David A. B. Murray
the last fifteen to twenty years have witnessed the
movement of sexuality out of relative obscurity into relative
acceptance in anthropological research (Boellstor√ 2007b;
Lancaster and di Leonardo 1997; Lyons and Lyons 2004;
Weston 1993, 1998). Anthropology has contributed toward a
better understanding of same-sex sexual practices and/or
identities beyond the Euro-American ‘‘gay-lesbian’’ frame-
work, albeit in an imbalanced manner with the majority of
work focusing on male homosexuality. In his review article
‘‘Queer Studies in the House of Anthropology,’’ Boellstor√
(2007b) notes that anthropologists have shifted toward in-
vestigating the role of political and economic forces operat-
ing through national and global contexts in the construction
of sexual subjectivities. There has also been an increase in
work on ‘‘normative heterosexualities,’’ much of it drawing
from, inspired by, or in collaboration with, feminist an-
thropological research. However, while this latter category
includes important topics ranging from romantic love to
masculinity, female-male sexual relations in the context of
tourist economies, and heterosexuality’s articulations with
nationalism (Boellstor√ 2007b), there does not appear to be
any sustained interrogation of what might be thought of
as normative heterosexuality’s ugly o√spring, homophobia.
Such is the case as well in anthropological literature focusing
Previous Page Next Page