Gay rights demonstration in New York City, 1976.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender social movements share inter-related goals of social acceptance of sexual and gender minorities. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people and their allies have a long history of campaigning for what is generally called LGBT rights, also called gay rights and gay and lesbian rights. Various communities have worked not only together, but also independent of each other in various configurations including gay liberation, lesbian feminism, the queer movement and transgender activism. There is no one organization that represents all LGBT people and their interests, although there are two organizations that are inclusive of many of the LGBT community issues: InterPride by coordinating and networking gay pride events worldwide, and International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC), which addresses human rights violations against LGBT and HIV-positive people and works with the United Nations.

A commonly stated goal is social equality for LGBT people; some have also focused on building LGBT communities, or worked towards liberation for the broader society from sexual oppression.^[1] LGBT movements organized today are made up of a wide range of political activism and cultural activity, such as lobbying and street marches; social groups, support groups and community events; magazines, films and literature; academic research and writing; and even business activity.

Workers of the Taiwan Tongzhi Hotline Association participating in 2005 Taiwan Pride parade in Taipei.

Overview[link]

Sociologist Mary Bernstein writes: "For the lesbian and gay movement, then, cultural goals include (but are not limited to) challenging dominant constructions of masculinity and femininity, homophobia, and the primacy of the gendered heterosexual nuclear family (heteronormativity). Political goals include changing laws and policies in order to gain new rights, benefits, and protections from harm."^[2] Bernstein emphasizes that activists seek both types of goals in both the civil and political spheres.

As with other social movements, there is also conflict within and between LGBT movements, especially about strategies for change and debates over exactly who comprises the constituency that these movements represent. There is debate over to what extent lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgendered people, intersexed people and others share common interests and a need to work together. Leaders of the lesbian and gay movement of the 1970s, 80s and 90s often attempted to hide masculine lesbians, feminine gay men, transgendered people, and bisexuals from the public eye, creating internal divisions within LGBT communities.^[3]

LGBT movements have often adopted a kind of identity politics that sees gay, bisexual and/or transgender people as a fixed class of people; a minority group or groups. Those using this approach aspire to liberal political goals of freedom and equal opportunity, and aim to join the political mainstream on the same level as other groups in society.^[4] In arguing that sexual orientation and gender identity are innate and cannot be consciously changed, attempts to change gay, lesbian and bisexual people into heterosexuals ("conversion therapy") are generally opposed by the LGBT community. Such attempts are often based in religious beliefs that perceive gay, lesbian and bisexual activity as immoral.

However, others within LGBT movements have criticised identity politics as limited and flawed, elements of the queer movement have argued that the categories of gay and lesbian are restrictive, and attempted to deconstruct those categories, which are seen to "reinforce rather than challenge a cultural system that will always mark the nonheterosexual as inferior."^[5]

After the French Revolution the anticlerical feeling in Catholic countries coupled with the liberalizing effect of the Napoleonic Code made it possible to sweep away sodomy laws. However, in Protestant countries, where the tyranny of the church was less severe, there was no general reaction against statutes that were religious in origin. As a result, many of those countries retained their statutes on sodomy until late in the 20th century. The prominent Nazi jurist Rudolf Klare argued for the moral superiority of harsh anti-homosexual Teutonic traditions (such as Germany, England and American states) over Latin countries (such as France, Spain, Italy, and Poland) which no longer punished homosexual acts.^[6]

History[link]

Before 1860[link]

In eighteenth and nineteenth century Europe, same-sex sexual behaviour and cross-dressing were widely considered to be socially unacceptable, and were serious crimes under sodomy and sumptuary laws. There were, however, some exceptions. For example, in the 17th century cross dressing was common in plays, as, for example, evident in the content of many of William Shakespeare's plays (and by the actors in the actual performances, since female roles in Elizabethan Theater were always performed by males, usually prepubescent boys). And Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's opera "Apollo et Hyacinthus" was performed by males only, although the libretto differed from the original text of Ovidius to reduce homosexual relations among Apollon, Hyacinthus, and Zephyrus.

Thomas Cannon wrote what may be the earliest published defence of homosexuality in English, Ancient and Modern Pederasty Investigated and Exemplify'd (1749). Social reformer Jeremy Bentham wrote the first known argument for homosexual law reform in England around 1785, at a time when the legal penalty for buggery was death by hanging.^[7] However, he feared reprisal, and his powerful essay was not published until 1978.

The emerging currents of secular humanist thought which had inspired Bentham also informed the French Revolution, and when the newly-formed National Constituent Assembly began drafting the policies and laws of the new republic in 1792, groups of militant 'sodomite-citizens' in Paris petitioned the Assemblée nationale, the governing body of the French Revolution, for freedom and recognition.^[8] In 1791 France became the first nation to decriminalise homosexuality, probably thanks in part to the homosexual Jean Jacques Régis de Cambacérès who was one of the authors of the Napoleonic code.

In 1830, the new Penal Code of the Brazilian Empire did not repeat the title XIII of fifth book of the "Ordenações Philipinas", which made sodomy a crime.

In 1833, an anonymous English-language writer wrote a poetic defence of Captain Nicholas Nicholls, who had been sentenced to death in London for sodomy:

Whence spring these inclinations, rank and strong?

And harming no one, wherefore call them wrong?^[8]

Three years later in Switzerland, Heinrich Hoessli published the first volume of Eros: Die Männerliebe der Griechen ("Eros: The Male-love of the Greeks"), another defence of same-sex love.^[8]

During that period, Poland never criminalized homosexuality. 18th century Poland was marked by an Enlightenment-driven tolerant attitude to sexuality, with public figures reported to engage in homosexual activities or transvestitism. Such "scandalous" events drew public attention, but did not result in prosecution. One example is Poland's last king, Stanislaw August Poniatowski, who was said to have slept with the British ambassador in his youth. After the partitions of Poland Polish territories came under control of the Russian Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Kingdom of Prussia; the law of those countries ruled homosexual acts illegal. Nevertheless, prominent figures were known to form homosexual relationships, including Narcyza Żmichowska (1819–1876), a writer and founder of the Polish feminist movement, who used her private experiences in her writing.^[9]

1860–1944[link]

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2009)

Karl Heinrich Ulrichs, German gay rights activist of the 1860s

From the 1870s, social reformers in other countries had begun to defend homosexuality, but their identities were kept secret. A secret British society called the "Order of Chaeronea" campaigned for the legalisation of homosexuality, and counted playwright Oscar Wilde among its members in the last decades of the 19th century.^[10] In the 1890s, English socialist poet Edward Carpenter and Scottish anarchist John Henry Mackay wrote in defense of same-sex love and androgyny; Carpenter and British homosexual rights advocate John Addington Symonds contributed to the development of Havelock Ellis's groundbreaking book Sexual Inversion, which called for tolerance towards "inverts" and was suppressed when first published in England.

In Europe and America, a broader movement of "free love" was also emerging from the 1860s among first-wave feminists and radicals of the libertarian left. They critiqued Victorian sexual morality and the traditional institutions of family and marriage that were seen to enslave women. Some advocates of free love in the early 20th century, including Russian anarchist and feminist Emma Goldman, also spoke in defence of same-sex love and challenged repressive legislation.

In 1897, German doctor and writer Magnus Hirschfeld formed the Scientific-Humanitarian Committee to campaign publicly against the notorious law "Paragraph 175", which made sex between men illegal. Adolf Brand later broke away from the group, disagreeing with Hirschfeld's medical view of the "intermediate sex", seeing male-male sex as merely an aspect of manly virility and male social bonding. Brand was the first to use "outing" as a political strategy, claiming that German Chancellor Bernhard von Bülow engaged in homosexual activity.

May 14, 1928 issue of German lesbian periodical Die Freundin (The Girlfriend).

The 1901 book Sind es Frauen? Roman über das dritte Geschlecht (Are These Women? Novel about the Third Sex) by Aimée Duc was as much a political treatise as a novel, criticising pathological theories of homosexuality and gender inversion in women.^[11] Anna Rüling, delivering a public speech in 1904 at the request of Hirschfeld, became the first female Uranian activist. Rüling, who also saw "men, women, and homosexuals" as three distinct genders, called for an alliance between the women's and sexual reform movements, but this speech is her only known contribution to the cause. Women only began to join the previously male-dominated sexual reform movement around 1910 when the German government tried to expand Paragraph 175 to outlaw sex between women. Heterosexual feminist leader Helene Stöcker became a prominent figure in the movement. Friedrich Radszuweit published LGBT literature and magazines in Berlin (for example "Die Freundin").

Hirschfeld, whose life was dedicated to social progress for people who were transsexual, transvestite and homosexual, formed the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft (Institute for Sexology) in 1919. The institute conducted an enormous amount of research, saw thousands of transgender and homosexual clients at consultations, and championed a broad range of sexual reforms including sex education, contraception and women's rights. However, the gains made in Germany would soon be drastically reversed with the rise of Nazism, and the institute and its library were destroyed in 1933. The Swiss journal Der Kreis was the only part of the movement to continue through the Nazi era.

The Russian Revolution of 1917 decriminalised homosexuality and recognised same-sex marriage.^{[citation needed]} This was a remarkable step in Russia of the time – which was very backward economically and socially, and where many conservative attitudes towards sexuality prevailed. This step was part of a larger project of freeing sexual relationships and expanding women's rights – including legalising abortion, granting divorce on demand, equal rights for women, and attempts to socialise house-work. With the era of Stalin, however, Russia reverted all these progressive measures – re-criminalising homosexuality and imprisoning gay men and banning abortion.

In the United States, several secret or semi-secret groups were formed explicitly to advance the rights of homosexuals as early as the turn of the 20th century, but little is known about them.^[12] A better documented group is Henry Gerber's The Society for Human Rights formed in Chicago in 1924, which was quickly suppressed.^[13]

After 1918, the newly independent Polish state returned to the Napoleonic tradition and the 1932 criminal code did not specify homosexuality as a crime. The police still used gross indecency laws instead to harass homosexuals, but the gay community in Poland thrived, with many important public figures, such as the composer Karol Szymanowski, the poet Bolesław Leśmian and the novelists Jarosław Iwaszkiewicz and Maria Dąbrowska being of homosexual orientation. The German Nazi invasion of 1939 put an end to it.^[9]

1945–1968[link]

Immediately following World War II, a number of homosexual rights groups came into being or were revived across the Western world, in Britain, France, Germany, Holland, the Scandinavian countries and the United States. These groups usually preferred the term "homophile" to "homosexual", emphasizing love over sex. The homophile movement began in the late 1940s with groups in the Netherlands and Denmark, and continued throughout the 1950s and 1960s with groups in Sweden, Norway, the United States, France, Britain and elsewhere. ONE, Inc., the first public homosexual organization in the U.S,^[14] was bankrolled by the wealthy transsexual man Reed Erickson. A U.S. transgender-rights journal, Transvestia: The Journal of the American Society for Equality in Dress, also published two issues in 1952.

The homophile movement lobbied to establish a prominent influence in political systems of social acceptability; radicals of the 1970s would later disparage the homophile groups for being assimilationist. Any demonstrations were orderly and polite.^[15] By 1969, there were dozens of homophile organizations and publications in the U.S,^[16] and a national organization had been formed, but they were largely ignored by the media. A 1965 gay march held in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia, according to some historians, marked the beginning of the modern gay rights movement. Meanwhile in San Francisco in 1966, transgender street prostitutes in the poor neighborhood of Tenderloin rioted against police harassment at a popular all-night restaurant, Gene Compton's Cafeteria.

After the introduction of Soviet-style communism to Poland, the 1948 law stated that the age of consent for all sexual acts, homosexual or heterosexual, was 15. However, the powerful influence of the Roman Catholic Church made open homosexuality a matter of scandal. While a gay poet Grzegorz Musiał could publish officially, Jerzy Andrzejewski's last novel dealing with the subject of homosexuality was censored. While the gay subculture grew, with official and underground press alike discussing the subject of homosexuality, the traditionally conservative attitudes towards sexuality were used by the secret police to harass and put pressure on individuals.^[9]

1969–1974[link]

The new social movements of the sixties, such as the Black Power and anti-Vietnam war movements in the U.S, the May 1968 insurrection in France, and Women's Liberation throughout the Western world, inspired some LGBT activists to become more radical,^[15] and the Gay Liberation Movement emerged towards the end of the decade. This new radicalism is often attributed to the Stonewall riots of 1969, when a group of transsexual, butch/femme lesbians, drag queens and gay male patrons at a bar in New York resisted a police raid.^[13]

Immediately after Stonewall, such groups as the Gay Liberation Front (GLF) and the Gay Activists' Alliance (GAA) were formed. Their use of the word "gay" represented a new unapologetic defiance — as an antonym for "straight" ('respectable sexual behaviour'), it encompassed a range of non-normative sexualities and gender expressions, such as transgender street prostitutes, and sought ultimately to free the bisexual potential in everyone, rendering obsolete the categories of homosexual and heterosexual.^[17][18] According to Gay Lib writer Toby Marotta, "their Gay political outlooks were not homophile but liberationist".^[19] "Out, loud and proud", they engaged in colourful street theatre.^[20] The GLF’s "A Gay Manifesto" set out the aims for the fledgling gay liberation movement, and influential intellectual Paul Goodman published “The Politics of Being Queer” (1969).

Chapters of the GLF were established across the U.S. and in other parts of the Western world. The Front Homosexuel d'Action Révolutionnaire was formed in 1971 by lesbians who split from the Mouvement Homophile de France.

One of the values of the movement was gay pride. Within weeks of the Stonewall Riots, Craig Rodwell, proprietor of the Oscar Wilde Memorial Bookshop in lower Manhattan, was working to commemorate them by replacing the Annual Reminder, which had been held annually in at Independence Hall in Philadelphia since 1965, with a celebration of the Stonewall Riots. In September 1969, Rodwell and local lesbian allies led by Ellen Broidy, attended an Eastern Regional Conference of Homophile Organizations (ERCHO) meeting in Philadelphia and got it to vote to replace the Fourth of July Annual Reminder at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, which ERCHO had been sponsoring since 1965, with a first commemoration of the Stonewall Riots. Rodwell and the committee he assembled to organize this event spent the next nine months assembling the first end-of-June commemoration of the Stonewall Riots. Other liberation groups that had been formed during the previous year—-consecutively, the Gay Liberation Front, Queens, the Gay Activists Alliance, Radicalesbians, and Street Transvestites Action Revolutionaries (STAR)—-asked for an opportunity to hold officially recommended commemorative events of their own. Rodwell and his committee accommodated them by organizing the first Gay Pride Week. The secretary of their planning committee circulated copies of their meeting minutes to movement leaders in cities throughout the country. Los Angeles held a big parade on the first Gay Pride Day. Smaller demonstrations were held in San Francisco, Chicago, and Boston. (Toby Marotta).

Organized by an early GLF leader Brenda Howard, the Stonewall riots were commemorated by annual marches that became known as Gay pride parades. From 1970 activists protested the classification of homosexuality as a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association in their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, and in 1974 it was replaced with a category of "sexual orientation disturbance" then "ego-dystonic homosexuality", which was also deleted, although "gender identity disorder" remains.

In 1972, Sweden became first country in the world to allow people who were transsexual by legislation to surgically change their sex and provide free hormone replacement therapy. Sweden also permitted the age of consent for same-sex partners to be at age 15, making it equal for heterosexual couples.

1975–1986[link]

From the anarchistic Gay Liberation Movement of the early 1970s arose a more reformist and single-issue "Gay Rights Movement", which portrayed gays and lesbians as a minority group and used the language of civil rights — in many respects continuing the work of the homophile period.^[21] In Berlin, for example, the radical Homosexuelle Aktion Westberlin was eclipsed by the Allgemeine Homosexuelle Arbeitsgemeinschaft.^[22]

Gay and lesbian rights advocates argued that one’s sexual orientation does not reflect on one’s gender; that is, “you can be a man and desire a man... without any implications for your gender identity as a man,” and the same is true if you are a woman.^[23] Gays and lesbians were presented as identical to heterosexuals in all ways but private sexual practices, and butch "bar dykes" and flamboyant "street queens" were seen as negative stereotypes of lesbians and gays. Veteran activists such as Sylvia Rivera and Beth Elliot were sidelined or expelled because they were transgender.

In 1977, Harvey Milk was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors becoming the first openly gay man in the United States elected to public office. Milk was assassinated by a former city supervisor Dan White in 1978.

In 1977, a former Miss America contestant and orange juice spokesperson, Anita Bryant, began a campaign "Save Our Children", in Dade County, Florida (greater Miami), which proved to be a major set-back in the Gay Liberation movement. Essentially, she established an organization which put forth an amendment to the laws of the county which resulted in the firing of many public school teachers on the suspicion that they were homosexual.

In 1979, a number of people in Sweden called in sick with a case of being homosexual, in protest of homosexuality being classified as an illness. This was followed by an activist occupation of the main office of the National Board of Health and Welfare. Within a few months, Sweden became the first country in the world to remove homosexuality as an illness.^[24]

Lesbian feminism, which was most influential from the mid 1970s to the mid 1980s, encouraged women to direct their energies toward other women rather than men, and advocated lesbianism as the logical result of feminism.^[25] As with Gay Liberation, this understanding of the lesbian potential in all women was at odds with the minority-rights framework of the Gay Rights movement. Many women of the Gay Liberation movement felt frustrated at the domination of the movement by men and formed separate organisations; some who felt gender differences between men and women could not be resolved developed "lesbian separatism", influenced by writings such as Jill Johnston's 1973 book Lesbian Nation. Disagreements between different political philosophies were, at times, extremely heated, and became known as the lesbian sex wars,^[26] clashing in particular over views on sadomasochism, prostitution and transsexuality. The term "gay" came to be more strongly associated with homosexual males.

In Canada, the coming into effect of Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1985 saw a shift in the gay rights movement in Canada, as Canadian gays and lesbians moved from liberation to litigious strategies. Premised on Charter protections and on the notion of the immutability of homosexuality, judicial rulings rapidly advanced rights, including those that compelled the Canadian government to legalize same-sex marriage. It has been argued that while this strategy was extremely effective in advancing the safety, dignity and equality of Canadian homosexuals, its emphasis of sameness came at the expense of difference and may have undermined opportunities for more meaningful change.^[27]

The Rainbow flag

Mark Segal, an early member of Gay Liberation, has continued to pave the road of gay equality. Many [who?] refer to Mark Segal as the dean of American gay journalism. As a pioneer of the local gay press movement, he was one of the founders and former president of both The National Gay Press Association and the National Gay Newspaper Guild. He also is the founder and publisher of the award-winning Philadelphia Gay News (PGN). As a young gay activist, Segal understood the power of media. In 1973 Segal disrupted the CBS evening news with Walter Cronkite, an event covered in newspapers across the country and viewed by 60% of American households, many seeing or hearing about homosexuality for the first time. Before the networks agreed to put a stop to censorship and bias in the news division, Segal went on to disrupt The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson, and Barbara Walters on The Today Show. The trade newspaper Variety claimed that Segal had cost the industry $750,000 in production, tape delays and lost advertising revenue.^{[citation needed]}

Aside from publishing, Segal has also reported on gay life from far reaching places as Lebanon, Cuba, and East Berlin during the fall of the Berlin Wall. He and Bob Ross, former publisher of San Francisco's Bay Area Reporter represented the gay press and lectured in Moscow and St. Petersburg at Russia's first openly gay conference, referred to as Russia's Stonewall. He recently coordinated a network of local gay publications nationally to celebrate October as gay history month, with a combined print run reaching over a half million people. His determination to gain acceptance and respect for the gay press can be summed up by his 15 year battle to gain membership in the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association, one of the nation's oldest and most respected organizations for daily and weekly newspapers. The 15 year battled ended after the Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News and the Pittsburgh Post Gazette joined forces and called for PGN's membership. Today Segal sits on the Board of Directors of PNA. In 2005, he produced Philadelphia's official July 4 concert for a crowd estimated at 500,000 people. The star-studded show featured Sir Elton John, Pattie Labelle, Bryan Adams, and Rufus Wainwright. On a recent anniversary of PGN an editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer stated "Segal and PGN continue to step up admirably to the challenge set for newspapers by H.L. Menchen. "To afflict the comfortable and to comfort the afflicted."^{[citation needed]}

1987 – present[link]

Homosexual acts legal   Same-sex marriage   Other type of partnership (or unregistered cohabitation)   Marriage recognized but not performed   Same-sex unions not recognized

Homosexual acts illegal   Minimal penalty   Heavy penalty   Up to life in prison   Up to death Rings indicate local or case-by-case application.

---

• v
• t
• e

Some historians consider that a new era of the gay rights movement began in the 1980s with the emergence of AIDS, which decimated the leadership and shifted the focus for many.^[14] This era saw a resurgence of militancy with direct action groups like AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) (formed in 1987), and its offshoots Queer Nation (1990) and the Lesbian Avengers (1992). Some younger activists, seeing "gay and lesbian" as increasingly normative and politically conservative, began using queer as a defiant statement of all sexual minorities and gender variant people — just as the earlier liberationists had done with gay. Less confrontational terms that attempt to reunite the interests of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transpeople also became prominent, including various acronyms like LGBT, LGBTQ, and LGBTI, where the Q and I stand for Questioning and Intersex respectively.

In the 1990s, organizations began to spring up in non-western countries, such as Progay Philippines, which was founded in 1993 and organized the first Gay Pride march in Asia on June 26, 1994. In many countries, LGBT organizations remain illegal and transsexual, transgender and homosexual activists face extreme opposition from the state.^{[citation needed]} The 1990s also saw the emergence of many LGBT youth movements and organizations such as LGBT youth centers, Gay-straight alliances in high schools and youth specific activism such as the National Day of Silence. Colleges also became places of LGBT activism and support for activists and LGBT people in general, with many colleges opening LGBT Centers.^[28]

The 1990s also saw a rapid push of the transgender movements, while at the same time a sidelining of the identity of those who are transsexual. In the English-speaking world, Leslie Feinberg's, "Transgender Liberation: A Movement Whose Time Has Come — The Story of Ben Wells", published in 1992. In 1993 Cheryl Chase founded the Intersex Society of North America. Gender different peoples across the globe also formed minority rights movements – Hijra activists campaigned for recognition as a third sex in India and Travesti groups began to organize against police brutality across Latin America, while activists in the United States formed direct-confrontation groups such as Transexual Menace.

In many cases, LGBTI rights movements came to focus on questions of intersectionality, the interplay of oppressions arising from being both queer and underclass, colored, disabled, etc.

The Netherlands was the first country to allow same-sex marriage, in 2001. As of today, same-sex marriages are also recognized in Sweden, Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, Norway, South Africa, Spain, Portugal, Mexico, and Israel (though not performed there), along with six states in the United States: Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and New York, as well as the District of Columbia, and one in Brazil.^[29] During this same period, some municipalities have been enacting laws against homosexuality. E.g., Rhea County, Tennessee unsuccessfully tried to "ban homosexuals" in 2006.^[30]

In 2003, in the case Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court of the United States struck down sodomy laws in fourteen states, making consensual homosexual sex legal in all 50 states, a significant step forward in LGBT activism and one that had been fought for by activists since the inception of modern LGBT social movements^[31].

From 6 to 9 November 2006, The Yogyakarta Principles on application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity was adopted by international meeting of 29 specialists, International Commission of Jurists and International Service for Human Rights. On 13 December 2008, UN declaration on sexual orientation and gender identity was adopted by United Nations General Assembly. And on August 2010, Yogyakarta Principles in Action published "An Activist's Guide" for activists and human rights defenders.

On 22 October 2009, the assembly of the Church of Sweden, voted strongly in favour of giving its blessing to homosexual couples.,^[32] including the use of the term marriage, ("matrimony"). The new law was introduced on November 1, 2009 and is the first case in the world.

In 2010 in the U.S. an ad campaign was launched to inform people not to use the term "that's so gay" to mean "that's so stupid", due to the term's offensive nature.

On 11 June 2010, Iceland became the first country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage through a unanimous vote: 49-0.^[33]

On July 2010, Argentina became the first country in Latin America to legalize same-sex marriage.

On December 18, 2010, "Don't ask, don't tell," the 1993 law forbidding homosexual people from serving openly in the United States military, was repealed. This meant that gays and lesbians could now serve openly in the military without any fear of being discharged because of their sexual orientation.

In 2012, The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity issued a regulation to prohibit discrimination in federally-assisted housing programs. The new regulations ensure that the Department's core housing programs are open to all eligible persons, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Opposition[link]

LGBT movements are opposed by a variety of individuals and organizations.,^{[34][35][36][37][38]} They may have a personal, moral, political or religious objection to gay rights, homosexual relations or gay people. Opponents have said same-sex relationships are not marriages,^[39] that legalization of same-sex marriage will open the door for the legalization of polygamy,^[40] that it is unnatural^[41] and that it encourages unhealthy behavior.^[42][43] Some social conservatives believe that all sexual relationships with people other than an opposite-sex spouse undermines the traditional family^[44] and that children should be reared in homes with both a father and a mother.^[45][46] Since society has become more accepting of homosexuality, there has been the emergence of many groups that desire to end homosexuality; during the 1990s, one of the best known groups that was established with this goal is the ex-gay movement.

Some people worry that gay rights may conflict with individuals' freedom of speech,^{[47][48][49][50][51]} religious freedoms in the workplace,^[52][53] and the ability to run churches,^[54] charitable organizations^[55][56] and other religious organizations^[57] that hold opposing social and cultural views to LGBT rights. There is also concern that religious organizations might be forced to accept and perform same-sex marriages or risk losing their tax-exempt status.^{[58][59][60][61]}

Eric Rofes author of the book, A Radical Rethinking of Sexuality and Schooling: Status Quo or Status Queer?, argues that the inclusion of teachings on homosexuality in public schools will play an important role in transforming public ideas about lesbian and gay individuals.^[62] As a former teacher in the public school system, Rofes recounts how he was fired from his teaching position after making the decision to come out as gay. As a result of the stigma that he faced as a gay teacher he emphasizes the necessity of the public to take radical approaches to making significant changes in public attitudes about homosexuality.^[62] According to Rofes, radical approaches are grounded in the belief that "something fundamental needs to be transformed for authentic and sweeping changes to occur."The radical approaches proposed by Rofes have been met with strong opposition from anti-gay rights activists such as John Briggs. Former California senator, John Briggs proposed Proposition 6, a ballot initiative that would require that all California state public schools fire any gay or lesbian teachers or counselors, along with any faculty that displayed support for gay rights in an effort to prevent what he believe to be " the corruption of the children's minds".^[63] The exclusion of homosexuality from the sexual education curriculum, in addition to the absence of sexual counseling programs in public schools, has resulted in increased feelings of isolation and alienation for gay and lesbian students who desire to have gay counseling programs that will help them come to terms with their sexual orientation.^[62] Eric Rofes founder of youth homosexual programs, such as Out There and Committee for Gay Youth, stresses the importance of having support programs that help youth learn to identify with their sexual orientation.

David Campos, author of the book, Sex, Youth, and Sex Education: A Reference Handbook, illuminates the argument proposed by proponents of sexual education programs in public schools. Many gay rights supporters argue that teachings about the diverse sexual orientations that exist outside of heterosexuality are pertinent to creating students that are well informed about the world around them. However, Campos also acknowledges that the sex education curriculum alone cannot teach youth about factors associated with sexual orientation but instead he suggests that schools implement policies that create safe school learning environments and foster support for gay and lesbian, bisexual, and transgender youth.^[64] It is his belief that schools that provide unbiased, factual information about sexual orientation, along with supportive counseling programs for these homosexual youth will transform the way society treats homosexuality.^[64] Many opponents of LGBT social movements have attributed their indifference toward homosexuality as being a result of the immoral values that it may instill in children who are exposed to homosexual individuals.^[63] In opposition to this claim, many proponents of increased education about homosexuality suggest that educators should refrain from teaching about sexuality in schools entirely. In her book entitled "Gay and Lesbian Movement", Margaret Cruickshank provides statistical data from the Harris and Yankelvoich polls which confirmed that over 80% of American adults believe that students should be educated about sexuality within their public school. In addition, the poll also found that 75% of parents believe that homosexuality and abortion should be included in the curriculum as well. An assessment conducted on California public school systems discovered that only 2% of all parents actually disproved of their child being taught about sexuality in school.^[65]

It had been suggested that education has a positive impact on support for same sex marriage. African Americans statistically have lower rates of educational achievement, however, the education level of African Americans does not have as much significance on their attitude towards same-sex marriage as it does on white attitudes. Educational attainment among whites has a significant positive effect on support for same-sex marriage, whereas the direct effect of education among African Americans is less significant. The income levels of whites have a direct and positive correlation with support for same-sex marriage, but African American income level is not significantly associated with attitudes toward same-sex marriage.^[66]

Location also affects ideas towards same-sex marriage; residents of rural and southern areas are significantly more opposed to same-sex marriage in comparison to residents elsewhere. Women are consistently more supportive than men of LGBT rights, and individuals that are divorced or have never married are also more likely to grant marital rights to same-sex couples than married or widowed individuals. Also, white women are significantly more supportive than white men, but there are no gender discrepancies among African Americans. The year in which one was born is a strong indicator of attitude towards same-sex marriage—generations born after 1946 are considerably more supportive of same-sex marriage than older generations. Statistics show that African Americans are more opposed to same-sex marriage than any other ethnicity.^[67]

Studies show that Non-Protestants are much more likely to support same-sex unions than Protestants; 63% of African Americans claim that they are Baptist or Protestant, whereas only 30% of white Americans are. Religion, as measured by individuals’ religious affiliations, behaviors, and beliefs, has a lot of influence in structuring same-sex union attitudes and consistently influences opinions about homosexuality. The most liberal attitudes are generally reflected by Jews, liberal Protestants, and people who are not affiliated with religion. This is because many of their religious traditions have not “systematically condemned homosexual behaviors” in recent years. Moderate and tolerant attitudes are generally reflected by Catholics and moderate Protestants. And lastly, the most conservative views are held by Evangelical Protestants. Moreover, it is a tendency for one to be less tolerant of homosexuality if their social network is strongly tied to a religious congregation. Organized religion, especially Protestant and Baptist affiliations, espouse conservative views which traditionally denounce same-sex unions. Therefore, these congregations are more likely to hear messages of this nature. Polls have also indicated that the amount and level of personal contact that individuals have with homosexual individuals and traditional morality affects attitudes of same-sex marriage and homosexuality.^[68]

See also[link]

References[link]

External links[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: LGBT history by century

• Gay Civil Rights Organizations around the World
• Guide to the Alan Klein collection of archvial material related to the Gay-rights movement, housed in the Fales Library at NYU
• Gallagher, John & Chris Bull, , Perfect Enemies, 1996, Crown, 300 pp.
• Milligan, Don, The Politics of Homosexuality (1973)
• Norton, Rick, “The Suppression of Lesbian and Gay History”, February 12, 2005, updated April 5, 2005.
• Percy, William A., Review of “Before Stonewall: Activists for Gay and Lesbian Rights”, November 22, 2005. Accessed on 18 June 2006.
• Gerald Schoenewolf, "Gay Rights and Political Correctness: A Brief History"
• Spitzer, RL, "The diagnostic status of homosexuality in DSM-III: a reformulation of the issues." Am J Psychiatry. 1981 Feb;138(2):210-5.
• Antidiscrimination Legislation, April 1999, a worldwide summaryPDF (53.5 KiB) IGLHRC
• International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC)
• International Lesbian and Gay Association World Legal Survey (2000)
• Gay Rights Community Center (USA)
• Good As You "Gay & Lesbian Activism With A Sense of Humor"
• The Prague Post – New era for gay rights movement in the Czech Republic
• "Is That All There Is?: More to Gay Rights Than Marriage", The Indypendent, July 4, 2003
• "Police Brutality Strikes Fifth Anniversary of Sylvia Rivera Law Project" Indymedia, September 27, 2007
• History of Gay Bars in New York City
• Palestine and gay rights
• The Gay Civil Rights Movement Media Feed
• The Christian Democrats of America: position regarding Gay Rights
• Gay Rights Movement Confronts Teen Suicides, Homophobic Electioneering and Violent Attacks - video report by Democracy Now!

Further reading[link]

• John Lauritsen and David Thorstad. The Early Homosexual Rights Movement (1864–1935). Revised edition. 1974; Ojai, CA: Times Change Press, 1995. ISBN 0-87810-041-5
• Cante, Richard C. (March 2009). Gay Men and the Forms of Contemporary US Culture. London: Ashgate Publishing. ISBN 0-7546-7230-1. 
• Margaret Cruikshank. The Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement. New York: Routledge, Chapman and Hall, 1992. ISBN 0-415-90648-2
• Martin Duberman. Stonewall. New York: Plume, 1994. ISBN 0-452-27206-8
• David Eisenbach. "Gay Power: An American Revolution." New York: Carroll & Graf, 2006. ISBN 0-7867-1633-9
• Barry D. Adam. The Rise of a Gay and Lesbian Movement. Revised edition. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1995. ISBN 0-8057-3864-9
• Warren Johansson and William Armstrong Percy, Outing: Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence. New York and London: Haworth Press, 1994.
• Robert Aldrich, (ed.) Gay Life and Culture: A World History. London: Thames & Hudson, 2006.
• David Carter [MA]. Stonewall: the riots that sparked the Gay revolution; New York, NY; St Martin’s Press; 2004. ISBN 0-312-20025-0
• Neil Miller; Out of the Past: Gay and Lesbian history from 1869 to the present; New York, NY; Alyson Books; 2006. ISBN 0-7394-6463-0
• Thomas C. Caramagno. "Irreconcilable Differences? Intellectual Stalemate in the Gay Rights Debate." Westport, CT: Praeger, 2002. ISBN 0-275-97721-8
• Scott Gunther. "The Elastic Closet: A History of Homosexuality in France, 1942–present" Book about the history of homosexual movements in France (sample chapter available online). New York: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2009. ISBN 0-230-22105-X

v t e Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) topics   Academic fields Discourse LGBT topics in education Gender studies Lavender linguistics Lesbian feminism LGBT literature LGBT/Queer studies Queer theory Transfeminism   Community Culture Anthems Bars Bisexual community Coming out Community center Drag king Drag queen Gay friendly Icons Lesbian utopia Literature Music Neighborhoods Organizations Periodicals Pride Pride parade Religious groups Rodeos Same-sex relationships Slang List of slang Slogans Symbols Tourism Category:LGBT culture   Gender identities Sexual identities Gender identities Male Female Androgyne Bigender Boi Cisgender Genderqueer Girlfag and guydyke Intersex Pangender Transgender Womyn Third sex / Third gender Akava'ine Eunuch Fa'afafine Fakaleiti Femminiello Hijra Kathoey Khanith Mahu Mukhannathun Muxe Bissu Two-Spirit Hermaphrodite Sexual orientation identities Sexual orientations Asexual Bisexual Heterosexual Homosexual Ex-gay Ex-ex-gay Pansexual Polyamorous Banjee Gay Lesbian Queer Same gender loving Non-heterosexual Object sexuality Questioning Related Gender roles Human female sexuality Human male sexuality Sexuality and gender identity-based cultures   History LGBT history History of lesbianism LGBT History Timeline Social movements History of Christianity and homosexuality History of same-sex unions Pederasty Category:LGBT history Pre-modern era Adelphopoiesis Homosexuality in ancient Greece Homosexuality in ancient Rome Homosexuality in ancient Egypt Homosexuality in ancient Peru Homosexuality in medieval Europe 16th to 19th century Mollies Urnings 20th century Gay Liberation Homosexuals in Nazi Germany and the Holocaust Inversion Sea queens Stonewall riots Festival of Light action White Night riots Queer theory 21st century Same-sex marriage Post-Queer Theory   Rights Legal issues LGBT rights by country or territory Africa Americas Asia Europe Oceania List of LGBT rights articles by region LGBT rights topics Adoption Civil unions and partnerships Hate crime laws Legal aspects of transsexualism Military service Parenting Same-sex marriage (Status Timeline) Socialism Sodomy laws United Nations/Yogyakarta Principles LGBT rights movements Gay Liberation LGBT rights groups LGBT rights activists   Sexual orientations – Medicine, science and sexology Biology Birth order Demographics Environment Heterosexual–homosexual continuum Homosexuality and psychology Kinsey scale Klein Grid Mental roots Neuroscience Prenatal hormones Sexual orientation change efforts Sexual orientation identity Timeline of sexual orientation and medicine   Social attitudes Prejudice Violence Social attitudes Anti-LGBT slogans Heteronormativity Gay panic LGBT rights opposition LGBT stereotypes Religion and homosexuality Transgenderism and religion Prejudice & Discrimination AIDS stigma Biphobia Heterosexism Homophobia Internalized homophobia Lesbophobia Riddle scale Transphobia Violence against LGBT people Corrective rape Gay bashing History of violence in the UK History of violence in the US Significant acts of violence against LGBT people Trans-bashing Unlawfully killed transgender people LGBT suicides Category:LGBT LGBT portal

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2010)

The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with USA and Europe and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (May 2012)

Sociology
Outline
Theory · History
Positivism · Antipositivism Functionalism · Conflict theory Middle-range · Mathematical Critical theory · Socialization Structure and agency
Research methods
Quantitative · Qualitative Historical · Computational Ethnographic · Network analytic
Topics · Subfields
Cities · Class · Crime · Culture Deviance · Demography · Education Economy · Environment · Family Gender · Health · Industry · Internet Knowledge · Law · Medicine Politics · Mobility · Race and ethnicity Rationalization · Religion · Science Secularization · Social networks Social psychology · Stratification
Browse
Portal Category tree · Lists Journals · Sociologists Article index
v t e

Social movements are a type of group action. They are large informal groupings of individuals or organizations which focus on specific political or social issues. In other words, they carry out, resist or undo a social change.

Modern Western social movements became possible through education (the wider dissemination of literature), and increased mobility of labor due to the industrialization and urbanization of 19th century societies. It is sometimes argued that the freedom of expression, education and relative economic independence prevalent in the modern Western culture are responsible for the unprecedented number and scope of various contemporary social movements. However, others point out that many of the social movements of the last hundred years grew up, like the Mau Mau in Kenya, to oppose Western colonialism. Either way, social movements have been and continued to be closely connected with democratic political systems. Occasionally, social movements have been involved in democratizing nations, but more often they have flourished after democratization. Over the past 200 years, they have become part of a popular and global expression of dissent.^[1]

Modern movements often utilize technology and the internet to mobilize people globally. Adapting to communication trends is a common theme among successful movements.

Political science and sociology have developed a variety of theories and empirical research on social movements. For example, some research in political science highlights the relation between popular movements and the formation of new political parties as well as discussing the function of social movements in relation to agenda setting and influence on politics.

Definition[link]

Charles Tilly defines social movements as a series of contentious performances, displays and campaigns by which ordinary people make collective claims on others .^[1] For Tilly, social movements are a major vehicle for ordinary people's participation in public politics.^[2] He argues that there are three major elements to a social movement:^[1]

1. Campaigns: a sustained, organized public effort making collective claims of target authorities;
2. Repertoire (repertoire of contention): employment of combinations from among the following forms of political action: creation of special-purpose associations and coalitions, public meetings, solemn processions, vigils, rallies, demonstrations, petition drives, statements to and in public media, and pamphleteering; and
3. WUNC displays: participants' concerted public representation of worthiness, unity, numbers, and commitments on the part of themselves and/or their constituencies.

Sidney Tarrow defines a social movement as collective challenges [to elites, authorities, other groups or cultural codes] by people with common purposes and solidarity in sustained interactions with elites, opponents and authorities. He specifically distinguishes social movements from political parties and advocacy groups.^[3]

History[link]

American Civil Rights Movement is one of the most famous social movements of the 20th century. Here, Martin Luther King is giving his "I Have a Dream" speech, in front of the Lincoln Memorial during the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom

The term "social movements" was introduced in 1848 by the German Sociologist Lorenz von Stein in his book Socialist and Communist Movements since the Third French Revolution (1848) in which he introduced the term "social movement" into scholarly discussions - actually depicting in this way political movements fighting for the social rights understood as welfare rights.

Tilly argues that the early growth of social movements was connected to broad economic and political changes including parliamentarization, market capitalization, and proletarianization.^[1] Political movements that evolved in late 18th century, like those connected to the French Revolution and the Polish Constitution of May 3, 1791 are among the first documented social movements, although Tilly notes that the British abolitionist movement has "some claim" to be the first social movement (becoming one between the sugar boycott of 1791 and the second great petition drive of 1806). The labor movement and socialist movement of the late 19th century are seen as the prototypical social movements, leading to the formation of communist and social democratic parties and organisations. From 1815, Britain after victory in the Napoleonic Wars entered a period of social upheaval. Similar tendencies were seen in other countries as pressure for reform continued, for example in Russia with the Russian Revolution of 1905 and of 1917, resulting in the collapse of the Russian State around the end of the First World War.

In 1945, Britain after victory in the Second World War entered a period of radical reform and change. In the post-war period, women's rights, gay rights, peace, civil rights, anti-nuclear and environmental movements emerged, often dubbed the New Social Movements ^[4] They led, among other things, to the formation of green parties and organisations influenced by the new left. Some find in the end of the 1990s the emergence of a new global social movement, the anti-globalization movement. Some social movement scholars posit that with the rapid pace of globalization, the potential for the emergence of new type of social movement is latent—they make the analogy to national movements of the past to describe what has been termed a global citizens movement.

Key processes[link]

Several key processes lie behind the history of social movements. Urbanization led to larger settlements, where people of similar goals could find each other, gather and organize. This facilitated social interaction between scores of people, and it was in urban areas that those early social movements first appeared. Similarly, the process of industrialization which gathered large masses of workers in the same region explains why many of those early social movements addressed matters such as economic wellbeing, important to the worker class. Many other social movements were created at universities, where the process of mass education brought many people together. With the development of communication technologies, creation and activities of social movements became easier - from printed pamphlets circulating in the 18th century coffeehouses to newspapers and Internet, all those tools became important factors in the growth of the social movements. Finally, the spread of democracy and political rights like the freedom of speech made the creation and functioning of social movements much easier.

Types of social movement[link]

Types of social movements.^[5]

Sociologists distinguish between several types of social movement:

• Scope:
  • reform movement - movements advocating changing some norms or laws. Examples of such a movement would include a trade union with a goal of increasing workers rights, a green movement advocating a set of ecological laws, or a movement supporting introduction of a capital punishment or the right to abortion. Some reform movements may aim for a change in custom and moral norms, such as condemnation of pornography or proliferation of some religion.
  • radical movement - movements dedicated to changing value systems in a fundamental way. Examples would include the American Civil Rights Movement which demanded full civil rights and equality under the law to all Americans, regardless of race; the Polish Solidarity (Solidarność) movement which demanded the transformation of a Stalinist political and economic system into a democracy; or the South African shack dwellers' movement Abahlali baseMjondolo which demands the full inclusion of shack dwellers into the life of cities.
• Type of change:
  • innovation movement - movements which want to introduce or change particular norms, values, etc. The singularitarianism movement advocating deliberate action to effect and ensure the safety of the technological singularity is an example of an innovation movement.
  • conservative movement - movements which want to preserve existing norms, values, etc. For example, the anti-technology 19th century Luddites movement or the modern movement opposing the spread of the genetically modified food could be seen as conservative movements in that they aimed to fight specific technological changes.
• Targets:
  • group-focus movements - focused on affecting groups or society in general, for example, advocating the change of the political system. Some of these groups transform into or join a political party, but many remain outside the reformist party political system.
  • individual-focused movements - focused on affecting individuals. Most religious movements would fall under this category.
• Methods of work:
  • peaceful movements - various movements which use nonviolent means of protest as part of a campaign of nonviolent resistance, also often called civil resistance. The American Civil Rights movement, Polish Solidarity movement or the nonviolent, civil disobedience-orientated wing of the Indian independence movement would fall into this category.^[6]
  • violent movements - various movements which resort to violence; they are usually armed and in extreme cases can take a form of a paramilitary or terrorist organization. Examples: the Rote Armee Fraktion, Al-Qaida.
• Old and new:
  • old movements - movements for change have existed for many centuries. Most of the oldest recognized movements, dating to late 18th and 19th centuries, fought for specific social groups, such as the working class, peasants, whites, aristocrats, Protestants, men. They were usually centered around some materialistic goals like improving the standard of living or, for example, the political autonomy of the working class.
  • new movements - movements which became dominant from the second half of the 20th century - like the feminist movement, pro-choice movement, civil rights movement, environmental movement, free software movement, gay rights movement, peace movement, anti-nuclear movement, alter-globalization movement, etc. Sometimes they are known as new social movements. They are usually centered around issues that go beyond but are not separate from class.
• Range:
  • global movements - social movements with global (transnational) objectives and goals. Movements such as the first (where Marx and Bakunin met), second, third and fourth internationals, the World Social Forum, the Peoples' Global Action and the anarchist movement seek to change society at a global level.
  • local movements - most of the social movements have a local scope.^[7] They are focused on local or regional objectives, such as protecting a specific natural area, lobbying for the lowering of tolls in a certain motorway, or preserving a building about to be demolished for gentrification and turning it into a social center.

Identification of supporters[link]

A difficulty for scholarship of movements is that for most of them, neither insiders to a movement nor outsiders apply consistent labels or even descriptive phrases. Unless there is a single leader who does that, or a formal system of membership agreements, activists will typically use diverse labels and descriptive phrases that require scholars to discern when they are referring to the same or similar ideas, declare similar goals, adopt similar programs of action, and use similar methods. There can be great differences in the way that is done, to recognize who is and who is not a member or an allied group:

• Insiders: Often exaggerate the level of support by considering people supporters whose level of activity or support is weak, but also reject those that outsiders might consider supporters because they discredit the cause, or are even seen as adversaries.
• Outsiders: Those not supporters who may tend to either underestimate or overestimate the level or support or activity of elements of a movement, by including or excluding those that insiders would exclude or include.

It is often outsiders rather than insiders that apply the identifying labels for a movement, which the insiders then may or may not adopt and use to self-identify. For example, the label for the levellers political movement in 17th century England was applied to them by their antagonists, as a term of disparagement. Yet admirers of the movement and its aims later came to use the term, and it is the term by which they are known to history.

Caution must always be exercised in any discussion of amorphous phenomena such as movements to distinguish between the views of insiders and outsiders, supporters and antagonists, each of whom may have their own purposes and agendas in characterization or mischaracterization of it.

Dynamics of social movements[link]

Stages of social movements.^[8]

Social movements are not eternal. They have a life cycle: they are created, they grow, they achieve successes or failures and eventually, they dissolve and cease to exist.

They are more likely to evolve in the time and place which is friendly to the social movements: hence their evident symbiosis with the 19th century proliferation of ideas like individual rights, freedom of speech and civil disobedience. Social movements occur in liberal and authoritarian societies but in different forms. However there must always be polarizing differences between groups of people: in case of 'old movements', they were the poverty and wealth gaps. In case of the 'new movements', they are more likely to be the differences in customs, ethics and values. Finally, the birth of a social movement needs what sociologist Neil Smelser calls an initiating event: a particular, individual event that will begin a chain reaction of events in the given society leading to the creation of a social movement. For example, American Civil Rights movement grew on the reaction to black woman, Rosa Parks, riding in the whites-only section of the bus (although she was not acting alone or spontaneously—typically activist leaders lay the groundwork behind the scenes of interventions designed to spark a movement). The Polish Solidarity movement, which eventually toppled the communist regimes of Eastern Europe, developed after trade union activist Anna Walentynowicz was fired from work. The South African shack dwellers' movement Abahlali baseMjondolo grew out of a road blockade in response to the sudden selling off of a small piece of land promised for housing to a developer. Such an event is also described as a volcanic model - a social movement is often created after a large number of people realize that there are others sharing the same value and desire for a particular social change.

One of the main difficulties facing the emerging social movement is spreading the very knowledge that it exists. Second is overcoming the free rider problem - convincing people to join it, instead of following the mentality 'why should I trouble myself when others can do it and I can just reap the benefits after their hard work'.

Many social movements are created around some charismatic leader, i.e. one possessing charismatic authority. After the social movement is created, there are two likely phases of recruitment. The first phase will gather the people deeply interested in the primary goal and ideal of the movement. The second phase, which will usually come after the given movement had some successes and is trendy; it would look good on a résumé. People who join in this second phase will likely be the first to leave when the movement suffers any setbacks and failures.

Eventually, the social crisis can be encouraged by outside elements, like opposition from government or other movements. However, many movements had survived a failure crisis, being revived by some hardcore activists even after several decades.

Social movement theories[link]

Sociologists have developed several theories related to social movements [Kendall, 2005]. Some of the better-known approaches are outlined below. Chronologically they include:

• collective behavior/collective action theories (1950s)
• relative deprivation theory (1960s)
• marxist theory (1880s)
• value-added theory (1960s)
• resource mobilization (1970s)
• frame analysis theory (1980s) (closely related to social constructionist theory)
• new social movement theory (1980s)
• political process theory (1980s)

Deprivation theory[link]

Deprivation theory argues that social movements have their foundations among people who feel deprived of some good(s) or resource(s). According to this approach, individuals who are lacking some good, service, or comfort are more likely to organize a social movement to improve (or defend) their conditions.^[9]

There are two significant problems with this theory. First, since most people feel deprived at one level or another almost all the time, the theory has a hard time explaining why the groups that form social movements do when other people are also deprived. Second, the reasoning behind this theory is circular - often the only evidence for deprivation is the social movement. If deprivation is claimed to be the cause but the only evidence for such is the movement, the reasoning is circular.^[10]

Marxist theory[link]

Derived from Karl Marx, Marxism as an ideology and theory of social change has had an immense impact on the practice and the analysis of social movements. Marxism arose from an analysis of movements structured by conflicts between industrial workers and their capitalist employers in the 19th century. In the twentieth century a variety of neo-Marxist theories have been developed that have opened themselves to adding questions of race, gender, environment, and other issues to an analysis centered in (shifting) political economic conditions. Class-based movements, both revolutionary and labor-reformist, have always been stronger in Europe than in the US and so has Marxist theory as a tool for understanding social movements, but important Marxist movements and theories have also evolved in the US. Marxist approaches have been and remain influential ways of understanding the role of political economy and class differences as key forces in many historical and current social movements, and they continue to challenge approaches that are limited by their inability to imagine serious alternatives to consumer capitalist social structures.

Mass society theory[link]

Mass society theory argues that social movements are made up of individuals in large societies who feel insignificant or socially detached. Social movements, according to this theory, provide a sense of empowerment and belonging that the movement members would otherwise not have.^[11]

Very little support has been found for this theory. Aho (1990), in his study of Idaho Christian Patriotism, did not find that members of that movement were more likely to have been socially detached. In fact, the key to joining the movement was having a friend or associate who was a member of the movement.

Structural strain theory[link]

Social strain theory, also known as value-added theory, proposes six factors that encourage social movement development:^[12]

1. structural conduciveness - people come to believe their society has problems
2. structural strain - people experience deprivation
3. growth and spread of a solution - a solution to the problems people are experiencing is proposed and spreads
4. precipitating factors - discontent usually requires a catalyst (often a specific event) to turn it into a social movement
5. lack of social control - the entity that is to be changed must be at least somewhat open to the change; if the social movement is quickly and powerfully repressed, it may never materialize
6. mobilization - this is the actual organizing and active component of the movement; people do what needs to be done

This theory is also subject to circular reasoning as it incorporates, at least in part, deprivation theory and relies upon it, and social/structural strain for the underlying motivation of social movement activism. However, social movement activism is, like in the case of deprivation theory, often the only indication that there was strain or deprivation.

Resource mobilization theory[link]

Resource mobilization theory emphasizes the importance of resources in social movement development and success. Resources are understood here to include: knowledge, money, media, labor, solidarity, legitimacy, and internal and external support from power elite. The theory argues that social movements develop when individuals with grievances are able to mobilize sufficient resources to take action. The emphasis on resources offers an explanation why some discontented/deprived individuals are able to organize while others are not.

Some of the assumptions of the theory include:

• there will always be grounds for protest in modern, politically pluralistic societies because there is constant discontent (i.e., grievances or deprivation); this de-emphasizes the importance of these factors as it makes them ubiquitous
• actors are rational; they weigh the costs and benefits from movement participation
• members are recruited through networks; commitment is maintained by building a collective identity and continuing to nurture interpersonal relationships
• movement organization is contingent upon the aggregation of resources
• social movement organizations require resources and continuity of leadership
• social movement entrepreneurs and protest organizations are the catalysts which transform collective discontent into social movements; social movement organizations form the backbone of social movements
• the form of the resources shapes the activities of the movement (e.g., access to a TV station will result in the extensive use TV media)
• movements develop in contingent opportunity structures that influence their efforts to mobilize; as each movement's response to the opportunity structures depends on the movement's organization and resources, there is no clear pattern of movement development nor are specific movement techniques or methods universal

Critics of this theory argue that there is too much of an emphasize on resources, especially financial resources. Some movements are effective without an influx of money and are more dependent upon the movement members for time and labor (e.g., the civil rights movement in the U.S.).

Political process theory[link]

Political process theory is similar to resource mobilization in many regards, but tends to emphasize a different component of social structure that is important for social movement development: political opportunities. Political process theory argues that there are three vital components for movement formation: insurgent consciousness, organizational strength, and political opportunities.

Insurgent consciousness refers back to the ideas of deprivation and grievances. The idea is that certain members of society feel like they are being mistreated or that somehow the system is unjust. The insurgent consciousness is the collective sense of injustice that movement members (or potential movement members) feel and serves as the motivation for movement organization.

Photo taken at the 2005 U.S. Presidential inauguration protest.

Organizational strength falls inline with resource-mobilization theory, arguing that in order for a social movement to organize it must have strong leadership and sufficient resources.

Political opportunity refers to the receptivity or vulnerability of the existing political system to challenge. This vulnerability can be the result of any of the following (or a combination thereof):

• growth of political pluralism
• decline in effectiveness of repression
• elite disunity; the leading factions are internally fragmented
• a broadening of access to institutional participation in political processes
• support of organized opposition by elites

One of the advantages of the political process theory is that it addresses the issue of timing or emergence of social movements. Some groups may have the insurgent consciousness and resources to mobilize, but because political opportunities are closed, they will not have any success. The theory, then, argues that all three of these components are important.

Critics of the political process theory and resource-mobilization theory point out that neither theory discusses movement culture to any great degree. This has presented culture theorists an opportunity to expound on the importance of culture.

One advance on the political process theory is the political mediation model, which outlines the way in which the political context facing movement actors intersects with the strategic choices that movements make. An additional strength of this model is that it can look at the outcomes of social movements not only in terms of success or failure but also in terms of consequences (whether intentional or unintentional, positive or negative) and in terms of collective benefits.

Culture theory[link]

More recent strains of theory understand social movements through their cultures - collectively shared beliefs, ideologies, values and other meanings about the world. These include explorations into the "collective identities" and "collective action frames" of movements and movement organizations.

Culture theory builds upon both the political process and resource-mobilization theories but extends them in two ways. First, it emphasizes the importance of movement culture. Second, it attempts to address the free-rider problem.

Both resource-mobilization theory and political process theory include a sense of injustice in their approaches. Culture theory brings this sense of injustice to the forefront of movement creation by arguing that, in order for social movements to successfully mobilize individuals, they must develop an injustice frame. An injustice frame is a collection of ideas and symbols that illustrate both how significant the problem is as well as what the movement can do to alleviate it,

"Like a picture frame, an issue frame marks off some part of the world. Like a building frame, it holds things together. It provides coherence to an array of symbols, images, and arguments, linking them through an underlying organizing idea that suggests what is essential - what consequences and values are at stake. We do not see the frame directly, but infer its presence by its characteristic expressions and language. Each frame gives the advantage to certain ways of talking and thinking, while it places others out of the picture."^[13]

Important characteristics of the injustice frames include:^[14]

• Facts take on their meaning by being embedded in frames, which render them relevant and significant or irrelevant and trivial.
• People carry around multiple frames in their heads.
• Successful reframing involves the ability to enter into the worldview of our adversaries.
• All frames contain implicit or explicit appeals to moral principles.

In emphasizing the injustice frame, culture theory also addresses the free-rider problem. The free-rider problem refers to the idea that people will not be motivated to participate in a social movement that will use up their personal resources (e.g., time, money, etc.) if they can still receive the benefits without participating. In other words, if person X knows that movement Y is working to improve environmental conditions in his neighborhood, he is presented with a choice: join or not join the movement. If he believes the movement will succeed without him, he can avoid participation in the movement, save his resources, and still reap the benefits - this is free-riding. A significant problem for social movement theory has been to explain why people join movements if they believe the movement can/will succeed without their contribution. Culture theory argues that, in conjunction with social networks being an important contact tool, the injustice frame will provide the motivation for people to contribute to the movement.

Framing processes includes three separate components:

• Diagnostic frame: the movement organization frames what is the problem or what they are critiquing
• Prognostic frame: the movement organization frames what is the desirable solution to the problem
• Motivational frame: the movement organization frames a "call to arms" by suggesting and encouraging that people take action to solve the problem

Social movement and social networking[link]

Many discussions have been generated recently on the topic of social networking and the effect it may play on the formation and mobilization of social movement.^[15] For example, the emergence of the Coffee Party first appeared on the social networking site, Facebook. The party has continued to gather membership and support through that site and file sharing sites, such as Flickr. The 2009–2010 Iranian election protests also demonstrated how social networking sites are making the mobilization of large numbers of people quicker and easier. Iranians were able to organize and speak out against the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by using sites such as Twitter and Facebook. This in turn prompted widespread government censorship of the web and social networking sites.

The sociological study of social movements is quite new. The traditional view of movements often perceived them as chaotic and disorganized, treating activism as a threat to the social order. The activism experienced in the 1960s and 1970s shuffled in a new world opinion about the subject. Models were now introduced to understand the organizational and structural powers embedded in social movements.

See also[link]

• Anti-jock movement
• Civil resistance
• Countermovement
• Global citizens movement
• List of social movements
• Moral shocks
• Nonviolent resistance
• Political movement
• Reform movement
• Revolutionary movement
• Social defence
• Social equality
• Teaching for social justice
• Union organizer

Notes[link]

References[link]

• David F. Aberle 1966. The Peyote Religion among the Navaho. Chicago: Aldine. ISBN 0-8061-2382-6
• James Alfred Aho. 1990. Politics of Righteousness: Idaho Christian Patriotism. Washington: University of Washington Press. ISBN 0-295-96997-0
• Herbert G. Blumer 1969. "Collective Behavior." In Alfred McClung Lee, ed., Principles of Sociology. Third Edition. New York: Barnes and Noble Books, pp. 65–121.
• Mark Chaves. 1997. Ordaining Women: Culture and Conflict in Religious Organizations. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-64146-9
• Graeme Chesters, & Ian Welsh. Complexity and Social Movements: Multitudes at the Edge of Chaos Routledge 2006. ISBN 0-415-43974-4
• Mario Diani and Doug McAdam, Social movements and networks, Oxford University Press, 2003.
• Susan Eckstei, ed. Power and Popular Protest: Latin American Social Movements, Updated Edition, University of California Press 2001. ISBN 0-520-22705-0
• Anthony Giddens. 1985. The Nation-State and Violence. Cambridge, England: Polity Press. ISBN 0-520-06039-3
• J. Craig Jenkins and Charles Perrow. 1977. Insurgency of the Powerless Farm Worker Movements (1946–1972). American Sociological Review. 42(2):249-268.
• Diana Kendall, Sociology In Our Times, Thomson Wadsworth, 2005. ISBN 0-534-64629-8
• William Kornhauser. 1959. The Politics of Mass Society. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-02-917620-4
• Donna Maurer. 2002. Vegetarianism: Movement or Moment? Philadelphia: Temple University Press. ISBN 1-56639-936-X
• Armand L. Mauss. 1975. Social Problems of Social Movements. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
• Denton E. Morrison. 1978. "Some Notes toward Theory on Relative Deprivation, Social Movements, and Social Change." In Louis E. Genevie, ed., Collective Behavior and Social Movements. Itasca, Ill.: Peacock. pp. 202–209.
• Immanuel Ness, ed. Encyclopedia of American Social Movements, 2004. ISBN 0-7656-8045-9.
• Adam Roberts and Timothy Garton Ash (eds.), Civil Resistance and Power Politics: The Experience of Non-violent Action from Gandhi to the Present, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. ISBN 978-0-19-955201-6. [2]
• Charlotte Ryan and William W. Gamson, The Art of Reframing Political Debates. Contexts. 2006; 5(1):13-18.
• Neil J. Smelser, 1962. Theory of Collective Behavior. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0-02-929390-1
• David Snow, Sarah A. Soule and Hanspeter Kriesi, ed. Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, Blackwell, 2004.
• Suzanne Staggenborg, Social Movements, Oxford University Press, 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-542309-9
• Sidney Tarrow, Power in Movement: Collective Action, Social Movements and Politics, Cambridge University Press, 1994. ISBN 0-521-42271-X
• Charles Tilly, 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1978.
• Charles Tilly, Social Movements, 1768–2004, Boulder, CO, Paradigm Publishers, 2004 262 pp. ISBN 1-59451-042-3 (hardback) / ISBN 1-59451-043-1 (paperback)
• "Draft:Social Movements." - TriasWiki. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://wiki.triastelematica.org/index.php/Draft:Social_movements>
• "Dictionary - Definition of Social Movement." Webster's Online Dictionary. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/definitions/Social%20Movement>.
• "Sociology of Religion." Social Movement Theory and the : Toward a New Synthesis. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://socrel.oxfordjournals.org/content/52/4/311.abstract>.
• "GSDRC: Display." GSDRC: Governance and Social Development Resource Centre. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.gsdrc.org/go/display>
• "SOCIAL MOVEMENT THEORIES." Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://stmarys.ca/~evanderveen/wvdv/social_change/social_movement_theories.htm>
• "Trent University :: Theory, Culture and Politics." Trent University. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.trentu.ca/theorycentre/>
• "Resource Mobilization and New Social Theory." University of Victoria. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://web.uvic.ca/~stucraw/Lethbridge/MyArticles/ResourceMobilization.htm>
• "Structural Strain Theories." Structural Strain Theories. Web. 23 Feb. 2012. <http://www.umsl.edu/~keelr/200/strain.html>.

Further reading[link]

• Marco G. Giugni, How Social Movements Matter, University of Minnesota Press, 1999, ISBN 0-8166-2914-5
• Rod Bantjes, Social Movements in a Global Context, CSPI, 2007, ISBN 978-1-55130-324-6
• Michael Barker, Conform or Reform? Social Movements and the Mass Media, Fifth-Estate-Online - International Journal of Radical Mass Media Criticism. February 2007. Fith-estate-online.co.uk
• Dennis Chong, "Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement", University of Chicago Press, 1991, ISBN 978-0-226-10441-6

External links[link]

• ASA section on Collective Behavior and Social Movements
• Interface: a Journal For and About Social Movements
• RevolutionArt Movement
• Social Movements: A Summary of What Works (pdf)

Audre Lorde
Audre Lorde, Austin, Texas, 1980
Born	February 18, 1934 New York City, New York
Died	November 17, 1992(1992-11-17) (aged 58) St. Croix
Cause of death	Liver Cancer
Ethnicity	African American
Occupation	Poet, Writer, Activist, Essayist
Known for	The First Cities, Zami: A New Spelling of My Name, The Cancer Journals

Audre Lorde (born Audrey Geraldine Lorde February 18, 1934 – November 17, 1992) was a Caribbean-American writer, poet and activist.