The 20th century was a time of great cultural change — each decade profuse with issues and movements causing dissent across the nation. A growing clash during the mid-19th century was the greater visibility, and later, the fight for equal rights, for gays and lesbians. “Homosexuality” was and continues to be (now in certain parts of the country) both widely scorned as socially unacceptable and consequently, gays and lesbians were discriminated against along with other minorities, such as Black-Americans and Mexican-Americans. The gay rights (LGBTQ) movement grasped a larger following during the 1940s with the homophile movement, but exploded nearing the end of the 60s, after the Stonewall Riots, which initiated the Gay Liberation movement, uncovered the unscrupulous practice of police brutality, and brought visibility to the gay rights cause. The initiation of the Gay Liberation movement was a radical push of united LGBTQ individuals who challenged intolerance and demanded equal rights and protection against discrimination. The homosexual revolution led to a less radical but influential LGBT rights movement during the late 70s to present day which has continued to fight for equality. The radical Gay Liberation organizations were unable to make any significant political progress but was able to bring larger visibility to gays and lesbians and their rights, whereas significant change in rights comes with the groups of the homophile and modern-LGBT rights movements.
The post-World War II homophile movement was small and heavily marginalized, however, managed to make a few changes on and national level. Although, there were large setbacks in achieving equality for gays and lesbians — police brutality, persecution, and investigation of these individuals — which heavily infringed on the their personal rights, the homophile movement was able to bring more visibility to the gay rights cause. This increase in visibility may have exacerbated tensions between police and federal authority, however, would help escalate the movement into a larger and more unified gay rights movement.
Homophile organizations, such as the Mattachine Society, were able to bring slight visibility to gay rights through publications such as the Mattachine Review. These magazines focused on challenging anti-gay discrimination throughout society, as well as recognized the importance of building a gay consciousness. The Mattachine Review, although a small one, was a step towards gay rights visibility as the society received responses from readers, such as Mr. K.D.M. from Idaho: “‘You have no idea how efforts you are putting forth are helping those of us who are isolated and feel like we are alone in a hostile society[…]’” (1). As stated earlier, there was no voice for the persecuted in a time when homosexuals were isolated. Magazines for homosexuals was unprecedented; the recognition of a minority group which was heavily persecuted was unheard of, due to consequences like imprisonment. The ability for publications to reach out to the gay community was important in establishing a rise in activism for gay rights. The Supreme Court case ONE, Inc. v. Olesen signified a huge turning point for gays and lesbians, in that their rights to freedom of speech were recognized on a national level. In the next issue, ONE published, “For the first time in American publishing history, a decision binding on every court now stands….affirming in effect that it is in no way proper to describe a love affair between two homosexuals as constitut(ing) obscenity” (6). The Supreme Court made history for dealing with a very first case that concerns homosexuality and rights to free speech with respect to gays and lesbians. This was an essential stepping stone towards equality as now publications that discussed GLBTQ ideas were not flagged as obscene and immoral. Establishing new rights for minority groups allowed the homophile movement to continue to increase visibility and shine light on the ridiculousness of anti-gay discrimination. Like abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison’s The Liberator, publications that reached out to oppressed minority groups was a pivotal point in constructing a following to fight for a cause.
The escalation of the homophile movement began to move to a larger scale as activists began staging protests. Although small-scale, the protests continued to increase visibility. Furthermore, protesters staged their demonstrations in front of politically significant buildings such as Independence Hall in Philadelphia, the White House and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and the United Nations building in New York (2). These efforts did not lead to any large-scale demonstrations or protests, and did not result in widespread legal or social changes for homosexuals. The failure of the homophile movement to achieve extensive civil rights, only exacerbated tensions between gay rights activists and the more radical ones who wanted immediate change. After the Stonewall Riots, the homophile movement evolved into the Gay Liberation movement after a group of homophile organizations, North American Conference of Homophile Organizations, imploded on themselves during a convention in 1970. Gay Sunshine magazine expressed that the convention was "the battle that ended the homophile movement" (3).
The Stonewall Riots gave birth to the radical Gay Liberation movement, uniting heterosexuals along with gays and lesbians together to build public affirmation of gays and lesbians. Closeted individuals were encouraged to come out and find pride in being gay. A new emphasis on coming out initiated gay pride parades. However, these demonstrations only brought about publicity and lacked influence on policy. Two significant groups which emerged after the Stonewall Riots were the Gay Liberation Front (GLF) and Gay Activists Alliance (GAA).
The GLF was a both a militant and radical activist group that aimed to achieve basic civil rights. The very name of the organization was based off the Vietnam’s National Liberation Front, the guerrilla communist movement fighting against the United States during the Vietname War. In the introduction to its manifesto, the GLF states,
“We will show you how we can use our righteous anger to uproot the present oppressive system with its decaying and constricting ideology, and how we, together with other oppressed groups, can start to form a new order, and a liberated lifestyle, from the alternatives which we offer” (4).
The GLF was very radical, seen in its language and the very basis that it was founded by socialists and communists. Although seemingly assertive in the document, the GLF did not manage to acquire any rights for gays. GLF members were also very involved in other radical activist groups, like the Black Panthers, and disagreed with each other which led to the demise of the GLF in 1972. As a result the GLF failed to achieve much besides the fact that they represented the radical voice of the attempt to achieve gay rights.
The group that emerged after the GLF was the Gay Activists Alliance (GAA) which also played a role during the Gay Liberation movement. The GAA was founded by the less radical members of the GLF, and unlike the more radical organization, the GAA devoted all of their activities solely and specifically to gay and lesbian rights. Furthermore, they would work within the political system, seeking to abolish discriminatory sex laws, promoting gay and lesbian civil rights, and challenging politicians and candidates to state their views on gay rights issue
The GAA, however, struggled to carry out their goals like the GLF. Many rifts within the organization began to slowly break it apart. Lesbian women left to find another activist group that would support both lesbians and gays. Then the president, Bruce Voeller, left along with a large fraction of the members, in that he “felt out of touch with the community roots” (5). Moreover, the GAA lost its Firehouse headquarters when arsonists set it ablaze. The Firehouse headquarters was essential to the dances the GAA hosted and also a shelter as a safe haven for gays and lesbians. These series of events led to a great decrease in GAA membership and threatened the organization’s existence. Because of internal divisions, the GAA could not carry out what they had intended to do.
However, members of the GAA did protest measures against anti-discrimination laws in employment, through “zaps” (5), in which the GAA sought to draw media attention to the issues gays and lesbians faced through boisterous public confrontations. In New York City, the GAA demonstrated this boisterous manner to voice their cause by disrupting the city’s mayor, John Lindsay, through interrupting his speeches and enjoyment of opera by yelling gay slogans at him. Lindsay, a liberal Republican, did not want to ruin his political reputation amongst his party, did not publicly support gay rights. He ultimately succumbed and signed an executive order prohibiting city agencies from discriminating against job candidates based on “private sexual orientation.” However, it would not be until 1986 would the New York City Council pass a bill prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. As a result of inner rifts, the GAA, just like the GLF, failed to effect large scale change when the group closed in 1981. Regardless, the GAA is still remembered as an important organization of the Gay Liberation movement following the Stonewall riots which strove to give gays and lesbians visibility in American politics and safety shelters, where a gay or lesbian can be safe to be him or herself.
It is important to note what the organizations and the collective unification had an effect on closeted gays and lesbians. This sudden rowdy vocal demand for rights ended the silence that suppressed most GLBTQ persons to be “proud.” Doug Ireland, a journalist, lived through the post-Stonewall Gay Liberation era and states,
“In the early seventies, when I came out, gay liberation saw itself as ‘a paradigm of resistance’ to the stultifying political culture of the Nixon years, and was infused with a sense of commitment to unleashing the collective energies of a hitherto invisible people as part of the much larger effort to maximize social justice and human liberation for all. […] Since official liberalism of that day rejected gay liberation as a ‘pathetic’ celebration of ‘perversion,’ we felt it was doubly subversive and were proud of that” (7).
Ireland corroborates that gay liberation was politically unsuccessful, however, rather than political change, the movement was able to bring gays, lesbians, and transgenders alike to help fuel the next era of the Gay Rights movement.
Where much of the change happens occurs during the gay rights movement after the mid-1970s. Large changes can be seen through the works of the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) and the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, now GLAAD. From their work in the 80s, these two groups were able to set the pathway to future equality for gays and lesbians.
The GLAD is a legal organization that works to end discrimination based on sexual orientation, HIV status, and gender identity and expression. Its second case was brought to the Supreme Court, in which a high school was prevented from bringing a male escort to prom. In Fricke v. Lynch, the Supreme Court ruled that a gay student is allowed to bring a same-sex date to a high school dance, which is protected by the First Amendment. Court cases like Fricke v. Lynch highlight the absurdity of the vast discriminations gays and lesbians face. Especially after Aaron Fricke, gay high school student who wanted to bring a male escort, sacrificed his personal safety in which “a student shoved and, the next day, punched Aaron” (8). In order to effect these changes, GLBTQ individuals must go great lengths they must go in order to attain equal rights for events such as prom. The cases GLAD bring to the Supreme Court not only brought visibility to the cause but also took small steps towards achieving equality.
GLAAD is another gay activist group during the 1980s gay rights movement which focused on countering discrimination against GLBTQ individuals non-governmental media. In 1987, after a meeting with GLAAD, The New York Times changed its editorial policy to use the word gay instead of harsher terms referring to homosexuality. As a result, many publishers followed suit and GLAAD’s influence spread to the West Coast in Los Angeles, where the entertainment industry is at large. GLAAD was very successful at lobbying the media for inclusion for gays and lesbians. Because of this, they were able to promote understanding and tolerance for GLBTQ individuals and empower them. GLAD and GLAAD are two examples of successful organizations that demonstrated a cohesiveness within the GLBTQ community and along with other gay rights activists which focused on one goal, which was to attain equality.
The gay rights movement continues today as equality is slowly but surely attained. Throughout the post-WWII years, homophile organizations like the Mattachine Society were able to bring light to the widespread discrimination gays, lesbians, and transgender individuals faced. Later on, the Stonewall Riots spurred a radical movement that gave birth to organizations like the Gay Liberation Front and the Gay Activists Alliance. The organizations of these two social movements for gay rights failed to effect great change, but did bring visibility to the cause. The greatests amount of change was when GLBTQ individuals united together on issues they agreed about and organized to tackle these problems that they faced, seen in the judiciary path GLAD focused on and the social path GLAAD took. Only after they become more organized and structured, GLBTQ rights activists were able to achieve the rights they wanted to.