Suchergebnisse

"The US military has done an about-face on gender and sexuality policy over the last decade, ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell, restrictions on women in combat, and transgender exclusion. Contrary to expectations, service members have largely welcomed LGB inclusion-yet they continue to vociferously resist trans inclusion and women on the front lines. In the minds of many, the embodied "deficiencies" of cisgender women and trans people of all genders puts others-and indeed, the nation-at risk. In this book, Connell identifies the homonormative bargain that underwrites these uneven patterns of reception. Despite the promise of inclusivity, in practice, the military has made room for only a "few good gays," to the exclusion of all others"--

AbstractThe 2010 Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal Act, along with the 2016 DOD announcement regarding the impending inclusion of transgender soldiers, created the possibility of open and unsanctioned military service for LGBTQs for the first time in US history. This article provides an overview of how these policy changes came about, from the emergence of DADT to the legal and activist challenges to its legitimacy, including its ultimate repeal and the subsequent move to extend open service to transgender people. After summarizing what we know so far about how the repeal has (and has not) changed the experience of service for LGBTQs, I consider how these policy changes have been received and interpreted by LGBTQ activists and scholars. Open military service is either viewed as one of the most exciting or the most damning developments of LGBTQ organizing in the 21st century, according to the two most prominent activist perspectives. This review outlines the key arguments of each perspective and concludes by considering the value of reconciling these disparate vantage points when analyzing the future of LGBTQ social movement strategy.

LGBT educators struggle to balance professionalism and pride in the classroom, splittling, knitting, or quittting, in the words of the authors.

AbstractSexualities scholars and cultural critics debate whether or not the United States is moving toward a "post‐gay" future in which sexual orientation will cease to be relevant to a person's social position, life experiences, and conception of self. While some have argued that a post‐gay revolution is underway, others are more skeptical of this claim, particularly for rural, non‐White, poor, and otherwise marginalized queers. Further, recent political shifts may indicate that a backlash to the mainstreaming of nonheterosexualities has begun, meaning any progress of the past that might be labeled post‐gay has stalled or even lost ground in recent years. In addition to the question of whether there has been a post‐gay turn, there is disagreement over whether such a turn should be the end goal of sexualities activism. Some champion a post‐gay ethos as a means to alleviate sexuality‐based discrimination while others critique this kind of assimilation and argue it actually intensifies inequality and stratification. This article explores the history of these post‐gay debates and discovers significant conceptual confusion inherent in the use of the term, which limits its utility as a social scientific concept. In addition, we argue that despite the better intentions of some scholars who take it, the post‐gay position ultimately buttresses homonormative strategies of social and political activism that actively exclude marginalized queer and trans people. We suggest that to the extent the concept of post‐gay remains academically relevant, it is as a descriptor of a particular politics or discourse rather than as a statement of fact about the contemporary era.

Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution of the State of Washington guarantees, "Justice in all cases shall be administered openly, and without unnecessary delay." The Washington State Supreme Court has interpreted this clause to guarantee the public a right to attend legal proceedings and to access court documents separate and apart from the rights of the litigants themselves. Based on this interpretation, the court has struck down laws protecting the identity of both juvenile victims of sexual assault and individuals subject to involuntary commitment hearings. Its interpretation has also compromised the privacy rights of litigants wrongly named in legal proceedings. The court has supported these rulings by claiming that the public's right of access to the courts "is rooted in centuries-old English common law." Part I of this Article engages in a detailed exploration of the history of the right of public access to legal proceedings and court records, going back to Magna Carta of 1215 and other historical accounts of English common law. It also explores the tradition of publicly held proceedings, as well as the articulation of defendants' Sixth Amendment rights under the United States Constitution and other early colonial documents. The Article then considers the history of Article I, Section 10 of Washington's constitution, the "Open Courts Clause," and the early interpretations of the state constitution. From there, it examines the more recent precedent, where the independent right of the public is articulated. Part II of this Article urges Washington courts to reexamine the Experience and Logic Test, which has been adopted by the Washington State Supreme Court to guide the lower courts' application of the "Open Courts Clause." Finally, Part III of this Article contends that certain cases may need to be reexamined in light of the court's adoption of the Experience and Logic Test.

This provocative collection showcases the work of emerging and established sociologists in the fields of sexuality and gender studies as they reflect on what it means to develop, practice, and teach queer methods. Located within the critical conversation about the possibilities and challenges of utilizing insights from humanistic queer epistemologies in social scientific research, Other, Please Specify presents to a new generation of researchers an array of experiences, insights, and approaches, revealing the power of investigations of the social world. With contributions from sociologists who have helped define queer studies and who use a range of interpretative and statistical methods, this volume offers methodological advice and practical strategies in research design and execution, all with the intent of getting queer research off the ground and building a collaborative community within this emerging subfield