James Kirchick: How Homophobia Warped the Cold War
The Secret City author explains how panic about homosexuality led to discrimination, bad policy, and, eventually, freedom.

During the Cold War in America, about the two worst things you could be accused of was being a communist or a homosexual. In fact, people like FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover routinely conflated the two, asserting that the Soviet Union blackmailed gay diplomats, politicians, and citizens into betraying the United States. Despite no evidence of that, the federal government banned gay and lesbian employees, leading to all sorts of discriminatory and stupid behavior on the part of government officials and private actors.
In the new book Secret City: The Hidden History of Gay Washington, James Kirchick explores how panic and hysteria over gays informed everything from the Alger Hiss trial to Lyndon Johnson's 1964 presidential campaign to Ronald Reagan's first run for governor of California and his two terms in the White House.
Kirchick, a columnist at Tablet and a writer at large for Air Mail, also talks to me about a libertarian angle to all this too besides the government discriminating against people due to sexual orientation: Gay rights activists such as Randy Shilts, whose And The Band Played On was the first big history of the AIDS crisis, and Harvey Milk, the openly gay politician who was assassinated after being elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, started out as ardent Barry Goldwater supporters. So did Young Americans for Freedom activist and former Rep. Robert Bauman (R–Md.), who lost his 1980 re-election bid after getting caught soliciting sex from a 16-year-old male prostitute.
"For gay men of this particular generation, of this particular political disposition, they were inclined towards libertarianism," Kirchick tells me. "They were inclined towards small government. Get off my back. That's what Barry Goldwater was was advertising in 1964."
We also talk about people like Frank Kameny, a federal employee who sued the government after getting fired simply for being gay, and how the gay rights movement is a powerful model for social and political change based on individual rights.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
the gay rights movement is a powerful model for social and political change based on individual rights.
"chemjeff radical individualist frequently advocating for radical collectivism" is really James Kirchik. Prove me wrong.
They're both working from the same talking points newsletters.
Sorry, no.
And what specifically is your complaint here? Gays were able to obtain some measure of formal equality by appealing to concepts of individual liberty. Is this wrong?
Since the gay rights movement started focusing on forcing cake makers, florists, photographers and such to serve them has put the lie to the assertion that they were about individual rights.
"Despite no evidence of that, the federal government banned gay and lesbian employees"
If you were breaking the law you were already "banned" and homosexuality was illegal... everywhere on the planet. If you think America hated gays you should look up the "godless commies" opinions.
The only modern pre-90's government that was cool with homosexuality in its military and intelligence services were the Nazis, and that ended pretty abruptly when they were no longer convenient.
I hate this dishonesty that underpins all the woke signaling at Reason nowadays.
Go read old copies of Der Sturmer for Your Perfect Amusement then, Perfect One, and stop polluting liberty-lovers with Your Perfect NAZI Thoughts!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_St%C3%BCrmer
"Go read old copies of Der Sturmer"
I don't have any. Are you volunteering to lend one from your big collection of hate, ᛋᛋqrlsy?
Hold on. You don't have copies of Der Sturmer, but you DO have a Nazi-style SS font at the ready??? I'm happy to say I wasn't even aware those characters were available until now.
I hate this dishonesty that underpins all the woke signaling at Reason nowadays.
Yeah, nevermind that Hoover kept what is believed to be the world's largest collection of pornography as blackmail, that blackmailing political figures on this continent predates Reynolds' blackmailing Hamilton, that shtogun weddings were relatively normal (and relatively justified) in this country for centuries, that we just went through a #believeallblackmail movement... those poor gays were denied government jobs because of a bunch of people believed their respective Steele Dossiers.
From the other Reason article on this book:
https://reason.com/2022/06/01/gay-history-in-the-city-of-secrets/
"In 1991," Kirchick writes, "the Department of Defense published a study analyzing the cases of 117 American citizens who had either committed or attempted to commit espionage since 1945. Only 6 were gay, and none of them had done so under the threat of blackmail."
Because the others were Communist spies like Ethel and Julius Rosenberg.
Don't pretend that this wasn't a reaction the fact that Cambridge Five spy ring members like Anthony Blunt and Guy Burgess were demonstrably susceptible to Soviet blackmail because they were gay.
There was clear precedent.
If Mammary-Fuhrer is susceptible to being blackmailed by threats to reveal to the Canuckistanistanistanistan Government Almighty, the fact that She uses purple fingernail polish... Then is that Mammary-Fuhrer's fault for wearing purple fingernail polish? Or is it the fault of the Canuckistanistanistanistan Government Almighty, for being intolerant about irrelevant bullshit?
At least bring a cogent argument. This is a waste of space and a waste of my time.
Well, some of us think that a nation founded explicitly on principles of individual liberty ought to hold itself to a higher standard than nations ruled by commies, theocrats, or inbred monarchs.
The fear of blackmail was not an unreasonable position, from a standpoint of logic, even if it turned out to be wrong-- let alone how we feel morally about it in 2022. (June of 2022, to be exact, as the morals move quickly and that which is acceptable right now at 518pm PST might get you canceled or fired from your job by 7am tomorrow).
Anyhoo, if a society generally thinks that X personal behavior is wrong or immoral (whatever you think of it now, 20 years, or 50 years hence) it's not uncommon for that to be eschewed in areas like national intelligence agencies where secrecy are paramount. Any ugliness (whatever it might be or perceived to be) is seen as a potential lever for "the other side".
I remember I was looking into getting a security clearance in a job that's long, long behind me in the 1980s and one of the things they looked at was your financial history and conditions of bankruptcy. I asked my father (who had been a rather high up in the US Airforce during the height of the cold war-- and who was the first Protolibertarian I ever met) why on earth they'd give a shit if I'd ever declared bankruptcy.
"Because you could be a potential target for monetary bribes," he answered without hesitation.
You may not like it, I may not like it, but the culture is the culture and if keeping secrets is the order of the day, then anything that might be perceived as a potential weakness is rooted out. Right or wrong, if the culture of a particular time considers drinking milk before 9am to be a social taboo, and everyone in that culture would never admit drinking milk before 9am to avoid being ostracized, then any intelligence agency is going to see drinking milk before 9am as something that could be levered against its members.
Jeff's posing. He knows that the problems Britain had with gay honeytraps and double-agents in the 50's led to the US' reaction... or maybe he doesn't. He's not too smart when the topic isn't covered in his talking points.
Please, tell us more about how gays are inherently disloyal traitors.
Where did he say that? Making more strawman huh? 20 wasn't enough in the earlier thread?
There was absolutely nothing in that comment which suggested gays were disloyal traitors. The statement was about honeypots which were used to lever intelligence assets.
I don't have any data on hand to know if "it worked" but the idea that no one tried it because it would have been a violation of the Order of Rainbow Flags is laughable.
If everyone is operating in a culture where homosexuality is frowned upon, or... in England's case...literally illegal and I'm a foreign agent and via surveillance suspect that Richard P. Spotswood might be a little light in the loafers, you can damn well bet that a gay honeypot is going to be one of the tools in my playbook.
How about this: If there was no Goddamn stigma attached to being LGBTQ+, thajkas to the morality of the so-called "Good Book,"there would be no cause for blackmailing LGBTQ+ people and the U.S. could have kept some quality people during the Cold War?
Exactly, but in fairness the stigma does not arise solely from religion.
It was certainly the driving force of homophobia in The West and the Middle East with the Abrahamic Religions and in India with Hinduism and Buddhism. It wasn't as strong with Sikhism, Taoism, or many tribal and Pagan religions, but, of course, these were frquently minority religions and/or were suppressed by majority or invading religions.
Well, let's not forget that gays were banned from the federal government *entirely*, not just in "national security" areas. Not sure why the janitor at some USDA field office had to be fired because he was gay.
But, let's just assume that the blackmail motivation is genuine, and not a mere pretext to rationalize bigotry. If that is the case, then the solution here is to have fewer culturally taboo behaviors. After all, the 9am-milk-drinking taboo could not only be an opportunity for blackmail, it could also be a reason for the secret 9am-milk-drinker to lie on the employment application, and before you know it, the federal government is full of 9am-milk-drinkers just waiting to be blackmailed, AND/OR the government is full of milk spies prying into the personal lives of everyone trying to uncover the filthy milk drinking habits of the degenerates. So, fewer taboos solves that problem.
Well, let's not forget that gays were banned from the federal government *entirely*, not just in "national security" areas. Not sure why the janitor at some USDA field office had to be fired because he was gay.
Yes, exactly, because the culture frowned on that sort of thing. Now imagine how useful that would be if I discover agent Spotswood is a Friend of Dorothy?
Being gay in the 1950s was almost as bad as being black and voting for Trump. Almost. But not quite.
Or, to be more to the point, imagine if Agent Richard Spotswood knows that if he's found out, that not only will he lose his job on the Canada Desk, but he won't even be able to get a janitorial position at the Department of the Interior.
How realpolitik of you. Yes, this is but one of many reasons progressivism exists. Reducing the social stigma of being a certain minority group is basically what progressivism is all about. To protect people from things like political blackmail and lynching.
Tony has his finger up the ass of the Correct Moral Position on Everything, from the beginning of time, through now and on into eternity. Nothing Tony does, believes or thinks will ever be Morally Unfashionable or Incorrect. He has come to the Correct Position on every possible set of cultural mores that will ever arise in the hearts of human kind. His statue will never be torn down. It will remain resplendent for all to see, know and revere, until the end of time.
While I appreciate your acknowledging my superior wisdom, I have to evolve same as everyone else. You think I came out of high school understanding what trans people were all about?
You're just part of the slow half of the population. There's no crime in that, as long as you don't commit any crimes.
Being conservative with requirements in a context involving potential blackmail is just common sense, if admittedly awkward.
My colleagues who were in the IC earlier on (than me) were fairly consistent in stating things like: "If you're 'out,' no one cares. I worked with a guy, and if some KGB officer said 'we have pictures,' he'd say 'Great! Send me copies."
I never got this question, but a colleague once recounted how a particular agency inquired of him during a polygraph: "Have you ever had the desire to draw blood from your partner during sex?"
I am still trying to figure out where in the threat model that one fits.
you were breaking the law you were already "banned" and homosexuality was illegal... everywhere on the planet. If you think America hated gays you should look up the "godless commies" opinions.
You do understand that you can hate Homophobia both from the U.S. Government and from Communist regimes equally, right?
The only modern pre-90's government that was cool with homosexuality in its military and intelligence services were the Nazis, and that ended pretty abruptly when they were no longer convenient.
You do know that Nazism considered Homosexuality, Lesbianism, Abortion, Contraception, Pornography, and Prostitution to be "acts of sabotage against the Aryan people," right?
I hate this dishonesty that underpins all the woke signaling at Reason nowadays.
You do know that efending the Individual Rights of LGBTQ+ people is not Wokeism, right? You do know that claiming otherwise isn't honest, right?
Do you really know much at all?
The Nazis seem to have evolved on gayness, as I understand it:
When they needed their gay-friendly paramilitaries, they were gay-friendly. When the paramilitaries needed to be repudiated and crushed, gayness became bad too.
You mean devolved?
All that means was that the Nazis regarded Homosexuals as cat's paws for doing dirty work at the very best.
Libertariians were the first to openly regard LGBTQ+ as sovereign and equal human beings. Libertarians also did so at a time when too many LGBTQ+ couldn't vote because of criminal records, so acceptance was obviously not a vote-getting ploy.
This is one.
We'll get at least one, if not two, more articles in the next week and a half pushing this book. That's how the advertising-as-an-article deal seems to work.
This is actually two:
https://reason.com/2022/06/01/gay-history-in-the-city-of-secrets
Good find! I shoulda' known. The podcast is usually not the first.
people like FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover routinely conflated the two, asserting that the Soviet Union blackmailed gay diplomats, politicians, and citizens into betraying the United States. Despite no evidence of that, the federal government banned gay and lesbian employees, leading to all sorts of discriminatory and stupid behavior on the part of government officials and private actors.
Said the gayest director the FBI ever had.
But what about [name redacted] and Charles Bonaparte?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Joseph_Bonaparte
"For gay men of this particular generation, of this particular political disposition, they were inclined towards libertarianism," Kirchick tells me. "They were inclined towards small government. Get off my back. That's what Barry Goldwater was was advertising in 1964."
There's a joke in here somewhere, I'll let others make it.
"In Your Hard-On, You Know He's Right!" 🙂
Well, the more complete gay thought might be, "Get off of my back, unless you're gonna get up my ass!"
PS... Q: What is the difference between a gay guy and a fridge?
A: The fridge doesn't fart when you pull your meat out!
Well, both can use baking soda for problems of smells, so there's that. 🙂
Bigots are among my favorite culture war casualties. Right up there with faux libertarian right-wingers. Who turn out to be most of the bigots.
Carry on, clingers. Until replacement.
Conservatards have been letting their psychosexual fixations inform bad global policy decisions for decades.
This whole trans panic should do wonders for America and freedom.
When are you going to finally admit that you're not gay, you're just in the wrong body?
In don't even like women in my bars.
And in other news of tolerance:
I'm strangely glad that a trans group shut down a corporate pride event. "Pride" is now the fucking Krystallnacht of our culture. It needs to just fucking go away. Go back to selling me widgets, and quit lecturing me on what you do with your cock all day.
They want to ban books that oppose their ideology. How libertarian of them.
"Now as for what people do with their wombs, allow me to introduce you to the nearest jackbooted government thug."
Criminal justice reform! Quit incarcerating people! It ruins their lives!
If you want to be gay, be gay just don't involve the rest of us. Heterosexuals have no flag, no day, and no month.
Every day is heterosexual day. Let them have their rainbow flags! Especially the new more Hugo-Boss like flag.
I somehow doubt you're being invited to a lot of gay social events.
Two. Can we get three for this piece?
"For gay men of this particular generation, of this particular political disposition, they were inclined towards libertarianism"
Sadly, as evidenced by the comment section to these articles, modern libertarianism doesn't want them.
Yeah, like the right to force someone to bake you a cake..
Any rights beyond "HUMAN RIGHTS" eat away at true rights.
All this talk of perversion and immorality -- yet you can't hold the rational opinion that homosexual activity is wrong, wrong, wrong.
I oppose all violations of rights against gays. But they remindme of what Lincoln said about defenders of slavery : They won't stop until you say what they are doing is GOOD !!
This is a little bit stupid. Be Justice. Patron Oldum