Sexuality, Geography and/of

Geographies of sexuality focus on the idea that there is a spatial component to the connections between sexuality (in all its forms), power, and knowledge. This body of work, following on the heels of the poststructural turn in the social sciences and humanities, is a direct outgrowth of feminist geography. Social and spatial constructions of both gender and sex are invoked through issues of heteropatriarchy, which challenges the unequal power relations between those at “the center” (usually heterosexual males) and all other gendered and sexual identities. Lesbians in particular suffer even greater oppression due to the dual constructions of gender and sexuality. As seen through the eyes of lesbian feminist geographers, perceptions of space and place are very important when played out through these manifestations of heterosexual patriarchal power. Sometimes called heteronormativity, this assumed or “compulsory heterosexuality” is challenged in geographical research, giving credence and voice to those sexual minorities that are oppressed and marginalized because of their “difference.” Hence, there is a heavy emphasis on identifying how geographical space plays a critical role in defining (and performing) one's sexual identity. In other words, notions of space and place reveal how particular sexualities materialize themselves on the material landscape.

Much of this work on spatializing sexuality is relatively recent. In the 1970s, a number of things began to take shape that put geographies of sexuality on the map, but not without a struggle. Indeed, the simple act of arranging meetings of gay and lesbian geographers at national and regional academic meetings was often met with hostile denouncements from established scholars within the discipline. During the 1980s, a small number of geographers, mainly associated with the gay and lesbian rights movement, began drawing attention to the way sexual space is produced and acted on.

The earliest significant work in sexuality and space was in urban geography, as scholars sought to map out the most visible lesbian and gay spaces within the North American city. Among the first to publish geographies of the “gay landscape” was the urban sociologist Manuel Castells, whose treatise The City and the Grassroots (1983) was widely cited. His study on the boundaries of the Castro District in San Francisco postulated that gay men (as men) were actively more territorial than lesbians (as women), who relied on informal social networks more than the “brick-and-mortar” commercial spaces (bars, bathhouses, etc.) that were so closely associated with gay men. This was perhaps the first work that drew attention to the spatialized aspects of homosexuality, and it readily drew geographers’ attention. Analyzing the locations of social networks, particularly of lesbian communities, is another theme. It is argued that these networks are fragile and fluid, given the threat of male violence against women in general and lesbians in particular. A third theme explores the intersections of sexuality with everyday life in rural areas. Arguing against an urban-metropolitan bias in sexual geographies, rural spaces are explored, showing that these spaces are numerous, complex, and influential.

Another aspect of geographies of sexuality revolves around “nature-society” relationships, a popular theme in geography that studies the relationship between human beings and their natural or biological environments. In particular, medical geographers, epidemiologists, and others have attempted to map and model the spread of AIDS and HIV globally and nationally. Many of these studies have come under heavy criticism, as they omitted the social and cultural dimensions of sexuality that affect prevention and infection. But recently, a “critical health geography” has emerged, which shows the importance of making sense of the geographies of HIV/AIDS by examining the spaces of the disease and its treatment, as well as the influence of sexual subcultures, institutions, and political activism.

...