FROCI

AND QUEERS: 30 YEARS OF COMING OUT IN ITALY AND THE UK - A TEXT COMPARATIVE STUDY
by Franco Zappettini Department of Applied Linguistcs and Communication Birkbeck College, University of London fzappe01@mail.bbk.ac.uk 2010

INTRODUCTION
This research investigates patterns of inclusion and exclusion experienced by Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) people in relation to the construction, negotiation and performance of non-heterosexual identities in the British and the Italian societies over the last 30 years. In particular, spaces and opportunities for the emergence and affirmation of such identities provided (or denied) by social attitudes towards homosexuality will be examined by comparing and analysing corpora of texts. The corpora comprise of a variety of publications produced by LGBT Associations in the two countries as well as a number of LGBT-related policy documents. These types of texts were chosen because they communicate issues effectively and they lend themselves to discourse analysis, thus providing insights into different perceptions of LGBT identities and the social debate, tension and negotiation involved in their shaping.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
A variety of theoretical models exist that have explored the construction and performance of identity. Most psychological models (exemplified by Troiden, 1979, 1989) use an essentialist approach explaining identity as the true expression of ones self with individuals thus externalising their sexuality as intrinsically specific to them. From a social perspective, however, both the construction and performance of identity have been in many cases seen as relational (Hall, 1990) because they require social interaction through negotiation with the other. As Burr (1996) argues, one should think of personality as existing not within people but between them (p. 28) and, ultimately, one is who one can make oneself accepted to be. With regards to gender and sexual identities, Turner et al. (1987) suggest that individuals are socially encouraged to ascribe themselves to categories which are perceived as relevant to them, thus creating in-groups and out-groups whose differences sustain identities. Similarly, Herek (1998) argues that we learn to be a gender by being exposed to socially recognised gender models (primarily parents) and by internally accepting (or not) the implicit social rules carried by belonging to that gender. Boys are thus typically expected to be assertive and dominant and girls nurturing and passive. Historically, the emergence of LGBT as a source of personal and social identity is a rather recent construction that Foucault (1978) ascribes to the normalization of sexuality by governments. Although sexual and romantic bonds between same-sex individuals are well documented in the Imperial China of the Quing Dinasty (Hinsch, 1992) and in Ancient Rome and Greece (Crompton, 2003), physical and emotional attraction between individuals of the same sex was never self-perceived as an exclusive source of social identity nor it was a defining or integral part of a persons identity (Yee, 2003). For Foucault, the introduction of sodomy laws in the 19th century contributed to the creation of sexual categories and, in particular through the heteronormative use of language, to the construction of the

heterosexual/homosexual dichotomy with the consequent labelling of non- normative groups. It is though only with the Stonewall riots in 1969 (that saw gay residents of Greenwich Village rising together against the police) that a proper LGBT movement as we know it today has emerged (Duberman, 1993). For the purpose of this study the theoretical framework proposed by Castells (1997, 2010) will be used to analyse the documents. Castells sees identities as constructed through a process in which social actors derive a major source of meaning and experience from cultural attributes socially constructed and negotiated (p. 6). Unlike roles, however, which are primarily organised around norms and defined by arrangements, identities carry a deeper significance for individuals because they are internalized by them. Castells categorizes identities into legitimizing, resistance and project identities suggesting that categories are shifty in nature and identities that start as resistance may also transform themselves into projects or legitimizing. For Castells, a resistance identity will typically be generated by those actors who are in positions/conditions devalued and/or stigmatized by the logic of domination (p.8); they will thus separate from the group they have been excluded from and will reject its culture. He writes that identities can also be built around a project when social actors, on the basis of whatever cultural materials are available to them, build a new identity that redefines their position in society and, by so doing, seek the transformation of overall social structure (p.8). By aspiring to affirm themselves as subjects, individuals thus become collective social actors in order to give a holistic meaning to their life experiences. Finally, legitimizing identities are introduced by the dominant institutions of society to extend and rationalise their domination vis-a-vis social actors (p. 8), suggesting that identities that originate as roles negotiated with institutions can be internalized as identity sources. Castells argues that the three types of identity construction theorized would lead to different societies with civil societies, communes or communities and subjects being the products of legitimizing, resistance and project identities respectively.

ANALYSIS
THE GAY LIBERATION The first set of texts analyses the gay liberation themes of the early years by comparing the first issue of FUORI! (1972) and the Manifesto of the UK Gay Liberation Front (1971, revised 1978). FUORI! (Annexe 1), the official monthly publication of the Fronte Unitario Omosessuale Rivoluzionario Italiano was issued in Turin, between 1972 and 1982. A magazine of sexual liberation (as it described itself), the publication derived its title from the acronym of its publisher which is also the Italian word for out. Coming out, pride, and sexual liberation are indeed the dominant themes encountered throughout the issue. The discourse of sexual liberation, emphasising ones right to the self-determination of ones own body (similar to that argued by the feminist movement), develops into a social critique of the patriarchal family with gender roles as constricted patterns of masculine and feminine. The opening article (p.1) criticizes the roles that our society has already created for each of us arguing that, whilst the roles of mother and father typically come with social recognition (as well as responsibilities) the role of homosexual comes only with the expectation that we should apologize (if not hide and feel guilty) for our homosexuality. Similar themes emerge from the 1971 Manifesto of the UK Gay Liberation Front (Annexe 2), an organisation founded at the London School of Economics on the example of the post-Stonewall American Gay Liberation Front. The Manifesto aims to give voice to all homosexuals angered by an oppressive system and oppression is the dominant theme throughout the document. The system that has fostered and maintained the inescapable gender roles paradigm is blamed for the oppression of homosexuals. The traditional family (consisting of the man in charge, a slave as his wife, and their children on whom they force themselves as the ideal models) is thus identified as one of the ways in which the heterosexual paradigm is reinforced by social institutions. Rejection of society's blueprints for the

couple, including gender roles and monogamy, is advocated as a way out of oppression. Similarly, the education system, the Church and the media are seen as obstacles to the free expression of LGBT identities because, by expecting individuals to conform to traditional values, they contribute to make feel homosexuals ashamed, guilty and failures. The social exclusion of homosexuals is also denounced in other social contexts. For instance, the workplace is pointed at as where being married is the respectable guarantee, but being homosexual apparently makes us unstable, unreliable security risks. Discrimination is also exposed in the legal treatment of different age consents for heterosexuals and homosexuals and the exclusion of homosexuals from the armed forces or the navy. Furthermore, it is denounced, the oppression has been perpetrated by the established psychological view of homosexuals as disturbed and the use of therapy conversion practices that would seek to treat them. Similarly, FUORI! (p.3) reports of a demonstration launched by a group of LGBT activists at the first International Congress of Sexology in Sanremo (5/4/1972) who challenged the notion of homosexuality as deviance claiming that Normality does not exist (p.3). In Castells framework, the elements analysed so far would strongly suggest the initial construction of LGBT identities as resistance and project identities alike. For instance, Castells (p. 9) maintains that resistance identities construct forms of collective resistance against otherwise unbearable oppression. Resistance would have then emerged as a source of identity for LGBTs in counter reaction to the oppressed condition imposed on them by mainstream society through the systematic alienation, stigmatization and devaluation (which are for instance described by FUORI! as historical experiences shared with Black and Jews (p.2)). LGBT identities for resistance would have then created communes through a distinct separation from the dominant heteronormative group they had been dominated by and excluded from by rejecting its culture. LGBT (sub)culture would have thus been able to provide their members with relatively complete values and patterns of behaviour (even if stemmed from the mainstream groups hostility) which were distinctive enough to support stand-alone subgroup identities. 5

 Castells argues that resistance identities can be constructed even [with] the pride of self-denigrationinverting the terms of oppressive discourse all in the name of the exclusion of the excluders by the excluded (p.9). In FUORI! the language is often used in a reverse discourse strategy that, by inverting the terms of oppressive discourse, reverses the values and strengthens the separateness. An article (Issue 3, p. 9) for instance, explains the heterosexual perversion whilst another (Issue 14, p.39) reclaims the Italian derogatory term frocio for homosexual (the term gay is not used unless in an anglophone context) to turn them into positive labels that LGBTs should now be proud to wear. In the British Manifesto, on the other hand, a more positive approach to definitions is called for (including the stigma-neutral term gay originated in the U.S.) pointing at homosexuals negative self-perception as a consequence of adopted and internalized straight people's definition of what is good and bad. On another level, the two texts suggest the emergence of a distinctive LGBT project identity as exemplified by these extracts from FUORI! (Issue1, p. 2): for the first time now homosexuals are coming out of a historical oppression that has seen the society labelling and stigmatizing individuals coming out openly to other homosexuals like you with pride. This message is exemplified by the picture on page 16. No one will tell us ever again what we are and who we are we have finally understood that our abnormality rooted in oppressionis indeed a privilege that needs no excuses but rather should be a source of dignity. The liberation of homosexuals should be a joyful coming out to an awareness of their homosexual condition it is time that us, homosexuals, woke up and started something contagiously beautiful. Not dissimilarly, the Manifesto encourages LGBTs to become aware of their oppression so that a free society of the future can be achieved, based on a new

life-style that rejects heterosexual models and demands reforms that would lead to tolerance legal equality and protection civil rights. In both documents homosexuals are encouraged to increase their visibility by disclosing their sexual orientation (coming out) and in general a pattern is recognizable in the discourse calling for a shift from the shame paradigm to that of pride. This would then be consistent with Castells framework that suggests that new identities can be built around a project seeking to redefine social actors position in society whilst generally changing the social system itself. AIDS REDEFINING IDENTITIES National health policies in relation to the emergence of AIDS represent the second set of texts which is examined to analyse the inclusion and exclusion of LGBTs and the impact on their identities. Since it largely affected the homosexual male population in the early 80s, HIV infection soon became associated with homosexuality and promiscuity in the eyes of the public (Troiden, 1988). However, the LGBT communitys focus on supporting its members and educating them about prevention with dedicated awareness campaigns has succeeded in reversing the trend, so that HIV+ homosexual males currently represent only 38% of the infected population in Western Europe (advert.org.uk). Nevertheless, the stigmatization of homosexuals is to some extent still traceable, for instance, in the EUs blood donation polices (Recommendation 98/463 and subsequent 2002/98 and 2004/33 directives) and those of member states. The overall discourse of such EU policy documents in relation to the risk assessment of potential infection in blood donation (that would determine the exclusion of unsuitable donors) suggests a terminology shift from the risk group categorization of the early days to that of risk behaviour. Whilst dissociating what one does from what one is (in Foucaults view the paradigm of the social construction of homosexuality) was intended as a non-judgemental categorization to prevent discrimination against gay men, the very concept is used by the 2004 Directive to 7

require member states to permanently defer persons whose sexual behaviour puts them at high risk of acquiring severe infectious diseases that can be transmitted by blood ( p.8). This requirement has filtered down into the Italian and British legislative systems somewhat differently. Italian Health Ministry Decree 78/2001 (Annexe 3) states that: the doctor is ultimately responsible for the selection of suitable [blood] donors based on the information collected from a questionnaire in which the donors give details about their lifestyle [including sexual behaviour] (Articolo 9) Although the law has been generally interpreted and applied in favour of homosexual donors being allowed to give blood, doctors discretion to identify risk behaviours has in some cases resulted in healthy gays being refused as donors (La Repubblica, 15/7/2010). In the UK, the NHS National Blood Service policy (Annexe 4) asks all men who have ever had sex with mennot to give blood (blood.co.uk). Whilst the NHS states that this exclusion rests on specific sexual behaviour rather than sexuality, Tatchell (2009) denounces that the ban effectively affects any man who has ever had sex with another man - even just once, even with a condom, even 50 years ago and even if they now test HIV-negative. Furthermore, at a discourse level, the political correctness of the men who have sex with other men definition (that emphasizes the behaviour rather than the orientation) is ironically dropped when stating that the exclusion does not apply to gay men who have never had sex with a man. The impact of these policies on the shaping of LGBT identities has been duplex. On the one hand, whilst the gay liberation of the `70s may have been instrumental in the shaping of LGBT identities along the identity pride line, the AIDS crisis had the opposite effect replacing identity pride with identity fear due to the stigma attached to homosexuality (Troiden, 1989). In Castells terms, alienation and stigmatization could have contributed, once again, to the construction of forms of collective resistance against the dominance of society. One example that might seem supporting this argument is the emergence of movements like OutRage! in 8

the early 90s. A self defined broad based group of queers committed to radical, non-violent direct action and civil disobedience to assert the rightsof queers (Outrage website), OutRage! has supported a separatist ideology, rejecting the identity politics approach to gay rights as alienating to those who do not fit into the mold (Slagle, 1995: 86). On the other hand, the spread of AIDS was a great individual and collective trauma that marked the shift in the public discourse from that of body self determination to new strategies of social and political legitimazion (Cavarocchi, 2010: 4). This occurred with the creation of support networks amongst the LGBT community and, crucially, through engaging in a dialogue with institutions (in order to gain recognition). This would have started a culture of gradual acceptance and institutional inclusion. For instance, a European Council recommendation presented in 1981 by the Commission for Social and Health issues (strongly campaigned for by LGBT associations across Europe) would have been instrumental in the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental disorders by the World Health Organization in 1984 (Fuori!, issue 30). In the NHS case, the blood donation policy document links up with The Terence Higgins Trust - THT (originally set up as a LGBT organisation to provide support to AIDS affected individuals and now the UKs largest HIV charity) committing to a policy review that the THT has been calling for. The THT, in turn ask people to abide to the [NHS] policy whilst waiting for a review in what would appear a reciprocal legitimization. THE QUEST FOR LEGITIMIZATION Legitimizing identities will be analysed in more depth in the last set of texts that relates to the legal recognition of same-sex couples. Since the Danish government passed a law allowing for same sex couples to register their union and be legally treated as spouses in 1989, an increasing number of European states have introduced similar provisions (ILGA, 2010). Whilst the UK Government passed the Civil Partnership Act in 2004, Italy is currently lacking any form of recognition, 9

despite a long and politically polarised debate that saw a proposal of a bill regulating the matter being discussed in the Italian Parliament for two years to be finally abandoned in 2008 due to strong opposition by a number of MPs and the demise of the Prodi 2 Cabinet (La Repubblica, 27/2/2008). During the Parliamentary debate over the bill that would have had same sex couples recognised, several initiatives took place in support of either side of the argument. One of such initiatives is represented by the Manifesto for Equal Rights, an appeal endorsed by a group of LGBT activists and supported by various liberal Italian politicians, presented to the President of Italy and the Italian Government in 2007 (Annexe 5). Referring to the values and fundamental principles of equality enshrined in the Italian Constitution, the document emphasizes how equal social dignity is denied to citizens who have been systematically discriminated on account of their sex or their sexual orientation and how this treatment is impacting on the full development of the [LGBT] person. This request for recognition is embodied in the demand for granting full access to marriage (and no surrogate provision) to same-sex couples in virtue of their right to accomplish a project of common life. Nowhere in the document is the word homosexual or gay used, but rather citizen(s) and (same-sex) spouses. Further calls are made to ensure that the matter is dealt with by the Government in the respect of laicity (secular) principles and the European Charter of Human Rights. Europe is often cited as a benchmark against whose ideals and legislation Italy falls short: a Europe-wise vision is needed. legislation similar to that of Spain, Belgium, the Netherlandsmust be adopted we call for an affirmation of freedom to all who share secular values belonging to the Europe that we want to create On the EU side, The Agency for Fundamental Rights has systematically denounced the discriminatory condition of Italian LGBTs (2008 report) and calls have been made by the EU Parliament to member states urging them to take legislative action by converging towards a mutual recognition of homosexual couples in application of 10

the principle of equality (75/76/77 European Parliament resolution of 14 January 2009). The UK document analysed is Responses To Civil Partnership: A framework for the legal recognition of same-sex couples (Annexe 6). Published in November 2003 by the Government Equalities Office (the department responsible for equalities legislation and policy in the UK), it offers valuable insights into the institutional views that would lead to the Civil Partnership Act in 2004. The document informs that as the Government has no plans to allow same-sex couples to marry (p.14) it nevertheless intends to provide them with a legal recognition of their relationship for reasons of general equality and social justice (p. 21). According to the report, under this new legal status, same-sex couples will now be treated in the same way as opposite-sex couples especially in relation to income-related benefits. Moreover, it is crucially stated that civil partnerships are designed to support stable families and to recognise committed, interdependent and loving relationships, qualities that the Government does not believe are exclusive to heterosexual peoples relationships (p. 32). In both documents, the struggle for recognition of civil rights has been primarily conducted by LGBTs through negotiation with and (in the UK) granted by the dominant institutions. This could be interpreted in terms of what Castells refers to as the identity legitimization process. For instance, historically states have used citizenship rights as a leverage tool to include or exclude citizens to the political life. As citizens, therefore, we derive our validation as nationals from accepting and performing identities based on these values as a consequence of our allegiance to the state. Legitimization, however, can be seen as a zero-sum game: for Castells, legitimizing actors reproduce the identity that rationalises the sources of structural domination (p. 8) that is they contribute to keep the system functioning and expanding in what Foucault sees as a normalization of identities achieved through domination. Castells argues that legitimizing identities generate a civil society as theorized by Gramsci (1975); that is the creation and extension of a system of apparatuses (or state institutions) on one hand, whilst allowing people to embed themselves among such institutions on the other, thus making it possible to seize the state without launching a direct, violent assault (p. 9). In this light, the impact of 11

marriage provisions on LGBT identities could be dually interpreted. Allowing LGBT couples to access legal provisions that recognise them as such reinforces their social inclusion (widening the democratic participation of non-conformist identities) and, at the same time, enables them to reproduce the citizen identity that state institutions need for the civil society to function. By contrast, their legitimization has opened up new opportunities for LGBTs to construct new and more varied identities around the shifting concept of family, ironically embracing the very same traditional family values that they were distancing themselves from in the gay liberation discourse. Nevertheless, in the case of the UK, although LGBTs represent citizens worthy of same rights and obligations as heterosexuals, they have not been granted access to marriage but only to a parallel institution to accommodate certain religious views of marriage as exclusively heterosexual. In the Italian case, by aspiring to European standards, legitimization (denied by the Italian state) is sought from a higher institution that is more willing to provide such validation. At present, however, the status of European citizen (that is nationals of any member state) does not entitle LGBT individuals to the same treatment across borders despite the freedom of movement within the EU. It is worth noting that Castells frames the quest for legitimization by LGBTs in a context of diversification of family arrangements experienced by modern society and (perceived) attacks on the patriarchal family. He argues that same-sex couples have challenged the power system of patriarchalism traditionally based on compulsory heterosexuality (p. 216) and this has in some cases resulted in forms of homophobic fundamentalist restoration. In the light of this, some data on the Italian society showing that in 2008 50.2% of Italians believed that homosexuality is never justifiable compared to 29.9% in 1999 (World Value Survey) and that homophobic attacks went from 75 (of which 9 were lethal) in 2008 to 123 (of which 12 were lethal) in 2009 (Arcigay) would indeed suggest a reactionary radicalization.

12

CONCLUSIONS
The documents analysis suggests that, in many cases, the construction of Italian and British LGBT identities has not been a linear process and, overall, it has involved constant negotiation with a diversity of social attitudes that have impacted on the levels of acceptance and support of LGBTs. Conversely, the fluid and relational nature of identities has also meant that different strategies have been dynamically adopted by LGBTs to shape and perform their identities. These have been discussed in the light of Castells framework, many elements of which have indeed been related to the texts analysed. Overall, this study has been able to established that both the Italian and the British LGBT movements have largely developed their discourses alongside similar ideological tracks. However, whilst the early discourses of British and Italian LGBT movements encountered resistance among mainstream societies respectively (resulting in patterns of social exclusion of LGBTs) there is much evidence suggesting that since the early 90s the British society has developed a more inclusive attitude to non-standard sexualities. By contrast this social shift has not occurred to the same extent in Italian society thus resulting in an increased gap between the two society. This is even more conspicuous in the which has not been matched by mof, s, Finally, it would appear that, in the wider European context, where in spite of equality rights and recognition policies supported by the European institutions, these have only filtered down to individual countries and been adopted as national policies insofar as the local attitude has allowed them to be. Note: all English translations of Italian texts quoted have been provided by the author.

13

 ANNEXES Annexe 1: FUORI! Issue 1/June 1972 Pages 1-4; Picture 1 p. 16 FUORI! Issue 3/September 1972, p. 9 FUORI! Issue 14/Spring 1975, p. 39 Annexe 2: Manifesto of the UK Gay Liberation Front, London 1971 (Revised 1978) Annexe 3: Italian Health Ministry Decree 78/2001 Decreto Ministero Sanit 26 Gennaio 2001 - (G.U. n.78 3/04/2001) Annexe 4: NHS Blood and Transplant Exclusion of Men who have Sex with Men from Blood Donation The Terence Higgins Trust Blood donations by people at higher risk of HIV - our policy The Terence Higgins Trust Man Sex Man Second Edition 2004 Annexe 5: Manifesto for Equal Rights Manifesto per l'Eguaglianza Dei Diritti, 2007 Annexe 6: The Government Equalities Office Responses To Civil Partnership: A framework for the legal recognition of same-sex couples (2003) Franco Zappettini Personal Identifier X7577327 AA300 13 BIBLIOGRAPHY Arcigay Italia Rapporto Omofobia 2008-2009 Available from: 14

http://www.arcigay.it/report-omofobia-italia-2008-2009 Accessed 14/7/2010 Avert, Trends in HIV and AIDS statistics Available from http://www.avert.org/uk- statistics.htm Accessed 2/8/2010 Burr, V. (1996) An Introduction to Social Constructionism, London: Routledge Castells, M. (1997, second edition, 2010). The Power of Identity, The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture Vol. II. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Cavarocchi, F. (2010) Il movimento gay e Francesca lesbico italiano negli anni 70 e 80 miracolo/PaperCavarocchi.pdf Crompton, L. (2003) Homosexuality & Civilization. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press Duberman, M. (1993) Stonewall. New York: Dutton European Commission Directive 2004/33/EC of 22 March 2004 Available from: http://eur- lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:091:0025:0039:EN:PDF European Parliament Resolution of 14 January 2009 on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union 2004-2008 Available from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA- 2009-0019+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN Accessed 20/7/2010 Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality: An Introduction. (R. Hurley trans). Harmondsworth: Penguin 15 available from http://www.sissco.it/fileadmin/user_upload/Attivita/seminari_sissco/Italia_dopo_il_

 FUORI! (1982) Issue No. 1-30 http://www.omofonie.it/fuori.htm Gay Liberation Front: Manifesto London, 1971, revised 1978 Available from : http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/glf-london.html Accessed 20/7/2010 Gramsci, A. (1975) Quaderni del Carcere. Torino, Einaudi Hall, S. (1990) Cultural identity and diaspora in J. Rutjerford (ed.), Identity: community, culture,difference, London, Lawrence & Wishart Herek, G. M. (1998). Stigma and sexual orientation: Understanding prejudice against lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Hinsch, Bret (1992). Passions of the Cut Sleeve: The Male Homosexual Tradition in China. Oxford: University of California Press ILGA, 2010 Lesbian and Gay rights in the world available from http://ilga.org/ilga/en/article/1161 Accessed 21/7/2010 Italian Health Ministry Decree Ministero della Salute, Decreto 3 Marzo 2005 Available http://www.avis.it/repository/cont_schedemm/1004_documento.pdf 31/7/2010 Italian Health Ministry Decree Ministero della Salute, Decreto 26 Gennaio 2001, Available from: http://www.avis.it/usr_view.php/ID=2292/id_indice=1155 Accessed 31/7/2010 La Repubblica, 15/7/2010 "I gay non possono donare sangue" E un altro ospedale chiude le porte Available from from: Accessed

16

http://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2010/07/15/news/trasfusioni_gay- 5614730/index.html?ref=search Accessed 20/7/2010 La Repubblica, 27/2/2008 Immigrati, Cus, droga, riforma tv tutte le leggi rimaste nel cassetto Available from http://www.repubblica.it/2008/02/sezioni/politica/crisi- governo-7/leggi-slatate/leggi-slatate.html?ref=search Accessed 15/7/2010 Manifesto for Equal Rights Manifesto per l'Eguaglianza Dei Diritti, 2007. Available from http://www.matrimoniodirittogay.it/ Accessed 15/4/2010 NHS Blood and Transplant Exclusion of Men who have Sex with Men from Blood Donation Available from : http://blood.co.uk/can-i-give-blood/exclusion/ Accessed 4/8/2010 OutRage! website Available from http://outrage.org.uk/about/ Slagle, R.A. (1995) In defense of queer nation: From identity politics to a politics of difference. Western Journal of Communication, 1745-1027, Volume 59, Issue 2, 1995, Pages 85 102 Tatchell, P. (2009) End the gay blood ban available from: http://www.petertatchell.net/blood%20ban%20on%20gays/cif-end-the-gay-blood- ban.html Accessed 25/07/2010 The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2008) Homophobia and Discrimination on Grounds of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in the EU Member States The Government Equalities Office Responses To Civil Partnership: A framework for the legal recognition of same-sex couples Available from http://www.equalities.gov.uk/pdf/responses%20to%20civil%20partnership%20-

17

%20a%20framework%20for%20the%20legal%20recognition%20of%20same- sex%20couples.pdf Accessed 5/8/2010 The Terence Higgins Trust Blood donations by people at higher risk of HIV - our policy Accessed 27/07/2010 The Terence Higgins Trust Man Sex Man Second Edition 2004 Available from: http://www.tht.org.uk/informationresources/publications/gaymengerneralinformati on/mansexman519.pdf Accessed 25 July 2010 Troiden, R. R. (1979) Becoming homosexual: a model of gay identity acquisition. Psychiatry, 42, 362373. Troiden, R. R. (1989) A model of Homosexual Identity formation from Gay and Lesbian Identity: A Sociological Analysis. New York: General Hall Troiden, R. R. (1989) The formation of homosexual identities. Journal of Homosexuality, 17(1/2), 4373. Turner et al. (1987) Rediscovering the social group: A Self-Categorization Theory, Oxford: Basil Blackwell World Value Survey Online Data Analysis Italy 1999-2005 Is Homosexuality Justifiable Available from http://www.wvsevsdb.com/wvs/WVSAnalizeQuestion.jsp Accessed 22/7/2010 Yee, N. (2003) Catching The Phoenix: The Social Construction of Homosexuality Available from http://www.nickyee.com/ponder/social_construction.html Accessed 21/6/2010 18 Available from: http://www.tht.org.uk/informationresources/policy/healthpolicy/blooddonations/