Sex, Politicans and Morality in France 1945-1982

1945-1982 年法国的性、政治家和道德

• 批准号: AH/E505856/1
• 负责人: Julian Jackson
• 金额: $ 4.19万
• 依托单位: Queen Mary University of London
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2007
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2007 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FE505856%2F1
• 关键词: Sex; Politicans; Morality; France; 1945

My work can be situated within the context a whole body of new historical writing which has begun to explore the social and cultural history of homosexuality before the early 1970s, challenging the view that the preceding decades can be characterised as a period of invisibility and passivity, when many homosexuals internalised dominant culture's hostility. John d'Emilio's work on the American 'homophile' movement Mattachine revisits the 1950s and early 1960s. George Chauncey's work on New York, uncovering the richness of gay male subcultures of the 1890s-1930s, show that the 'modern homosexual' did not appear until well into the 1930s and that the power of medical discourse in fashioning homosexual identities was weaker than often believed. He is now taking this research into the post-war period, and challenging certain received images about the 1950s. There is also interesting work on models of sexual identity bycultural commentators such as Eve Kossovsky Sedgwick and David Halperin. Until recently, however, work on France has lagged behind. This is due to a certain suspicion within the French historical community towards approaches seen as too influenced by 'Anglo-Saxon' identity politics (for the same reason French historians were slow to address the issue of immigration). A good indication of this is the book by Frederic Martel whose survey of the history of homosexuality in France since 1968 ended with a denunciation of homosexual 'communitarianism'. Over the last ten year attitudes have been changing, partly under the influence of non-French scholars, but also owing to the research of a younger generation of French historians who have started to explore the history of homosexuality in a more sophisticated manner. But so far cost of their work has been on the period before 1945. My book will be the first to apply some of the research agendas described above to France after the war. The aim of my book will be to revisit the history of the politics of the French homosexual movement between the 1950s and the early 1980s. Focusing on the 'homophile' movement Arcadie, it will challenge a certain set of assumptions which were born out of the political struggles of the period, but which now require to be analysed historically. I want to show the complexity and diversity of Arcadia's discourses on sexuality; to examine the ways in which it affected and transformed the lives of thousands of French homosexuals; to test the success of it political strategy; to probe its political influence. It is reductionist and unhistorical to reduce the strategies of survival and solidarity, adaptation and resistance, which homosexuals developed in the 1950s and 1960s to an 'interiorisation' of homosexual repression (as claimed by Arcadie's critics). I plan to explore a lost continent of homosexual experience in France after 1945. My work will be a piece of historical research, and in that sense it cannot be said to have any immediate applications. I think, however, that it will feed into current debates in France about sexual politics (gay marriage and the French civil partnerships) and identity politics. Owing to the strong intellectual dominance of the French republican tradition, religion, ethnicity and sexuality are relegated to the sphere of the private. This intellectual context influences the way discussions over gay politics are conducted. Already in 1964 Arcadia published an article stigmatising the emergence in the United States of a gay 'community'. In reality the polarity between 'communitarianism' and 'universalism', between what one Arcadia writer called 'le droit a!'Indifference' in opposition to gay liberationists' claim to 'le droit a Ia difference' is too simplistic. Arcadia itself embraced a discourse of 'integration' in theory, but in practice it created the embryo of a gay community in France. This ambiguity makes Arcadie an interesting prism through which to approach these issues.

我的作品可以放在一个新的历史写作的背景下，这些新的历史写作已经开始探索20世纪70年代初之前的同性恋的社会和文化史，挑战了之前几十年可以被描述为隐形和被动的时期的观点，当时许多同性恋者内化了主流文化的敌意。约翰·德埃米利奥关于美国同性恋运动的作品《马塔钦》重温了20世纪50年代和60年代初。乔治·昌西关于纽约的作品揭示了19世纪90年代至30年代男性同性恋亚文化的丰富性，显示出直到20世纪30年代，“现代同性恋者”才出现，而医学话语在塑造同性恋身份方面的力量比人们通常认为的要弱。他现在正在将这项研究带入战后时期，并对某些收到的关于20世纪50年代的图像提出质疑。文化评论家伊芙·科索夫斯基·塞奇威克和大卫·哈尔佩林也对性别认同模型进行了有趣的研究。然而，直到最近，有关法国的工作一直落后于人。这是因为法国历史界对被认为过于受盎格鲁-撒克逊身份政治影响的方法有一定的怀疑(出于同样的原因，法国历史学家在解决移民问题上行动迟缓)。弗雷德里克·马特尔的书很好地说明了这一点，他对1968年以来法国同性恋史的调查以谴责同性恋的“社群主义”而告终。在过去的十年里，人们的态度发生了变化，这在一定程度上受到了非法国学者的影响，但也得益于年轻一代法国历史学家的研究，他们已经开始以更复杂的方式探索同性恋历史。但到目前为止，他们的工作成本一直是1945年之前的时期。我的书将是第一本将上述一些研究议程应用于战后法国的书。我这本书的目的将是重温20世纪50年代至80年代初法国同性恋运动的政治史。这部电影聚焦于“同性恋”运动阿卡迪，它将挑战一系列假设，这些假设诞生于那个时期的政治斗争，但现在需要进行历史分析。我想展示阿卡迪亚关于性的论述的复杂性和多样性；考察它如何影响和改变成千上万法国同性恋者的生活；测试它的政治战略的成功；探索它的政治影响。将同性恋者在20世纪50年代和60年代发展起来的生存与团结、适应与抵抗的策略简化为同性恋压制的内在化(正如阿卡迪的批评者所声称的那样)，这是简约主义的，也是不合历史的。我计划探索1945年后法国失落的同性恋经历大陆。我的工作将是一项历史研究，从这个意义上说，它不能说有任何立即的应用。然而，我认为，这将推动法国目前对性政治(同性恋婚姻和法国民事伴侣关系)和身份政治的辩论。由于法国共和主义传统在知识上的强大主导地位，宗教、种族和性倾向被降级到私人领域。这种知识背景影响了有关同性恋政治的讨论的进行方式。早在1964年，阿卡迪亚就发表了一篇文章，污蔑美国出现了一个同性恋“社区”。在现实中，一位阿卡迪亚作家所说的对同性恋自由主义者声称的“不同的权利”之间的两极分化过于简单化了。阿卡迪亚本身在理论上信奉“融合”的话语，但在实践中它创造了法国同性恋社区的雏形。这种模棱两可使《阿卡迪》成为探讨这些问题的一个有趣的棱镜。