Capalisms and Gay Inti Towards a Capalist Theory of Social Movements on JSTOR

Contents:

• CAPALISM MA GAY INTY POSSIBLE. NOW WE MT DTROY CAPALISM.
• CAPALISM AND GAY INTY
• CAPALISM AND GAY INTY BY D’E AND BEBE
• D’E – “CAPALISM AND GAY INTY”
• CAPALISMS AND GAY INTI
• CAPALISM AND GAY INTY
• GLOW UP: ON QUEER EYE, CAPALISM AND GAY INTY

CAPALISM MA GAY INTY POSSIBLE. NOW WE MT DTROY CAPALISM.

Specifilly, different kds of palism yield different domant unrstandgs of gay inty held by the movement over s 70-year history: reform palism created a psychiatric gay inty; social ntract palism created an “out” mory gay inty; palism--crisis created a centered and ntted gay inty; and neoliberal palism created a domtited and nsumerist gay inty.

Rather than viewg gay inty and the movement through the prism of rourc, opportuni, social works, and social nstctn, the article argu that the procs are bt subsumed unr the broar bric of palist polil artículo revisa una doctra central en la vtigación sobre la intidad gay: ncretamente, aquel que dice que el palismo dtrial “creó” la intidad gay y tableció las bas para el movimiento gays y lbianas en los Estados Unidos.

CAPALISM AND GAY INTY

Específimente, las diferent clas palismo produjeron terpretacn diferent la intidad gay mantenidas por su movimiento a lo largo s setenta años historia: el palismo reforma creó una intidad gay psiquiátri; el palismo ntrato social creó una intidad gay “anómala” moraria; el “palismo-en-crisis” creó una intidad gay scentrada y nflictiva; y el palismo neoliberal creó una intidad gay domtida y nsumista. Más que ver la intidad gay y su movimiento a través l prisma recursos, las oportunidas, las res social y la nstcción social, el artículo argumenta que tos procos mejor englobarlos bajo un más ampl apartado la enomía políti palista.

Gay activists diligently studyg Marx’s Capal together has not necsarily been a equent occurrence throughout Amerin history, but phenomena of this type did occur more equently durg a few years the seventi, when activists briefly unrstood anti-palism to be a self-evint ponent of gay liberatn. Jab’s Meagan Day spoke to D’E about the parallel histori of palism and gay inty — wh a foc on homosexualy, though the nversatn do touch on transgenr issu — and why even though palism has generated new possibili for sexual exprsn, we mt enavor to transcend .

CAPALISM AND GAY INTY BY D’E AND BEBE

Alongsi that, you have this other moral panic that gets scribed by historians now as the Lavenr Sre, which the opprsn of gay people sudnly be much more overt and tensified, wh the police and the FBI actively gog after people, creatg lists, raidg bars, and so on.

D’E – “CAPALISM AND GAY INTY”

But here is another parallel: jt as the Civil Rights Movement generated “massive ristance” om whe racists, the emergence of gay polics sparked an tense backlash, one that was more popular-facg and many ways more vilent than the Lavenr Sre.

CAPALISMS AND GAY INTI

” He asserts the importance of “a new, more accurate theory of gay history” as part of this project, particular overg the vented mythology of “silence, visibily, and isolatn” and the nsequent “overreliance on a strategy of g out.

Their emergence is associated wh the relatns of palism; has been the historil velopment of palism – more specifilly, s ee labor system – that has allowed large numbers of men and women the late twentieth century to ll themselv gay, to see themselv as part of a muny of siar men and women, and to anize polilly on the basis of that inty.

1) “we are not a fixed social mory posed for all time of a certa percentage of the populatn… Capalism has created the material ndns for homosexual sire to exprs self as a central ponent of some dividuals’ liv; now, our polil movements are changg nscns, creatg the iologil ndns that make easier for people to make that choice. Although Red Butterfly supports Whman for generally lkg the dividual effects of gay opprsn to “the social and enomic facts which are at once the e and effects of this suatn, ” they note the tensn his manifto between personal eedom and the need for llective actn, and they crique Whman’s promotn of “g out” as an aquate strategy for social change self bee n so easily separate personal liberatn om changg the social ndns that foster gay opprsn. Comprised of a loose work of llectiv, journals, newsletters, study groups, nferenc, and actns whose most tensive activy lasted only until the mid-seventi, the Gay Left reprented a short-lived but val willgns to make e of Marxism as a cril amework to lk sexual opprsn to global palism.

CAPALISM AND GAY INTY

Nohels, the fact that a broad sector of the disurse of gay liberatn was at least spir directed toward nnectg sexual opprsn to the history of palism ma this one of the most excg flash pots the historil velopment of a cril and materialist unrstandg of sexualy. Among the llectiv that very potedly did set out to velop a Marxist or socialist analysis of sexualy as a basis for actn were the Los Angel Rearch Group, the Lavenr and Red Unn (Los Angel), Red Butterfly (New York), the Gay Left Collective (UK), and the Gay Socialist Actn Project (New York Cy).

As the Collective Statement for the Brish socialist journal Gay Left announced 1975, the aims of the Gay Left were to “ntribute towards a Marxist analysis of homosexual opprsn… and enurage the gay movement an unrstandg of the lks between the stggle agast sexual opprsn and the stggle for socialism.

GLOW UP: ON QUEER EYE, CAPALISM AND GAY INTY

” Like many socialist gay anizatns formg at the time, the Brish Gay Left Collective brought together men who benefed om and were volved the gay liberatn movement’s dramatic terptn of the negative value attached to homosexualy.

They acknowledged that “there has not… been a properly Marxist unrstandg of sexual opprsn, ” an unrstandg that, they suggted, would lie “ graspg the relatnship between the enomy, iology, and culture and the sights supplied by recent velopments the study of sexualy” (Gay Left Collective, 9).

But ntendg that is at the iologil level that most of our opprsn as gays is exprsed (10), they ran the danger of separatg iology om palism’s base and openg the door to an exclive foc on iologil and polil practic that would ultimately domate the New Left.