KATH WESTON

“Families We Choose”
from Families We Choose: Gays, Lesbians, and Kinship
(New York: Co’umbia University Press, 1991): chapter 5

Friendship is an upstart category, for it to usurp to debate that perennial enigma: “What do
the place of kinship or even intrude upon it is an heterosexual women see in Torn Selleck, any
impertinence. way?” While we grew comfortable with argu
(Elsie Clews Parsons)
ment and with differences in our class
Every Thursday night in the cityscape that backgrounds, age, and experiences, we tended
framed my experience of “the field,” my lover to assume a degree of mutual comprehension as
and I had dinner with Liz Andrews. The three of white women who all identified ourselves as
us juggled work schedules, basketball practice, lesbians.
and open-ended interviews around this weekly After a few months of these dinners we began
event. Occasionally these gatherings meant can to apply the terms “family” and “extended
dlelight dinners, but more often Thursday family” to one another. Our remarks found a
found us savoring our repast in front of the TV. curious counterpart in a series of comments on
The first few weeks of gourmet meals gave way changes in the behavior of Liz’s cat. Once an
to everyday fare with a special touch, like unsociable creature that took to hiding and
avocado in the salad or Italian sausage in the growling from the other room when strangers
spaghetti sauce. invaded her realm, now she watched silently
Responsibility for planning, preparing, and from beneath the telephone table and even
subsidizing the meals rotated along with their ventured forth to greet her visitors. Not that she
location, which alternated between Liz’s home does that for everyone, Liz reminded us: clearly
and the apartment I shared with my lover. At only we were being taken into an inner circle.
one point did this egalitarian division of labor In retrospect, the incipient trust and sol
and resources become the subject of conscious idarity imaged in this depiction of a world
evaluation. Liz offered to pay a proportionately viewed through cat’s eyes appears as one of
greater share of a high-ticket meal, reasoning that several elements that combined to make Thurs
she had the largest income. In the ensuing discus days feel like family occasions, The centrality of
sion, reluctance to complicate “power dynam the meal sharing food on a regular basis in a
—

ics” in the group resolved the issue in favor of domestic setting certainly contributed to our
—

maintaining equal contributions. growing sense of relatedness. In the United

After supper we might play cards, trade States, where the household is the normative
anecdotes about mutual acquaintances, unit of routinized consumption, many family
describe recent encounters with heterosexism, relationships are also commensal relationships.
discuss world politics or the opening of a new Although we occupied separate households, we
lesbian strip show, exchange recipes, explain interpreted the option of independent residence
how we would reorganize the Forty-Niner as a feature distinguishing gay families from
offensive line-up, or propose strategies for straight, one that qualified “our” kind of family
handling the rising cost of living in San as a creative innovation. In truth, this contrast
Francisco. Or we might continue watching tele may have been a hit overdrawn. Moving to the
vision, taking advantage of commercial breaks same neighborhood I had prompted the routini
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE” 391

zation of the weekly dinner meetings, and I work. “Emotional support” accompanied this
personally enjoyed walking over to Liz’s apart sort of assistance, exemplified by midweek
ment when it was her turn to cook. These phone calls to discuss problems that could not
evening strolls underlined the spatial contiguity wait until Thursday. Our joint activities began
of our households while allowing rue to avoid to expand beyond the kitchen and living room,
the seemingly interminable search for a parking extending to the beach, the bars, political
space in San Francisco. events, restaurants, a tour of Liz’s workplace,
Efforts to encourage a low-key atmosphere and Giants games at Candlestick Park.
framed our interactions during supper as every Faced with the task of analyzing this type of
day experience rather than a guest—host rela self-described family relationship among les
tionship. It was not uncommon for any one of bians and gay men, my inclination while yet in
us to leave immediately following the meal if we the field was to treat it as an instance of what
were tired or had other things to do. Conversa anthropologists in the past have termed “fictive
tion, while often lively, seldom felt obligatory. kin.” The concept of fictive kin lost credibility
Also facilitating the developing family feeling with the advent of symbolic anthropology and
was a sense of time depth that arose after the the realization that all kinship is in some sense
arrangement had endured several months, a fictional — that is, meaningfully constituted
dimension augmented by a ten-year friendship rather than “out there” in a positivist sense.
between Liz and myself. Viewed in this light, genes and blood appear as
On some occasions other people joined our symbols implicated in one culturally specific
core group for activities, events, and even way of demarcating and calculating relation
Thursday night get-togethers. Once Liz asked ships. Under the influence of Continental
two gay male friends to dinner, and another philosophy, literary criticism, and an emerging
time with somewhat more anticipation and
— critique of narrative form in ethnographic writ
formality the group extended an invitation to
— ing, anthropological monographs — like the
Liz’s parents. When her parents arrived a guest— kinship structures they delineated came up for
—

host relationship prevailed, but Liz, my lover, review as tales and constructions, inevitably
and I became the collective hosts, preparing and value-laden and interpretive accounts (Clifford
serving the food and making sure that her 1988; Clifford and Marcus 1986; Geertz 1973;
parents were entertained. one could imagine Marcus and Fischer [986; Rabinow 1977).
other possible alignments: for example, Liz and Although the category “fictive kin” has fallen
her parents busy in her kitchen while my lover from grace in the social sciences, it retains
and I waited to he served. The differentiation of intuitive validity for many people in the United
activities and space presented a graphic juxta States when applied to chosen families. From
position of the family Liz was creating with the coverage in the popular press to child custody
family in which she had been raised. By intro suits and legislative initiatives, phrases such as
ducing my lover and me to her parents in the “pretended family relations” and “so-called
context of a Thursday night meal, Liz hoped to family” are recurrently applied to lesbian or gay
bridge these two domains. couples, parents, and families of friends.
About the time that the three of us began to The very concept of a substitute or surrogate
classify ourselves as family, we also began to family suffers from a functionalism that
provide one another with material assistance assumes people intrinsically need families
that went beyond cooking and cleaning up the (whether for psychological support or material
dinner dishes. When one of us left on vacation, assistance). Commentators who dispute the
another volunteered to pick up the mail. After legitimacy of gay families typically set up a
Liz injured her foot and decided to stay at her hierarchical relationship in which biogenetic
parents’ house, I fed the cat. On street cleaning ties constitute a primary domain upon which
days Liz and my lover moved each other’s “fictive kin” relations are metaphorically pre
vehicles. Liz offered me the use of her apartment dicated. Within this secondary domain, rela
for interviews or studying while she was at tionships are said to he “like” family, that is,
392 KATH WESTON

similar to and probably imitative of the rela and gay identity to produce a discourse on
tions presumed to actually comprise kinship. families we choose.
When anthropologists have discussed the insti
tutionalization of “going for sisters” (or broth
ers, or cousins) among urban blacks in the BUILDING GAY FAMILIES
United States, for example, they have empha
sized that such relationships can be “just as The sign at the 1987 Gay and Lesbian March on
real” as blood ties to the persons involved Washington read: “Love makes a family —

(Kennedy 1980; Liebow 1967; Schneider and nothing more, nothing less.” From the stage,
Smith 1978; Stack 1974). While framed as a speakers arguing for domestic partner benefits
defense of participants’ perspectives, this type of and gay people’s right to parent repeatedly
argument implicitly takes blood relations as its invoked love as both the necessary and the
point of departure. Insofar as analysis becomes sufficient criterion for defining kinship.
circumscribed by the unvoiced question that Grounding kinship in love deemphasized dis
asks how authentic these “fictive” relations are, tinctions between erotic and non-erotic rela
it makes little difference that authenticity refers tions while bringing friends, lovers, and
back to a privileged and apparently unified children together under a single concept. As
symbolic system rather than an empirically such, love offered a symbol well suited to carry
observable universe. the nuances of identity and unity so central to
Theoretically I have adopted a very different kinship in the United States, yet circumvent the
approach by treating gay kinship ideologies as procreative assumption embedded in symbols
historical transformations rather than deriva like heterosexual intercourse and blood ties.
tives of other sorts of kinship relations. Some It has become almost a truism that “family”
might contend that these emergent ideologies can mean very different things when compli
represent variations modeled on a more gener cated (as it always is) by class, race, ethnicity,
alized “American kinship” to the extent that and gender (Flax 1982; Thorne with Yalom
they utilize familiar symbols such as blood and 1982). In her studies of kinship among
love, but this terminology of modeling would Japanese-Americans, Sylvia Yanagisako (1978,
prove misleading.
1 As Rayna Rapp has convinc 1985) has demonstrated how the unit used to
ingly argued, calculate relatedness (“families” or “persons”)
may change, and additional meanings adhere to
When we assume male-headed, nuclear families to
be central units of kinship, and all alternative symbols like love, based on variable definitions
patterns to be extensions or exceptions, we accept of context that invoke racial or cultural identi
an aspect of cultural hegemony instead of study ties. Determining who is a relative in a context
ing it. In the process, we miss the contested that an individual perceives as “Japanese” may
domain in which symbolic innovation may occur, draw on different meanings and categories than
Even continuity may be the result of innovation.
(1987: 129) determining relationship in a context defined as
“American.”
Gay families do not occupy a subsidiary In speaking broadly of “gay families,” my
domain that passively reflects or imitates the objective is not to focus on that most impov
primary tenets of a coherent “American kinship erished level of analysis, the least common
system.” The historical construction of an ideo denominator, or to describe symbolic contrasts
logical contrast between chosen (gay) families in pristine seclusion from social relations. Nei
and blood (straight) family has not left bio ther do I mean to imply an absence of differ
logistic and procreative conceptions of kinship ences among lesbians and gay men, or that gay
untouched. But if coming out has supplied gay families are constructed in isolation from identi
families with a specific content (the organizing ties of gender, race, or class. Rather, I have
principle of choice) by exposing the selective situated chosen families in the specific context
aspects of blood relations, it remains to be of an ideological opposition between families
shown how choice became allied with kinship defined as straight and gay families identified
—
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE” 393

with biology and choice, respectively. On the ing, multiplex connections among members. In
one hand, this highly generalized opposition one such case, a woman reported incorporating
oversimplifies the complexities of kinship a “circle” of her new lover’s gay family into her
organization by ignoring other identities while own kinship universe.
presenting its own categories as timeless and In the Bay Area, families we choose resem
fundamental. On the other hand, the same bled networks in the sense that they could cross
discourse complicates understandings of kin household lines, and both were based on ties
ship in the United States by pairing categories that radiated outward from individuals like
previously believed to be at variance (“gay” and spokes on a wheel. However, gay families dif
“family”). fered from networks to the extent that they
The families I saw gay men and lesbians quite consciously incorporated symbolic dem
creating in the Bay Area tended to have onstrations of love, shared history, material or
extremely fluid boundaries, not unlike kinship emotional assistance, and other signs of endur
organization among sectors of the African- ing solidarity. Although many gay families
American, American Indian, and white working included friends, not just any friend would do.
2
class. David Schneider and Raymond Smith Fluid boundaries and varied membership
(1978: 42) have characterized this type of meant no neatly replicable units, no defined
organization as one that can “create kinship ties cycles of expansion and contraction, no pat
out of relationships which are originally ties of terns of dispersal. ‘What might have represented
friendship.” Listen for a moment to Toni Wil a nightmare to an anthropologist in search of
liams’s account of the people she called kin: mappable family structures appeaxed to most
participants in a highly positive light as the
In my family, all of us kids are godparents to each
others’ kids, okay? So we’re very connected that product of unfettered creativity. The subjective
way. By when I go to have a kid, i’m not gonna agency implicit in gay kinship surfaced in the
have my sisters as godparents. I’m gonna have very labels developed to describe it: “families we
people that are around me, that are gay. That are choose,” “families we create.” In the language
straight. I don’t have that many straight friends, of significant others, significance rested in the
but certainly I would integrate them in my life.
They would help me. They would babysit my eye of the beholder. Participants tended to
child, or ... like my kitty, I’m not calling up depict their chosen families as thoroughly indi
my family and saying, “Hey, Mom, can you watch vidualistic affairs, insofar as each and every ego
my cat?” No, I call on my inner family my —
was left to be the chooser. Paradoxically, the
community, or whatever—to help me with my life. very notion of idiosyncratic choice originally
—

So there’s definitely a family. And you’re build

ing it; it keeps getting bigger and bigger. Next conceived in opposition to biogenetic givens —

thing you know, you have hundreds of people as lent structural coherence to what people pre
your family. Me personally, I might not have a sented as unique renditions of family.
hundred, because I’m more of a loner. I don’t have The variety in the composition of families we
a lot of friends, nor do I want that many friends, choose was readily apparent. At one Metropoli
either. But I see [my lover] as having many, many
family members involved in what’s going on. tican Community Church service, when the
time came for communion, the pastor invited
What Toni portrayed was an ego-centered cal congregants to bring along family members. In
culus of relations that pictured family members groups and in couples, with heads bowed and
as a cluster surrounding a single individual, arms linked, people walking to the front of the
rather than taking couples or groups as units of church displayed ties of kinship and friendship
affiliation. This meant that even the most for all to see. On a different occasion, I joined
nuclear of couples would construct theoretically several people preparing for a birthday party in
distinguishable families, although an area of someone’s home. When I asked what, if any
overlapping membership generally developed. thing, separated those who came early to help
At the same time, chosen families were not decorate from those who arrived after the time
restricted to person-to-person ties. Individuals officially set for festivities to begin, the host
occasionally added entire groups with preexist- explained that the helpers were family, closer to
 KATH WESTON

her than most of the other guests. encountered, given and transmitted from the
Obituaries provide a relatively overlooked, if past.” Only after coming out to blood relatives
somber, source of information about notions of emerged as a historical possibility could the
kinship. Death notices in the Bay Area Reporter element of selection in kinship become isolated in
(a weekly newspaper distributed in bars and gay experience and subsequently elevated to a
other gay establishments) were sometimes writ constitutive feature of gay families.
ten by lovers, and included references to friends, I)espite the ideological characterization of
former lovers, blood or adoptive relatives gay families as freely chosen, in practice the
(usually denominated as “father,” “sister,” particular choices made yielded families that
etc.), “community members” present at a death were far from randomly selected, much less
or assisting during an illness, and occasionally demographically representative. When I asked
co-workers. While I was conducting fieldwork, people who said they had gay families to list the
the San Francisco Chronicle, a major citywide individuals they included under that rubric,
daily, instituted a policy of refusing to list gay their lists were primarily, though not exclu
lovers as survivors, citing complaints from rela sively, composed of other lesbians and gay men.
tives who could lay claim to genealogical or Not surprisingly, the majority of people listed
adoptive ties to the deceased. Although the tended to come from the same gender, class,
Chronicle’s decision denied recognition to gay race, and age cohort as the respondent.
families, it also testified to the growmg impact Both men and women consistently counted
of a discourse that refused to cede kinship to lovers as family, often placing their partners at
relations organized through procreation. the head of a list of relatives. A few believed a
By opening the door to the creation of lover, or a lover plus children, would he essen
families different in kind and composition, tial in order to have gay family, but the vast
choice assigned kinship to the realm of free will majority felt that all gay men and lesbians,
and inclination. In the tradition of Thoreau’s including those who are single, can create famil
Walden, each gay man and lesbian became ies of their own. The partner of someone
responsible for the exemplary act of creating an already considered family might or might not be
ideal environment (cf. Couser 1979). People included as kin. “Yeah, they’re part of the
often presented gay families as a foray into family, hut they’re like in-laws,” laughed one
uncharted territory, where the lack of cultural man. “You know, you love them, and yet there
guideposts to mark the journey engendered fear isn’t that same closeness.”
and exhilaration.
3 Indeed, there was a utopian Former lovers presented a particularly inter
cast to the way many lesbians and gay men esting case. Their inclusion in families we
talked about the families they were fashioning. choose was far from automatic, hut most people
Jennifer Bauman maintained that as a gay hoped to stay connected to ex-lovers as friends
person, “you’re already on the edge, so you’ve and family (cf. Becker [988; Clunis and Green
got more room to he whatever you want to be. i988). When former lovers remained estran
And to create. There’s more space Ofl the edge.” ged, the surprise voiced by friends underscored
What to do with all that “space”? “I create my the power of this ideal. “It’s been ten years since
own traditions,” she replied. you two broke up!” one man exclaimed to
“Choice” is an individualistic and, if you will, another. “Hasn’t he gotten over it yet?” Of
bourgeois notion that focuses on the subjective course, when a breakup involved hard feelings
power of an “I” to formulate relationships to or a property dispute, such continuity was not
people and things, untrammeled by worldly always realizable. After an initial period of
constraints. Yet as Karl Marx (1963: 15) pointed separation, many ex-lovers did in fact
out in an often quoted passage from The 18th re-establish contact, while others continued to
Brurnaire, “Men [sic] make their own history, strive for this type of reintegration. As Diane
hut they do not make it just as they please; they do Kunin put it, “After you break up, a lot of
not make it under circumstances chosen by people sort of become as if they were parents
themselves but under circumstances directly and sisters, and relate to your new lover as if
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE” 395

they were the in-law.” I also learned of several In addition to friendships and relationships
men who had renewed ties after a former lover with lovers or ex—lovers, chosen family might
developed AIDS or ARC (AIDS-Related Com also embrace ties to children or people who
plex). This emphasis on making a transition shared a residence.
5 Gay Community News
from lover to friend while remaining within the published a series of letters from gay male
bounds of gay families contrasted with hetero prisoners who had united to form “the Del-Ray
sexual partners in the Bay Area, for whom. Family” (only to be separated by the warden).
separation or divorce often meant permanent Back in San Francisco, Rose Ellis told me about
rupture of a kinship tie. the apartment she had shared with several
Jo-Ann Krestan and Claudia Bepko (1980: friends. One woman in particular, she said, was
285) have criticized lesbians’ efforts to maintain “like a big sister to me.” When this woman died
relationships with former lovers as “triangling,” of cancer, the household split up, and “that kind
(a no-no in therapeutic circles). They argue that of broke the family thing.” In other circum
such relationships “tend to be intrusive and stances, however, hardship drew people
involve inappropriate claims.” But notions of together across household lines. Groups orga
appropriateness are culturally constituted and nized to assist individuals who were chronically
contested. What a person expects from an “cx” or terminally ill often incorporated love and
may not be what they expect from a friend who persisted through time, characteristics some
is also family. In the context of gay kinship, participants took as signs of kinship. Occasion
former lovers can be both. ally a person could catch a glimpse of potential
A lover’s biological or adoptive relatives family relationships in the making. When I met
might or might not be classified as kin, con Harold Sanders he was making plans to live
tingent upon their “rejecting” or “accepting” with someone to prepare for the possibility that
attitudes. Gina Pellegrini, for example, found he might require physical assistance as he
refuge at a lover’s house after her parents kicked moved into his seventies. Harold explained that
her out of her own home as an adolescent. She he would rather choose that person in advance
was out to her lover’s mother before her own than be forced to settle for “just anyone” in an
parents, and still considered this woman family. emergency.
Jorge Quintana claimed that his mother adored The relative absence of institutionalization or
his ex-lover and vice versa, although Jorge had rituals associated with these emergent gay fam
broken up with this man many years earlier. ilies sometimes raised problems of definition
After years of listening to her father attack and mutuality: I may count you as a member of
homosexuality, remembered Roberta Osahe, my family, but do you number me in yours? In
“My girlfriend Debi and my fathe.r shot pooi this context offers of assistance, commitment to
together. And she whipped his ass! . That was
. . “working through” conflicts, and a common
his way, I think, of trying to make amends.” history measured by months or years, all
Jerry Freitag and his partner Kurt had made a became confirming signs of kinship. By symbol
point of introducing their parents to one ically testifying to the presence of intangibles
another. “My mother and his mother talk on such as solidarity and love, these demonstra
the phone every once in a while and write letters tions operated to persuade and to concretize, to
and stuff. Like my grandmother just died. move a relationship toward reciprocity while
Kurt’s mother was one of the first people to call seeking recognition for a kin tie.
my morn.” For Charlyne Harris, however, call Like their heterosexual counterparts, most
ing her ex-lover’s mother “family” would have gay men and lesbians insisted that family mem
been out of the question. “Her mother didn’t bers are people who are “there for you,” people
like me. Number one, she didn’t want her to be you can count on emotionally and materially.
in a lesbian relationship; number two, she knew “They take care of me,” said one man, “I take
that I was black. So I didn’t have a lot of good care of them.” According to Rayna Rapp (1982)
things to say about her mother ... Pam told me, the “middle class” in the United States tends
‘She can’t even say your name!” to share affective support but not material
396 KATH WESTON

resources within friendships. In the Bay Area, from working-class backgrounds reported con
however, lesbians and gay men from all classes tributing to the support of biological or adop
and class backgrounds, regularly rendered both tive relatives (either their own or a lover’s).
sorts of assistance to one another. Many con Another frequently cited criterion for sepa
sidered this an important way of demarcating rating “just plain” friends from friends who
friend from family. Diane Kunin, a writer, were also family was a shared past. in this case,
described family as people who will care for you the years a relationship had persisted could
when you’re sick, get you out of jail, help you become a measure of closeness, reflecting the
fix a flat tire, or drive you to the airport. Edith presumption that common experiences would
Motzko, who worked as a carpenter, said of a lead to common understandings. Jenny Chin
woman she had known ten years, “There’s explained it this way:
nothing in the world that [she] would ask of me
I have, not blood family, but other kind of family.
that I wouldn’t do for her.” Louise Romero And I think it really takes a lot to get to that point.
joked that a gay friend “only calls me when he Like years. Like five years, ten years, or whatever.
wants something: he wants to borrow the truck I think that we’re gonna have to do that to survive.
‘cause he’s moving. So I guess that’s family!” That’s just a fact of life, Because the whole fact of
Overall, the interface between property rela being gay, you’re estranged from your own family.
tions and kinship relations among lesbians and At a certain level, pretty basic level. Unless you’re
lucky. There are some exceptions.
gay men who called one another family seemed So to survive, you have to have support net
consistent with such relations elsewhere in the works and all that kind of stuff. And if you’re
society, with the exception of a somewhat settled enough, I think you do get into a ... those
greater expectation for financial independence people become family. If you kind of settle in
and self-sufficiency on the part of each member together. And your work, and your lives, and your
house, and your kids or whatever become very
of a couple. Individuals distributed their own intertwined.
earnings and resources; where pooling occur
red, it usually involved an agreement with a While people sometimes depicted the creation
lover or a limited common fund with house- of ties to chosen kin as a search for relationships
mates. Some households divided bills evenly, that could carry the burden of family, there are
while others negotiated splits proportionate to many conceivable ways to move furniture,
income. A person might support a lover for a solicit advice, reminisce, share affection, or find
period of time, but this was not the rule for babysitters for your children. All can be accom
either men or women. Putting a partner through plished by calling on relationships understood
school or taking time off from wage work for to be something other than family, or by pur
childrearing represented the type of short-term chasing services if a person has the necessary
arrangements most commonly associated with funds. But allied to the emphasis on survival
substantial financial support. in Jenny’s account was the notion of a co
Across household lines, material aid was less operative history that emerged as she bent her
likely to take the form of direct monetary litany of years to the task of establishing rather
contribution, unless a dependent child was than assuming a solidarity that endures.
involved. Services exchanged between members Relationships that had weathered conflict,
of different households who considered them like relationships sustained over miles but espe
selves kin included everything from walking a cially over time, also testified to attachment.
dog to preparing meals, running errands, and Allusions to disagreements, quarrels, and
fixing cars. Lending tools, supplies, videotapes, annoyance were often accompanied by laugh
clothes, books, and almost anything else imagi ter. Charlyne Harris named five lesbians she
nable was commonplace in some relationships. counted as kin “because if they don’t see me
Many people had extended loans to gay or within a certain amount of time [they check up
straight kin at some time. Some had given on mel, and they’re always in my business!
money to relatives confronted with the high cost Sometimes they get mad, too. They’re like
of medical care in the United States, and a few sisters. I know they care a lot.” Another woman
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE”

chuckled, “I never see these family, so you can ness. I could share stuff with my sisters. You used
tell they’re family!” Still others mentioned, as a to talk all your deep dark secrets. You can’t any
more ‘cause they think you’re weird. Which is true
sign of kinship, hearing from people only when in my case they really do
— ... I think a lot of
they wanted something. Through reversal and women look for that, and you need that.
inversion, an ironic humor underscored mean
ings of intimacy and solidarity carried by the This theory has a certain appeal, not only
notion of family in the United States (cf. Pratt becaue it speaks to the strong impact of coming
1977). out on lesbian and gay notions of kinship, but
In descriptions of gay families, sentiment and also because it is consistent with the elaboration
emotion often appeared alongside material aid, of chosen families in conceptual opposition to
conflict resolution, and the narrative encapsula biological family. On a practical level, most of
tion of a shared past. “Why do you call certain the services that chosen kin provide for one
people family?” I asked Frank Maldonado. another might otherwise be performed by rela
“Well,” he responded, tives calculated according to blood, adoption,
Some of my friends I’ve known for fifteen years. or marriage.
You get attached. You stay in one place long Although gay families are families a person
enough, you go through seasons and years creates in adult life, this theory portrays them
together, it’s like they’re part of you, you’re part primarily as replacements for, rather than
of them. You have fights, you get over them. It’s
. .
chronological successors to, the families in
just unconditional love coming through to people
that you didn’t grow up with. which individuals came to adulthood. If chosen
families simply represent some form of com
Though imaged here as the sole defining feature pensation for rejection by heterosexual rela
of kinship, love represents as much the product tives, however, gay families should logically
as the symbolic foundation of gay families. focus on the establishment of intergenerational
Closely associated with the experience of love relationships. (Remember that the loss of par
were the practices through which people estab ents, as opposed to other categories of relatives,
lished and confirmed mutual, enduring sol was the main concern in deciding whether or
idarity. not to reveal a gay or lesbian identity to straight
family.) But when lesbians and gay men in the
Bay Area applied kinship terminology to their
SUBSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL FAMiLY? chosen families, they usually placed themselves
in the relationship of sisters and brothers to one
Far from viewing families we choose as imita another, regardless of their respective ages. In
tions or derivatives of family ties created else cases where gay families included children,
where in their society, many lesbians and gay adults who were chosen kin but not co-parents
men alluded to the difficulty and excitement of to a child sometimes characterized themselves
constructing kinship in the absence of what they as aunts or uncles.
called “models.” Others, however, echoed the As with any generalization, this one admits
viewpoint popular in this society at large
— — exceptions. Margie Jamison, active in organiz
that chosen families offer substitutes for blood ing a Christian ministry to lesbians and gay
ties lost through outright rejection or the dis men, described her work with PWAs (persons
tance introduced into relationships by remain with AIDS) while tears streamed down her face.
ing in the closet.
6 “There will always be an “When I have held them in my arms and they
empty place where the blood family should be,” were dying, it’s like my sons. Like my sons.”
one man told me. “But Tim and I fill for each In this case the intergenerational kinship
other some of the emptiness of blood family that terminology invoked Margie’s pastoral role as
aren’t there.” In Louise Romero’s opinion, well as her experience raising two sons from a
A lot of lesbians I think they’re just looking for
. . .
previous heterosexual marriage. However, the
stuff maybe the same stuff I am. Like my family
—
characterization of most ties to chosen kin as
ties, before coming out, there was a lot of close- peer relationship brings families we choose
398 KATH WESTON

closer to so-called “fictive kin” relations found I had a lot drilled into me about your friends are
elsewhere in the United States than to even a just your friends. Just friends. Very minimalizing
and discounting [oil friendships. Because family
moderately faithful reconstruction of the famil was supposed to he all-important. Everything was
ies in which lesbian- and gay-identified individ done to preserve the family unit. Even if people
uals grew up. were killing each other; even if people had twenty-
Equally significant, the minority of gay peo year-old grudges and hadn’t spoken.
ple who had been disowned were not the only
ones who participated in the elahoration of gay In contrast, discussions of gay families pictured
kinship. Many who classified relations with kinship as an extension of friendship, rather
their biological or adoptive relatives as cordial than viewing the two as competitors or assim
to excellent employed the opposition between ilating friendships to biogenetic relationships
gay and straight family. Among those whose regarded as somehow more fundamental. It was
relations with their straight families had grad not unusual for a gay man or lesbian to speak of
ually improved over the years, ties to chosen kin another as family in one breath and friend in the
generally had not diminished in importance. If next. Yet the solidarity implicit in such state
laying claim to a gay family in no way depends ments has not always been a taken-for-granted
upon a break with one’s family of origin, the feature of gay lives. According to John D’Ernilio
theory of chosen family as a surrogate for (1983h), recognition of the possibility of estab
kinship lost dissolves. A satisfactory explana lishing non-erotic ties among homosexuals con
tion for the historical emergence of gay families stituted a key historical development that paved
requires an understanding of the changing rela the way for the emergence (>1 lesbian and gay
tion of friendship to sexual identity among the “community” and, I might add, for the later
—

large numbers of gay people who flocked to appearance of the ideological opposition
urban areas after World War II. between biological family and families we
choose.
When Harold Sanders was coming out in the
FRIENDS AND LOVERS 1930s, particularly in the white and relatively
wealthy circles where he traveled, same-sex ties
“That’s the way one builds a good life: a set of were experiencing a historical devaluation that
friends.” At 64, Harold Sanders had no hesita coincided with a new affirmation of eroticism in
tion about indulging his passion for aphorisms, relations between women and men embodied in
the turn of phrase stretched backward to gather the ideal of companionate marriage. Strong
in experiences of a lifetime. His statement reflec bonds between persons of the same sex became
ted a conviction very widely shared by lesbians something best left behind with childhood (Pleck
and gay men of all ages. People from diverse and Pleck 1980). By 1982 Lillian Rubin found
backgrounds depicted themselves as the bene that two-thirds of the single men in her sample of
ficiaries of better friendships than heterosex two hundred could not name a best friend. While
uals, or made a case for the greater significance the disparagement of same-sex ties may have had
and respect they believed gay people accord to a greater impact on men than women, all same-
7 Most likely such comments reflec
friendship. sex relationships became subjected to a higher
ted a mixture of observation and self- degree of scrutiny. Today many heterosexuals in
congratulation, hut they also drew attention to the United States are quick to judge certain
the connection many lesbians and gay men friendships as “too intense,” taking intensity as a
made between friendship and sexual identity (as 8 According to Lourdes
sign of homosexuality.
well as race or ethnicity). The same individuals Alcantara, who was born in Peru during the
tended to portray heterosexuals as people who 1950s, such associations are no longer confined
place family and friends in an exclusive, even to North America.
antagonistic, relationship. As a child growing I read an article in the newspaper, and they
up in a Chinese-American family, said Jenny present two women hugging like friends in the
Chiti, street. Iatin friends, right? And I was in love with
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE”

this woman. We were lovers. And 1 was in her Corning-out narratives invoke this distinction
house. So I brought the Sunday newspaper to her when they establish a double time frame, the
house, and 1 took that page out, so her mother
didn’t see that. And then we were so hot, reading “before” and “after” of coming out, effectively
that. But the distortion! They put us like sick reinterpreting relationships previously descri
people. So to he a lesbian, the description was bed with the terminology of blood ties as having
terrible! Even my girlfriend got upset. She said, been “really” erotic all along.
“We better be friends, just friends, and get mar The years following World War II a water
—

ried.” And we were 11 years old, 9 years old!

God! Qué terrible! Can you believe that? shed period for many groups in the United
States witnessed an unprecedented elabora
In the United States during the twentieth tion of nonerotic solidarities among homo
century, sibling ties and friendship have offered sexuals (Bérubé 1989; D’Emilio 1983a, 1983b,
some of the few cultural categories available for 1989b). During the 1950s and 1960s, gay men
making sense of powerful feelings toward a adapted kinship terminology to the task of
person of the same sex. During high school, distinguishing sexual from non-sexual relation
Peter Ouillette had what he later identified as a 9 At that time the rhetoric of brothers,
ships.
“crush” on another boy. “Absolutely under no sisters, and friends applied primarily to non-
circumstances would I think about sex,” he erotic relationships. In the film version of The
said. “It was friendship. But real close friend Boys in the Band, one character quips, “If
ship, that’s the way I thought of it. Almost like they’re not lovers, they’re sisters.” This camp
brothers.” Philip Korte remembered thinking, usage of “sister” among gay men coexisted with
“Wouldn’t it be nice to have a big brother. Or the institutionalization of mentor relationships
wouldn’t it be nice to just have a best Fri end that in which older men introduced younger men to
I could he affectionate with and spend a lot of “the life.” Normatively, mentor relationships
time with, companionship, those kinds of were inter-generational and emphatically non-
things. Now I recognize that, as gay. But, at the sexual. Bob Korkowski, who flouted conven
time, what I knew of gay, that didn’t fit at all.” tion by having sex with his mentor, described
What did not seem to fit were his fantasies of the experience as “weird, because a mentor is
love and caring for another man, since homo kind of like a father. [It was like sleeping with
sexuality then appeared to him as a matter of your father.” This reservation of kinship termi
sex and sex alone. nology for nonsexual relations represents a very
Given this alliance between the language of different usage from its subsequent deployment
kinship and the language of friendship, which to construct gay families that could include both
Jonathan Katz (1976) dates to the nineteenth lovers and friends.
century, one might expect to uncover a direct The contrast between the sexual and the
link between the early interchangeability of nonsexual was drawn only to be blurred in later
these terms and contemporary discourse on gay years after the possibility of non-erotic ties
families. However, historical evidence and day- among gay people because firmly established.
to-day observation suggest otherwise. By mid- By the 1970s both gay fl1Cfl and lesbians had
century coming out as a lesbian or gay man begun to picture friends and lovers as two ends
entailed learning to discriminate between feel of a single continuum rather than as opposi
ings of erotic and non-erotic love, drawing tional categories. “We women been waiting all
meaningful contrasts between sexual attraction our lives for our sisters to he our lovers,”
and friendship. A person could then theoret announced the lyrics of the song Gay and Proud
ically sort relationships into two groups: “just (Lempke 1977). The contribution of lesbian-
friends” (not sexually involved) and “more than feminism toward codifying this notion of a
friends” (lovers). One day while sitting in a continuum is evident in Adrienne Rich’s (1980)
coffeeshop, for example, I overheard a woman work on “compulsory heterosexuality.” Carroll
in the next booth tell the woman sitting across Smith-Rosenberg’s (1975) classic article on
from her that she was “only” interested in a relations between women in the nineteenth
friendship, since she already had a lover. century United States was also widely read in
400 KATH WESTON

women’s studies classes and cited to buttress the “friend” into one another. The phrases “just
contention that sexual and sisterly relations friends” and “more than friends” remained in
were semantically separable but overlapping in common usage to indicate whether two people
practice with little regard for efforts to dis
— had incorporated sex into their relationship. A
tinguish precisely these relationships during the certain unidirectionality also characterized the
intervening decades. enterprise of melding sex and friendship. While
The realignment that linked erotic to non- a lover ideally should become a friend, many
erotic relations through the device of a con believed that sex could ruin a pre-existing
tinuum was not confined to political activists. friendship. People who were single seemed as
As San Francisco moved into the 1980s, wont as ever to invoke the old gay adage that
“friend” seemed to be overtaking “roommate” friends last, while lovers are simply “passing
in popularity as a euphemistic reference to a through.”
lover in situations where lesbians and gay men In a 1956 study (reprinted in 1967) Maurice
elected not to reveal their sexual identities. Leznoff and William Westley found that most
Victoria Vetere’s 1982 study of lesbian inter gay men looked to friends, not lovers, for
pretations of the concepts “lover” and “friend,” security in old age. Yet the dictum that friends
though based on a small sample, found that rather than lovers endure took on a different
most lesbians were uncomfortable with any cast for a later generation that believed lovers
suggestion of a dichotomy between the two should not only double as friends, but continue
terms. A similar continuity was implicit in as friends and kin following a breakup. New
coming out stories narrated by women who had contexts can engender novel interpretations of
first claimed a lesbian identity during the 1970s. received wisdom.
One said coming out was epitomized for her by In retrospect, this shift from contrast to
the realization that “oh, wow, then I get to keep continuum laid the ground for the rise of a
all my girlfriends!” Elaine Scavone explained family-centered discourse that bridged the
with a laugh, “All of a sudden I felt I could be erotic and the non-erotic, bringing lovers
myself. I could be the way I really want to be together with friends under a single construct.
with women: I could touch them, I could make But the historical development of friendship ties
friends, I could make my girlfriends and I could among persons whose shared “sexual” identity
go home and kiss them.” Although women were was initially defined solely through their sexual
sometimes said to be more likely to come out by ity turned out to be merely an introductory
falling in love with a friend and men through an episode in a more lengthy tale of community
encounter instrumentally focused on sex, both formation.
men and women featured early attractions to
friends in their coming out stories.
The category of mentor, which epitomized FROM FRIENDSHIP TO COMMUNITY
one type of non-sexual relationship between gay
men, appeared to be losing, rather than gaining Among lesbians and gay men the term “commu
currency during the same period. In the few nity” (like coming out) has become as multi
cases when the term came up in casual conversa faceted in meaning as it is ubiquitous. In
tion during my fieldwork, its meaning seemed to context, community can refer to the historical
be changing. One man in his early thirties appearance of gay institutions, the totality of
described himself as a mentor to his lover, based self-defined lesbians and gay men, or unity and
on his claim to have been out longer and to harmony predicated upon a common sexual
know more about what he called “the gay identity. Older gay people generally considered
world.” Such a statement would have been a the term an anachronism when applied to the
non sequitur not so many years ago. period before the late 1960s, since “commu
Given that any continuum is defined by its nity” came into popular usage only with the rise
poles, these changes did not represent a com of a gay movement.”
plete collapse of the categories “lover” and Often contrasted with “isolation,” commu
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE” 401

nity subsumed one of the earlier senses of or a “continuing collectivity” of individuals

coming out: making a public debut at a gay bar. with common interests and activities (William
The area of overlap involved locating other gay Simon and John Gagnon), they tended to treat
people, a project that can remain surprisingly homosexuals as a fairly homogeneous group
difficult in an era when homosexuality makes with concrete, if not readily ascertainable,
headline news. Toni Williams, who had grown boundaries. More recently Stephen Murray
up in a large metropolitan area and begun (1979) has used sociological criteria to argue for
identifying as a lesbian only a few years before the validity of applying the community concept
I interviewed her, insisted, “I didn’t think that to gay men in urban areas of the US and
there was nobody that was going to be like me. Canada, dubbing them a “quasi-ethnic commu
But I didn’t know where to search for that 13
nity.”
person. I didn’t think that there was a commu Deborah Wolf’s (1979) ethnography of les
nity.” bians (actually lesbian-feminists) in the Bay
Finding community, as one man very elo Area fails prey to many of the same traps that
quently put it, meant discovering “that your have ensnared other investigators who treat
story isn’t the only one in the world.” Such a lesbians andlor gay men as members of an
discovery need not entail meeting other gay integrated subculture. Most studies that set out
people, hut rather becoming convinced of their to explore a “gay world” or “gay lifestyle” not
existence. Sean O’Brien, originally from New only situate their subjects in a historical vac
York City, used to listen to a weekly gay radio uum, but assume an amazingly uncomplicated
show, “a voice coming through a box once a relationship between claiming an identity and
week,” which he said helped him “understand feeling a sense of belonging or community. With
myself as part of a community, even though I their presumption of harmonious solidarity and
was not connected with that community.” Dur their reduction of varied experience to a single
ing the 1970s the concept of community came woridview, such approaches have proven far
to embody practical wisdom emerging from the from satisfactory.
bars, friendship networks and a spate of new Yet the shortcomings of previous research
gay organizations: the knowledge that lesbians offer no reason to reject the community concept
and gay men, joining together on the basis of a altogether, as Kenneth Read (1980) does in his
sexual identity, could create enduring social ties. study of patrons in a gay bar on the West Coast.
In the process, sexuality was reconstituted as a It is important to understand how gay men and
ground of common experience rather than a lesbians came to use a category that over time
quintessentially personal domain. has served as everything from a rallying cry for
From its inception, activists pressed the com political unity, to a demographic indicator, to a
munity concept into the service of an identity symbol for a small sector of wealthy white men
politics that cast gays in the part of an ethnic set apart from the majority of people who call
minority and a subculture.’° Lesbians and gay themselves lesbian or gay. Viewed in cultural
men represent a constant 10 percent of the and historical context, the so-called minority
population, they contended, a veritable multi model appears as part of a series of historical
tude prepared to claim its own distinct history, struggles to define and dispute the boundaries of
culture, and institutions. The basis for these communities based on sexual identity, struggles
arguments was, of course, laid earlier with the that in turn paved the way for a discourse on
recognition that homosexuals could unite gay families. Gay community can best be under
through bonds of friendship as well as sex, and stood not as a unified subculture, but rather as
elaborated through analogies with identity- a category implicated in the ways lesbians and
based movements organized along racial lines.” gay men have developed collective identities,
Many social scientists of the period subscribed organized urban space, and conceptualized their
to a similar paradigm in their studies of “the gay significant relationships.
2 Whether describing an aggregate of
world.” My interpretation of community departs in
persons in ongoing interaction (Evelyn Hooker) several key respects from the long tradition of
402 KATH WESTON

community studies in the United States (see During the 1 980s gay areas of San Francisco
Hilery 1955). Conrad Arensherg (1954), for did not escape the restructuring of the urban
example, treats community primarily as a set landscape taking place in cities across the
ting in which to conduct sociology, whereas gay 4 On Castro and Polk Streets,
United States.’
communities are only roughly defined spatially many small gay businesses gave way to banks,
and rest on variable interpretations of identity. chain stores, and franchises. Residents fought
In the hands of W. Lloyd Warner (1963), extension of the downtown financial district
community becomes a microcosm of society at into the South of Market region. Even under
large, yet lesbians and gay men have contested these economic pressures, however, gay neigh
and transformed hegemonic understandings of borhoods retained enough of their character to
kinship and sexuality. My approach perhaps contribute materially to the formation of gay
comes closest to Robert Lynd’s and Helen identity by offering a place to meet and forge
Lynd’s (1937) depiction of community as a ties to other gay people.
vantage point from which to view historical Because gay neighborhoods in San Francisco
events (in their case, the Great Depression), hut have been formed and populated principally by
again I am not concerned with a hounded entity men, many lesbians looked to the Bay Area at
or with community as locale, To comprehend large as a place to make such connections. John
the historical ascendance of a family-centered D’Emilio (l989) has pointed out the link
discourse among lesbians and gay men, my between male control of public space and the
analysis focuses on social movements, and on greater public visibility of gay male (as opposed
the meanings of togetherness and identity that to lesbian) institutions in the United States.
have shaped community as a cultural category Economic factors are also involved, since rental
defined in opposition to equally cultural notions or ownership in the Bay Area can be prohibitive,
of individualism and selfhood (Varenne 1977). and women in general receive lower incomes
Although lesbian and gay communities can than men. By the mid-1980s, however, lesbian
not be reduced to a territorial definition, this has institutions and residential concentrations had
not prevented San Francisco from becoming begun to appear in the less expensive Mission
a geographical symbol of homosexuality, re and Bernal Heights districts.
nowned here and abroad as the “gay capital” of “In terms of meeting people,” said Sharon
the United States. With the gay movement came Vitrano,
the consolidation of “gay ghettos,” neighbor
I feel a hit controlled by Iheing a lesbian], in that
hoods featuring a variety of gay-owned busi I’d like to at least have the option of living in a
nesses and residential concentrations of gay men small town. One of the reasons that I came out
(Castells 1983). “At some points I have thought, here was that I felt I could meet lesbians in a
‘Oh, my life is too gay.’ I work in a gay environ context that was “normal.” Where I could go
ment, I live in a gay neighborhood, most of my about my business and meet people that way. I
don’t like having to hang out with a group of
friends are gay,” remarked Stephen Richter, who people just because they’re gay.
rented an apartment in the Castro district. “But I
don’t know, you go out in the straight world and Sharon’s juxtaposition of small towns with life
you can’t wait to get home!” Ronnie Walker in the metropolis echoed the folk wisdom that
agreed: “For all the dishing that people do about gay men and lesbians are better off relocating in
Castro Street, whenever I go away to middle a big city where they can find others “like”
America, I’m always glad to kneel down and kiss themselves. Almost paradoxically, many people
the earth when I get to Castro Street.” Others described the urban community they had hoped
who lived in outlying areas traveled to gay to discover in terms that incorporated mythical
neighborhoods for the express purpose of “feel notions of the rural “America” of a bygone era.
ingthe community.” Neighborhood had become Expectations of homogeneity based on a com
another marker of the contrast between gay and mon sexual identification lent credence to bids
straight, signifier of belonging, “home,” and for political power, while depictions of lesbian
things held in common. and gay community as a club or secret society
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE”
f 403
composed of “people who know people” mediated by the symbo
lism of blood ties?
invoked the face-to-face relationships supposed Yet the application of kinship terminology to
to typify small-town life. gay community differed from the subsequent
Non-territorial understandings of commu discourse on gay familie
s in that it described all
nity that rest on a sense of belonging with one’s lesbians and gay
men as kin: no “choice”
“own kind” have numerous antecedents in the determined familial
relationships. To claim a
United States; those most relevant to a gay lesbian or gay identit
y was sufficient to claim
context include such unlikely compatriots as kinship to any and
every other gay person. Some
religion and the tavern. Long before the first gay people hoped
community would replace alien
activists portrayed lesbians and gay men as ated biological
ties (Altman 1979), appealing
sisters and brothers, the Puritans elaborated a not to chosen familie
s but to the collectivity: “If
notion of brotherhood based on the leveling I could gain accept
ance in the community of
effect of original sin (Bercovitch 1978; Burke lesbians, I would
have, I hoped, the loving
1941). A concept of “beloved community” family I missed
” (Larkin 1976: 84).17 In gay
ushered in the Civil Rights struggle so instru bars across the
nation, this was the era of circle
mental to the emergence of later social move dances to the popula
r music hit, We Are Family
ments (Evans 1979). On the secular side, (Rodgers and Edwar
ds 1979).
community has been symbolically linked to While the use of kinship terminology to
bars, saloons, and neighborhood in the United indicate community
membership has fallen into
States since the massive urban immigrations of disfavor as the
politics of identity have given
the late nineteenth century (Kingsdale 1980). way to the politic
s of difference, people still
During that period, the saloon became a locus employed it from
time to time as a way of
for the formation of same-sex (in this case male) hinting at sexual
identity. “Don’t worry, he’s
solidarity and a proxy for small-town paradise one of the brethre
n,” explained a man I was
lost. Although lesbians and gay men are now as meeting for lunch
when his housemate walked
likely to “find community” through a softball into the room. On
another occasion, a woman
team, a coming-out support group, or the Gay told me to expect
a relatively smooth job
Pride Parade as through a bar, bars remain a interview becaus
e the person I would be seeing
central symbol of identity, and almost everyone was “a sister.” Marta
Rosales, who worked at a
has a story about a first visit to a gay club (see hospital, reported
one of the nurses asking if a
Achilles 1967). new staff member was “family,” and another
Among political activists and the bar crowd woman remembered
the back door of an East
alike, the notion of community voiced during Bay bar being fondly
the 1970s resembled nothing so much as a entrance.” In termed the “family
1985 a blood drive for persons
Jeffersonian version of Victor Turner’s (1969) with AIDS incopo
rated a unique play on bio
communitas: an alternative, non-hierarchical, genetic notion
s of kinship and the materializa
and undifferentiated experience of harmony tion of identity
as shared substance. Leaflets
and 15 mutuality. Founded on the premise of a bearing the headlin
e “Our Boys Need Blood”
shared sexual identity, gay community called on lesbian
s as “blood sisters” to help
remained, like friendship, an egalitarian and “our brothers” in
a time of need. By all accounts
fundamentally nonerotic concept. the drive was a great success, and soon became
In extending homosexuality beyond the sex a model for similar
events (with similarly styled
ual, the notion of identity-based community publicity) across the
country.
opened new possibilities for using kinship ter Tales of “coming home” into community are
minology to imagine lesbians and gay men as structured much
like the scenes in Victorian
members of a unified 6 totality.’ Identity pro novels that depict the recognition
vided the linking concept that lent power to kinship. As metaph of concealed
or, “home” merges the
analogies between gay and consanguineal rela meanings of coming
out and living in a place
tions. Wasn’t this what families in the United with a large
lesbian and gay population (cf.
States were all about: identity and likeness Dank 1971: 189).
404 KATH WESTON

[Coming our] was like coming home. I can’t mutual understanding would flow from a shared
explain it. It felt so right. It really felt so right. It identity. Along with Jewish lesbians and gay
was like, you know, keeping your eyes shut and men, they drew attention to the racism and anti-
looking around a floor full of shoes and when you Semitism pervading gay communities, and
put your foot into your shoe you know it fits. You
don’t have to see it, you just know it. exposed the illusory character of any quest for
an encompassing commonality in the face of the
Portrayals of fitting and belonging became a crosscutting allegiances produced by an identity
conventional element in coming-out stories with politics. Predictably, this recognition of differ
reference to which individuals either equated or ences, while important and overdue, tended to
distinguished their experiences. undermine meanings of harmony and equality
carried by “community.” Accompanying the
I’ve heard of people’s experience, like moving
from different parts of the country, moving here, positive explorations of what it meant to be
and just like going into a women’s bar and feeling, black and gay or lesbian and Latina was wide
oh, wonderful. They’ve finally found their home, spread disillusionment with the failure to attain
or something like that. The experience that I the unity implicit in the ideal of communitas.
wanted, but I just haven’t had I don’t feel like
...

I’ve come home or anything or that I belong here.

Identity and community, so often taken to DELIBERATING DIFFERENCE
define the limits of lesbian and gay experience,
have become polarized in ways that presuppose By the 1980s the rhetoric of brotherhood and
culturally specific values of individualism. In the sisterhood had begun to seem dated and trite.
United States, tensions between notions of per Sherry McCoy and Maureen Hicks (1979: 66),
sonhood and collectivity date back to Tocque attempting to grapple with “disappointment”
ville’s warnings about a tyranny of the majority. and “unrealistic demands” among Lesbian
The paradigm that casts lesbians and gay men in feminists, wrote, “The concept of ‘sisterhood’ at
the part of a minority (or subculture) interposes times seemed to evaporate as we watched.”
18
community between “the individual” and “soci “This newfound reluctance to apply kinship
ety.” In this context, it becomes relatively easy terminology to all other lesbians and gay men
to move from a view of community as a extended well beyond activist circles. Many gay
comfortable home or unified interest group to a men and lesbians began to doubt the existence
picture of community as a mini-enforcer, of “the” community or any single gay “life
mediator of all the conformity and oppression style.” Some abandoned the notion of identity-
attributed to Society with a capital “S.” based communities altogether, attempting to
By the late 1970s, signs of disenchantment escape social categorization by adopting
with the unity implicit in the concept of commu extreme forms of individualism. “I am who I
nity began to appear: a popular critique of the am,” they explained. Others associated commu
look-alike styles of “Castro clones”; a resur nity strictly with wealthy white men, who were
gence of butch/fern relations among lesbians neither representative of nor identical with the
that flew in the face of feminist prescriptions for totality of gay people. Along with a recognition
androgyny; and a heated debate about sado of the relative privilege of this sector came the
masochism (S/M), pedophilia, and other mar refusal to allow this part to stand for the whole.
ginalized sexualities. Though some dissenters Seemingly unable to comprehend the inequal
insisted upon their right to be included in the ities that structure identity-based difference in
larger collectivity of lesbians and gay men, the United States (white being privileged over
others did not experience themselves as commu Native-American, men over women, and so on),
nity members, much less as agents in commu the concept of community lost credibility.
nity formation. “I was just me, in a gay world,” The most popular alternative was to divest
explained Kevin Jones. community of its egalitarian associations by
During the same period, lesbians and gays of using it as a proxy for “population.” Dissem
color critiqued the simplistic assumption that ination of Alfred Kinsey’s (i948, 1953) data on
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE” 405

the incidence of homosexual sex in the United tamed a nominal lesbian presence. A gay thea
States had opened the way for picturing an ter, for example, included scripts with lesbian
essential 10 per cent who make up the imagined characters in its annual repertoire, and the
universe (“community”) of gay men and les number of women in attendance grew from two
bians. One indication of the extent of this or three to a third of the audience when lesbian
muddle in the model of community is that, by plays were performed. Yet the most visible gay
the time of my fieldwork, most people qualified institutions, businesses, and public rituals (such
the term by adding a phrase such as “whatever as Halloween on Castro Street) remained male-
that means.” owned and male-organized. Even the exceptions
The practice of identity politics in the United seemed to prove the rule. After a crafts fair in
States has rested upon the cultural configura the gay South of Market area, the Bay Area
tion of race, ethnicity, class, gender, and sexual Reporter published a picture of two women
identity as categories for organizing subjective kissing over the caption, “It wasn’t aB men at
experience (Epstein 1987; Omi and Winant the Folsom Street Fair either.”
1983). What motivated the transition from When gay groups in southern California
“speaking sameness” to a division of commu suggested adding a lambda to the rainbow flag,
nity into ever-narrower circumscriptions of supposedly to represent all gay people, lesbians
9 In the first place, perceptions of
identity?’ denounced the addition as a non-inclusive male
fragmentation represent a view from the top. symbol. At a benefit for the Gay Games spon
Attempts to understand the integration of sexu sored by the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence (a
ality with other aspects of identity were not group of gay men in nun drag), lesbians cheered
experienced as “splits” by those who had never the women’s softball game and martial arts
felt included in community from the start. demonstration, but some voiced impatience
Paradoxically, however, the very process of with “all the boys parading around in their
building gay community contributed to the outfits.” Disagreements periodically erupted
emergence and timing of this discourse on concerning the proportion of men’s to women’s
difference. coverage in newspapers that attempted to serve
John D’Emilio (1989) has argued that the “the community” as a whole. It was not uncom
political tactic of coming out tO others as a mon for lesbians and gay men to stereotype one
means of establishing gay unity had the contra another, building on constructions of identity
dictory effect of making differences among and difference in the wider culture. Jenny Chin,
lesbians and gay men more apparent. The dis herself Chinese-American, combined notion of
tance is considerable from the Chicago of the gender, sexuality, and racial identity with the
late 1 960s, where Esther Newton (1979) found image of the Castro clone to portray difference
little social differentiation among gay men and and position herself outside “gay community”:
no gay economy to speak of, to the San
Francisco of the 1980s, where gay institutions I would read the Bay Guardian, and they’d say
had multiplied and residents were heirs to a “gay rap.” And I would take all these buses
social movement for gay pride and liberation. In crosstown, through all these parts of town I’d
the Bay Area the sheer size of the relatively never been at night, and transfer, and wait on bus
corners, and go to this huge room that had like
“out” gay and lesbian population permitted the 300 gay men ... These men were very much
recognition and replication of differences found talking from their hearts, and they were really
in the society at large. needing the support, but it’s hard for me to
During the 1980s, categories of identity identify with all these tall white guys with mous
remained integral to the process of making and taches talking about how they’re being judged
because they’re not coming well enough, or some
breaking social ties among lesbians and gay thing like that.
men. Most gay bars and social or political
organizations in San Francisco were segregated Joan Nestle (in Gottlieb 1986) has con
by gender. Some of the community institutions demned the essentialism implicit in general
that lesbians associated with gay men main- izations that assert “lesbians do this, gay men
406 (KATH WESTON

do that.” When it comes to something like cover that their shared sexual identity could not
public sex, Nestle points out, some do and some resolve the issue at hand. The hegemony of a
don’t. Like other differences, divisions between managerial and entrepreneurial class within
lesbians and gay men are not absolute, but “the community” was also evident in the rela
socially, historically, and interpretively con tive absence of gay owned and operated dis
structed. After a women’s musical troupe was count stores. While merchants encouraged
asked to play for a gay male swimsuit contest, people to “buy gay” and pointed with pride to
group members voiced positions ranging from the proliferation of shops that had made it
“support our gay brothers,” to “porn is porn,” theoretically possible to live without ever leav
to “who cares, let’s take the money!” Several ing the Castro, only a very small segment of
lesbians cited their work with AIDS organiza lesbians and gay men could have afforded to do
tions as an experience that had helped them so, even if they were so inclined.
“feel connected” to gay men. Social contexts Anyone who visits a variety of lesbian and
defined as heterosexual also fostered expecta gay households in the Bay Area will come away
tions of solidarity based on sexual identity. At with an impression of generational depth. Gay
one of our Thursday evening family dinners, Liz organizations and establishments, however,
told with dismay the story of fighting with a tended to serve a relatively narrow middle age
male co-worker at a holiday party given by her range. Bowling, for instance, is a sport that
employer. “There we were,” she explained, “the many people in the United States pursue into
only two gay people in the place, having it out their older years. But gay league nights at
with each other.” bowling alleys across the city found the lanes
Class differences traced out lines of division filled with teams predominantly composed of
within as well as between the men’s and wom men in their twenties and thirties. Young les
en’s “communities.” Many lesbians attributed bians and gay men came to San Francisco
the visibility of gay male institutions to the fact expecting to find acceptance and gay mecca but
that men in general have greater access to instead experienced trouble getting into bars
money than women. Gay vacation spots at the and often ended up feeling peripheral to “the
nearby Russian River proved too expensive for community” (cf. Heftier and Autin 1978; Heron
many lesbians (as well as working-class and 1983). Gina Pellegrini had initially gained
unemployed gay men), who tended to stay at entrance to one bar with a fake ID, only to
campgrounds rather than resorts if they visited encounter hostility from one of the older “reg
the area. Popular categories opposed “bikers” ulars”:
to “professionals” and “bar gays” (presumably I just felt like we all should have been the same no
working-class) to “politicals” (stereotyped as matter [whati age or not. And she was discrim
—

“middle-class”). People described making pain inating against her own quote “kind” unquote.
ful choices regarding employment, based on That was very strange to me. I didn’t realize that
their perceptions of how out a person could be a 15-year-old could he pretty damn much of a
pain in the ass when you want to relax and talk to
in a particular type of job. David Lowry, for your friends and have a drink.
example, had dropped out of an MBA program
to become a waiter after he experienced pres For their part, older people mentioned ageist
sure from corporate employers to be more door policies at bars, and complained about
“discreet” about his sexual identity. feeling “other” when surrounded by younger
Individuals who had purposefully sought faces at community events.
employment in gay businesses reported their Racially discriminatory treatment at gay
surprise at finding the gay employer—employee organizations, white beauty standards, ethnic
relationship as marked by conflict and differ divisions in the crowds at different bars, and
ence as any other (cf. Weston and Rofel 1985). racist door policies were other frequently cited
In a dispute between the lesbian owner of an reasons for questioning the community concept.
apartment building and one of her lesbian Kevin Jones, an African-American man, said
tenants, both sides seemed perplexed to dis that when he first came to San Francisco,
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE” 407

I thought that if I was white, it would be a lot exclusive alternatives, like living in an Asian-
different then. Because it seemed like it was hard American or a gay neighborhood, or working
for me to talk to people in bars. But it didn’t seem
like other people were having a hard time talking for a gay or an African-American newspaper.
to each other. It almost seemed like they knew Some political activists have endeavored to
each other. And if they didn’t know each other, fabricate a solidarity capable of spanning “the
they were gonna go up and talk to each other and community” without denying differences that
meet. But I’d go to the bars, and I could sit there divide its members. The general trend, however,
and watch pool, and nobody would ever talk to
me. And I couldn’t understand that. And I has involved building coalitions composed of
thought, “If I was white, I bet you I would know autonomous groups that invoke more special
a lot more of these people.” ized combinations of identities (cf. Reagon
1983).
Something more is involved here than racial To avoid prioritizing identities, a person
identity as a ground for difference and discrim could integrate them seeking out other gay
—

ination, or ethnicity as an obstacle to the easy American Indians, joining a group for lesbians
interaction implicit in notions of community. over 40, or hanging out in a bar for gays of color
Most people of color claimed membership in — but this solution is limited in the number of
communities defined in terms of racial identity, identities and settings it can encompass. A
attachments that predated coming out as a person could move back and forth among
lesbian or gay man. Simon Suh, for example, communities as an “out” lesbian or gay man,
believed that his own coming out was compli giving up the hope of having all identities
cated by thinking of gays as “very outside of my accepted in any one context. He or she could
own [Korean-American] community.” Meta pass for heterosexual in situations defined by
phors like “home” served as well for describing race or ethnicity, like Kenny Nash, who had
race and ethnicity as sexual identity. Because his decided to remain closeted to other African-
best friend was also Latino, Rafael Ortiz Americans. “I didn’t want people to think that
explained, “it makes it more like home.” This is I’d left the [blacki community,” he explained,
not to deny divisions of class, language, age, “so that therefore I had no right to speak about
national origin, gender, and so forth that cut things that were of concern to me.” Or that
across communities organized through cate person could turn toward a radical individual
gories of race or ethnicity. It is simply to note ism which focused on issues of style and railed
that many, if not most, lesbians and gay men of against conformity, whether it be as a “lesbian
color did not experience coming out in terms of for lipstick” or a gay man who objected to
any one-to-one correspondence of identity to uniforms of jeans, keys, and sculptured mus
°
2
community. cles.
Whites without a strong ethnic identification For some, sexual identity had become a
often described coming out as a transition from minimal defining feature, all “we” have in
no community into community, whereas people common. Scott McFarland told the story of
of color were more likely to focus on conflicts getting on the wrong bus when he first arrived in
between different identities instead of express the city during the 1970s, and finding himself on
ing a sense of relief and arrival. Implicit in the Castro Street:
coming out narratives of many white people
was the belief that whites lack community, It just devastated me. [I thought], this is it! This is
the dream of all these people like me moving to
culture and a developed sense of racial identity. somewhere [gay] Everybody was dressed in
...

As Scott McFarland, a white man, remarked these incredibly macho fashions These weigh-
...

when we were discussing the subject of gay a-ton shoes. Jeans. The first five years I lived in San
pride day, “There were no other parades that I Francisco, I refused to wear blue jeans It took
...

could march in.” me years to recover from finding out that gay
people weren’t like me much at all!
Division of the master trope of community
into multiple communities has forced individ “I knew that I didn’t fit into the Castro any
uals to make difficult choices between mutually more than I fit into my family,” another man
408 KATH WESTON

insisted. Whether that sense of difference was NOTES

based on categorical understandings of self I Schneider (1968) represents the classic anthro
(mediated by race, age, class, gender) or on pological text on “American kinship.” For a
tensions between the individual and the social, critique of Schneider’s account as overly coher
the result has been a generalized rejection of the ent and systematized, as well as insensitive to
contextual shifts in meaning, see Yanagisako
unity and above all the sameness implicit in the (1978, 1985). For a discussion of models in
concept of gay community. culture theory, see (ieerrz’s (1973: 93—4) distinc
In contrast, the family-centered discourse tion between “model of” and “model for.”
emerging during this period did not assume 2 Cf. Riley (1988), who found in a small study of
identity (in the sense of sameness) based upon eleven lesbians in New York City that those
sexuality alone. Lesbians and gay men who friends characterized as family were “intimate”
rather than “social” friends.
claimed membership in multiple communities 3 For a discussion of the theme of uncharted lives
but felt at home in none joined with those who in lesbian autobiography, see Cruikshank
had strategically repositioned themselves outside (1982).
community in transferring the language of kin- 4 Iii practice this generalization may hold more for
ship from collective to interpersonal relations. lesbians than for gay men, although many gay
men also shared the ideal of transforming the
While familial ideologies assumed new promi formerly erotic tie to an ex-lover into an endur
nence in the United States at large during the ing non-erotic bond.
I 980s, among gay men and lesbians the historical S The notion of a substitute family can also he
legacy of community-building and subsequent criticized as functionalist in that it assumes all
struggles to comprehend relations of difference people have a need for family. Social scientists
have applied theories of surrogate family to
mediated a shift in focus from friendship to many marginalized groups in the US. See, for
kinship. Meanwhile the possibility of being rejec example, Vigil (1988) on barrio gangs in south
ted by blood relatives for a lesbian or gay identity ern California.
shaped the specific meanings carried by “family” 6 Cf. Hooker (1965) on the importance placed on
in gay contexts, undermining the permanence friendship by gay men of an earlier era.
7 Foucault (in Gallagher and ‘Wilson 1987: 33—4)
culturally attributed to blood ties while high has speculated that the devaluation of male
lighting categories of choice and love. friendship in eighteenth-century Europe was his
Defined in opposition to biological family, torically linked to the problematization of sex
the concept of families we choose proved attrac between men.
tive in part because it reintroduced agency and 8 To my knowledge less is documented concerning
lesbian usage of kinship terminology during this
a subjective sense of making culture into lesbian period. Among gay men, this application of
and gay social organization. The institution kinship terminology persists in the form of camp
alized gay community of the 1970s, with its references, in the specialized context of drag
shops and bars and associations, by the 1980s balls and competitions, gay male novices enter
could appear as something prefabricated, an all-gay “houses” in which “the ‘mother’ and
‘father’ supervise the training and activities of
entity over and above individuals into which their ‘children” (Goldsby 1989: 34—5).
they might or might not fit. Most understood 9 For a comprehensive discussion of the develop
gay families to be customized, individual crea ment of urban gay communities in the postwar
tions that need not deny conflict or difference. years, see D’EmiLio (1983b). On the emergence
Family also supplied the face-to-face relation of a social movement grounded in gay identity,
see also Adam (1987).
ships and concrete knowledge of persons prom 10 Epstein (1987) explores in more depth the lim
ised by the romantic imagery of small-town itations of analogies between ethnicity and gay
community (Mannheim 1952). As a successor identity.
to non-erotic ties elaborated in terms of com 11 On the formation of “new types of collective
munity or friendship, chosen families intro subjectivity” in association with postwar move
ments that invoked racial identity, see Omi and
duced something rather novel into kinship Winant (1983: 37).
relations in the United States by grouping 12 See, for example, Hoffman (1968), Hooker
friends together with lovers and children within (1967), Simon and Gagnon (1967), and Warren
a single cultural domain. (1974).
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE” 409

13 Written before the emergence of discourse on A Lesbian Anthology (Watertown, MA: Perse
gay families, Murray’s piece identified lack of phone Press).
kinship as the major difference distinguishing Becker, Carol S. (1988), Unbroken Ties: Lesbian
urban gay communities from urban ethnic com Ex-Lovers (Boston: Alyson).
munities. Bercovitch, Sacvan (1978), The American Jeremiad
14 On the relation of gentriflcation to public policy (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press).
and wider economic trends during the Reagan Bérubé, Allan (1989), “Marching to a Different
years, see Harrison and Bluestone (1988). Drummer: Lesbian and Gay Gis in World War II,”
15 For an application of Turner’s concept of corn in Martin Baunil Duberman, Martha Vicinus, and
munitas to feminist and lesbian-feminist or George Chauncey, Jr (eds), Hidden From History:
ganizing before the politics of difference Reclaiming the Gay and Lesbian Past: 383—94
questioned the notion of sisterhood, see Cassell (New York: New American Library).
(1977). Burke, Kenneth (1941), The Philosophy of Literary
16 Ct. Anderson (1983), who has elaborated the Form (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University
notion of imagined community with respect to Press).
nation-states. Cassell, Joan (1977), A Group Called Women: Sister
17 Cf. Lockard (1986: 85), writing about lesbians hood and Symbolism in the Feminist Movement
in Portland: “The Community may be seen as a (New York: David McKay).
partial alternative form of family unit for Com Castells, Manuel (1983), The City and the Grass
munity members.” roots: A Cross-Cultural Theory of Urban Social
18 On the limitations of sisterhood as an all- Movements (Berkeley: University of California
embracing concept intended to bring women Press).
together across lines of race, age, ethnicity, Chrystos (1988), Not Vanishing (Vancouver: Press
se,ual identity, and class, see E. T. Beck (1982), Gang Publishers).
Chrystos (1988), Dill (1983), Fox-Genovese Clifford, James (1988), The Predicament of Culture:
(1979—80), Gibbs and Bennett (1980), hooks Twentieth-Century Ethnography, Literature, and
(1981), 1-lull et al. (1982), Joseph and Lewis Art (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).
(1981), Macdonald (1983), Moraga and Anzal Clifford, James and George E. Marcus (1986), Writ
dna (1981), and Smith (1983). ing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnog
19 The term “speaking sameness” comes from Bon raphy (Berkeley: University of California
nie Zimmerman’s (1985) discussion of identity Press).
politics among lesbians during the early Clunis, D. Merilee and G. Dorsey Green (1988),
1980s. Lesbian Couples (Seattle: Seal Press).
20 Cf. M. B. Pratt (1984), who very eloquently Couser, C. Thomas (1979), American Autobi
refutes the notion of home as a space of safety ography: The Prophetic Mode (Amherst, MA:
and comfort. For a perceptive commentary on University of Massachusetts Press).
issues raised by Pratt’s portrayal of home as a Cruikshank, Margaret (1982), “Notes on Recent
locus of exclusions and oppressions, see Martin Lesbian Autobiographial Writing,” Journal of
and Mohanty (1986). Homosexuality 8:1: 19—26.
Dank, Barry M. (1971), “Coming Out in the Gay
World,” Psychiatry 34: 180—95.
D’Emilio, John (1983a), “Capitalism and Gay Iden
REFERENCES tity,” in Ann Snitow, Christine Stansell, and
Sharon Thompson (eds), Powers of Desire: The
Achilles, Nancy (1967), “The Development of the Polities of Sexuality: 100—13 (New York:
Homosxual Bar as an Institution,” in John H. Monthly Review Press).
Gagrion and William Simon (eds), Sexual (1983 b), Sexual Politics, Sexual Commu
Deviance: 228—44 (New York: Harper & nities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in
Row). the United States, 1940—1970 (Chicago: Uni
Adam, Barry D. (1987), The Rise of a Gay and versity of Chicago Press).
Lesbian Movement (Boston: Twayne Publishers). (1989), “Gay Politics, Gay Community: San
Altman, Dennis (1979), Coming Out in the Seventies Francisco’s Experience,” in Martin Bauml Duber
(Sydney: Wild & Woolley). man, Martha Vicinus, and George Chauncey Jr
Anderson, Benedict (1983), imagined Communities: (eds), Ridden From History: Reclaiming the Gay
Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nation and Lesbian Past: 456—73 (New York: New
alism (London: Verso). American Library).
Arensberg, Conrad M. (1954), “The Community- DiLl, Bonnie Thornton (1983), “Race, Class, and
Study Method,” American Journal of Sociology Gender: Prospects for an All-Inclusive Siserhood,”
60: 109—24. Feminist Studies 9:1: 131—50.
Beck, Evelyn Torton (ed.) (1982), Nice Jewish Girls: Epstein, Steven (1987), “Gay Politics, Ethnic
410 KATH WESTON

Identity: The Limits of Social Constructionism,” Katz, Jonathan (1976), Gay American History:
Socialist Review 93/4: 9—54. Lesbians and Gay Men in the USA (New York:
Evans, Sara (1979), Personal Politics: The Roots of Thomas Y. Crowell).
Women’s Liberation in the Civil Rights Move Kennedy, Theodore 8.. (1980), You Gotta Deal With
ment and the New Left (New York: Vintage). It: Black Family Relations in a Southern Commu
Flax, Jane (1982), “The Family in Contemporary nity (New York: Oxford University Press).
Feminist Thought: A Critical Review,” in Jean Kingsdale, Jon M. (1980), “The ‘Poor Man’s Club’:
Bethke Elshtain (ed,), The Family in Political Social Functions of the Urban Working-Class
Thought: 223—53 (Amherst, MA: University of Saloon,” in Elizabeth H. Pleck and Joseph H.
Massachusetts Press). Pleck (eds), The American Man: 255—83 (Engle
Fox-Genovese, Elizabeth (1979/80), “The Personal is wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).
Not Political Enough,” Marxist Perspectives 2:4: Kinsey, Alfred C., Wardell B. Pomeroy and Clyde E.
94—113. Martin (1948), Sexual Behavior in the Human
Gallagher, Bob and Alexander Wilson (1987), “Sex Male (Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders).
and the Politics of Identity: An Interview with (1953), Sexual Behavior in the Human Female
Michel Foucault,” in Mark Thompson (ed.), Gay (Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders).
Spirit: Myth and Meaning: 25—35 (New York: St Krestan, Jo-Ann and Claudia S. Bepko (1980), “The
Martin’s Press). Politics of Fusion in the Lesbian Relationship,”
Geertz, Clifford (1973), The Interpretation of Cu! Family Process 19:3: 277—89.
tures (New York: Basic Books). Larkin, Joan (1976), “Coming Out,” Ms. 4:9: 72—4,
Gibbs, Joan and Sara Bennett (1980), Top Ranking: 84-6.
A Collection of Articles on Racism and Classism Lempke, Debbie (1977), Gay and Proud, performed
in the Lesbian Community (New York: Come! by the Berkeley Women’s Music Collective (Olivia
Unity Press). Records, LF9ISA stereo).
Goldsby, Jackie (1989), “All About Yves,” OUT! Leznoff, Maurice and William A. Westley (1967),
LOOK 2:1:34-5. “The Homosexual Community,” in John H. Gag-
Gottlieb, Amy (1986), “Amy Gottlieb Talks to Joan non and William Simon (eds), Sexual Deviance
Nestle,” Rites (April). 184—96 (New York: Harper & Row).
Harrison, Bennett and Barry Bluestone (1988), The Liebow, Elliott (1967), Tally’s Corner: A Study of
Great U-Turn: Corporate Restructuring and the Negro Streetcorner Men (Boston: Little, Brown &
Polarizing of America (New York: Basic Co.).
Books). Lockard, Denyse (1986), “The Lesbian Community:
Hefner, Keith and Al Autin (eds) (1978), Growing An Anthropological Approach,” in Evelyn Black-
Up Gay (Ann Arbor: Youth Liberation Press). wood (ed.), Anthropology and Homosexual
Heron, Ann (ed.) (1983), One Teenager in Ten: Behavior: 83—95 (New York: Haworth Press).
Writings by Gay and Lesbian Youth (Boston: Lynd, Robert S. and Helen M. Lynd (1937), Middle-
Alyson). town in Transition (New York: Harcourt, Brace).
Hillery, George A. (1955), “Definitions of Commu Mannheim, Karl (1952), Essays on the Sociology of
nity: Areas of Agreement,” Rural Sociology 20: Knowledge (New York: Oxford University Press).
111—23. Marcus, George E. and Michael M. J. Fischer (1986),
Hoffman, Martin (1968), The Gay World: Male Anthropology as Cultural Critique: An Experi
Homosexuality and the Social Creation of Evil mental Moment in the Human Sciences (Chicago:
(New York: Basic Books). University of Chicago Press).
Hooker, Evelyn (1965), “Male Homosexuals and Martin, Biddy and Chandra Talpade Mohanty
Their ‘Worlds’,” in Judd Marmor (ed.), Sexual (1986), “Feminist Politics: What’s Home Got to
Inversion: 83—107 (New York: Basic Books). Do with It?” in Teresa de Lauretis (ed.), Feminist
(1967), “The Homosexual Conununity” in Studies/Critical Studies: 191—212 (Bloomington:
John H. Gagnon and William Simon (eds), Sexual Indiana University Press).
Deviance: 167—84 (New York: Harper & Row). Marx, Karl (1963), The 18th Brumaire of Louis
hooks, bell (1981), Ain’t I a Woman: Black Women Bonaparte (New York: International Publishers).
and Feminism (Boston: South End Press). McCoy, Sherry and Maureen Hicks (1979), “A
Hull, Gloria T., Patricia Bell Scott, and Barbara Smith Psychological Retrospective on Power in the Con
(eds) (1982), All the Women Are White, All the temporary Lesbian-Feminist Community,” Fron
Blacks Are Men, But Some of Us Are Brave: Black tiers 4:3: 65—9.
Women’s Studies (Old Westbury, NY: Feminist McDonald, Gary J. (1982), “Individual Differences
Press). in the Coming Out Process for Gay Men: Implica
Joseph, Gloria I. and Jill Lewis (1981), Common tions for Theoretical Models,” Journal of Homo
Differences: Conflicts in Black and White Femin sexuality 8:1: 47—60.
ist Perspectives (Garden City, NY: Anchor/ Moraga, Cherrie and Gloria Anzaldiia (1981), This
Doubleday). Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical
 “FAMILIES WE CHOOSE” 411

Women of Color (Watertown, MA: Persephone Arbor: University of Michigan Press).

Press). Simon, William and John H. Gagnon (1967), “The
Murray, Stephen 0. (1979), “The Institutional Elab Lesbians: A Preliminary Overview,” in John H.
oration of a Quasi-Ethnic Community,” Inter Gagnon and William Simon (eds), Sexual Devi
national Review ofModern Sociology 9: 165—77. ance: 247—82 (New York: Harper & Row).
Newton, Esther (1979), Mother Camp: Female Smith, Barbara (ed.) (1983), Home Girls: A Black
Impersonators in America (Chicago: University of Feminist Anthology (New York: Kitchen Table:
Chicago Press). Women of Color Press).
Omi, Michael and Howard Winant (1983), “By the Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll (1975), “The Female
Rivers of Babylon: Race in the United States, Part World of Love and Ritual: Relations Between
Two,” Socialist Review 72: 35—6 8. Women in Nineteenth-Century America,” Signs
Pleck, Elizabeth H. and Joseph H. Pleck (eds) (1980), 1:1: 1—30.
The American Man (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Stack, Carol B. (1974), All Our Kin: Strategies for
Prentice-Hall). Survival in a Black Community (New York:
Pratt, Mary Louise (1977), Toward a Speech Act Harper & Row).
Theory of Literary Discourse (Bloomington: Thorne, Barrie with Marilyn Yalom (eds) (1982),
Indiana University Press). Rethinking the Family: Some Feminist Questions
Pratt, Minnie Bruce (1984), “Identity: Skin Blood (New York: Longman).
Heart,” in Elly Bulkin, Minnie Bruce Pratt, and Turner, Victor (1969), The Ritual Process: Structure
Barbara Smith (eds), Yours in Struggle: Three and Anti-Structure (Ithaca: Cornell University
Feminist Perspectives on Anti-Semitism and Press).
Racism: 11—63 (New York: Long Haul Press). Varenne, Hervê (1977), Americans Together: Sruc
Rabinow, Paul (1977), Reflections on Fieldwork in tured Diversity in a Midwestern Town (New
Morocco (Berkeley: University of California York: Teachers College Press).
Press). Vigil, James Diego (1988), Barrio Gangs: Street Life
Rapp, Rayna (1987), “Toward a Nuclear Freeze? The and Identity in Southern California (Austin: Uni
Gender Politics of Euro-American Kinship Analy versity of Texas Press).
sis,” in Jane Fishburne Collier and Sylvia Junko Warner, W. Lloyd et at. (1963), Yankee City (New
Yanagisako (eds), Gender and Kinship: Essays Haven: Yale University Press).
Toward a Unified Analysis: 119—31 (Stanford: Warren, Carol A. B. (1974), Identity and Community
Stanford University Press). in the Gay World (New York: Wiley).
Read, Kenneth E. (1980), Other Voices: The Style of Weston, Kathleen M. and Lisa B. Rofel (1985),
a Male Homosexual Tavern (Novato, CA: Chan “Sexuality, Class, and Conflict in a Lesbian Work
dler & Sharp). place,” in Estelle B. Freedman, Barbara C. Gelpi,
Reagon, Bernice Johnson (1983), “Coalition Politics: Susan L. Johnson and Kathleen M. Weston (eds),
Turning the Century,” in Barbara Smith (ed.), The Lesbian Issue: Essays from SIGNS: 199—222
Home Girls: A Black Feminist Anthology: (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
356—68 (New York: Kitchen Table: Women of Wolf, Deborah Goleman (1979), The Lesbian Com
Color Press). munity (Berkeley: University of California Press).
Rich, Adrienne (1980), “Compulsory Heterosexual Yanagisako, Sylvia J. (1978), “Variance in American
ity and Lesbian Existence,” Signs 5: 631—60. Kinship: Implications for Cultural Analysis,”
Riley, Claire (1988), “American Kinship: A Lesbian American Ethnologist 5:1: 15—29.
Account,” Feminist Studies 8:2: 75—94. (1985), Transforming the Past: Tradition and
Rodgers, Nile and Bernard Edwards (1979), We Are Kinship among Japanese Americans (Stanford:
Family, performed by Sister Sledge (Cotillion Stanford University Press).
Records, SD5209 stereo). Zimmerman, Bonnie (1985), “The Politics of Trans
Schneider, David M. (1968), American Kinship: A literation: Lesbian Personal Narratives,” in Estelle
Cultural Account (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- B. Freedman, Barbara C. Gelpi, Susan L. Johnson,
Hail). and Kathleen M. Weston (eds), The Lesbian Issue:
Schneider, David M. and Raymond T. Smith (1978), Essays from SIGNS: 27—42 (Chicago: University
Class Differences in American Kinship (Ann of Chicago Press).