Changes across time in the way people think about homosexuality also challenge the traditional notion of a universal, unchanging sexuality. Until the late 19th century, passionate romantic friendships between women were seen as a normal and a healthy part of a middle-class woman’s life (Jeffreys, 1985 as cited in Kitzinger, 1994). On the rare occasion when sex between women was discussed it was regarded as a preparation for marriage (Cook, 1979, as cited in Kitzinger, 1994).
A greatly revised view of sexual activities between women emerged at approximately the same time as the first wave of feminism in the early 20th century. Passionate relationships between women became identified with sexuality and seen as a fundamental aspect of the individual that indicated pathology (Kitzinger, 1994). Thus, concepts of sexuality are connected to social and political changes and facilitate maintenance of the status quo. Similarly, outspoken feminist activists of today are often stigmatized as lesbians. This is ironic, because one would think that the women and men who embrace traditional gender-related values would vehemently deny that their sexual intimacies have any political overtones whatsoever, yet they readily discern the potential subversive political subtexts in the intimate sexualities of women who oppose traditional gender arrangements. This leads to the questions: If resistance is political, what is acquiescence? If political resistance is linked (according to traditional logic) to intimate sexuality, how can it be that the embodiment of traditional sexuality within a mainstream culture is devoid of political causality?
A similar pathologizing of gay male relationships began in the late 19th century (D’Emilio & Freedman, 1988). By the end of the 19th century, homosexual behavior among men was seen “not as a discrete, punishable offense, but as a description of the person, encompassing emotions, dress, mannerisms, behavior, and even physical traits” (D’Emilio & Freedman, 1988, p. 226). As homosexual behavior began to be seen as a pathological behavior that defined the person, physicians began to hypothesize about the etiology of homosexuality. Initially, researchers suggested that homosexuality was an acquired type of insanity or a degenerative disease, but it was later reconceptualized as congenital in the writings of Havelock Ellis (1898-1928). Subsequently, the influence of Freud shifted the construction of homosexuality back to the belief in an acquired etiology. Thus, both lesbian and gay male identities have been constructed or reconceptualized as homosexual activity that is a central defining characteristic of a person.