Week 15: Sexual Conflict and Conservatism in the Recent Past

Allison Brown HIST 4990: History of Sexuality Dr. Hampton November 29, 2022 Reading Response - Week 15: Sexual Conflict and Conservatism in the Recent Past This week’s readings, although on different topics, both relate to more broadly the balance between a post-gay liberation world and the changing dynamics of conservative and liberal policies for both US Immigration policy as well as domestic discourses. Both of these readings also speak to the changing dynamics in how the US views “homosexuality” and “gay” life in terms of how it relates to everyone else in society. Essentially, the stakes of gay migration or life are raised when it impacts the lives of “normal, nuclear-family” structures. Both Mariel migration and the AIDS epidemic brought these issues to the forefront of US foreign or domestic policy and news. To start, Capó’sQueering Mariel: Mediating Cold War Foreign Policy and U.S. Citizenship Among Cuba’s Homosexual Exile Community, 1978-1994(2010) centers around the Mariel migration of Cubans marked as undesirable by the Castro regime to the United States. Capó’s article uses the Refugee Act of 1980 as well as immigration and refugee laws to create the argument that “the United States drastically shifted its long-standing anti-homosexual stance on immigration and citizenship to reconcile 1 its position as a refuge for those fleeing Cuban Communism.” “Homoesexuals” in Cuba were labeled by the Castro government as “lumpens”, slang developed by the Marxist term “lumpen proletariat” as a community which needed to be exiled for the betterment of society due to their criminal nature. Additionally, “the Castro government largely based its institutionalized homophobia on the notion that homosexuals, particularly effeminate men, represented the antithesis of Cuba’s virile machismo and 2 hyper-masculine “Revolutionary” man.” These labels and developments of “homosexual” populations in Cuba, in my opinion, are not dissimilar to those which were used to label queer populations in the US 1 Julio Capó Jr., “Queering Mariel: Mediating Cold War Foreign Policy and U.S. Citizenship Among Cuba’s Homosexual Exile Community, 1978-1994,” Journal of American Ethnic History 29 no. 4 (Summer 2010), pg. 81 2 pg. 85 1 during conflicts, especially World War II, and labels put on those populations during the Lavender Scare. This marking of queer populations in the aftermath of the Lavender Scare and the ongoing Cold War undeniably have an impact on the Mariel migration from Cuba. Also, not dissimilar to the US policy and impactful on Mariel migration was the marking of “homosexuals” as committing “social crimes” in Cuba. According to Capó, “The case for criminalized homosexuality in Cuba is equally complex. Although homosexuality was not an official crime in Cuba by 1980, many homosexuals in the island were often arrested for seemingly arbitrary “social crimes.” This too mirrors the way local police forces treated homosexuals in the U.S. during the pre-Stonewall era that 3 preceded the gay liberation movement.” The Castro government, by labeling “homosexuals” as those who committed “social crimes” made their migration to the US more difficult as they could be further examined as “social criminals” upon entry to the US or held in detention centers or even US prisons if deemed necessary. When related to the readings prior in our course, it’s clear how legal definitions of “social criminal” or “undesirable” as was the case with WWII, go on to shape how migrants and immigrants or veterans are able to live in the US within the law as well as the borders of belonging more broadly. Shifting to examine these discourses in the AIDS epidemic, Brier’s “Affection is Our Best Protection: Early AIDS Activism and the Legacy of Gay Liberation,” in Infectious Ideas: U.S. Political Responses to the AIDS Crisis (2009) examines how the domestic dialogue surrounding the AIDS epidemic was a reflection of the broader debates surrounding “gay liberation” and activism in the US. Brier argues that more broadly the discourse surrounding AIDS in the US “instead of calling on men to curtail sexually liberated behavior, they sought to reinvigorate gays and lesbians in the fight for political 4 and cultural recognition as well as to push for equality of diverse sexual practices.” This discourse and 3 pg. 86 4 Jennifer Brier, “Affection is Our Best Protection: Early AIDS Activism and the Legacy of Gay Liberation,” in Infectious Ideas: U.S. Political Responses to the AIDS Crisis (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009), pg. 14 2 changes in viewpoint during the AIDS epidemic speak even more broadly to the discourse of the “moral panic” and “conservatism” in the US. Simply put, some in the public believed AIDS to be a “plague” or “punishment” for the overt sexuality which “homosexuals” exhibited post-gay liberation. This theme speaks to the shifts in the US, especially once President Reagan takes office in the late sixties more broadly to conservatism in the public and private spheres. This shift overall leads to a domestic discourse in which AIDS is portrayed, and this is reflected by some discourse from within the gay community related to AIDS as gay men needing to scale back the number of sexual partners they have as a way to mitigate risk. In a 1982 article written in the Native Sonnabend it published, “Promiscuity is a considerable health hazard; this is not a moralistic judgment, but a clear statement of the devastating 5 effect of repeated infections.” In tandem with this dialogue ran a discourse from texts published by Lynch and Lewis as well as others that the AIDS pandemic marked a new era in gay liberation in which the prioritization of gay men making their own decisions regarding their health was of utmost importance when weighed against broader changes in dialogue in the US. These disagreements in how to address the AIDS epidemic both inside and outside the queer community spoke to broader changes in US society as was written in an article at the time, “We believed in upsetting the social order and in creating alternatives to traditional gender roles, definitions of sexuality, and hierarchical power structures of all 6kinds.” 5 pg . 24 6 pg. 30 3 Discussion Questions Brier references that Callen and Berkowitz published: “We are not suggesting legislating an end to promiscuity. Ultimately, it may be more important to let people die in the pursuit of their own happiness than to limit personal freedom by regulating risk…” (pg. 32) → How do the debates and exchanges between different members in the queer community related to AIDS information and education reflect broader discourses surrounding conservatism and the “Moral Panic”? → How does the AIDS pandemic highlight the changes happening in society between gay liberation and sexual repression in society? What balance might have been struck between authors? Capó writes: “In August 1960, Fidel Castro created the Federation of Cuban Women (FMC). In part, he did this to indoctrinate women as vital members of the Cuban Revolution and, on the surface, to address gender equality. The FMC seems to have been primarily occupied with mobilizing women into a revolutionary consciousness.” (pg. 90) → In what ways does Castro’s Regime catering to women and including women in their regime’s priorities speak to changes in gender discourse, even in Cuba? → What impact did these womens’ groups and the FMC have on women and gender in Cuba? 4