Sexual Identity Readings

Our readings for this week were on Cass’ and D’Augelli’s homosexual identity development models. When I first read through the models, I thought they were both somewhat similar in process, however, the differences lie in their framework. Cass’ model presents homosexual identity as a relationship between psychological and social factors where the individual is seeking congruence as a means to achieve their identity. D’Augelli’s model itself is incredibly succinct, but the framework in which he places his model is extensive. His model is rooted in a lifetime developmental process framework where identity is a social construct that evolves throughout the lifetime where at some points one’s sexual identity may be salient/crystallized than at other points. His model takes into account personal aspects, interactive intimacies, and sociohistorical context. I think D’Augelli did a better job at placing his model within a framework, while Cass explained her model in extensive detail just kind of throwing in an, “oh, by the way, this is subject to change depending on society.”

I’m currently reading a book called “The New Gay Teenager” by Ritch C. Savin-Williams that offers an interesting perspective on gay adolescents. From his perspective, homosexuality is an invention that today’s teenagers don’t necessarily see as relevant to them. He foresees a “postgay” future where (perhaps) sexuality is irrelevant. Some of the more interesting points the book has brought out for me thus far are the following:
1)Gay culture (and hetero culture) is the result of society.
2)Gay adolescent research has (for a long time) focused on those that were available to study – troubled teens – and how to help them. Research often completely ignored bisexual students or students that were “other” not to mention students that were not out, thus only studying one facet of the gay youth. (Not to mention that the grant money was for research to support these youth and not anything otherwise.)
3)The outcome of gay research depends on the operational definition of “homosexuality” to which we should really question “What does it mean to be gay?” Is it an inner orientation? Is it sexual behavior? Is it someone saying they are gay? What about a virgin that thinks they are gay? Or someone who labels themselves as heterosexual but sleeps with their gender? What if no sex is involved but there is an intense relationship otherwise?

As someone that identifies as a lesbian, I think this research is fascinating and it made me look at my life not just from a personal perspective, but from a historical perspective. Maybe the only reason I consider myself to be a lesbian is because society has made me a lesbian. When I was little, I saw a show on TV (maybe on Oprah or 60 Minutes) where there were gay people on TV and it seemed to me to be something that was not desirable. What if I had seen a different show – one where there were lesbian couples with children and families – maybe things would have been different. I was experiencing my most intense inner incongruence during the time of Ellen’s original sitcom. When she came out and her show was cancelled and there was media backlash, I took it personally. What if, instead, I had seen Ellen on TV with her current talk show – knowing that she’s a lesbian, but seeing its irrelevance to the show?

It took a long time for me to “come out” and it took me a long time because I was scared and I wasn’t sure. How do you know? I hadn’t even dated anyone at the time – how could I come out if I didn’t have “proof”? What if none of that mattered? What if you just had feelings for who you had feelings for? Maybe it isn’t truly a big deal – it’s all in society’s perception and in our perception. For me, it took a long time to say I was a lesbian. I started out saying I was queer. Then I stuck with “gay” for awhile. As I got older, I kind of settled into “lesbian.” When I finally said, “I am a lesbian” it was more than a declaration of who I am, but an identity with a minority group. It was acceptance of my gay history, a gay “family” of people out there that I don’t know. People that fought for my rights that have made my life easier, I see them as my “ancestors.” Here is an excerpt from an old blog of mine:

Anyhow, this pride was RI’s 30th Pride celebration. At one point, a man came up on the stage to talk about the first pride back in 1976 (the original pride folk from back then are referred to as "76ers"). His speech was brief, but it was extremely moving. He stood onstage and looked at the vast expanse of people who showed up for pride noting how many people there had children and how many people in the audience weren’t even ALIVE in 1976. I don’t remember exactly how he phrased it, but he spoke of how different it was back then, what it meant to be gay back then, as well as the rise of AIDS. He closed his speech with a message to all the younger folks in the audience saying "If we have in any way made your lives easier, than all the difficult times, and all the struggles have been worth it." -What a wonderful message, and what a great legacy. He referred to himself and the 76ers as our "ancestors" and that is truly what they are. That, for me, was what pride was all about. I felt the "Pride" - that I am a "child" of an ongoing gay revolution with ancestors who have paved the way and have responsibility to give back to this community who has made my life easier.

I don't think my lesbian identity was ever the most salient identity for me, but as I've gotten older, it has become less salient. Maybe Savin-Williams is right - maybe someday there will be no differentiation between "heterosexuals" and "homosexuals." Then something comes up like this whole civil-union ordeal and I feel like maybe that time will never come.

It doesn't matter what your opinion is. A civil-union is not "equal" to marriage - and there are people that don't even want to let people be recognized in civil-unions. This is not equality, all we want is equality. This isn't a "gay" issue or a "religious" issue. It's a human rights issue, and by not allowing some people to marry, by allowing or even not allowing civil-unions, the rights of gays are taken away.