text:
The term 'homosexuality' was coined in the late 19th century by an Austrian-born Hungarian psychologist, Karoly Maria Benkert. Although the term is new, discussions about sexuality in general, and same-sex attraction in particular, have occasioned philosophical discussion ranging from Plato's Symposium to contemporary queer theory. Since the history of cultural understandings of same-sex attraction is relevant to the philosophical issues raised by those understandings, it is necessary to review briefly some of the social history of homosexuality. Arising out of this history, at least in the West, is the idea of natural law and some interpretations of that law as forbidding homosexual sex. References to natural law still play an important role in contemporary debates about homosexuality in religion, politics, and even courtrooms. Finally, perhaps the most significant recent social change involving homosexuality is the emergence of the gay liberation movement in the West. In philosophical circles this movement is, in part, represented through a rather diverse group of thinkers who are grouped under the label of queer theory. A central issue raised by queer theory, which will be discussed below, is whether homosexuality, and hence also heterosexuality and bisexuality, is socially constructed or purely driven by biological forces.
- 1. History
- 2. Historiographical Debates
- 3. Natural Law
- 4. Queer Theory and the Social Construction of Sexuality
- 5. Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Academic Tools
- Other Internet Resources
- Related Entries
1. History
As has been frequently noted, the ancient Greeks did not have terms or concepts that correspond to the contemporary dichotomy of 'heterosexual' and 'homosexual' (e.g., Foucault, 1980). There is a wealth of material from ancient Greece pertinent to issues of sexuality, ranging from dialogues of Plato, such as the Symposium, to plays by Aristophanes, and Greek artwork and vases. What follows is a brief description of ancient Greek attitudes, but it is important to recognize that there was regional variation. For example, in parts of Ionia there were general strictures against same-sex eros, while in Elis and Boiotia (e.g., Thebes), it was approved of and even celebrated (cf. Dover, 1989; Halperin, 1990).
Probably the most frequent assumption about sexual orientation, at least by ancient Greek authors, is that persons can respond erotically to beauty in either sex. Diogenes Laeurtius, for example, wrote of Alcibiades, the Athenian general and politician of the 5th century B.C., "in his adolescence he drew away the husbands from their wives, and as a young man the wives from their husbands." (Quoted in Greenberg, 1988, 144) Some persons were noted for their exclusive interests in persons of one gender. For example, Alexander the Great and the founder of Stoicism, Zeno of Citium, were known for their exclusive interest in boys and other men. Such persons, however, are generally portrayed as the exception. Furthermore, the issue of what biological sex one is attracted to is seen as an issue of taste or preference, rather than as a moral issue. A character in Plutarch's Erotikos (Dialogue on Love) argues that "the noble lover of beauty engages in love wherever he sees excellence and splendid natural endowment without regard for any difference in physiological detail" (ibid., 146). Gender just becomes irrelevant "detail" and instead the excellence in character and beauty is what is most important.
Even though the gender that one was erotically attracted to (at any specific time, given the assumption that persons will likely be attracted to persons of both sexes) was not important, other issues were salient, such as whether one exercised moderation. Status concerns were also of the highest importance. Given that only free men had full status, women and male slaves were not problematic sexual partners. Sex between freemen, however, was problematic for status. The central distinction in ancient Greek sexual relations was between taking an active or insertive role, versus a passive or penetrated one. The passive role was acceptable only for inferiors, such as women, slaves, or male youths who were not yet citizens. Hence the cultural ideal of a same-sex relationship was between an older man, probably in his 20s or 30s, known as the erastes, and a boy whose beard had not yet begun to grow, the eromenos or paidika. In this relationship there was courtship ritual, involving gifts (such as a rooster), and other norms. The erastes had to show that he had nobler interests in the boy, rather than a purely sexual concern. The boy was not to submit too easily, and if pursued by more than one man, was to show discretion and pick the more noble one. There is also evidence that penetration was often avoided by having the erastes face his beloved and place his penis between the thighs of the eromenos, which is known as intercrural sex. The relationship was to be temporary and should end upon the boy reaching adulthood (Dover, 1989). To continue in a submissive role even while one should be an equal citizen was considered troubling, although there certainly were many adult male same-sex relationships that were noted and not strongly stigmatized. While the passive role was thus seen as problematic, to be attracted to men was often taken as a sign of masculinity. Greek gods, such as Zeus, had stories of same-sex exploits attributed to them, as did other key figures in Greek myth and literature, such as Achilles and Hercules. Plato, in the Symposium, argues for an army to be comprised of same-sex lovers. Thebes did form such a regiment, the Sacred Band of Thebes, formed of 500 soldiers. They were renowned in the ancient world for their valor in battle.
Ancient Rome had many parallels to ancient Greece in its understanding of same-sex attraction, and sexual issues more generally. This is especially true under the Republic. Yet under the Empire, Roman society slowly became more negative in its views towards sexuality, probably due to social and economic turmoil, even before Christianity became influential.
Exactly what attitude the New Testament has towards sexuality in general, and same-sex attraction in particular, is a matter of sharp debate. John Boswell argues, in his fascinating Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, that many passages taken today as condemnations of homosexuality are more concerned with prostitution, or where same-sex acts are described as "unnatural" the meaning is more akin to 'out of the ordinary' rather than as immoral (Boswell, 1980, ch.4; see also Boswell, 1994). Yet others have criticized, sometimes persuasively, Boswell's scholarship, arguing that the conventional contemporary reading is more plausible (see Greenberg, 1988, ch.5). What is clear, however, is that while condemnation of same-sex attraction is marginal to the Gospels and only an intermittent focus in the rest of the New Testament, early Christian church fathers were much more outspoken. In their writings there is a horror at any sort of sex, but in a few generations these views eased, in part due no doubt to practical concerns of recruiting converts. By the fourth and fifth centuries the mainstream Christian view allowed only for procreative sex.
This viewpoint, that procreative sex within marriage is allowed, while every other expression of sexuality is sinful, can be found, for example, in St. Augustine. This understanding of permissible sexual relationships leads to a concern with the gender of one's partner that is not found in previous Greek or Roman views, and it clearly forbids homosexual acts. Soon this attitude, especially towards homosexual sex, came to be reflected in Roman Law. In Justinian's Code, promulgated in 529, persons who engaged in homosexual sex were to be executed, although those who were repentant could be spared. Historians agree that the late Roman Empire saw a rise in intolerance towards homosexuality, although there were again important regional variations.
With the decline of the Roman Empire, and its replacement by various barbarian kingdoms, a general tolerance (with the sole exception of Visigothic Spain) for homosexual acts prevailed. As one prominent scholar puts it, "European secular law contained few measures against homosexuality until the middle of the thirteenth century." (Greenberg, 1988, 260) Even while some Christian theologians continued to denounce nonprocreative sexuality, including same-sex acts, a genre of homophilic literature, especially among the clergy, developed in the eleventh and twelfth centuries (Boswell, 1980, chapters 8 and 9).
The latter part of the twelfth through the fourteenth centuries, however, saw a sharp rise in intolerance towards homosexual sex, alongside persecution of Jews, Muslims, heretics, and others. While the causes of this are somewhat unclear, it is likely that increased class conflict alongside the Gregorian reform movement in the Catholic Church were two important factors. The Church itself started to appeal to a conception of "nature" as the standard of morality, and drew it in such a way so as to forbid homosexual sex (as well as extramarital sex, nonprocreative sex within marriage, and often masturbation). For example, the first ecumenical council to condemn homosexual sex, Lateran III of 1179, stated "Whoever shall be found to have committed that incontinence which is against nature" shall be punished, the severity of which depended upon whether the transgressor was a cleric or layperson (quoted in Boswell, 1980, 277). This appeal to natural law (discussed below) became very influential in the Western tradition. An important point to note, however, is that the key category here is the 'sodomite,' which differs from the contemporary idea of 'homosexual'. A sodomite was understood as act-defined, rather than as a type of person. Someone who had desires to engage in sodomy, yet did not act upon them, was not a sodomite. Also, persons who engaged in heterosexual sodomy were also sodomites. There are reports of persons being burned to death or beheaded for sodomy with a spouse (Greenberg, 1988, 277). Finally, a person who had engaged in sodomy, yet who had repented of his sin and vowed to never do it again, was no longer a sodomite. The gender of one's partner is again not of decisive importance, although some medieval theologians single out same-sex sodomy as the worst type of sexual crime (Crompton, 2003, ch.6).
For the next several centuries in Europe, the laws against homosexual sex were severe in their penalties. Enforcement, however, was episodic. In some regions, decades would pass without any prosecutions. Yet the Dutch, in the 1730s, mounted a harsh anti-sodomy campaign (alongside an anti-Roma pogrom), even using torture to obtain confessions. As many as one hundred men and boys were executed and denied burial (Greenberg, 1988, 313–4). Also, the degree to which sodomy and same-sex attraction were accepted varied by class, with the middle class taking the most restrictive view, while the aristocracy and nobility often accepted public expressions of alternative sexualities. At times, even with the risk of severe punishment, same-sex oriented subcultures would flourish in cities, sometimes only to be suppressed by the authorities. In the 19th century there was a significant reduction in the legal penalties for sodomy. The Napoleonic code decriminalized sodomy, and with Napoleon's conquests that Code spread. Furthermore, in many countries where homosexual sex remained a crime, the general movement at this time away from the death penalty usually meant that sodomy was removed from the list of capital offenses.
In the 18th and 19th centuries an overtly theological framework no longer dominated the discourse about same-sex attraction. Instead, secular arguments and interpretations became increasingly common. Probably the most important secular domain for discussions of homosexuality was in medicine, including psychology. This discourse, in turn, linked up with considerations about the state and its need for a growing population, good soldiers, and intact families marked by clearly defined gender roles. Doctors were called in by courts to examine sex crime defendants (Foucault, 1980; Greenberg, 1988). At the same time, the dramatic increase in school attendance rates and the average length of time spent in school, reduced transgenerational contact, and hence also the frequency of transgenerational sex. Same-sex relations between persons of roughly the same age became the norm.
Clearly the rise in the prestige of medicine resulted in part from the increasing ability of science to account for natural phenomena on the basis of mechanistic causation. The application of this viewpoint to humans led to accounts of sexuality as innate or biologically driven. The voluntarism of the medieval understanding of sodomy, that sodomites chose sin, gave way to the prevailing though contested modern notion of homosexuality as a deep, unchosen characteristic of persons, regardless of whether they act upon that orientation. The idea of a 'latent sodomite' would not have made sense, yet under this new view it does make sense to speak of a person as a 'latent homosexual.' Instead of specific acts defining a person, as in the medieval view, an entire physical and mental makeup, usually portrayed as somehow defective or pathological, is ascribed to the modern category of 'homosexual.' Although there are historical precursors to these ideas (e.g., Aristotle gave a physiological explanation of passive homosexuality), medicine gave them greater public exposure and credibility (Greenberg, 1988, ch.15). The effects of these ideas cut in conflicting ways. Since homosexuality is, by this view, not chosen, it makes less sense to criminalize it. Persons are not choosing evil acts. Yet persons may be expressing a diseased or pathological mental state, and hence medical intervention for a cure is appropriate. Hence doctors, especially psychiatrists, campaigned for the repeal or reduction of criminal penalties for consensual homosexual sodomy, yet intervened to "rehabilitate" homosexuals. They also sought to develop techniques to prevent children from becoming homosexual, for example by arguing that childhood masturbation caused homosexuality, hence it must be closely guarded against.
In the 20th century sexual roles were redefined once again. For a variety of reasons, premarital intercourse slowly became more common and eventually acceptable. With the decline of prohibitions against sex for the sake of pleasure even outside of marriage, it became more difficult to argue against gay sex. These trends were especially strong in the 1960s, and it was in this context that the gay liberation movement took off. Although gay and lesbian rights groups had been around for decades, the low-key approach of the Mattachine Society (named after a medieval secret society) and the Daughters of Bilitis had not gained much ground. This changed in the early morning hours of June 28, 1969, when the patrons of the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in Greenwich Village, rioted after a police raid. In the aftermath of that event, gay and lesbian groups began to organize around the country. Gay Democratic clubs were created in every major city, and one fourth of all college campuses had gay and lesbian groups (Shilts, 1993, ch.28). Large gay urban communities in cities from coast to coast became the norm. The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its official listing of mental disorders. The increased visibility of gays and lesbians has become a permanent feature of American life despite the two critical setbacks of the AIDS epidemic and an anti-gay backlash (see Berman, 1993, for a good survey). The post-Stonewall era has also seen marked changes in Western Europe, where the repeal of anti-sodomy laws and legal equality for gays and lesbians has become common. In the 21st century, the legal recognition of same-sex marriage has become widespread.
The increasing acceptance of same-sex relations has prompted new theoretical debates, such as whether a "post-gay" culture will emerge due to widespread assimilation of gays and lesbians (Anderson, 2016). Generally what is meant by the term "post-gay" is that if LGBTQ persons have full legal and social equality, that level of acceptance makes it so sexual orientation is no longer a defining aspect of one's identity or social position. While it seems unlikely that gay, lesbian, or queer persons of color, or who live in rural areas, or are otherwise in a marginalized position will achieve such assimilation in the foreseeable future, the debate is still of theoretical interest. For instance, post-gay can be conceptualized as either a specific political order, characterized by equality across sexual orientations, or it can be seen as a specific type of identity, where persons understand and accept themselves as same-sex oriented but as not in any way defined by that. Post-gay can also be a time, an era marked by widespread assimilation, or a space, where persons are fully treated as equals. Some regard the variety of meanings given to the term as evidence of confusion (Kampler and Connell, 2018). A better understanding, however, is that the term is being used to rival ends. For some, post-gay marks the culmination of the gay rights movement, which all along, they contend, was an effort to be treated as equals. For others, it opens a space where sexual labels can be resisted, renegotiated, and made fluid and non-binary (Coleman-Fountain, 2014).
2. Historiographical Debates
Broader currents in society have influenced the ways in which scholars and activists have approached research into sexuality and same-sex attraction. Some early 20th century researchers and equality advocates, seeking to vindicate same-sex relations in societies that disparaged and criminalized it, put forward lists of famous historical figures attracted to persons of the same sex. Such lists implied a common historical entity underlying sexual attraction, whether one called it 'inversion' or 'homosexuality.' This approach (or perhaps closely related family of approaches) is commonly called essentialism. Historians and researchers sympathetic to the gay liberation movement of the late 1960s and 1970s produced a number of books that implicitly relied on an essentialist approach. In the 1970s and 1980s John Boswell raised it to a new level of methodological and historical sophistication, although his position shifted over time to one of virtual agnosticism between essentialists and their critics. Crompton's work (2003) is a notable contemporary example of an essentialist methodology.
Essentialists claim that categories of sexual attraction are observed rather than created. For example, while ancient Greece did not have terms that correspond to the heterosexual/homosexual division, persons did note men who were only attracted to person of a specific sex, hence the lack of terminology need not be taken as evidence of a lack of continuity in categories. Through history and across cultures there are consistent features, albeit with meaningful variety over time and space, in sexual attraction to the point that it makes sense of speak of specific sexual orientations. According to this view, homosexuality is a specific, natural kind rather than a cultural or historical product. Essentialists allow that there are cultural differences in how homosexuality is expressed and interpreted, but they emphasize that this does not prevent it from being a universal category of human sexual expression.
In contrast, in the 1970s and since a number of researchers, often influenced by Mary McIntosh or Michel Foucault, argued that class relations, the human sciences, and other historically constructed forces create sexual categories and the personal identities associated with them. For advocates of this view, such as David Halperin, how sex is organized in a given cultural and historical setting is irreducibly particular (Halperin, 2002). The emphasis on the social creation of sexual experience and expression led to the labeling of the viewpoint as social constructionism, although more recently several of its proponents have preferred the term 'historicism.' Thus homosexuality, as a specific sexual construction, is best understood as a solely modern, Western concept and role. Prior to the development of this construction, persons were not really 'homosexual' even when they were only attracted to persons of the same sex. The differences between, say, ancient Greece, with its emphasis on pederasty, role in the sex act, and social status, and the contemporary Western role of 'gay' or 'homosexual' are simply too great to collapse into one category.
In a manner closely related to the claims of queer theory, discussed below, social constructionists argue that specific social constructs produce sexual ways of being. There is no given mode of sexuality that is independent of culture; even the concept and experience of sexual orientation itself are products of history. For advocates of this view, the range of historical sexual diversity, and the fluidity of human possibility, is simply too varied to be adequately captured by any specific conceptual scheme.
There is a significant political dimension to this seemingly abstract historiographical debate. Social constructionists argue that essentialism is the weaker position politically for at least two reasons. First, by accepting a basic heterosexual/homosexual organizing dichotomy, essentialism wrongly concedes that heterosexuality is the norm and that homosexuality is, strictly speaking, abnormal and the basis for a permanent minority. Second, social constructionists argue that an important goal of historical investigations should be to put into question contemporary organizing schemas about sexuality. The acceptance of the contemporary heterosexual/homosexual dichotomy is conservative, perhaps even reactionary, and forecloses the exploration of new possibilities. (There are related queer theory criticisms of the essentialist position, discussed below.) In contrast, essentialists argue that a historicist approach forecloses the very possibility of a 'gay history.' Instead, the field of investigation becomes other social forces and how they 'produce' a distinct form or forms of sexuality. Only an essentialist approach can maintain the project of gay history, and minority histories in general, as a force for liberation.
3. Natural Law
Today natural law theory offers the most common intellectual defense for differential treatment of gays and lesbians, and as such it merits attention. The development of natural law is a long and very complicated story. A reasonable place to begin is with the dialogues of Plato, for this is where some of the central ideas are first articulated, and, significantly enough, are immediately applied to the sexual domain. For the Sophists, the human world is a realm of convention and change, rather than of unchanging moral truth. Plato, in contrast, argued that unchanging truths underpin the flux of the material world. Reality, including eternal moral truths, is a matter of phusis. Even though there is clearly a great degree of variety in conventions from one city to another (something ancient Greeks became increasingly aware of), there is still an unwritten standard, or law, that humans should live under.
In the Laws, Plato applies the idea of a fixed, natural law to sex, and takes a much harsher line than he does in the Symposium or the Phraedrus. In Book One he writes about how opposite-sex sex acts cause pleasure by nature, while same-sex sexuality is "unnatural" (636c). In Book Eight, the Athenian speaker considers how to have legislation banning homosexual acts, masturbation, and illegitimate procreative sex widely accepted. He then states that this law is according to nature (838–839d). Probably the best way of understanding Plato's discussion here is in the context of his overall concerns with the appetitive part of the soul and how best to control it. Plato clearly sees same-sex passions as especially strong, and hence particularly problematic, although in the Symposium that erotic attraction is presented as potentially being a catalyst for a life of philosophy, rather than base sensuality (Cf. Dover, 1989, 153–170; Nussbaum, 1999, esp. chapter 12).
Other figures played important roles in the development of natural law theory. Aristotle, with his emphasis upon reason as the distinctive human function, and the Stoics, with their emphasis upon human beings as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, both helped to shape the natural law perspective which says that "True law is right reason in agreement with nature," as Cicero put it. Aristotle, in his approach, did allow for change to occur according to nature, and therefore the way that natural law is embodied could itself change with time, which was an idea Aquinas later incorporated into his own natural law theory. Aristotle did not write extensively about sexual issues, since he was less concerned with the appetites than Plato. Probably the best reconstruction of his views places him in mainstream Greek society as outlined above; his main concern is with an active versus a passive role, with only the latter problematic for those who either are or will become citizens. Zeno, the founder of Stoicism, was, according to his contemporaries, only attracted to men, and his thought did not have prohibitions against same-sex sexuality. In contrast, Cicero, a later Stoic, was dismissive about sexuality in general, with some harsher remarks towards same-sex pursuits (Cicero, 1966, 407-415).
The most influential formulation of natural law theory was made by Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century. Integrating an Aristotelian approach with Christian theology, Aquinas emphasized the centrality of certain human goods, including marriage and procreation. While Aquinas did not write much about same-sex sexual relations, he did write at length about various sex acts as sins. For Aquinas, sexuality that was within the bounds of marriage and which helped to further what he saw as the distinctive goods of marriage, mainly love, companionship, and legitimate offspring, was permissible, and even good. Aquinas did not argue that procreation was a necessary part of moral or just sex; married couples could enjoy sex without the motive of having children, and sex in marriages where one or both partners is sterile (perhaps because the woman is postmenopausal) is also potentially just (given a motive of expressing love). So far Aquinas' view actually need not rule out homosexual sex. For example, a Thomist could embrace same-sex marriage, and then apply the same reasoning, simply seeing the couple as a reproductively sterile, yet still fully loving and companionate union.
Aquinas, in a significant move, adds a requirement that for any given sex act to be moral it must be of a generative kind. The only way that this can be achieved is via vaginal intercourse. That is, since only the emission of semen in a vagina can result in natural reproduction, only sex acts of that type are generative, even if a given sex act does not lead to reproduction, and even if it is impossible due to infertility. The consequence of this addition is to rule out the possibility, of course, that homosexual sex could ever be moral (even if done within a loving marriage), in addition to forbidding any non-vaginal sex for opposite-sex married couples. What is the justification for this important addition? This question is made all the more pressing in that Aquinas does allow that how broad moral rules apply to individuals may vary considerably, since the nature of persons also varies to some extent. That is, since Aquinas allows that individual natures vary, one could simply argue that one is, by nature, emotionally and physically attracted to persons of one's own gender, and hence to pursue same-sex relationships is 'natural' (Sullivan, 1995). Unfortunately, Aquinas does not spell out a justification for this generative requirement.
More recent natural law theorists, however, have presented a couple of different lines of defense for Aquinas' 'generative type' requirement. The first is that sex acts that involve either homosexuality, heterosexual sodomy, or which use contraception, frustrate the purpose of the sex organs, which is reproductive. This argument, often called the 'perverted faculty argument', is perhaps implicit in Aquinas. It has, however, come in for sharp attack (see Weitham, 1997), and the best recent defenders of a Thomistic natural law approach are attempting to move beyond it (e.g., George, 1999a, dismisses the argument). If their arguments fail, of course, they must allow that some homosexual sex acts are morally permissible (even positively good), although they would still have resources with which to argue against casual gay (and straight) sex.
Although the specifics of the second sort of argument offered by various contemporary natural law theorists vary, they possess common elements(Finnis, 1994; George, 1999a). As Thomists, their argument rests largely upon an account of human goods. The two most important for the argument against homosexual sex (though not against homosexuality as an orientation which is not acted upon, and hence in this they follow official Catholic doctrine; see George, 1999a, ch.15) are personal integration and marriage. Personal integration, in this view, is the idea that humans, as agents, need to have integration between their intentions as agents and their embodied selves. Thus, to use one's or another's body as a mere means to one's own pleasure, as they argue happens with masturbation, causes 'dis-integration' of the self. That is, one's intention then is just to use a body (one's own or another's) as a mere means to the end of pleasure, and this detracts from personal integration. Yet one could easily reply that two persons of the same sex engaging in sexual union does not necessarily imply any sort of 'use' of the other as a mere means to one's own pleasure. Hence, natural law theorists respond that sexual union in the context of the realization of marriage as an important human good is the only permissible expression of sexuality. Yet this argument requires drawing how marriage is an important good in a very particular way, since it puts procreation at the center of marriage as its "natural fulfillment" (George, 1999a, 168). Natural law theorists, if they want to support their objection to homosexual sex, have to emphasize procreation. If, for example, they were to place love and mutual support for human flourishing at the center, it is clear that many same-sex couples would meet this standard. Hence their sexual acts would be morally just.
There are, however, several objections that are made against this account of marriage as a central human good. One is that by placing procreation as the 'natural fulfillment' of marriage, sterile marriages are thereby denigrated. Sex in an opposite-sex marriage where the partners know that one or both of them are sterile is not done for procreation. Yet surely it is not wrong. Why, then, is homosexual sex in the same context (a long-term companionate union) wrong (Macedo, 1995)? The natural law rejoinder is that while vaginal intercourse is a potentially procreative sex act, considered in itself (though admitting the possibility that it may be impossible for a particular couple), oral and anal sex acts are never potentially procreative, whether heterosexual or homosexual (George, 1999a). But is this biological distinction also morally relevant, and in the manner that natural law theorists assume? Natural law theorists, in their discussions of these issues, seem to waver. On the one hand, they want to defend an ideal of marriage as a loving union wherein two persons are committed to their mutual flourishing, and where sex is a complement to that ideal. Yet that opens the possibility of permissible gay sex, or heterosexual sodomy, both of which they want to oppose. So they then defend an account of sexuality which seems crudely reductive, emphasizing procreation to the point where literally a male orgasm anywhere except in the vagina of one's loving spouse is impermissible. Then, when accused of being reductive, they move back to the broader ideal of marriage.
Natural law theory, at present, has made significant concessions to mainstream liberal thought. In contrast certainly to its medieval formulation, most contemporary natural law theorists argue for limited governmental power, and do not believe that the state has an interest in attempting to prevent all moral wrongdoing. Still, most proponents of the "New Natural Law Theory" do argue against homosexuality, and against legal protections for gays and lesbians in terms of employment and housing, even to the point of serving as expert witnesses in court cases or helping in the writing of amicus curae briefs. They also argue against same sex marriage (Bradley, 2001; George, 1999b). There have been some attempts, however, to reconcile natural law theory and homosexuality (see, for example, Lago, 2018; Goldstein, 2011). While maintaining the central aspects of natural law theory and its account of basic human goods, they typically either argue that marriage itself is not a basic good (Lago), or that the sort of good it is, when understood in a less narrow, dogmatic fashion, is such that same-sex couples can enjoy it. Part of the theoretical interest in these arguments is that they allow for a moral evaluation of sexuality, still requiring it to realize the basic good of friendship if it is to be permissible, while avoiding what seem to be the various problematic aspects of contemporary natural law theorists' denigration of same-sex sexuality in any form.
4. Queer Theory and the Social Construction of Sexuality
With the rise of the gay liberation movement in the post-Stonewall era, overtly gay and lesbian perspectives began to be put forward in politics, philosophy and literary theory. Initially these often were overtly linked to feminist analyses of patriarchy (e.g., Rich, 1980) or other, earlier approaches to theory. Yet in the late 1980s and early 1990s queer theory was developed, although there are obviously important antecedents which make it difficult to date it precisely. There are a number of ways in which queer theory differed from earlier gay liberation theory, but an important initial difference becomes apparent once we examine the reasons for opting for employing the term 'queer' as opposed to 'gay and lesbian.' Some versions of, for example, lesbian theory portrayed the essence of lesbian identity and sexuality in very specific terms: non-hierarchical, consensual, and, specifically in terms of sexuality, as not necessarily focused upon genitalia (e.g., Faderman, 1985). Lesbians arguing from this framework, for example, could very well criticize natural law theorists as inscribing into the very "law of nature" an essentially masculine sexuality, focused upon the genitals, penetration, and the status of the male orgasm (natural law theorists rarely mention female orgasms).
This approach, based upon characterizations of 'lesbian' and 'gay' identity and sexuality, however, suffered from three difficulties. First, it appeared even though the goal was to critique a heterosexist regime for its exclusion and marginalization of those whose sexuality is different, any specific or "essentialist" account of gay or lesbian sexuality had the same effect. Sticking with the example used above, of a specific conceptualization of lesbian identity, it denigrates women who are sexually and emotionally attracted to other women, yet who do not fit the description. Sado-masochists and butch/fem lesbians arguably do not fit this ideal of 'equality' offered. A second problem was that by placing such an emphasis upon the gender of one's sexual partner(s), other possible important sources of identity are marginalized, such as race and ethnicity. What may be of utmost importance, for example, for a black lesbian is her lesbianism, rather than her race. Many gays and lesbians of color attacked this approach, accusing it of re-inscribing an essentially white identity into the heart of gay or lesbian identity (Jagose, 1996).
The third and final problem for the gay liberationist approach was that it often took this category of 'identity' itself as unproblematic and unhistorical. Such a view, however, largely because of arguments developed within poststructuralism, seemed increasingly untenable. The key figure in the attack upon identity as ahistorical is Michel Foucault. In a series of works he set out to analyze the history of sexuality from ancient Greece to the modern era (1980, 1985, 1986). Although the project was tragically cut short by his death in 1984, from complications arising from AIDS, Foucault articulated how profoundly understandings of sexuality can vary across time and space, and his arguments have proven very influential in gay and lesbian theorizing in general, and queer theory in particular (Spargo, 1999; Stychin, 2005).
One of the reasons for the historical review above is that it helps to give some background for understanding the claim that sexuality is socially constructed, rather than given by nature. Moreover, in order to not prejudge the issue of social constructionism versus essentialism, I avoided applying the term 'homosexual' to the ancient or medieval eras. In ancient Greece the gender of one's partner(s) was not important, but instead whether one took the active or passive role. In the medieval view, a 'sodomite' was a person who succumbed to temptation and engaged in certain non-procreative sex acts. Although the gender of the partner was more important in the medieval than in the ancient view, the broader theological framework placed the emphasis upon a sin versus refraining-from-sin dichotomy. With the rise of the notion of 'homosexuality' in the modern era, a person is placed into a specific category even if one does not act upon those inclinations. It is difficult to perceive a common, natural sexuality expressed across these three very different cultures. The social constructionist contention is that there is no 'natural' sexuality; all sexual understandings are constructed within and mediated by cultural understandings. The examples can be pushed much further by incorporating anthropological data outside of the Western tradition (Halperin, 1990; Greenberg, 1988). Yet even within the narrower context offered here, the differences between them are striking. The assumption in ancient Greece was that men (less is known about Greek attitudes towards women) can respond erotically to either sex, and the vast majority of men who engaged in same-sex relationships were also married (or would later become married). Yet the contemporary understanding of homosexuality divides the sexual domain in two, heterosexual and homosexual, and most heterosexuals cannot respond erotically to their own sex.
In saying that sexuality is a social construct, these theorists are not saying that these understandings are not real. Since persons are also constructs of their culture (in this view), we are made into those categories. Hence today persons of course understand themselves as straight or gay (or perhaps bisexual), and it is very difficult to step outside of these categories, even once one comes to see them as the historical constructs they are.
Gay and lesbian theory was thus faced with three significant problems, all of which involved difficulties with the notion of 'identity.' Queer theory arose in large part as an attempt to overcome them. How queer theory does so can be seen by looking at the term 'queer' itself. In contrast to gay or lesbian, 'queer,' it is argued, does not refer to an essence, whether of a sexual nature or not. Instead it is purely relational, standing as an undefined term that gets its meaning precisely by being that which is outside of the norm, however that norm itself may be defined. As one of the most articulate queer theorists puts it: "Queer is … whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate, the dominant. There is nothing in particular to which it necessarily refers. It is an identity without an essence" (Halperin, 1995, 62, original emphasis). By lacking any essence, queer does not marginalize those whose sexuality is outside of any gay or lesbian norm, such as sado-masochists. Since specific conceptualizations of sexuality are avoided, and hence not put at the center of any definition of queer, it allows more freedom for self-identification for, say, black lesbians to identify as much or more with their race (or any other trait, such as involvement in an S & M subculture) than with lesbianism. Finally, it incorporates the insights of poststructuralism about the difficulties in ascribing any essence or non-historical aspect to identity.
This central move by queer theorists, the claim that the categories through which identity is understood are all social constructs rather than given to us by nature, opens up a number of analytical possibilities. For example, queer theorists examine how fundamental notions of gender and sex which seem so natural and self-evident to persons in the modern West are in fact constructed and reinforced through everyday actions, and that this occurs in ways that privilege heterosexuality (Butler, 1990, 1993). Also examined are medical categories, such as 'inverts' and intersexuality, which are themselves socially constructed (Fausto-Sterling, 2000, is an erudite example of this, although she is not ultimately a queer theorist). Others examine how language and especially divisions between what is said and what is not said, corresponding to the dichotomy between 'closeted' and 'out,' especially in regards to the modern division of heterosexual/homosexual, structure much of modern thought. That is, it is argued that when we look at dichotomies such as natural/artificial, or masculine/feminine, we find in the background an implicit reliance upon a very recent, and arbitrary, understanding of the sexual world as split into two species (Sedgwick, 1990). The fluidity of categories created through queer theory even opens the possibility of new sorts of histories that examine previously silent types of affections and relationships (Carter, 2005).
Another critical perspective opened up by a queer approach, although certainly implicit in those just referred to, is especially important. Since most anti-gay and lesbian arguments rely upon the alleged naturalness of heterosexuality, queer theorists attempt to show how these categories are themselves deeply social constructs. An example helps to illustrate the approach. In an essay against gay marriage, chosen because it is very representative, James Q. Wilson (1996) contends that gay men have a "great tendency" to be promiscuous. In contrast, he puts forward loving, monogamous marriage as the natural condition of heterosexuality. Heterosexuality, in his argument, is an odd combination of something completely natural yet simultaneously endangered. One is born straight, yet this natural condition can be subverted by such things as the presence of gay couples, gay teachers, or even excessive talk about homosexuality. Wilson's argument requires a radical disjunction between heterosexuality and homosexuality. If gayness is radically different, it is legitimate to suppress it. Wilson has the courage to be forthright about this element of his argument; he comes out against "the political imposition of tolerance" towards gays and lesbians (Wilson, 1996, 35).
It is a common move in queer theory to bracket, at least temporarily, issues of truth and falsity (Halperin, 1995). Instead, the analysis focuses on the social function of discourse. Questions of who counts as an expert and why, and concerns about the effects of the expert's discourse are given equal status to questions of the verity of what is said. This approach reveals that hidden underneath Wilson's (and other anti-gay) work is an important epistemological move. Since heterosexuality is the natural condition, it is a place that is spoken from but not inquired into. In contrast, homosexuality is the aberration and hence it needs to be studied but it is not an authoritative place from which one can speak. By virtue of this heterosexual privilege, Wilson is allowed the voice of the impartial, fair-minded expert. Yet, as the history section above shows, there are striking discontinuities in understandings of sexuality, and this is true to the point that, according to queer theorists, we should not think of sexuality as having any particular nature at all. Through undoing our infatuation with any specific conception of sexuality, the queer theorist opens space for marginalized forms of sexuality, and thus of ways of being more generally.
The insistence that we must investigate the ways in which categories such as sexuality and orientation are created and given power through science and other cultural mechanisms has made queer theory appealing to scholars in a variety of disciplines. Historians and sociologists have drawn on it, which is perhaps unsurprising given the role of historical claims about the social construction of sexuality. Queer theory has been especially influential in literary studies and feminist theory, even though the dividing lines between the latter and queer thinking is contested (see Jagose, 2009; Marinucci, 2010). One of the most prominent scholars working in the area of gay and lesbian issues in constitutional law has also drawn on queer theory to advance his interrogation of the ways that US law privileges heterosexuality (Eskridge, 1999). Scholars in postcolonial and racial analyses, ethnography, American studies, and other fields have drawn on the conceptual tools provided by queer theory.
Despite its roots in postmodernism and Foucault's work in particular, queer theory's reception in France was initially hostile (see Eribon, 2004). The core texts from the first 'wave' of queer theory, such as Judith Butler's and Eve Sedgwick's central works, were slow to appear in French translation, not coming out until a decade and a half after their original publication. Doubtless the French republican self-understanding, which is universalist and often hostile to movements that are multicultural in their bent, was a factor in the slow and often strenuously resisted importation of queer theoretical insights. Similarly, queer theory has also been on the margins in German philosophy and political philosophy. In sum, it is fair to say that queer theory has had a greater impact in the Anglo-American world.
Queer theory, however, has been criticized in a myriad of ways (Jagose, 1996). One set of criticisms comes from theorists who are sympathetic to gay liberation conceived as a project of radical social change. An initial criticism is that precisely because 'queer' does not refer to any specific sexual status or gender object choice, for example Halperin (1995) allows that straight persons may be 'queer,' it robs gays and lesbians of the distinctiveness of what makes them marginal. It desexualizes identity, when the issue is precisely about a sexual identity (Jagose, 1996). A related criticism is that queer theory, since it refuses any essence or reference to standard ideas of normality, cannot make crucial distinctions. For example, queer theorists usually argue that one of the advantages of the term 'queer' is that it thereby includes transsexuals, sado-masochists, and other marginalized sexualities. How far does this extend? Is transgenerational sex (e.g., pedophilia) permissible? Are there any limits upon the forms of acceptable sado-masochism or fetishism? While some queer theorists specifically disallow pedophilia, it is an open question whether the theory has the resources to support such a distinction. Furthermore, some queer theorists overtly refuse to rule out pedophiles as 'queer' (Halperin, 1995, 62) Another criticism is that queer theory, in part because it typically has recourse to a very technical jargon, is written by a narrow elite for that narrow elite. It is therefore class biased and also, in practice, only really referred to at universities and colleges (Malinowitz, 1993).
Queer theory is also criticized by those who reject the desirability of radical social change. For example, centrist and conservative gays and lesbians have criticized a queer approach by arguing that it will be "disastrously counter-productive" (Bawer, 1996, xii). If 'queer' keeps its connotation of something perverse and at odds with mainstream society, which is precisely what most queer theorists want, it would seem to only validate the attacks upon gays and lesbians made by conservatives. Sullivan (1996) also criticizes queer theorists for relying upon Foucault's account of power, which he argues does not allow for meaningful resistance. It seems likely, however, that Sullivan's understanding of Foucault's notions of power and resistance is misguided.
5. Conclusion
The debates about homosexuality, in part because they often involve public policy and legal issues, tend to be sharply polarized. Those most concerned with homosexuality, positively or negatively, are also those most engaged, with natural law theorists arguing for gays and lesbians having a reduced legal status, and queer theorists engaged in critique and deconstruction of what they see as a heterosexist regime. Yet the two do not talk much to one another, but rather ignore or talk past one another. There are some theorists in the middle. For example, Michael Sandel takes an Aristotelian approach from which he argues that gay and lesbian relationships can realize the same goods that heterosexual relationships do (Sandel, 1995). He largely shares the account of important human goods that natural law theorists have, yet in his evaluation of the worth of same-sex relationships, he is clearly sympathetic to gay and lesbian concerns. Similarly, Bruce Bawer (1993) and Andrew Sullivan (1995) have written eloquent defenses of full legal equality for gays and lesbians, including marriage rights. Yet neither argue for any systematic reform of broader American culture or politics. In this they are essentially conservative. Therefore, rather unsurprisingly, these centrists are attacked from both sides. Sullivan, for example, has been criticized at length both by queer theorists (e.g., Phelan, 2001) and natural law theorists (e.g., George, 1999a).
Yet as the foregoing also clearly shows, the policy and legal debates surrounding homosexuality involve fundamental issues of morality and justice. Perhaps most centrally of all, they cut to issues of personal identity and self-definition. Hence there is another, and even deeper, set of reasons for the polarization that marks these debates.
- Alderson, David, 2016, Sex, Needs & Queer Culture: From liberation to the Postgay, London: Zed Books.
- Bawer, Bruce, 1993, A Place at the Table: The Gay Individual in American Society, New York: Poseidon Press.
- –––, 1996. Beyond Queer: Challenging Gay Left Orthodoxy, New York: The Free Press.
- Berman, Paul, 1993, "Democracy and Homosexuality" in The New Republic, 209(25): 17–35.
- Boswell, John, 1980, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
- –––, 1994, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe, New York: Vintage Books.
- Bradley, Gerard V., 2001, "The End of Marriage," in Marriage and the Common Good, Kenneth D. Whitehead (ed.), South Bend, IN: St. Augustine's Press.
- Butler, Judith, 1990, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, New York: Routledge.
- –––, 1993, Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of "Sex", New York: Routledge.
- Kampler, Benjamin, and Catherine Connell, 2018, "The Post-gay Debates: Competing Visions of the Future of Homosexualities," Sociology Compass 12:e12646.
- Carter, Julian, 2005, "On Mother-Love: History, Queer Theory, and Nonlesbian Identity," Journal of the History of Sexuality, 14: 107–138.
- Cicero, 1966, Tusculan Disputations, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Coleman-Fountain, Edmund, 2014, "Lesbian and Gay Youth and the Question of Labels," Sexualities, 17: 802–817.
- Crompton, Louis, 2003, Homosexuality and Civilization, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Dover, K.J., 1978 [1989], Greek Homosexuality, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Eribon, Didier, 2004, Insult and the Making of the Gay Self, Durham: Duke University Press.
- Eskridge, Jr., William N., 1999, Gaylaw: Challenging the Apartheid of the Closet, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Faderman, Lillian, 1985, Surpassing the Love of Men: Romantic Friendship and Love Between Women from the Renaissance to the Present, London: The Women's Press.
- Fausto-Sterling, Anne, 2000, Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality, New York: Basic Books.
- Finnis, John, 1994, "Law, Morality, and 'Sexual Orientation'," Notre Dame Law Review, 69: 1049–1076.
- Foucault, Michel, 1980, The History of Sexuality. Volume One: An Introduction, Robert Hurley (trans.), New York: Vintage Books.
- –––,1985, The History of Sexuality (Volume Two: The Use of Pleasure), New York: Pantheon Books.
- –––, 1986, The History of Sexuality (Volume Three: The Care of the Self), New York: Pantheon.
- George, Robert P., 1999a, In Defense of Natural Law, New York: Oxford University Press.
- –––, 1999b, "'Same-Sex Marriage' and 'Moral Neutrality'," in Christopher Wolfe (ed.), Homosexuality and American Public Life, Dallas: Spence Publishing, 141–153; reprinted in Kenneth D. Whitehead (ed.), Marriage and the Common Good, South Bend, IN: St. Augustine's Press, 646–655.
- Goldstein, Joshua D., 2011, " New Natural Law Theory and the Grounds of Marriage: Friendship and Self-Constitution," Social Theory and Practice, 37(2): 461–482.
- Greenberg, David F., 1988, The Construction of Homosexuality, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
- Halperin, David M., 1990, One Hundred Years of Homosexuality: and other essays on Greek love, New York: Routledge.
- –––, 1995, Saint Foucault: Towards a Gay Hagiography, New York: Oxford University Press.
- Jagose, Annamarie, 1996, Queer Theory: An Introduction, New York: New York University Press.
- –––, 2009, "Feminism's Queer Theory," Feminism and Psychology, 19(2): 157–174.
- Lago, Pablo Antonio, 2018, "Same-Sex Marriage: a defense based on foundations of natural law," Revista Direito GV, 4(3): 1044–1066.
- Macedo, Stephen, 1995, "Homosexuality and the Conservative Mind," Georgetown Law Journal, 84: 261–300.
- Malinowitz, Harriet, 1993, "Queer Theory: Whose Theory?" Frontiers, 13: 168–184.
- Marinucci, Mimi, 2010, Feminism is Queer: The Intimate Connection Between Queer and Feminist Theory, London: Zed Books.
- Nussbaum, Martha, 1999, Sex and Social Justice, New York: Oxford University Press.
- Phelan, Shane, 2001, Sexual Strangers: Gays, Lesbians, and Dilemmas of Citizenship, Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
- Plato, The Symposium, Walter Hamilton (trans.), New York: Penguin Books, 1981.
- –––, The Laws, Trevor Saunders (trans.), New York: Penguin Books, 1970.
- Rich, Adrienne, 1980, "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence," in Women, Sex, and Sexuality, Catharine Stimpson and Ethel Spector Person (eds.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Sandel, Michael J., 1995, "Moral Argument and Liberal Toleration: Abortion and Homosexuality," in New Communitarian Thinking: Persons, Virtues, Institutions, and Communities, Amitai Etzioni (ed.), Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.
- Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky, 1990, Epistemology of the Closet, Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Shilts, Randy, 1993, Conduct Unbecoming: Gays and Lesbians in the U.S. Military, New York: St. Martin's Press.
- Spargo, Tasmin, 1999, Foucault and Queer Theory, New York: Totem Books.
- Stychin, Carl F., 2005, "Being Gay," Government and Opposition, 40: 90–109.
- Sullivan, Andrew, 1995, Virtually Normal: An Argument about Homosexuality, New York: Knopf.
- Weitham, Paul J., 1997, "Natural Law, Morality, and Sexual Complementarity," in Sex, Preference, and Family: Essay on Law and Nature, David M. Estlund and Martha C. Nussbaum (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press.
- Wilson, James Q., 1996, "Against Homosexual Marriage," Commentary, 101(3): 34–39.
Academic Tools
How to cite this entry. Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society. Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers, with links to its database.
Other Internet Resources
- Queer Theory Reading List, compiled by the LGBTQ Center, Brown University


text:
Press Releases
Brainlab Curve Wins Coveted Red Dot Award 2012
Feature by benefit, Curve inspired the experts and received the globally sought after red dot in product design
Feldkirchen, Germany, March 14, 2012 – Brainlab wins coveted 'red dot award.' Creative heads and manufacturers from all over the world submitted 4,515 designs altogether to the international product competition. Feature by benefit, Curve inspired the experts and received the globally sought after red dot in product design.Curve embodies the latest in medical technology. This advanced surgical navigation system for the brain and body features the latest image guidance software powering advanced 3D displays. Curve incorporates great ergonomics, two game-changing, multi-directional touch terminals, digital HD, hi-fi and wi-fi .
"Using a human-centered design approach, we set out to challenge conventional surgical utility to help foster collaboration and potentially improve patient outcomes," stated Stefan Vilsmeier, President and CEO of Brainlab. "Curve represents thousands of enhancements based on years of feedback from our customers. Incorporating user feedback has always been a priority for Brainlab and has helped to produce the ultimate surgical navigation experience in design and functionality."
"The most distinguished products of the respective branches of industry faced up not only to the tough competition this year again, but also to the critical eye of the jury, explains Professor Dr. Peter Zec, initiator and CEO of the red dot design award. "The experts thoroughly examined, tested and evaluated each individual entry, applying the highest standards. With their performances, the laureates did not only demonstrate an extraordinary design quality but they also showed that design is an integral part of innovative product solutions. At this high level, the winners are able to increase their potential for success on the market considerably by purposefully using our design prize."
The award winning products in the red dot design museum
Showcasing more than 1,500 products over 4,000 square metres of space, the red dot design museum accommodates the world's largest permanent exhibition of temporary design. From July 3 – 29, 2012, red dot again invites the world to visit the traditional special exhibition of the award winning products. In "Design on Stage – red dot award winners: product design 2012", enthusiasts can admire the latest trends at close range. Touching is explicitly requested and welcome: In this way, visitors experience live, the prizewinning design of Curve by Brainlab, on display in the breath-taking atmosphere of the one-time boiler house of the Zeche Zollverein, a former coalmine.
The red dot design award
The red dot design award, whose origins reach back to the 1950s, is carried out in three disciplines: 'red dot award: product design, 'red dot award: communication design' and 'red dot award: design concept'. In 2011 alone, more than 14,000 entries from over 70 countries were registered. The 'red dot award' itself is internationally established as one of the most appreciated quality seals for outstanding designs.
For further information please go to: www.red-dot.de/press.
About Brainlab
Brainlab develops, manufactures and markets software-driven medical technology that supports targeted, less-invasive treatment.
Among the core products are image-guided systems that provide highly accurate real-time information used for navigation during surgical procedures. This utility has been further expanded to serve as a computer terminal for physicians to more effectively access and interpret diagnostic scans and other digital medical information for better-informed decisions.
Brainlab solutions allow expansion from a single system to operating suites to digitally integrated facilities covering all subspecialties from neurosurgery and spinal surgery to orthopedics, ENT, CMF and trauma and oncology. With about 5,000 systems installed in over 80 countries, Brainlab is a market leader in image-guided technology.
The privately held Brainlab group, founded in 1989, is headquartered in Munich, Germany, and today employs 1,020 people in 17 offices worldwide.
To learn more about Curve™ Image Guided Surgery, visit www.brainlabcurve.com.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Urban Outfitters enters Japan with Free People
PHILADELPHIA — Urban Outfitters is entered into an exclusive deal with World Co. to bring its Free People brand to Japan.
"We are excited to partner with World Co., Ltd to help us expand the Free People brand in Japan," said Chief Executive Officer, Richard Hayne. "Free People designs compelling merchandise with a strong lifestyle message, and World brings deep expertise and a track record of marketing success in Japan. Together we expect to build the same customer awareness and brand loyalty in the Japanese Market that Free People currently enjoys domestically."
The multi-year agreement with World Co., Ltd. will mark Urban Outfitter's first full-scale entry into the Japanese market, and is expected to commence with the Free People brand's spring 2013 collection. Under the agreement, World Co., Ltd will have the right to distribute merchandise through shop-in-shop locations, a stand-alone store, direct-to-consumer sites, distribute to specialty store and department store wholesale accounts, and market the brand throughout Japan.


text:
Precision Automotive Paint & Collision is a Lake Isabella Garage and Body Shop that offers superior Garage and Body Shop services to the greater Lake Isabella region and surrounding areas. Our mission is to service your vehicle as quickly and effectively as possible so that you experience the least amount of delay in getting back to your daily activities. We strive to offer the very best prices on both products and garage services, ensuring you are safely back on Lake Isabella's roads without having to empty your wallet.
We strongly believe that we can attribute our growing success in the Lake Isabella market to our unparalleled level of customer service and flawless workmanship. When you trust Precision Automotive Paint & Collision with repairs or regular maintenance to your vehicle, you can expect our full attention; our mechanics will always take the time to listen to your needs and explain any procedure we feel is necessary to repair your vehicle or fine tune it so that it is functioning to the best of its ability. We always ensure that our esteemed customers pay only for what is necessary, and never try to convince them to fix something that isn't broken. That is the Precision Automotive Paint & Collision guarantee.
Precision Automotive Paint & Collision is happy to take on any repair or maintenance project, however big or small, and we always strive to work within your budget. We have a wide variety of auto parts and accessories on location at our Lake Isabella Garage and Body Shop, and we can perform most any service quickly, without having to wait for ordered materials to be shipped in. Upon assessing your needs, our qualified and experienced technicians will be able to give you an accurate time and cost estimate so that you know exactly what to expect. We are also extremely proactive in keeping you up to date on the progress of your repair or maintenance services, and are always available to answer any question or discuss any concern you may have.
CALL US! (760) 379-6222 | (760) 223-1620 - Emergency Towing
If you live in the greater Lake Isabella area and are in need of a professional, qualified team of auto mechanics to handle repair or maintenance on your vehicle, do not hesitate to contact Precision Automotive Paint & Collision today. We are always happy to meet new customers and take the time to fully understand your needs and expectations so that we know you are completely satisfied with our work.
Client Google Reviews
Took my truck in to have a New ignition switch installed, they had it done very quickly, only took a couple of days. Friendly service as well. Definitely the place to go!
Glen Tanner
They towed our truck and fixed on a late Friday afternoon. The owner fixed it himself. He test drive it for 15 minutes and made sure it is fixed. They saved the day. Thank you.
Divina Grover
Stopped in cause our driver door wouldn't close. The guy was quick and real professional. I really appreciate the kindness of a small town business
Eddie Dillard-


text:
Here is a pastoral conundrum for you to think about. In 1412 the pre-Reformation preacher John Huss found himself facing a difficult decision. The Roman Catholic Church had excommunicated him for his refusal to burn his copies of John Wycliffe's writings and now the Church had also leveled an interdict against the city of Prague on his account. This was a scare tactic that meant that for as long as he was in the city, no sacraments could be administered there. According to Roman Catholic theology, the interdict put the whole city at risk of losing their salvation. It placed extreme pressure on Huss to decide whether he would flee his congregation and see the interdict lifted, or whether he would stay and, in all likelihood, face death.
In a letter to friends, Huss processed his thoughts on the matter, ultimately concluding with counsel from St. Augustine (that had, of course, been penned many, many years earlier).
I burn with ardent zeal for the gospel; and my soul is sad, for I know not what to resolve on. I have meditated on these evangelic words of our Savior (John, chap. x.) — "The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. But he that is an hireling and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them and scattereth the sheep."
I have also meditated on these words from St Matthew (chap. x.) — "But when they persecute you in one city, flee ye into another." Of these two precepts, so different to each other, which ought I to follow? I know not. …
Therefore, let us pray humbly to Almighty God, that he may deign to reveal to us what I ought to do in the present circumstance, in order that I may dwell in the right way. The advice that the blessed St. Augustine expresses in his letter, is wise: he establishes in fact, that in circumstances where we may be anxious for ourselves alone, flight is permitted, and he cites on the point the example of St. Athanasius; but should the whole flock be exposed, we must resign ourselves to our lot, in order to do what may prove most useful to the Church. (Letters of John Huss, 19-21)
Augustine's counsel was that a pastor could, in good conscience, leave his congregation as long as his departure would not expose the sheep to wolves. However, if it was likely that his departure would leave the sheep vulnerable to attack, out of love for his flock he should stay and endure whatever might come. This strikes me as a wise way of breaking down with a difficult situation.
Huss ultimately did leave Prague, convinced that his people would be cared for even without him. Until his martyrdom in 1415, he visited the city whenever he could and wrote numerous pastoral letters to the congregation.


text:
Just as we have internal clocks that help regulate the systems in our bodies, fruit and vegetable plants have circadian rhythms, too.
And a new study published in Current Biology finds there may be a way to boost some of the beneficial compounds in plants by simulating the light-dark cycle after crops are harvested.
So, how does it work?
Well, take cruciferous vegetables such as cabbage, which contains cancer-fighting compounds called glucosinolates. Studies have shown that glucosinolates secrete enzymes that can remove carcinogens.
"The protective effect of these vegetables is that they rev up the capacity of cells to dispose of toxic compounds," says Paul Talalay, a pharmacologist at Johns Hopkins University.
In other words, they help our bodies get rid of harmful substances.
Now, as vegetables go from the field to the store to our plate, the levels of these compounds start to fizzle out.
If you listen to my story on All Things Considered, you'll hear how researcher Janet Braam of Rice University and her colleagues conducted lab studies to test the possibilities of coaxing more life — and more of these beneficial compounds — out of the fruits and vegetables we buy.
They put cabbages under light for 12 hours a day, followed by 12 hours of darkness, to try to re-create the light-dark cycle in the field.
Prior research has already shown that plants use circadian rhythms to help them judge when to turn on their chemical defenses. Some plants release these beneficial chemicals to fend off bugs in the field or cope with the stresses of heat or drought.
"And sure enough we found that when we put the plants under light-dark cycles, we found periods of accumulation of those [beneficial] chemicals," explains Braam.
The peak of the compounds came in the afternoon, in the hours before dusk.
They were "significantly higher in the day," Braam says — about twice as high. It was as if the plants were still alive, even though they're no longer attached to their roots or the earth. "This very much surprised us," Braam says.
Her team found similar responses with a range of crops including lettuce, spinach, sweet potatoes and blueberries.
Outside experts seem impressed by the study. "I'm excited to see this research going on," plant researcher Bhimu Patil told me by phone. And he explains there's a lot of interest in the industry in figuring out ways to retain the beneficial compounds in produce after harvest.
Braam is quick to point out that more research is needed to see whether the findings carry over into real-life situations, like our kitchens or in grocery stores. "It just opens the door to many possibilities," says Braam.
For instance, it might make sense for supermarkets — or consumers at home — to think abut storing our produce under light-dark cycles.
Or maybe it's time for a vegetable happy hour: eating our produce in the hours before dusk when some of the most beneficial compounds are at their peak.
Copyright 2023 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.


text:
Kidville respects your privacy and values the relationship we have with you. Your visit to this website is subject to this Privacy Policy.
This Privacy Policy describes the types of personal information we collect at kidville.com, (the "Site"), how we may use that information and with whom we may share it. Our Privacy Policy also describes the measures we take to protect the security of this information as well as how you may reach us to update your contact information, remove your name from our mailing list or ask us any questions you may have about our use of your personal information. It also explains how you may elect to stop receiving communications about our products and services.
Please note that this Privacy Policy governs only information provided to kidville.com. It does not govern any other information collected or communications received by way of any other product or service. If you link to another website from this Site, you are subject to the privacy policy applicable for that website and we suggest that you consult such privacy policy.
You may choose to provide us with personal information when you visit our Site. For example, if you decide to complete an online survey, complete a user registration form or make a purchase, you may be asked to provide certain information such as your contact information (name, email address, mailing address, and telephone number), age group and gender. If you decide to place an order, we will also need to know your billing address, credit card number and expiration date. To protect your personal information, users registering at the Site must also enter a user name/email address and password.
If you would prefer that we not collect any personal information from you, please do not provide us with any such information.
a. Marketing Emails
The information you provide may be used by Kidville and its partners or affiliates to create and deliver to you emails such as our newsletters, surveys or other email messages containing product and event information ("Emails"). If you decide that you would no longer like to receive these Emails, see the Deactivate or Change Your Status section below.
b. Communications to Serve You
If you have elected to provide us with your contact information, we may provide you with service related announcements by email, or direct mail, concerning the Site or contact you regarding your customer service requests or questions or your order. For example, all registered users will receive a welcoming Email to confirm their registration. These types of communications are necessary to serve you, respond to your concerns and to provide the high level of customer service that Kidville offers its customers.
c. Special Events, Questionnaires and Surveys
On occasion, Kidville may sponsor special events (such as contests, sweepstakes or other offerings), questionnaires and surveys. There may be specific rules applicable to these promotions that explain how any personal information you provide will be processed. We strongly suggest you review any applicable rules before participating. To the extent any special event, questionnaire or survey is not subject to specific rules, the processing of personal information is governed by this Privacy Policy for the purposes set forth herein.
We use various technologies to collect information about your visit to our Site and to enhance and customize your experience on our Site. For example, we may collect the numerical Internet Protocol (IP) address identifying your computer or device which may indicate your geographic location. In some instances, we may use these technologies in combination with the personal information you provide on the Site. These technologies may provide a variety of information such as whether you have visited our Site before. They also may enable you to save your preferences. Each technology is explained below.
a. Web Beacons and Tracking Links
Web beacons (also called clear gifs and pixel tags), tracking links and/or similar technology consist of a few lines of code and are embedded on the pages of our Site. They are often used in combination with cookies and are often not visible to the user of the Site. Web beacons may relay information to third parties such as our service providers and may be used in order to track customer response to certain advertising, to better target interactive advertising such as re-targeting and to enhance customer support and usability. If you reject our cookies (see "Cookies" section below), you will prevent Web beacons from relaying this information about you and may limit your use of some of our Site features.
b. Cookies
The Site uses "cookies" to help you personalize your online experience. A cookie is a text file that is placed on your hard disk by a web page server. Cookies cannot be used to run programs or deliver viruses to your computer. Cookies are uniquely assigned to you, and can only be read by a web server in the domain that issued the cookie to you.
One of the primary purposes of a cookie is to provide a convenience feature to save you time. The purpose of a cookie is to tell the web server that you have returned to a specific page. This simplifies the process of recording your personal information, such as billing addresses, shipping addresses, and so on. When you return to kidville.com, the information you previously provided can be retrieved, so you can easily use the kidville.com features that you customized.
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies. Most web browsers automatically accept cookies, but you can usually modify your browser settings to decline cookies if you prefer. If you choose to decline cookies, you may not be able to fully experience the interactive features of the kidville.com services or web sites you visit.
We may use third-party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our website. These companies may use non-identifying information (not including your name, address, email address, or telephone number) about your visits to this and other websites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you.
We will not provide your personal information to third parties for their use in marketing their products or services to you without your consent, except as described below. In addition, we do not sell or otherwise disclose personal information about our Site visitors except as described here.
a. Kidville Companies
We may share your personal information with other Kidville affiliates or partners (the "Kidville Companies"). Kidville Companies will use this information in accordance with this Privacy Policy.
b. Third Parties
We may retain other companies and individuals to perform functions on our behalf consistent with this Privacy Policy. Examples include credit card companies, data analysis firms, customer support specialists, email vendors, and web hosting companies. Such third parties may be provided with access to personal information needed to perform their functions but may not use such information other than on our behalf and in accordance with this Privacy Policy.
In addition, in some instances, you may be offered the opportunity to consent to the sharing of your information with a third party such as an event or promotion co-sponsor. If you consent, we will share your information with such third party and the information you provide may be used by such third party for their own purposes and in accordance with their own policies.
c. Compliance With Law and Fraud Protection
We may disclose any information we deem necessary, in our sole discretion, to comply with any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request. In addition, we may disclose any information when we believe, in our sole discretion, disclosure is necessary or appropriate to prevent physical harm or financial loss or in connection with suspected or actual illegal activity.
We maintain reasonable safeguards for this Site to protect against unauthorized disclosure, use, alteration or destruction of the personal information you provide on the site. If you have any questions about security at our Site, you can send an email to firstname.lastname@example.com.
We may revise this Privacy Policy from time to time. If we decide to change our Privacy Policy, we will post the revised policy here. We suggest that you periodically consult this Privacy Policy.
With the exception of order confirmation emails the like, Kidville gives our members the option of deactivating from our service so as not to receive future communications from us or any other part of our service by following the unsubscribe instructions at the bottom of any email communication.
Note: It may take up to 48 hours for us to process your request and any e-mail communications within the queue prior to your decision to deactivate will still be sent to you.
We have taken great measures to ensure that your visit to our Site is an excellent one and that your privacy is constantly respected. If you have any questions, comments or concerns about our privacy practices, please contact us by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
Day two for NPR Music's team at South By Southwest started on a high note and hardly ever flagged. After the Wednesday night showcase ran to the wee hours of the morning, Thursday's opening event, a keynote address by Bruce Springsteen, didn't start until after noon, local time.
But Springsteen must have been out late too: His first words upon taking the stage were, "Good morning, good morning, good morning. Why are we up so early?" Except he added an expletive that had crowd in the palm of his hand.
He kept them there over the course of a wide-ranging talk that lasted nearly an hour and covered half his life and dozens of musical influences (you can listen to audio of the complete speech here and find all of our coverage, including audio from concerts at our Main SXSW page).
Meeting up with Robin Hilton, Bob Boilen and Stephen Thompson after a jam-packed Thursday, Ann Powers says that Professor Bruce, spoke mostly "about his songwriting process and the artists who inspired him," including Eric Burdon of the Animals, Roy Orbison and Woody Guthrie. He mentioned KISS multiple times. He sang snippets of his own songs and songs he loved as a kid.
The start of NPR Music's day party at The Parish overlapped with the end of Springsteen's speech, so while Ann was watching the Boss, Stephen, Robin and Bob were taking in the dance party thrown by La Vida Boheme. Bob heard elements of The Clash and Pink Floyd in the Venezuelan band's performance. "It wasn't the musicality of what they were doing on stage, but the power and the originality of it," he said.
Atlanta rapper Sugar Tongue Slim kept the party going, picking up on La Vida Boheme's energy and Springsteen's salty language: "There was a sense of playfulness about him that was very winning. He kind of had this wink with the audience where, 'I'm going to make you work as hard as I do,'" Stephen said.
Polica was Robin's "oh wow" band of the day. "Just in terms of pure surprise." The Minneapolis band arrived in Austin with a bunch of buzz after an endorsement by Bon Iver's Justin Vernon, and they're making good on that promise (Bob has seen the band play three times already). Lower Dens, another favorite of Robin's, played a set of all-new material from its forthcoming album, Nootropics.
After that, the deluge. People were weeping in the audience as The Magnetic Fields played droll, melancholy love songs, including a certain NPR Music editor: "We actually had to take out an extra rider on our insurance to cover any slippage that occurred on the puddles of my tears," Stephen said. The band's new album, Love At The Bottom Of The Sea, returns to its earlier synth-based sound, but this set was warm, and mostly acoustic.
From there, the team split up. Ann returned to the church of Springsteen for a performance she compared to "every ritual you ever love" and reports that Bruce brought out Jimmy Cliff, Eric Burdon and members of The Low Anthem and Arcade Fire and even crowd surfed at one point.
Stephen tried Bob's game plan: never stay in one place for too long. "I was trying to do three bands an hour. You lower the chances that you're going to be hypnotized, but you want to catch a moment." Here were a few: ZZ Ward, a "compelling" Oregon hippie chick "with a great band." We Are Augustines, who played "maritime anthems." Sarah Siskind, who has "a gorgeous, piercing voice." The Barr Brothers "reminded me of Josh Ritter with interesting, atmospheric instrumentation." Nada Surf, after 20 years, is still "one of the most heartwarming, lovable bands on Earth.
Stephen closed the night by jumping into the mosh pit at a show by another "spiritual obligation," Andrew W.K.
Bob's highlights included a set by the South African group Spoek Mathambo, who dressed in "Sgt. Pepper outfits" and sounded "almost Hendrix-like at times, not at all like the record." Taken By Trees, the project of Swedish singer Victoria Bergsman, whose last album, East of Eden, came out in 2009, returned to SXSW with a sound that approached reggae. Bam Bam, a Mexican rock band, played "pop songs with biting guitar" and sounded a bit like Television.
Robin caught many personal favorites who he had never seen live, including Little Scream, Hospitality and Exit Music, but his "most profound moment of the day" came at a show that also drew Bob and Stephen. Patrick Watson managed to get Bob Boilen to sit still for an entire set, and when he moved into the crowd to lead a sing-along, brought Robin to tears. "It was magical. ... That's the world that I want my kid to inherit."
It was a perfect note to end on. As Bruce Springsteen said (to Ann, personally, there was no one else around, she swears), "Have a little faith, there's magic in the night."
Copyright 2020 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.


text:
Women's Casual Shoes
All of our Casual Shoes are custom-made-to-order and handcrafted to the highest quality standards.
- Features a full wrap canvas print.
- Elastic stretch V for easy on-and-off use.
- High quality canvas construction for everyday use and durable EVA outsole for exceptional traction.
Please allow 5-7 days to receive a tracking number while your order is hand-crafted, packaged and shipped from our facility.
Estimated Shipping Time:
- Standard Shipping: 15-20 business days.
- Express Shipping: 4-7 business days.
Got question? Email us email@example.com
If you have never ordered with us, please take a few minutes to read over our Delivery Policy and Refund & Return Policy to ensure the smooth delivery of your product.
Model: BEEGC03


text:
We strongly believe in proactive communication environment for outsourcing projects. Our project managers will be in touch with you throughout the entire project and give you daily update you on the progress of your project.
Competitive Prices
We offer highly affordable pricing models to each client. Also, at India-Data-Entry.com - we have designed our pricing models based on per record/row/line, price per hour, price per month/person, price per key stroke, etc.
State-Of-The-Art Infrastructure
We use the most advanced technology and hardware to accomplish your valuable product data migration, data cleansing, web research, data mining, product upload, photo editing and back office support projects.
Data Security
At India-Data-Entry.com, we ensure you that all your data and business information which you share with us during project execution will be protected physically, digitally, electronically from unauthorized access.


text:
Catch Me If You Can
2002 film by Steven Spielberg
Catch Me If You Can is a 2002 film starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hanks set in the 1960s loosely based on the life of con artist Frank Abagnale Jr.
- Directed by Steven Spielberg. Written by Jeff Nathanson from the book by Frank Abagnale Jr. and Stan Redding.
The true story of a real fake. (taglines)
Frank Abagnale Jr.
edit- You're gonna have to catch me first!
- Ah, people only know what you tell them, Carl!
- An honest man has nothing to fear, so I'm trying my best not to be afraid.
- For the last six months, he's gone to Harvard and Berkeley. I'm betting he can get a passport.
- [When asked why Frank won't flee to New York or Atlanta] Because I'm not in New York. I'm not in Atlanta.
- How'd you do it Frank? How did you cheat on the bar exam in Louisiana?
- He's a kid. Our unsub is a kid. That's why we couldn't match his prints. That's why he doesn't have a record. Now, I want you to contact the NYPD for every all-points juvenile runaways in New York City. And don't forget the airports. He's been kiting checks all over the country.
Frank Abagnale Sr.
edit- Two little mice fell in a bucket of cream. The first mouse quickly gave up and drowned. The second mouse, wouldn't quit. He struggled so hard that eventually he churned that cream into butter and crawled out. Gentlemen, as of this moment, I am that second mouse.
- To the moon!
- Where are you going tonight, Frank? Some place exotic? Tahiti, Hawaii?
edit- Frank Abagnale Sr.: You know why the Yankees always win, Frank?
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: 'Cause they have Mickey Mantle?
- Frank Abagnale Sr.: No, it's 'cause the other teams can't stop staring at those damn pinstripes.
- Carl Hanratty: Well, would you like to hear me tell a joke?
- Earl Amdursky: Yeah. Yeah, we'd love to hear a joke from you.
- Carl Hanratty: Knock knock.
- Earl Amdursky: Who's there?
- Carl Hanratty: Go fuck yourselves.
- Mr. Strong: Frank, would you like to say grace? ...Unless you're not comfortable.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: Absolutely. Two little mice fell into a bucket of cream. The first mouse quickly gave up and drowned, but the second mouse, he struggled so hard that he eventually churned that cream into butter and he walked out. Amen.
- Mrs. Strong: Oh, that was beautiful. The mouse, he churned that cream into butter.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: Carl, how long do I have to work here [the FBI]?
- Carl Hanratty: 8:15 in the morning, 4:00 in the afternoon. Forty-five minutes for lunch.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: No, I mean...how long?
- Carl Hanratty: Every day. Every day, Frank...until we let you go.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: Hey, Carl.
- [Carl and Mr. Marsh are visiting Frank in prison; Carl hopes to convince the FBI to let Frank out of prison]
- Assistant Director Marsh: I'd like for you to take a look at something, tell me what you think.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: [Marsh hands Frank a fake check as Carl looks on] That's a fake.
- Assistant Director Marsh: How do you know? You haven't looked at it.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: There's no perforated edge, right? This check was hand-cut, not fed. The paper's double-bonded, much too heavy to be a bank check. Magnetic ink, it's raised against my fingers, not flat. This doesn't smell like MICR, it's some kind of, uh, some kind of drafting ink. The kind you get at a stationery store.
- [Carl and Mr. Marsh, who is obviously fascinated and impressed, look at each other.]
- Assistant Director Marsh: Frank, would you be interested in working for the FBI's Financial Crimes Unit?
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: I've already got a job here, you know. I, uh, deliver the mail.
- Assistant Director Marsh: Frank, we have the power to take you out of prison. You'd be placed in the custody of the FBI where you'd serve out the remainder of your sentence as an employee of the Federal Government.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: Under whose custody?
- [Carl raises his hand]
- [Frank is making one last attempt to run by impersonating a pilot once again. Carl catches up with him at Dulles Airport]
- Carl Hanratty: How'd you do it, Frank? How'd you pass the bar in Louisiana?
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: [Frank continues to walk. Carl walks several paces behind] What are you doing here?
- Carl Hanratty: Listen...
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: I'm sorry I put you through all this.
- Carl Hanratty: You go back to Europe, you're gonna die in Perpignan Prison. You try to run here in the States, we'll send you back to Atlanta for 50 years.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: I know that.
- Carl Hanratty: I spent four years trying to arrange your release. Had to convince my bosses at the FBI and the Attorney General of the United States you wouldn't run.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: Why'd you do it?
- Carl Hanratty: You're just a kid.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: I'm not your kid. You said you were going to Chicago.
- Carl Hanratty: My daughter can't see me this weekend. She's going skiing.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: You said she was four years old. You're lying.
- Carl Hanratty: She was four when I left. Now she's 15. My wife's been remarried for 11 years. I see Grace every now and again.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: I don't understand.
- Carl Hanratty: Sure you do. Sometimes, it's easier living the lie. [Frank stops, Carl catches up]
- Carl Hanratty: I'm going to let you fly tonight, Frank. I'm not even going to try to stop you. That's because I know you'll be back on Monday.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: Yeah? How do you know I'll come back?
- Carl Hanratty: Frank, look. Nobody's chasing you.
- [Last lines, after Hanratty waits for Frank to show up at work]
- Carl Hanratty: There's impressions on every line... looks like the original amount was for $60...
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: [walks up and takes magnifier] Mind if I take a look?
- Carl Hanratty: [looks up] Cashed in Flagstaff a week ago. Cost the bank $16,000.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: It's a real check.
- Carl Hanratty: Yeah. Yeah, it's been washed. The only thing original is the signature.
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: But it's perfect, Carl. I mean, this isn't hydrochloride or bleach.
- Carl Hanratty: No. Something new. Maybe a nail polish remover where the acetone removes the ink that's not been printed?
- [long pause]
- Carl Hanratty: How did you do it, Frank? How did you cheat on the bar exam in Louisiana?
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: I didn't cheat. I studied for two weeks and I passed.
- Carl Hanratty: Is that the truth, Frank? Is that the truth?
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: I'll bet this guy steals checks out of mailboxes. He washes off their names and he puts on his own.
- Carl Hanratty: You're saying he's a local?
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: Well, if it were me, you know, I'd call the bank first... check out the balance...
- Carl Hanratty: Make sure there's enough money in there to make it worth your while...
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: You know, Carl, I think this guy's pretty smart.
- [Carl laughs]
- Frank Abagnale, Jr.: Now, all we have to do is catch him.
edit- The true story of a real fake.
edit- Leonardo DiCaprio - Frank Abagnale Jr.
- Tom Hanks - Carl Hanratty
- Christopher Walken - Frank Abagnale Sr.
- Martin Sheen - Roger Strong
- Nathalie Baye - Paula Abagnale
- Amy Adams - Brenda Strong
- James Brolin - Jack Barnes
External links
edit- Catch Me If You Can quotes at the Internet Movie Database
- Catch Me If You Can at Rotten Tomatoes
- The Official Catch Me If You Can Site


text:
David Letterman: Vanity Fair profile on the scandal that "rocked CBS"
Pour yourselves a tall cool one, Talk Show News readers, and set aside some time to read Vanity Fair's new six-page article about David Letterman. The article promises to explore "the explosive triangle—(Stephanie) Birkitt's ambition, (Joe) Halderman's bitterness, and Letterman's self-loathing—that rocked CBS," and pretty much succeeds. It's a juicy read.
Reporter Mark Seal sets the scene with Halderman spotting Letterman, in his "$100,000 electric Tesla sports car," dropping off Birkitt at the home she shared with the "48 Hours Mystery" producer. "From where he stands, [Halderman] can see them 'in the car in a passionate embrace, and the way Joe interpreted it was: We just had hot sex and we're going to do it again as soon as we possibly can,'" a friend of the producer, Bob Arnot, told Seal. "Now, here's Letterman in a hundred-thousand-dollar car, and—the ultimate insult—he's stealing Joe Halderman's girl!"
The article delves into Halderman's problems -- he was upset about the fact that his ex-wife had moved with their 11-year-old to Colorado, a development that sent him "reeling" -- as well as recapping Letterman's romantic life, from his ill-fated first marriage to his longtime affair with Merrill Markoe and subsequent relationship with Regina Lasko. The always-hilarious Markoe reveals that during the last two years of their relationship, Dave was cheating on her with Lasko. "I, like Tiger Woods's wife, was under the impression that my flawless Scandinavian supermodel good looks were enough to keep a man at home," quipped Markoe, explaining why she hadn't suspected that Letterman was cheating on her.
Why have so many women been drawn to Dave? "I've come in contact with countless celebrities, and only two emit a tangible, almost magnetic force, an electricity that draws you to them: David Letterman and Bill Clinton," said Madeleine Smithberg, a former Letterman segment producer who went on to co-create "The Daily Show" and Current TV's "Infomania." "I would be in my office with my back to the door. Suddenly, I would notice that the hair on my arms and neck would be standing on end. I'd turn around and there would be Dave, standing in my doorway. The man is electric! I was there for six years. You want to be with him; you want to be close to him. And when you are, you feel good. It's like you're basking in the buzz of Dave."
Halderman will learn his trial date next Tuesday. If found guilty, he faces up to 15 years in prison. As for Birkitt, she's keeping an ultra-low profile, on a paid leave of absence from "Late Show."