The post‐gay debates: Competing visions of the future of homosexualities

Abstract

Abstract Sexualities 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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.