The purpose of this study was to analyze student therapist’s level of agreement with the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy’s (AAMFT) formal statements concerning lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) persons and families; specifically, it examined student’s level of agreement with the AAMFT’s definition of Marriage/Couple and Family Therapy (CFT), and the AAMFT’s formal statement concerning same sex couples. This was explored via the participant’s qualitative and quantitative answers. The study used an existing data set consisting of 248 participants; 62.6% were enrolled in a masters program and 36.8% were enrolled in a PhD CFT program. Participant’s quantitative responses indicated that a large majority of participants agreed with the statements, and were in support of the AAMFT inviting same sex couples to receive therapeutic services. However, the qualitative responses also indicated that some participants disagreed with the statements, and did not hold accepting beliefs towards LGB persons and families.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Waiting for Ignition, a collection of 47 poems, deals with themes of desire, masculinity, family, community, and connection/disconnection. The speaker in these poems navigates the difficulties of identifying as a young gay man in rural Missouri, the loneliness that stems from his disconnect with the queer community, and his inability to find meaningful connection through his romantic and sexual experiences. / Master of Fine Arts

It is wrong to interfere with the rights of conscience and association of homosexuals in the United States. A large faction in this country intends to amend the Constitution of the United States in such a way that a portion of its fellow citizens, identified as homosexuals, will be excluded from the legal and social benefits conferred upon individuals who choose to be married. The social and moral arguments supporting this legislation are only partial considerations of . the case, and are insufficient in providing the necessary grounds upon which exclusion would. be acceptable. I base this conclusion on the contention that America's founding principles are dedicated to preserving individualism and reform, and that it is necessary to safeguard each · citizen from the cabals of the majority. To support this contention, I have differentiated between a Pluralist-Liberal conception of freedom, which supports the expansion of liberty where it is argued that reform is · necessary, and an Exclusivist-Conservative conception of freedom, which supports the preservation of the fault lines that separate individual freedom and social concerns. I draw from John Rawls1 Political Liberalism, and J. S. Mills' On Liberty, and compare their theories about the proper functions of a free democracy with the writings of America's founding fathers. I ·also give attention to historical cases in which the Exclusivist-Conservative arguments, presented as social concern, were revealed to defend nothing more than status and prejudice. Given the context of a pluralistic democracy, which more strongly accommodates the alternate conception, the use of historical examples is · intended to show, by comparison, the deficiencies of the E-C argument against homosexual rights.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Oregon State University, 2010. / Printout. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 115-131). Also available on the World Wide Web.

No description available.

In contrast to East European cities, West European cities have increasingly targeted gay and lesbian travelers as part of their tourism campaigns. In order to exemplarily analyze the potential of international gay tourism for Budapest, nineteen semi-structured, in-depth interviews with non-Hungarian gay travelers, about their motivation to come and their experiences, were conducted in different gay establishments in the city. One result of the study is that their motivations for travel did not differ from "mainstream tourists"; while their expectations about gay life in the city were negative, their experiences were mixed. Implications for Budapest's city-marketing are discussed. (authors' abstract)

This dissertation is the product of research into white, South African masculinities. It is concerned with the official treatment of white, gay men in this country by the governments of the day from the 1960s to 2000 and the government’s control of hegemonic masculinity in order to maintain power. By looking at gay masculinities the threat to hegemonic masculinity was ascertained as well as the different versions of heterosexual masculinities. This thesis also analyses the degree of change in the toleration or acceptance of white homosexuality in South Africa from churches, society, and elements within the SAP and the SADF as well as within gay organisations. Legislative achievements in the Constitutional Court show the most extreme changes in the perceptions of gay masculinities. This dissertation primarily begins in the 1960s, looking at why it was necessary to set up the 1968 Select Committee. This committee investigated criminalising all male homosexual acts, including those in private and also aimed to dictate societal norms and maintain white, privileged, hegemonic masculinity established and defined by the NP government. The state had always repressed homosexuality through law; even colonial legislation proved this. It was the creation and maintenance of hegemonic masculinity that advocated such legislation. 1966 was the focal year where white homosexuality became a recognisable problem. A gay party was held at a Johannesburg residence, which made white homosexuality visible and alerted the police to this alternative masculinity. The Select Committee, however, did not fulfil its initial aims. Once elements within the SAP were faced with the visibility of white homosexuality, their power thereby being challenged, Major van Zyl set about requesting stricter legislation by proposing amendments to the Minister of Justice regarding the 1957 Immorality Act and submitting evidence to the Select Committee. However, numerous submissions to and interviews by the Select Committee proved that it was unnecessary and illogical to criminalise private homosexuality. Such submissions showed white homosexuality was no societal threat and that some in white society recognised gay masculinities and challenged hegemonic masculinity. Consequently the Select Committee did not propose stricter legislation regarding homosexuality. Furthermore, repressive official treatment of white, male homosexuals was evident in the SADF in the 1970 and 1980s. Through a military perception of masculinity, that is, aggressive masculinity, most in the SADF were intent on conforming its white soldiers to the traditional definition of masculinity, the NP government’s definition of white masculinity, which did not include homosexual men. Dr Levine used electro-shock therapy to ‘cure’ gay conscripts at 1 Military Hospital. This extreme practice of ensuring conformity was no longer utilised by the 1980s and there was also some unofficial acceptance of white homosexuality within the SADF by some white commanders and soldiers. There was no gay liberation movement to speak of until the 1980s. GASA, a white gay organisation, led the movement but it was to be unsuccessful in that it supported the NP government, that is, it benefited from hegemonic masculinity because GASA’s membership was predominantly white men. Because of this GASA was seen to support the government’s policy of apartheid and there ensued the consequent debate between gay essentialism and gay rights as part of the broader struggle. GASA was purely reactionary, because in effect it did not really want change and was therefore ineffective. The gay movement grew but it did not unify. This failure to unify meant the gay liberation movement, as a movement had failed, even though, later, liberation and much change was achieved, mainly through the work of the NCGLE. Like the 1968 Select Committee, the President’s Council was set up in 1985 to once again investigate stricter penalties against homosexuality. The ANC was still very quiet on the issue of gay rights, supporting heterosexist hegemony and not recognising gay masculinities. The President’s Council did not recommend stricter legislation against homosexual men but the 1988 Sexual Offences Act retained the penalties against homosexuality as stipulated by the 1969 Immorality Amendment Act. Gay essentialism damaged any headway regarding gay rights, especially when it came to gaining the support of progressive organisation in the broader political struggle because there was so much in-fighting regarding defining gay masculinities. Race could not be discounted in this equation and the RGO, a black gay organisation, challenged GASA’s support of the NP government. New gay organisations only contributed to the failure of the gay liberation movement because again there was no unity. In 1989 Albie Sachs of the ANC met with a liberal gay organisation, OGLA, and finally gay rights were beginning to be taken seriously, culminating in the protection of gay rights in the 1996 Constitution. This was due to individual members of the ANC and Kevan Botha, the lawyer hired by the NCGLE to represent gay rights at CODESA. Once sexual orientation was retained in the equality clause of the Constitution it was left to the NCGLE to fight for the legal practice of equality for gay men and lesbians. There was also greater toleration and even acceptance of homosexuality by the South African society at large, both black and white, the churches, and the SAP, especially officially. Hence, although the gay liberation movement had failed, gay rights had been entrenched and change allowed for potential equality, the last of which would be legal gay marriage, which remains to be seen. / Prof. L. Grundlingh