A resurgence of biological determinism in explanations of (male) homosexuality has been uncritically embraced by some gay rights activists in the expectation that civil rights are more likely to accrue to minorities whose difference is "natural" not social. The experience of activists fighting for a comprehensive anti-discrimination ordinance in one Northern California city confirms this expectation, while also highlighting some of the dangers of such an approach.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Dorgan, Michael.1993. "Appetite-fed Obesity Not a Disability, Court Rules ." San Jose Mercury News (September 3):A1.
2.
LeVay, Simon.1991. "A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men." Science (August 30):134-138.
3.
Musitelli, Robin.1992. "National Media Responds." Santa Cruz Sentinel (January 16):A1, A12.
4.
Rist, Darrel Yates.1992. "Are Homosexuals Born That Way?" The Nation (October 19): 424-429.
5.
Rogers, Paul.1992. "Santa Cruz City Council Passes 'Looks Law'." San Jose Mercury News (April 29):B1, B4.
6.
Santa Cruz Sentinel. 1992. Editorial (March 6).
7.
Swaab, Dick.1990. "An Enlarged Suprachiasmatic Nucleus in Homosexual Men ." Brain Research (December 24):141-148.
8.
van Gelder, Lindsay.1992. "When Your Looks Aren't Good Enough." Allure Magazine (September).
