My main focus for this week is primary sources, and I got a decent head start today. I went through around half of the sources I found yesterday, and they have proven very useful. I also think I know why so many historians argue that the queer community was not very politicised and that the movement was not organised, which was the source of yesterday’s frustration. Many of the sources I have read today keep saying that it was a small movement, that it is not politicised, essentially, they agree with what some historians have said. In particular, there was this stress on the movement being in a ‘crisis’ in the early to mid-1980s. I find this bizarre.

I think that historians are misinterpreting what the sources mean by crisis. It’s not that there was a lack of politically active individuals (although one or two sources suggest that, but this goes against the majority), rather, it was a crisis in leadership, aims and organisation. Yes, many groups lasted only a few years; in fact, most of them only lasted a few years, but as one disappeared, others emerged. It was almost like a revolving door of new groups and activists. There was a crisis in the political movement, but it was not about a lack of political consciousness among the queer community. Yesterday’s hypotheses, then, have so far proven to be true.