Suchergebnisse

Frontmatter -- CONTENTS -- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS -- ONE. Virgin Ground -- TWO. From "Lavender" People to "Lavender" Voters -- THREE. The Sexuality Gap: The 1990 National Exit Polls -- FOUR. A View from the States -- FIVE. Can the Activists Turn Out the Vote? The Case of Deborah Glick -- SIX. Into the Mainstream: The Lavender Vote Helps Elect a President -- SEVEN. What It All Means and Why It Matters -- Appendix: Methods -- NOTES -- REFERENCES -- INDEX

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Introduction -- BOWERS V. HARDWICK in the Renaissance -- Homosexuality and the Signs of Male Friendship in Elizabethan England -- The (In ) Significance of "Lesbian" Desire in Early Modern England -- Fraudomy.· Reading Sexuality and Politics in Burchiello -- Practicing queer philology with Marguerite de Navarre: nationalism and the castigation of desire -- Erasmus's Tigress : the language of Friendship, pleasure and the renaissance letter -- John Bale and Early Tudor sodomy discourse -- "To serve the Queere": Nicholas Udall, master of revels -- Into other arms: Amoret's evasion -- Romeo and Juliet's Open Rs -- The epistemology of expurgation: bacon and the masculine birth of time -- Pleasure and devotion: the body of Jesus and seventeenth-century religious lyric -- My two dads: collaboration and the reproduction of Beaumont and Fletcher -- Fighting women and loving men: Dryden's representation of Shakespeare in all for love -- New English Sodom -- Afterword -- Notes on contributors -- Index

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction On Our Backs, in Our Attics, on Our Minds -- Chapter One Making Barbie -- Chapter Two Older Heads on Younger Bodies -- Chapter Three Barbie's Queer Adult Accessories -- Conclusion. On Our Backs, in Our Hands, on Our Broadsides -- Notes -- Index

Frontmatter -- CONTENTS -- FOREWORD -- INTRODUCTION -- 1. DEBATE IN THE LESBIAN PRESS: INTRODUCING THE ISSUES -- 2. "EXPERTS'" VOICES: LESBIANISM, BLSEXUALITY, AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES -- 3. BEHIND THE SCENES: HOW THE STUDY WAS DONE AND WHO PARTICIPATED IN IT -- 4. LESBIANS' VOICES: WHAT DO LESBIANS THINK ABOUT BISEXUALITY AND ITS ROLE IN SEXUAL POLITICS? -- 5. WHO BELIEVES WHAT? THE IMPACT OF LESBIANS' PERSONAL POLITICS AND EXPERIENCES ON THEIR ATTITUDES TOWARD BISEXUALITY -- 6. THE PINK AND BLUE HERRING: THE ISSUE IS LESBIANISM, NOT BISEXUALITY -- 7. BISEXUAL WOMEN'S VOICES: WHAT DO BISEXUAL WOMEN THINK ABOUT BISEXUALITY AND THE ROLE OF BISEXUALS IN SEXUAL POLITICS? -- 8. ANOTHER REVOLUTION ON THE POLITICAL WHEEL: THE POLITICIZATION OF BISEXUALITY -- APPENDIX A: FIGURES -- APPENDIX B: TABLES -- NOTES -- BIBLIOGRAPHY -- SUBJECT INDEX -- AUTHOR INDEX

Frontmatter -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1. The Logic of Folly in the Political Campaigns of Harvey Milk -- 2. On the Owning of Words: Reflections on San Francisco Arts and Athletics vs. United States Olympic Committee -- 3. Die Non: Gay Liberation and the Rhetoric of Pure Tolerance -- 4. Reflections on Gay and Lesbian Rhetoric -- 5. Guilt by Association: Homosexuality and AIDS on Prime-Time Television -- 6. Whose Desire? Lesbian (Non)Sexuality and Television's Perpetuation of Hetero/Sexism -- 7. Old Strategies for New Texts: How American Television Is Creating and Treating Lesbian Characters -- 8. What Is Wrong with This Picture? Lesbian Women and Gay Men on Television -- 9. A Portrait of the Adolescent as a Young Gay: The Politics of Male Homosexuality in Young Adult Fiction -- 10. Self as Other: The Politics of Identity in the Works of Edmund White -- 11. Female Athlete = Lesbian: A Myth Constructed from Gendex Role Expectations and Lesbiphobia -- 12. The Politics of Self and Other -- 13. Self-Disclosure Behaviors of the Stigmatized: Strategies and Outcomes for the Revelation of Sexual Orientation -- 14. Gender and Relationship Crises: Contrasting Reasons, Responses, and Relational Orientations -- 15. Gay and Lesbian Couple Relationships -- 16. Reflections on Interpersonal Communication in Gay and Lesbian Relationships -- 17. Performing the (Lesbian) Self: Teacher as Text -- 18. Coming Out to Students: Notes from the College Classroom -- 19. Coming Out in the Classroom: Faculty Disclosures of Sexuality -- 20. Ways of Coming Out in the Classroom -- Contributors -- Name Index -- Subject Index

White t-shirt. Text: [Front] "After 20 years… WE WON! Friday May 16, 1997 Governor Angus S. King Jr. signs the Maine Human Rights Act" [Back] "Thanks, Governor King, Senator Abromson, the Maine Legislature & Maine Citizens for passing Human Rights for ALL Mainers! Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for Everyone!" ; https://digitalcommons.usm.maine.edu/lgbt_tshirts/1020/thumbnail.jpg

White t-shirt. Text: [Front] "After 20 years… WE WON! Friday May 16, 1997 Governor Angus S. King Jr. signs the Maine Human Rights Act" [Back] "Thanks, Governor King, Senator Abromson, the Maine Legislature & Maine Citizens for passing Human Rights for ALL Mainers! Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for Everyone!" ; https://digitalcommons.usm.maine.edu/lgbt_tshirts/1106/thumbnail.jpg

Too often as teachers we feel that we are doing the right thing by assigning our students "open-ended" essay topics or by inviting students to argue "both" sides of a controversial current event. The ideologies and institutions of liberal pluralism tell us that this is the way to promote "free speech," "democratic" argument, etc. But these kinds of topics and discussions have the effect of privileging dominant power relations and of further silencing our queer students. For example, if we ask our students to debate whether homosexuality is "wrong" or not, we are expecting our queer students to justify their very existences in the classroom--a debate over the rightness or wrongness of heterosexuality would be unthinkable--and to endure painful and threatening homophobic remarks from their colleagues. Queer students have a right to expect not to be wounded in this way in the classroom. Teachers should avoid texts that adopt this type of "pro" and "con" approach (i.e, most generic composition readers) and should create assignments that do not invite homophobic responses. For instance, instead of asking students whether homosexuality is "wrong" or not, we might ask them to analyze a homophobic article, explaining who they think the intended audience is, what assumptions the writer makes, what values the argument embodies, what rhetorical strategies the writer uses, etc. Better still, we could invite students to analyze, for instance, Queer Nation's founding manifesto, "I hate straights." Instead of asking students to agree or disagree with the article (an invitation bound to elicit some virulently homophobic responses) we could ask them to discuss the article's use of the pronouns "I" and "we." Or we might ask students to conduct some research that could indicate why the article's authors adopt the positions that they do. Or we could say to students: "You are a member of Queer Nation. Explain what you hope to accomplish with this manifesto." The topics that I have suggested are no "narrower" or more "restricted" or "less free" than any other topics. Every time we give students an assignment we circumscribe their possible responses. The question is not one of "censorship," then. We can choose how to circumscribe assignments, not whether or not we should circumscribe assignments. If teachers don't want to have to read homophobic papers and don't want queer students in the class to be subjected to such papers, we have to frame our assignments in ways that do not invite such responses. It would be disingenuous to ask students if homosexuality is "wrong" and then chastise those students who answer affirmatively. At least we should be honest when we assign papers.

Articles from The Daily Barometer pertaining to LGBTQ+ issues and students on campus. All articles are organized in chronological order that begins with a Table of Contents listing the article titles and dates.