lipped equivocations” and denials- even to oneself” (Miller 10). There were no phrases, word, terms, or definition, not even descriptions that could get more specific than sexual inversion, which cover a tremendous range of deviancy. As a result, one could easily deny the abnormality behind the kiss or embrace given to a male friend Halperin states, “in other words, sexual preference for a person of one’s own sex was not clearly distinguished from other sorts of non-conformity to one’s culturally defied sex-role…” (15).In 1895, four years after Whitman’s death, Oscar Wilde would give a sense of clarity, to the courtroom he stood before, as to what was meant by, “the love that dare not speak its name” (Miller 4). In the words of the intellectual Peter Gay, “Whitman was the product of the age in which homosexuality wasn’t labeled or understood, the age that “chose the spurious safety of ignorance over the risky benefits of knowledge,” (Miller 4).Homosexuality’s emergence into American society gave everyone something to think about and their relationships to reconsider. “Physical contact was an incidental part of sharing a bed, but it happened- and, in the context of a very affectionate relationship, this contact could express warmth or intimacy. It could even express erotic desire. In the absence of a deep cultural anxiety about homosexuality, men did not have to worry about the meaning of those moments of contact” (Miller 5).It takes no scholar to recognize that the excerpts from Ryman’s diary raise unexpected, disquieting questions.“When was the last time any of us, like Ryman one hundred years ago, slept cuddled in the arms of a close friend—a friend, not a lover, not a trick? When was the last time we fantasized about doing so? How many of us have ever done so, or fantasized about it? If, like me, your answers to t...
