Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Is This What Equality Looks Like?

How Assimilation Marginalizes the Dutch LGBT Community

Sexuality Research and Social Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Cite this article

Abstract

Using the Netherlands as a case study, this article explores how increased social acceptance of and legal protections for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people impact their lives. The author draws on in-depth interviews with nine LGBT people to argue that the danger of acceptance is invisibility for those who assimilate and marginalization for those who do not conform to assimilationist discourses, such as transgender individuals and other gender nonconformers. Utilizing Butler’s theories of normalization and Goffman’s theories of stigmatization, the findings also show that assimilating into homonormativity can generate feelings of shame and fear. The author concludes that new approaches in dismantling heteronormativity and seeking equality are needed in order to achieve genuine acceptance for LGBT people.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For a general overview of social scientific methods and in-depth interviewing, see Chambliss and Shut (2006); for a more detailed look at the method of in-depth interviewing, see Taylor and Bogdan (1998)

  2. This research project was conducted through the School for International Training (SIT). SIT did not require the project to go through Institutional Review Board. Each informant had to read and sign a consent form. The consent form was in both Dutch and English—all informants spoke both of these languages fluently.

  3. The Homomonument is a memorial in Amsterdam that honors gays and lesbians who were persecuted during World War II, and the memorial acknowledges the continuing fight against oppression that the LGBT community still faces today (Goldman 2009).

  4. This question was only asked if the interviewee answered “Yes” to question number 7.

References

  • Ahmed, S. (2006). Orientations: toward a queer phenomenology. GLQ, 12, 543–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandzel, A. L. (2005). Queering citizenship?: same-sex marriage and the state. GLQ, 11, 171–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buijs, B., Hekma, B., & Duyvendak, W. D. (2011). ‘As Long as They Keep Away From Me’: the paradox of antigay violence in a gay-friendly country. Sexualities, 14(6), 632–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. (2008). Sexual politics, torture, and secular time. The British Journal of Sociology, 59(1), 1–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chambliss, D. F., & Shut, R. K. (2006). Making sense of the social world: methods of investigation (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, H. L. (1991). Reflections on the lesbian and gay marriage debate. Law & Sexuality, 1, 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duggan, L. (2003). The Twilight of Equality? Neoliberalism, Cultural Politics, and the Attack on Democracy. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duyvendak, J. W. (1996). The depoliticization of the Dutch gay identity, or why Dutch gays aren’t queer. In S. Seidman (Ed.), Queer Theory/Sociology (pp. 421–438). Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: the University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassin, E. (2001). Same sex, different politics: “Gay marriage debates in France and the United States”. Public Culture, 13(2), 215–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamson, J. (2000). Sexualities, queer theory, and qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: theories and issues (pp. 347–365). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerhards, J. (2010). Non-discrimination towards homosexuality: the European Union’s policy and citizens’ attitudes towards homosexuality in 27 European countries. International Sociology, 25(1), 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, J. (2009). Homomonument. GLBTQ: an encyclopedia of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer culture. Chicago: GLBTQ, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haritaworn, J. (2008). Loyal repetitions of the nation: gay assimilation and the “War on terror.” DarkMatter, 3.

  • Hekma, G. (1998). ‘As long as they don’t make an issue of it…’: gay men and lesbians in organized sports in the Netherlands. Journal of Homosexuality, 35, 1–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hekma, G. (2002). Imams and homosexuality: a post-gay debate in the Netherlands. Sexualities, 5(2), 237–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hekma, G. (2004). Queer: the Dutch case. GLQ, 10, 276–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hekma, G. (2005). How libertine is the Netherlands? Exploring contemporary Dutch sexual cultures. In E. Bernstein & L. Schaffner (Eds.), Regulating sex: the politics of intimacy and identity (pp. 209–224). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hekma, G. (2006). The demise of gay and lesbian radicalism in the Netherlands. In M. Chateauvert (Ed.), New social movements & sexuality: conference papers 2004. Sofia: Bilitis Resource Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hequembourq, A., & Arditi, J. (1999). Fractured Resistances: The Debate over assimilationism among gays and lesbians in the United States. The Sociological Quarterly, 40(4), 663–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingraham, C. (1996). The heterosexual imaginary: feminist sociology and theories of gender. In S. Seidman (Ed.), Queer theory/sociology (pp. 168–193). Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jagose, A. (1996). Queer Theory. Washington Square: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keuzenkamp, S. Bos, D. Adolfsen, A. Duyvendak, J. W. & Hekma, G. (2007). Out in the Netherlands: acceptance of homosexuality in the Netherlands. The Netherlands Institute for Social Research.

  • Keuzenkamp, S. (2011). Acceptance of homosexuality in the Netherlands 2011: international comparison, trends, and current situation. The Netherlands Institute for Social Research.

  • Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider. Berkeley: Ten Speed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubbers, M., Jaspers, E., & Ultee, W. (2009). Primary and secondary socialization impacts on support for same-sex marriage after legalization in the Netherlands. Journal of Family Issues, 30, 1714–1745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mepscehn, P., Duyvendark, J. W., & Tonkens, E. H. (2010). Sexual politics, orientalism and multicultural citizenship in the Netherlands. Sociology, 44(5), 962–979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oswin, N. (2007). Producing homonormativity in neoliberal South Africa: recognition, redistribution, and the equality project. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture & Society, 32, 649–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puar, J. K., & Rai, A. (2002). Monster, terrorist, fag: the war on terrorism and the production of docile patriots. Social Text, 20(3), 117–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puar, J. K. (2007). Terrorist assemblages: homonationalism in queer times. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, A. L. (2010). Diversity, dissent, and decision making: the challenge to LGBT politics. GLQ, 16, 465–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stryker, S. (2008). Transgender history, homonormativity, and disciplinarity. Radical History Review, 100, 145–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, N. (2003). A critical introduction to queer theory. Washington Square: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1998). In-depth interviewing. In Introduction to qualitative research methods: a guidebook and resource (3rd ed., pp. 87–116). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentine, D. (2007). Imagining transgender: an ethnography of a category. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valocchi, S. (2005). Not yet queer enough: the lessons of queer theory for the sociology of gender and sexuality. Gender and Society, 19, 750–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitulli, E. (2010). A defining moment in civil rights history? The employment non-discrimination act, trans-inclusion, and homonormativity. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 7, 155–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner, M. (1999). The trouble with normal: sex, politics and the ethics of queer life. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weeks, J. (2008). Regulation, resistance, recognition. Sexualities, 11, 787–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. L., Giuffre, P. A., & Dellinger, K. (2009). The gay-friendly closet. Sexuality Research & Social Policy, 6, 29–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfson, E. (2004). Why marriage matters: America, equality, and gay people’s right to marry. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

First and foremost, I greatly appreciate the anonymous reviewers at Sexuality Research & Social Policy for their encouraging and constructive feedback on this manuscript. I would also like to thank Christine Williams, Kristine Kilanski, Pamela Neumann, Lady Adjepong, and Kate Henley Averett for their support and comments throughout this entire process.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station A1700, Austin, TX, 78712, USA

    Brandon Andrew Robinson

Authors
  1. Brandon Andrew Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brandon Andrew Robinson.

Appendix

Appendix

Interview guide

  1. 1.

    Describe for me your sexual and gender identity.

  2. 2.

    Which term (Holebi or LGBT), if either, do you use to describe the sexual minority community in the Netherlands, and why do you prefer to use this acronym?

  3. 3.

    Can you tell me about your relation to the Dutch sexual minority community?

  4. 4.

    How would you describe the Dutch sexual minority community?

  5. 5.

    What are your opinions on the Dutch idiom: “Doe maar gewoon, dan doe je al gek genoeg” (“Act normal, as that is crazy enough”) in relation to the Dutch sexual minority community?

  6. 6.

    Do you view yourself being outside of this “act normal” notion that the Dutch sexual minority community may at times emulate? If so, why or how?

  7. 7.

    Have you ever felt marginalized by the Dutch sexual minority community? If so, how? And can you describe specific instances?

  8. 8.

    Why do you think you were marginalized by the Dutch sexual minority community and where do you think this marginalization comes from?Footnote 4

  9. 9.

    Do you think the Dutch sexual minority community is fully liberated and the movement has achieved all of its goals? If not, what goals or ends does the movement still need to fight for?

  10. 10.

    What personal solutions do you have in solving the problems within the Dutch sexual minority community?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Robinson, B.A. Is This What Equality Looks Like? . Sex Res Soc Policy 9, 327–336 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-012-0084-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-012-0084-3

Keywords

search

Navigation