Discreet gay life

– The title of my book: Masker og motstand (Masks and resistance), was chosen in order to emphasize my main message: That a discreet lifestyle can contain a form of resistance to heterosexual culture. Thus the title is not from masks to resistance – both existed at the same time. It is important not to underestimate what an accomplishment a homosexual lifestyle represented in this period, Kristiansen stresses.

The book is based on interviews with Norwegian middle-aged and elderly homosexual men and women, but mostly men, as it was difficult to get in touch with lesbian women over 60. In addition, around 20 elderly heterosexual women and men were interviewed, to get stories of same-gender couples from their childhood and youth.

1920 is used as a starting-point because that is how far back it is possible to find oral accounts. The book ends with the period when the political landscape changed radically and does not mention incidents like the Stonewall rebellion in New York in 1969, where gays, lesbians and transgendered people rioted against the recurring police raids against their meeting places. The uprising is considered a watershed for the international gay movement. Kristiansen wants to present an image of the period before this event.

A dark and sinister past?

– Even though our society now is more open, I also see a less positive effect of the struggle for liberation – that is the one-sided negative views of those who earlier chose to be discreet with regard to their love life. In historical accounts the past is typically portrayed as dark and sinister, and contrasted to a bright and happy present. In gay history this means that everything that didn’t represent overt opposition is seen as part of the suppression, the writer says. He wants to give a more nuanced perspective on homosexual “friendships”.  

Kristiansen’s book contains three main views.

– First of all I want to present stories of individuals and couples who managed to have a love life in the days before it was possible to live openly as a homosexual. Those who were able to act on their love for someone of the same gender aren’t necessarily representative, but they prove that it was possible also in previous times.

Secondly, Kristiansen wants to challenge the negative views on the discretion that marked this period.

– When the call for openness came many elderly homosexuals felt discriminated against. They felt that the term “closet homosexual” was degrading, says Kristiansen. The debate was characterized by dichotomies like open – hidden, but the researcher believes that the quiet acceptance in earlier days is less directly opposed to openness than the historical presentation suggests.

– Is silence always suppressive, or may it be a case of quiet acceptance and that people were protecting friends and neighbours by keeping quiet? Kristiansen asks rhetorically.

– The third aspect that was important for me in this book was to illuminate and rehabilitate the gay movement of the 1950s and 60s. This period saw the beginning of what was to become Det norske forbundet av 1948 (the Norwegian Association of 1948), after having left the Danish association in the 1950s. In light of several “gay scandals” in Sweden and Denmark the Norwegian association chose a policy of discretion, Kristiansen says. He feels that this policy of discretion has been criticized and ridiculed by later activists. Kristiansen also argues that the LLH’s (The Norwegian LGBT Association) timeline of milestones in gay and lesbian history leaves out some important events from the period before the 1970s.  

The basis of later liberation

– Even if they chose a policy of discretion, the 1950s and 60s prepared the ground for many of the changes associated with the 1970s and 80s, the researcher stresses. When he interviewed elderly homosexual men for his doctoral thesis it was mainly those who were involved with the Association that had had lesbian acquaintances. Thus, it was the Association that laid the foundation for a united movement by working actively to recruit female members.

In the book Kristiansen argues that the Association’s fight against the law that criminalized sex between men, which started in the 1950s, played an important role in the decriminalization in 1972.

– In addition, the Association spread information, for instance through “letters to the editor” in newspapers. This has later not been regarded as “valid” opposition because the writers used pseudonyms. But the camouflage did not just serve to protect them against real dangers like losing their jobs; it was also a strategic tool to create the impression that this represented popular opinion, not merely the views of a few eager writers, the researcher points out.

And last, but not least: Some homosexuals actually came forward, like Arne Heli, who declared that he was a homosexual during a speech at the Student Society in 1965 (albeit under his alias Ivar Selholm).

Exuberant sex life in the countryside

Another remarkable aspect of Kristiansen’s book is the stories of gay relationships in small rural communities. Presentations of homosexual practice very often focus on urban areas, and homosexuals from the countryside are assumed to flee to the city in order to live out their sexuality.

– I was for instance surprised to hear stories of sexual relations between teenagers who worked as shepherds, Kristiansen says. – A conservative nostalgia has put a lid on these stories, as when the innocent countryside is seen as a dichotomy to the sinful city or when urbanites put narrow-mindedness in the countryside against freedom in the city.

There are also stories of people who have lived together as couples – like Kari and Jorunn, who lived a long life together. The official story was that Jorunn was Kari’s maid.

– Couples who had close family ties in their local communities appear to have managed quite well. The scandals I have encountered are mainly about outsiders, the researcher says.

He does not wish to romanticize gay life in former times.
– What I react to is the lack of acceptance from today’s point of view; an anachronistic moralization that labels people as cowards or ridicules the work of the Association in its early days. Many of my subjects feel that they lived a good life and are grateful for the quiet acceptance from family and friends. It is these aspects I wanted to shed light on, Hans W. Kristiansen states.

Translated by: Vigdis Isachsen