Feminism, 1970) and was reprinted in Radical Feminism, ed. Anne Koedt, Ellen Levine, and Anita Rapone (New York: Quadrangle Books, 1973), 375, 376. As Martha Shelley wrote in “Lesbianism and the Women’s Liberation Movement,” “Love can only exist between equals, not between the oppressed and the oppressor.” Shelley, “Lesbianism and the Women’s Liberation Movement,” in Radical Feminism: A Documentary Reader, ed. Barbara A. Crow (New York: NYU Press, 2000), 308. See also a critique of “the heterosexual institution” in Anne Koedt, “The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm,” in Notes from the Second Year, a reprint of her 1968 article, available at http://collections.mun.ca. Yet another example: Charlotte Bunch of The Furies warned that heterosexual privilege remained a problem for the women’s liberation movement: “As long as women still benefit from heterosexuality, receive its privileges and security, they will at some point have to betray their sisters, especially lesbian sisters who do not receive those benefits.” Bunch, “Lesbians in Revolt,” in Crow, Radical Feminism, 336.
56. “Is Homosexuality Natural?,” in Gay Liberation (February 1970), 5, available at http://paganpressbooks.com.
57. Carl Wittman, A Gay Manifesto (1970), 3, available at http://paganpressbooks.com.
58. The Red Butterfly, Gay Oppression: A Radical Analysis (New York, 1970), 1, available at http://paganpressbooks.com. See also John Lauritsen, “The Red Butterfly,” Pagan Press, 2011, http://paganpressbooks.com.
59. Gayle Rubin, “The Traffic in Women: Notes on the ‘Political Economy’ of Sex,” in Deviations: A Gayle Rubin Reader (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2011), 54.
60. Rubin, 61.
61. Adrienne Rich, “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence,” Signs 5 (Summer 1980): 631–60. For a series of articles under the heading of “The Institution of Heterosexuality,” see Snitow, Stansell, and Thompson, eds., Powers of Desire, 177–275. Feminist historians continued to explore the “institution of heterosexuality” into the mid-1980s, although subsequent works, perhaps due to the impact of queer theory in the late 1980s and early 1990s, named it less often. Feminist scholars have, however, productively engaged Rich’s classic article in relation to select racialized populations. See, for example, Judy Tzu-Chun Wu, “Asian American History and Racialized Compulsory Deviance,” Journal of Women’s History 15, no. 3 (2003): 58–62; Mattie Udora Richardson, “No More Secrets, No More Lies: African American History and Compulsory Heterosexuality,” Journal of Women’s History 15, no. 3 (2003): 63–76. Leila J. Rupp notes that Rich actually prefers another iteration of her article to the one that was published in Signs. See Rupp, “Women’s History in the New Millennium: Adrienne Rich’s ‘Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence’: A Retrospective,” Journal of Women’s History 15, no. 3 (2003): 9–10. For that different iteration, see Rich, Blood, Bread, and Poetry: Selected Prose, 1979–1985 (New York: Norton, 1994), 23–75.
62. The historian Gerda Lerner developed these theories in her history of patriarchy, in which she argued that male domination over women was the result of historical processes rooted in resource allocation and systems of domination, the results of which allow for women to remain marginal to the ideological contours and political operations of societies in which they play socially instrumental roles. Lerner, The Creation of Patriarchy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986).
63. For brief discussions of this particular history, see Deborah Gray White, Too Heavy a Load: Black Women in Defense of Themselves, 1894–1994 (New York: Norton, 1999), 242–56; Kimberly Springer, Living for the Revolution: Black Feminist Organizations, 1968–1980 (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005), 56–61; Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, How We Get Free: Black Feminism and the Combahee River Collective (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2017), 4–8.
64. The Combahee River Collective, The Combahee River Collective Statement: Black Feminist Organizing in the Seventies and Eighties, Freedom Organizing Series 1 (New York: Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press, 1986), 9.
65. Combahee River Collective, 13.
66. Audre Lorde, I Am Your Sister: Black Women Organizing across Sexualities, Freedom Organizing Series 3 (New York: Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press, 1985), 3.
67. Lorde, I Am Your Sister, 3–4.
68. Michael Warner, “Introduction: Fear of a Queer Planet,” Social Text, no. 29 (1991): 3.
69. Michael Warner, introduction to Fear of a Queer Planet: Queer Politics and Social Theory, ed. Warner, Cultural Politics 6 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993), xxi. Karma Lochrie builds from Warner’s definitions to explain how heteronormativity differs from heterosexuality: “‘Heterosexuality’ expands on a specific desire for the opposite sex and sexual intercourse to include moral and social virtue. ‘Heteronormativity,’ in brief, is heterosexuality that has become presumptive, that is, heterosexuality that is both descriptive and prescriptive, that defines everything from who we think we are as a nation, to what it means to be human, to ‘our ideals, our principles, our hopes and aspirations’” (Heterosyncrasies, 4). Lochrie quotes a passage from Warner’s The Trouble with Normal, where he, in turn, is citing a woman who held a leadership position in the Mattachine Society in the 1950s; see Warner, The Trouble with Normal: Sex, Politics and the Ethics of Queer Life (New York: Free Press, 1999), 46.
70. Marlon B. Ross, “Beyond the Closet as a Raceless Paradigm,” in Black Queer Studies: A Critical Anthology, ed. E. Patrick Johnson and Mae Henderson (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2005), 183.
71. See, for example, Ann Laura Stoler, Race and the Education of Desire: Foucault’s History of Sexuality and the Colonial Order of Things (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1995); Stoler, Carnal Knowledge and Imperial Power: Race and the Intimate in Colonial Rule (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002); Stoler, Haunted by Empire: Geographies of Intimacy in North American History (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2006). Important, allied analysis may also be found in Anne McClintock, Imperial Leather: Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Colonial Conquest (New York: Routledge, 1995).
72. Relevant overviews include Joanne Meyerowitz, “AHR Forum: Transnational Sex and U.S. History,” American Historical Review 114, no. 5 (2009): 1273–86; Cornelia H. Dayton and Lisa Levenstein, “The Big Tent of U.S. Women’s
