tv Lectures in History CSPAN August 30, 2016 9:46pm-10:56pm EDT
traditional values we see an underlying sense of dissent or change or discontent or stepping back from those values. kinsey expoises the fact that we don't practice what we preach. sanger wants to challenge traditional notions married women simply being mother after mother after mother. hefner wants to challenge marriage completely and celebrate alternative lifestyles for men. people are fascinated by sex change operations. starting to leave the home for consumer goods. women are wildly admiring other women who work outside the home. while the overlay of the cold war 1950s is grounded in patriotism, hit heterosexuality, religion, marriage, motherhood,
and fatherhood, the underlay, the sort of undercurrent is going in a slightly different direction. as you'll see as we move in the weeks ahead, that this sort of crack in the cold war etiface begins with challenging and changing perspectives on sexual behavior. eventually it will become more political. eventually it will deal more with racial issues and eventually it will explode in the 1960s. the seed bed of the counter culture of the 1960s which totally challenges the cold war can be seen quite clearly in the early efforts of these dissenters from traditional sexual and cultural values in the late 1940s and early 1950s. that's our lecture today, and i thank you all for attending. are there any questions before we finish?
okay. i'll see you next week. thank you. >> american history tv airs on c-span 3 every weekend telling the american story through events, interviews, and visits to historic locations. this month american history tv is in primetime to introduce you to programs you could see every weekend on c-span 3. our features include lectures in history, visits to college classrooms across the country, to hear lectures by top history professors. american artifacts takes a look at the treasures at u.s. historic sites, museums, and archives. real america, revealing the 20th century through archival films and newsreels. the civil war where you hear about the people who shape the civil war and reconstruction, and the presidency focuses on u.s. presidents and first ladies. to learn about their politics, policies, and legacies. all this month in primetime and
every weekend on american history tv on c-span 3. this week during american history tv in primetime we feature our lectures in history series taking you into college classrooms across the country. each night we debut a new lecture, and wednesday it's native americans. at 8:00 eastern we take you to dartmouth college for an overview of american indian history. at 9:20 the colonial west in the 1700s from a class at the college of william and mary, and that will be followed at 10:30 eastern with a florida state lecture on the creek indians and the first seminole war. that's wednesday night on american history tv primetime. >> with the house and senate returning from their summer break next week, on thursday at 8:00 p.m. eastern we'll preview four key issues facing congress this fall. federal funding to combat the zika virus. >> women in america today want
to make sure that they have the ability to not get pregnant. why? because mosquitoes ravage pregnant women. >> but today they turn down rav pregnancies. >> today, they decide to gamble with the lives of children like this. >> the annual defense policy and program bill. >> all of these are vital to the future of our nation in a time of turmoil and the greatest number of refugees and world war ii. >> gun violence legislation and criminal justice reform. >> every member of this body, every republican and democrats must see less gun violence. >> demand of sense less killing everywhere. >> and a resolution for congress to impeach irs commissioner,
john koskinen. >> commissioner of the internal revenue service for high crimes and misdemeanors. >> we'll review the congressional debate with susan ferrechio. join us thursday night at 8 eastern on c-span for congress this fall. next, santa clara professor nancy unger in her class discuss societial attitudes towards gay men and lesbians. however, interesting freud and the new field of psychology. the culture plays on emphasis on masculinity. as a result, gay men and
lesbians were considered deviant of this cultural idea. santa clara university is in california. this class is just over an hour. good morning, today after three weeks in this class of talking about how there had been from the colonial period to early american history, same-sex acts that people seem to know about but not homosexuals. finally, after three weeks we are going to talk about what happens when there starts to be a definition and identities. homo sexuals. bha does it mean? >> what does it diagnose and
label? >> what difference does it make? so what? we want to address this issue. is sexuality socially constructed. we have been grappling with this question. we'll talk about the medicalization of sexuality. as it defines as a negative tintin thing, we are seeing all kinds of repercussions. one of them is be ware of the l lesbian campaign and we'll talk about that. and the question of we know there are male homo sexuals. what counts and we'll depend it on the medical and criminal definitions and we'll talk about that. we'll get into kind of, kind of bear with me for this long intro
of the progressive error politics on notion of masculinity and feminine. there will be a political component to this as well. >> we'll talk about that and its impact on homosexuals. we'll talk about now that there are lesbians and homosexuals, that's been identified. what gays and lesbians sub cultures take inform. we'll do our best to cover it. >> in your reading, there is this point where she's talking about she's been asked to be apart of this legal fight in colorado for civil rights protection based on sexual orientation, pages 73 and 74. this is 1993. she's talking about that whole situation. she says when i met with the
lawyer, setting up the case, i found we spoke in different languages. what they wanted to hear that history shows that people are born gay have been discriminated against in the same ways as african-americans of color have suffered and deserve the same kind of protection. trying to explain my view of the history of same-sex sexuality made me sweat. when i mention that some scholar considered race as well as sexuality socially constructed, they seem to me taking a lead of my senses. >> what does she mean by this notion that race as well as sexuality is socially constructed. isn't race, race? are you the race that you are? what does she mean?
class? [ inaudible ] >> she says even race is socially constructed. how can race be socially constructed? amanda? [ inaudible ] >> or you can appear white but you are back in the days where one drop of blood made you negro. even these ideas of race are not quite as fixed as we think. she says all of them are more so for sexuality. the last straw was the concept of political lesbian, do you remember this, class? >> right, right, a woman says
this is a more popular and feminist movement. there are women saying, i believe in this society, i declare myself and i identify myself as a lesbian. i don't want to have sex with a woman but i am a lesbian. >> remember we had this whole argument before. kyle, remember what was your argument? >> they get the benefit of having the community behind them. but -- it is tricky >> yes, that's what she's saying. she did not want to say yeah, we are born that way and that's all there is to it. there is all k-9s of do
definitions. when i told them about the article that will we wrote together and describe the fluid identity of sexual women. they immediately end with a sigh of relief and scratched it off the list. this was not a concept they wanted to introduce in court. how can the law protect a category with so little stability. she says it was a sobering experience for me. how could the scholarly explanation that many of us driven to construct be so dangerous. we have been talking about this notion of fluid identity and the harder we try to define, you know, same-sex and sexuality and cultural and it is hard to grip it. it keeps on getting away from us. did we really have to violate our scholarship and argue that people are simply born gay and they always have been.
because the meanings of same sexuality have differed across time and place. should discrimination be allowed just because it is not always stable. this is where i wanted to spend a couple of minutes to talk about it before we get into the definition of the term of the last century. >> since this experience, she says, i have taken courage fr from lisa dugan should take as our model -- sexual desire like religion is not biological or fixed but neither is it trivia. it is an intriguing approach that i think is a great deal to commend it. what do you think about this idea? what do you think?
>> it is interesting. she was saying the definition keeps on changing. the same thing as religion. the parents wanted to pick up for them. >> right. >> i guess people as they get older, they change their religions. because of the fluidity is religion, it has so many protections so i think she's trying to say apply that to the homosexual and the lgbt community and people are changing often. >> that's not a category or it does not count, what do you think? >> i think it has to be with the idea of toleration verses equality. what she's saying is more like
what dugan is talking about embracing your differences rather than trying to fit in a set label of society. we all want to be equal and we want to have the exact same thing but lets look to our differences and accept each other for them. i think it can be tricky because there are other homosexuality as far as is it natural because it is non-productive or how does it affect religious morality and all sorts of things. it is an interesting but an interesting way to look at it. >> go ahead nicole. >> the former almost sounds like settling because you are settling just to be tolerated and not necessarily to have rights and did that sat fun funny -- i didn't like that because i think there are still people, they deserve more to be
tolerated and they should have rights just like everyone else. >> the word tricky keeps oncoming up here. i think you are right. >> kera when you said -- of this notion, you may agree with someone on a religious bases but you still respect the right to hold that idea. >> it is about respect. >> right. >> do you see any danger with this approach? yeah. >> a choice that they can be more judgemental. race is being more tolerated and understood than it used to be. >> uh-huh. >> i think it could be easier
for sexuality to be based on gender because it is easier. you are more forced and be toll re rant of it. >> and religion, so many people are against it. >> the first time i read this, i went crazy trying to federal government out how i felt about this. >> and you know -- i was struggling with this notion, okay, i agree that something does not have to be biological or fixed for it to be, for it to be respected and so forth. she said -- sexual desires like religion is not biological or fixed. when i first read this book and read that piece t there is a big news story about a mormon man who was deeply religious and also gay. he found it was just impossible for him to reconcile these two
and committed suicide in a public way. so i thought, nobody told him that he could pick his religion. even that notion that you peck yo pick your religion, it is not always compelling. anyway, this -- this question of definition -- it matters and it matters legally and socially and it matters politically. and, so these are important questions to be asking in 2014. we are still struggling with this issue of definition and the best way to move forward and so forth. with that is kind of the background. i really want to move us into this issues of these early definition in the 1870s and the 1880s. i don't want to rush off from this. anybody having any last comment on these questions? >> yes. >> i thought it is weird how
they are not separated by gender as being a fluid thing. je gender is more like races than sexuality. to me that's a bit close minded, kind of saying gender of male or female. >> which you know, we talked about for a long time in this class as well and even that is simple and easy to define. there is more of them now as time moves forward and recognition of that. >> okay, lets start with the early definition in the 1700s and the 1880s. we have this notion where this homosexuality is a medical condition. it is starting to come on the radar. we left off last time of the last thing we left off was this
urban community, there is a visible population of these men who are having sex with each other. there is this recognition and it is not just that they are having sex but there is almost like a culture that's beginning to develop. this is recognized and it is about men. they're talking about men and these doctors are doing about this. why are they talking about primarily men. we know there is lesbian activities going on. why are these big focus looking on urban standards, why are they focusing them? >> go ahead. >> because it is the men who are out in public who are having this kind of culture. women are still staying at home or going over to their friend's house having long vacations. >> they're not a visible
population. they're not really on the radar yet. >> yes. >> the doctor's diagnoses, they're not calling it homosexuals early on. what was the term, do you are ebb? remember? >> sexual inverts. these are men who suffer from sexual invertions. >> what does it mean to be invert? >> feminine and characteristics of maybe having sex with other guys. >> that's why they are having sex with other men. they are like women trapped in a man's body. that's exactly right. they think and they act and sort of have a total identity of the opposite sex.
the term homosexuals, again, it is not just about act. it is the general, mental state of the opposite sex. so homosexual men -- that kind of stuff. all right, so what causes this, according to these doctors? what causes this initially and why is it this way? >> mentally there is something defective so it is making them sexuals. the idea was if you were a man with a small grape penis or womh
a large clitoral and that's a defect. unusual anatomy would be a big cause. no, no, that's not what it is, it is sigmund freud, what does freud say? >> what kacauses everything? >> social, what's the bases of everything, ashley? parents, your upbringing and everyone is sexual. men are sexual and women are sexual. this is a big change from all the victorian. freud says everything is based in sex or sexuality.
it is not biology he says. it comes from in proper and unnatural family dynamics and bad upbringing and so forth. lets talk about freud's attitude about sex for a moment. not everybody becomes a freudian. his attitude and idea about sexuality, do change things quickly for women sexuality. we are going to go quickly from all women are asexual. on the one hand, freud gives women a lot, a lot of their sexuality. freud is taking something away. what is freud's big thing? what do all women suffer from? what do all women suffer from?
penis envy. >> women are sexual but they are all frustrated because they cannot be men. there is sort of the return of women sexuality, but again it is a little -- you know, it is distorted. here we picasso. what is this woman dreaming of? yes, the penis. there is a lot of interesting thing going on around this time. >> so same-sex desires have been identified and yet, we have people like walt wittman. he's very open about loving other man and sexually, he makes no bums about this and he's very open about it and poetry about it. he denies that he's an invert. why? since he's completely open about
desiring sex with a man and having sex with man. why would he deny from being an invert. what do you think? >> inverts are kind of -- the definition of what you are. like y like i don't think you should be identified in that part of it. >> i am a man, i don't want to be a woman. i am not a woman trapped in a man's body. i am a man who desires other man. >> this definition is one size fits all definition. i am not denying my same-sex desires. this is not who i am. and, he does not feel he's pathological and that he's sick. already, this is making it to be
problemat problematic. but, this talk of inversion and the whole widely accepted notion that homosexuals are sick. it is really going to change a lot of things that we are going to talk about in this class. what's going to happen to cross dressing? what's going to happen to occasions like this? you know when these kinds of things were happening before these definitions and forth that were occurring. how were they presented and proceed? is this a great sign of homosexual behavior, nicole? >> suddenly now there is
definitions attached to it. nobody wants to be labeled as homosexuals. they are afraid of the term and what it entails. >> right. it is no longer a playful activity. it is offensive. this could be a sign of, deep and dark trouble. what about those intimate friendships of the boston marriages, what about them now? what do you say? >> it is not like two women living together like mothers are worried that their daughters are having intimate relationships that's more than just deep friendships and people are starting to get worried that something is wrong with that kind of relationship. >> yeah, exactly. >> this is no longer just this kind of harmless activity. page 87. by 1920, intimacy between two
girls, before they're sleep ing in the same bed and writing letters, nobody is worried about it. >> one looks for the bi sexual type. before it was kind of sweet. the word is "smash." one girl having a "smash" on another girl and we call it crush now a day. now, it is worrisome and now is suspicious. if occasionally too obsessive of the relationship of the women, now taking on the taint of deviant. they are homosexuals and they are dangerous and you need to be
ware of them. what is the impact of this on women in the boston marriages? the ones who are, you know, with this lifelong partner of the same-sex. what happens to them now? all these women that we talked about last time. it is on page 92. really interesting phenomenon, i think -- um, jeanette marks, a professor, living with the college's president, mary woo e woolly. she insisted contrary to her own life experience that the only relationship that could fulfill itself and be complete is between a man and a woman.
what do you think about that? yaw, kooyle. >> i would say that's typical of everyone. it is one case because back earlier it talks about, was it jane adams and mary rose smith, they would make point if they are going to a hotel, they would make a point to have a double bed. i guess it is something -- i don't think people start to denying it. but it is becoming political and you see a dichotomy of the two extremes. >> it becomes dangerous. >> now, it is like what are they doing in that double bed. >> do you think this woman ais big hypocrite to say that she's fulfilling the relationship of the women that the only relationship that could fulfill itself between a man and a
woman. >> uh-huh. >> it made it difficult for individuals for boston marriages to continue that lifestyle. i think if you are something like this, you are in charge of -- university where there are a lot of women coming and parents maybe worried or something that you do have to put up ta front even though that's not what they are feeling and would be difficult to be living in boston marriage. >> that's exactly right. >> to be complete between a man and a woman. like i am viewing it as a completion is having a child. technically, a man and a woman, that's what their purpose is is to reproduce. and so, same-sex relationship cannot fully be completed because they cannot take that final aspect and have a child together. but, that does not mean that those relationships are emotionally sexually fulfilling. it could still be fulfilled and in love with the person but they cannot complete it because they
cannot have a child. i don't know if she's maybe saying that it cannot be completed because of that? but, i don't know if she's denouncing her own lifestyle. >> yeah, i think this question up here, why should she denounce her own lifestyle and minimizing it. yeah, it is kind of scary now, you are being looked at by some suspicion. yes, my partner and i are lesbians here, bring your daughter here. this is big, dangerous thing. these are deviant women now. >> i don't know if you can call her a hypocrite. i think that's something we have talked about a lot in the past th three weeks are you actually homosexuals that you accept the term. is it how she sees herself. maybe she's not being hypocrite
cal here. it is a new term and she's maybe uncomfortable of the medical literature and maybe it is scientif scientif scientific jargon and it had nothing to do with her. >> yes, like whit mman. >> insisted that our lives are on the higher plain than those are on the high in verse. >> what are lesbians? sex crazed women. >> it seems to me that up until this point of the focus on same-sex male community and that started to be stigmatized that these women don't want to be associated with a deviant community.
they just want to be accepted as living a normal life. >> because they did not see themselves as deviant. >> it is hard to know how much this is and no, that's not me and how much this political ly that i separate myself from it. it was interesting to me how this kind of played out. there is a rose of be ware of this campaign and particularly for girls and all-girls schools and in the colleges and the seven sister colleges, be ware of the lesbians. the be ware of the lesbians campaign reminded me of many campaigns. one so what does the stranger look
like in the poster and so forth? who would you run away from and what does a stranger look like? >> a scary man wearing black and looking very scary. >> when i was a kid, the big scary man wore a trench coach in a fedora. if you saw a strange, big man wearing a fedora, be ware. you and i know who's molesting children. is it a big scary stranger wearing a fedora. family members or mom's boyfriend or the funny uncle. in a way was the be ware stranger campaign is also kind of protecting it. they were not the ones you are looking for the family members and so forth. it kind of have the same, be ware of the lesbians and you will know the lesbian because
how does she look? >> ultra masculine. >> very masculine. wearing low heel shoes. short hair. you can spot her a mile away. how do lesbian fes feel about m? they are men hater and all these terrible things. there is this be ware lesbian campaign and don't let your innocent daughter being sucked in and remind her to be ware and all the dangers that are there and so forth. this is going to backfire in a number of ways. remember, i think the first day of class, i read you that little exert from a letter to emma gold man that was very graphic. remember we said -- it is clear that these women, were having sex. we did not have to guess or think putting all kinds of
astericks and so forth. she's bisexual and she enjoys it with men and women. she writes this. i simply cannot bear such narrowness. so is she a hypocrite? >> it goes back to the fact that a lot of these educated women, they are high classes and they are in this upper, you know kind of academia level and a lot of people in the social class viewed homosexuality is this working class or deviant of whatever. that's something that they are
not really categorizing their stunt. there is something else. >> they're not wearing the trench coat or fedora. >> is emma goldman a lesbian? does she see herself as a homosexual? no, she's a woman that likes to have sex with woman. this sort of identification of homosexuals and be ware of it is going to be a lot of interesting backfires this. on the other hand, same-sex behaviors now has a name. it now has a name and it is deviant. it is determined by the medical profession that it is deviant and soon criminal as well. it is not jaust a sickness or
criminal behavior. before the 1860s or the 1870s. there are not going to be very many arrests. we don't see those begin to pick up until the 1880s. when homo sexualities, this is going to be a crime for which you can be arrested. so, we have gone from same-sex acts to identity and a physical disease or, now proversion and crime. what's going to be the impact of this on people who enjoys sex of the same-sex? what are they going to deal? how are they going to deal with these labels. we have seen some just rejected. they're saying they're going to reject the whole thing.
others begin to sort of oh, well, that's what it means. this is what my action means then this is an identity then. so we see some men consciously being and becoming more feminine. if that's what it means then there is definition in a way and it is going to have a self fulfilling prophecy. these definitions are really hard to follow. if two men are caught in a public park and they are having oral sex. what are they charged with when they are arrested? do you remember this? they're charged with vagrancy. that's not considered as
homosexualism. what is that? anal sex. even of the men themselves both agreeing to have this sexual act, who is determined among the two men to be the homosexuals? >> right, right. >> so the idea is who takes on the receptive role? if you are receiving, if someone is havipenetrating you then you the homosexual. tl man who's doing the penetrating, he's the man. even though who men are having consensual sex, who's going to
be arrested and had a lot to do of what acts or what role one plays in the act. are y'all with me, here? you see it is getting confusing. i want to add one more complicated point to this. it is a long store are i so stay with me for this. these are the political implicati implications of what's happening at this time. so as some of you know my training are in the progressive era. i am going to give you my reader's digest, it kills me to do this to paint in broad strokes. you know that we have the civil war and we have reconstruction and we have the period that historians have called the gilded age. it is from the late 18 00s. they call it the gilded age as
oppose to the golden age. when something is gilded, what does it mean? >> covered in gold. it is not pure gold. it is gold plate. >> that's exactly right. thing that is are gold plated in a distance, looked gold. they look pretty good until you get up close and you scratch it off and underneath is wood or metal or whatever it is. this period is called the gilded age, what makes it look gold of the period of the 1900, what's so great about that period that's turning to guilded. what's the gold plating of that period? >> could you say the rising industry and industrialization? >> right, we got urbanization
and industrialization, united states is going from this little, sleepy nation to a major world player. immigrants are pouring in. therefore, providing cheap labor and the united states is turning out all kinds of products and it is really just an amazing time of growth we got. we got new technology and all kinds of of -- and all stuff that's happening. it is called the golded age, it is -- when you scrape it off, what's underneath and what are the problems of all this wonderfulness? >> people are not having the quality of life, necessarily that comes along the golden age. >> sorry, start again. >> like discrimination, you
know, aftrican-american communiy and a lot of over crowded and sanitary going down and general politic health is really, really low and the quality of life is not very high. >> yeah, these are people who should be living the american drea dreams. they are working hard and honest. life is really grim. we have fires and we have unsafe working conditions and we have children working in factories. we have to have our children working in factories because we cannot put food on the table without them. this is not such a golden age when you start looking at these problems when you have urbanization and industrialization happening so fast. so -- the progressive period is kind of -- there are a number of people during the gilded age called progression, it is true they are all these problems. we can solve them and we know we
can solve it. if we become an urban industrial giant over night, if we take the same expertise that created these wonderful factories that produce all these great stuff and we have experts focusing on not just how to make the most profit but on what? is that a factory and you want it to be profitable and also what? safe. humane. how many fire exits do we need to have and how much ventilation do we need to have? and how many hours appropriate to ask people to work and how much is too much? they'll be looking to regulate all kind of things and saying no, you cannot just run the business the way you want to. you cannot just when somebody gets hurt, you cannot throw them out on the street. we are going to have worker's compensation and safety legislation. we are going to have all kinds of efforts. we are going to have pure food and drug acts and we are dpoigo
to do all kinds of stuff to make this country not just profitable but humane and good. we can do both at the same time. this is the big idea. a lot of people are very, very opposed to this. okay, you are creating a new eastern span -- you are interfering with businesses and telling people, you know, how to behave and trying to control their behavior. you are going to take all the competition and drive out of this country. you a you are making decisions for them. this is a huge mistake. so there is going to be one president who i argue aggressively is the only president i think who could make this happen, all right? he's so manly and he's so aggressive. nobody can say oh, he's a wuss,
who am i talking about? roosevelt. look at this guy, he's a cowboy and out in the dakotas and he's a great outdoor and a tremendous hunter. unlike woodrow wilson, he's a professor and an egghead. theodore roosevelt, he's a man, he's very manly. listen to -- here is some quotes from roosevelt. "i wish to preach the doctrine of the strenuous life. i took the canal zone in panama and let congress debate and
while the debate goes on, the canal does also." when he ran for presidency in 1912 rather than saying i am announcing my candidacy. he says "my hat is in the ring and the fight is on." here is what he says about war. "no triumph of peace is quite so great as its supreme triumph of war. just war in the long run is far better than a man's soul than the most prosperous peace. or, is good or masculine" we do not admire the man of timid peace. it is because of their greatness coming to an end. are we still in the prime of your lusty youth and beginning
of our manhood to sit down to out warn people and taking our place with the weak and the craven of a thousand times? no. theodore roosevelt is just as manly and depressiaggressive as get. in 1912 when he's running for the presidency for the third time. he's giabout to give a speech i milwaukee. he's shocked of the assassin and the bullet went through and into his lungs and so he starts bleeding. roosevelt, of course, says, "friends, i shall ask you to be quiet as possible, i don't know if you know that i have been shocked but it takes more than that to kill a bull moose." he gives that peach for almost an hour and finally they got him
to the hospital and giving rise to his poster. i don't get shot in the middle of the speech but when i do, i finish the dam speech. this is our manly, manly, manly president. >> so what does it got to do with us? a lot of what i am about to tell you, i got it from this book. political manhood of the politics of the progressive era reform. so you know, look in a 1907 lecture of harvard graduates. theodore roosevelt, warning of too sense sitive of the wall wo of the world and contending that one's physical, moral and mental strength, indeed of the quality of one man's hood depended on participation.
colleges should not quote -- the weaklings and the cowards are out of place. roosevelt's speech fixed the figure of the molly cuddle in the american imagination as a pa paradigm of weakness. the red blood with a man of action. pocket ideals of american masculinity around these two distinct categories. because of its similarity to the emergent type -- >> so this is picked up by sarah watson, a rough writer in the white house. >> against men who were not men.
roosevelt was a master of a political invective. he hurled the most humiliating criticism. criticisms that created the images of the undesired body of ideal represented by him. mckinly had a backbone of a chocolate eclair. some men's shoulders sloped like a champagne bottle. henry george "emasculated" and naval appropriations and a group which roosevelt reserve special iron and considered of a small bunch of unix. he thought that the lunatic
reformer -- our short haired female brother. you have to remember that everything theodore roosevelt says is reported as the press and making headline news and everybody is following his utterance. and, in 1916, enraged over woodrow wilson, roosevelt called the president "physically cowardly demagogue and a white handy miss nancy." a term men often used to refer as women as men.
unix and sis sy. a deficiency that's left more than a women and hardness requires for practical politics. we got roosevelt just, you know, reeking testosterones. he's very, very masculine and anybody who's not masculine in his term is they're not just weak and a feminine or sissy, what are they as far as the nation is concerned? >> not just use less but what? >> almost a drain on society. >> they are dangerous and unpatriotic and un-american.
>> you start talking about this kind of language just as the united states is really starting to talk about homosexuals as deviants and inverts. what are they? yeah. un-american. unpatriotic and danl yogerous. this takes on a whole new identity at this time. he's talking about strenuous masculinity that's going to save this nation and allow us to have good prerogative era reforms and so forth. we are grand, vigorous nation, he says. the only thing that can hurt us are these weak, sissy men. >> now, what about lesbians?
if the idea that we need strong aggressive people and the stereotype type at this time is that lesbians are manly, where do they fit in? is roosevelt going to say hooray for the lesbians? why not? what do you think? >> that's like the role of men but it is not the role of women. >> what is the role of women? >> to be submissive and stay home and -- >> and taking care of? >> children. >> there is these women reformers and so forth. while reform is fine. he says these women who don't married are traitors to their race and class. they are traitors to their race and class. why are they traitor to their
race? >> well, they're not reproducing so they're not helping the cause of white people. >> they are not reproducing and traitor to their race and class. >> what does class fit in? >> same thing, if you have kids and having at that high classes, they'll keep it. you college women, you go out there and you have careers and you don't get married, you are the cream of american society, you are the white women and the educated ones, you are not marying and who's marrying and having children? what class of women? >> working class. >> all of these iimmigrants. you are committing race suicide here. you women in these boston -- you are also are what? unpatriotic and un-american. >> so homosexuality now has a
lot of identities. it is a sickness and a crime and undesirable political acts and all of these things are all coming in to be being. okay th okay, they are working to under mine this great nation here. are you with me here on this material? any questions about any of these? >> well, we have seen what the medical community is saying and police are saying and politicians are saying and so fort. now, we are going to talk a little bit about what is the impact of all of this on people who are now beginning to identify themselves as homosexuals? what do you think it is going to be? and how do you feel when society says you are not just sick and
you are behavi your behavior is not just criminal but it is un-american and unpatriotic. what do you think the response is of among the people who are now deemed to be homosexuals. >> they are not un-american. it is something normal and that they are trying to live their life. >> i don't think -- at this point, there is a whole big effort to prove that so much as -- that's going to come in later at this point. >> it is a lot more hidden and kind of, i mean, we are talking about the parties but they're kind of in these boarding houses and hidden behind closed doors and people would come there dressing normally like any other person but they would go to these homosexual parties all the time. >> you see these boston marriages, they're working to
distance themselves from business and so forth. some homosexuals thinking oh my god, this is terrible, there is a great deal of shame. i cannot admit these desires to anyone. i don't want to be these sick horrible people and i see myself as a good person. there is deep closeting and tremendous loathing and experiencing of deep degrees and we have all kinds of diaries. on the other hand, there is something else that's going on for a long time that for generations, we had people who felt same-sex desires and thought they were the only ones. you know you are the only ones. i think it is really hard in 2014 to imagine before there were sex and before all this, people did not talk about
heterosexuals and led alone homosexuals and now it is being defined, oh, i am identifying with that. it is not just me. as kyle suggesting, i don't think i am, you know a deviant and horrible person. and if i am not the only one, i want to find who all the other ones are. there is this kind of awearenes for some homosexuals is damage ing and upsetting and for others, it is inspiring and there is a desire to meet others who feel the way that you do. if you are a gay man or a lesbian today and you want to get together and you want to find other gay men and lesbians. how do you do that? what do you do? >> go to a bar.
what else do you do? >> there is an app. >> there is an app for everything. br [ laughs ] >> what else do you do? >> >> there's, like, sports leagues and things like that. organizations. >> you join the softball team. there's just so many digit -- you can go on the lesbian cruise line. there are just so many, you know -- you can join a reading group, you can go to the gay father's group, there is a million different things. what do these people do? what do these people who are just, you know, at the turn of the century, they're just beginning to understand that they're not the only one. if you live in a rural community, what do you do? >> well, there were a lot of talks about a lot of men who started to embrace effeminate that were these fairies that were very feminine men and then
there were queers who reject ee flamboyancy, and so you really got this bridging of sexuality and gender. so it wasn't just -- you know, before it was you had people that cross-dressed but weren't necessarily sexual with their same sex and then you had people who didn't cross-dress and had sex with people at the same sex, and now you have kind of crossing of that in order to be able to recognize each other outwardly. >> yeah. so there's -- it's -- and you want to be able to recognize each other and how does one do that? and there's this whole rise of kind of a culture. yeah, kyle? >> i mean, taken, for example, they would move into a city, they would, you know, everybody knew where sort of the gay district was but even though it wasn't talked about, so they would figure out where that was and there were certain characteristics, walking with your hands on your hips or a certain sway. >> a red necktie. >> a red necktie, silk shoes,
anything. there were all sorts of different little clues that, you know, you would go to the city, learn what those clues were then go to the different districts. >> right. so there's this notion of being gay, of walking gay, of looking gay, of -- i mean, so this whole culture is going to -- all right. so what i was fishing for earlier is in rural areas there were some places you could go, these juke joints that were kind of out in the middle of nowhere and this is where there was more opportunity. most rural areas, though, it's pretty difficult. as kyle says people are much more likely to move to the city. and so we see, you know, gay new york. gender urban culture and the making of the gay male world. there's a whole male world, gay male world for heavens sake of behavior, of ideas, of ways of talking. all kinds of stuff. and so we see things are really going to -- are really going to change. mabel hampton is going to appear
in the documentary that we are going to see before stonewall so you get to hear this from her directly. but how does she make this sound? this african-american woman living in harlem in the 1920s? she is a lesbian. does she feel that she's sick and -- >> she didn't seem to have a lot of fun with the environment and talk about all of her friends and just, like, them getting to know one another. >> yeah, she says this is just fabulous. she says -- for hampton, she says, i never went in with straight people. i do more bother with straight people now than i ever did in my life. she summed up her memories of the clubs and nightlife available to an openly lesbian woman with a wistful, you had a beautiful time up there. oh, girl, you had some time up there. so for her, you know, she's not
internalizing any of this negative stuff. this is a great time, it's a great moment, she's really en y enjoying this. and she talked about how these private parties, because they were cheaper than going to bars and you didn't get hassled. lesbians, she said, lived together and worked together. when someone got sick, the lover would come and help them, bring food, bring money and helped them out. i never felt lonely. she says in a small town you wouldn't have a chance to get around and meet gay people. now, in new york you met them all over the place, from the theater to the hospital to anywhere. yes, new york is a good place to be a lesbian. so, you know, there are a whole variety of experiences that are coming out of this new, you know, definition, this period of definition. and so what we're going to move into next time is what happens
if you aren't mabel hampton? what happens if you are like most americans, you're not living in a major city, you're not able to take advantage of these gay bars and so forth. now that there is this new definition, what is it like to be a small town man or woman who has -- who is now known to be at least in their own -- their own mind a homosexual? what does that mean? so that's where we're going to pick up next time. do you have any questions about any of this stuff that we covered today? the real point here is that, you know, these notions of definition, they really matter. they have -- it's not just kind of re torically, does this -- you know, we are talking about this. what's the dictionary say? they had an impact on how people lived, how they thought about themselves, how they were perceived medically, psychologically, in the criminal system and it had some horrible impact for many and it had some really liberating and sort of