"Dr." Eric Cervini

His last name means cute little deer in Italian.

[quote]A beautiful mind or just another pretty privileged pro?

Completely depends on whether there is actual scholarship behind his work or whether it's merely sound bites for the twitter age.

Is he playing fast and loose with facts to support some delusional made-up history or does he make sound, well-reasoned points.

My agreement with him is not a prerequisite.

OP, is that an abbreviation for ElderLoungers?

faggy smile. Way too twinky for me

Dr. Serve Weenie

I don't know. His presentation seems too focused on his appearance. In my (European) country, historians tend to be quite conservative. I feel that his social media presence / way of presenting himself would undermine his credibility as a scholar, although he definitely seems to have the appropriate qualifications. Then again, I suspect that this way of 'branding' himself could work quite well in the US, especially in Cali. Here in mainland Europe, he probably wouldn't be taken seriously.

Other than that, he seems like nice and intelligent guy (if a bit too 'Queer'-focused for my taste), and is definitely handsome. His boyfriend as well. I wish him/them success.

Where is the COCK????!!???!!??!?!?!?

Doesn't admit his own privilege.

Just noticed... 'Author | Historian | Homosexual'?

Not only does it sound stupid, it's also a real turn-off that he has to stress his homosexuality like this. Seems like being a homo is his profession. Also, a pre-order package for his book? With politically correct Sylvia and Masha campaign buttons and launch party invitation? Marketing shit like this undermines his professionality and credibility as a scholar.

Can't wait until he starts his own OnlyFans account.

There are no quotation marks around his title, OP: he has a Ph.D. from Cambridge in History, so he is a genuine doctor of philosophy.

Also, it looks like he actually currently does not have an academic job, which is not surprising because it's very hard to get an academic job in the US with a Ph.D. from a British university in the humanities, even Oxford or Cambridge. (Usually people have not had enough experience teaching because the UK schools have very abbreviated times to degree for their doctorates.)

He has a codpiece....ummm...a codpast......ummm....a podcast. Well, you knowww....

Fans have an opportunity to have a wank while hearing him read about old-timey homosex!

Just watched his quarantine videos on Facebook. He's ok I guess, but man there's nothing more annoying than people with a Phd who call themselves doctors. This dude introduces himself as Dr. Eric, so exhausting.

The book is probably his dissertation--people in the humanities are rewarded for books more than research papers. His bio mentions being summa cum laude from Harvard, the kind of detail that people stop mentioning once they have a PhD. The books sounds like cataloging a lot that many of us already know.

He’s a top isn’t he?

People still read books?

Professional gays are exhausting.

Looks like Boo Radley to me.

Looks like Boo Radley to me.

I bought the book...the kindle version, so I can embiggen the font. He's going to send me the bookplate anyway. I think he's adorable. And Frank Kameny's chapter of the gay saga is well worth knowing more about. I wish Eric weren't so comfortable using LGBTQ instead of "gay." It's going to hurt if he starts talking about "the LGBTQs of 1978," etc.

Chicago's Windy City Times, usually objective, goes lowbrow:

'Hunky Historian' @ericcervini explores life of astronomer-turned-activist Frank Kameny in new book #gayhistory #gaybooks #frankkameny

He's about as cute as it is possible to be, and I spent most of my life in DC, so his book on Frank Kameny sounds like a good read. I have two books to finish before I get to The Deviants' War.

He's scheduled a number of online book tour events. Depending on where you look, he's interviewing author and gay historian Eric Marcus either tonight or on June 9. Marcus is one of the few people Cervini is interviewing on his tour in whom I have a genuine interest.

Is anyone clear on when this is actually happening?

Sad look in his eyes. I'm sure he's not stupid as Oxbridge don't give away PhDs just for having a hot ass.

R22 I just heard from Eric Cervini, who told me "Sorry, we're postponing until next week." So the Eric Marcus talk is June 9 now.

the chin

Brian Sims fans can watch him and Eric tonight at 6:00 eastern.

Is it wrong that I want to buy his book mainly because he's so hot?

Erm, I think he’s counting on that, R27.

No, and he's counting on it. It's a good read, though.

You don't have to be a woman to have the advantage that good looks offer

Alok is on his "tour". Gross.

Eric's coming out story.

He comes closer in both look and affect to my original mental picture of Michael "Mouse" Tolliver in the [italic]Tales of the City[/italic] books than anyone I've ever seen.

[quote] Just noticed... 'Author | Historian | Homosexual'

I find “Homosexualist” works much better in such formal settings.

A Ph.D and he can’t figure out that the IPhone should be in landscape orientation for recording video?

You call him a professor OP. Where is he a professor at? Think you just made that up.

Google doesn't show any university has hired him. And he doesn't call himself one, just describes himself as an author.

He is trying to make a living as an author r6, that's why he is so shameless about PR and marketing himself. Really he is just a guy who finished grad school last year and is trying to become self-made success.

This man did nothing to earn love and admiration other than be born with a beautiful face. Now I understand the anger of other towers white for earning things just because the color of their skin. This man will never know the pain many of us have because he was born with a beautiful face.

R34, not if you're watching the video on a phone. You don't have to rotate the screen to watch it in full screen. Watching a horizontally filmed video on a phone can be quite of an operation since most people keep the screen locked in the portrait mode.

If you are planning to post the video online, you’re a moron to record it in portrait mode.

R39, many or even most people these days go online on their phones. For them it's easier to watch videos filmed in portrait mode. Nothing moronic about that.

R9 Quite right. If he must make mention of it at all, he should have declared himself a [italic] Homosexualist [/italic].

Hot, OP?

Well, he's certainly no John Boswell.

R29 But what makes it 'a good read'.

He may be cute now but he'll be as cute as Andrew Sullivan soon.

This Year's Sensation/Next Year's Embarrassment.

[quote]He may be cute now but he'll be as cute as Andrew Sullivan soon.

Andrew Sullivan was not cute at this age. I knew him then.

R45 How close did you know him?

I've watched several of his book interviews. He cannot shut up about "trans women of color" being responsible for Stonewall. I thought that was debunked?

If you live in DC, you probably don't need to hear anymore about Frank Kameny. The good he did was somewhat balanced by his attention whoring in later years as well as his fondness for barely twinks. The last one basically scammed him out of his house.

not sure. I hate the whole marketing bullshit aspect of publishing, and really it's an aspect of pretty much everything in this shit culture, but I can't really blame him for jumping into that if it's what it takes to get his book out there.

[quote]As an authority on 1960s gay activism, Cervini serves on the Board of Directors of the Harvard Gender and Sexuality Caucus and on the Board of Advisors of the Mattachine Society of Washington, D.C., a nonprofit dedicated to the preservation of gay American history.

Any true Gay Historian who has done even a single semester of research and is still pushing the unsupported "Trans Women of Color" fetish deserves an F- in Gay History!

I'm so tired of these queens.

The book has a strong narrative line, r43. Like reading a good novel. There was another book about this period a year or two ago, a bio of Ike's assistant someone-or-other that was nothing but a collection of facts, so bereft of any storytelling, I couldn't finish it.

The Deviants' War is NOT that book. It's filled, not only with the large conflict that is the history of our gay lives, but also with some of the smaller ones, the wants and frustrations and joys of the different players. I like it so much, I'm parceling it out. I read 20%, then chose another book to read. I'm back to it again. I don't want to finish it too quickly.

As for Sylvia and Marsha, I'm looking forward to Cervini's interview of Eric Marcus tonight (Tuesday, 6/9/20 at 7:30 PM eastern). It is in Marcus' blog that Marsha P. Johnson states that she and Sylvia Rivera were uptown when the Stonewall riot started in 1969—not down on Christopher Street. Apparently they did [italic]not[/italic] throw the first brick (scroll down to the text right below the painting of Marsha with the blue background).

[quote]Marsha: The way I winded up being at Stonewall that night, I was having a party uptown. And we were all out there and Miss Sylvia Rivera and them were over in the park having a cocktail.

[quote]I was uptown and I didn’t get downtown until about two o’clock, because when I got downtown the place was already on fire. And it was a raid already. The riots had already started.

Yet, as r47 and r50 allude to, Cervini is one of their biggest fans, putting forth the "trans women of color" proposition. I haven't gotten there in the book yet, but yes, we have heard him say it, over and over.

r46 Young Mr. Loads was a friend of mine's AIDS buddy. He was as rodent-y looking then as (I imagine) he is now (I haven't looked in a while). Maybe more so without all the padding.

Let us know if they address the "trans women of color started the Stonewall riots" bit.

When they say "trans women of color" do they mean transvestites who wear ladies clothes or transexuals who go through surgery?

The current fashion for being undecided wasn't around during the Stonewall uprising.

He’s a babe.

If he's pushing the Marsha Myth, PASS.

Call me when he has an OnlyFans when he dresses up as historical figures taking it up the bum.

He's short and he wears glasses which he takes off when posing.

And he's an Aries.

Ph.Ds who insist on using Dr should be shunned.

R58 All this stuff was well and truly covered in this very thorough compilation back in 1978

Rabid homosexualist!

What about me!

I recognized him when I saw this post, but only because my Instagram and Facebook accounts have been spammed by ads from him. The ads claim he is a historian and scholar but they promote him like an Instaho. And sorry, but I am Gen X and sexy photoshoots plus a Ph.D. are not a combo that is going to effectively sell me anything.

Hey DLer, did you just ask that question about "trans women of color"? hahaha Cause that was the first question he got.

No, I did get to bump it up, though, r64. Call me Bump Bitch.

He doesn't have an Instagram account.

yes he does

Where are the shirtless Instaho pictures for this nubile young man who's selling his looks (rather than his brains)?

here you go

Love him!!

So what was the answer to the "trans women of color" question?

They appeared with that they last week.

r71, if you're speaking specifically about the "first brick" question, Eric Marcus said that what Marsha said in her interview is good enough for him, and for official gay history: they were uptown when it started, and Marsha got down to Christopher Street around 2:00 am.

The Erics agreed about "the mythology" of Sylvia and Marsha being more important than the actual "who was exactly where and when they were there" on the night Stonewall began. Also, what's really important is each of them was instrumental in future gay rights work, e.g., IIRC, Gay Activists Alliance, and the organization that eventually became Lambda Legal.

So is he going to continue the "trans women of color gave us gay rights" myth?

I have no respect for anyone who appears with attention whore Alok, either.

[quote]So is he going to continue the "trans women of color gave us gay rights" myth?

I don't know. In the sense that they were instrumental post-Stonewall, I imagine so. To me, it then becomes a matter of whether they thought of themselves as trans or as drag queens. The first time I ever met a man who was engaged in the process of transitioning was 1978, and she was a very feminine-appearing, petite person. IDK whether Marsha and Sylvia seemed, or even wanted to seem, like women the way my friend did.

I have a good friend who will occasionally dress up as a woman, but he makes no attempt to hide his beard, his armpit hair in a sleeveless dress, his leg hair, etc. My mental picture of M&S is of two people more like this guy, but again, I do not know what their affect was like.

There's no such thing as LGBT history and in what way were trans women of colour instrumental post-Stonewall?

r76 Mention was made in the Eric Marcus interview of Marsha and/or Sylvia's apparently being involved post-Stonewall with GAA and with the organization that became Lambda Legal. I'm not trying to sell this point, btw. I'm simply passing on what I remember hearing last night. I frequently sign posts "AncientGay," so my memory may be not quite perfect.

I googled, and the GAA wiki mentions Sylvia Rivera:

[quote]The group was incorporated by Hal Weiner, Esq., of Coles & Weiner, a two-person firm, after Weiner defended Sylvia Rivera in a criminal court proceeding where she had been arrested in Times Square while obtaining signatures on a petition for the first proposed LGBTQ legislation in the New York City Council, Intro 475, and charged with soliciting for the purpose of sex, rather than exercising a civil right to petition.

R73 Someone who embraces "mythology" is NOT an historian.

People who prefers feelings over facts is NOT an historian.

Take it up with them, r78. I'm just telling you what I heard.

Preferred pronoun: "a" before "historian."

[quote]People who prefers feelings over facts is NOT an historian.

Oh, double dear.

R77, one person "being involved" in a couple of organisations (which could mean maybe having gone to one social event put on by that organisation) doesn't mean anything. Thousands of people were probably involved on some level, and the vast majority would have been white gay men and lesbians, but it is forbidden to mention them these days. Of course GAA would mention any connection with Sylvia, we are in the era of the cult of Marsha and Sylvia, where they apparently were everywhere and did everything and anyone attempting to point out facts like Sylvia was not at Stonewall and Marsha was barely there is crushed and cancelled by the online mob.

Everywhere I fucking look online all I see is bullshit about how "The stunning and brave Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera started Stonewall. We would not have same-sex marriage if it wasn't for them". They would never even have considered themselves as transwomen, for a start.

One positive thing that could come from Cervini's book is that he focuses on what was going on pre-Stonewall. The whole Stonewall thing is being turned into a freakish cult too, it's significance being blown out of all proportion because that allows the creation of a neat mythology of how "trans women of colour single-handedly brought about gay rights and all gays have to bow down to them".

Anyone remember Edith Windsor? She literally won the right to same-sex marriage in the US - her name is in the title of the Supreme Court case that overturned DOMA and made same-sex marriage possible, United States v. Windsor. This happened not even ten years ago yet Edith Windsor has been airbrushed out of "LGBT" history because she was a white biological female lesbian.

Just a few short years ago, Edith Windsor was a hero. Now no one remembers her. Instead, we have to bow down to Marsha P. Johnson, who was just an average person on the gay scene of NYC but whose figure has been plucked from semi-obscurity to promote an ideology that - if taken to its logical extent (as its proponents want to do) - would delegitimise gays because what is central to us is being attracted to our own sex, but trans ideology does not permit any mention of sex and even rejects sex as a category that has any meaning for human existence.

So essentially trans women of color weren't "instrumental", and the ones that were involved with gay and lesbian organizations (prior to LGB+T) may not even have been "trans" as it means today, they were primarily gay or lesbian cross dressers.

Historians aren't philosophers. They should definitely not be trafficking in promoting "myths" as fact, which this guy is.

So basically years after Stonewall, pet tokens of the cause Marsha and Sylvia occasionally popped up within white gay and lesbian-founded organizations to be shoved in front of the cameras, and got lots of attention because they were radical guys in dresses and really loud and flamboyant.

I've been going to Gay Pride Parades and rallies since 1981 (before they took the word ""Gay" out of it!) and Marsha would be in the parade, but she wasn't given more or less importance than other Stonewall participants, she was just out front wearing a dress. It is literally all she had and people clapped. Her mythology hadn't been written yet. Her canonization is so bizarre to me.

I wish Dr. Cutie Pie would be a lot more public in his findings about "the myth being more important than the facts" that neither of our "transwomen of color" were really present, or imperative at the start of the Stonewall events. Marsha just looks like a delighted onlooker. That's not really doing anything, is it?

R84, I believe it was Eric Marcus who made the comment about "the myth." But Eric Cervini agreed with him.

R13, I agree with you, yet here's the other side of the argument. You work damn hard to get the PhD....course work, research, writing, jumping through loops to please your advisor. It's a great deal of sacrifice. At the end, you've earned the damn title. That's especially true for women and minority groups

That said, it's ridiculous to use it outside a college campus. People assume here in the US that you're an MD. There are a few (mostly male) who are a bit insufferable, and they insist upon you calling them the title.

I assume this guy calls himself "Dr. Eric" as a moniker to increase his visibility, increase notice of his scholarship, get "likes" on social media, and earn a living. It doesn't look like he's going the tenure-track root to me.

I beg your pardon. I meant "route" not "root" at R86.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!

He's a very busy bee with snagging other gay talking heads to placate the THEYs.

"the THEYs," r88?

You know exactly what I mean.

A further irony is that while his book is about Frank Kameny and the pre-Stonewall gay rights struggle, he's aligned his talks with revisionist "woke" now-establishment POC talking heads who erase anything pre-Sylvia/Marsha, and probably can't pronounce Kameny's name, let alone share anything about his work.

R77 - Sylvia was also a prostitute. For her to be getting signatures for something in Times Square in the 70's was an odd choice. Many people ran through that area because it was all hookers and junkies.

She could have obtained signatures in Grand Central, Penn Station, and other places.

Sylvia was loose with the truth and, frankly, no one respected her appearance at gay pride rallies in the 80's and 90's.

r90 Oh, God, you're right. Having a SLOW day. Thanks.

Am I the only one who doesn't find him devastatingly good-looking?

Cute. Certainly. And the bar is notoriously low in academia. But I think DL (and social media) is making way too much of his face/body.

Best of luck to him, anyway.

I prefer Josh Gates.

My impression was that Eric Cervini is heavily invested in the "trans women of color" mythology. He even brought up the possibility that Marsha and Sylvia were remembering incorrectly later in their lives during their interview with Eric Marcus! He is DETERMINED to credit them for Stonewall and frankly, it turned me off and made all his research somewhat suspect to me. He seems to have an agenda and if someone is willing to bend the truth on the air in front of everybody, why wouldn't he do it in secret with only him and the papers and letters he references? Despite what Eric Marcus said, Cervini would NOT admit that Sylvia and Marsha did not throw the first bricks. He said the 'mythology' is too important. He also said that Sylvia is responsible for Lambda Legal and that "you can thank Sylvia Rivera for same-sex marriage!"

Kameny was an attention whore in his later years. he practically demanded to be trotted out even though decades went by where he was not an highky active part of the DC gay community.

His little pink button nose looks like a clitoral hood.

[quote]probably can't pronounce Kameny's name

One of the first people he made those videos with [italic]couldn't[/italic] pronounce "Kameny." His pronunciation rhymed with the famous Ayatollah's last name.

yikes, overbearing personality......annoying

dr of what ???

Dr of "fuk", Fuk Troll r100.

"Dr." Eric Cervini, "Dr." of "Trans Woman of Color" Mythology!

I've been listening to Eric Marcus' podcast, and his first interview was with Sylvia Rivera. Within in the first couple of minutes she states emphatically that the Stonewall was not a drag bar or a black bar. What's more, if they didn't know you they wouldn't let you in. The cops would come in to get their payoff and the patrons would throw coins at them in annoyance.

Dismantling the myth of TWOC starting Stonewall has become an annual ritual...

This video is pretty revealing, juxtaposing contemporary witnesses with TWOC. It also emphasizes the importance of respecting historical facts.

That's why I have a hard time respecting Cervini; it's not the job of historians to repeat popular myths and narratives, they have an obligation to research facts, document their sources meticulously, and put these findings into the proper historical context. Historians are conservative and there is nothing more discrediting to them than giving the appearance of putting your agenda before proper methodology.

Agreed!

The Stonewall You Know is a Myth, and That's NOT OK!

R104 - I would say that Historians are 'cautious' - saying they're conservative, while being accurately used as word, makes some people think of it in a political way, particularly in this argument.

Peer review can and does have most researchers shaking in their boots. If you make uncredited claims, it won't be long until others will correct you.

It sounds like this guy doesn't have an interest in academia if he is supporting unfounded myths. But I support any publications that make TRUE gay rights pioneers as part of gay rights discussions.

Frank Kameny, Phyllis Lyons, Harry Hay - the list goes on and on. They did a fucking lot more than throw a brick or put on a dress and march at the front of a parade every June.

R107 the problem is that he's using his historian and doctorate credentials to push forward a myth as reality. Sure if he's questioned about it directly he may admit it's not based in fact, but everything else he says and does is supportive of the myth, not facts.

It's like the trans women who push forward a trans biologist who hides behind her degree to support trans arguments about biology and gender. They're pretending they are rooting their arguments in actual science but they are, in fact, not.

Agreed, 'cautious' might be a better word. In my native language, 'conservative' is generally understood in a broader sense with a bit less political baggage (at least, less specific political baggage); but it makes sense--in an American context--to choose another, less loaded word.

R109 - we use it that way as well in many circumstances, but the term is more charged when it comes to this issue.

Unfortunately, the Republican party has co-opted this word despite there being relatively nothing about their politics that is conservative. They're just right-wing and benefiting to the wealthy.

And they've made the word 'liberal' almost a curse word as well. That word also has to be used judiciously now.

Who? No one cares about this complete non entity.

As Rivera points out, those who could not hide their sexuality--who could not "pass"--were on the front lines because they had nothing to lose. They were already being bullied, berated, "cured," taunted, etc. This much is true, and the service they did for the gay movement is invaluable. So I don't understand the reticence in simply stating the truth: Neither River nor Blackburn arrived at the Stonewall riot until the early hours of the morning, after it was well underway. The truth to me is more interesting than some made-up agenda full of mythological "facts."

R112 - I would say those who did have something to lose were even more brave. Those before Stonewall and after Stonewall who actually changed things socially and legally by having people see that we are human beings deserving of the same rights - that was invaluable.

His surname makes me think he's Italian and Lapsed-Catholic.

The fact that he believes in the "the mythology of Sylvia" confirms it.

Will Sylvia become a Patron Saint for Catholics? I think it's only inevitable.

Her miracle was being two places at once! Both at Stonewall at the start of the riots (so she could throw a brick) and drunk and turning tricks a mile away.

The Catholic Church usually likes to get some kind proof before beatifying a new saint.

So I'm sure pretty, young Eric will provide some "documentation" of Saint Sylvia's miracle.

When is someone gonna write a book debunking this shit? What is taking so long?!!

r116 the proof is ask anyone on Twitter, Stonewall, faux historians, Mermaids, or all the other gay or trans organizations pushing this "trans savior" myth.

This wasn't really a question or problem for decades - until the last few years with you know who.

^. It has nothing to do with you know who.

It's been a problem for the last decade when people started believing in myths rather than facts. They think they can change their sex as well as change our history.

His book just received a pretty good review yesterday in "The New York Times Book Review" yesterday.

And Charles Kaiser reviews it in the Washington Post.

Could someone copy and paste the reviews? I'd be curious to read them.

Charles Kaiser's review in the Post (June 12, 2020 at 8:00 a.m. EDT). Charles Kaiser is the author of three books, including “The Gay Metropolis: The Landmark History of Gay Life in America.” He is acting director of the LGBTQ Policy Center at Hunter College.

[bold]How a stubborn ex-federal employee launched the gay rights movement.[/bold]

Just because you’re gay doesn’t mean you’re sick.

Today that simple declaration is the conventional wisdom in civilized cities and towns all over the world. But as recently as the 1960s, almost no educated person believed it, whether they were gay, straight, lesbian, bisexual or trans.

One brilliant, litigious and exceptionally stubborn man did more to change the mind of the world than anyone else. His name was Frank Kameny, a Harvard-educated astronomer who lived his whole adult life in Washington. Kameny may be responsible for more fundamental social change in the post-World War II world than any other American of his generation, but it’s usually only students of gay history who know that.

“The Deviant’s War” is a brilliant new book that ought to change that forever. The author, a young Harvard- and Cambridge-educated historian named Eric Cervini, is a smooth writer and a brilliant researcher. Besides being the first full-length biography of the intellectual father of the gay liberation movement, Cervini’s work provides a wealth of fascinating new details about the movement before the Stonewall riots of 1969.

The son of a Jewish electrical engineer and a secretary, Kameny enjoyed a comfortable middle-class life growing up in the New York borough of Queens. The precocious student entered Queens College at the age of 16.

By then he was well aware of his attraction to other boys. Like almost every gay boy of his generation, he assumed that those desires would rapidly be replaced by a “normal” attraction to girls. But unlike nearly everyone else in his situation, even before he graduated from high school, he had decided that if his gay desires never went away, that had to mean he was right and society was wrong.

The reader gets a stark idea of how much time and energy were wasted — and how many thousands of lives were ruined — when Cervini points out that between 1945 and 1960, 1 million homosexuals were arrested in the United States, or one every 10 minutes. In Washington in the late 1940s, the police touted a “Sex Perversion Elimination Program.”

After President Dwight Eisenhower signed an executive order in 1953 banning the employment of homosexuals in the U.S. government and all of its contractors, thousands of gay employees were fired as federal departments competed with one another to expel as many “perverts” and “deviants” as possible — the words most often used by the press in that era. In 1957, even the American Civil Liberties Union declared that it was not within its “province” to “evaluate the social validity of laws aimed at the suppression or elimination of homosexuals.”

Kameny joined the Army in 1943. When I first interviewed him in 1995 for my own gay history book, he told me that he had fought “virtually slit trench by slit trench through the Rhineland in the 9th Army under [Gen. William Hood] Simpson, halfway across Germany.” When the war in Europe ended, he was certain he would be shipped off to the Pacific, until President Harry Truman dropped two atomic bombs and the war in Asia ended as well. Kameny never doubted that Truman had made the right decision about the bomb.

After getting his doctorate in astronomy at Harvard, Kameny was hired by the Army Map Service in the summer of 1957. Three months later the space race began when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the world’s first artificial satellite. Kameny’s timing seemed perfect — he dreamed of becoming one of America’s first astronauts. But his dreams were shattered just two months later, when the Army discovered that he had been arrested on a morals charge in a San Francisco men’s room a couple of years earlier, and he was immediately fired.

Kaiser, p. 2:

Unlike every other gay federal employee before him, Kameny fought his firing. In his brief asking the Supreme Court to hear his case, he said that homosexuals were “a group comparable in size to the Negro minority” and that the government had branded him as “dishonest” and “immoral — “neither of which” he was. That was a revolutionary statement all by itself.

He called the government rules banning homosexuals from federal employment “a stench in the nostrils of decent people, an offense against morality, an abandonment of reason, an affront to human dignity, an improper restraint upon proper freedom and liberty, a disgrace to any civilized society, and a violation of all that this nation stands for.”

Kameny lost his appeal to the court, but he had found his voice. For the next 50 years he would continue to repeat these same ideas; to recruit members for a new branch of the Mattachine Society, Washington’s first effective group of gay activists; to organize the first gay picket lines outside the White House and Independence Hall in the mid-’60s; to argue the cases of other homosexuals who had lost their jobs; and — most important — to transform the attitude of American psychiatry.

The black civil rights movement provided the blueprint and the inspiration for the gay rights movement: “It was no coincidence that Kameny first made the comparison between homosexual and racial discrimination in the summer of 1960,” writes Cervini, when young black Americans were staging the first sit-ins at segregated lunch counters at Woolworth’s in Greensboro, N.C. In 1961 Kameny told the chairman of the federal Civil Service Commission that “the homosexual in this country is in the position that the Negro was in about 1925, when he first began to fight, in a coordinated fashion, for his proper rights.” And in 1962, Robert Nix, a black congressman from Philadelphia, became the first federal legislator to invite Kameny to meet him at his Washington office.

How Kameny successfully emulated black civil rights leaders — even inventing “Gay Is Good” in 1968 in response to Stokely Carmichael’s “Black Is Beautiful” — forms one of the spines of this compelling narrative. The book also does a fine job of tracing the decades-old divide within the movement, between those like Kameny who thought gays needed to look as much as possible like heterosexuals to be accepted (White House picketers were all required to wear suits if they were men or unrevealing dresses if they were women) and those most eager to celebrate gay differences.

Cervini also correctly identifies the importance of the Kinsey report, whose revelations about the prevalence of gay sex acts caused an uproar in 1948, especially within the homophobic psychiatric establishment. (In an uncharacteristically sloppy mistake, Cervini writes that the New York Times refused to review the report; actually, the newspaper gave it a warm and respectful review. )

More than anything else, Kameny changed the world through a two-step process: first by convincing gay people that they weren’t sick and then by getting millions of straight allies to embrace that point of view. His single greatest contribution was the pivotal role he played in persuading the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from its list of disorders in 1973 — the singular accomplishment that made all future LGBTQ progress possible.

Besides its rich portrait of Kameny, this book is careful to give honorable mentions to many other pre-Stonewall activists, including Jack Nichols and Barbara Gittings, as well as later figures such as Jim Fouratt, Randy Wicker, Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera.

Kameny lived long enough to see many of the great victories of the gay movement of the 21st century, and he was a guest of honor several times at President Barack Obama’s White House. I telephoned Kameny the day after his first White House visit, where Obama had warmly greeted him as a fellow Harvard alumnus. “How does it feel, Frank?” I asked.

“I feel like the frog who turned into the prince,” he replied.

Wait a minute... Kameny isn't a trans woman of color! Clearly this is a fraud.

You know who else thought you should dress up for protests? MLK and the entire first generation of civil rights activists (all modern civil rights movements have similar tensions but "queering" history means exaggerating and embellishing the division between moderates and radicals) . It's not like Kameny was some self-loathing conservative curmudgeon looking to conform but that is the implication whenever someone condemns so called "respectability politics" even in the guise of historical analysis. Activists of that generation were being practical and self protective in a time where public demonstrations could result in your death or prison or the madhouse. Even today, radicals usually are their own worst enemy because you have to work within a system to change but that work isn't as gratifying as stomping your feet on twitter.

Despite it being about Kameny, he lets dead Marsha shit all over his book.

Kameny simply thought that to be taken seriously, you needed to look like serious, thoughtful people. MLK obviously felt the same. 1968 changed all that but this was before then.

r129 When your society imagines homosexuals as child molesting psychopaths, seems like a necessary strategy to change that image might require creative tactics since protest is by its nature an attempt to force those in power to acknowledge your existence if only to silence you. And Kameny and others understood that aesthetics were an important part of protest but this was purely strategic - I doubt they were naive enough to think that formal attire would impress not only the political but also medical and religious elites and certainly not as some moral imperative or test of character as the critique of so called "respectability politics" seems to imply. Were they supposed to go naked or in drag? Anyway, when academic history took its cultural turn away from analyzing structural forces and tracing elite opinion and power and sought to elevate individuals and their agency it oddly came full circle back to an ersatz version of the o;d whiggish great man of history except the focus was on those previously excluded or erased from the record. This has unfortunately has become politicized and used as another way of adjudicating current disputes laden with moralistic judgments that would be completely anachronistic to the time but it is much easier to rewrite history and penalize the guilty ab initio.

I am still baffled when someone pulls out the "you white cis gays wouldn't have any rights if it weren't for trans women of color XYZ" as if history is predetermined and providence would punish you for defying the script as written by those prophetic historians. History could unfold in a wide range of potential outcomes and changing some event or person might be instrumental in shaping major political and social forces or more likely simply required other historical actors to achieve the same outcome - maybe delaying certain trends or accelerating them them. Or maybe individual actors have a much smaller role and larger historical forces are predetermining much of what is we view as freely willed individual agency. If there was no Silvia, someone else would have most likely performed the actions that formed a link in the chain of causality from the past to the present. Or maybe Silvia didn't impact history much at all - most people, even powerful politicians, have little to no impact on history but as humans we want to believe in the power of individuals to forge a better future and we read that back in the forms of historical narratives that have more to do with the present than the past.

"Silvia didn't impact history much at all"

Unless you consider being a drug-addled drag whore 'historic.'

DONKEY TOOTH IS TRIGGERED, Y'ALL!

[quote] A beautiful mind or just another pretty privileged pro?

"Pretty"? You must be into the Frankenstein's Monster look, OP.

Go for it.

Cervini was on Anderson Cooper again touting the 'trans women of color' and basically saying that the gay movement stole everything from the black power movement.

How about "learned?"

What a little prick.

Jesus H Christ - the obsession these people have with claiming ownership in intangible concepts, theories or even mere words and has been historically understood as belonging to (if that is even possible with such intangibles) the public domain and not subject to intellectual property claims of any one person, race, tribe or culture. MLK deliberately studied and incorporated significant portions of Ghandian philosophy and activist strategies, especially in adopting a near absolute non-violence ethic (Also heavily influenced by Quaker practice via Bayard Rustin who was raised in the Quaker tradition). Also, the only intersection with Black Power movement would be Kameny's modelling Gay is Good from Black is Beautiful and the emphasis on raising ones own consciousness and identify as a minority in a larger more hostile culture. And the general ethos of loving ones own cultural roots and traditions existed before the Black Panther Party, which was a political failure but somewhat of social success. We certainly relied on an ethnic minority model but not out of some villinous strategy to harm other minority but primarily because it is one of the only successful models that has been effective in both politics and culture. I just don't get why bad faith and illegitimate motives are baked into this mode of cultural theory - there are usually much more convincing and logical explanations for cultural change rather than this self-critique that borders on pathological nihilism. Anyway, the proof is in the pudding so to speak in that social movements tend to learn by practice what works and doesn't and it isn't like there is some Gay (sorry LGBTQ++__()(*&) central committee that adopts 5 year plans and has the resources Stalin did to enforce conformity. One of the reasons I gave up on a history PhD and went to law was that I absolutely hated the dominance of queer theory and other non-empirical methods and theories that had an iron grip on the discipline by the early to mid-90s and still pollutes the history of sexuality to this day. And now to have the same BS recycled in even less convincing polemical forms online is very disheartening...

^ I think you say some good things there about Quakers and stuff. But I will have to come back again to read what should have been the second of four paragraphs.

R134, there was a lot that the gay rights movement “borrowed” from the civil rights movement. He’s not wrong about that. He’s just wrong that black transsexuals led or started the gay rights movement.

r137 the DL interface doesn't make writing long expositions easy and my first drafts of papers in school and briefs now in practice are always bloated (easier to cut stuff out in revisions rather than the other way round for me.

r138 There should be nothing wrong with such a claim and it was the received historical narrative for many years with no controversy but the recent advent of denouncing various "appropriations" has led many of the woke crowd to actually see that as some moral transgression (similar to the taboo on making any comparisons between blacks and gays as far as minority status and historical repression even though civil rights legends like Julian Bond did so all the time but he got blowback from the religious segment not from supposed left wing progressives). It is odd how the left and right often come together when it comes to putting those uppity gays in there place.

"putting those uppity gays in there (sic) place."

The expansive bloviating rhetoric of your non-paragraphed diatribe is staunchly undermined by a basic misunderstanding of English, exemplified by a common syntactical usage of a preposition as opposed to the accurate possessive term, a differentiation that should have been clearly made in lessons for juveniles.

Translation: Oh, dear.

[quote]the DL interface doesn't make writing long expositions easy

Actually, r139, it couldn't be easier.

Just hit "enter" twice to create a new paragraph.

It works after you've written it all down or as you go along. It's even more effective, in terms of being read, after the fact.

Stop making excuses, dear.

"expansive bloviating" - takes one to know one...

In OP"s picture he reminds me of a young Adrian Pasdar.

Which is a good thing.

Cervini has proven himself to be an intellectual sellout, fraud and piece of shit.

Here is R136's interesting post with paragraph breaks—

"…. the obsession these people have with claiming ownership in intangible concepts, theories or even mere words and has been historically understood as belonging to (if that is even possible with such intangibles) the public domain and not subject to intellectual property claims of any one person, race, tribe or culture.

"MLK deliberately studied and incorporated significant portions of Ghandian philosophy and activist strategies, especially in adopting a near absolute non-violence ethic (Also heavily influenced by Quaker practice via Bayard Rustin who was raised in the Quaker tradition).

"Also, the only intersection with Black Power movement would be Kameny's modelling Gay is Good from Black is Beautiful and the emphasis on raising ones own consciousness and identify as a minority in a larger more hostile culture. And the general ethos of loving ones own cultural roots and traditions existed before the Black Panther Party, which was a political failure but somewhat of social success.

"We certainly relied on an ethnic minority model but not out of some villinous strategy to harm other minority but primarily because it is one of the only successful models that has been effective in both politics and culture. I just don't get why bad faith and illegitimate motives are baked into this mode of cultural theory - there are usually much more convincing and logical explanations for cultural change rather than this self-critique that borders on pathological nihilism.

"Anyway, the proof is in the pudding so to speak in that social movements tend to learn by practice what works and doesn't and it isn't like there is some Gay (sorry LGBTQ++__()(*&) central committee that adopts 5 year plans and has the resources Stalin did to enforce conformity. . . "

R142, your dense failure to recognize parody posts is only one of your deficiencies.

Cervini's recent article in Time about Sylvia Rivera basically starting the fight for same-sex marriage and being a "leader" of ACT UP is so historically inaccurate it's embarrassing. This man has a Phd from Oxford and is a Harvard graduate. Ponder that.

[quote]His surname makes me think he's Italian and Lapsed-Catholic.

Most Italian Americans his age were not raised in the church or only nominally a part of it.

Can someone with a better grasp of grammar than I conjugate “cervini?”

It's not clear. Cervo is deer. Cervino is the Matterhorn. It could also be some kind of bird. It's probably some old Italian name that evolved out of either the mountain or an animal in nature.

The name means 'Pap Smear Specialist'

The name means "trans woman of color lover"

Oh dear!

He's either a complete moron or thinks saying this kind of shit is what's going to get him a bigger media profile.

Maybe they were booing Sylvia because she was a junkie grifter.

I love him and I respect his work.

Because I keep seeing paid Instagram ads with his picture and his name has “Dr.,” and what more do you need to love and respect someone?

[quote]He's either a complete moron or thinks saying this kind of shit is what's going to get him a bigger media profile.

I think it's the latter. He's hungry for some level of fame and status, and this is a means to an end.

Reasons why Pride is celebrated