LGBTQI+ Pride Month: The Importance of Words, Identification, and Inclusion

Historically, LGBTQI+ pride month is dedicated to remembering the people who launched the battle for the right to be recognized as “subjects.” However, the road to equality is still very long. This is demonstrated by the inappropriate use, including in important media outlets, of terms such as “sexual choices” and “marriage,” but also the reticence to use the words “homosexual” and/or “gay.”

On the occasion of LGBTQI+ pride month, we want to stress the importance of certain themes: the use of words, identification, and inclusion.

The Stonewall revolt in New York in June 1969 marked the beginning of the modern homosexual movement, and in the United States the movement chose to define itself with the term “gay.” The expression “gay man” indicated a “lascivious” and/or “depraved” man, while “gay woman” indicated a “free” woman, a woman of easy virtue. As far back as the 1920s, in the United States the term was used by both heterosexuals and homosexuals themselves to indicate homosexual persons, and thus to indicate others and themselves. The movement chose “gay” because it wanted to free itself from stigmatization and get away from the medical-juridical enclosure associated with the term “homosexual.” The subjective identities then gradually increased, and became differentiated, but how to call and recognize oneself should still be central aspects of a movement and/or a community. Pride month is dedicated precisely to remembering those who started the battle to be recognized as subjects. Unfortunately, a recent interview and news story seem to have forgotten this. 

On June 1, Corriere della Sera published an interview, conducted by Walter Veltroni, with the journalist Alberto Matano on the occasion of his civil union.[1] In the text of the interview there are some aspects that show that LGBTQI+ issues are not yet well understood in Italy. Let’s start from the use of words. The interview still speaks of “sexual choices,” when in order to define the first letters of the acronym LGBTQI+ it is better to speak of “sexual orientation.” The expression “sexual choices” is used by the interviewer and the interviewee. In this case we are at the ABCs of how to approach LGBTQI+ issues. In the interview the word “marriage” is also used. This is an incorrect term because in Italy equal marriage doesn’t exist, there are only civil unions. For lesbian and gay couples, Italian lawmakers have chosen the path of an institution other than marriage. We recall that on October 6, 2015 a bill was filed in the Italian Senate (Senate Act no. 2081) on “Regulation of civil unions between persons of the same sex and rules on cohabitation.” The definitive version of the law was approved on May 9, 2016 by the Chamber of Deputies. This law does not remedy the discrimination that exists in regard to LGBTQI+ citizens. First of all, the law defines a civil union between persons of the same sex “as a specific social formation pursuant to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution,” and does not reference Article 29 (the article dedicated to marriage). It therefore represents a form of segregation[2]: “As for blacks half a century ago [in the United States] – forced to use specific train cars and seats in meetings and public places – today in many countries [including Italy] gay and lesbian couples […] are forced to ride in a different car, dedicated to them with a specific name.” Therefore, to use the term “marriage” in the place of “civil union” is a form of misrepresentation. 

Furthermore, in the text of the interview the words “homosexual” and “gay” do not appear. Rather there is the word “heterosexual.” In particular, the person interviewed defines his past “heterosexual” life, but does not want to define his present, based on a civil union with a person of the same sex: “My stability was a person, not an identity […] For me, in every field, fences are the antithesis of freedom. I realized over the years that in order to reassure themselves, people need to give you, or even assign themselves, a category, a box, an affiliation, whether sexual or political, even at work.” Obviously, everyone is free to identify themselves as they want. It is striking that heterosexuals are never afraid of being labeled as such, while some people who are attracted, sexually and/or emotionally, to people of the same sex, prefer not to be called that way. It is even more striking when in this interview, the interviewer was the secretary of one of the main parties in the Italian left (and thus in theory, among those closest to the LGBTQI+ community) and the interviewed person is a journalist for whom the use of words should be a key feature of his profession. This is one way to measure the backwardness of our country.

We will end this post with the news story we cited at the beginning. The organizers of the LGBTQI+ pride march in Bologna, that took place on June 25, 2022, asked Polis Aperta, the LGBTQI+ association of workers in the police and armed forces,[3] not to participate in the march with logos and banners, but to limit themselves to participating anonymously.[4] This request gave rise to debate in the press and social media. From our standpoint, it is a form of exclusion. Inclusion is not simple: we must be ready to include different types of identities, and in the vast and heterogeneous LGBTQI+ movement there is room for many sexual minorities. There should also be room for those who define their identity intersectionally, intersecting their sexual identity with their professional identity. It is positive that in the army and police LGBTQI+ identities emerge and that they can be visible in LGBTQI+ price marches. This visibility should contaminate the real and virtual barracks, of everyone.

The road to equality is still long. We still need to learn to use the proper terms, without the fear of identifying ourselves with an identity broader than our simple “I,” and to be ready to include different subjects as well.