First national march for gay rights and freedoms in Paris. April 4, 1981. Photo by: Claude Truong-Ngoc. No changes made. View license here.
By Fionnuala Braun
Fionnuala Braun is an interdisciplinary historian and public health researcher working at the intersection of community, culture, and identity formation. She focusses on justice as a way to advocate for marginalized groups, and believes that writing histories is the best way to reaffirm identity and action in the present. Her current thesis work aims to identify textures of socio-sexual identity in the queer group Arcadie – based in Paris from the 1950s to the 80s.
Abstract: This paper positions itself at a time of flux during the homosexual liberation movement in France. Operating in a space between a conservative past and a radical future, the homosexual group Arcadie found itself occupying a grey area where members often adhered to both radical and conservative viewpoints on how the homosexual movement ought to move forward. While previous scholarship has argued that Arcadie, which ceased to exist in 1982, was mainly a relic of a sexually conservative past by the 1980s, this piece presents the hypothesis that its dissolution was a deliberate act of a socially and politically aware leader. Furthermore, it postulates that Arcadie’s leader, André Baudry, rather than oppressing all expressions of homophile sexuality, created an important place of discovery for many homosexual men who might not have otherwise understood their sexualities. As such, his school of thought served as a framework for those who would eventually go on to found more radical homosexual activism groups in France. The collision of identity, notions of belonging, and a desire to appeal to a popular front are all emblematic of the French body politic during the 1980s. Therefore, Arcadie places itself as a small case study within a broader movement both against and alongside populism and the desires of a modernizing nation.
Keywords:
In May 1982, André Baudry, the combative and mercurial leader of France’s homophile organization Arcadie, gave his final interview as the leader of a movement that had spanned over three decades.[1] In it, he expressed his disillusion with the future of his cause. “They make me want to vomit,” he said of radical homosexual-rights protests in America. “[T]he homosexual must live in the society that he finds himself in…if he differentiates himself to the point of becoming the laughingstock of the population…this is not a good method.”[2] Several days later, Baudry dissolved his organization.[3] After several years of fighting for recognition amongst new, provocative, and politically-centred homosexual movements, Arcadie’s moralistic and often conservative viewpoints could no longer compete. The organization itself – despite being extremely politically aware – refused to take on any public political standpoint, adhering to neutrality to reduce polarization. The future of the French homosexual movement had found itself a new home in the development of Comité d’urgence anti-répression homosexuelle (CUARH), a more radical liberation movement, which fought for political and legal reform by revolutionary means.[4]
CUARH amalgamated many smaller groups into its cause and took on many adherents from Arcadie. Pushed to the sidelines of a field they had once dominated, members of Arcadie watched as CUARH organized a nationwide French march for homosexual legal reform. It drew over 10,000 people, making it the largest homosexual demonstration ever organized in France.[5] To many of the participants in these protests, as well as former Arcadians, it seemed that Arcadie had “missed the boat” – that its failure to side with the more outspoken CUARH had been a critical misjudgment that ultimately led to its dissolution.[6] However, the reality of Arcadie’s end was much more complex. Instead of a single misjudgment or failure to act, the organization’s demise was predicated on years of slow decline – one not caused by a failure to modernize, but by a recognition that their style of organizing no longer had a place in the movement for homosexual emancipation.
Arcadie’s narrative focused on positively presenting the homosexual man in the public eye while simultaneously encouraging homosexuals to consider the possibility of having equal rights. This duality allowed them to occupy a positive place both within homosexual and public discourses. However, as calls for increasingly radical actions mounted, Arcadie’s moderate approach, while having laid the grounds for this radicalization, no longer fit the approach of groups campaigning for liberation. Rather than trying to adapt to a change that went against the most fundamental values of their organization, Baudry and his compatriots chose to take a step back, having laid the framework for a homosexual rights campaign that would ultimately fundamentally shift the landscape of human rights politics in France.
Through the use of interviews with and about Baudry, as well as writings by Michel Foucault, this essay seeks to demonstrate the end of Arcadie not as a singular event. Instead, Arcadie’s dissolution was the conscious decision of the leader of a populist movement – a leader who recognized that populism had laid the groundwork for radicalism but no longer had a place in the modernizing world of homosexual activism. This essay will expand that narrative by placing the constantly shifting needs of both modernity and progress within the transition of respectable homophile to revolutionary homosexual, and by seeking to explain what part Arcadie might have played in pushing progress forward.
Taking a step back from the micronarrative of one organization, the importance of analyzing Arcadie’s final years also takes on a larger issue within the sphere of historical understandings of homosexuality. Historians, such as Vernon A. Rosario and Robert A. Nye in their contributions to the book Homosexuality in Modern France, trace a linear history of progress and modernization in homosexual communities.[7] Beginning with seeing homosexuals as pederasts and medical oddities and moving on to Foucault’s arguments about state-imposed biopower, these historians see French history of homosexuality through a teleological lens, with antiquated ways of being disappearing without a trace in the face of new forms of activism.[8] In America, many historians have taken a similar approach, writing a linear progress narrative. Henry L. Minton’s book Departing from Deviance: A History of Homosexual Rights and Emancipatory Science in America crafts an adept interrogation of how opinions on homosexuality were changed in America – and how it went from a pathology to a natural variation of human life.[9] While this book, and others like it, challenge important aspects of the homosexual movement, very few of them interrogate the ebb and flow of progress.[10] None of the sources discussed above take a deep dive into how progress builds on previous form of action. Rather, they assume that one type of activism emerges from another without acknowledging the trace aspects that link them.
In an anonymously published opinion piece in the homosexual publication Libération in 1982, Michel Foucault heralded Arcadie as the first populist homosexual movement in France.[11] He viewed the organization as a politically calculated one that adhered to neutrality in the face of adversity and placed a respectable face on the increasing recognition of homosexuals as French sexual citizens. This type of organizing made Arcadie approachable. They didn’t take part in reprehensible or vulgar displays of public affection. In fact, the idealized Arcadian man distanced himself from his sexuality, at least publicly. To Foucault, Arcadie represented a shift in homosexual organizing from the elite political sphere into the popular discourse – essentially, making discourses surrounding homosexuality accessible to anyone in France who wanted to participate in them.[12] Arcadie was much more than a movement concerned with the respectability and social acceptability of the gay man. Rather, it demonstrates that their organizing was foundational to planting ideas of emancipation for all homosexuals, and empowering individuals to take responsibility for their own liberation.
Baudry and Arcadie have long been a neglected aspect of the historiographical landscape of European homophile organizations. Julian Jackson, the author of the one comprehensive overview of the organization, makes note in the beginning of his book Living in Arcadia that France’s history of “republican universalism” has largely confined French sexual and personal identities to the private sphere.[13] The little work that has been done on Arcadie has largely been the work of American non-historians, or it has been work done to contribute to the larger discourse of the history of sexuality without a focus on the group itself.[14] Furthermore, anti-American sentiment received a new lease on life during the 1980’s, and thus American practices of historicizing sex and sexuality were largely ignored by French historians during this period.[15]
While the secondary work on Arcadie is extremely limited, primary sources are extensive. During his life, André Baudry gave many interviews, lectured extensively, and frequently published his thoughts in the pages of Arcadie: Revue Littéraire et Scientifique, the club’s annual publication.[16] In all of his statements, he made his positions abundantly clear – the homosexual was to be respectable, socialized, and pleasant.[17] His personal behaviours further served to reinforce what he preached to the members of his club. As one Arcadian remembered, “From time to time…André Baudry would cast a gleaming eye over those present and then he went out again satisfied that everyone was dancing respectably.”[18] Baudry’s constant moralizing was distasteful to some members of Arcadie and simply amusing to others.[19] However, it situated his views with uncompromising clarity – reiterating them countlessly over the course of his life. His testimonies provided a clear view into the sorts of conservative, but emancipatory, rhetoric the average Arcadian might have been exposed to, providing insight into where their own views might have stemmed from. This, in turn, shows the ebb and flow of historical progress and illuminates the role that smaller organizations have had, and may continue to have, in pushing movements forward.
The Homophile Prophet: Arcadie’s Work in Progressing Social and Homosexual Discourses
André Baudry, before all else, was concerned with the public image of his organization. Regardless of what actually occurred at Arcadie’s famous dance nights or during various lectures – with topics ranging from the aesthetic superiority of black bodies to sadomasochism – Baudry was constantly vigilant about how Arcadians were presenting themselves to the world around them.[20] He posted notices outside of the Parisian club headquarters on the Rue du Château d’Eau, informing members that they were not to “gather in gangs…[and be] careful about noise, loud conversations.”[21] While Arcadie’s neighbours likely harboured no delusions about what occurred in the club, it was still of utmost importance that its members comport themselves respectably.[22]
Many of the articles written in Arcadie encouraged similar virtues, exhorting dignity, marriage, and faithfulness to one’s partner.[23] Any small slip could have been seen as proof of what had already been written about homosexuality – that it was a disease that corrupted young, virile men and turned them to hedonism over procreation.[24] Baudry’s non-sexual, respectable homophile man countered that narrative, slowly building the base of the homosexual as a non-threatening presence within everyday life. Furthermore, his high sensitivity to image management was a manifestation of his political consciousness – a theme that continued throughout Arcadie’s lifespan and dictated both the inner and outer workings of the organization.
Once one became a member of Arcadie and was safely ensconced within the walls of the Rue du Château d’Eau, behaviour was much less scrutinized. Private lives of Arcadians ranged from the benign to the flamboyant, with some coming to the weekly dance nights dressed in wigs and gowns, while others cruised for sexual partners in the shadows.[25] While none of this behaviour was strictly allowed, neither was it harshly discouraged.[26] Even Baudry’s own speeches and monthly letters to the club often extolled the virtues of liberation. He discussed the existence of the powerful enemies of homosexuality and denounced the great injustices forced upon members.[27] Personal testimonies from Arcadians state that they felt empowered by Baudry and ready to “give up everything” to fight for the right to love who they wished.[28] While he did encourage conservatism and modesty, Baudry was also a prophet, the first of his kind for many young homosexuals who had previously believed they were the only ones in the world. His organization, as Foucault stated after its collapse, was truly populist in that it was about the people who were a part of it – empowering them, existing for them, instead of for any elite or institution.[29]
Baudry’s own capabilities as an orator, along with providing a safe and welcoming milieu for Arcadians to exist authentically, would have begun to implant the idea that homosexuals were deserving of equal rights under the law. Certainly, after having existed in such a space, no man would have wanted to go back to a hidden life of pretending to be something he was not. Despite holding many conservative views, Baudry found himself in the position to provide an empowering environment – one upon which provided the ideological basis for the liberation movement that followed Arcadie closing its doors.
These two sides of the organization demonstrate the duality that Arcadie navigated daily, which was incredibly valuable in changing homosexual discourse. While operating externally as a group displaying the positive aspects of the community – respectability, dignity, and monogamy – Arcadie was still able to encourage its members to campaign for their rights. By operating simultaneously as a positive force both outside and within homosexual circles, Arcadie was instrumental in establishing a platform upon which homosexuals could campaign for their rights while still gaining allies from outside their community. Without a base of non-homosexual allies and a positive public discourse, it is unlikely that the protests of CUARH would have been as successful. While Baudry presented himself outwardly as conservative and moralistic, the truth of his organization was built upon a much more complex structure of societal acceptability juxtaposed against campaigning for freedom. Certainly, the radical liberation movement was predicated upon decades of diligent work building rapport inside and outside the homosexual community – work completed in large part by Baudry and Arcadie.
The Beginning of the End: CUARH and the Shift to Radical Activism
In July 1982, a full-page article was published in the Parisian homosexual periodical Gai Pied Hebdo, entitled “The End of Arcadie?”[30] The article quoted Baudry himself, stating that “unless there is a miracle, on the 30th of June 1982, [Arcadie] will close its doors.”[31] To people familiar with the inner machinations of publications like Arcadie, Gai Pied, and Libération, this news came as no surprise. There was a new wave of homosexual activism taking the place of the conservative homophile discourses that had dominated the 1950s-1970s. “Arcadian values” of dignity, monogamy and respectability were being supplanted by newer, more radical discourses – some inspired by the actions of radical homosexual groups in the United States.[32] This radical shift reached new heights of success and recognition with the creation of CUARH in the early 1980s.[33] This organization’s mandate was to campaign for the abolition of the most glaring legal discrimination affecting homosexuals.[34] It organized rallies, founded a magazine to lobby for legal reform, and was the catalyst for initiating the largest homosexual demonstration ever to take place in France.[35]
Despite all this, Arcadie refused to join CUARH.[36] Loyal to his policy of political neutrality, Baudry refused to join any sort of lobbying or demonstrations.[37] As such, Arcadie stood aside as CUARH harnessed one of the most successful homosexual activist moments in modern European memory. Fundamental ideological and political differences proved too much for Arcadie and CUARH to reconcile themselves, leading many to accuse Baudry of “missing the boat” of the modernization of homosexual liberation.
The narratives from homosexual publications, however, tell a much more complicated story. Baudry, above all else, was conscious of the public image of his organization. He was hyper-aware of how Arcadians were perceived at all times, and very little escaped his scope when it came to telling the story of his movement. Therefore, by interrogating the interviews Baudry gave to Gai Pied, a Parisian homosexual publication, one can begin to understand his motivations for choosing not to join CUARH or not to put his name forth as an organizer for such a successful movement. While Gai Pied was outspoken in how Arcadie had outlived its usefulness – stating “we could do more things now…you get the sense that the person who prepared [Arcadie and its texts] was not with the times,” – these narratives served not to undermine Arcadie, but rather to set forth the first hints of a shift from populism to radicalism.[38] Baudry, despite being one of the most powerful and respected men in the homosexual community, did nothing to stop these narratives from being circulated. While he did not give his outright approval of them, he certainly did not fight the claims that Arcadie’s approach was no longer fit for a modernizing movement. Furthermore, Baudry’s own interviews to Gai Pied gave the “opinion of Arcadie” – and said in no uncertain terms that Arcadie was not a political organization, and that it condemned issues like a special homosexual vote, which CUARH was campaigning for.[39] In allowing these narratives to circulate, he placed Arcadie in a position to take a back seat to newer organizations that were rallying young people to fight for equal rights. Rather than being a shock decision, his choice to close Arcadie’s doors was one he had hinted at for years. Baudry recognized that his and Arcadie’s roles in the movement had reached their completion. Having laid the framework for organizations like CUARH, Baudry and Arcadie took a back seat and passed the torch on to more radical movements and facilitated the transition from a political populist discourse to one of legal and political emancipation.
Passing the Torch: From Populist to Revolutionary
The story of Arcadie did not end when it announced the end of its review and club. Baudry and his group had allowed the decline of their review to happen naturally, as they saw it was no longer needed. But the legacy and inspiration of their organization left deep imprints on the years of French homosexual liberation that followed. Michel Foucault, as stated previously, had declared Arcadie to be a “populist movement” – a movement that was not indexed to politics or culture.[40] His writings on André Baudry in the months following the closure of Arcadie make it clear that, to Foucault, the group represented an essential shift in homosexual organizing from the political or classist to a universalist milieu revolving around a “people” instead of a “revolution”.[41] Arcadie and Baudry, he claims, were able to do what activists like Magnus Hirschfeld and writers like Stefan George were unsuccessful in doing: humanizing homosexuality.[42] While he acknowledges Arcadie’s staunch adherence to apoliticism, to Foucault, this distance had a distinct advantage in that it permitted the group to reach a wider, more diverse audience.[43] Without its basis as a movement rooted in populism, it is unlikely that so many young homosexuals would have found themselves an organization in which they felt comfortable expressing themselves and their views. Foucault acknowledges this openly, valourizing Baudry as the “homophile prophet.”[44] Despite Arcadie’s successors, such as CUARH and Gai Pied, wanting to confirm their origins in revolutionism, it is unlikely they would have experienced such success so early on if it had not been for the groundwork laid down by Baudry and his fellows.
One of Baudry’s most enlightening statements about the closure of Arcadie revolves around one of the most pivotal moments in homosexual history: the AIDS crisis. In a 2006 interview with the French gay publication Triangul’ère, Baudry expressed his regret that AIDS had not arrived a year earlier – or that Arcadie had not lasted a year longer.[45] He believed it would have given him a reason to continue. Had there been funds, he stated, he likely would have reorganized Arcadie to respond to the crisis.[46] These statements are illuminating as to how Baudry saw – and continued to perceive – Arcadie’s purpose. He was clearly strategic with how Arcadie responded to public discourses by keeping an eye on current issues in the homosexual community; this goes without saying. However, his wish to respond to the AIDS crisis shows that he also believed the existence of Arcadie was predicated on Baudry’s ability to see its relevance in the political and social landscape of the time. Certainly, the need for a populist homosexual movement increased during the AIDS crisis, with revolutionary organizations leading the charge for liberation, but also alienating many homosexuals and allies who felt that such direct action only caused more polarization in the public discourse.[47] Constrained by financial difficulties, Baudry found himself unable to respond how he might have liked. However, his intentions were clear. Arcadie’s existence was very much dependent on the social climate and on whether Baudry believed he could be of use. Therefore, it would be remiss to argue that his original closure of the organization was not enacted strategically, thoughtfully, and with the utmost awareness of the climate of homosexual activism at the time.
Conclusion: The Importance of Challenging Dominant Narratives and Linear History
Historians like Julian Jackson, through works like Living in Arcadia, have brought our attention to the importance of individual homophile groups and leaders like Arcadie and André Baudry. However, by adhering to the narrative of linear progress and a Darwinian elimination of groups that no longer conformed to the dominant societal narrative, much is left to be interrogated in the history of homosexual activism and rights. The reduction of the end of Arcadie to a simple act of “missing the boat” and failing to adopt revolutionary activism erases the organization’s significant importance as France’s first populist homophile organization. This paper does not seek to invalidate Jackson’s groundbreaking work on Arcadie – rather, it works to complexify the narrative he presents. By painting André Baudry and his organization as strategic historic actors who took ownership of their own relevance, we can begin to complexify the narrative of homosexual history itself. Instead of representing Arcadie as a group that simply failed to step up in the face of modernization, the sources interrogated here show how Baudry was a modern actor – one who laid the basis for the radical emancipation that came in the 1980s. Furthermore, we can begin to see Baudry as the leader of a populist movement that was incredibly aware of public discourse. Rather than simply allowing his organization to be swallowed by the larger, commercial homosexual groups of the 1980s, Baudry strategically stepped back from the public discourse, knowing he had achieved what he wanted – the humanization and emancipation of the homosexual in the public gaze. He had set the course for a future of discourse, action, and modernization that led not only to the CUARH protests in the 1980s, but by extension also to the populist and political French emancipation movement that is still fighting for homosexual rights to this day.
In the final chapter of Living in Arcadia, Jackson makes the argument that we are “all Arcadian now.”[48] This statement carries the weight of more than an organization that fell to a modernizing form of activism. Rather, it shows Arcadie’s true power as a rallying force. Whether or not we recognize it, Arcadie’s influence has had a lasting ripple effect on homosexual identity politics in the 21st century. In this sense, we can say that André Baudry’s strategic step back from homosexual activism worked exactly as he intended. Modern French homosexual emancipation would not exist without his carefully calculated choice – and in this way, all French homosexual activists carry a small part of the Arcadian doctrine within their own work.
Endnotes
[1] Julian Jackson, Living in Arcadia: Homosexuality, Politics, and Morality in France from the Liberation to AIDS (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009), 233.
[2] André Baudry, “Des homosexuels sous condition,” interview by Gai Pied, May 1982, LGBTQ History and Culture Since 1940.
[3] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231 and Christian Colombani, “La fin d’”Arcadie” “Et quant à moi, André Baudry…”,” Le Monde, July 2, 1982, https://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/1982/07/02/la-fin-d-arcadie-et-quant-a-moi-andre-baudry_3105972_1819218.html.
[4] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[5] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[6] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[7] Robert A. Nye, “Michel Foucault’s Sexuality and the History of Homosexuality in France,” in Homosexuality in Modern France, ed. Jeffrey Merrick and Bryant T. Ragan (Oxford University Press, 1996), https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195093032.003.0011; and Vernon A. Rosario, “Pointy Penises, Fashion Crimes, and Hysterical Mollies: The Pederastsʼ Inversions,” in Homosexuality in Modern France, ed. Jeffrey Merrick and Bryant T. Ragan (Oxford University Press, 1996), https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195093032.003.0008.
[8] Nye, “Michel Foucault’s Sexuality and the History of Homosexuality in France,” 229.
[9] Henry L. Minton, Departing from Deviance: A History of Homosexual Rights and Emancipatory Science in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002).
[10] See Eric Cervini, The Deviant’s War: The Homosexual vs. the United States of America (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2020) and Alison Avery et al., “America’s Changing Attitudes toward Homosexuality, Civil Unions, and Same-Gender Marriage: 1977-2004,” Social Work 52, no. 1 (January 2007), https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=EAIM&u=usaskmain&id=GALE%7CA161396389&v=2.1&it=r.
[11] Michel Foucault (Didier Eribon pseud.), “Le Départ Du Prophète,” Libération, July 12, 1982.
[12] Foucault (Didier Eribon pseud.) “Le Départ Du Prophète.”
[13] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 4.
[14] See Sylvie Chaperon, “L’histoire Contemporaine Des Sexualités En France,” Vingtième Siècle: Revue d’histoire, no. 72 (2002), Anne-Claire Rebreyend, “Comment Écrire l’histoire Des Sexualités Au XXe Siècle? Bilan Historiographique Comparé Français/Anglo-Américain,” CLIO: Histoires, Femmes et Sociétés 22 (2005): 185–209 and Eric Fassin, “The Purloined Gender: American Feminism in a French Mirror,” French Historical Studies 22 (1999): 113–38.
[15] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 5.
[16] To differentiate between Arcadie as an organization and Arcadie as a publication, the publication will be referred to from this point on in italics.
[17] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 160; Christopher Miles, “Arcadie, Ou l’impossible Eden,” La Révue H no. 2 (1996).
[18] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 153.
[19] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 160.
[20] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 154-156.
[21] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 154.
[22] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 154.
[23] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 127-128.
[24] Alessio Ponzio, “‘What They Had Between Their Legs Was A Form Of Cash’: Homosexuality, Male Prostitution and Intergenerational Sex in 1950s Italy,” Historical Reflections/Réflexions Historiques 46, no. 1 (Spring 2020).
[25] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 151-157.
[26] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 151.
[27] André Baudry, En France, Personal Letter, 1964 and André Baudry, Cher Ami, Personal Letter 1962.
[28] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 159-160.
[29] Foucault (Didier Eribon pseud.), “Le Départ Du Prophète.”
[30] Y.E., “La Fin d’Arcadie?,” Gai Pied Hebdo, July 1982, Periodicals from ONE National Gay and Lesbian Archives, LGBTQ History and Culture Since 1940, Part II.
[31] Y.E., “La Fin d’Arcadie?”
[32] Baudry, “Des homosexuels sous condition.”
[33] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[34] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[35] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[36] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[37] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[38] Arnal, “Arcadie: L’éternité Moins Le Paragraphe 3,” and Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 231.
[39] Y.E., “André Baudry et Le Vote Rose,” Gai Pied Hebdo, March 1981, Periodicals from ONE National Gay and Lesbian Archives, LGBTQ History and Culture Since 1940, Part II.
[40] Foucault (Didier Eribon pseud.), “Le Départ Du Prophète.”
[41] Foucault (Didier Eribon pseud.), “Le Départ Du Prophète.”
[42] Foucault (Didier Eribon pseud.), “Le Départ Du Prophète” and Marita Keilson-Lauritz, “Stefan George’s Concept of Love and the Gay Emancipation Movement,” in A Companion to the Works of Stefan George, ed. Jens Rieckmann (Boydell & Brewer, 2005), 207–30, https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/companion-to-the-works-of-stefan-george/stefan-georges-concept-of-love-and-the-gay-emancipation-movement/29D4856372F519DC3AF135809438783E.
[43] Foucault (Didier Eribon pseud.), “Le Départ Du Prophète.”
[44] Foucault (Didier Eribon pseud.) “Le Départ Du Prophète.”
[45] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 247.
[46] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 247.
[47] Jan Willem Duyvendak, “The Dutch Approach to an Epidemic: Or Why ‘Act Up!’ Did Not Succeed in the Netherlands,” Acta Politica 20, no. 2 (1995): 189–214.
[48] Jackson, Living in Arcadia, 253.
References
Anonymous. “A. Baudry n’en Sera Plus,” Gai Pied Hebdo, May 1981. Periodicals from ONE National Gay and Lesbian Archives. LGBTQ History and Culture Since 1940, Part II.
Arnal, Frank. “Arcadie: L’éternité Moins Le Paragraphe 3.” Gai Pied Hebdo, December 1980. Periodicals from ONE National Gay and Lesbian Archives. LGBTQ History and Culture Since 1940, Part II.
Avery, Alison, Justin Chase, Linda Johansson, Samantha Litvak, Darrel Montero, and Michael Wydra. “America’s Changing Attitudes toward Homosexuality, Civil Unions, and Same-Gender Marriage: 1977-2004.” Social Work 52, no. 1 (January 2007). https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/52.1.71.
Baudry, André. Cher Ami. Personal letter, 1962.
Baudry, André. Des homosexuels sous condition, May 1982. LGBTQ History and Culture Since 1940, Part II.
Baudry, André. En France. Personal letter, 1964.
Cervini, Eric. The Deviant’s War: The Homosexual vs. the United States of America. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2020.
Chaperon, Sylvie. “L’histoire Contemporaine Des Sexualités En France.” Vingtième Siècle: Revue d’histoire, no. 72 (2002).
Colombani, Christian. Le Monde. “La fin d’”Arcadie” “Et quant à moi, André Baudry…”.” July 2, 1982. https://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/1982/07/02/la-fin-d-arcadie-et-quant-a-moi-andre-baudry_3105972_1819218.html.
Duyvendak, Jan Willem. “The Dutch Approach to an Epidemic: Or Why ‘Act Up!’ Did Not Succeed in the Netherlands.” Acta Politica 20, no. 2 (1995): 189–214.
Fassin, Eric. “The Purloined Gender: American Feminism in a French Mirror.” French Historical Studies 22 (1999): 113–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/286704.
Foucault, Michel (Didier Eribon pseud.). “Le Départ Du Prophète.” Libération, July 12, 1982.
Jackson, Julian. Living in Arcadia: Homosexuality, Politics, and Morality in France from the Liberation to AIDS. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009.
Keilson-Lauritz, Marita. “Stefan George’s Concept of Love and the Gay Emancipation Movement.” In A Companion to the Works of Stefan George, edited by Jens Rieckmann, 207–30. Boydell & Brewer, 2005.
Miles, Christopher. “Arcadie, Ou l’impossible Eden.” La Révue H, no. 2, 1996.
Minton, Henry L. Departing from Deviance: A History of Homosexual Rights and Emancipatory Science in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002.
Nye, Robert A. “Michel Foucault’s Sexuality and the History of Homosexuality in France.” In Homosexuality in Modern France, edited by Jeffrey Merrick and Bryant T. Ragan. Oxford University Press, 1996.
Ponzio, Alessio. “‘What They Had Between Their Legs Was A Form Of Cash’: Homosexuality, Male Prostitution and Intergenerational Sex in 1950s Italy.” Historical Reflections/Réflexions Historiques 46, no. 1 (Spring 2020). https://doi.org/10.3167/hrrh.2020.460105.
Rebreyend, Anne-Claire. “Comment Écrire l’histoire Des Sexualités Au XXe Siècle? Bilan Historiographique Comparé Français/Anglo-Américain.” CLIO: Histoires, Femmes et Sociétés 22 (2005): 185–209. https://doi.org/10.4000/clio.1776.
Rosario, Vernon A. The Pederastsʼ Inversions.” In Homosexuality in Modern France, edited by Jeffrey Merrick and Bryant T. Ragan. Oxford University Press, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195093032.003.0008.
Y.E. “André Baudry et Le Vote Rose.” Gai Pied Hebdo, March 1981. Periodicals from ONE National Gay and Lesbian Archives. LGBTQ History and Culture Since 1940, Part II.
Y.E. “La Fin d’Arcadie?” Gai Pied Hebdo, July 1982. Periodicals from ONE National Gay and Lesbian Archives. LGBTQ History and Culture Since 1940, Part II.