Promoting Positivity, Refuting Negativity, Or Remaining Neutral?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Promoting Positivity, Refuting Negativity, or Remaining Neutral? Language Use in Select Issues of The Homosexual Citizen and Eastern Mattachine Magazine By Zach Baldwin Andrea Brenner, Department of Sociology General University Honors May 2014 American University Washington, DC 2 Dedication To Frank Kameny, Jack Nichols, Lilli Vincenz, Barbara Gittings, and the many other members of the early gay rights movement in the United States. Without your sacrifices our community would not be where it is today. Thank you. To Bob Connelly for peeking my interest in the early gay rights movement and for being a constant source of friendship and advice – I owe you some Navratan Korma. 3 Abstract The gay rights movement in the United States truly began with the conclusion of World War II when returning GIs who identified as gay, or had gay inclinations, met one another and took the opportunity to begin exploring their sexuality. This research examines the messaging and language used during the early days of the gay rights movement in the United States. Specifically, this work examines how the DC Mattachine Society spoke to their constituents and focuses on the tone used. As such, this research asks the following questions: What language did the DC Mattachine Society use in these publications to communicate with their members? Were the messages about homosexuality conveyed in these publications primarily refuting negativity, promoting positivity, or neutral? Did certain topics tend to lean towards one type of message or were they varied? The data for this research was drawn from a content analysis of select issues of Eastern Mattachine Magazine and The Homosexual Citizen, two publications released by the DC Mattachine Society, from 1965 to 1967. The most significant finding to come out of this research is the strong focus on neutrality across each of the publications examined. Many articles approached the topic at hand in an almost scientific manner that provided straight facts more than advocacy-type articles full of emotion. This ran counter to expectations at the start of this research. 4 Table of Contents Dedication · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 2 Abstract · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 3 Introduction · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 5 Literature Review and Theoretical Framework · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 8 Insider/Outsider Dynamics · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 8 Language of the Other · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 9 Influence of Language on the Understanding of Identity · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·10 Research Methodology · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 11 Operational Definitions · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·11 Preliminary Research Design · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·12 Sampling Considerations · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·12 Strengths and Weaknesses of Methodology · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 13 Guides and Content · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·14 Results and Analysis · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·15 Types of Content · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 15 Positivity, Negativity, and Neutrality · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·16 Positivity, Negativity, and Neutrality by Types of Content · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 17 Conclusion · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 20 Appendices · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 22 References · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·32 5 Introduction The Gay Rights Movement in the United States is commonly assumed to have begun with the Stonewall Riots in June of 1969.1 While this event was a catalyst for increased activism and demands for equal rights, it is not the first action by gay and lesbian activists in the United States. Arguments can be made for gay rights activism taking place at the beginning of the 19th century, but those instances of activism are few and not widely impactful. Rather, an important period to study is that which led up to the Stonewall Riots and made such an act of resistance successful and possible in the first place. Of note are actions taken by the Mattachine Society of Washington, DC, under the leadership of Dr. Frank Kameny, between its founding in 1961 leading up to the Stonewall Riot in June of 1969. The Washington, DC chapter of the Mattachine Society was co-founded by Dr. Franklin E. Kameny and Jack Nichols on November 15, 1961 (The Rainbow History Project n.d.). According to the Statement of Purpose released by the organization, the Mattachine Society of DC was formed in order to: “Secure for homosexuals the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…to equalize the status and position of the homosexual with those of the heterosexual…to inform and enlighten the public about homosexuals and homosexuality…to assist, protect, and counsel the homosexual in need” (Mattachine Society of Washington DC 1961). The Statement of Purpose also makes it clear that the Mattachine Society is not a social organization and that they will willingly cooperate with other civil rights groups. The Mattachine Society of DC was a membership organization that screened members and was governed by an 1 The Stonewall Riots occurred on June 28th when a group of gay customers at the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village, NY fought back against the police harassment that happened regularly at the time. In 1969 in New York and elsewhere throughout the country there were laws prohibiting homosexuality in public and many gay establishments were continually raised and shut down. The police beat back the protestors on the first night, but on June 29th the riot resurrected with an even larger crowd. Demonstrations continued throughout the week. (The Leadership Conference 2009). 6 executive board (The Rainbow History Project n.d.). The organization released monthly publications, organized lawful demonstrations, lobbied government officials, and provided support for homosexuals in the area and across the country. Among other things, this period included: the first civil rights claim to the Supreme Court on the basis of sexual orientation (Franklin Edward Kameny, Petitioner v. Wilber M. Brucker, Secretary of the Army, et al., Respondents, 1960), the first picket line in front of the White House advocating for gay rights, efforts to overturn sodomy laws, and more (Gaynair 2009). Throughout this time, gay rights activists had to combat strong social stigma and negative cultural beliefs about homosexuality. As such, Kameny and the Mattachine Society had to be very careful and calculating about the language they used to express their beliefs and fight for their rights. Today, many primary documents from Frank Kameny and the Washington, DC chapter of the Mattachine Society are publically available through the Library of Congress and the Smithsonian Museum, however little research has been conducted to directly analyze the language used during the first decade of the organization’s operation, or studied how that language has changed over time. It is important to conduct this research in order to help give a voice to the history of the gay rights movement. All too often, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender aspects of history are left out of the public record. This history is not taught at public schools and is rarely a topic of discussion outside specific academic circles. Through a content analysis, this research examined the questions: What language did the DC Mattachine Society use in these publications to communicate with their members? Were the messages about homosexuality conveyed in these publications primarily refuting negativity, 7 promoting positivity, or neutral? Did certain topics tend to lean towards one type of message or were they varied? 8 Literature Review and Theoretical Framework Before delving deeper into this topic, it is necessary to review some relevant literature and theory, most notable the dynamics of insider/outsider relations; the language of the ‘other’; and the influence of language on the understanding of identity. Insider/Outsider Dynamics The terms ‘insider’ and ‘outsider’ in this context refer to the position of the researcher in relation to his or her research subjects. It has primarily been used to inform the interactions of interviews; however it is also applicable to a researcher studying primary source documents from the past and can help foster a better understanding of the subjects under study. Early discussions of insider/outsider dynamics assumed that the research could only fit into one or the other category (Merriam and Johnson-Bailey 2010, 405). The common thought