From the archive: Towards lesbian and gay psychology, November 1998

What strikes me most now, re-reading this 'scientific' argument for a 'Lesbian and Gay Psychology' (now 'Psychology of Sexualities') Section, more than a quarter of a century later, is how carefully reasonable it is and how conservative its stated aspirations are.

Labelling ourselves 'a traditionally under-represented group' found only in research on abnormal psychology or sexuality, we offered to 'help the discipline in its development towards becoming a true "psychology of people"'. Our representation of psychology was wholly benign: psychology can 'contribute to improving the lives of lesbians and gays'. And – although all four authors were lesbian or gay – we were careful to say that members of the proposed section could be heterosexual, 'just as a "social psychologist" can be anti-social, or a "sports psychologist" a couch potato'.

The new section was finally founded later that year and marked the culmination of nearly a decade of campaigning – three previous proposals having been turned down as 'too narrow' and 'too political'.  When the Council rejected the 1994 proposal by just one vote, we could see that the tide of society opinion was turning: senior figures advised us 'not to make waves', 'to be patient', and 'to expect success in due course'. The article was published in that context, with the goal of a section finally within reach.

My commitment to establishing a section, and the conservative approach it entailed, ran alongside the much more critical research I'd published on lesbian identities (The Social Construction of Lesbianism, 1987). It also sat uneasily with my challenges to the emerging 'lesbian/gay-affirmative psychology' that the new section was likely to foster. In Changing Our Minds (1993, with Rachel Perkins), I'd argued that psychology serves to obscure the structural forces of oppression by prescribing individualised solutions to social problems.

In Heterosexuality (1993, with Sue Wilkinson), I'd treated dominant sexual identities and structures as the problem to be interrogated, turning the tables on the questions traditionally asked of us (e.g. 'when did you first realise you were heterosexual?').

I argued for a Section because I wanted an institutional home for an oppressed and minoritised group to be active participants in (not merely 'subjects' of) the discipline. I wanted the Section to reflect a range of theories and perspectives, and to provide a space where they could be explored and analysed less defensively than in our dealings with the 'mainstream' psychology that had pathologised or ignored us. The strength and diversity of the field today is evidenced by the third edition of its core textbook (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Intersex, and Queer Psychology, Ellis SJ et al, Cambridge University Press).

My interests since then have significantly changed, and I'm no longer involved in the Section. After a (failed) High Court bid in 2006 to get my lawful Canadian marriage to Sue Wilkinson recognised in our home country, my research interests moved to the power of law to control our lives. Today (now retired), I run the Open Justice Court of Protection Project, inspired by some of the same passions and principles that motivated me in founding the Section.

Professor Celia Kitzinger, Chartered Psychologist
Honorary Professor, School of Law and Politics, Cardiff University