Marriage, the Final Frontier? Same-Sex Marriage and the Future of the Lesbian and Gay Movement

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Bernstein ◽  
Brenna Harvey ◽  
Nancy A. Naples
Federalism-E ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-66
Author(s):  
Morag Keegan-Henry

Alan Cairns argues that “federalism is not enough” to deal with non-territorial minorities.1 This certainly seems to have been the case with the Canadian LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender)2 movement. In some ways, federalism (the specific system of sovereignty-sharing wherein both levels of government are co-equal and each is sovereign in areas under its jurisdiction) has directly inhibited attempts to stop discrimination, provide benefits to common-law same-sex partners, and legalize same-sex marriage. First, prior to the introduction of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, human rights cases were usually decided on the basis of jurisdiction, thus severely limiting the ability of activists to challenge discriminatory laws. Second, activists who wish to limit the allocation of rights to gays and lesbians have used arguments regarding provincial rights to frame the debate as a question of constitutionality rather than of strictly human rights [...]


Author(s):  
Stephen Macedo

This chapter examines the many “legal incidents” of marriage: the specific benefits, responsibilities, obligations, and protections that are associated with marriage by law. While critics focus on the special privileges or benefits that spouses acquire in marriage, those are balanced by special obligations. The chapter suggests that the whole package seems reasonably appropriate for both opposite-sex and same-sex couples. It also considers the ways in which marriage seems to promote the good of spouses, children, and society, along with the class divide that now characterizes marriage and parenting. It argues that this class divide, not same-sex marriage, is the great challenge for the future.


Politics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 265-280
Author(s):  
Callum Stewart

Same-sex marriage is emblematic of a crisis of vision in lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and gender non-binary, intersex, and queer (LGBTIQ) politics, according to some queer theorists. Through the concept of homonormativity, Duggan insightfully criticizes same-sex marriage politics as spatially privatizing and depoliticizing queer difference. Brown argues, however, that Duggan herself reifies homonormativity. He calls for theorists to imagine the queer potential in non-fixed spatial relations. Given Duggan and Brown’s focus on spatiality, this article approaches queer imaginations beyond homonormativity from a temporal perspective: I ask what transformational potential same-sex marriage holds to queer heteronormative and homonormative temporalities. I argue that same-sex marriage may not only queer the public/private dichotomy, but also subvert the heteronormative temporality of straight time. Straight time produces identities, spaces, and times as fixed, pre-political, and timeless, and is constructed against queer time in which identities, spaces, and times are non-fixed, political, and sociohistorically constructed. By theorizing straight/queer time as politically produced through the reproductive relation between adulthood and Childhood, I repoliticize the temporalities of homonormative and queer imaginaries and recognize children as queer citizens of a queer future. Same-sex marriage may therefore produce two previously untheorized images of queer potential: the Child queered by their parents, and the Child queered by their sexuality.


2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robbie Love ◽  
Paul Baker

This paper uses corpus-based methods to explore how British Parliamentary arguments against LGBT equality have changed in response to decreasing social acceptability of discriminatory language against minority groups. A comparison of the language of opposition to the equalisation of the age of consent for anal sex (1998–2000) is made to the oppositional language in debates to allow same-sex marriage (2013). Keyword, collocation and concordance analyses were used to identify differences in overall argumentation strategies, assessing the extent to which previously explicit homophobic speech (e.g. homosexuality as unnatural) has been replaced by more indirect strategies (e.g. less use of personalised argumentation via the pronoun I). We argue that while homophobic language appears to be on the decrease in such contexts, there is a mismatch between words and acts, requiring analysts to acknowledge the presence of more subtle indications of homophobic discourse in the future.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 321-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Bernstein

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document