Win, Lose, or Draw

Using LGBTQ+ Legal History to Reassess Social Movement Outcomes

Bibliographic Data

ID6090227
AuthorsMarie‐amélie George (0000-0001-9936-8849, Wake Forest University Winston Salem North Carolina USA, corresponding author)
Year2026
Volume48
Issue1
Publication date2026-01-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLaw & Policy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0265-8240 • E-ISSN: 1467-9930
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/lapo.70008
OpenAlexW4416935173
LanguageEN
References cited45

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

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access