. The whole idea of the societal acceptance and legalization of homosexual behavior is the agenda and focus of homosexuals themselves and those on the liberal political left. Attempting to bring about the acceptance and change, the social and legal tolerance of homosexuality by a minority upon the majority. When viewed in the context of the defining marriage to allow same-sex marriage, and voting by the general population homosexual behavior is not approved. Though one important difference when comparing homosexuality between the two is that concerning the sexual component to pederasty, sex between adult males and adolescent boys is legally and socially not allowed in modern western society.

Bibliography

Cantarella, Eva. Translated by CormacO Cuilleanain. Bisexuality in the Ancient World. Yale University Press. New Haven & London, 1992.

Clark, Anna. Desire A History of European Sexuality. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. New York and London, 2008.

Cohen, David. Law, Society and Homosexuality in Classical Athens. p. 151-166 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey.

Cohen, David. Law, Sexuality, and Society The Enforcement of Morals in Classical Athens. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England, 1991.

Detel, Wolfgang. Translated by David Wigg-Wolf. Foucault and Classical Antiquity Power, Ethics and Knowledge. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Dover, K. J. Classical Greek Attitudes to Sexual Behavior, p. 114-125 in Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome, editors Mark Golden and Peter Toohey.

Downing, Christine. Myths and Mysteries of Same-Sex Love. Continuum Publishing Company. New York, 1989.

Finnis, John. “Law, Morality, and “Sexual Orientation””, p.31- 42 in Same Sex Debating the Ethics, Science and Culture of Homosexuality, editor John Corvino. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Lanham, Maryland, 1997.

Flacelliere, Love in Ancient Greece. Greenwood Press Publishers. Westport, Connecticut, 1973.

Golden, Mark and Peter Toohey. Editors. Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh, 2003.

Halperin, David M. One Hundred Years of Homosexuality and Other essays on Greek Love. Routledge. New York and London, 1990.

Henderson, Jeffery. The Maculate Muse. Yale University Press. New Haven, 1975.

Garrison, Daniel H. Sexual Culture in Ancient Greece. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman OK, 2000.

Golden, Mark and Peter Toohey. Editors. Sex and Difference in Ancient Greece and Rome. Edinburgh University Press. Edinburgh, 2003.

King, “Sowing the Field: Greek and Roman Sexology, p. 29-46 in Sexual Knowledge Sexual Science: The History of the Attitudes in Sexuality editors Roy Porter and Mikulas Teich.

Keuls, Eva C. The Reign of the Phallus Sexual Politics in Ancient Greece. University of California Press. Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London, 1985.

Licht, Hans. Sexual Life in Ancient Greece. Constable and Company Limited. London, 1994.

McLure, Laura K. Editor. Sexuality and Gender in the Classical World Readings and Sources. Blackwell Publishers. Oxford & Malden, MA, 2002.

Nussabaum, Martha C. and Juha Sihvola. The Sleep of Reason Erotic Experience and Sexual Ethics in Ancient Greece and Rome. The University of Chicago Press. Chicago and London, 2002.

Porter, Roy and Mikulas Teich editors. Sexual Knowledge, Sexual Science: The History of the Attitudes to Sexuality. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, 1994.

Scanlon, Thomas F. Eros and Greek Athletics. Oxford University Press. Oxford and New York, 2002.

Sissa, Giulia. Translated by George Staunton. Sex and Sensuality in the Ancient World. Yale University Press. New Haven and London, 2008.

Thorton, Bruse S. Eros The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality. Westview Press. Boulder, CO, 1997.

Vanggard, Thorkil. Phallos A Symbol and Its History in the Male World. International Universities Press, Inc. New York, 1972.

Williams, Craig A. Roman Homosexuality Ideologies of Masculinity in Classical Antiquity. Oxford University Press. Oxford & New York, 1999.

Winkler, John J. The Constraints of Desire The Anthropology of Sex and Gender in Ancient Greece. Routledge. New York and London, 1990.

Winkler, John J. “Laying Now the Law: The Oversight of Men's Sexual Behavior in Classical Athens”. p. 171-209 in Before Sexuality The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World editors David M. Halperin, John J. Winkler and Froma I. Zeitlin.

Younger, John G. Sex in the Ancient World From A to Z. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. London and New York, 2005.

Articles and Journals

Larry Houston — 2011-03-01T07:00:00Z

Articles and Journals

Allen, PhD. Michael S “Sullivan's Closet: A Reappraisal of Harry Stack Sullivan's Life and His Pioneering Role in American Psychiatry.” Journal of Homosexuality. 1995, Vol. 29 (1), p.1-18.

The Science of AIDS: Readings from Scientific American Magazine. W. H. Freeman and Company. New York, 1989.

Bailey, PhD, J. Michael. “Homosexuality and Mental Illness.” Archives of General Psychiatry. October 1999, Vol. 56, 883-884.

Bailey, J. Michael and Kenneth J. Zucker. “Childhood Sex-Typed Behavior and Sexual Orientation: A Conceptual Analysis and Quantitative Review.” Developmental Psychology 1995, Vol.31, No.1, 43-55.

Bailey, J. Michael. PhD. & Richard C Pillard, MD. “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation.” Archives of General Psychiatry. December 1991. Vol. 48, 1089-1096.

Baldwin, John D. Ph.D, and Jannice I. Baldwin. “The Socialization of Homosexuality and Heterosexuality in a Non-Western Society.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1989, Vol.18, No.1, 13-29.

Bancroft, John. “Homosexual Orientation The search for a biological basis.” British Journal Of Psychiatry. 1994, 164, 437-440.

Bancroft, M.D., John, Erik Janssen, Ph.D., David Strong, M.A., Lori Carnes, B.S., Zoran Vukadinovic, B.A., and J. Scott Long, Ph.D. “Sexual Risk Taking in Gay Men: The Reverance of Sexual Arousability, Mood, and Sensation Seeking.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. December 2003, Vol.23, No. 6, p.555-572.

Barber, Nigel. “Ecological and Psychosocial Correlates of Male Homosexuality A Cross-Cultural Investigation.” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. May 1988, Vol.29, No.3, 387-401.

Baumrind, Diana. “Commentary on Sexual Orientation: Research and Social Policy Implications.” Developmental Psychology 1995, Vol.31, No.1, 130-136.

Beatu, Lee A. “Identity Development of Homosexual Youth and Parental and Familial Influences on the Coming Out Process.” Adolescence. Fall 1999, Vol. 34, No. 135, 596-601.

Bem, Darly J. “Exotic Becomes Erotic: A Development Theory of Sexual Orientation.” Psychological Review.1996, Vol.103, No.2, 320-335.

Bem, Daryl J. “Is EBE Theory Supported by the Evidence? Is It Androcentric?” A Reply to Peplau et al. (1998).” Psychological Review. 1998, Vol.105, No.2, 395-398.

Bieber, Irving. “ A Discussion of “Homosexuality : The Ethical Challenge”.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1976, Vol. 44, No.2, 163-166.

Billingham, Robert E. and Stewart L. Hockenberry. “Gender Conformity, Masturbation Fantasy, Infatuation, and Sexual Orientation: A Discriminant Analysis Investigation.” The Journal of Sex Research. August 1987, Vol.23, No.3, 368-374.

Bocklandt, Sven, Steve Horvath, Eric Vil ain, and Dean H. Hammer. “Extreme skewing of X chromosome inactivation in mothers of homosexual men.” Human Genetics. 2006, 118:691-694.

Bolton Jr., F.G. & Ann E MacEachron.. “Adolescent Male Sexuality: A Developmental Perspective.” Journal of Adolescent Research. 1988, Vol.3, Nos. 3-4, 259-273.

Brookmeyer, Ron. “Reconstruction and Future Trends of the AIDS Epidemic in the United States.” Science. July 5, 1992, Vol.253, No. 5015, 37-42.

Byne, William MD, PhD, and Bruce Parsons, MD, PhD. “Human Sexual Orientation The Biological Theories Reappraised.” Archives of General Psychiatry. March 1993. Vol.50, 228-239.

Byne, MD, PhD William. “Why we Cannot Conclude That Sexual Orientation is Primarily a Biological Phenomenon”. Journal of Homosexuality. 1997, Vol. 34 (1), p. 73-80.

Cameron, Paul, Kirk Cameron and William L. Playfair. “Does Homosexual Activity Shorten Life?” Psychological Reports. 1998, 83, 847-866.

Cameron, Paul, Kirk Cameron and Kay Proctor. “Effect of Homosexuality Upon Public Health and Social Order.” Psychological Reports. 1989, 64, 1167-1179.

Carballo-Dieguez, Ph.D., Alex and Jose Bauermeister, MPH. “Barebacking”: Intentional Condomless Anal Sex in HIV-Risk Contexts. Reasons for and Against.” Journal of Homosexuality. 2004, Vol.47, No. 1, p. 1-16.

Cass, Vivenne C. “Homosexual Identity Formation: Testing a Theoretical Model.” The Journal of Sex Research May 1984, Vol. 20, No.2, 143-167.

Catania PhD, Joseph A. and et. al. “The Continuing HIV Epidemic Among Men Who have Sex With Men.” American Journal of Public Health. June 2001, Vol. 91, No. 6, 907-914.

Centers for Disease Control. Morbidity and Morality Weekly Report. 1999; 48: 45-48. “Increases in Unsafe Sex and Rectal Gonorrhea Among Men Who Sex With Men-San Francisco, California, 1994-1997.”

Centers for Disease Control. Morbidity and Morality Weekly Report. 2001; 50: 113-117. “Primary and Secondary Syphilis-United States, 1999.”

Centers for Disease Control. Morbidity and Morality Weekly Report. 2001; 50: 430-434.”HIV and AIDS – United States, 1981-2000.”

Centers for Disease Control. Morbidity and Morality Weekly Report. 2001; 50: 922-926. Shigella sonnei Outbreak Among Men Who Have Sex With Men-San Francisco, California, 2001.”

Centers for Disease Control. Morbidity and Morality Weekly Report. 2000; 49: 465-470. “HIV/AIDS Among Men Who Have Sex With Men and Inject Drugs-United States, 1985-1989.”

Centers for Disease Control. “Suicide Among Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults – United States, 1980-1992.” MMWR Weekly April 21, 1995/44(15); 289-291.

Committee on Adolescence. “Homosexuality and Adolescence.” Pediatrics. October 1993, Vol. 92, No. 4, 631-634.

Cox, BSc (Hons), Morg Psych, Stephen and Cynthia Gallois, PhD. “Gay and Lesbian Identity Development: A Social Identity Perspective.” Journal of Homosexuality. 1996, Vol. 30, (4), 1-30.

D'Augelli, Anthony R. and Scott L. Hershberger. “Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Youth in Community Settings: Personal Challenges and Mental Health Problems.” American Journal of Community Psychology. August 1993, Vol. 21, No. 4, 421-448.

D'Emilio, John. “Capitalism and Gay Identity, p. 467-476 in The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader by Henry Abelove, Aine Barale, and David Halperin. Routledge. New York and London, 1993.

Dailey, Timothy J. “ Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk.” Family Research Council website. www.frc.org/get/is01j.cfm.

Daily, Timothy J. “The Negative Heath Effects of Homosexuality.” Family Research Council website. www.frc.org/get/is01b1.cfm.

Daily, Timothy J. “Boys Will Be Boys: How a Scientific Cover-Up Led to Gender as a Social Construct.” Family Research Council website. www.frc.org/get/is01a1.cfm.

Daily, Timothy J. “Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse.” Family Research Council website. www.frc.org/get/is02e3.cfm.

Davison, Gerald C. “Homosexuality : The Ethical Challenge.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1976, Vol. 44, No.2, 157-162.

De Cecco, John P. “Confusing the Actor With the Act: Muddled Notions About Homosexuality.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1990. Vol.19, No.4, 409-412.

Delamater, John D. & Janet Shibley Hyde. “Essentialism vs Social Constructionism in the Study of Human Sexuality.” The Journal of Sex Research. 1998, Vol. 35, No. 1, 10-18.

Diamond, Milton. Ph.D. “Homosexuality and Bisexuality in Different Populations.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1993, Vol. 22, No. 4, 291-31.

Dube, Eric M. “The Role of Sexual Behavior in the Identification Process of Gay and Bisexual Males.” The Journal of Sex Research. Vol. 37, No. 2, May 2000, p.123-132.

Durby, Dennie D. “Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Youth. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services. 1994, Vol. 1, No. 3-4. 1-37.

Dykes, Benjamin. “Problems in Defining Cross-Culture “Kinds of Homosexuality” – and a Solution.” Journal of Homosexuality. 2001, Vol. 42 (2), 1-18.

Edwards, Willie J. “operating within the mainstream: copying and adjustment among a sample of homosexual youths.” Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 1996, 17, p. 229-251.

Ehrhardt, Anke A. & Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg. “Effects of Prenatal Sex Hormones on Gender-Related Behavior.” Science. March 20, 1981. Vol. 211, No. 4488, 1312-1318.

Elizur, Yoel Ph.D & Michael Ziv, M.A. “Family Support and Acceptance, Gay Male Identity Formation, and Psycholigical Adjustment: A Path Model.” Family Process. Summer 2001, Vol. 40, No. 2, 125-144.

Ellis, Lee & M. Ashley Ames. “Neurohormonal Functioning and Sexual Orientation: A Theory of Homosexuality-Heterosexuality.” Psychological Bulletin. 1987, Vol. 101, No. 2, 233-258.

Fausto-Sterling, Anne, and Evan Balaban. Genetics and Male Sexual Orientation.” Science. September 1993, Vol. 216, 1257.

Fay, Robert E., Charles F. Turner, Albert D. Classen, and John H. Gagnon. “Prevalence and Patterns of Same-Gender Sexual Contact Among Men.” Science. January 20, 1989, Vol. 243, No. 4889, 338-348.

Fenaughty, MA (HONS) John & Niki Harre, PhD. “Life on the Seesaw: A Qualitative Study of Suicide Resiliency Factors for Young Gay Men.” Journal of Homosexuality. 2003, Vol. 45 (1), p. 1-22.

Fergusson, PhD, David M., John Horwood, MSc, Annette L. Beautrais, PhD. “Is Sexual Orientation Related to Mental Health Problems and Suicidality in Young People?” Archives of General Psychiatry. Oct. 1999, Vol. 56, 876-880.

Fineberg, Harvey V. “The Social Dimensions of AIDS.” p.111-121 in The Science of AIDS: Readings from Scientific American Magazine. W. H. Freeman and Company. New York, 1989.

Finnis, John. “Law, Morality, and Sexual Orientation””, p.31- 42 in Same Sex Debating the Ethics, Science and Culture of Homosexuality, editor John Corvino. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Lanham, Maryland, 1997.

Floyd, Frank, J. Ph.D. and Roger Bokeman Ph.D. “Coming-Out Across the life Course” Implications of Age and Historical Context.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. June 2006, Vol. 35, No. 3, p. 287-296

Fox, Kimberly K. MD, MPH; Carlos del Rio, MD, King K Holmes, MD, PhD, Edward W Hook III, MD, Franklyn N Judson, MD, Joan S Knapp, PhD, Gary W Procop, MD, MS, Susan A Wang, MD, William L H Whittington, AB, and William C Levine, MD,MSc. “Gonorrhea in the HIV Era: A Reversal in Trends Among Men Who Have Sex With Men.” American Journal of Public Health. June 2001, Vol. 91, No. 6, 959-964.

Friedman, Richard C. M.D., and Jennifer I Downey, M.D. “Homosexuality.” The New England Journal of Medicine. Oct. 6, 1994, Vol. 331, No. 4

Friedman, MD, Richard C. “Homosexuality, Psychopathology, and Suicidality.” Archives of General Psychiatry. Oct. 1999, Vol. 56, 887-888.

Friedman, Robert M. “The Psychoanalytic Model of Male Homosexuality: A Historical and Theoretical Critique.” The Psychoanalytic Review. Winter 1986, Vol.73, No.4, 483-519.

Gabriel, Phillips, M. Psych. And Ray Over, Ph.D. “Adult Sexual Orientation in Relation to Memories of Childhood Gender Conforming and Gender Nonconforming Behaviors.” Archives Of Sexual Behavior. 1992, Vol. 21, No. 6, 543-558.

Gadpaille, Warren J. MD. “Cross-Species and Cross- Cultural Contributions to Understanding Homosexuality Activity.” Archives of General Psychiatry. March 1980, Vol. 37, 349-356.

Gamson, Joshua. “Must Identity Movements Self-Destruct?” p.515-537 in Sexualites: Critical Concepts in Sociology Volume II. Edited by Ken Plummer. Routledge. London and New York, 2002.

Garofalo, MD Robert; Cameron Wolf, MS; Shari Kessel, ScB; Judith Palfrey, MD; and Robert H. DuRant, PhD. “The Association Between Health Risk Behaviors and Sexual Orientation Among a School-based Sample of Adolescents.” Pediatrics. May 1998, Vol. 101, No. 5, 895-902.

Gauthier, DeAnn K. and Craig J. Forsyth. “bareback sex, bug chasers, and the gift of death.” Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 1999, 20, p. 85-100.

Ghaziani, Amin. “The Circuit Party's Faustin Bargain.” The Gay & Lesbian Review / Worldwide. July-August, 2005, Volume XII, Number 4, p. 21-24.

Gonsiorek John C PhD, Randall L. Sell, ScD, and James D. Weinrich, PhD. “Definition and Measurement of Sexual Orientation.” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 1995 Supplement, Vol. 25, 40-51.

Graaf, Ronde, Ph.D., Theo G. M. Sandfort, Ph.D., and Margreet ten Have, Ph.D. “Suicidality and Sexual Orientation: Differences Between en and Women in a General Population-Based sample from the Netherlands.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. June 2006, Vol. 35, No. 3, p. 253-262.

Green, Adam Isaiah. “chem friendly”: the institutional basis of ‘club drug' use in a sample of urban gay men.” Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2003, 24, p.427-447.

Gross PhD, Michael. “The Second Wave Will Drown Us.” American Journal of Public Health. June 2003, Vol. 93, No. 6, 872-879.

Grov, Christian. “make me your death slave”: men who have sex with men and use the internet to intentionally spread HIV.” Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2004, 25, p.329-349.

Gudel, Joseph P. “Homosexuality: Fact and Fiction”. Christian Research Journal. Summer 1992, page 30. (See also CRI Journal web site, article, crj0107a).

Gudel, Joseph P. “Homosexuality in Society, the Church, and Scripture”. Christian Research Journal Winter. 1993, page 8. (See also CRI Journal web site, article, crj0108a).

Haaga, David A. “Homophobia?” Journal of Social behavior and Personality. 1991, Vol. 6, No. 1, 171-174.

Haldeman, Douglas C. “The Practice and Ethics of Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy”. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1994, Vol. 62, No 2, 221-227.

Haldeman, PhD. Douglas C. “The Pseudo-science of Sexual Orientation Conversation Theraphy. Angels. December 1999, Vol.4, No. 1, 1-4.

Halleck, Seymour L. “Another Response to ‘Homosexuality: The Ethical Challenge'" Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1976, Vol. 44, No 2, 167-170.

Hammer, Dean H., Stella Hu, Victoria L Magnuson, Nan Hu, & Angela M. L. Pattatucci. “A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation.” Science. July 16, 1993, Vol. 261, No.5119, 321-327.

Herrel, Richard, MS, Jack Goldberg, PhD, William R True, PhD, MPH, Visvanathan Ramakrishman, PhD, Michael Lyons, PhD, Seth Eison, MD, Ming T Tsuang, MD DSc, PhD. “Sexual Orientation and Suicidality: A Co-twin Control Study in Adult Men.” Archives of General Psychiatry. Oct. 1999, Vol. 56, 867-874.

Hershberger, Scott L. “A Twin Registry Study of Male and Female Sexual Orientation.” The Journal of Sex Research. 1997, Vol. 34, No. 2, 212-222.

Hersberger, SL, NW Pilkington, AR D'Augelli. Predictors of Suicide Attempt Among Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Youth. Journal of Adolescent Research. October 1997, Vol. 12, No. 4, 477-497.

Hewitt, Christopher. “Homosexual Demography:Implications for the Spread of AIDS.” The Journal of Sex Research. 1998, Vol. 35, No. 4, 390-396.

Hockenberry, M.S., Stewart L. and Robert E. Billingham, Ph.D. “Sexual Orientation and Boyhood Gender Conformity: Development of the Boyhood Gender Conformity Scale (BGCS)”. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1987, Vol. 16, No. 6,

Hogan, John. “Gay Genes, Revisited.” Scientific America. November 1995, Vol. 273, No. 5, 26.

Hooker, Evelyn. “Parental Relations and Male Homosexuality in Patient and Nonpatient Samples”. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1969, Vol.33, No. 2, 140-142.

Horowitz, Janna L. MS Ed, PH.D. and Michael D Newcomb Ph.D. “A Multidimensional Approach to Homosexual Identity.” Journal of Homosexuality. 2001, Vol. 42, (2), 1-19.

Hudson, W. and Ricketts, W. “A Strategy for the Measurement of Homophobia.” Journal of Homosexuality, Summer, 1980Vol. 5 (4), 357-372.

Imperato-McGinley, Julianne, Luis Guerero, Teofilo Gautier, & Ralph E. Peterson. “Steroid 5 a-Reductase Deficiency in Man: An Inherited Form of Male Pseudohermaphroditism.” Science. December 12, 1974, Vol. 186, No, 4170, 1213- 1215.

Imperato-McGinley, M.D., Julianne, Ralphe E. Peterson M.D., Teofilo Gautier M.D. and Erasmo Sturla, M.D. “Androgens and the Evolution of Male-Gender Identity Among Male Pseudohermaphrodities with 5 a-Reductase Defiency.” New England Journal of Medicine. May 31, 1979, Vol. 300, No. 22. 1233-1237.

Keating, B.A., James and Ray Over, Ph.D. “Sexual Fantasies of Heterosexual and Homosexual Men.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1990, Vol. 19, No. 5, 462-475.

King, Michael & Elizabeth McDonald. “Homosexuals who are Twins.” The British Journal of Psychiatry. March 1992, Vol. 160, 407 - 409.

Kulkin, MSW Heidi S., Elizabeth A. Chauvin, MSW, Gretchen A. Percle, MSW. “Suicide Among Gay and Lesbian Adolscents and Young Adults: A Review of the Literature.” Journal of Homosexuality. 2000, Vol. 40 (1), p. 1-29.

LaBarbera, Peter, “The Gay Youth Suicide Myth”. The Journal of Human Sexuality.

Lebson, BS Micah. “Suicide Among Homosexual Youth.” Journal of Homosexuality. 2002, Vol. 42 (4), p. 107-117.

LeVay, Simon. “A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men.” Science. August 30, 1991, Vol. 253, No. 5023, 1034-1037.

Linn, Ph.D., Lawrence S. James Sinden Spiegel MD, MSPH, William Christopher Mathew MD, Barbara Leake Ph.D., Robert Lien MPH, Scott Brooks. “Recent Sexual Behaviors Among Homosexual Men Seeking Primary Medical Care.” Archives of internal Medicine. December 1989, Vol. 194, No. 12, 2685-2690.

Logan, PhD, Colleen R. Homophobia? No, Homopredjudice. Journal of Homosexuality. 1996. Vol. 31(3), p. 31- 53.

Lumby, M. “Homophobia: A quest for a Valid Scale.” Journal of Homosexuality, Fall 1976, Vol. 2, (1), p. 39-47.

Mann, Jonathan M., James Chin, Peter Piot and Thomas Quinn. “The International Epidemiology of AIDS.” p. 51-61 in The Science of AIDS: Readings from Scientific American Magazine. W. H. Freeman and Company. New York, 1989.

Manosevitz, Martin. “Early Sexual Behavior in Adult Homosexual and Heterosexual Males.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 1970, Vol. 76, No. 3, 396-402.

Mansergh, Gordon, Gary Marks, Grant N Colfax, Robert Guzman, Melissa Rader and Susan Buchbinder. “ ‘Barebacking' in a diverse sample of men who have sex with men.” AIDS. 2002, Vol.16, No. 4, 653-659.

Mansergh, Gordon, PhD, Grant N Colfax, MD, Gary Marks, PhD, Melissa Rader, MPH, Robert Guzman, BA, & Susan Buchbinder, MD. “The Circuit Party Men's Health Survey: Findings And Implications for Gay and Bisexual Men.” American Journal of Public Health. June 2001, Vol. 91, No. 6, 953-958.

Marshall, Eliot. “NIH's “Gay Gene” Study Questioned.” Science. June 30, 1995, Vol. 268, No. 5219,1841.

Mattison, Andrew M., Michael W. Ross, Tanya Woldson, Donald Franklin and HNRC Group. “ Circuit Party Attendance, Club Drug Use, and Unsafe Sex in Gay Men.” Journal of Substance Abuse. September 2001, Vol. 13, Issues 1-2, p.119-126.

McConaghy, DSc, MD, Nathaniel. “ Biologic Theories of Sexual Orientation.” Archives of General Psychiatry May. 1994, Volume 51, 431-431.

McConaghy D.Sc., M.D., Nathaniel. “Unresolved Issues in Scientific Sexology.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 199, Vol. 28, No. 4, 285-318.

McIntosh, Mary. “The Homosexual Role.” Social Problems. 1968, 16, 182-192.

McNall Miles PhD, Gary Remafedi, MD, MPH. “Relationship of Amphetamine and Other Substance Use to Unprotected Intercourse Among Young Men Who Have Sex With Men. Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine. Nov. 1999, Vol. 53, 1130-1135.

Mesholam, Uriel, Ph.D. “Bem's Theory of Sexual Orientation: Implication for Treatment and Prevention.” http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/bem.html.

Milham, J., San Miguel, C., and Kellogg, R. Fall, Factor Analytic Conceptualization of Attitudes Towards Male and Female Homosexuals. Journal of Homosexuality, 1976, Vol. 2 (1), 3-20.

Mills, John K. “The Psychoanalytic Perspective of Adolescent Homosexuality: A Review.” Adolescence. Winter 1990, Volume 25, No.100, 913-922.

Money, John. “Sin, Sickness, or Status?” American Psychologist. April 1987, Vol.42, No.4, 384-399.

Monroe, PhD Michael, Richard D. Baker, PhD, & Samuel Roll, PhD. “The Relationship of Homophobia to Intimacy in Heterosexual Men.” Journal of Homosexuality. 1997, Vol. 33(2), p. 23-37.

Moscicki, Eve K. ScD, MPH, Peter Mueher, PhD, Lloyd B. Potter, PhD. “Recommendations for a Research Agenda in Suicide and Sexual Orientation.” Suicide and Life -Threatening Behavior. 1995 Supplement, Vol. 25, 82-88.

Muehlenhard, Charlene L. “Categories and Sexuality.” Journal of Sex Research. May 2000, Vol. 37, No. 2, 101-107.

Muehrer, PhD, Peter. “Suicide and Sexual Orientation: A Critical Summary of Recent Research and Directions For Future Research.” Suicide and Life -Threatening Behavior. 1995 Supplement, Vol.25, 72-81.

Nicolosi, Joseph, Ph.D. “A Critique of Bem's E.B.E. Theory.” http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/critique.html.

O'Carroll, MD, MPH, Patrick W., Alan L. Berman, PhD, Ronald W. Maris, PhD, Eve K. Moscicki, ScD, MPH, Bryan L. Tanney, MD, and Morton M. Silverman, MD. “Beyond the Tower of Bable: A Nomenclature for Suicidology.” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. Fall 1996, Vol. 26(3), 237-252.

Olson MD, Eva D. and Cheryl A. King, PhD. “Gay and Lesbian Self-Identification: A Response to Rotheram-Borus and Fernandez”. Suicide and Life -Threatening Behavior. 1995 Supplement, Vol.25, 35-39.

Patterson, Charolette J. “Sexual Orientation and Human Development: An Overview.” Developmental Psychology.1995, Vol. 31, No.1, 3-11.

Paul, Jay P., Ron D. Stall, G. Michael Crosby, Donald C. Barrett, & Lorriane T Midanik. “Correlates of sexual-risk taking among gay male substance abusers.” Addiction. 1994 89, 971-983.

Payne,Tony. “ ”. Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Vol. 5, No. 2. Fall 2000, 17-19.

Peplau, Letita Anne, Linda D. Garnets, Leah R. Spaulding, Terri D. Conley, and Rosemary C. Veniegas. “A Critique of Bem's “Exotic Becomes Erotic” Theory of Sexual Orientation.” Psychological Review. 1998, Vol.105, No.2, 387-394.

Perkins, Daniel F. and Glen Hartless. “An Ecological Risk – Factor Examination of Suicide Ideation and Behavior of Adolescents.” January 2002, Vol. 17, No. 1, 3-26.

Peterson Anne C .Phd, Leffert, Nacny PhD, and Barbara L. Grham, BA “ Adolescent Development and the Emergence of Sexuality.” Suicide and Life -Threatening Behavior. 1995 Supplement, Vol. 25, 4-17.

Pillard, Richard C. MD, & J Michael Bailey, PhD. “A Biological Perspective on Sexual Orientation.” The Psychiatric Clinics of North America. March 1995, Vol.18, No.1, 71-84.

Phillips, Gabriel M. Psych & Ray Over, PhD. “Adult Sexual Orientation in Relation to Memories of Childhood Gender Conforming and Gender Nonconforming Behaviors.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1992, Vol. 21, No. 6, 543-558.

Proctor, Curtis D. and Victor K. Groze. “Risk Factors for Suicide among Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Youths.” Social Work. 1994, Vol. 39, No. 5, 504-513.

Remafedi, Gary MD, MPH, “Male Homosexuality: The Adolescent's Perspective.” Pediatrics. March 1987, Vol.79, No. 3, 326-330. Remafedi, Gary MD, MPH. “Adolescent Homosexuality: Psychosocial and Medical Implications.” Pediatrics March 1987, Vol.79, No. 3, 331-336.

Remafedi, MD, MPH, Gary, James A Farrow, MD and Robert W Deisher, MD. “Risk Factors for Attempted Suicide in Gay and Bisexual Youth.” Pediatrics. June 1991, Vol. 87, No. 6, 869-875.

Remafedi, MD, MPH., Gary, and S. French M Story, M. Resnick, R. Blum. “The Relationship Between Suicide Risk and Sexual Orientation: Results of a Population-Based Study.” American Journal of Public Health. January 1998, Vol. 1998, Vol. 88, No. 1, 57-60.

Remafedi, MD, MPH., Gary. “Suicide and Sexual Orientation.” Archives of General Psychiatry. Oct. 1999, Vol. 5, 885-886.

Remafedi, Gary, MD, MPH. “Sexual Orientation and Youth Suicide.” Journal of the American Medical Association. October 6, 1999, Vol. 282, No.13, p. 1291-1292.

Rice, George, Carol Anderson, Neil Risch, George Ebers. “Male Homosexuality: Absence of Linkage to Microsatellite Markers at Xq28.” Science. April 23, 1999, Vol. 284, No. 5414, 665-667.

Rich, MD, Charles L., Richard C. Fowler, MD, Deborah Young, MD, and Mary Blenkush, MD. “San Diego Suicide Study: Comparison of Gay to Straight Males. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. Winter 1986, Vol. 16(4), 448-456.

Rind, Bruce. “Biased Use of Cross-Cultural and Historical Perspectives on Male Homosexuality in Human Sexuality Textbooks.” Journal of Sex Research. November 1998, Vo. 35, No. 4, 397-407.

Rogers, Sy. “Questions I'm Most Asked About Homosexuality.” Exodus North America web site, Library.

Rondeau, Paul E. “Selling Homosexuality to America.” Regent University Law Review. Spring 2002, Vol. 14, No. 2, 443-485.

Root-Bernstein, Robert S. “Agenda for U.S. AIDS Research is Due for a Complete Overhaul.” The Scientist. Philade;phia, PA. April 4, 1994, Vol. 8, No. 7, p. 1,11,14.

Roscoe, BS, Will. “Making History: The Challenge of Gay and Lesbian Studies”, Journal of Homosexuality, 1988, Vol. 15(3/4), p. 1-40.

Rosenberg, PH.D. Philip S., Robert T. Biggar, M.D., James T. Goedert, M.D. “Declining Age at HIV Infection in the United States.” New England Journal of Medicine. March 17, 1994, Vol.330, No. 11, 789-790.

Ross, Michael W. and B.R. Simon Rosser. “Dimensions of Sexual Behavior in Homosexual Men: Replicability Across Time and Country.” Psychological Reports 1991, 68, 607-612.

Rotheram-Borus, PhD, Mary Jane and M Isabel Fernandez, PhD. “Sexual Orientation and Developmental Challenges Experienced by Gay and Lesbian Youths.” Suicide and Life - Threatening Behavior 1995 Supplement, Vol. 25, 26-34.

Rotheram-Borus, Mary J. Joyce Hunter, and Margaret Rosrio. “Suicidal Behavior and Gay Related Stress Among Gay and Bisexual Male Adolescents.” Journal of Adolescent Research. October 1994, Vol. 9, No. 4, 498-508.

Safren, Steven A. and Richard G. Heimberg. “Depression, Hopelessness, Suicidality and Related Factors in Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adolescents.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1999, Vol. 67, No. 6, 859-866.

San Miguel, MS., Christopher L. and Jim Milham, PhD., “The Role of Cognitive and Situational Variables in Aggression.” Journal of homosexuality. Fall 1976, Vol.2 (1), 11-27.

Savin-Williams, Ritch. “An Ethological Perspective on Homosexuality during Adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Research. 1987, Vol. 2, No. 3, 283-302.

Savin-Williams, Rich C. “ Verbal and Physical Abuse as Stressors in the Lives of Lesbian, Gay Male, and Bisexual Youth: Associations With School Problems, Running Away, Substance Abuse, Prostitution, and Suicide.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1994, Vol. 62, No. 2, 261-269.

Savin-Williams, Ritch C. “Suicide Attempts Among Sexual – Minority Youths: Population and Measurement Issues.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2001, Vol. 69, No. 6, 983-991.

Savin-Williams, Ritch C. Ph.D. and Geoffrey L. Ream, Ph.D. “Pubertal Onset and sexual Orientation in Adolescent National Probability Sample.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. June 2006, Vol. 35, No. 3, p. 279-286

Schneider, PhD, Stephen G., Norman L. Farberow, PhD, and Gabriel N. Kruks. “Suicidal Behavior in Adolescent and Young Adult Gay Men.” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. Winter 1989, Vol. 19(4), 381-394.

Schaffer, David. “Political Science.” The New Yorker. May 3, 1993, Vol. 69, 116.

Schaffer, David, FRCP (Lond) FRCP Psych (Lond), Prudence Fisher, MS, R H Hicks, Michael Parides, PhD, and Madelyn Gould PhD, MPH. “Sexual Orientation in Adolscents Who Commit Suicide.” Suicide and Life -Threatening Behavior 1995 Supplement, Vol. 25, 64-71.

Scmidt, Thomas E Ph.D. “Searching for Truth in Lifestyles: Homosexuality and Christian Morality.” Leadership University Reprint (web www.leaderu.com) . The Veritas Forum Lecture at University of North Carolina at Asheville. October 2, 1996.

Schneider, Margaret S., Laura S. Brown, Judith M. Glassgold. “Impolementing the Resolution on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation: A Guide for the Perplexed.” Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 2002, Vol.33, No.3, 265-276.

Schreier, Barry A. “Of Shoes, and Ships, and Sealing Wax: The Faulty and Specious Assumptions of Sexual Reorientation Therapies.” Journal of Mental Counseling October 1998, Volume 20 (4), 305-314.

Schuklenk, PhD (cand.), Udo and Michael Ristow, MD. “The Ethics of Research into the Cause(s) of Homosexuality. Journal of Homosexuality. 1996. Vol. 31(3), p.5-30.

Seidman, Stuart M.D. & Ronald Rieder, M.D. “ A Review of Sexual Behavior in the United States.” American Journal of Psychiatry March 1994, 151:3, 330-341.

Sell, ScD, Randall L. and Christian Petrulio, BA. “Sampling Homosexuals, Bisexuals, Gays and Lesbians for Public Health Research: A Review of the literature from 1990-1992.” Journal of Homosexuality. 1996, Vol. 30, (4), 31-58.

Shaffer, David. “Political Science.” The New Yorker. May 3, 1993. Vol. 69, p. 116.

Shernoff, Michael. “The Sociology of Barebacking.” The Gay & Lesbian Review /Worldwide. January-February 2005, Volume XII, Number 1, p.33-35.

Shernoff, Michael. “Crystal's Sexual Persuasion.” The Gay & Lesbian Review / Worldwide. July-August, 2005, Volume XII, Number 4, p. 24-26.

Smith, K. “Homophobia; A Tentative Personality Profile.” Psychological Reports, 1971, 29, 1091-1094.

Socarides, Charles W. “Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality.” The Journal of Psychohistory Winter 1992, 19 (3), 307-329.

Sophie, PhD Joan. “A Critical Examination of Stage Theories of Lesbian Identity Formation.” Journal of Homosexuality. 1985-1986 Winter, Vol. 12 (2), 39-51.

Spitzer, M.D., Robert L. “Can Some Gay Men and Lesbians Change Their Sexual Orientation? 200 Participants Reporting a Change from Homosexual to Heterosexual Orientation.” Archives of Sexual Behavior October 2003, Vol. 32, No. 5, 403-417.

Spitzer, M.D., Robert L. “Reply: Study Results Should Not be Dismissed and Justify Further Research on the Efficacy of Sexual Reorientation Therapy.” Archives of Sexual Behavior October 2003, Vol. 32, No. 5, 469-472.

Stacy, Judith and Timothy J. Biblarz. “(How) Does the Sexual Orientation of Parents Matters?” American Sociological Review. April 2002, Vol. 66, No. 2, p.159-183.

Steyn, Mark. “There's No Stopping Them Now.” Chicago Sun-Times. July 13, 2003. p.35

Stoller, Robert J. MD, and Gilbert H. Herdt, PhD. “Theories of Origins of Male Homosexuality.” Archives of General Psychiatory April 1985, Vol. 42, 399-404.

Storms, Michael D. “Theories of Sexual Orientation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980, Vol.38, No.5, 783-792.

Storms , Michael D. “A Theory of Erotic Orientation Development.” Psychological Review 1981, Vol. 88, No. 4, 340-353.

Strickland, Bonnie R. “Research on Sexual Orientation and Human Development: A Commentary.” Developmental Psychology 1995, Vol.31, No.1, 137-140.

Tewksbury, Richard. “bareback sex and the quest for HIV: assessing the relationship in internet personal advertisement of men who have sex with men.” Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2003, 24, p.467-482.

Thompson, Norman L., David M Schwartz, & Boyd R. Mcandless. “Parent-Child Relationships and Sexual Identity, In Male and Female Homosexuals and Heterosexuals.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1973, Vol. 41, No.1, 120-127.

Throckmorton, Warren PhD, “Attempts to Modify Sexual Orientation: A Review of Outcome Literature and Ethical Issues.” Journal of Mental Counseling October 1998, Volume 20 (4), 283-304.

Troiden, Richard R. “Becoming Homosexual: A Model of Gay Identity.” Psychiatry. November 1979, Vol. 42, 362-373.

Valeroy, PhD Linda A. (corresponding author) “HIV Prevalence and Associated Risks in Young Men Who Sex With Men.” Journal of the American Medical Association July 12, 2000, Vol. 284, No.2, 198-204.

Van Wyk Paul H. Ph.D, and Chrisann S.Geist, PhD. “Psychosocial Development of Heterosexual, Bisexual, and Homosexual Behavior.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 1984, Vol.13, No. 6, 505-543.

Walters, PhD, MPH Andrew S & David M. Hayes, PhD. “Homophobia Within Schools: Challenging the Culturally Sanctioned Dismissal of Gay Students and Colleagues.” Journal of Homosexuality. 1998, Vol. 35 (2), p. 1-23.

Westhaver, Russel. “ ‘Coming Out of Your Skin': Circuit Parties, Pleasure, and the Subject.” Sexualities. July 2005, Volume 8, Number 3, p. 347-374.

Whitman, Ph.D., Frederick L., Milton Diamond, Ph.D., James Markin, B.A., “Homosexual Orientation in Twins: A Report on 61 Pairs and Three Triplet Sets.” Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1993, Vol. 22, No. 3, 187-206.

Wickelgren, Inggrid. “Discovery of ‘Gay Gene' Questioned.” Science. April 23, 1999, Vol. 284, No. 5414, 571.

Wolitski, Richard J. MA, Ronald O Valiserri, MD, MPH, Paul H Denning, MD, MPH, and William C Levine, MD, Msc. “Are We Headed for a Resurgence of the HIV Epidemic Among Men Who Have Sex With Men?” American Journal of Public Health June 2001, Vol.91, No.6, 883-88.

Worthen, Frank. “Ex-Gay: Fact or Fantasy?” Exodus North America web site, Library.

Yep, PhD Gust A, Karen E. Lovaas, PhD, &John P. Elia, PhD. “A Critical Appraisal of Assimilationist and Radical Ideologies Underlying Same-Sex Marriage in LGBT Communities in the United States.” Journal of Homosexuality. 2003, Vol. 45 (1), p. 45-64.

Yoder, Kevin A. “Comparing Suicide Attempters, Suicide Ideators, and Nonsuicidal Homeless and Runaway Adolescents.” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. Spring 1999, Vol. 29(1), 25-36.

Zera, Deborah. “Coming of Age in a Heterosexist World: The Development of Gay and Lesbian Adolescents.” Adolescence. Winter 1992, Vol. 27, No. 108, 849-854.

Chapter Eight "Circuit Parties" and "Gay Male Clone"

Larry Houston — 2011-01-27T07:00:00Z

Chapter Eight “Circuit Parties” and the “Gay Male Clone”

· Circuit Parties

Circuit parties" are unique to the homosexual community, but are similar to other parties called “raves” and can be traced back to the popularity of disco music in the 1970s. The popularity of these “circuit parties” has grown tremendously over the past 10 years. There is no uniform definition of a “circuit party”, because these parties continue to evolve.

“However, a circuit party tends to be a multi-event weekend that occurs each year at around the same time and in the same town or city and centers on one or more large, late-night dance events that often have a theme (for example, a color such as red, black or white).” (Mansergh, Colfax, Marks, Rader, Guzman, & Buchbinder, “The Circuit Party Men's Health Survey: Findings And Implications for Gay and Bisexual Men.” p.953)

“Circuit Parties are weekend-long, erotically-charged, drug-fueled gay dance events held in resort towns across the country. There's at least one party every month somewhere in the U.S.-New York's “Black Party,” South Beach's “White Party,” Montreal's “Black and Blue Party,” and so on- and people travel far and wide to take part.” (Ghaziani, “The Circuit Part's Faustian Bargin,” p.21)

Because these “circuit parties” are unique to the homosexual community, it is from the media of this community itself that most of the information about these parties comes from. Although there has been a study published in the American Journal of Public Health, which is quoted from above. I have also found an article form USATODAY.com, “Worries crash ‘circuit parties', 06/20/2002. The information that is coming from all sources is strikingly similar. That is the high prevalence of drug use and sexual activity, including unprotected anal sex.

“The circuit-with its jet set “A-List” of well-heeled and muscular gay men- had actually been in existence in the pre-AIDS time, albeit it was small and very exclusive. It consisted in the late 1970s into the early 1980s mostly of a about thousand men who flew back and forth between New York and Los Angeles, going from the famous parties at the Flamingo and the Saint in New York to the ones at the Probe in L.A. But in the 1990s the circuit grew to consist of parties all around the country, indeed around the world-from Miami to Montreal, Vancouver to Sydney-with tens of thousands of men who regularly attend events. In the early 1990s there were only a handful of events; by 1996, according to Alan Brown in Out and About, a gay travel newsletter, there were over 50 parties a year, roughly one per week. Typically these are weekend-long events, more a series of all-night (and daytime) parties stretching over a few days, often taking place in resort hotels, each punctuated by almost universal drug use among attendees.” (Signorile, Life Outside, p.64-65)

“Every party has a similar format, with loud music and dancing at its core, spiced with live entertainment from popular singers and scantily-clad male dancers. Circuit parties began in the mid-1980's as part of an effort to raise gay men's awareness of AIDS as well as to raise funds to combat the disease and help its victims. To this day, many circuit parties HIV/AIDS charity events, benefiting a variety of nonprofit organizations.” (Ghaziani, “The Circuit Part's Faustian Bargin,” p.21)

According to health officials, Palm Springs, CA has developed one of the highest per capita rates of syphilis in the nation, driven mostly by gay and bisexual men. Palm Springs is where the White Party is held annually in April. The 2003 party raised concerned among public health officials and some gay leaders that the event would feed the spread of syphilis.

Some charities - along with public health officials and many gay rights leaders - are increasingly uncomfortable with what has become the dark side of circuit parties: widespread drug use and random, unprotected sex that some charities say is just the type of behavior they discourage. (“Worries crash ‘circuit parties'.” www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/06/20/circuit-parties-usat.htm

“Our findings confirm anecdotal reports of a high prevalence of drug use during circuit party weekends and at specific party events.” (Mansergh, Colfax, Marks, Rader, Guzman, & Buchbinder, “The Circuit Party Men's Health Survey: Findings And Implications for Gay and Bisexual Men,” p.956)

“Sexual activity, including unprotected anal sex, was relatively common during circuit party weekends.” (Mansergh, Colfax, Marks, Rader, Guzman, & Buchbinder, “The Circuit Party Men's Health Survey: Findings And Implications for Gay and Bisexual Men,” p.956)

“Consider the potential impact of circuit party weekends on HIV infection rates and rates of infection with other sexually transmitted diseases, based on sexual mixing opportunities and patterns both within and beyond the 3-day periods. Our data pertain to a single party weekend for each participant. If we multiply the prevalence of sexual risk behavior by the median of 3 parties per year revealed in this sample, and if we consider the large number of men who attend circuit parties, as well as the growing popularity of such parties, then the likelihood of transmission of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases among party attendees and secondary partners becomes a real public health concern.” (Mansergh, Colfax, Marks, Rader, Guzman, & Buchbinder, “The Circuit Party Men's Health Survey: Findings And Implications for Gay and Bisexual Men,” p.957)

“This seems harmless enough, but there is also a flipside. While the evidence to date is inconclusive, circuit parties may ironically be a potential site for HIV infection. The irony is that circuit parties began as vehicles for HIV awareness and fundraising.” (Ghaziani, “The Circuit Part's Faustian Bargin,” p.22)

“It is well known, both anecdotally and through research, that drug use is wide spread at circuit parties. Studies indicate that club drugs are consumed by about 95 percent of party attendees (Mansergh, 2001). Indeed drug use is incorporated into the setting as an intergal part of circuit culture.” (Ghaziani, “The Circuit Part's Faustian Bargin,” p.22)

“Research revels an abundance of sexual activity during party weekends.” (Ghaziani, “The Circuit Part's Faustian Bargin,” p.22)

But one national gay organzation in September of 2004 appears not to be concerned with this dark side of circuit parties. The NGLTF (National Gay and Lesbian Task Force) has purchased the rights and assets to the Winter Party held in Maimi, FL. A Washington Blade online article (Friday, September 09, 2004) quotes the executive director of the NGLTF, who sees no problem with being a sponsor of a "circuit party". He goes on to call it a dance event.

“Foreman said he sees no problem with the Task Force becoming associated with a circuit party.”

“We're very proud to have acquired the Winter Party,” Foreman said. “Having a dance event where people come together and have a good time is a good thing.” (“Task Force to take over Winter Party”, Washington Blade online, Friday, September 03, 2004) · Gay Male Clones

Throughout history the male homosexual was often based on non-gender conformity, that is the effeminate male. Although this still continues today, a rejection of this stereotyping is seen in the “gay male clone”. There are two books written by homosexuals themselves that defines this “gay male clone”. Michelango Signorileis is the author of the book, Life Outside. Signorileis writes about gay men, masculinity, the “gay male clone”, and “circuit parties”. Martin Levine was a sociologist, and university professor. The book, Gay Macho, is an edited version of Levine's doctoral dissertation. He died from complications of AIDS at the age of 42. The "gay male clone" was not a representative homosexual, but only one of many groups among the “modern homosexual” gays, lesbians, queers, and homosexual.

“Clones symbolize modern homosexuality. When the dust of gay liberation had settled, the doors to the closet were opened, and out popped the clone. Taking a cue from movement ideology, clones modeled themselves upon traditional masculinity and the self-fulfillment ethic. (Yankelovitch 1981) Aping blue-collar workers, they butched it up and acted like macho men. Accepting me-generation values, they searched for self-fulfillment in anonymous sex, recreational drugs, and hard partying. Much to activists' chagrin, liberation turned the “Boys in the Band” into doped-up, sexed-out, Marlboro men.

The clone was, in many ways, the manliest of men. He had a gym-defined body; after hours of rigorous body building, his physique rippled with bulging muscles, looking more like competitive body builders than hairdressers or florists. He wore blue-collar garb-flannel shirts over muscle T-shirts, Levi 501s over work boots, bomber jackets over hooded sweatshirts. He kept his hair short and had a thick moustache or closely cropped beard. There was nothing New Age or hippie about this reformed gay liberationist. And the clone lived the fast life. He “partied hard,” taking recreational drugs, dancing in discos till dawn, having hot sex with strangers.

Throughout the seventies and early eighties,clones set the tone in the homosexual community (Altman 1982, 103; Holleran 1982). Glorified in the gay media, promoted in gay advertising, clones defined gay chic, and the clone life style became culturally dominant. Until AIDS. As the new disease ravaged the gay male community in the early 1980s, scientist discovered that the clone lifestyle was “toxic”: specific sexual behaviors, even promiscuity, might be one of the ways that the HIV virus spread in the gay male population. Drugs, late nights, and poor nutrition weakened the immunity system (Fettner and Check 1984)” (Levine, Gay Macho, p.7-8)

“The clone role reflected the gay world's image of this kind of gay man, a doped-up, sexed-out, Marlboro man. Although the gay world derisively named this social type the clone, largely because of is uniform look and life-style, clones were the leading social type within gay ghettos until the advent of AIDS. At this time, gay media, arts, and pornography promoted clones as the first post-Stonewall form of homosexual life. Clones came to symbolize the liberated gay man.” (Levine, “The Life and Death of Gay Clones.” p.69-70 in Gay Culture in America: Essays from the Field editor Gilbert Herdt.)

“Four features distinguished clones: (1) strongly masculine dress and deportment; (2) uninhibited recreational sex with multiple partners, often in sex clubs and baths; (3) the use of alcohol and other recreational drugs; and (4) frequent attendance at discotheques and other gay meeting places. Clone culture with its pattern of sexual availability, erotic apparel, multiple partners, and reciprocity in sexual technique became an important organizing feature of gay male life during the 1970s. It also became a seedbed for high rates of sexually transmitted diseases as well as frequent transmission of the hepatitis B virus. Many treated sexually transmitted diseases as a price that had to be paid for a life style of erotic liberation.” (Jonsen and Stryker, editors, The Social Impact of AIDS in the United States, p. 261-262)

“A key factor in the formulation and promulgation of the cult of masculinity that also dismayed the gay liberationist was that the dominant gender style was now supermasculine. It was as if the 1960s and the counter culture androgyny never occurred. Gay male culture was still reeling from the crisis of masculinity that had affected homosexuals for decades. Gay men, attracted to the masculine ideas they'd cultivated in the furtive days prior to Stonewall, seemed now institutionalize and exaggerate a heterosexual-inspired, macho look. The 1970s clone was born, and his look explored on the streets of rapidly growing gay ghettos in dozens of American cities.” (Signorile, Life Outside, p.52-53)

“A whole industry was sprouting from and glorifying this male culture, with clothing stores like All American Boy on Castro Street, a gym called Body Works, and dozens of sex clubs and baths, with names like Animals. The sex clubs catered to every to every imaginable sexual taste: the leather set; men who enjoyed being tied up; men who wished to be urinated on. The bathhouses had once been seen as an expression of gay liberation, at least among those who equated gay liberation with sexual abandon. Now, they were celebrating and enforcing the values that Evans saw parading down the Castro every day: The Premium was put on physical appearance and conformity.” (Clendinen and Nagourney, Out for Good: The Struggle to Build a Gay Rights Movement in America, p.445)

For the “gay male clone” what resulted was not “gay liberation” or freedom from alienation by society, but was bondage into the enforced cult of modern homosexuality.

“Similarly, in particular, clone culture constructs an identity of apparently complete uniformity: individual differences, even physical differences, are undermined in a self-conscious attempt to appear completely ‘masculine', partly as a development of the 1970s attempts to create a counter- or alternative culture and partly as an attempt to oppose stereotypes of effeminacy. Most importantly, then, clone culture is essentially a ‘masculine' construction. The various identities are all related to occupations traditionally defined as ‘masculine' or ‘real man's work': the western cowboy, the construction worker, the military, motorcyclists, sportsmen, or policemen. These costumes or uniforms reinforced or reflected overall the 1970s ‘masculinisation' of male homosexual culture as previously outlined in chapter. 2.” (Edwards, Erotics and Politics Gay male sexuality, masculinity and feminism, p.96)

“For a great many gay men in the urban centers-the majority of which, some studies since the 1970s have shown, have hundreds of partners throughout their lives-living the fantasy has of course all been under the guises of liberation. But perhaps there is no such thing as true liberation. When we break from one rigid system, we often create another. It's true that most gay men in urban America are not having a life of enforced heterosexuality, as gay liberationist might call it, with a driveway, a picket fence, and children to nurture. Many are, however, instead living a life of enforced cult homosexuality, with parties, drugs, and gyms ruling their lives.” (Signorile, Life Outside, p.26-27)

In New York City, San Francisco, and other large cities many gay and lesbians had formed large “gay communities.” So it was now possible to live, work, and socialize in what became “gay gehettos.” The following quote is making reference to the opening of, The Saint, a large disco for gay males in New York City.

“It was mailed only to Mailmans' friends and their friends, a self-selected group that formed the base of The Saint's membership of three thousand. Anyone who wanted to join had to be referred by a member to the membership office for screening. The clientele reflected the screening process: nearly all white, professional in their twenties and thirties, mostly good-looking and muscled, with the mustaches and short hair that were the style of the time.” (Clendinen and Nagourney, Out for Good: The Struggle to Build a Gay Rights Movement in America, p.442-443)

“The streets of San Francisco offered, in theory at least, a cross-section of America's male homosexual community, but, Evans thought, one would never know it to walk down Castro Street. All these men looked identical, with their short haircuts, clipped mustaches and muscular bodies, turned out in standard-issue uniforms of tight faded blue jeans and polo shirts. The image was one part military, one part cowboy, one part 1950s suburbia and conformity, and they swaggered down the street, many aloof and unfriendly, as if their affected distance enhanced their masculinity.” (Clendinen and Nagourney, Out for Good: The Struggle to Build a Gay Rights Movement in America, p.444)

Bibliography

Clendinen, Dudley and Adam Nagourne. Out for Good: The Struggle to Build a Gay Rights Movement in America. Simon and Schuster. New York, 1990.

Edwards, Tim. Erotics and Politics Gay male sexuality, masculinity and feminism. Routledge. London and New York, 1994.

Ghaziani, Amin. “The Circuit Party's Faustin Bargain.” The Gay & Lesbian Review / Worldwide. July-August, 2005, Volume XII, Number 4, p. 21-24.

Jonsen, Albert R. and Jeff Stryker. The Social Impact of AIDS in the United States. National Academy Press. Washington D.C., 1993.

Levine, Martin P. Gay Macho. New York University Press. New York and London, 1998.

Levine, Martin P. “The Life and Death of Gay Clones.” p. 68-86 in Gay Culture in America: Essays from the Field editor Gilbert Herdt.

Signorile, Michelangelo. Life Outside. HarperCollins Publishers. New York, 1997.

Gay and Lesbians Who Oppose Same-Sex Marriage

Larry Houston — 2010-10-18T00:13:32Z

Not all Gays and Lesbians Advocate and Support Same-Sex Marriage

Not all of those who self-identify as gay and lesbian advocate for and support same-sex marriage. There are gays and lesbians who self-identify as “queer” and they are the ones who generally oppose same-sex marriage. This opposition to same-sex marriage comes from their ideology for sexual liberation. This opposition to same-sex marriage also is historical, in that it was an ideological division from the very beginning of the modern gay and lesbian movement. This ideological division is framed in the discussion of assimilation or liberation in how homosexuals, gays, lesbians, and queers should relate to the cultuer and society in which they live. For more information about ideological division of "assimilation" or "liberation" at www.banap.net This opposition to same-sex marriage may be read in the extensive writings by gay and lesbian authors.

“Homosexuals have hardly been unified in their support for same-sex marriage (Egan and Sherrill 2005). The division comes in two relevant forms. On one hand, many homosexuals, like many heterosexuals, do not personally aspire to become married. On the other hand, some homosexuals oppose marriage as an institution. Especially during the early years of the gay liberation movement, some voices “rejected everything they associated with heterosexuality, including sex roles, marriages, and the family” (Chauncey, 2004, 89). For many men, gay liberation was about sexual experimentation, not monogamous coupling. For many lesbians, marriage was an “inherently patriarchal institution, which played a central role in structuring the domination of women”.” (Rom, Introduction: The Politics of Same-Sex Marriage, p. 15 in The Politics of Same-Sex Marriage, editors Craig A. Rimmerman and Clyde Wilcox)

“The campaign for marriage, never a broad-based movement among gay and lesbian activists, depended for its success on the courts. It was launched by a relatively small number of lawyers, not by a consensus of activists. It remains a project of litigation, though with the support of the major lesbian and gay organizations.” (Warner, The Trouble With Normal Sex, Politics, and the Ethics of Queer Life, p. 85)

“First, marriage will not liberate us as lesbians and gay men. In fact, it will constrain us, make us more invisible, force our assimilation into the mainstream, and undermine the goals of gay liberation. Second, attaining the right to marry will not transform our society from one that makes narrow, but dramatic, distinctions between those who are married and those who are not married to one that respects and encourages choice of relationships and family diversity. Marriage runs contrary to two of the primary goals of the lesbian and gay movement: the affirmation of gay identity and culture and the validation of many forms of relationships.” (Ettelbrick, “Since When is Marriage a Path to Liberation?”, p. 21 in Lesbian and Gay Marriage Private Commitments, Private Ceremonies, editor Suzanne Sherman.)

“But the picture is more complex than coverage of recent events suggest. Gays and lesbains have been debating the desirability and importance of same-sex marriage for years, and this intracommunity debate reflects deeper tension and oppositions within gay and lesbians communities, conflicts over the political and cultural goals of the gay and lesbian movement and over the tactics used to accomplish those goals. In particular, the marriage question reveals a fault line among gay and lesbian activists and commentators, a divide between those who emphasis a rights-orientated approach to social change, viewing assimilation as the ultimate goal of gay and lesbian activism, and those who advocate a liberationist or “queer” ethic focused on deconstructing fixed sexual categories and transforming dominant cultural understandings of intimacy, sexuality, family, and the state.” (Hull, Same-Sex Marriage The Cultural Politics of Love and Law, p. 78-79)

“Gay and lesbian critics of marriage, by contrast, view marriage as fundamentally incompatible with the defining principles of queer life and activism and argue that the costs of pursuing marriage outweigh its supposed benefits.” (Hull, Same-Sex Marriage The Cultural Politics of Love and Law, 81)

“The tensions evident in this intracommunity debate on marriage reflect deeper divisions within gay and lesbian communities and movements along the fault line of assimilation vs. liberation. For those on the queer/liberation side of the divide, the desire for marriage represents a problematic effort to integrate into mainstream society without challenging its oppressive power structure. Critics view the institution of marriage as fundamentally flawed, both because of its patriarchal history and because it grants the state undue control over sexual behavior and intimate commitments. They dismiss the idea that gays and lesbians will fundamentally alter and improve the institution of marriage by becoming part of it. For those on the assimilation/equality side of the divide, however, the lack of marriage rights symbolizes one of the few remaining barriers to full social and legal equality for American gays and lesbians. Marriage supporters argue that the institution of marriage has changed over time and will continue to evolve, such participation in marriage signifies the chance to reshape an important social institution into a more egalitarian form, rather than capitulation to an inherently oppressive and stratifying arrangement.” (Hull, Same-Sex Marriage: The Cultural Politics of Love and Law, p. 83-84)

What may be seen alarming is those gays and lesbians who voice their support for same-sex marriage as apart of a greater goal, that starts with same-sex marriage, but ends with cultural support and legal recognition for all kinds of relationships regardless the age and the number of the participants in a relationship.

“A significant number of influential voices on the gay left reject the idea of same-sex marriage, suggesting marriage itself is oppressive. They tolerate same-sex marriage only as a transitional movement toward the eventual abolition of marriage.” (Byrd, “Conjugal Marriage Fosters Healthy Human and Societal Development”, p.9 in. What's the Harm? Does Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Really Harm Individuals, Families or Society? Editor Lynn D Wardle.)

“In fact, soon after same-sex marriage advocates suffered a defeat in Washington State, a group of 250 academics and celebrities including Cornell west, Gloria Steinem, Rabbi Michael Lerner, Judith Stacey, Nan Hunter and Armistead Maupin signed the manifesto, “Beyond same-Sex Marriage, A New Strategic Vision for All Our Families and Relationships”, which petitions for legal rights and privileges of marriage for all arrangements, like extend families living in one household and friends in long-term, care-giving relationships.” (Byrd, “Conjugal Marriage Fosters Healthy Human and Societal Development”, p.9 in. What's the Harm? Does Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Really Harm Individuals, Families or Society? Editor Lynn D Wardle.)

A web page, Beyond Marriage has been created and you may access it through this link www.beyondmarriage.org

Those advocating for same-sex marriage say the argument that same-sex marriage will lead to more than two people in a relationship is a slippery slope argument. And they are right. It is not a slippery slope argument because multiple partnered relationships are taking place now among gays, lesbians and homosexuals. An article in the June 6, 2006 of The Advocate discusses such relationships. The magazine cover carries the phrase, “National gay and lesbian newsmagazine.” The cover has a picture of three male figurines on top of a cake, and the headline is “Polygamy & gay men, Dirty laundry or sexual freedom?, How gay men handle multiple partners.” Here is a link to the Advocate article at www.highbeam.com

The cover story, Dose gay polygamy work? also mentions the HBO's (Home Box Office television network) show, “Big Love.” The Advocate article contains the following. “HBO's “Big Love” has ignited debate about hetro polygamy, but polyamorous relationships are not news to the many gay men with multiple log-term partners.” The article begins with discussing the relationship between 3 men and a woman from Somerville, MA. The Advocate also has an article interviewing an out (openly gay) man who is a writer for the HBO show “Big Love.”

Polygamy is the word used for heterosexual relationships and it used in the context of men with multiple wives. The word used for multiple partnered homosexual relationships is polyamory. A polyamorous relationship is an open homosexual relationship, usually allowing sexual relationships among the multiple partners in the relationship. Often in these multiple partnered homosexual relationships there is full knowledge and consent to this sexual relationship by all the partners involved. The Advocate article writes about four polyamorous relationships and has pictures of all four polyamorous relationships including the Somerville, MA group.

Another article that may be found on the internet and contains more details and information may be found in a conservative political magazine was published in 2003. The article “Beyond Gay Marriage” and authored by Stanley Kurtz.The link is www.weeklystandard.com.

Although those gays and lesbians who are honest and sincere, with the best of intentions for wanting to be able to enjoy and particpate all the benefits of marriage, espically the legal benefits, an honest, meaningful and open discussion is in the best interest for our culture and soceity, today and in the future.

"Court of Public Opinion"

Larry Houston — 2010-09-21T00:04:47Z

"Court of Public Opinion"

Thirty-one states have allowed their citizens to participate through voting on the issue of defining marriage and who is allowed to marry. Voters have approved constitutional bans on same-sex marriage in 26 states since the 2003 Massachusetts Judicial Supreme Court ruling, legalizing same-sex marriage; the constitutions of four other states also limit marriage to heterosexuals. The importance and value of a constitution may be seen in the process of amending a constitution. State constitutional amendments are typically approved first by the legislature or special constitutional convention and then by the voters in a referendum. In some states, one or both of these steps is repeated. Maine in a 2009 election was the thirty-first state by a public voter referendum in the battle over same-sex marriage to reject same-sex marriage. It was not an amendment to the Maine State Constitution, but a voter referendum to overturn and veto a law, passed by the legislature and signed by the governor allowing same-sex marriage. It past with 53%, 300,848 out of the 568,676 votes being cast voting to overturn and veto the law allowing same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage in California has been accepted by the California Supreme Court and the legislature, but rejected by the Governor and the people. Legislation was passed in 1971 to replace gendered pronouns with gender-neutral pronouns. California Civil Code relating to marriage was uniformly interpreted as including only opposite –sex couples. But because of worries that the language was unclear, a bill was passed in 1977 defining marriage in California as a civil contract between a man and a woman. Proposition 22 was passed in a 2000 primary election, by a vote of 61% to 38%. Senator Knight authored it and the one-sentence code section explicitly defined the union of a man and a woman as the only valid or recognizable form of marriage in the State of California. In 2005 and in 2007 the California state legislature passed bills legalizing same-sex marriage both times Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the bills. He did so in reference to Proposition 22. The California Supreme Court overturned Proposition 22 in a 2008 decision, thus allowing same-sex marriages to take place in California until November 2008. The ballot initiative, Proposition 8, a state constitutional amendment titled Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry Act, appeared on the California general election ballot in November 2008 and passed with a 52% majority.The California Supreme Court heard several challenges to Proposition 8 in March 2009,[but ultimately upheld the amendment. Following is a table of the states listing the year, title, and the percentage of support for the amendment.

Amendments that grant legislative authority to ban same-sex marriage

State Year Support Vote % Title

Hawii 1998 69% Constitutional Amendment 2

Amendments that ban same-sex marriage

Alaska 1998 68 Ballot Measure 2

Nevada 2000, 2001 70%, 67% Nevada Question 2

Mississippi 2004 86% Mississippi Amendment 1

Missouri 2004 72% Constitutional Amendment 2

Montana 2004 67% Montana Initiative 96

Oregon 2004 57% Oregon Ballot Measure 36

Colorado 2006 56% Colorado Amendment 43

Tennessee 2006 81% Tennessee Amendment 1

Arizona 2008 56% Arizona Proposition 102

California 2008 52% California Proposition 8

Amendments that ban same-sex marriage and civil unions, but not other contracts

Nebraska 2000 70% Initiative Measure 416

Arkansas 2004 75% Constititional Amendment 3

Georgia 2004 76% Constititional Amendment 1

Kentucky 2004 75% Constititional Amendment 1

Louisiana 2004 78% Constititional Amendment 1 North Dakota 2004 73% North Dakota Constitutional Measure 1

Ohio 2004 62% State Issue 1

Oklhoma 2004 76% State Issue 1

Utah 2004 66% Constititional Amendment 3

Kansas 2005 76% Proposed Amendment 1

Texas 2005 76% Proposition 2

Alabama 2006 81% Sanctity of Marriage Amendment (Amendment 774)

Idaho 2006 63% Idaho Amendment 2 South Carolina 2006 78% South Carolina Amendment 1

South Dakota 2006 52% South Dakota Amendment C

Wisconsin 2006 59% Wisconsin Referendum 1

Florida 2008 62% Florida Amendment 2

Amendments that ban same-sex marriage, civil unions, and other contracts

Michigan 2004 59% State Proposal –04-2

Virginia 2006 57% Marshall-Newman Amendment

Due Process and Equal Protection

Larry Houston — 2010-09-14T13:18:53Z

Due Process and Equal Protection

A rational basis for a due process claim.

"bear[ ] a real and substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or some other phase of the general welfare."

The information in this paper is relevant and important in the discussion of same-sex marriage. To legally sanction same-sex relationships would continue to normalize and legitimize relationships, which may include same-sex physical sex acts, that are detrimental to the individuals involved and to our society at large. What has been written here is to share information that should be apart of an open and honest discussion of homosexuality in light of the majority opinion written in the legal case, Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. Including this information it could be logically argued that the marriage ban does meet the rational basis test for either due process or equal protection.

Included here is information that has been taken from several recent Boston Globe articles, books and articles written by those advocating for homosexuality. First quotes have been taken from the following website that contains the opinions from the Goodridge vs Department of Public Health. These quotes have been taken from the majority opinion written by Chief Marshall. Emphasis has been added.

www.state.ma.us/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/supremejudicialcourt/goodridge.html

“Entry of judgment shall be stayed for 180 days to permit the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of this opinion.”

“Protecting the welfare of children is a paramount State policy. Restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples, however, cannot plausibly further this policy.”

" This reformulation redresses the plaintiffs' constitutional injury and furthers the aim of marriage to promote stable, exclusive relationships. It advances the two legitimate State interests the department has identified: providing a stable setting for child rearing and conserving State resources.”

“For the reasons we explain below, we conclude that the marriage ban does not meet the rational basis test for either due process or equal protection.”

“Due Process claims: rational basis analysis requires that statutes "bear[ ] a real and substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or some other phase of the general welfare."

“Equal protection challenges: the rational basis test requires that "an impartial lawmaker could logically believe that the classification would serve a legitimate public purpose that transcends the harm to the members of the disadvantaged class."

After the Ball published in 1989

This is a book by Marshall Kirk a 1980 graduate of Harvard University. Co-author Hunter Madsen is a public-communications expert who has taught on the Harvard University faculty, designed commercial advertising on Madison Avenue and helped with the first national gay advertising effort, the Positive Images Campaign. It is a book advocating for homosexuality and a change in the strategy from a gay revolution to a public relations campaign for winning greater acceptance of homosexuality in America.

“The campaign we outline in this book, though complex, depends centrally upon a program of unabashed propaganda, firmly grounded in long-established principles of psychology and advertising.” (Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay's in the 90s, p.xxvi)

“After the Ball has now detailed a comprehensive public relations campaign that should go a long way toward sanitizing our very unsanitary image. But we can't hide forever beneath a coat of whitewash; we have to step out from behind the façade eventually, and unless we've made some real changes by the time we do, people will see that we're still the same old queers. Straights hate gays not just for what their myths and lies say we are, but also for what we really are, all the squeaky-clean media propaganda in the world won't sustain a positive image in the long run unless we start scrubbing to make ourselves a little sqeakier and cleaner in reality. And as it happens, our noses (and other parts) are far from clean. In one major aspect, America's homohaters have, like the proverbial blind pig, rooted up the truffle of truth: the gay lifestyle - not our sexuality, but our lifestyle - is in the pits. This chapter will tell you what's wrong with a lot of gays, why its wrong, and how you can dance the new steps . . . after the ball.” (Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay's in the 90s, p. 276-277)

“This chapter's purpose, therefore, is Constructive Criticism. We outline ten categories of misbehavior - things that many gays do, or are that are praised and idealized by the gay leadership as part of our ‘lifestyle '- that can no longer be borne, and for two reasons: they make us look bad to straights, and they cause needless suffering, lowering the quality of life within the gay community.” (Kirk and Madsen, After the Ball How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of the Gay's in the 90s, p.276-277)

Boston Globe 11/23/2002

In a November 23, 2003 article, “10 years' work led to historic win in court” written by Yvonne Abraham gives insight and background information to the case, Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. This court case is about same-sex marriage in Massachusetts. While credit may be given for the strong case made by the lawyers and plaintiffs in this legal suit, they prevailed with the SJC. It is in this critical issue of redefining the historical meaning of marriage that this article reveals some disturbing insight into the preparation of the case by the lawyers and plaintiffs. There is a comparison to the court case that led to Vermont civil unions. One important consideration is that the plaintiffs in the MA case are not a “representative sample” of the homosexual population. In many so called scientific studies involving homosexuality, “sampling” is a common methodological flaw Is this another attempt at deliberate deceit and deception by homosexuals to influence a greater acceptance to homosexuality in America? In this paper there are other newspaper articles and books that are cited to give a greater understanding into a more representative sample of homosexuals. But first the following quotes have been taken form this newspaper article, “10 years' work led to historic win in court”

Bonauto told the group that Massachusetts, with the broad protections provided by its constitution and a Supreme Judicial Court steadily expanding the notion of family, was the ideal state in which to seek marriage licenses.

The case demanded careful calculation. The timing had to be right; the plaintiffs had to look like friendly next-door-neighbors; the strategy had to be tailored to avoid a decision like Vermont's, which stopped short of marriage.

"I was mad," Bonauto said. "I was thrilled we were still in the game, and they had this beautiful language in there about the humanity of gay people, but I couldn't believe they had done something that I thought was a political judgment. I had never heard of segregating the word marriage from its rights and protections."

The plaintiffs, who would serve as the public face of the lawsuit, were chosen carefully. They had to be varied in age, ethnicity, and profession. They had to be well-spoken, but not too political. They had to be longtime couples who had been faithful to one another. They had to stand up to rigorous criminal background checks, and to convince the lawyers that there were no skeletons in their closets.

Whittling down the legal arguments took hundreds of hours. Bonauto and her colleagues had to find a way to avoid the Vermont outcome, to win a judgment that went all the way — not just civil unions, but full-fledged marriage.

In Vermont, a major part of the plaintiffs' case had focused on the rights and protections given to married couples, such as hospital visitation and tax benefits. That focus had left room for the Legislature to give gay and lesbian couples some of the rights and protections of marriage, without granting marriage itself. To avoid that in Massachusetts, GLAD lawyers had to convince the court that marriage is more than the sum of its protections.

"We spent more time in Massachusetts talking about how marriage is a basic civil and human right," Bonauto said. "It cannot be splintered into state and federal protections. We talked about what marriage is in our culture."

Boston Globe 11/21/2003

This article from the November 21, 2003 Boston Globe, “Rise in syphilis found US, region” by Stephen Smith reports on the increasing rates of syphilis among homosexuals. It repeats the themes found in other similar articles about syphilis and AIDS. The incidences of syphilis is falling in all other groups of people, but rising in homosexuals. This rise in the number of the cases of syphilis among homosexuals reflects a resumption of unsafe sex practices and foreshadows a possible second AIDS epidemic. The following quotes have been taken from this Boston Globe article.

The increase in syphilis cases among men, specialists said yesterday, reflect complex changes in sexual behavior and the means of meeting sexual companions two decades deep into the AIDS epidemic, and they fear those same changes may foreshadow a new wave of HIV.

Massachusetts provides a telling snapshot of the challenges confronted by disease specialists.

the number of cases in the state nearly doubled from 2001 to 2002, from 106 to 197.

"We're talking about small numbers still, but numbers that are going in the wrong direction," said Dr. Alfred DeMaria, the state's director of communicable disease control.

Still, specialists said, there's no denying that syphilis has returned to the gay and bisexual communities with a ferocity not seen for more than 20 years.

Today, with the arrival of powerful drug cocktails, AIDS is just as likely to be viewed as a chronic illness that can be controlled. That belief, in turn, has led to a resumption of unsafe sexual practices, fueled by the use of club drugs such as ecstasy and sexual liaisons arranged over the Internet.

Boston Globe 11/24/2003

In the November 24, 2003 edition of the Boston Globe there was an article about AIDS. “I was Infected Needlessly”, subtitled, “Risky Behavior and HIV Increasing Among Young Gay Men” written by Bella English. The article was about a 24 year old HIV positive young gay man, Nate Longin who works for a Boston nonprofit health-care agency. In the article he shares his story and the article repeats common themes found among homosexuals today.

The following is his response to finding out he was HIV positive.

Longtin was stunned. Yes, he was gay, and yes, he'd had "unprotected" sex. "Still, it was the last thing I expected," he recalls. "I had not been promiscuous. When you're 23, you just don't think this is going to happen. You think you're invincible. It's like drinking and driving: You never think you're going to crash the car."

The article also repeats the warnings and concerns about the status of AIDS today among homosexuals. Alarming is the age of those becoming HIV positive today, some of them as young as 13 years old. AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease.

A generation after the AIDS epidemic cut a devastating swath through the gay community, the number of gay young men who are newly infected with the virus is alarming. Despite 20 years of warnings about "unsafe" sex— and seeing the deadly results of the plague— gay men between the ages of 18 and 24 do not seem to be getting the message.

The new face of HIV is not the old face. Thanks to the "drug cocktail" that can keep opportunistic infections and full-blown AIDS at bay for years, many people today with HIV are living with it, not dying from it. So the message received by a new generation of gay men is that HIV is just another sexually transmitted disease— that, like syphilis, it's treatable, not life-threatening.

As a result, risky behavior is up. According to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, 13- to 24-year-olds made up 8.7 percent of new HIV cases in Massachusetts in 2002, compared with 6.1 percent in 1999— an increase of more than 40 percent. And in a two-year HIV vaccine trial conducted in Boston, doctors found the rate of new infection among young males more than double what they had anticipated.

In the following quotes, Nate reveals how he became HIV positive. A story that is common for many homosexuals.

He soon settled into what he considered a serious relationship. They were together nine months but broke up in the spring of 2002. "I started going out and drinking a little more," says Longtin. He met a man at a bar. After a few dates, they had sex.

"A couple of weeks later, he stopped answering my calls," says Longtin, who is now 24. Among his friends, Longtin is known as thoughtful and careful: He doesn't cruise bars or go online looking for an anonymous hookup. "My preference is a monogamous relationship," he says.

Dr. Kenneth Mayer, a medical research director at the Fenway Community Health Center was also interviewed in the article. The following are his comments about the antiretroviral drugs used by HIV positive individuals.

For the drugs to be effective, they must be taken every day, which many of his patients fail to do.

“ If you're not 95 percent adherent, you are at great risk for the virus becoming resistant," he says.

Then there are the physiological complications and the long term effects of the drugs. "We're concerned about other malignancies and liver and cardiovascular disease," he says.

The article also contains comments about homosexuals who are HIV positive and sexually active.

To Longtin, disclosing one's HIV status to a sexual partner is a moral and ethical no-brainer. "I think it's just wrong not to," he says.

Not all gay men feel the same way. At a recent support-group meeting for young HIV-positive men at JRI, two of the men say they would not tell sex partners— even though they had been infected by men who failed to tell them.

"You're known as a 'gift giver' if you have it," says one man. "There is definitely a stigma."

These last two quotes from the article are in reference to the life of 24-year-old Nate Longtin.

As for Longtin, it has been a year since his diagnosis, a year of not living dangerously. His new life includes taking his drug cocktail twice a day and living with the side effects: some dizziness and vivid dreams

"I choose to continue living my life," he says. He pauses. "But it's still a terminal disease."

English ISP News 12/2/2003

A news article in the English version of the Inter Press News was written from the Port of Spain in the Caribbean. The article was about a speech given by Courtney Bartholomew for World AIDS Day. Bartholomew is head of the Medical Research Foundation (MRF) and an AIDS researcher. He did not advocate for the use of condoms as part of a change in behavior in his speech. Also he expressed concern about relying on antiretroviral drugs, for two reasons, long term side effects from the drugs and increasing numbers of HIV-infected patients have developed resistance to all the antiretroviral drugs available to date. The web address for Inter Press News is www.ipsnes.net. The following quotes are taken from the article. “Lifestyles Must Be Changed, Says AIDS Researcher” written by Peter Richards and published on Dec. 2, 2003 in the English IPS News.

"No amount of quilts, condoms and commemorative stamps on World AIDS Day are going to stamp out this pandemic unless we address the root causes," said Courtney Bartholomew, head of the Medical Research Foundation (MRF), in a speech here for World AIDS Day on Monday.

“The virus's root causes, according to the researcher, include poverty, permissiveness, promiscuity, prostitution and pornography.”

Bartholomew said that during the early days of the AIDS pandemic, people were so "scared that many curbed their promiscuous lifestyles".

"After a few years and particularly with the advent of antiretroviral drugs, it is business as usual," he added.

“But relying on drugs might be a mistake, according to Bartholomew.

“Whereas these drugs are prolonging the lives of many — albeit not all — we do not know for how many years one can continue taking them without eventual long term and serious toxic effects.”

"Moreover, it is not commonly known that in the best centres of HIV/AIDS treatment and care in the United States, the stage has now been reached where between 35 and 65 per cent of HIV-infected patients have developed resistance to all the antiretroviral drugs available to date," he added.

The following historical information has been taken from books and articles written by those advocating for homosexuality. A bibliography of sources is at the end of this paper.

“gay male clone”, “circuit parties” and “AIDS

Beginning in the early 1970s, and through the following two decades it was social and cultural events that were primarily of historical significance in the continue development of the concept of the “modern homosexual”. Three of them may be seen in the “gay male clone”, “circuit parties” and AIDS. All three of these are intertwined together. The gains of greater social and political acceptance were offset by the consequences of behavior. Although homosexuals were achieving acceptance by the status as a homosexual, “who one is”, it was the consequence of homosexuality, “what one does” that was of overwhelming larger historical significance. The disease, AIDS, ravaged the homosexual population and greatly affected the society at large. What continues to be generally over looked today is that AIDS is primarily a sexually transmitted disease, and particularly so with some of the sexual practices that take place in the homosexual lifestyle. There has always been and still continues to be today a minority of those that have accepted the homosexual identity who bravely speak out that AIDS is a consequence of behavior and sexual practices. They are overwhelming shouted down by a majority of those that have accepted the homosexual lifestyle and who fail to take personal responsibility. Instead demanding that they be allowed to live their lives as they please and even doing those things that may have deadly consequences. There are those homosexuals who want to have sex: whenever they want it, however they want it, and with whomever they want.

“ From Stonewall to the first AIDS alert was only twelve short years

. . . AIDS did not appear out of nowhere. It was a direct result of the sexual revolution, which my generation unleashed with the best intentions, but whose worse effects were to be suffered primarily by gay men. In the West, despite much propaganda to the contrary, AIDS is a gay disease and will remain one for the foreseeable future.” (Paglia, Vamps and Tramps. p.68)

Throughout history the male homosexual was often based on non-gender conformity, that is the effeminate male. Although this still continues today, a rejection of this stereotyping is seen in the “gay male clone”. There are two books written by homosexuals themselves that defines this “gay male clone”. Life Outside is by Michelango Signorileis. He writes about gay men, masculinity, the “gay male clone”, and “circuit parties”. Martin Levine was a sociologist, and university professor. The book, Gay Macho, is an edited version of Levine's doctoral dissertation. He died of AIDS complications at the age of 42.

The clone in many ways was, the manliest of men. He had a gym-defined body; after hours of rigorous bodybuilding, his physique rippled with bulging muscles, looking more like competitive body builders than hairdressers or florists. He wore blue-collar garb-flannel shirts over muscle T-shirts, Levi 501s over work boots, bomber jackets over hooded sweatshirts. He kept his hair short and had a thick moustache or closely cropped beard. There was nothing New Age or hippie about this reformed gay liberationist. And the clone lived the fast life. He “partied hard,” taking recreational drugs, dancing in discos till dawn, having hot sex with strangers.” (Levine, Gay Macho, p.7-8)

“Circuit parties” are unique to the homosexual lifestyle, but are similar to other parties called “raves” and can be traced back to the popularity of disco music in the 1970s. The popularity of these “circuit parties” has grown tremendously over the past 10 years. There is no uniform definition of a “circuit party”, because these parties continue to evolve.

“However, a circuit party tends to be a multi-event weekend that occurs each year at around the same time and in the same town or city and centers on one or more large, late-night dance events that often have a theme (for example, a color such as red, black or white).” Mansergh, Colfax, Marks, Rader, Guzman, & Buchbinder, “The Circuit Party Men's Health Survey: Findings And Implications for Gay and Bisexual Men.” p.953)

Because these “circuit parties” are unique to the homosexual lifestyle, it is from the homosexual media itself that most of the information about these parties comes from. Although there has been a study published in the American Journal of Public Health, which is quoted from above. Also USATODAY.com published an article, “Worries crash ‘circuit parties', 06/20/2002. The information that is coming from all sources is strikingly similar. That is the high prevalence of drug use and sexual activity, including unprotected anal sex.

“But charities - along with public health officials and many gay rights leaders - are increasingly uncomfortable with what has become the dark side of circuit parties: widespread drug use and random, unprotected sex that some charities say is just the type of behavior they discourage.” (“Worries crash ‘circuit parties'.”

www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/06/20/circuit-parties-usat.htm)

It is the dramatic increase in the incidences of syphilis in the past two years by those who have accepted a homosexual lifestyle and a group usually titled MSM (men who have sex with men) that is alarming. Once again it is the homosexual media that has been expressing concern, along with the government's Center for Disease Control. The significance of this increase in syphilis is as an indicator for the increase in unsafe sex practices and precludes a possible dramatic rise in the incidence of AIDS again. The following quote is from the online edition of the Advocate, a gay magazine and is from a commentary that was published on October 13, 2003.

“We must ACT UP again! We have to take to the streets armed with our rage and claim our health and dignity. We need to scream bloody murder, point the finger of shame, and demand action. But this time we're not going to scream at the White House or shame the Vatican or demand action from the Department of Health and Human Services or the Centers for Disease Control and prevention. This time we're going to scream at ourselves, shame ourselves, demand action from ourselves-nobody but ourselves.” (“Is the badge of the “sexual outlaw” killing us?” http//www.advocate.com/html/stories/900/900_actup.asp)

This alarming trend surrounding AIDS was also being reported in a 1994 article published in the New England Journal of Medicine. It was on the declining age of HIV infection. For the years of 1987 to 1991 the average age was less then 25 years. This is also the latter period referred in the following quote. “During the latter period one of every four people newly infected with HIV was younger then 22.” (Rosenberg, Biggar, & Goedert, “Declining Age at HIV Infection”, p.789-790) According to the November 24, 2003 Boston Globe article, “I was infected needlessly” it has fallen to individuals 13 years of age for the keeping of AIDS statistics.

The three social and cultural events from the 1970's AIDS, the “gay male clone”, and “circuit parties” continue to be of historical significance and increasingly so in the development of the concept of the “modern homosexual”. They do so because there is a new generation of homosexual men, who once again are participating in even larger numbers in this harmful lifestyle. The current generation of homosexual men who are participating in this harmful lifestyle are suffering the same consequences as the previous generation. And these consequences carry over to affect the society at large as it did with the first AIDS epidemic among homosexuals.

What has been written here is to share information that should be apart of an open and honest discussion of homosexuality in light of the majority opinion written in the legal case, Goodridge versus Department of Public Health. To legally sanction same-sex relationships would continue to normalize and legitmatelize relationships that are detrimental to the individuals involved and to our society at large. Including this information it could be logically argued that the marriage ban does meet the rational basis test for either due process or equal protection.

Suspect Class

Larry Houston — 2010-09-14T13:17:04Z

Suspect Class

As an individual, a homosexual has all of the rights provided to all individuals in the United States. As couples, homosexuals are denied some rights, which are granted to heterosexual couples. A FoxNews.com, in a partial transcript of a “Special Report with Brit Hume” who was speaking to Douglas Kmiec, Law Professor, Pepperdine University the idea of a “suspect class” was raised. Professor Kmiec was also quoted, as saying the recent SJC ruling in the Goodridge vs Department of Public Health “is also very much an example of raw, judicial activism.” http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,103523,00.html

The following quote is written in reference to homosexuals and their relationship to being a “suspect class”.

“ The reason is that, until now, the Supreme Court has correctly refrained from putting homosexuals on par with racial minorities or women as a class of citizens deserving of such high protection that any state action discriminating against them must survive the Court's strict scrutiny (as the Court calls them, a "suspect class"). This is because science proves that homosexuality is not an immutable characteristic as is race or gender, and because as one of the most well-funded political lobbies in the nation, homosexuals do not have the political powerlessness so clearly exhibited by African-Americans under slavery and segregation.” http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=PV03F01

There are four Indicia of Suspectedness that can be used to determine if a group is a suspect class, history of purposeful discrimination, political powerlessness, immutable trait, and grossly unfair. In Lawrence vs Texas, a legal challenge to homosexual sodomy the Supreme Court narrowly ruled that sodomy was a matter of privacy between two consenting adults. This case was not about same-sex marriage, nor did it conclude that homosexuals were a “suspect class.”

“When a group fails to qualify as a suspect class, which homosexuals have repeatedly done, they are prohibited from appealing to the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution, unless they are being deprived of "fundamental rights." Individual homosexuals have all the fundamental rights accorded to every citizen of the United States. Included as fundamental rights are: the right to vote, the right to interstate travel, the right to privacy, and the First Amendment rights of free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of petition, freedom of religion, and freedom from the establishment of religion.” http://www.family.org/cforum/research/papers/a0002964.html

The following information is from a web site, “Text Assist for Suspect Classes Flowchart” http://classes.lls.edu/archive/manheimk/114d3/echarts/suspectx.htm

History of Purposeful Discrimination

“Racial or religious minorities may have been given little or no chance to succeed in society. Barriers preventing full participation included limiting education for African Americans and women (partially because of the belief that neither group was capable of learning and were so worthless as human beings as not merit the expenditure of time and effort to educate them) and then passing laws prohibiting voting. The discrimination in these types of cases is intentional and those doing the discriminating are doing it for the purpose of limiting the groups access to and effect on society in general. The stigma of inferiority that has been imposed on the members of suspect classes by society may become a self-fulfilling prophesy and the groups will begin to accept society's view of them as true and valid, perpetuating the vicious circle of helplessness and social disdain.”

Political Powerlessness

“Individuals belonging to the suspect classes are either structurally or functionally excluded from the process. The history of previous discrimination, historical lack of education, and the entrenched feelings that their votes will not count, has created a situation where minorities and women are reluctant to vote or run for office. These barriers are very significant. Although there are many laws that guarantee women and minorities all the rights guaranteed to white men, there are still very few women and minorities in high positions in the government. Furthermore, it is much more difficult to mobilize women or minorities to vote.”

Immutable Trait

“There is no way to change the distinguishing characteristic that places the individual into the suspect or quasi-suspect class. Another way to see this is that there is no free entry into and egress this group. This is the difference between race or gender which cannot be easily changed and a characteristic like wealth, which, at least theoretically, can be altered (Note: Wealth is not a suspect class unless it is a proxy for race, alienage, or another suspect class).”

"Grossly Unfair”

“Is the discrimination or disparate effect of a facially nondiscriminatory law so egregious as to offend common precepts of decency.”

Homosexual behavior has been tolerated throughout history by most societies and cultures. By many of those advocating for homosexuality the idea of a “homosexual” as a distinct individual is a recent invention. The “homosexual” seen as a distinct individual is a “social construct” and is historically traced to the 1860s in Germany. There is still no way to identify who is a homosexual, modern scientific scrutiny has failed to do so. It continues be behavior and acts, homosexuality which defines the individual as a homosexual.

There are several national homosexual advocacy groups; one is the Human Rights Campaign. This group was founded in 1980 and today has more then 500,000 members according to their web site. They are America's largest gay and lesbian organization, who lobbies members of Congress in Washington DC, mobilizes grassroots action, and attempts to increase public understanding through innovative education and communication strategies. They are currently running a one million dollar national ad campaign promoting same-sex marriage. This year they have moved into their new national headquarters in Washington DC on Rhode Island street, near our national government. This 60,000 square foot building was purchased and remodeled for around 25 million dollars.

The following quote is from a book written by a gay historian.

“It isn't at all obvious why a gay rights movement should ever have arisen in the United States in the first place. And it's profoundly puzzling why that movement should have become far and away the most powerful such political formation in the world. Same gender sexual acts have been commonplace throughout history and across cultures. Today, to speak with surety about a matter for which there is absolutely no statistical evidence, more adolescent male butts are being penetrated in the Arab world, Latin American, North Africa and Southeast Asia then in the west.

But the notion of a gay “identity” rarely accompanies such sexual acts, nor do political movements arise to make demands in the name of that identity. It's still almost entirely in the Western world that the genders of one's partner is considered a prime marker of personality and among Western nations it is the United States - a country otherwise considered a bastion of conservatism - that the strongest political movement has arisen centered around that identity.

We've only begun to analyze why, and to date can say little more then that certain significant pre-requisites developed in this country, and to some degree everywhere in the western world, that weren't present, or hadn't achieved the necessary critical mass, elsewhere. Among such factors were the weakening of the traditional religious link between sexuality and procreation (one which had made non-procreative same gender desire an automatic candidate for denunciation as “unnatural”). Secondly the rapid urbanization and industrialization of the United States, and the West in general, in nineteen century weakened the material (and moral) authority of the nuclear family, and allowed mavericks to escape into welcome anonymity of city life, where they could choose a previously unacceptable lifestyle of singleness and nonconformity without constantly worrying about parental or village busybodies pouncing on them.” (Martin Duberman. Left Out. South End Press. Cambridge, MA, 2002 p. 414-415.)

Justice Marshall in the 29th footnote of her opinion declares that homosexuals are a “class”. Is she implying here that homosexuals are members of a “suspect class”?

www.state.ma.us/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/supremejudicialcourt/goodridge.html

“If anything, extending civil marriage to same-sex couples reinforces the importance of marriage to individuals and communities. That same-sex couples are willing to embrace marriage's solemn obligations of exclusivity, mutual support, and commitment to one another is a testament to the enduring place of marriage in our laws and in the human spirit. [FN29]”

“29. We are concerned only with the withholding of the benefits, protections, and obligations of civil marriage from a certain class of persons for invalid reasons. Our decision in no way limits the rights of individuals to refuse to marry persons of the same sex for religious or any other reasons. It in no way limits the personal freedom to disapprove of, or to encourage others to disapprove of, same-sex marriage. Our concern, rather, is whether historical, cultural, religious, or other reasons permit the State to impose limits on personal beliefs concerning whom a person should marry.”

The following quotes are taken from the minority opinion that was written as apart of the SJC response from the request by the MA Senate. This request was asking the SJC if civil unions for same-sex relationships offering all the protections and benefits of marriage would satsify the ruling from Goodridge v Department of Health. These quotes speak to the issue of "suspect class." Justice Sosman appears to understand that the majority is implying that homosexuals are a "suspect class."

“The Goodridge opinion employed repeated analogies to cases involving fundamental rights and suspect classifications, while ostensibly not adopting either predicate for strict scrutiny. Id. at 359-361 (Sosman, J., dissenting). Today's answer to the Senate's question discards the fig leaf of the rational basis test and, relying exclusively on the rhetoric rather than the purported reasoning of Goodridge, assumes that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is prohibited by our Constitution as if sexual orientation were indeed a suspect classification. [FN6] If that is the view of a majority of the Justices, they should identify the new test they have apparently adopted for determining that a classification ranks as "suspect"— other types of persons making claims of a denial of equal protection will need to know whether they, too, can qualify as a "suspect" classification under that new test and thereby obtain strict scrutiny analysis of any statute, regulation, or program that uses that classification. No analysis of why sexual orientation should be treated as a suspect classification was provided in Goodridge, and none is provided today. Yet that is, apparently, the interpretation that is now being given to Goodridge. The footnote disclaimer of any resort to "suspect classification" and corresponding "strict scrutiny" analysis, ante at n. 3, rings hollow in light of the sweeping text of today's answer.” (MARTHA B. SOSMAN, J., OPINIONS OF THE JUSTICES TO THE SENATE. SJC-09163.)

“This assumption is most explicit in the answer's invocation of the concept of "separate but equal," suggesting that the different naming of the statutory scheme contains the same type of constitutional defect as that identified in Brown v. Board of Educ., 347 U.S. 483, 495 (1954). See ante at. Of course, that landmark case involved a classification (and resulting separation) based on race, a classification that is expressly prohibited by our Constitution (art. 1 of the Declaration of Rights, as amended by art. 106 of the Amendments of the Massachusetts Constitution) and has long been recognized as a "suspect" classification requiring strict scrutiny for purposes of equal protection analysis under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. See McLaughlin v. Florida, 379 U.S. 184, 191-192 (1964), citing Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497, 499 (1954), and Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214, 216 (1944). Classifications based on race, and hence any separate but allegedly equal treatment of the races, "must be viewed in light of the historical fact that the central purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to eliminate racial discrimination emanating from official sources in the States." McLaughlin v. Florida, supra at 192. It is that "historical fact" concerning the "central purpose" of the Fourteenth Amendment, id., not how "elegantly [it] decries the denial of equal protection of the laws 'to any person,' " ante at n. 3, that subjects racial classifications to strict scrutiny. Here, we have no constitutional provision that has, as either its "central" or even its peripheral purpose, the elimination of discrimination based on sexual orientation. And, notwithstanding the "elegant and universal pronouncements" of our Constitution, id., all but a very few classifications are reviewed under the mere rational basis test.” (Footnote 6, MARTHA B. SOSMAN, J., OPINIONS OF THE JUSTICES TO THE SENATE. SJC-09163.)