Indeed, previous research shows that this domestic imaginary has serious implications for gay men and lesbians, and their longings for domestic comfort: the idealization of the heterosexual nuclear family home in house design, public policy and social convention has effectively ‘‘heterosexualized’’ the western home, rendering gay men and lesbians ‘‘improper’’ for ‘‘ideal’’ imaginings of home (Bell 1991, Valentine 1993, Johnson 2000). This has flow-on effects for how gay men and lesbians experience other key meanings of home, such as privacy, identity, hearth and heart.
Johnston and Valentine (1995), for instance, drawing on data from England and New Zealand, explicitly compared lesbians’ experiences of home with Somerville’s normative meanings, and found that many did not encounter either their family homes or their own homes in these ideal ways. The family home, as a primary site of heterosexual reproduction and heteronormative socialization, often symbolizes precisely what young gay men and lesbians cannot be (Valentine 1993). Consequently, many conceal their sexuality while residing in the family home (Johnston & Valentine 1995, Valentine, Skelton & Butler 2003). Houses occupied by adult gay men and lesbians similarly undergo heteronormative regulation from surrounding communities, with properties targeted for anti-gay harassment and vandalism, and gay/lesbian identities and relationships (including sexuality-identifying objects – e.g. magazines, photographs, shared beds) concealed from neighbours, tradespeople and visitors (Valentine 1993, Johnston & Valentine 1995, Kirby & Hay 1997, Kitchin & Lysaght 2003)
-