Jonathan Ned Katz

“Heterosexuality,” assumed to denote a universal sexual and cultural norm, has been largely exempt from critical scrutiny. In this boldly original work, Jonathan Ned Katz challenges the common notion that the distinction between heterosexuality and homosexuality has been a timeless one. Building on the history of medical terminology, he reveals that as late as 1923, the term “heterosexuality” referred to a "morbid sexual passion," and that its current usage emerged to legitimate men and women having sex for pleasure. Drawing on the works of Sigmund Freud, James Baldwin, Betty Friedan, and Michel Foucault, The Invention of Heterosexuality considers the effects of heterosexuality’s recently forged primacy on both scientific literature and popular culture.

A chronology of two sexual worlds--early Colonial America and early modern United States--combines a wide variety of information, including personal testimony, news reports, medical records, songs, cartoons, and more, to portray the history of gays in America.

Collection of primary source documents.

Along with John Brown's raid, one of the major harbingers of the Civil War and a major episode in black American history.

This issue of Granta is dedicated to love, or more often the lack of it, the loss of it, and the search for it. It includes stories about sibling rivalry, about rediscovering parental love, and about the end of marriage and enduring friendship.

This unique and pioneering work is a comprehensive collection of documents on American gay life from the early days of European settlement to the emergence of modern American gay culture. Hailed by reviewers, it offers a new historical perspective on this once invisible minority and its 400-year battle. Photographs and illustrations.

In June 1972, Jonathan Ned Katz's documentary play, Coming Out!, about gay and lesbian life and liberation, directed by David Roggensack, was produced by the New York Gay Activists Alliance, at its firehouse headquarters, in Soho. "In 2009," says Katz, "looking over these reviews for the first time in more than thirty years, I'm struck by the strong emotional responses reported, positive and negative. Even the worst review (see below, Marilyn Stasio, in Cue magazine, August 27-September 2, 1973) says that the play 'packs a wallop' and the material 'is dynamite stuff,' though the play is 'deadly as theatre.' I'm fascinated by the contradictory character of many of the reviews."