Win, Lose, or Draw: Using LGBTQ+ Legal History to Reassess Social Movement Outcomes

ABSTRACT In 1992, Colorado's citizens enacted Amendment 2, a ballot initiative that prevented governmental entities from extending antidiscrimination protections to gays and lesbians. That same year, Oregon's voters rejected a similar measure. At first glance, it may seem that queer rights advocates experienced a loss in Colorado and a victory in Oregon. But the story is much more complicated than this simple framing suggests. This article draws on extensive original archival research to analyze these historical events, focusing on a striking paradox at the heart of Amendment 2: the initiative was simultaneously a stunning rebuke to the queer rights movement and a series of notable victories for gay and lesbian rights advocates. It uses the history of both the Colorado and Oregon ballot measures to build a new typology for evaluating social movement success, one that categorizes outcomes as comparative, adversarial, and contingent victories. This reformulation offers scholars a more robust framework of analysis for identifying wins, losses, and draws. It also helps contemporary social movements better assess their potential to secure essential gains.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Law & Policy
Published
2025-12-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.70008
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Win, Lose, or Draw: Using LGBTQ+ Legal History to Reassess Social Movement Outcomes

Marie‐Amélie George
Law & Policy
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
article

Win, Lose, or Draw: Using LGBTQ+ Legal History to Reassess Social Movement Outcomes

Marie‐Amélie George
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT In 1992, Colorado's citizens enacted Amendment 2, a ballot initiative that prevented governmental entities from extending antidiscrimination protections to gays and lesbians. That same year, Oregon's voters rejected a similar measure. At first glance, it may seem that queer rights advocates experienced a loss in Colorado and a victory in Oregon. But the story is much more complicated than this simple framing suggests. This article draws on extensive original archival research to analyze these historical events, focusing on a striking paradox at the heart of Amendment 2: the initiative was simultaneously a stunning rebuke to the queer rights movement and a series of notable victories for gay and lesbian rights advocates. It uses the history of both the Colorado and Oregon ballot measures to build a new typology for evaluating social movement success, one that categorizes outcomes as comparative, adversarial, and contingent victories. This reformulation offers scholars a more robust framework of analysis for identifying wins, losses, and draws. It also helps contemporary social movements better assess their potential to secure essential gains.

Law & PolicyVol. 48(1)
Wake Forest University (US)
Yale University
Openalex Percentile: Top 57%
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.