GLIP_Review_vol1_no21.pdf

Gay and Lesbian

Issues and

Psychology

Review

Editor

Damien W. Riggs

The Australian

Psychological

Society Ltd.

ISSN 1833-4512

Gay and Lesbian Issues and Psychology Review

Editor

Damien W. Riggs, The University of Adelaide

Editorial Board

Graeme Kane, Eastern Drug and Alcohol Service

Jim Malcom, The University of Western Sydney

Jane Edwards, Spencer Gulf Rural Health School

Warrick Arblaster, Mental Health Policy Unit, ACT

Murray Drummond, The University of South Australia

Gordon A. Walker, Monash University

Ela Jodko, Private practice

Robert Morris, Private practice

Brett Toelle, The University of Sydney

Elizabeth Short, The University of Melbourne

General Information

All submissions or enquires should be directed in the first instance to the Editor. Guidelines for

submissions or for advertising within the Gay and Lesbian Issues in Psychology Review (‘the Review’)

are provided on the final page of each issue.

http://www.groups.psychology.org.au/glip/glip_review/

The Review is listed on Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory: http://www.ulrichsweb.com/

Aims and scope

The Review is a peer-reviewed publication that is available online through the Australian Psychological

Society website. Its remit is to encourage research that challenges the stereotypes and assumptions of

pathology that have often inhered to research on lesbians and gay men (amongst others). The aim of

the Review is thus to facilitate discussion over the direction of lesbian and gay psychology in Australia,

and to provide a forum within which academics, practitioners and lay people may publish.

The Review is open to a broad range of material, and especially welcomes research, commentary and

reviews that critically evaluate the status quo in regards to lesbian and gay issues. The Review also

seeks papers that redress the imbalance that has thus far focused on the issues facing white lesbians

and gay men, to the exclusion of other sexual and racial groups.

Whilst the Review is a peer-reviewed, ISSN registered journal, in the interest of fair practice the

published elsewhere acknowledges that it was originally published in the Review, and that the same

piece of work is not published for free elsewhere online. Upon submitting a manuscript for publication in

the Review, contributing authors warrant that they have not already had the manuscript published

elsewhere, and that they have the appropriate permission to reproduce any any copyrighted material

(eg. diagrams) which forms part of their manuscript.

Publications of the Society are distributed to various other publications for review and abstracting

purposes. In addition, the Society has contractual agreements with various secondary publishers for

the republication, in hard copy, microfilm or digital forms, of individual articles and journal issues as a

whole. Upon acceptance of their manuscripts by the Society for publication in this Review, authors who

retain copyright in their work are deemed to have licensed the Society to reproduce their works, as they

appear in the Review, through secondary publication.

Disclaimer

Work published within the Review does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Australian

Psychological Society. Whilst the APS supports the work of the Gay and Lesbian Issues and Psychology

Interest Group, it also adheres to its own standards for practice and research that may at times conflict

with those of the Review.

Gay and Lesbian Issues and Psychology Review

Volume 1

Number 2

Contents

Editorial: Psychology and same-sex attraction: 30 years on

Damien W. Riggs

Articles

Same-sex marriage and equality

Sue Wilkinson and Celia Kitzinger

Who is influencing whom? The relationship between identity, sexual orientation and

indigenous psychologies

Vivienne Cass

Psyched in: Psychology, psychiatry and homosexuality in Australia

Graham Willett

Towards a principled exposure of sexuality

Baden Offord

Book Reviews

The mental health professions and homosexuality: International perspectives

Adrian Booth

Transgender subjectivities: A clinician’s guide

Jasmin Miller

Sperm ars

Damien W. Riggs

Handbook of LGBT issues in community mental health

David Semp

Conference Report

Health in Difference 5

Melanie Gleitzman

Calls for Papers

Lesbian & Gay Psychology Review: LGBTI families & parenting

Gay & Lesbian Issues and Psychology Review: LGBTI ageing

WorldPride 2005: Jerusalem

Gay & Lesbian Issues and Psychology Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005

EDITORIAL: PSYCHOLOGY AND SAME-SEX ATTRACTION: 30 YEARS ON

DAMIEN W. RIGGS

formation has been taken up, and where she

sees this field of work going in the future. By

reflecting on how the field came about 30 years

ago, Cass details some of the social practices

that make identities possible by elaborating the

‘indigenous psychologies’ that circulate around

identities in the Western world.

It is my pleasure to report in this editorial that

the first issue of Gay and Lesbian Issues and

Psychology Review was very well received, and

that this has resulted in a number of new

submissions to the journal, and, most excitingly,

the Australian Psychological Society (APS) has

suggested that it is willing to take the Review on

as an official APS journal following on from 2

years of peer reviewed publication. As this issue

of the Review will elaborate, whilst we must be

constantly mindful of how the sanction of

particular dominant groups (such as the APS)

can work against the aims of lesbian and gay

politics, it is also important to acknowledge the

shift that is evidenced by the provision of such

sanction.

In the third article, Graham Willett explores how

the removal of homosexuality as a pathology

from the DSM-III was precipitated in Australia

by broader political and social moves towards

the recognition of the validity of same-sex

attractions.

In the final article, Baden Offord shares some

personal and theoretical insights into how we

may see homosexuality continuing to be

pathologised within Australian and international

contexts. Offord outlines what this may mean

for understanding queer identities, and how this

may inform praxis.

These issues of sanction and politics lead me to

introduce the theme of this issue: 30 Years On.

As most people will be aware, whilst the

American Psychiatric Association removed

homosexuality as a pathology from the

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual in 1973, the

American Psychological Association did not

follow suit in adopting this position until 1975.

Thus whilst in 2003 the Gay and Lesbian Issues

and Psychology Interest Group celebrated the 30

Year anniversary with a conference in

Melbourne, this year we celebrate the second 30

year anniversary with a special issue of this

journal.

Together, all of these articles demonstrate the

large scale shifts that have occurred within the

discipline of psychology over the past 30 years.

However, at the same time, they challenge us to

question the limitations of psychological-

sanction, and to develop new ways of

understanding ‘the psychological’ that may offer

points of resistance. As I will now elaborate,

understanding how identities are formed in

relation to state-based practices of race and

sexuality may be one of the ways in which we

can challenge normative models of citizenship

and relationality.

We are fortunate in this issue to have papers

from many key theorists working on lesbian and

gay issues, from both within Australia and

abroad. The issue begins with a reprint of an

article by Sue Wilkinson and Celia Kitzinger on

same-sex marriage and equality. The paper

provides an excellent elaboration of the context

of same-sex marriage, and the role that

psychology may play in supporting this push for

equal rights. The importance of the theme ‘30

Years On’ is thus clearly evidenced by the fact

that we may now consider the discipline of

psychology to be a potential ally in same-sex

marriage campaigns.

Cultural contexts of marriage

This section of the editorial will serve as a

springboard for the development of a position

statement from the Interest Group on same-sex

marriage. Read alongside the reprint from

Wilkinson and Kitzinger, we invite readers to

contact the Review with comments and

suggestions for the formulation of a position

statement. Such a statement, however, requires

consideration of a number of key issues relating

to context that I believe need to inform any

In the second article, Vivienne Cass provides an

examination of how her work on identity

RIGGS: EDITORIAL

discussion of same-sex marriage in Australia. In

particular, these include Australia’s history as a

colonial nation; the current association between

the State and familial relations; and the existing

rights campaigns that are being presently being

negotiated by lesbian and gay rights activists. I

will now outline each of these in turn in order to

elaborate these specific contexts.

contested by individuals or altered at the volition

of individual states, this is no longer the case.

Federal law overrules state law, thus meaning

that marriage is defined as above throughout

Australia. Whilst this does not prevent other

forms of relationship sanction being developed

(e.g., civil partnerships or civil unions – see the

article by Wilkinson and Kitzinger for more on

this), such relationships often do not receive the

same level of benefits at a federal level as do

heterosexual marriages.

In the first instance, it is important that lesbian

and gay rights in Australia are framed in a

relationship to ongoing histories of colonisation,

and to the fact of Indigenous sovereignty. Whilst

the concept of identity politics (and its focus on

singular axes of oppression) has in the past

been a useful tool for gaining rights, it is

necessary to question the ongoing utility of this

approach. In other words, if lesbian and gay

rights in Australia focus predominantly on the

needs of white, middle-class lesbians and gay

men, what will this mean for same-sex attracted

individuals who do not identify as being in this

category?

These issues of State sanction thus point

towards the importance of considering the pros

and cons of inclusion versus transformation of

the law in regards to same-sex marriage. Many

readers will already be aware of the disjuncture

between, on the one hand, lesbian and gay

rights activists who are seeking equality with the

heterosexual majority in the form of equal

recognition of the status of same-sex

relationships (and thus equal benefits), and on

the other, those who are more concerned with

challenging the heterosexism (and racism) that

inheres to federal and state law in Australia. It is

not my intention to attempt to fully explicate or

reconcile these approaches within this editorial

(excellent analyses of these differences are

provided in Bernstein, 2001; Butler, 2002; Halle,

2001). Rather, my point is that in developing a

response to the issue of same-sex marriage in

Australia, we must be mindful of the outcomes

of these particular approaches. And again, both

approaches need to take into consideration the

racialised context of the law in Australia, and the

implications of this for access to rights.

What is required, then, is open, honest dialogue

about racism and race privilege in Australia, with

a focus on how this may be played out in lesbian

and gay rights campaigns. Thus as Mills (1997)

suggests, whilst not all white people may be

intentional signatories of racism, those of us

who identify as white continue to benefit from it

– we gain privileges that come from the state

sanction of certain groups of people at the

expense (or oppression) of others.

This point about privilege and oppression leads

me to the second context in need of discussion,

namely the relationship between the State and

familial relations. In Australia, we have recently

seen the passing of the Marriage Legislation

Amendment Bill (2004), which has resulted in

marriage now been federally defined as:

This issue of differential access to rights in

Australia also draws attention to the importance

of examining the implications of same-sex

marriage campaigns for transgendered

individuals. Much the same as the above point

about differing strategic approaches to rights

campaigns, there is also a long history of lesbian

and gay rights groups either banding together

with, or remaining separate from, the campaigns

of transgendered individuals.

the union of a man and a woman to the

exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for

life.

Certain unions are not marriages. A union

solemnized in a foreign country between: (a) a

man and another man; or (b) a woman and

another woman; must not be recognized as a

marriage in Australia.

What is important to take note of here, is the

fact that transgendered people may also identify

as lesbian or gay. The terms are not mutually

exclusive. This has important implications for

same-sex marriage campaigns, as Coombs

(2001, p. 413) suggests in the statement that “a

gay man can marry another gay man today, but

The outcome of this is that whilst prior to the

amendment the definition of marriage depended

on state law, which could potentially be

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: