Building a more stately closet: French gay movements since the early 1980s

Journal of the History of Sexuality

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 326-347

  Gunther, Scott ^a  

^a WELLESLEY COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 14144256452     PISSN: 10434070     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/sex.2005.0009     Document Type: Review

References (77)

1. The notable exception in this timeline is the Comité d'urgence anti-répression homosexuelle (CUARH). However, it is not as exceptional as this chart might indicate, since while it is true that CUARH did not dissolve entirely between 1979 and 1981, it did lose most of its membership and underwent a restructuring of its goals in order to bring it more in line with the prevailing political ideas of the early 1980s. Therefore, while the association survived technically intact, it would be misleading to see this as a simple continuation of its earlier, 1970s self.
2. Jacques Girard, Le mouvement homosexuel en France, 1945-1980 (Paris, 1981 ), 61. Girard explains the origins of the term homophile: "It is a Dutchman, Arent Van Sunthorst, who in 1949 invented the term homophile, which was taken up again by André Baudry in September 1953 in Amsterdam, during a meeting of the International Committee for Sexual Equality. 'Homosexual' is a barbarism, because 'homo' comes from Greek, while 'sexual' comes from the Latin sexualis. . . . One could ask whether the term 'phile' would not also carry with it traces of the old Judeo-Christian guilt. It is as if all it took in order for homosexuality to be more acceptable in the eyes of religion and the powers of the State was this small makeover: love became henceforth an excuse for sex" (49).
3. For more information on the French homosexual movements of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s see Girard; Janine Mossuz-Lavau, Les lois de l'amour: Les politiques de la sexualité de 1950 à nos jours (Paris, 1991); Gérard Bach-Ignasse, Homosexualité: La reconnaissance? (Boulogne-Bilancourt, 1988); Antony Copley, Sexual Moralities in France, 1780-1980: New Ideas on the Family, Divorce, and Homosexuality (New York, 1989); and Frédéric Martel, The Pink and the Black: Homosexuals in France since 1968 (Stanford, Calif, 1999).
4. For more information on the French homosexual movements of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s see Girard; Janine Mossuz-Lavau, Les lois de l'amour: Les politiques de la sexualité de 1950 à nos jours (Paris, 1991); Gérard Bach-Ignasse, Homosexualité: La reconnaissance? (Boulogne-Bilancourt, 1988); Antony Copley, Sexual Moralities in France, 1780-1980: New Ideas on the Family, Divorce, and Homosexuality (New York, 1989); and Frédéric Martel, The Pink and the Black: Homosexuals in France since 1968 (Stanford, Calif, 1999).
5. For more information on the French homosexual movements of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s see Girard; Janine Mossuz-Lavau, Les lois de l'amour: Les politiques de la sexualité de 1950 à nos jours (Paris, 1991); Gérard Bach-Ignasse, Homosexualité: La reconnaissance? (Boulogne-Bilancourt, 1988); Antony Copley, Sexual Moralities in France, 1780-1980: New Ideas on the Family, Divorce, and Homosexuality (New York, 1989); and Frédéric Martel, The Pink and the Black: Homosexuals in France since 1968 (Stanford, Calif, 1999).
6. For more information on the French homosexual movements of the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s see Girard; Janine Mossuz-Lavau, Les lois de l'amour: Les politiques de la sexualité de 1950 à nos jours (Paris, 1991); Gérard Bach-Ignasse, Homosexualité: La reconnaissance? (Boulogne-Bilancourt, 1988); Antony Copley, Sexual Moralities in France, 1780-1980: New Ideas on the Family, Divorce, and Homosexuality (New York, 1989); and Frédéric Martel, The Pink and the Black: Homosexuals in France since 1968 (Stanford, Calif, 1999).
7. The radicalism of these 1970s groups is apparent in their perspectives on: 1. Pederasty. In 1976 the GLH's journal explained that "the fight for the liberation of pederasts ... is essential. This fight for liberation is essential, perhaps, more fundamental than that of homosexuals, perhaps even more than that of women. It radically questions all of society; subversion par excellence" ("Veculs," Anales du GLH 14-XII, no. 1 [Summer 1976]: 1 ). In its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH provided twelve specific goals for which the organization was fighting. The sixth principle states: "The blossoming of an individual in all areas including sexuality begins in childhood; this is why the GLH fights for the recognition of a right to sexuality without any age limitation" ("Principes fondamentaux de la charte d'adhésion au Groupe de libération homosexuelle," Journal du GLH, no. 0 [June 1976]: 1). For the FHAR the age of sexual majority served the interests of an authoritarian order: "Puberty is precisely when in all families without exception, the sharpest conflicts arise between adolescents and parents. The goal of repressing sexual activity [during adolescence] ... is to produce an individual who fits into the authoritarian order and who will submit himself to it regardless of all of the misery and all kinds of degradation" ("Plateforme du Sexpol," supplement to L'Antinorm, no. 3 [1973]: 11). 2. Same-sex marriage. In the seventh principle of its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH explicitly presented itself as against the model of a traditional nuclear family and against the social institution of marriage: "The GLH does not seek equality with heterosexuals, who, also prisoners of legislation and of a way of thinking reproduced by the family . . . , remain incapable of living socially and sexually as free men and women" ("Principes Fondamentaux," 1). 3. Public nudity. The FHAR's defense of public nudity was couched in terms of class: "Nudity blurs the visible criteria of wealth based on clothing (a worker wears blue, the petit bourgeois wears a suit and tie, a student has the hippie look)" (Gay Maës and Anne-Marie Fauret, " Homosexualité et socialisme," L'Antinorm, no. 1 [December 1972-January 1973]: 3). In addition, some of the FHAR's members held meetings with everyone naked ("Entretien, en mai 1992, de Jacques Girard avec Alain Huet," http://www.multimania. com/jgir/huet.htm, June 12, 2004).
8. The radicalism of these 1970s groups is apparent in their perspectives on: 1. Pederasty. In 1976 the GLH's journal explained that "the fight for the liberation of pederasts ... is essential. This fight for liberation is essential, perhaps, more fundamental than that of homosexuals, perhaps even more than that of women. It radically questions all of society; subversion par excellence" ("Veculs," Anales du GLH 14-XII, no. 1 [Summer 1976]: 1 ). In its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH provided twelve specific goals for which the organization was fighting. The sixth principle states: "The blossoming of an individual in all areas including sexuality begins in childhood; this is why the GLH fights for the recognition of a right to sexuality without any age limitation" ("Principes fondamentaux de la charte d'adhésion au Groupe de libération homosexuelle," Journal du GLH, no. 0 [June 1976]: 1). For the FHAR the age of sexual majority served the interests of an authoritarian order: "Puberty is precisely when in all families without exception, the sharpest conflicts arise between adolescents and parents. The goal of repressing sexual activity [during adolescence] ... is to produce an individual who fits into the authoritarian order and who will submit himself to it regardless of all of the misery and all kinds of degradation" ("Plateforme du Sexpol," supplement to L'Antinorm, no. 3 [1973]: 11). 2. Same-sex marriage. In the seventh principle of its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH explicitly presented itself as against the model of a traditional nuclear family and against the social institution of marriage: "The GLH does not seek equality with heterosexuals, who, also prisoners of legislation and of a way of thinking reproduced by the family . . . , remain incapable of living socially and sexually as free men and women" ("Principes Fondamentaux," 1). 3. Public nudity. The FHAR's defense of public nudity was couched in terms of class: "Nudity blurs the visible criteria of wealth based on clothing (a worker wears blue, the petit bourgeois wears a suit and tie, a student has the hippie look)" (Gay Maës and Anne-Marie Fauret, " Homosexualité et socialisme," L'Antinorm, no. 1 [December 1972-January 1973]: 3). In addition, some of the FHAR's members held meetings with everyone naked ("Entretien, en mai 1992, de Jacques Girard avec Alain Huet," http://www.multimania. com/jgir/huet.htm, June 12, 2004).
9. The radicalism of these 1970s groups is apparent in their perspectives on: 1. Pederasty. In 1976 the GLH's journal explained that "the fight for the liberation of pederasts ... is essential. This fight for liberation is essential, perhaps, more fundamental than that of homosexuals, perhaps even more than that of women. It radically questions all of society; subversion par excellence" ("Veculs," Anales du GLH 14-XII, no. 1 [Summer 1976]: 1 ). In its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH provided twelve specific goals for which the organization was fighting. The sixth principle states: "The blossoming of an individual in all areas including sexuality begins in childhood; this is why the GLH fights for the recognition of a right to sexuality without any age limitation" ("Principes fondamentaux de la charte d'adhésion au Groupe de libération homosexuelle," Journal du GLH, no. 0 [June 1976]: 1). For the FHAR the age of sexual majority served the interests of an authoritarian order: "Puberty is precisely when in all families without exception, the sharpest conflicts arise between adolescents and parents. The goal of repressing sexual activity [during adolescence] ... is to produce an individual who fits into the authoritarian order and who will submit himself to it regardless of all of the misery and all kinds of degradation" ("Plateforme du Sexpol," supplement to L'Antinorm, no. 3 [1973]: 11). 2. Same-sex marriage. In the seventh principle of its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH explicitly presented itself as against the model of a traditional nuclear family and against the social institution of marriage: "The GLH does not seek equality with heterosexuals, who, also prisoners of legislation and of a way of thinking reproduced by the family . . . , remain incapable of living socially and sexually as free men and women" ("Principes Fondamentaux," 1). 3. Public nudity. The FHAR's defense of public nudity was couched in terms of class: "Nudity blurs the visible criteria of wealth based on clothing (a worker wears blue, the petit bourgeois wears a suit and tie, a student has the hippie look)" (Gay Maës and Anne-Marie Fauret, " Homosexualité et socialisme," L'Antinorm, no. 1 [December 1972-January 1973]: 3). In addition, some of the FHAR's members held meetings with everyone naked ("Entretien, en mai 1992, de Jacques Girard avec Alain Huet," http://www.multimania. com/jgir/huet.htm, June 12, 2004).
10. The radicalism of these 1970s groups is apparent in their perspectives on: 1. Pederasty. In 1976 the GLH's journal explained that "the fight for the liberation of pederasts ... is essential. This fight for liberation is essential, perhaps, more fundamental than that of homosexuals, perhaps even more than that of women. It radically questions all of society; subversion par excellence" ("Veculs," Anales du GLH 14-XII, no. 1 [Summer 1976]: 1 ). In its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH provided twelve specific goals for which the organization was fighting. The sixth principle states: "The blossoming of an individual in all areas including sexuality begins in childhood; this is why the GLH fights for the recognition of a right to sexuality without any age limitation" ("Principes fondamentaux de la charte d'adhésion au Groupe de libération homosexuelle," Journal du GLH, no. 0 [June 1976]: 1). For the FHAR the age of sexual majority served the interests of an authoritarian order: "Puberty is precisely when in all families without exception, the sharpest conflicts arise between adolescents and parents. The goal of repressing sexual activity [during adolescence] ... is to produce an individual who fits into the authoritarian order and who will submit himself to it regardless of all of the misery and all kinds of degradation" ("Plateforme du Sexpol," supplement to L'Antinorm, no. 3 [1973]: 11). 2. Same-sex marriage. In the seventh principle of its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH explicitly presented itself as against the model of a traditional nuclear family and against the social institution of marriage: "The GLH does not seek equality with heterosexuals, who, also prisoners of legislation and of a way of thinking reproduced by the family . . . , remain incapable of living socially and sexually as free men and women" ("Principes Fondamentaux," 1). 3. Public nudity. The FHAR's defense of public nudity was couched in terms of class: "Nudity blurs the visible criteria of wealth based on clothing (a worker wears blue, the petit bourgeois wears a suit and tie, a student has the hippie look)" (Gay Maës and Anne-Marie Fauret, " Homosexualité et socialisme," L'Antinorm, no. 1 [December 1972-January 1973]: 3). In addition, some of the FHAR's members held meetings with everyone naked ("Entretien, en mai 1992, de Jacques Girard avec Alain Huet," http://www.multimania. com/jgir/huet.htm, June 12, 2004).
11. The radicalism of these 1970s groups is apparent in their perspectives on: 1. Pederasty. In 1976 the GLH's journal explained that "the fight for the liberation of pederasts ... is essential. This fight for liberation is essential, perhaps, more fundamental than that of homosexuals, perhaps even more than that of women. It radically questions all of society; subversion par excellence" ("Veculs," Anales du GLH 14-XII, no. 1 [Summer 1976]: 1 ). In its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH provided twelve specific goals for which the organization was fighting. The sixth principle states: "The blossoming of an individual in all areas including sexuality begins in childhood; this is why the GLH fights for the recognition of a right to sexuality without any age limitation" ("Principes fondamentaux de la charte d'adhésion au Groupe de libération homosexuelle," Journal du GLH, no. 0 [June 1976]: 1). For the FHAR the age of sexual majority served the interests of an authoritarian order: "Puberty is precisely when in all families without exception, the sharpest conflicts arise between adolescents and parents. The goal of repressing sexual activity [during adolescence] ... is to produce an individual who fits into the authoritarian order and who will submit himself to it regardless of all of the misery and all kinds of degradation" ("Plateforme du Sexpol," supplement to L'Antinorm, no. 3 [1973]: 11). 2. Same-sex marriage. In the seventh principle of its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH explicitly presented itself as against the model of a traditional nuclear family and against the social institution of marriage: "The GLH does not seek equality with heterosexuals, who, also prisoners of legislation and of a way of thinking reproduced by the family . . . , remain incapable of living socially and sexually as free men and women" ("Principes Fondamentaux," 1). 3. Public nudity. The FHAR's defense of public nudity was couched in terms of class: "Nudity blurs the visible criteria of wealth based on clothing (a worker wears blue, the petit bourgeois wears a suit and tie, a student has the hippie look)" (Gay Maës and Anne-Marie Fauret, " Homosexualité et socialisme," L'Antinorm, no. 1 [December 1972-January 1973]: 3). In addition, some of the FHAR's members held meetings with everyone naked ("Entretien, en mai 1992, de Jacques Girard avec Alain Huet," http://www.multimania. com/jgir/huet.htm, June 12, 2004).
12. The radicalism of these 1970s groups is apparent in their perspectives on: 1. Pederasty. In 1976 the GLH's journal explained that "the fight for the liberation of pederasts ... is essential. This fight for liberation is essential, perhaps, more fundamental than that of homosexuals, perhaps even more than that of women. It radically questions all of society; subversion par excellence" ("Veculs," Anales du GLH 14-XII, no. 1 [Summer 1976]: 1 ). In its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH provided twelve specific goals for which the organization was fighting. The sixth principle states: "The blossoming of an individual in all areas including sexuality begins in childhood; this is why the GLH fights for the recognition of a right to sexuality without any age limitation" ("Principes fondamentaux de la charte d'adhésion au Groupe de libération homosexuelle," Journal du GLH, no. 0 [June 1976]: 1). For the FHAR the age of sexual majority served the interests of an authoritarian order: "Puberty is precisely when in all families without exception, the sharpest conflicts arise between adolescents and parents. The goal of repressing sexual activity [during adolescence] ... is to produce an individual who fits into the authoritarian order and who will submit himself to it regardless of all of the misery and all kinds of degradation" ("Plateforme du Sexpol," supplement to L'Antinorm, no. 3 [1973]: 11). 2. Same-sex marriage. In the seventh principle of its Charter of Fundamental Principles the GLH explicitly presented itself as against the model of a traditional nuclear family and against the social institution of marriage: "The GLH does not seek equality with heterosexuals, who, also prisoners of legislation and of a way of thinking reproduced by the family . . . , remain incapable of living socially and sexually as free men and women" ("Principes Fondamentaux," 1). 3. Public nudity. The FHAR's defense of public nudity was couched in terms of class: "Nudity blurs the visible criteria of wealth based on clothing (a worker wears blue, the petit bourgeois wears a suit and tie, a student has the hippie look)" (Gay Maës and Anne-Marie Fauret, " Homosexualité et socialisme," L'Antinorm, no. 1 [December 1972-January 1973]: 3). In addition, some of the FHAR's members held meetings with everyone naked ("Entretien, en mai 1992, de Jacques Girard avec Alain Huet," http://www.multimania. com/jgir/huet.htm, June 12, 2004).
13. Interview with the FHAR, Actuel, February 17, 1972, in Girard, 94.
14. Gay political groups were not the first to use the expression "right to indifference." It was originally used by French civil rights groups and, in particular, SOS racisme.
15. Webster's New World Dictionary, 2nd college ed. (Cleveland, Ohio, 1986), 716.
16. An article in Gai Pied, signed only with author's initials, G.B., entitled "Une loi peut en cacher une autre" (One Law Can Conceal Another), attests to the distance between the gay movements of the 1980s and the fringe elements. The author's statement demonstrates that homosexual pedophiles, for example, were afraid of being left behind: "More fundamentally, we can ask whether the affirmed assimilation of clean, adult, and healthy homosexuals has not led at the same time to a reinforcement of the repression of pedophiles" (Gai Pied Hebdo, July 6-12, 1985: 5).
17. It is important to note that this process of exclusion occurred primarily at the level of representations made by lesbians and gays of themselves. The intent is to avoid suggesting that in the 1980s lesbians and gays were collectively repressing some innate desire for pedophilia, pederasty, promiscuity, sadomasochism, transvestitism, or public sex but, rather, that at the level of representations those who had no interest in these practices began to present themselves under the new label of "gay" and to distance themselves from the minority that did have an interest in these practices. In representations of homosexuality in the 1970s the homosexuals who did have an interest in these practices were put together with those who did not - it was a time when little distinction was made between acceptable and unacceptable homosexuality. In the 1980s, however, the distinction between acceptable and unacceptable became increasingly visible. This is quite different from saying that in the eighties within every lesbian or gay person there was a pedophile, a pederast, a sadomasochist, a transsexual, a transvestite, or a practitioner of public sex waiting to get out.
18. Portions of the discussion of the Marais that follow appeared in Scott Gunther, "Le Marais: The Indifferent Ghetto," Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review 6, no. 1 (1999): 34, 36, and in "Building a More Stately Closet: The Assimilationist Strategies of French Homosexuals," in Farväl hetero-normativitet: Papers Presented at the Conference Farewell to Heteronormativity, University of Gothenburg, May 23-25, 2002 (Lund, Sweden, 2003), 104-14.
19. Portions of the discussion of the Marais that follow appeared in Scott Gunther, "Le Marais: The Indifferent Ghetto," Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review 6, no. 1 (1999): 34, 36, and in "Building a More Stately Closet: The Assimilationist Strategies of French Homosexuals," in Farväl hetero-normativitet: Papers Presented at the Conference Farewell to Heteronormativity, University of Gothenburg, May 23-25, 2002 (Lund, Sweden, 2003), 104-14.
20. The term ghetto is used by some French gay political actors to describe what in the American context might simply be referred to as a community. According to Jacques Girard, the first political group to use the expression "gay ghetto" was the early 1970s Front homosexuel d'action révolutionnaire ("Entretien, en mai 1992, de Jacques Girard avec Alain Huet," August 22, 1999, http://www.multimania.com/jgir/huet.htm, June 12, 2004).
21. Jean Le Bitoux, "Marcher dans le gai Marais," La revue h, July 16, 1997, http://www.france.qrd.org/media/revue-h/001/marcher.html, June 12, 2004.
22. I b i d.
23. Michaël Pollak, "L'homosexualité masculine, ou le bonheur dans le ghetto?" in Philippe Ariès and André Béjin, eds., Sexualités occidentales (Paris, 1982), 56.
24. There is some reason to doubt that the early Gay Pride parades were actually signs of normalization. The first parades were small and were dominated by the presence of transvestites and those who came to watch them. By the end of the 1980s, however, the parades' participants grew significantly in number as the parades shifted their attention away from transvestites and toward the broader group of socially acceptable homosexuals.
25. "Souvenez-vous, militantes," in L'Association Gay Pride, ed., Programme Gay Pride Paris 1994, June 1984, 13.
26. Le Bitoux.
27. Frédéric Martel, La longue marche des gays (Paris, 2002), 59.
28. "Arcadie ou la préhistoire du mouvement gai," Masques: Revue des homosexualités 15 (1982): 85.
29. "La fin d'Arcadie?" Gai Pied 40 (July 1982): 7.
30. I b i d.
31. Martel, La longue marche des gays, 59.
32. Ibid., 60.
33. In fact, this was not the case. Among the unmet demands of seventies gay groups was one to abolish (rather than standardize) the age of sexual majority and another to permit sexual acts in public.
34. Jan Paul Pouliquen, interview by the author, tape recording, Paris, April 3, 1997.
35. "La politique, ça vous fait bander?: Aujourd'hui, le 'militante-isme' c'est pas très câblé!" Gai Pied Hebdo, June 30-July 5, 1985: 22-24.
36. Ibid., 24; Marco Lemaire, "Gais pour la liberté, un nouveau carburant," Gai Pied Hebdo, January 26-February 1, 1985: 8.
37. Ibid., 24; Marco Lemaire, "Gais pour la liberté, un nouveau carburant," Gai Pied Hebdo, January 26-February 1, 1985: 8.
38. Homosexualité et socialisme, like the other organizations, was primarily a group for meeting other people of the same political tendency, as opposed to some kind of structure for political action. The group's name is indicative of the kinds of identity problems it has suffered over the years, as its members periodically have asked which part, "homosexualité" or "socialisme," was more central to its purpose. Generally, the group provided limited dissent with regard to the actions of the Parti socialiste, focusing its political energies instead on combating the libéralisme of the Right. In this way, the group's respectability and legitimacy among mainstream socialists has never been called into question. The group Gais pour les libertés presents the strongest evidence of a move toward respectability among groups of this time. This is apparent in its own description of itself "not as a frustrating militant structure but rather a place for meeting one another, for imagination, for debates and proposals" (Lemaire, 8). Its primary purpose was to shatter the assumption that "gay" was equivalent to "leftist" by arguing that there was no contradiction between supporting laissez-faire economics and being gay. Les gai retraités was created primarily in response to the "ageism" present in other gay meeting spaces. It sponsored social events or bals regularly for its members as well as discussions relevant to the population of older gay men.
39. In English, "The new CUARH has arrived!" The statement alludes to the announcements made each November for the wine Beaujolais Nouveau that appear in café windows all over France: "Le Beaujolais Nouveau est arrivé!"
40. Claude Cocand, "Le CUARH nouveau est arrivé!" Gai Pied Hebdo, October 12-18, 1985: 12.
41. Lemaire, 24.
42. There is a potential for the phrase "affirmative rights" to be misinterpreted. Adding a new category to the law protecting individuals from discrimination is in a sense "affirmative," but it can also be understood as eliminating various forms of extralegal inequalities. Similarly, the creation of a legally recognized partnership can be seen as a response to the unfair exclusion of homosexuals from the institution of marriage, as opposed to some kind of special privilege. The term affirmative is used here to emphasize that these laws increased the rights of homosexuals (as opposed to earlier laws that penalized or restricted the actions of homosexuals). The intended meaning of the term is not that homosexuals were seeking some kind of "special rights."
43. Journal officiel, lois, law no. 85-772, July 25, 1985: 8471.
44. For a critical evaluation of similar strategies in the American context see David A. J. Richards, Women, Gays, and the Constitution (Chicago, 1998), and Identity and the Case for Gay Rights: Race, Gender, Religion as Analogies (Chicago, 1999).
45. For a critical evaluation of similar strategies in the American context see David A. J. Richards, Women, Gays, and the Constitution (Chicago, 1998), and Identity and the Case for Gay Rights: Race, Gender, Religion as Analogies (Chicago, 1999).
46. See, for example, X.L., "Le rendez-vous gai de SOS racisme," Gai Pied Hebdo, October 19-25, 1985: 5.
47. "Manifeste du GPL," Gai Pied Hebdo, December 22, 1984 - January 4, 1985: 3.
48. Francis Lacombe, "Tous à la marche," Gai Pied Hebdo, June 22-28, 1985: 6.
49. In French, "touche pas à mes murs" and "touche pas à mon pote."
50. P. Roy, "SOS racisme à la Concorde le 15 juin," Gai Pied Hebdo, June 8-14, 1985: 6.
51. Malek Boutih, "Contributions," in Michel Taube, ed., Pour le PaCS (Paris, 1999), 71-72.
52. X.L., 5.
53. Journal officiel, Assemblée nationale, 1ère séance, May 23, 1985: 1104. Not everyone viewed the association of sexism with homophobia positively. During the legislative debates Deputy Louis Boyer explained his opposition: "Besides the fact that the term [lifestyle] is excessively vague, it would encourage an association between women and homosexuals, which would be entirely negative for the feminine gender" (Hervé Liffran, " L'Assemblée nationale dit oui aux homos," Gai Pied Hebdo, July 6-12, 1985: 5).
54. Journal officiel, Assemblée nationale, 1ère séance, May 23, 1985: 1104. Not everyone viewed the association of sexism with homophobia positively. During the legislative debates Deputy Louis Boyer explained his opposition: "Besides the fact that the term [lifestyle] is excessively vague, it would encourage an association between women and homosexuals, which would be entirely negative for the feminine gender" (Hervé Liffran, " L'Assemblée nationale dit oui aux homos," Gai Pied Hebdo, July 6-12, 1985: 5).
55. Proposition de loi, no. 279, Sénat, second ordinary session of 1980-81, registered May 13, 1981.
56. In French, the terminology was "en raison de murs."
57. Some articles have falsely credited Jean-Pierre Michel rather than Robert Badinter with developing the phrase "based on lifestyle" (see, for example, N.B., "Touche pas à mes moeurs," Gai Pied Hebdo, June 1-7, 1985: 6).
58. Jean-Pierre Michel, interview by the author, tape recording, Paris, April 3, 1997. Former president of CUARH Jan Paul Pouliquen offered a similar explanation: "We at CUARH had proposed the term 'sexual orientation.' But there were some risks with that: for one, the term 'sexual orientation' could refer to pedophilia. It's true that lifestyle could also refer to pedophilia, but no one would imagine that. Besides, we saw the case of the guy who got fired for long hair, and well, having long hair, that's covered by 'lifestyle'" (Pouliquen interview, 1997).
59. Journal officiel, Assemblée nationale, 1ère séance, May 23, 1985: 1103.
60. In the discussion that follows "PaCS" refers to all the various forms of legally recognized same-sex partnerships proposed during the 1990s. The proposed structure went under a variety of acronyms, including the PaCS, the CUC, and the CUS. The term used in the final draft was "PaCS."
61. Eric Fassin and Michel Feher, "Parité et PaCS: Anatomie politique d'un rapport," in Daniel Borillo, Eric Fassin, and Marcela Iacub, eds., Au-delà du PaCS: L'expertise familiale à l'épreuve de l'homosexualité (Paris, 1999), 23.
62. Pouliquen interview, 1997.
63. Gérard Bach-Ignasse, interview by the author, tape recording, Paris, May 2, 1997.
64. Pouliquen interview, 1997.
65. Michel interview, 1997.
66. I b i d.
67. Pouliquen interview, 1997.
68. Recently, with the debates over gay marriage, the issue of adoption has come up again in France, and the notion of same-sex families is being discussed with greater frequency. Sociologist Eric Fassin explains, "For the first time, people are talking about homosexuality and family at the same time. The word homoparentalité entered the language in 1997 and [appeared] in the Petit Robert dictionary in 2001" (Clarisse Fabre and Eric Fassin, Liberté, égalité, sexualités [Paris, 2003], 50).
69. Another justification was based on psychoanalytical arguments dealing with the need for a "symbolic order that respects sexual difference." These kinds of arguments were presented in the legislative debates, particularly by Irène Théry, author of a report titled "Couple filiation et parenté aujourd'hui" (Fiammetta Venner and Joël Métreau, "Le PaCS, enfin!" Têu 39 [November 1999]: 61).
70. The slogan in French ("Un enfant, un papa et une maman; un enfant, deux papas, bonjour les dégâts!") is modeled after a public service advertisement in France against drunk driving, which said, "Deux verres, ça va; trois verres, bonjour les dégâts!"
71. Bach-Ignasse interview, 1997.
72. Fassin and Feher, 24-25.
73. Michel interview, 1997.
74. Fabre and Fassin, 28.
75. Pouliquen interview, 1997. Communautarisme is a pejorative term in French for political strategies that emphasize the need for political mobilization around distinct identities. The only evidence of deportations of French homosexuals comes from the region of Alsace, a region that at the time was part of Germany. In that region the numbers were probably not as high as those that Pouliquen mentions here, although there are, of course, many difficulties associated with establishing a precise number. See, for example, Pierre Seel, I, Pierre Seel, Deported Homosexual: A Memoir of Nazi Terror (New York, 1995).
76. Pouliquen interview, 1997. Communautarisme is a pejorative term in French for political strategies that emphasize the need for political mobilization around distinct identities. The only evidence of deportations of French homosexuals comes from the region of Alsace, a region that at the time was part of Germany. In that region the numbers were probably not as high as those that Pouliquen mentions here, although there are, of course, many difficulties associated with establishing a precise number. See, for example, Pierre Seel, I, Pierre Seel, Deported Homosexual: A Memoir of Nazi Terror (New York, 1995).
77. Of course, some of this rhetoric might seem insincere, since in fact the main groups pushing for the PaCS were gay and lesbian groups. However, since the PaCS was enacted in 1999, one of the biggest surprises has been the discovery that more than half of the PaCS have been entered into by two people of different sexes. A recent study concluded: "Contrary to the fears of the prophets of doom, the arrival of the PaCS has done nothing to cause a drop in marriages.... In addition, everything seems to indicate that the PaCS has also not led to increased 'communautarisme, since approximately sixty percent of those entering a PaCS are individuals of different sexes" (Observatoire du PaCS, http://www.chez.com/obspacs/, April 13, 2004)