# data[].attributes.body
Although Homosexuality has just recently been identified universally as an innate part of ones identity, homosexuality has been around for centuries (Finding Out, 2). The picture from the article "The Victorian view of same-sex desire", depicts a same sex couple of the 19th century highlighting the point. Same sex couple have been around well before people believed it was an innate part of someones identity. "The groom may be turning away from same-sex love in favor of a respectable, heterosexual marriage, but the men’s fingers intertwine intimately in front of a naked crotch… As an image of forbidden, thwarted love and lust, today it seems pretty explicit (BBC, 2017). This specific artifact connects to the textbook because it proves the statements made in the book. It shows historical evidence of lesbian desires and the idea that LGBTQ individuals have always been present.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Starting in 1861, with the abolition of the death penalty for sodomy, and ending in 1967, when the act between consenting men was decriminalised in England and Wales, the new exhibition Queer British Art at Tate Britain in London offers just over a century of works exploring fluid gender identities and same-sex desire.

You might expect the show to display a gradual opening up, with increasingly explicit or unabashed imagery. Not so: the work of one of the first artists featured, Simeon Solomon - part of the Aesthetic movement and a youthful figure on the fringes of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood - potently telegraphs homosexual desire from as early as the mid-1800s.

Witness The Bride, The Bridegroom and Sad Love, a drawing from 1865. While the bride and bridegroom canoodle, the man's hand reaches behind him to a winged male youth, looking sad indeed. The groom may be turning away from same-sex love in favour of a respectable, heterosexual marriage, but the men's fingers intertwine intimately in front of a naked crotch... As an image of forbidden, thwarted love and lust, today it seems pretty explicit.

But was it so for 19th Century audiences? In the case of this particular drawing, it probably was - it's from a private collection - but Simeon was a notably fashionable, mainstream artist too, who exhibited at the Royal Academy, the institution at the centre of the Victorian art establishment. Much of his public work also carried a surprisingly bold homoerotic charge. Homosexual desire is a coded presence in many of his paintings, which in portraying classical myths, usually feature effeminate or androgynous young male nudes.

He even painted overt depictions of lesbian love, as in his watercolour Sappho and Erinna in a Garden at Mytilene, from 1864. "It's a really explicit depiction of female same-sex desire," says Tate curator Clare Barlow. "Not explicit as in pornographic, but the passionate kiss, the swooning, the flushed cheeks... it's all there for the reading. I think he goes further than others at the time."
Raised eyebrows
Even if Solomon was celebrated by the Pre-Raphaelites and regularly exhibited in major galleries, critical responses were often uneasy. Barlow points out that reactions to the highly sensuous style of the Pre-Raphaelites and the Aesthetic movement - all those languorously draped youthful bodies and heavy-lidded, languid expressions - were always shot through with contemporary anxieties. While critics might not have been able to come out and frame or label these works as homoerotic or deviant, they nonetheless frequently got their knickers in a twist about them.

As long as there was a degree of ambiguity, 19th Century society was prepared to turn a blind eye

"Words like decadent or feminine or sickly often come up - there are lots of suspicions," says Barlow, speaking of not only Solomon but also artists like Frederic Leighton (who remained unmarried and whose sexuality was a subject of much speculation) and Edward Burne-Jones (who appears to have been primarily heterosexual). In 1865, the Pall Mall Gazette saw in Burne-Jones's style "something seductive but it is not masculine"; the Spectator sniffed at a "repulsive sentiment which too frequently marks Mr Solomon's compositions". Of Leighton's Daedalus and Icarus, the Times fretted that the nude Icarus had the air of "a maiden rather than a youth", noting anxiously the "soft rounded contour of a feminine breast" in his plump pecs.

But as long as there was a degree of ambiguity - in both the work, and the artist's proclivities - 19th Century society was prepared to turn a blind eye. Or, at least, confine themselves to a raised eyebrow. Even works which, to the modern viewer, look blatantly homoerotic could be respectably contained within the framework of the classical male nude, the ideal of Hellenic youthful beauty, or celebration of noble male friendship. Such narratives "veiled the potential homoeroticism of the works," suggests Barlow.
Notes on a scandal
In 1873, however, Solomon rather publicly confirmed all whispered suspicions: he was caught having sex with a man in a public toilet off Oxford Street. It caused a scandal, with the 32-year-old Solomon charged with "attempted buggery" and given a £100 fine; a successful career was abruptly derailed. After once more being arrested for "indecent touching" in a lavatory in Paris the following year, he spent three months in jail. Solomon was admitted to lunatic asylums, and would for rest of his life battle alcoholism, spending the latter part of it penniless and destitute. It was a very public fall from grace.

Simeon's famous friends dropped him, and he died in a workhouse

"Artists at this time can get away with [suggesting] quite a lot providing there's no hard proof," points out Barlow. "It's only when Solomon gets caught that all these rumours that have been swirling about decadence and sickliness crystallise into a specific sexual act."

Although there is a sadness to Solomon's story - famous friends dropped him, and he died in a workhouse in Covent Garden in 1905 - the artist did continue to produce work with impressive tenacity and creative conviction. And, later in life, he also achieved something of a cult status within gay circles. Frederick Hollyer, the great populariser of the Pre-Raphaelites, sold photographs of his work, and collectors included Oscar Wilde, essayist and critic Walter Pater, and the writer John Addington Symonds. "If you're trying to seduce elegant young men in the 1890s, showing them your Simeon Solomon Hollyer editions is not likely to do you any harm," says Barlow wryly.
Queer eye
Queer British Art is a show that, necessarily, often invites us to read (or re-read) work through the frame of the artist's life, allowing what we know - or guess - about their sexual desires to open up fresh potential meanings. "It's always tempting to read the biography into the work - that's something which can be illuminating but can also be problematic. But he does produce these incredibly agonised series of highly symbolist works at the end of his life," says Barlow. She refers to a series of depictions of very tortured Medusa heads, cross-gendered male. They're referred to as masculine in the Latin inscriptions, which say things like "it is the worst thing for the best to become corrupted" or given titles such as The Tormented Conscience.

The Tate's exhibition may start with Solomon, but it goes right up to David Hockney and Francis Bacon, taking in cross-dressing music hall stars, Oscar Wilde's trial, and the Bloomsbury Group's experiments in art and living along the way. The show aims to highlight "lots of different points of connection between the works and the queer narrative that surround them: some are autobiographical, sometimes the queerness is in the eyes of the beholder, or comes from a queer sensibility perhaps," elaborates Barlow.

"What we're doing is seeing what happens when you put these readings front and foremost: does it add to our understanding, or are they distracting? That's certainly a possibility. We're not trying to propose that these are the only ways these works should be read, but the queer narratives often help you see things in the work you didn't see before."

Still, when it comes to some of Solomon's paintings, the thing that may prove most striking to the modern viewer in how little explanation or explication they need, how readily these works from the 19th Century offer up queer readings. And how they bring a note of tragedy in: it's hard not to feel for Solomon, rejected from society, left out in the cold.

If you would like to comment on this story or anything else you have seen on BBC Culture, head over to our page or message us on

And if you liked this story, sign up for the weekly bbc.com features newsletter, called "If You Only Read 6 Things This Week". A handpicked selection of stories from BBC Future, Earth, Culture, Capital and Travel, delivered to your inbox every Friday.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Starting in 1861, with the abolition of the death penalty for sodomy, and ending in 1967, when the act between consenting men was decriminalised in England and Wales, the new exhibition Queer British Art at Tate Britain in London offers just over a century of works exploring fluid gender identities and same-sex desire.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter ten is centered around LGBTQ film and television. LGBTQ film has come a long way. Specifically within the past couple years, we have seen the first LGBT film to ever win an Oscar. This was a huge step in the community, "Moonlight winning Best picture was a huge step for LGBT representation in Hollywood. First and foremost, it was a huge step for the LGBTQ community when Moonlight won the Best Picture award at The Oscars just weeks ago. It was the first LGBTQ film to ever win the award. Over the past two decades, Americans have experienced a significant evolution process in their acceptance for lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, and transgender people" (Penn State). The textbook talks about the Scientific Humanitarian Committee which aimed to help, "eliminate false prejudices against homosexuals" (finding out, 292). I believe this principle can be applied to most queer films and television shows. All forms of representation are a push to aid in normalization. Today many individuals are already advocating fro LGBTQ rights, but there will always be the minority who do not. Showing LGBTQ persons in media and film not only brings attention to LGBTQ issues, but also helps portray them as everyday people. By nominating these pictures for awards and shedding light on the films, the film and television community is expanding their view to those who have not been included in the past.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LGBTQ representation in the main stream media has made strides forward in the past decade, but it would be naive to believe that media has reached total equality. The issue has been at the forefront of arguments for a time now, especially with the advent of gay marriage legalization and more openness in the United States overall. Entertainment in the forms of movies and television has an advantage over other types of media to create more liberalization because it attracts viewers of various demographics-everyone wants to be entertained at some point or another.

First and foremost, it was a huge step for the LGBTQ community when Moonlight won the Best Picture award at The Oscars just weeks ago. It was the first LGBTQ film to ever win the award. Over the past two decades, Americans have experienced a significant evolution process in their acceptance for lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, and transgender people. Media coverage has shifted from its once simplistic storylines and towards more understanding and multidimensional representations. This shift is exemplified by the fact that characters are not just defined by their sexuality. They have lives outside of it with friends and family. LGBTQ peoples' stories are beginning to be told in the same way that other's will be told-fairly and inclusively.

When homosexual relationships are portrayed in different mediums, LGBTQ people tend to identify with the characters that they see, causing them to feel more comfortable to be themselves. It is not simply a choice, but a process of acceptance, and entertainment is able to bring viewers who are struggling with their true identity to a healthy place where they can be proud of themselves and who they are. Film and television proves to be a way for their stories to be told in a light of uniqueness and shows them how fundamental they are to the American story.

However, it would be ignorant to think that heteronormativity does not still dominate our screens. Writers and producers in the industry often face challenges with the complexities of storylines that LGBTQ characters come with purely because of their identity in such a one sided, rhetorically charged climate. Moreover, conservatively minded viewers believe that a "gay agenda" is being forced down society's throats. Many even think that progressive television and movies encourage people to be gay, as if it is a choice in the first place.

LGBTQ media is still most definitely lacking the relatable characters that straight people get to see every day. Relationships lack intimacy and general closeness that is a staple in heterosexual couples. They are often more platonic. It is very rare to see hand holding, kissing, etc. on any general TV network or movie.

GLAAD, a nonprofit organization dedicated to equal representation for the LGBTQ community in media, completed a report this year on where society is on TV presently. Of the 895 series regular characters expected to appear on broadcast scripted primetime programming in the coming year, 43 (4.8%) identified as gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer. This is the highest percentage of LGBTQ series regulars the organization has ever found. There were an additional 28 recurring LGBTQ characters, with bisexual representation on broadcast TV increasing 30%.

That being said, lesbian representation dropped dramatically on broadcast television, down 16 percentage points to 17% of all LGBTQ characters. Lesbian representation is also down on cable, to 20% from 22% reported last year. This can be attributed to what many are calling "Bury your gays" trope, which refers to the extreme number of untimely deaths of lesbian characters this past year. The most jarring and publically acknowledged one being Lexa from The 100 since she was violently killed immediately after confirming her relationship with her girlfriend, Clarke. The negative media coverage around her death brought about an entire convention, aptly named Clexacon after Lexa and Clarke's relationship, happening just a few weeks ago.

The convention focused on positive aspects of queer media and held multiple workshops to increase conversation about representation among society. It brought many actresses past and present for panels to discuss their thoughts on media today. Actresses of the past, tended to discuss the evolution of diversity on TV, while present celebrities conveyed more of what they wanted to see out of networks and other mediums in the future.

As an oppressed community, LGBTQ people understand what it is like to be under-represented and treated poorly. Because of this, it is no coincidence that the community's characters are treated poorly too-and the community rarely e
xpects anything more. Unfortunately, their minimal expectations are barely even met, as relationships are typically sensationalized in ways that are not realistic.

The importance of positive queer media cannot be overstated. It has the power to change the minds of people who do not accept others' identity and the power to make people with differences not feel alone. Rather, those differences should be celebrated and embraced by all. One can only hope in years to come that relatable representation becomes a priority for Hollywood.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LGBTQ representation in the main stream media has made strides forward in the past decade, but it would be naive to believe that media has reached total equality. The issue has been at the forefront of arguments for a time now, especially with the advent of gay marriage legalization and more openness in the United States overall.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter eleven is centered around queers and the internet. The internet was a revolutionary concept for LGBTQ individuals who felt they were alone. There were near limitless opportunities to connect with other LGBTQ individual's and feel connected through the internet (Finding Out, 324). People were creating websites, discussion boards, groups, and safe places for queer individuals through the internet. Youtuber Tyler Oakley said, "I'd never had such a positive response from people sharing my ideas and videos. The commenters and subscribers began talking about their experiences and different perspectives; not holding back. That was something I really didn't expect" (The Telegraph). The internet has truly changed the way people interact forever as well as how gay and lesbian individuals express themselves. The internet gave minorities the opportunity to find others like them and create a real community. Having this community for these individuals is fundamental to their lives due to the support they can receive from others who are going through exactly the same issues.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"It really was awesome," says Tyler Oakley, of the moment he discovered the power of Youtube.

"I'd never had such a positive response from people sharing my ideas and videos. The commenters and subscribers began talking about their experiences and different perspectives; not holding back. That was something I really didn't expect."

* Why aren't schools doing more to stop gay pupils being bullied?

Oakley, whose Youtube videos have been viewed over half a billion times, is an advocate for gay rights and a vocal campaigner who helps prevent suicide amongst LGBT+ youth. Now 26 and a prominent figure in the United States, where he's interviewed Barack Obama and vlogged with Michelle Obama, Oakley says he first discovered YouTube whilst he was studying at Michigan State University. At the time, he saw it as little more than a platform to stay in contact with his friends from high school.

"I'd just talk to them, and the first few videos would just get like 3 views or something like that. But, as I kept watching, I realised that there was this kind of community there, and people would comment and share ideas and begin discussions."

The tipping point, when Oakley first realised the true potential of Youtube - his "awesome moment" - happened in 2008, when the video sharing website held its annual charity day. Oakley made a clip extolling the virtues of The Trevor Project, a leading organisation providing crisis intervention and suicide prevention services to LGBT+ youth, and found himself featured on Youtube's homepage - a major traffic driver for videos that might otherwise remain undiscovered by the site's daily avalanche of users.

As time progressed, Oakley became more involved with the Trevor Project. One summer, he travelled to Los Angeles to intern for the project alongside another placement at a celebrity PR firm.

"It was the biggest juxtaposition, because I would go in to the Trevor Project and I would feel as though I was doing something of substance, and helping people and connecting with people. And then I would go to the celebrity PR firm and do the most trivial errands. I was just a cog in the wheel for something that didn't matter.

"After that, I knew what I should be doing."

Credit: YouTube

In the years that have followed, Oakley has supported the Trevor Foundation. But despite hosting red carpet galas and organising fundraisers (Oakley is personally responsible for raising over $1 million for the cause), the Youtuber remains the most influential and active online.

"In creating my Youtube videos, I don't want to speak for my audience and the people I represent; I want to amplify their voices.

* Gay couple get 'engaged' on Beijing subway

"And I want to do this for all people! Not just LGBT+, but aromantic, asexual, pansexual - all these different identities! The internet has opened up new avenues of discussion for younger people, and this makes sure that the organisations and charities pay attention and listen to them."

Oakley is keen to make the distinction between being a figurehead and a mouthpiece. He believes that the increasingly accessible internet allows minorities not just to idolise, but to also interact with the advocates of their causes, and even become influential in their own rights.

"The internet has caused the perception of LGBT+ people to change. And now, when I talk to the younger generations, I know that the future will be just fine thanks to the openness and opportunities the internet promotes. These young people are so socially aware and socially conscious, and just so passionate about what they do. They will have everything under control.

"Because, to them, it's refreshingly a 'duhh' kind of thing, it's obvious now. Whereas, with past generations, there has been a lot of debate about rights and equality. But with all the role models and discussions they can freely join in with now, gay rights and being gay has become just second nature; a part of everyday life.

"So that's why I think Youtube is cool, because I've been able to connect with people or watch people who might be from a walk of life - people that I wouldn't otherwise have had a chance to interact with. So be that a trans person from Europe or a bi person from Asia, the internet has amplified those voices.

"And before Youtube these people's representation was kind of just decided by some people in a room. And that negatively impacted disenfranchised voices. But now - with the internet - people have more of a platform to create those representations for themselves."

Credit: YouTube

Youtube, Oakley says, has allowed real representations of minority communities into mainstream, modern media.

"They are no longer just represented in the media as cast characters and written roles fuelled by stereotypes, they are now tangible real people. Casting rooms no longer decide who we can watch - we now get to decide. So now to be able to see these people without any filter - that's very important to the acceleration of minority groups and movements.

"You could have an audience of one, or ten, or ten thousand - but if you just connect with one person that's you making a difference.

* Why aren't more gay men becoming parents?

"And there was a moment when this really hit home for me. The moment I realised anyone could be watching - and this is going to sound so name-droppy - was when Ricky Martin reached out to me on Coming Out Day 2012. The internet has this massive potential, and you can never know the effect you might have on others by just being yourself."

.@ricky_martin This means more to me than you'll know. Thank you for sharing your experience and being an amazing role model for gay youth.
- Tyler Oakley / TODAY (@tyleroakley) October 11, 2012

Oakley has seen a massive change in the way that the LGBT+ community has been treated in the last decade, and he attributes this increasing acceptance to new avenues opened up by the internet. Be it the lifestyle window of social media or the popularisation of opinion-fuelled blogs, the young YouTuber believes the World Wide Web has opened man's eyes.

"Look, nobody is born with a sociology degree, and no-one can understand all perspectives. Nobody's going to get it all from the very start. But the internet at least allows everyone to hear these perspectives at a much faster rate than if we had to do it without it.

"I think the internet is an invaluable tool not just to lobby the changing of laws, but also for altering perception and sentiment, for raising awareness and starting discussions. A lot of those discussions weren't being had when I was growing up, so the internet has been crucial to changing that.

"We hear stories from people from every walk of life and, now you're able to interact with people from all over the world, you can hear stories you may have never heard had it not been for Youtube or social media."

But with increased exposure comes heavier responsibility. I ask Oakley whether he's conscious of just how many people he's reaching every time he posts a video, and the effect even a throwaway comment could have on someone's life.

* Watch what happens when two gay men hold hands while walking around Moscow

"I would for sure be conscious of some responsibility every time I make a video, but I don't feel that anyone has an obligation to be, you know, a spokesperson for any kind of demographic or community. I think the best case scenario is for a wide range of people within a community to rise to the challenge of being their best selves, so any person can at least begin to see themselves fitting somewhere in that community.

"Like I said, it's not an obligation to be a role model, but I'd consider it a missed opportunity if I didn't at least try to rise to the challenge. I try to be conscious of others, put my best foot forward and show growth. I just try to be my best self - and I think that is the most important thing."
Binge by Tyler Oakley is out now, published by Simon & Schuster and priced at £14.99

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tyler Oakley: how the internet revolutionised LGBT life

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"It really was awesome," says Tyler Oakley, of the moment he discovered the power of Youtube. "I'd never had such a positive response from people sharing my ideas and videos. The commenters and subscribers began talking about their experiences and different perspectives; not holding back. That was something I really didn't expect."

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter twelve is centered around alternative media. Alternative media is a way for LGBTQ individuals to find a sense of home. Home has been a difficult place to find for LGBTQ individuals, “We tell each other to come out because we wish to be visible as queer; we wish to embody a real identity. Simultaneously, we are sometimes disembodied by our cultures. We are ordered to disappear to inhabit a closet where we can’t be seen by the straights, the young, and the innocent” (Finding Out, 348). Alternative media such as music, documentaries, music festivals, and journalism are all places that these individuals could find solace in. A recent study centered around the impact of representation of LGBTQ youth in media states, "Results indicate that while traditional media (particularly television) creates a common dialogue and validates identity, it continues to represent LGBTQ people as one-dimensional and stereotypical, ignores many LGBTQ sub-groups, limits LGBTQ young people’s perceptions of their future trajectories, and offers no opportunities for critique. In contrast, emerging new media offers new, important, and valued spaces for discussion and creativity" (Journal of Youth Studies). The further acceptance of the media of LGBTQ individuals is essential to queer normalization. Representation is a way for people to identity with others and make the community feel a sense of home. When LGBTQ individuals are represented, they are often given a struggle narrative resulting most commonly in death. While this type of representation is better than no representation, growth is still needed in the portrayal for all individuals in the LGBTQ community. Showing LGBTQ individuals leading normal lives is the next step.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) young people have been increasingly represented in traditional (offline) media over the past two decades. However, research had not adequately focused on the content of contemporary representations, how such depictions impact LGBTQ young people, or how young people's experiences are affected by the present context characterized by the rapidly increasing prevalence of new (online) media. Utilizing grounded theory with a sample ( n  = 19) of emerging adults (age 18-22), this study investigates: (1) messages about sexual orientation and/or gender identity LGBTQ emerging adults receive from LGBTQ representations in traditional media; (2) potential differences in the experiences of LGBTQ emerging adults with traditional media compared to new media; and (3) how consumption of these media messages impact LGBTQ emerging adults. Results indicate that while traditional media (particularly television) creates a common dialogue and validates identity, it continues to represent LGBTQ people as one-dimensional and stereotypical, ignores many LGBTQ sub-groups, limits LGBTQ young people's perceptions of their future trajectories, and offers no opportunities for critique. In contrast, emerging new media offers new, important, and valued spaces for discussion and creativity.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [grant no. 491406].

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Perspectives of LGBTQ emerging adults on the depiction and impact of LGBTQ media representation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) young people have been increasingly represented in traditional (offline) media over the past two decades. However, research had not adequately focused on the content of contemporary representations, how such depictions impact LGBTQ young people, or how young people's experiences are affected by the present context characterized by the rapidly increasing prevalence of new (online) media.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter five is a chapter about identity. It aims to talk about and inspect many different sexualities and how they came to be. The graphic, "Gender Unicorn", is a great way to visually show some of the different variations of identity. The graphic only goes to show a small piece of all the sexualities, genders, and identities, but it highlights some of the most commonly talked about  orientations. The graphic can be connected the Kinsey scale created by Alfred Kinsey (Finding Out, 129). While the Kinsey scale measures the affinity towards one sex over the other and the middle ground, the "Gender Unicorn"  is a type of visual representation of the scale.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter two entails a section on the ideas of the Victorian era regarding sexuality and sex. The authors state, "Victorian doctors considered sexual desire in women to be pathological and warned that female sexual excitement and indulgence could damage their reproductive organs and urinary systems... similarly masturbation was linked to criminality and described as women who exhibited excessive sexual desire" (Finding Out, 29). When I read this section I made the connection to the victorian era views to the current issue of female genital mutilation. Female genital mutilation is used in some areas as as a way to prevent women from experiencing pleasure, "It reflects deep-rooted inequality between the sexes, and constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women. It is nearly always carried out on minors and is a violation of the rights of children. The practice also violates a person's rights to health, security and physical integrity, the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to life when the procedure results in death" (WHO) . Both views of the article and the text are based on the mistrust of women and the idea that women are not meant to be sexual beings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or cause injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter three of the text entails a common issue of normalizing LGBTQ individuals. There has always been a desire from evolutionary psychologists to find a specific "gay gene" or genes (Finding Out, 58). Finding the specific gene will prove to homophobic individuals that being gay or lesbian is innate and not a learned trait. It is not a choice it is how they were born. The new research suggests that a gay gene has possibly been identified, "One of the genes, which sits on chromosome 13, is active in a part of the brain called the diencephalon. Interestingly, this brain region contains the hypothalamus, which was identified in 1991 as differing in size between gay and straight men. Other research has found that this gene, called SLITRK6, is active in the hypothalamus of male mice fetuses a few days before they are born. “This is thought to be a crucial time for sexual differentiation in this part of the brain,” says LeVay. “So this particular finding is a potential link between the neuroanatomy and molecular genetics of sexual orientation" (New Scientist). The possible "gay gene" would be a revolutionary step in LGBTQ research.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What do the new ‘gay genes’ tell us about sexual orientation?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two gene variants have been found to be more common in gay men, adding to mounting evidence that sexual orientation is at least partly biologically determined. How does this change what we already knew? Didn’t we already know there were “gay genes”? We have known for decades that sexual orientation is partly heritable in men, …

# data[].attributes.body
Although this article is older than needed, the information and rhetoric was good and explained the problems of the time well. Most new articles are centered around Africa's aids epidemic which I feel is a much different issue than the New York epidemic in the 80's. The issues are different because Africa is receiving help from our government while New York did not until it was evident it was not just a "gay disease".

Chapter four is heavily centered around the AIDS crisis in 1980's New York among the gay community. AIDS was first suspected to be just a gay issue being labeled as "gay cancer". The gay community received little support from government officials and were swept under the rug, "Some politicians argued for quarantining gay men, or at least those with AIDS" (Finding Out 94). Due to lack of government help, the community was forced to be there own activists for help, "In 1982, Michael Callen and Richard Berkowitz, two gay men living with AIDS in New York City, published How to Have Sex in an Epidemic, which helped spread the idea that safe sex could be used as protection against spreading the epidemic--an idea that hadn't yet become prevalent in the medical community" (Smithsonian). After much fighting, AIDS was finally addressed by the federal government and actually treated as the medical epidemic that is was. This was not achieved until famous stars who were perceived as straight, came forward and announced they had the disease.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 1981, an unknown epidemic was spreading across America. In June of that year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's newsletter mentioned five cases of a strange pneumonia in Los Angeles. By July, 40 cases of a rare skin cancer were reported by doctors working in the gay communities of New York and San Francisco. By August, the Associated Press reported that two rare diseases, the skin cancer Kaposi's sarcoma and pneumocystis, a form of pneumonia caused by a parasitic organism, had infected over 100 gay men in America, killing over half of them. At the end of 1981, 121 men had died from the strange disease; in 1982, the disease was given a name; by 1984, two different scientists had isolated the virus causing it; in 1986, that virus was named HIV. By the end of the decade, in 1989, 27,408 people died from AIDS.

In the years following the AIDS epidemic, medical research has given us a better understanding of HIV and AIDS, as well as made some remarkable breakthroughs unimagined in the 1980s: today, people living with HIV aren't condemned to a death sentence, but rather have treatment options available. Still, to think of the AIDS epidemic in medical terms misses half of the story--the social aspect, which affected America's perception of HIV and AIDS just as much, if not more than medical research.

The two sides of the story are told through a collection of articles, pictures, posters and pamphlets in Surviving and Thriving: AIDS, Politics and Culture, a traveling exhibit and online adaptation curated by the National Library of Medicine that explores the rise of AIDS in the early 1980s, as well as the medical and social responses to the disease since. The human reaction to the AIDS epidemic often takes a back seat to the medical narrative, but the curators of Surviving and Thriving were careful to make sure that this did not happen--through a series of digital panels, as well as a digital gallery, readers can explore how the government and other community groups talked about the disease.

At the beginning of the epidemic, response was largely limited to the communities which were most affected, especially the gay male community. "People with AIDS are really a driving force in responding to the epidemic and seeing how change is made," says Jennifer Brier, a historian of politics and sexuality who curated the exhibit.

In 1982, Michael Callen and Richard Berkowitz, two gay men living with AIDS in New York City, published How to Have Sex in an Epidemic, which helped spread the idea that safe sex could be used as protection against spreading the epidemic--an idea that hadn't yet become prevalent in the medical community.The pamphlet was one of the first places that proposed that men should use condoms when having sex with other men as a protection against AIDS.

Condoms as protection against AIDS became a major theme for poster campaigns. The above poster, paid for by the Baltimore-based non-profit Health Education Resource Organization, shows how visuals attempted to appeal, at least at first, to the gay community. Due to widespread misinformation, however, many people believed that AIDS was a disease that affected only white gay communities. As a response to this, black gay and lesbian communities created posters like the one below, to show that AIDS didn't discriminate based on race.

Many posters and education campaigns harnessed sexual imagery to convey the importance of safe sex in an attempt to make safety sexy (like the Safe Sex is Hot Sex campaign), but it wasn't a campaign tactic supported by governmental bodies--in fact, in 1987, Congress explicitly banned the use of federal funds for AIDS prevention and education campaigns that "[promoted] or [encouraged], directly or indirectly, homosexual activities" (the legislation was spearheaded by conservative senator Jesse Helms and signed into law by President Reagan).

Instead, federally-funded campaigns sought to address a large number of people from all backgrounds--male, female, homosexual or heterosexual. The America Responds to AIDS campaign, created by the CDC, ran from 1987 to 1996 and became a central part of the "everyone is at risk" message of AIDS prevention.

The campaign was met with mixed feelings by AIDS workers. "The posters really do help ameliorate the fear of hatred of people with AIDS," Brier explains. "There's a notion that everyone is at risk, and that's important to talk about, but there's also the reality that not everyone is at risk to the same extent." Some AIDS organizations, especially those providing service to communities at the highest risk for contracting HIV, saw the campaign as diverting money and attention away from the communities that needed it the most--leaving gay and minority communities to compete with one another for the little money that remained. As New York Times reporter Jayson Blair wrote in 2001 (, "Much of the government's $600 million AIDS-prevention budget was used...to combat the disease among college students, heterosexual women and others who faced a relatively low risk of contracting the disease."
(This linked column by Blair was later found to be plagiarized from reporting by the Wall Street Journal, but the point still holds.)

Beyond campaigns that tried to generalize the AIDS epidemic, a different side used the fear of AIDS to try and affect change. These posters, contained under the section "Fear Mongering" in the exhibit's digital gallery, show ominous images of graves or caskets behind proclamations of danger.

"It was like this sort of scared straight model, like if you get scared enough, you really will do what is right," Brier says of the posters. "There were posters that focused on pleasure, or health, or positive things to get people to affect change in their behavior, but there were consistently posters that used the idea that fear could produce behavior change."

The above poster exemplifies the tactic of fear mongering: a large, visible slogan to affect fear (and shame sexual behavior), while information on how to prevent the spread of AIDS is buried in small print at the bottom of the poster. A lack of information was typical of fear-mongering posters, which relied on catchy, scary headlines rather than information about safe sex, clean needles or the disease itself.

"The posters fed on people's inability to understand how AIDS actually spread. It didn't really ever mention ways to prevent the spread of HIV," Brier says. "Fear-mongering posters don't talk about condoms, they don't talk about clean needles, they don't talk about ways to be healthy. They don't have the solutions in them, they just have the fear."

Through exploring the exhibit, users get a sense of the different approaches public organizations took to spread information about AIDS. "It's a fundamental question of public health," says Brier. "Do you spread information by scaring people, do you do it by trying to tap into pleasure or do you do it by recognizing that people's behavior isn't just about their individual will but a whole different set of circumstances?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Confusing and At-Times Counterproductive 1980s Response to the AIDS Epidemic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1981, an unknown epidemic was spreading across America. In June of that year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's newsletter mentioned five cases of a strange pneumonia in Los Angeles. By July, 40 cases of a rare skin cancer were reported by doctors working in the gay communities of New York and San Francisco.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter six dedicates a whole section of the chapter to "Bisexual Erasure in the LGBTQ Community" which is still a very relevant issue today. Bisexual representation in all forms of media is heavily lacking. Bisexual's have often been pushed aside in the LGBTQ community, "Many gays and lesbians have believed that bisexuals are just "going through a phase" on their way to "true" gayness or lesbianism, or that they are trying to hold on to straight privilege while fooling around with people of their own sex" (Finding out, 162-163). Bisexuals are not only being denied by their own community, but by the media as a whole. Who many bisexual characters can you think of? Not many. Representation is a way for people to identity with others and make the community feel a sense of home. When bisexual individuals are represented, they are often given a struggle narrative resulting most commonly in death. While this type of representation is better than no representation, growth is still needed in the portrayal for all individuals in the LGBTQ community. Showing bisexual individuals leading normal lives is the next step, "It can be argued that this (media) representation is normalizing bi identities by taking away the dramatic coming out, and by showing them living their lives authentically. It is a nice idea, but only works if enough good representation has already been shown in the media" (Film School Rejects).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
2018 has been a mixed year for bisexual representation. Shows like The Bisexual and Sally4Ever have focused on female characters exploring their sexuality, but film has mainly shied away from focusing on bi representation. As a medium, television has more storytelling room, so perhaps it is easier to fit in bisexual characters, but film needs to be making the push for more diversity in sexual experiences.

Representation is not arbitrary, and not just a box-ticking exercise, but helps shape and shift perceptions in the real world. This is important for people of any minority, and the statistics show the level of mental health problems that come with being bisexual. Studies have found that "approximately 40 percent of bisexual people have considered or attempted suicide, compared to just over a quarter of gay men and lesbians". Although representation of gay and lesbian people needs to improve, it is clear that if progress is going to be made in regards to the mental health of bi people, it needs to happen quickly. Bisexual people are not just a small minority, but as a study by the Williams Institute found, in the US, "Among adults who identify as LGB, bisexuals comprise a slight majority (1.8% compared to 1.7% who identify as lesbian or gay)". This highlights the need for more bisexual representation on screen, especially for men, as they are less likely to identify as such. That is why it is heartening that more shows are including positive depictions of bisexual people.

Bisexuality on screen is not always explicit, not always explained, and there are schools of thought on both sides of the fence. Some people think not uttering bisexuals bisexaul is progressive and others feel it is holding progress back. The same debate is being had in real life, with some bisexual and pansexual people choosing not to label their sexualities, whilst others feel the label is vital if progress is to be made. I personally feel that whatever someone wants to identify as is fine, as long as it is not actively harming anyone in the LGBTQ community. I personally don't think it hurts the bi community for people to classify themselves as fluid in real life, but I don't think there has been good enough representation on screen for the label to be discarded in the media. Two of the Main offenders who refuse to audibly call their characters bisexual over the years continued in this vain in 2018. The protagonists in How to Get Away with Murder and Orange is the New Black show bisexual characters but refrain from having them identified as such on screen. There have been many think-pieces about this over the years, but they haven't forced the shows into making a change. It can be argued that this representation is normalizing bi identities by taking away the dramatic coming out, and by showing them living their lives authentically. It is a nice idea, but only works if enough good representation has already been shown in the media.

An example of not explicitly labelling a character was discussed recently by Tessa Thompson, who starred as bisexual character Valkyrie in last year's Thor: Ragnarok. She defended her character not explicitly being shown as bi, stating, "I played her as a woman that's queer. I hope that we get to a space, in terms of the stories that we tell, where that's something that gets to exist, and it doesn't have to be noteworthy". Her defense is well-meaning but the operative phrase in her statement is, "I hope we get to that space". Thompson is bi and was clear in the promotion for Thor that her character is too, but we are not at a place in society where representation on screen can all follow the progressive mold of not identifying. Although I hope sexualities do not have to be spelled out in the future on screen, for now, it needs to be explicit in order to educate and to normalize.

Looking back at the year of Bisexual film and TV it is best to review them on the representation shown. Does it fall into any of the negative traps laid above? Does it skirt around the issue? Or does it show a happy and healthy character or relationship? Below is the good and the bad of bisexuality in film and TV.

The Good

The Bisexual

Desiree Akhavan burst onto the scene with 2013's wry Appropriate Behaviour. She finally directed her second feature, the heartwarming and vital gay conversion therapy film, The Miseducation of Cameron Post earlier this year. She followed the success of that film a few months later, with the aptly titled, The Bisexual. The show follows a 30-something American women, who after breaking up with her partner of 10 years (the masterful Maxine Peake) starts to experiment with her sexuality. Under a different showrunner the show could have perpetuated negative stereotypes, but identifying as Bisexual herself, Akhavan allows The Bisexual to upend all negative conventions. She sleeps with men and women, and does, as the show suggests, show the life of a bisexual woman. Funny, smartly-observed and as awkward as her debut feature, The Bisexual is the best example you will find this year, and maybe any year of a bisexual woman just figuring her life out.

Casual

The under watched and underappreciated Casual finished its run on Hulu earlier this year. It was A real gem of the past few years, sharing a tone with Bojack Horseman, with a tenth of the hype. This dramedy took the tired dysfunctional family setting and rejuvenated it bringing the will they/won't they to the sibling relationship. I could talk about Casual for the rest of the article, but I'll get focused on the sexuality of the daughter, Laura, played to perfection by Tara Lynne Barr. In previous seasons we witnessed Laura date both men and women, but there was always a sense she was still figuring out her attraction to the latter. That was no longer the case in the final season, as Laura happily dated women, showing no signs of doubt or internalized homophobia. Although she didn't date a man in the final season, this was an important portrayal, as it busts the myth that being bisexual means you have to date men and women to an equal degree. You could go your whole life without dating either, but still be attracted to both, while still identifying as bisexual. Laura's attraction to men and women was cemented in the first three seasons, making her happily dating women without renouncing her attraction to men a rarely seen but positive portrayal.

The Bi Life

Billed as a queer equivalent to Love Island, The Bi Life is a dating show where every contestant identifies as bisexual. Whilst not becoming the cultural megahit that Love Island has become in the UK, The Bi Life is a huge step forward in bisexual representation. Airing in the UK, and fronted by Queer drag icon, Courtney Act, the show both normalized and educated the idea of bisexuality. It showed the aching truth of dating when bi, but included 3 to 4 scenes in each episode where the contestants discussed the stereotypes surrounding bisexuality and the effect it can have on family and friends. The Bi Life entertained, educated and ultimately warmed the heart, making it a vital piece of television in 2018.

Dirty Computer

Highlighting the lack of bisexual representation in the film world, I am forced to stretch the definition of film for Dirty Computer, the film accompaniment to Janelle Monae's album of the same name. Running over 40 minutes and so much more than an extended music video, Dirty Computer is a great piece of feminist, avant garde and importantly, queer film making. Bursting with invention, striking visuals, and a love story at its core, Monae didn't just make one of the best albums of the year, but also one of the best films.

Brooklyn Nine-Nine

Although Stephanie Beatriz's character, Rosa Diaz came out on Brooklyn Nine-Nine in 2017, Diaz and Beatriz herself continued spreading positivity this year. Near the end of season five, Diaz found a love interest played by Jane the Virgin 's Gina Rodriguez, and the show continued to treat her sexuality the way it has always treated queer characters; perfectly. The positivity didn't just end with the show though, and Beatriz has continued to be an advocate for her bisexual identity. After she was accused of picking a side when she married a man, Beatriz explained her sexuality in the most direct way possible, stating, "I'm bi till the day I die".

Jane the Virgin

Fans of Jane the Virgin had long speculated (and in some cases hoped) that the character Petra was bisexual. The show confirmed this in 2018 when it gave her a love interest in the form of a new character Jane (not the virgin), played by the always brilliant Rosario Dawson. Because Petra dreamt of romancing Jane for so long, the romance was teased over a few episodes. However, once it was confirmed, the couple became a pitch-perfect example of bisexual representation. The show is campy, so the relationship was not without its highs and lows, and going into the next season, it is not clear whether they will continue dating. However, in the time that they were, it was not presented stereotypically in the slightest Virgin (which has always been great on queer stories) got this one right.

Crazy-Ex Girlfriend

The underappreciated tour de force that is, Crazy-Ex Girlfriend introduced its third bisexual character in 2018. That's right, 3 bisexual characters on one show. To show three bisexual characters on one program, without falling into any negative tropes, is really going the extra mile. This normalizes bisexuality and is exactly the kind of representation the community needs. There is not much more to say about this, except for, we love you Rachel Bloom.

Sally4Ever

Sally4Ever, which is still in the middle of its first season is a heightened, absurd story of a woman married to a man, falling for another woman. At times the show plays into stereotypes, but it is nice to see a show that isn't obsessed with the dramatics of it all, and instead allows the relationship to work in a bizarre world. It plays like an absurd The Bisexual, and is a reminder that representation doesn't always have to be stale and factual, it can be great fun too.

The Bad

Alex Strangelove

Alex Strangelove is an interesting addition to the bad category, because for the most part, the film is similar to the better-known, Love Simon. It follows a high-school student who comes to grips with his sexuality, finally realizing and accepting that he is gay. The film is funny, sweet, but ultimately standard, diverting romcom fare. The problem, however, is how it shows Alex coming to grips with his sexuality. The film presents bisexuality as a stepping stone, and whether accidentally or not implies that it is a safe middle ground. It can often take many gay people time to truly come to terms with their sexuality, and pondering the idea of their bisexuality is a legitimate step on many people's journey. Some gay people ultimately suppress their same-sex desires and come out as bisexual before accepting their homosexuality. But the idea that it is a stepping stone can be toxic, as it can imply it is a phase. So, for that reason it is in the bad category, but it hopefully highlights that representation is not always good or bad, but sometimes there is just more that needs to be done.

Bohemian Rhapsody

In the recently released Bohemian Rhapsody, Freddie Mercury, as played by the magnetic Rami Malek, tells his female partner that he is bisexual. She responds, "Freddie you're gay". Her response is authentic and a painful reminder to any bisexual man that we are coded as gay if we have any same-sex attraction. For many, getting past the binary straight/gay divide is too much, as they believe bi people must choose. The film does nothing to dissuade the audience that Mercury is in fact gay, and like what often happens, our specific identity is erased. This film did nothing to counter this, and is a continuation of how the film world treats male bisexuality.

Riverdale

Riverdale has not shied away from sexuality and queer storylines in its three seasons on the air, and even included a bisexual character in the first season. Although that character, Moose, is now peripheral as the show continues onto season 3, in the past year audiences were baited, but ultimately let down by a bisexual storyline. Head cheerleader, and all-round ice queen, Cheryl Blossom had shown interest in men early on in the shows run, but started to engage in a same-sex romance in season 2. At its infancy, Madelaine Petsch, who portrays Cheryl stated, "I would say she is bisexual". Hopes were raised, but after her romance with Toni Topaz was cemented, Petsch changed her tune, confirming that after talks with the showrunner, "Cheryl is a lesbian". This is a hard blow for bi representation. Not because Cheryl had previously shown interest in men, but because her bisexuality had been publicly confirmed. Stating it publicly, then denouncing it is painful, and stings harder considering Cheryl is dating a great representation of bisexuality on the show, Toni Topaz. The flip-flopping perpetuates the stereotype that bi people need to choose a side, and damages the great representation Riverdale had established with Moose and Topaz.

Bi representation is getting better and despite its flaws, 2018 has been a great year and a great step forward. TV is embracing queer identities more every year, and is finally starting to allow queer characters to live happy lives. Film is failing all queer identities, but its lack of bi representation is shocking, and its lack of meaningful positive representation of queer identities in general is disgraceful. 2018 has been a step in the right direction, but more needs to be done to highlight different voices, and make more people in 2019 comfortable to proclaim, "I'm bi till I die".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The State of Bisexual Representation in Our Pop Culture: 2018 Edition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
2018 has been a mixed year for bisexual representation. Shows like The Bisexual and Sally4Ever have focused on female characters exploring their sexuality, but film has mainly shied away from focusing on bi representation. As a medium, television has more storytelling room, so perhaps it is easier to fit in bisexual characters, but film needs to be making the push for more diversity in sexual experiences.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter seven of the textbook is about the topic of intersectionality. Intersectionality is a way "to desire our complex awareness that we inhabit- and a re inhabited by- multiple categories of identity and that our experience of several identities taken together may be emotionally, culturally, and materially different than the experience of any one particular identity category by itself" (Finding Out, 187).  Intersectionality is an important aspect to take into account when thinking about feminism. People's intersectionalities should be taken into account to further understand their privilege and their oppression. The TED talk, "The Urgency of Intersectionality", highlights the need for intersectionality as it does in the textbook. The speaker uses different visuals and interacts with the audience to make the audience further understand the topic and how it applies to them. Showing each attendee how their intersections are different than others highlights how they are privileged and possibly oppressed. This is different for everyone as a white male who is heterosexual and wealthy has far less things that oppress him than a women of color who is working class and is

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The urgency of intersectionality | Kimberlé Crenshaw | TED

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter nine of the textbook outlines many of the different visual and performing arts. One of the sections that is outlined is Queer Theater. Such as lesbian pulp novels many consumers of queer theater were not queer, "We should note that all of these artistic endeavors, from Wilde's plays to Diaghilev's ballet, were generally part of a privileged "high art" cultural scene that was somewhat tolerant of homoerotic gestures- provided they could be passed of as artistic or laughable" (Finding Out, 280). Queer theatre was another way for heterosexual individuals to view LGBTQ life. The article, "LGBTQ Theatre, Emphasis on the Q“ is an article centered around the trials and tribulations of queer theatre. Queer theatre toady is more open and accepts its heterosexual viewers, but recognizes that they are not who the shows are for, "My queer aesthetic is relentlessly and effervescently fabulous,” declares Berry. “It does not include heterosexuality under the umbrella of normality, nor does it shun straight people who want to explore queerness for themselves” (American Theatre). Queer theatre is a way for heterosexual individuals to show interest in gay and lesbian arts without openly supporting the communities they are about.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Only three months after late activist Edith Windsor's 2013 victory for gay rights at the Supreme Court, which led to the national legalization of same-sex marriage, The New York Times ran an article questioning the resolve of queer theatres to evolve with the times.

"At a time of rapid change in the gay-rights movement, from marriage to the military, the purpose of a strictly gay theatre company isn't the same as it was 10 years ago," remarked Times contributor Erik Piepenburg. The writer observed a general decline in interest for LGBTQ topics and a subsequent drop at gay-specific companies in both revenues and taste. The logical result? Queer theatre companies were opting for lighter, campier fare, Piepenburg wrote, to keep their audiences happy.

Underlying this high-profile conclusion is the anxiety that queer theatre cannot survive the shifting tides of public opinion. Without antipathy, is there just apathy? Without something to fight against, does the once edgy avant-garde of queer theatre disappear?

Elsewhere, critics have eviscerated a handful of once-classic gay works as shallow, dated excursions. Reflecting on the autumn 2016 season, The New Yorker's Hilton Als wrote a particularly brutal assessment of William Finn and James Lapine's Broadway revival of Falsettos. Als excoriated the dramatic musical as "hideously cheap sentiment" and "one of the most dishonest musicals" he had ever seen. Als went on to accuse the show of queer-baiting its audience into a middling family drama of Jews, AIDS, and self-referential schmaltz.

Even freshly minted New York Times critic Jesse Green has expressed doubts about the legacy and longevity of older classics like Matt Crowley's The Boys in the Band (1968) and Harvey Fierstein's Torch Song Trilogy (1981). In a September 2017 article, Green commented that the current fall season in New York City was yet another rewind of old gay plays (not only gay, it should be added, but very white, with the exception of Chicago scribe Philip Dawkins's story of a black transgender etiquette teacher in Charm, at MCC Theater). Again, a leading critic could be observed haranguing the old gay vanguard with charges of increasing irrelevance and encroaching banality. (Perhaps some of Green's worries can be laid to rest: The newly revised and rechristened Torch Song had a successful and critically lauded staging at Off-Broadway's Second Stage Theater, while The Boys in the Band is set for a starry Broadway run in April, not long after the long-awaited revival of Tony Kushner's Angels in America from London, though this last production is in a category-and deserves an analysis-of its own.)

Such complaints about queer theatre always seem to arise in tandem with social change. Piepenburg's 2013 admonishments arose during a short reprieve for the gay-rights movement under the Obama administration; coincidentally, The New Yorker published Als's screed against the superficiality of Falsettos just one day before President Trump's earthquake electoral win. Under this political lens, we see how important queer theatre is in critical circles: It acts as a weather vane for current social attitudes and the civic battles to come.

And, from this observer's perch, much queer theatre in recent years has simply not been poignant enough, or daring enough, or provoking enough, or political enough to rise to the historical occasion.
But a new generation of queer theatremakers is prepared to mount a makeover of the subgenre from outside the mainstream.
The well-worn melodramatric tropes of gayness simply no longer emanate dramatic tension, younger artists understand. And while the sequential threats of "coming out" and "assimilation" still haunt young and old queers alike, their exposition onstage has become hackneyed and dim. Today's queer theatre need not be reactionary vis-à-vis an intolerant America-it should instead strike out on its own as a force for political alternatives, resistance, and utopia.

That's what a new class of millennial theatremakers are demanding. They want queer theatre to become an aesthetic that transcends the commonplace instrumentalization of gayness. Indeed they tend to view much of what's been presented to mainstream audiences in the past decade as frankly embarrassing.

As an example, look no further than one of the most-produced gay plays in recent years, Geoffrey Nauffts's Next Fall. Though hailed by critics and nominated for several Tony and Drama Desk awards back in 2010, Next Fall is at its core a trite issue play that depicts homosexuality as sensational and incompatible with everyday life. Having seen three separate productions of the play, I can attest to its myopic views of homosexuality, and I understand why it's such a frequent target of critique. While it may not be a harmful play per se, its lily-white coterie of neoliberal concerns and its lack of nuance serve to stymie our expectations of what gay theatre can be and do.

Instead of mimicking the conservative techniques of Next Fall and its ilk, emerging playwrights are drafting work in the image of pathbreaking artists like Taylor Mac, whose seminal A 24-Decade History of Popular Music has already become a fixture of the queer canon. One of Mac's fans is young Manhattan-based playwright Kev Berry, currently working on his own marathon production: a 5-part, 12-hour play called Fabulous Creatures, being developed by the Tank in New York.

"My queer aesthetic is relentlessly and effervescently fabulous," declares Berry. "It does not include heterosexuality under the umbrella of normality, nor does it shun straight people who want to explore queerness for themselves."

Matt Morrow, the executive artistic director of the LGBTQ-focused Diversionary Theatre in San Diego, recognizes a similar element of relentlessness in the new work he sees. "For decades, maybe centuries, queer theatremakers have embedded codes in their stories based on their experiences in an effort to be heard and seen by others like them. Queer theatremakers were responding to a world not ready for them, or to crises threatening their very lives. Now queer theatremakers have the breadth of history behind them; they are looking to forge new ground with a fresh and offbeat perspective."

That history is certainly ripe for investigation. Most of today's emerging queer playwrights are committed to the cause of intersectionality, which investigates the permeable boundaries between queerness and the innumerable other categories of identity. In Chicago, About Face Theatre's new artistic director, Megan Carney, notes the necessity of defining a new chapter of LGBTQ theatre as quintessentially queer.

"I think of queerness as a way to disrupt, reimagine, and liberate our bodies and minds-we need to tell more stories that reveal the nuances of our identities and desires," she says. "We must remember that not all queer people benefited from the recently won policy battles, especially trans folks and queer people of color. That said, I think everyone in our extended communities feel vulnerable and galvanized to act right now."

Carney's specificity about the term "queerness" points to an important distinction: Theatremakers today are differentiating between theatre with LGBTQ themes and theatre that is innately queer. Popularly known as the tough-talking transgender waitress Lola on Hulu's "Difficult People," Shakina Nayfack also boasts theatre cred as the founding director of New York's Musical Theatre Factory. "Not every LGBT piece qualifies as queer in my book," she notes. "To me, a queer aesthetic implies a varied mix of subversive representations of sex and gender, a clearly politicized framing of LGBT bodies, and a discernible level of irreverence-or at least self-awareness."

Nayfack's definition gets to the point about queer theatre-that it's more than the sum of its experiences. New York-based emerging theatre artist Cristina Pitter would likely agree with Nayfack's words. A self-described "queer fat babe and bruja," Pitter often engages in her work with the histories of African and queer diasporas. Appropriately, her concept of queerness has unfolded slowly with time and research.

"Queer aesthetic-what a whirlwind of color, vibrations, exhilaration, raw energy, and magic," Pitter writes, in her patently extravagant fashion, in a personal manifesto. "The power of a fist held high, wrapped in fishnet glory and boots strapped up, or the fierce walk of a sleek black suit, heels, and mischievous eye. The soft femme fur of legs unshaved or the perfect polish on his fingernails. Queerness is more than sexuality and gender. I believe it's a political statement, a way of living and loving relentlessly, of knowing pain and violence and our history of existence-but still fighting for a better world."

As Pitter puts it in florid detail, queerness is an ideology that stretches far beyond theatrical walls. Again we see her describe it as "relentless," but we also gain a sense of the utopian aesthetic, the fight for a "better world." What would this queer utopian world look like? What are the laws of a queer utopia?

Today's queer artists sincerely believe their work marshals audiences toward a better future. Paradoxically, though, that future might not even contain the concept of queerness. "Queer only has power in so much as it's resisting something," notes Alok Vaid-Menon, a genderqueer South Asian performance artist currently based in New York. "Hopefully we won't have to resist in the future-and can maybe even rest instead!"

With a large social media following, a deftly poetic voice, and an accomplished regimen of art, poetry, and fashion to their credit, Vaid-Menon is among the important queer voices of the new generation. Having recently completed a world tour, Vaid-Menon is well positioned to speak on the state of queer performance. "It's not just all white cis men anymore-I've been excited about all the trans and genderqueer performers I've been watching emerge all over the world. I think it's because people are really coming to the stage as one of the only spaces in our culture in which we can be honest and experimental. With the rise of nationalism and conservatism everywhere, art is having to become political as a response! Trans artists are leading this push to create work that is relevant, political, honest."

Vaid-Menon cites a handful of queer trendsetters outside the U.S. who are making a strong impact: Vivek Shraya in Toronto, Travis Alabanza in the United Kingdom, Umlilo and FAKA in South Africa.

But despite its careful theoretical positioning, the emerging queer avant-garde faces precarious practical challenges. Structures that would specifically help these practitioners-theatre grants and residencies that so often provide a springboard for new talents, for example-are relatively scarce in America, particularly for artists from marginalized groups. So where are these artists finding their big breaks? Real economic and social investments in queer work have not been made yet.

There are positive signs: Queer | Art's mentorship program for the broader visual and performing arts is active in New York, and the city contains a multitude of queer theatre festivals ( La MaMa's Squirts in the winter; and in the summer, Dixon Place's HOT! Festival, the Brick Theater's Trans Theatre Festival, and the Fresh Fruit Festival at the Wild Project). But none of these programs is known for commissioning work from emerging artists.
Zachary Small is a New York-based genderqueer writer. He's written for BOMB magazine, Artinfo, and HowlRound, among other publications.
"I applaud producers who collaborate with us-more producers need to listen better to what queer artists and queer theatre needs to be," proffers writer-performer Diana Oh, creator of the concert/performance installation {my lingerie play} at Manhattan's Rattlestick Playwrights Theater. "And reviewers need a wake-up call, because they've pandered for too long to their subscribers, often silencing, belittling, and killing theatre made by queer people and people of color. Often there is damaging language and rhetoric included in the assessment of our work, and that needs to change. We are innovators, trailblazers, and out-of-the-box thinkers. We know what it's like to live in a society that chokes us, and our art is pushing back by screaming for liberation. The queer aesthetic is not quiet."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Only three months after late activist Edith Windsor's 2013 victory for gay rights at the Supreme Court, which led to the national legalization of same-sex marriage, The New York Times ran an article questioning the resolve of queer theatres to evolve with the times.

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter eight is centered around the different styles of literature that involve queer individuals. One type of these literatures are gay pulp novels. Gay pulp novels, "represent, beneath a veneer of enticing exploitation, a compendium of not-so-hidden preoccupations and fears of the tempestuous and socially unstable postwar years" (Finding Out, 234). Gay pulp novels were similar to their counterparts, lesbian pulp novels. The main difference between the pulp novels was audience. The lesbian pulp novels were originally published for the use of soldiers at war to read tantalizing material due to the mainly male writers. The women in the novels were the "lesbians of heterosexual fantasies" (Finding Out 231). Gay pulp novels did not attract a heterosexual following probably due to the fetishization of lesbianism and the rejection of gay tendencies. The pulp novel attached, "To Want a Boy", is an example of how the covers of the novels were designed.