<p>Under det senaste decenniet har svensk lagstiftning ändrats vid två tillfällen som möjliggjort för homosexuella par att gemensamt prövas som adoptivföräldrar och för lesbiska par att få barn med hjälp av assisterad befruktning inom den svenska sjukvården. I anslutning till att lagförslagen lagts fram har Sveriges Psykologförbund fungerat som remissinstans.</p><p>Syftet med studien är att närmare undersöka och skapa en fördjupad förståelse för Sveriges Psykologförbunds ställningstaganden i frågor som rör homosexuellas familjebildningar. Undersökningen består av nio enskilda intervjuer med personer som funnits i Psykologförbundets ledning under den aktuella tidsperioden. Materialet har analyserats med hjälp av kvalitativ metod inom det diskursanalytiska fältet.</p><p>Resultatet visar att homosexuella familjer framställs som problematiska med hjälp av två diskurser, vilka i sin tur är relaterade till vilken fråga som behandlas. En diskurs om svårigheter som tillförs familjen utifrån, i form av negativa samhällsattityder till homosexualitet, är retoriskt användbar i argumentation mot homoadoptioner. Frågan om assisterad befruktning för lesbiska par framställs däremot som problematisk genom argumentation som knyts till svårigheter som tillstöter inifrån familjen. Genom att jämföra den lesbiska familjen mot en heterosexuell norm skapas föreställningar om problem som kretsar kring ett underskott av män och ett överskott av kvinnor som föräldrar. Normativa bilder av biologi, kön och sexualitet framträder, vilka analyseras och diskuteras i uppsatsen.</p>

Although the social issue of intimate partner violence has come to receive increased attention in the social debate in recent decades, there are still different ideas regarding who is to be actually considered a victim of it. Intimate partner violence is often to be assumed as a phenomenon that occurs in heterosexual relationships only, leaving the abuse in homosexual relationships to be trivialized. This study seeks to fill the gap of knowledge about intimate violence in lesbian relationships together with the aim of shedding light on the existing support efforts, the prevailing heteronorm and its impact on our perception of intimate partner violence.    Using semi-structured interviews with professionals who meet women that has been a victim of violence in a lesbian relationship we wanted to investigate in what ways their approach against the target group is affected by the professionals prior knowledge and the general heteronorm in our society. Furthermore, the purpose is also to investigate whether these factors may in turn influence how the support efforts for this target group are designed. The results of this study showed that the professionals do not always have sufficient adequate knowledge of the potential needs of the target group, which in turn may affect the support available to women who have been subjected to violence. Furthermore, the result is presented based on connections to previous knowledge and the theories Social Constructivism and Gender Theory. These theoretical perspectives were used in order to inherit a critical approach to norms and structures in the society, and through different concepts gain a deeper understanding of how different norms can become established in our society. / Även om samhällsproblemet våld i nära relation har kommit att få en ökad uppmärksamhet i samhällsdebatten under de senaste decennierna råder det fortfarande skilda föreställningar kring vem som faktiskt anses vara offer för det. Ofta antas våld i nära relationer vara ett fenomen som enbart inträffar i heterosexuella förhållanden, vilket gör att våldet i homosexuella relationer bagatelliseras och osynliggörs. Denna studie syftar till att fylla kunskapsluckan om våld i nära lesbiska relationer tillsammans med syftet att belysa befintliga stödinsatser, den allmänna heteronormen och dess påverkan på uppfattningen om våld i nära relationer.   Med hjälp av semistrukturerade intervjuer med yrkesverksamma som möter kvinnor som har blivit utsatta för våld i lesbiska relationer ville vi undersöka på vilket sätt bemötande av denna målgrupp påverkas av yrkesverksammas förkunskaper samt den allmänna heteronormen i vårt samhälle. Vidare är syftet även att undersöka om dessa faktorer i sin tur kan komma att påverka hur stödinsatserna för denna målgrupp utformas. Resultaten av denna studie visade på att de yrkesverksamma inte alltid har tillräcklig adekvat kunskap om målgruppens eventuella behov, vilket i sin tur kan påverka vilket stöd som finns att erbjuda kvinnor som har blivit utsatta för våld. Vidare presenteras resultatet baserat på kopplingar till tidigare kunskap och teorierna Socialkonstruktivism och Queerteorin. Dessa teoretiska perspektiv användes för att erhålla en kritisk inställning till normer och strukturer i samhället, och genom olika begrepp få en djupare förståelse för hur olika normer kan etableras i vårt samhälle.

Under det senaste decenniet har svensk lagstiftning ändrats vid två tillfällen som möjliggjort för homosexuella par att gemensamt prövas som adoptivföräldrar och för lesbiska par att få barn med hjälp av assisterad befruktning inom den svenska sjukvården. I anslutning till att lagförslagen lagts fram har Sveriges Psykologförbund fungerat som remissinstans. Syftet med studien är att närmare undersöka och skapa en fördjupad förståelse för Sveriges Psykologförbunds ställningstaganden i frågor som rör homosexuellas familjebildningar. Undersökningen består av nio enskilda intervjuer med personer som funnits i Psykologförbundets ledning under den aktuella tidsperioden. Materialet har analyserats med hjälp av kvalitativ metod inom det diskursanalytiska fältet. Resultatet visar att homosexuella familjer framställs som problematiska med hjälp av två diskurser, vilka i sin tur är relaterade till vilken fråga som behandlas. En diskurs om svårigheter som tillförs familjen utifrån, i form av negativa samhällsattityder till homosexualitet, är retoriskt användbar i argumentation mot homoadoptioner. Frågan om assisterad befruktning för lesbiska par framställs däremot som problematisk genom argumentation som knyts till svårigheter som tillstöter inifrån familjen. Genom att jämföra den lesbiska familjen mot en heterosexuell norm skapas föreställningar om problem som kretsar kring ett underskott av män och ett överskott av kvinnor som föräldrar. Normativa bilder av biologi, kön och sexualitet framträder, vilka analyseras och diskuteras i uppsatsen.

A presente dissertação apresenta a pesquisa Banheiros públicos como demarcação de fronteiras identitárias: experiências de mulheres lésbicas em São Paulo, investigação que traz uma análise crítica sobre as experiências de mulheres lésbicas nos banheiros públicos em São Paulo. No seu objetivo geral, propôs-se identificar as desigualdades em termos de gênero e sexualidade, enquanto marcadores sociais da diferença, que operam nos banheiros públicos, fazendo uso de uma abordagem interdisciplinar entre os Estudos Culturais, as teorias Feministas, Pós-estruturalistas e Queer. Enquanto objetivo específico, buscou-se aprofundar na análise dos sentidos que as entrevistadas produziam ao narrarem suas experiências, analisando assim categorias conceituais e empíricas como mulher, homem, masculinidade, feminilidade, lésbica expressão de gênero e performance de gênero. A abordagem desses temas se contrapõe à concepção idealizada culturalmente dos banheiros como espaço neutro, no qual sua divisão se acredita dar de forma natural. Argumenta-se, por meio das experiências das entrevistadas, como este espaço opera como um dispositivo protocolar do gênero, em termos de indicar os limites e as fronteiras dos processos identitários entre os sujeitos. Desta forma, a não adequação dos sujeitos aos padrões de homem / mulher gera uma ruptura no sistema heteronormativo, no sentido das expectativas e demandas sociais, e aciona diversas técnicas de poder e controle, tornando o banheiro em mais um cenário normativo de afirmação da diferença sexual. O banheiro público é o local por meio do qual, a diferença sexual vai se afirmar e sustentar, já seja no sentido simbólico (os signos, figuras, representações do masculino e do feminino) ou literal (dispositivos de vigilância e controle que estão dispersos no meio social que instituem modelos de corpos-homem e corpos-mulher). Assim, o banheiro público representa, na sociedade paulista contemporânea, o último bastião do sistema heteronormativo e patriarcal / The present research Public bathrooms as demarcation of identity borders: experiences of lesbian women in São Paulo, provides a critical analysis of the experiences of lesbian women in public toilets in São Paulo. Its general objective was to identify inequalities in terms of gender and sexuality as social markers of difference that operate in public toilets, using an interdisciplinary approach between Cultural Studies, and the Feminist, Post-structuralist and Queer theories. As a specific objective, we sought to deepen the analysis of the meanings the interviewees produced in narrating their experiences, thus analyzing conceptual and empirical categories such as woman, man, masculinity, femininity, lesbian, gender expression and gender performance. The approach to these themes runs counter to the culturally idealized conception of the bathrooms as a neutral space, in which their division is believed to be natural. It is argued, through the experiences of the interviewees, that this space operates as a gender device protocol, in terms of indicating the limits and the boundaries of the identity processes between the subjects. As such, the non-adaptation of the subjects to the standards of man/ woman generates a rupture in the heteronormative system, in the sense of expectations and social demands, and triggers several techniques of power and control, making the bathroom another normative scenario of affirmation of sexual difference. The public toilet is the place whereby sexual difference is affirmed and sustained, whether in the symbolic sense (signs, figures, representations of the masculine and the feminine) or literal (devices of surveillance and control which are dispersed in the social environment that establish models of man-bodies and woman-bodies). Thus, the public bathroom represents, in contemporary Paulista society, the last bastion of the heteronormative and patriarchal system

O objetivo desta pesquisa de doutorado é compreender os distintos significados do que é ser uma professora lésbica no ambiente escolar. Trata-se de uma pesquisa de natureza qualitativa, e de perspectiva sociológica, que dialoga com estudos nacionais e internacionais já realizados sobre o tema, com base no debate sobre gênero, sexualidades e heteronormatividade. Foram entrevistadas seis professoras da rede pública (estadual ou municipal) de São Paulo, estando elas em atividade em três cidades: São Paulo, Diadema e Praia Grande. A partir de um roteiro semiestruturado, a pesquisa teve por objetivo compreender como essas docentes lidam com essa informação de suas vidas pessoais no ambiente escolar e quais seus principais obstáculos e medos. Os resultados da investigação mostram que, no lugar de uma invisibilidade suposta inicialmente, ganhou destaque a busca de uma visibilidade pedagógica, ou de uma tentativa consciente de construir uma possibilidade de existência legítima no ambiente escolar. Trata-se de um ser e estar na escola como docente que, por si só, traz uma aspiração e uma realização pedagógicas: a de construir uma visibilidade que garanta legitimidade para a existência lésbica. / The purpose of this doctoral research is to understand the different meanings of being a lesbian teacher in the school environment. It is a qualitative research and, of a sociological perspective, it dialogues with national and international studies already carried out on the subject, based on the debate on gender, sexualities and heteronormativity. Six public school teachers (state or municipal) from São Paulo were interviewed while they were teaching in three cities: São Paulo, Diadema and Praia Grande. From a semi-structured script, the research aimed to understand how these teachers deal with this information of their personal lives in the school environment and what your obstacles and fears would be. The results of the research show that, instead of an invisibility, initially supposed, the search for a pedagogical visibility, or a conscious attempt to construct a legitimate possibility of existence in the school environment, was highlighted. Wich means that being in a school as a teatcher, brings, itself, a pedagogical aspiration and a accomplishment: building a visibility that guarantees legitimacy for the lesbian existence.

本文旨在探討於我國憲法架構下，同性戀者的權利保障議題。期以引介國外相關學說與法制，解決我國日漸浮現的相關爭議。 第一章，緒論。說明研究動機與研究範圍，並揭櫫科際整合的研究方法，兼採社會學等其他學門對於同性戀議題的既有研究成果，作為法學研究的背景。 第二章以憲法平等權保障為核心，從美國聯邦最高法院所建立的三重審查基準，討論其於「性傾向歧視」案件的適用。研究發現，對於同性戀者所為的差別待遇，基於「代表強化論」等政治程序參與保障、構成違憲「可疑分類」與根據從社會學等理論，同性戀者與異性戀者並無不同，應享有同等基本權利的憲法保障，除非政府所為分類具有一「優位」政府利益，且手段與目的緊密關連，否則應屬違憲。值得注意的是，美國聯邦最高法院於Romer v. Evans一案中揭示「本質原則」(per se rule)，於立法者「惡意」對「孤立的弱勢族群」，根據偏見予以全面性不利的差別待遇，法院即得直接認定違憲。本文認為此項平等權審查途徑的突破，仍有其適用上的爭議與缺陷，其影響有待進一步觀察。 其後，針對「同性性行為」的除罪化，與「同性婚姻」的合法化等兩個當前最具爭議性，與同性戀者生活關係密切的問題，本文嘗試以第二章所建立的理論基礎，檢視其正當性。第三章討論同性性行為的除罪化。首先以社會生物學反駁同性性行為的「不自然論據」。其次，基於「自由主義」的「傷害原則」，除非對第三人造成傷害，否則對性行為均不應加以管制。再者，針對管制同性性行為的「雞姦法」，論者雖謂該法並非僅就同性戀者加以處罰，然，實際上處罰者確均為同性戀者，況立法本意往往隱涵對同性戀者的偏見等，此即與憲法平等權保障相悖，應屬違憲。惟，美國聯邦最高法院於Bowers v. Hardwick一案中則肯定該法的合憲性，本文亦就該項判決予以批判。最後則就台灣同性性行為管制或相關立法與行政措施之現狀，提出修法建議。 第四章討論最具爭議的「同性婚姻」合法化問題。研究發現，同性婚姻於本文第二章所提出自由主義傷害原則，以及平等權理論之下應予合法。首先，駁斥反對者所提出的「滑坡理論」等諸項疑懼。其次，剖析美國司法實務就同性婚姻所提出的若干論據，發現，其於同性戀者的刻板印象，深受「同性戀恐懼症」所影響，均屬情緒性反應與理所當然的偏見，是項見解，亦於夏威夷州最高法院所為指標性判決得到回應。此外，比較全球各國對同性婚姻保障的制度，「準婚姻」及「登記伴侶」等制度雖然給予同性戀者若干保障，本文認為，此項制度仍凸顯同性戀者有異於異性戀者，婚姻的形式意義與實質保障均應爭取之。基於平等權理論，國家應該提供人民相同的法律保障，既然並無禁止異性戀者合法結婚，亦不應該禁止同性戀者結婚。 第五章則總結研究發現：一、從美國聯邦最高法院、歐洲人權法院、加拿大最高法院，乃至於聯合國人權委員會對於同性戀者權利保障議題的關注，而於「亞洲人權憲章」草案中，亦明白規定對於同性戀者的平等保障，對同性戀者的人權保障，已為全球逐漸形成的共識。以比較法的觀點而言，不同法律制度所形成的理論，亦在同性戀人權保障議題上，獲得相互引證與批判，有助於理論的成熟發展。二、本文提出同性戀者權利保障的理論基礎，雖然從不同學門理論、自由主義、政治哲學等出發，然而最終關注的焦點仍在於憲法平等權保障的理念。而相關理論於晚進各國司法實務上已見採納與實踐。三、雖然台灣社會目前對同性戀者權利保障議題，其問題意識形成與公眾討論仍未熱烈，關注議題與焦點亦較未全面性深入。本文認為，法律於社會改革具有其功能，從法律與平權運動的互動，呼籲有識者重視司法途徑以解決法律限制，並提出修法建議與審查基準，作為立法機關制訂法律與法院（包括大法官）審查相關議題的參考。 關鍵詞：同性戀、隱私權、平等權、審查基準、同性婚姻、自由主義、社會建構論、法律經濟學、同性性行為、防衛婚姻法。 目次 中文摘要 英文摘要 表次 第一章 緒論…………………………………………………………………………1 第二章 同性戀者權利保障的理論基礎…………………………………………27 第三章 同性性行為的除罪化……………………………………………………115 第四章 同性婚姻的合法化………………………………………………………164 第五章 結論：同性戀與憲法-兼論台灣同性戀者權利保障的未來…………240 參考書目……………………………………………………………………………247 附錄……………………………………………………………………………………I 詳目 第一章 緒論 1.1 研究動機………………………………………………………………………………………1 1.2 問題意識：同性戀議題的法學發問基礎……………………………………………………9 1.2.1 同性戀者在憲法基本權利主體的定位…………………………………………………14 1.2.2 同性戀者權利保障的議題取向與理論基礎……………………………………………15 1.2.3 憲法平等權審查基準的建立……………………………………………………………16 1.2.4 同性戀者權利保障的終極關懷：後續法律關係的確定與爭端解決…………………17 1.3 研究方法………………………………………………………………………………………18 1.3.1 科際整合的研究途徑……………………………………………………………………19 1.3.2 比較法的研究方法………………………………………………………………………21 1.4 本文架構：從理論到實用，從私領域到公領域……………………………………………24 第二章 同性戀者權利保障的理論基礎 2.1 理論前提：社會建構論的觀察………………………………………………………………27 2.1.1 同性戀：一個歷史的偶然？……………………………………………………………28 2.1.1.1 古代西方文化中的同性戀………………………………………………………28 2.1.1.2 古代西方文化以外的同性戀……………………………………………………30 2.1.1.3 近代文化中的同性戀……………………………………………………………32 2.1.1.4 中國傳統文化中的同性戀………………………………………………………33 2.1.1.5 同性戀醫學定義的歷史演變……………………………………………………36 2.1.2 同性戀的釋疑：同性戀（者）的刻板印象及現代科學的解釋………………………37 2.1.2.1 對同性戀（者）的刻板印象……………………………………………………38 2.1.2.1.1 同性戀危害社會………………………………………………………38 2.1.2.1.2 同性戀者無法生殖，對人類繁衍構成威脅…………………………39 2.1.2.1.3 同性戀者對兒童與青少年構成威脅…………………………………40 2.1.2.1.4 同性戀者的生活方式並不幸福………………………………………41 2.1.2.1.5 同性戀者性關係複雜…………………………………………………42 2.1.2.1.6 同性戀等同愛滋病……………………………………………………43 2.1.2.1.7 同性戀破壞宗教道德，影響社會安定………………………………44 2.1.2.1.8 同性戀者要求特殊權利………………………………………………44 2.1.2.1.9 同性戀對家庭構成威脅………………………………………………45 2.1.2.1.10 小結…………………………………………………………………46 2.1.2.2 現代科學的正面回應……………………………………………………………46 2.1.2.2.1 同性戀並非病態………………………………………………………46 2.1.2.2.2 同性戀作為一種精神疾病﹕從歷史的角度來看……………………48 2.1.2.2.3 同性戀從精神疾病除名………………………………………………50 2.1.2.2.4 同性戀的成因…………………………………………………………53 2.1.2.2.4.1 x染色體上的發現………………………………………55 2.1.2.2.4.2 生物醫學的研究：荷爾蒙與腦部構造變異……………56 2.1.2.2.4.3 後天環境論………………………………………………56 2.1.3 社會建構論對於同性戀的意義…………………………………………………………57 2.1.3.1 異性戀主義：同性戀刻板印象的形成與同性戀恐懼症………………………57 2.1.3.2 Foucault的社會建構理論………………………………………………………58 2.1.3.2.1 現代概念下的同性戀：一個性文化的興起…………………………58 2.1.3.2.2 Foucault的性理論……………………………………………………59 2.1.3.2.2.1 坦白是性之根本…………………………………………59 2.1.3.2.2.2 性科學……………………………………………………60 2.1.3.2.2.3 權力關係…………………………………………………61 2.1.3.2.2.4 建構主義…………………………………………………62 2.1.3.2.3 Foucault對性概念的重建……………………………………………62 2.1.3.2.3.1 性是否已成為一個不夠用的概念﹖……………………62 2.1.3.2.3.2 快感與慾望………………………………………………63 2.1.3.2.4 Foucault的性與同性戀政治觀………………………………………63 2.1.3.2.5 Foucault對同性戀關係的詮釋：友誼…………………………………64 2.2 自由主義的哲學基礎與隱私權保障…………………………………………………………65 2.2.1 同性戀者自由的界限：「俄芬登報告」的論爭………………………………………66 2.2.2 白紙上的墨漬：傷害與容忍的法的詮釋………………………………………………68 2.2.2.1 憲法上保障基本權利的性質及其界限…………………………………………69 2.2.2.2 傷害原則的具體化：憲法第二十三條的適用…………………………………69 2.2.2.3 基本權利的「容忍」義務？……………………………………………………70 2.2.2.4 同性戀的傷害性？………………………………………………………………70 2.2.2.4.1 破壞社會？回應社會解構論…………………………………………70 2.2.2.4.2 破壞家庭生活幸福……………………………………………………71 2.2.2.4.3 同性性行為容易傳染疾病……………………………………………72 2.2.2.4.4 小結……………………………………………………………………73 2.2.3 當代自由主義者的理論對於同性戀議題的實用………………………………………73 2.2.3.1 John Rawls的「政治自由主義」：權利的道德基礎與優先性…………………73 2.2.3.2 Ronald Dworkin的「倫理的自由平等」…………………………………………75 2.2.3.3 Joseph Raz的「至善論者自由主義」……………………………………………76 2.2.3.4 法律道德主義的「圍城」：德國戰後「新自然法」浪潮……………………77 2.2.3.5 自由主義法典範下對於同性戀者權利保障的危機……………………………79 2.2.4 理性與自治：自由主義下隱私權的保障目的…………………………………………80 2.2.4.1 理性的人：一個古老的哲學問題………………………………………………80 2.2.4.2 同性戀者是否為理性的人？……………………………………………………82 2.2.5. Richard Posner的「法律經濟分析」……………………………………………………84 2.2.5.1 功效主義與同性戀………………………………………………………………84 2.2.5.2 Posner的法律經濟分析與同性戀者權利保障…………………………………87 2.2.5.2.1 Posner的性理論與同性戀……………………………………………87 2.2.5.2.2 Posner理論的適用……………………………………………………89 2.2.6 小結………………………………………………………………………………………90 2.3 平等權保障……………………………………………………………………………………90 2.3.1 一個新歷史的開始：Romer v. Evans……………………………………………………91 2.3.1.1 背景事實與纏訟經過……………………………………………………………91 2.3.1.2 多數意見…………………………………………………………………………94 2.3.1.3 不同意見…………………………………………………………………………95 2.3.1.4 Romer案的評析及其影響………………………………………………………97 2.3.1.4.1 本質原則對於平等權審查基準的定位………………………………98 2.3.1.4.2 同性戀者在憲法上的定位不明………………………………………98 2.3.1.4.3 Hardwick案於Romer案的關係懸而未決……………………………99 2.3.1.4.4 民主價值與憲法基本權利保障……………………………………100 2.3.2 同性戀者平等權審查基準的選擇……………………………………………………101 2.3.2.1 平等權審查基準的概說………………………………………………………101 2.3.2.2 從「性別歧視」主張同性戀者平等權：中度審查基準的適用………………102 2.3.2.2.1 性別歧視審查基準的早期見解……………………………………102 2.3.2.2.2 性別歧視的新視點…………………………………………………103 2.3.2.2.3 中度審查基準的形成………………………………………………104 2.3.2.2.4 「性傾向歧視」是「性別歧視」？性別角色的迷思………………106 2.3.2.3 同性戀作為「可疑分類」︰適用「嚴格審查基準」的坦途？………………108 2.3.2.3.1 缺乏政治力量………………………………………………………110 2.3.2.3.2 「隔離但平等」與「不同但平等」…………………………………111 2.3.2.3.3 與生俱來、不可改變的特徵…………………………………………112 2.3.2.3.4 小結…………………………………………………………………113 第三章 同性性行為的除罪化 3.1 從社會生物學看同性戀與同性性行為……………………………………………………115 3.1.1 社會生物學概說………………………………………………………………………115 3.1.2 社會生物學與同性戀…………………………………………………………………117 3.1.3 同性性行為是「不自然」？……………………………………………………………121 3.1.3.1 描述性的自然法則……………………………………………………………121 3.1.3.2 「人為的」就是不自然…………………………………………………………122 3.1.3.3 凡是不常見或不正常的東西不自然…………………………………………123 3.1.3.4 與一個器官或工具的主要目的或功能相反的使用方式不自然……………124 3.1.3.5 凡是不自然的就是不好的……………………………………………………125 3.2 各國管制現況與除罪化趨勢………………………………………………………………126 3.2.1 美國雞姦法在憲法上的爭議…………………………………………………………126 3.2.1.1 性行為管制的憲法爭議：隱私權的保障範圍…………………………………127 3.2.1.2 隱私權保障的負面教材：Bowers v. Hardwick…………………………………129 3.2.1.2.1 一個不存在的事實：事實與判決經過………………………………129 3.2.1.2.2 多數意見……………………………………………………………131 3.2.1.2.3 協同意見……………………………………………………………133 3.2.1.2.4 不同意見……………………………………………………………134 3.2.1.3 Hardwick案的評析及其對同性戀者平權運動的影響………………………138 3.2.1.3.1 本案應不應該受理？………………………………………………138 3.2.1.3.2 隱私權保障的目的…………………………………………………140 3.2.1.3.3 性行為受隱私權保障的範圍：滑坡論證的疑慮……………………141 3.2.1.3.4 創設基本權利類型的理由：歷史傳統？……………………………142 3.2.1.3.5 法律與道德的界限…………………………………………………142 3.2.1.3.6 Hardwick案對同性戀者權利保障的影響…………………………142 3.2.1.3.6.1 行為與地位的混淆……………………………………142 3.2.1.3.6.2 公領域與私領域的切割………………………………143 3.2.2 美國經驗的對照：歐洲國家與全球同性性行為除罪化的努力………………………143 3.2.2.1 歐洲同性性行為的管制歷史…………………………………………………144 3.2.2.2 歐洲人權法院的判決分析……………………………………………………144 3.2.2.2.1 保障範圍……………………………………………………………145 3.2.2.2.2 侵害類型與干涉程度………………………………………………146 3.2.2.2.3 比例原則……………………………………………………………149 3.2.2.2.4 「歐洲共識」…………………………………………………………151 3.2.2.3 同性性行為作為一種普遍人權………………………………………………152 3.3 我國關於同性性行為與刑法管制的可能議題……………………………………………154 3.3.1 刑法「性別意識」與「姦淫」、「猥褻」的定義……………………………………154 3.3.1.1 同性戀及其性行為的刑法評價………………………………………………154 3.3.1.2 刑法的性別意識………………………………………………………………155 3.3.2 合法性行為同意年齡…………………………………………………………………160 3.3.3 後天免疫症候群防治條例與性行為告知義務………………………………………162 第四章 同性婚姻的合法化 4.1 同性婚姻的歷史與正反意見的陳述………………………………………………………166 4.1.1 婚姻的意義及其對同性戀者的重要性………………………………………………166 4.1.1.1 不只是「婚姻」…………………………………………………………………166 4.1.1.2 同性戀社群內部對婚姻的爭論………………………………………………168 4.1.2 同性婚姻的歷史………………………………………………………………………170 4.1.3 反對同性婚姻的主要理由及其反駁…………………………………………………171 4.2 同性婚姻在各國的憲法爭議與法律實踐…………………………………………………173 4.2.1 美國同性婚姻的憲法爭議……………………………………………………………173 4.2.1.1 同性婚姻的爭訟………………………………………………………………173 4.2.1.1.1 Baker v. Nelson………………………………………………………173 4.2.1.1.2 Jones v. Hallahan……………………………………………………175 4.2.1.1.3 Singer v. Hara………………………………………………………176 4.2.1.1.4 Adams v. Howerton…………………………………………………179 4.2.1.1.5 Dean v.District of Columbia(Barry)…………………………………181 4.2.1.1.6 小結：結婚權的憲法意義……………………………………………182 4.2.1.1.6.1 隱私權與結婚權………………………………………182 4.2.1.1.6.2 結婚權與婚姻的社會意義……………………………183 4.2.1.2 Baehr v. Lewin(Baehr I)…………………………………………………………185 4.2.1.2.1 事實及爭訟經過……………………………………………………185 4.2.1.2.2 多數意見……………………………………………………………185 4.2.1.2.3 協同意見……………………………………………………………187 4.2.1.2.4 不同意見……………………………………………………………187 4.2.1.3 Baehr v. Miike(Baehr II)………………………………………………………190 4.2.1.3.1 事實及爭訟經過……………………………………………………190 4.2.1.3.2 法院意見……………………………………………………………191 4.2.1.4 Baehr二案的評析及其影響……………………………………………………193 4.2.1.5 「防衛婚姻法」的合憲性………………………………………………………194 4.2.1.5.1 「防衛婚姻法」的制定與其內容……………………………………195 4.2.1.5.2 「防衛婚姻法」的合憲性：Romer一案的適用……………………196 4.2.1.6 平等的極致：「滑坡論證」的失序挑戰………………………………………199 4.2.1.6.1 禁止童婚與同性婚姻………………………………………………200 4.2.1.6.2 禁止一夫多妻與同性婚姻…………………………………………201 4.2.1.6.3 禁止亂倫與同性婚姻………………………………………………202 4.2.1.6.4 小結…………………………………………………………………204 4.2.2 歐洲人權公約對於同性婚姻的保障…………………………………………………204 4.2.2.1 家庭關係的隱私權保障………………………………………………………205 4.2.2.2 婚姻權的保障…………………………………………………………………206 4.2.2.3 「禁止歧視」條款與同性婚姻…………………………………………………208 4.2.2.3.1 適用範圍及其限制…………………………………………………208 4.2.2.3.2 合理審查基準………………………………………………………209 4.2.2.3.3 「比例原則」審查基準………………………………………………211 4.2.3 「婚姻」定義的突破：加拿大最高法院M v. H判決…………………………………212 4.2.3.1 背景事實………………………………………………………………………212 4.2.3.2 多數意見………………………………………………………………………213 4.2.3.3 不同意見………………………………………………………………………214 4.2.3.4 本案評析及其影響……………………………………………………………214 4.2.4 同性婚姻在全球各國的制度實現……………………………………………………215 4.2.4.1 實質法律保障：伴侶登記或認可法……………………………………………216 4.2.4.1.1 從契約到身分………………………………………………………216 4.2.4.1.2 從身分到契約………………………………………………………218 4.2.4.2 現行制度的適用與評估………………………………………………………219 4.2.4.2.1 北歐國家對於同性婚姻態度開放的原因…………………………219 4.2.4.2.2 異性戀婚姻適用於同性戀者的評估………………………………220 4.3 我國同性婚姻合法性的憲法挑戰…………………………………………………………220 4.3.1 中國傳統下對婚姻的看法……………………………………………………………221 4.3.2 現行民法下同性婚姻的合法性及其衍生議題………………………………………221 4.3.3 同性婚姻合法化在我國的可能性：大法官解釋的評估………………………………224 4.3.3.1 性別歧視下的平等：我國大法官對於「男女平等」的解釋…………………224 4.3.3.1.1 釋字第三六五號解釋/男女「合理」差別待遇︰多合理？…………224 4.3.3.1.2 釋字第二四二號解釋/「婚姻」作為「制度性保障」………………229 4.3.3.1.3 小結…………………………………………………………………235 4.3.3.2 我國憲法第七條「男女平等」與同性戀平等權保障…………………………235 4.3.3.2.1 憲法文本的詮釋……………………………………………………235 4.3.3.2.2 性解放下的男女平等………………………………………………237 4.3.3.3 小結……………………………………………………………………………239 第五章 結論：同性戀與憲法-兼論台灣同性戀者權利保障的未來 5.1 平權運動策略建言…………………………………………………………………………240 5.1.1 建立共識，尋求認同…………………………………………………………………240 5.1.2 具體可行的目標………………………………………………………………………241 5.1.2.1 組織化…………………………………………………………………………241 5.1.2.2 持續化…………………………………………………………………………242 5.1.2.3 議題化…………………………………………………………………………242 5.1.2.4 司法化…………………………………………………………………………243 5.2 法律修正方向與司法審查基準……………………………………………………………243 5.2.1 國際人權公約與內國法律……………………………………………………………243 5.2.2 制定反歧視法？………………………………………………………………………244 5.2.3 司法審查基準…………………………………………………………………………245 表次 表1-1：同性戀者權利保障議題一覽表 ………………………………………………………………11 表2-1：Romer v. Evans案判決意見一覽表……………………………………………………………96 表2-2：美國最高法院三重審查基準一覽表…………………………………………………………106 表3-1：Bowers v. Hardwick案判決意見一覽表………………………………………………………136 表4-1：Baehr v. Lewin案判決意見一覽表……………………………………………………………189 表4-2：Baehr v. Miike案判決意見一覽表……………………………………………………………193 表4-3：種族、性別與性傾向歧視之類推過程一覽表………………………………………………194 表4-4：司法院大法官有關性別平等解釋案要旨……………………………………………………232 / "Lesbian and gay rights are human rights!" Is this just a political slogan to be chanted outsides legislatures? Is this just a fairytale, or are there legal arguments to support the claim that the right to be free from sexual orientation discrimination is a human right? In particular, can national constitutions and international human right treaties be interpreted as prohibiting discrimination against same-sex sexual activity ("sodomy"), gay, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual individuals, and same-sex couples? In this thesis, the author attempts to answer these questions by examining of these most commonly used arguments in favour of such an interpretation: sexual orientation is an "immutable status", sexual orientation is a "fundamental choice" or part of "privacy", sexual orientation discrimination is sex discrimination and "sexual orientation discrimination". However, the core argument is always "Equal Protection". Chapter I explains the motives of research, the goals to be achieved, the methods to be used, and the structure of this thesis. Chapter II investigates what and how to build the basic theories to justify the claim that lesbians and gay men, as well as heterosexuals, shall be equally protected under the constitution. Because this issue is largely invisible or marginalised in academic debate, the author first provides an invaluable exploration of sociology, sociobiology, and sexual science, in order to break up the stereotypes of lesbians and gay men. According to the theory of Equal Protection, the author concluded that "sexual orientation discrimination" deserved the strict or heightened scrutiny, i.e., either the discrimination achieves the compelling or overriding governmental interest, necessarily and narrowly tailored, or it should be hold unconstitutional. Applying the basic theories, then the author devoted two chapters to specific issues, particularly, and focused on sodomy law and same-sex marriage. Chapter III examines the constitutionality of sodomy law. According to the "Harm Principle", the author doesn't think that sexual activities between consenting adults should be criminalized. Although sodomy law is plainly neutral, i.e., applicable for men and women, homosexual and heterosexual individuals, the author found that, in practice, sodomy law always criminalize lesbian and gay men. The author also discussed relevant articles of Taiwan's Penal Code, especially the newly revised articles of sex crime-crime of "disturbing sexual autonomy". Chapter IV scrutinizes the constitutionality of same-sex marriage. The author first analyzed why people are always reluctant to recognize the same-sex marriage, and reiterate the so-called "slippery slope" arguments. The judiciary around the world never decided clearly that lesbians and gay men could legally wed, until the Hawaii Supreme Court held the Hawaii Revised Statutes §572-1 unconstitutional. Inspiringly by a recent development that the Canada Supreme Court declared positively the word "spouse" does not exclusively mean the combination of a man and a woman. This is , in indeed, a milestone in rhetoric. According to the "per se rule", the author also strongly criticized the "Defense of Marriage Act"(DOMA), and claimed that DOMA should be held unconstitutional. After comparing the institutions substantially protected same-sex couples, i.e., "registered partnership" or "domestic partnership", the author concluded such institutions as phase work. However, the final task is to make lesbians and gay men legally wed, just like "human being in love". Chapter V summarized the findings and suggested measures for further improvement. The author hopes to remind domestic gay organizations of the importance to use judicial approach solving the issue of equal protection for lesbian and gay men. After bloody wars and tragic disasters, why people can not learn to treat "others" as "selves"? Some day, lesbians and gay men can walk hand in hand with one's love in bright sunshine. Wish is not a dream. Keywords: Gay; Lesbian; Homosexuality; Queer; Equal Protection; Review Standards; Same-Sex Marriage; Sodomy; Privacy; Liberalism; Economic Analysis of Law; Social Constructionalism; Defense of Marriage Act.

The subject of master work is homosexuality. Main goals: clearly represent such topics as homosexual communities, discrimination, love, sex, individual alienation; to show more exposed and more honest version of individuality, personal features, that could be built only on individual preferences and life experience; examine the origins of the phenomenon of "homophobia" by analyzing the concept of "sexuality" and "homosexuality" in the Soviet era; the causes of lack of knowledge or awareness on homosexual topic in the post-soviet time; analyze how "authoritative importunity" of public conscience cultivates homophobic reactions; present a final project in the format of photo-book that could be a “deconstructor“ of the logic of public thinking towards the perception of LGBT-communitis in Belarus and Lithuania. Visual representation: a series of photographs of homosexual people , mostly portraits, that clearly represents each person’s identity and unique features of character with strong attempt of understanding a contradictory of individual essence and personal establishment. The project is represented as a photo-book under the name “Sweet dreams“. The master work is focused on: the sphere of homophobic problematic with the help of photo-visual explanation of personal meaningfulness and importance in social being and everyday life development without any references to stigmatic dogmas of sexual orientation that still save unreasonable character... [to full text] / Darbo tikslas - pristatyti tokias temas kaip homoseksuali visuomenė, diskriminacija,meilę,individualus atsiskyrimas. / Итак, исходя из сказанного выше, необходимо обозначить, что объект магистерской работы – гомосексуальность. Целью работы является привлечение внимание общественности к проблеме “закрытости” гомосексуалов на постсоветском пространстве, а также связанных с этим ряде других факторов, оказывающих негативное влияние на формирование гомосексуальной идентичности. Задачи, которые необходимо рассмотреть в данной работе, заключаются в следующем: исследовать истоки формирования такого явления как “гомофобия”, анализируя понятие “сексуальности” и “гомосексуальности” в эпоху советскости; также причины нехватки знания или осведомленности общества по вопросам гомосексуального характера в постсоветское время; проанализировать, каким образом “властная навязчивость” общественного сознания культивирует гомофобную реакцию; представить итоговый проект в формате фото-книги, который бы являлся “деконструктором” логики общественного мышления по отношению к ЛГБТ-сообществам Литвы и Беларуси. Визуальными средствами репрезентации является постановочная фотография, фото-книга. Проект ориентирован на широкую аудиторию таких стран, как Литва и Беларусь. Магистерская работа может быть полезна людям, работающим в сфере фотографии, дизайна, работникам по гендерной теории, студентам художественных специальностей.

[pt] O objeto central deste trabalho é a mulher negra lésbica: um sujeito político em construção no Brasil. O estudo busca dar visibilidade aos processos de opressão e discriminação interseccional, cotidianamente vivenciados pela mulher negra lésbica. A pesquisa deseja contribuir com a construção e afirmação desta identidade, bem como fornecer elementos para intervenções profissionais do serviço social e para a formação de novos assistentes sociais, em face às expressões contemporâneas das desigualdades sociais. Quatro mulheres colaboraram na construção deste estudo, sendo adotado como critério central nesta seleção suas autodeclarações enquanto negras e lésbicas. Adicionalmente, a pesquisadora buscou colaboradoras que fossem ativistas políticas, com representatividade no movimento de mulheres negras lésbicas, entre 35 e 65 anos, com o objetivo de garantir a percepção de diferenças geracionais. A pesquisa de campo, de natureza qualitativa, baseou-se em entrevistas semiestruturadas configuradas a partir de quatro aspectos: a) trajetória política e pessoal; b) questões raciais, de gênero e orientação sexual; c) preconceito e discriminação, e d) políticas públicas e serviço social. Cada um destes aspectos foi discutido em termos de identidade e preconceito, todos relacionados ao Serviço Social. O trabalho de pesquisa revelou que em algumas situações o peso do racismo é mais relevante e perverso do que a discriminação e o preconceito decorrentes da lesbofobia. / [en] The core object of this work is the black lesbian woman: a political subject under construction in Brazil. This study aims to give visibility to the processes of intersectional discrimination and oppression daily experienced by the black lesbian woman. The research wants to contribute with the construction and affirmation of this identity, as well as to provide elements for Social Work professional interventions and for the education of new Social Workers, in the face of contemporary expressions of social inequalities. Four women contributed to the construction of this work, and the main criteria for their selection were their self-determination as black and lesbians. Furthermore, the researcher looked for recognized political activists of the black lesbians movement, between the ages of 35 and 65, in order to enable the expression of generational differences. The field work, qualitative in nature, was based on semi-structured interviews, dealing with the following aspects: a) Personal and political history; b) Questions related to race, gender and sexuality; c) Prejudice and discrimination, and d) Public policies and Social Work. Each one of those aspects was discussed in terms of identity, race and prejudice, all of them related to Social Work. The fieldwork revealed that in some situations of racism are far more perverse and relevant than discrimination and prejudice based on lesbian phobia.

O objetivo desta pesquisa de doutorado é compreender os distintos significados do que é ser uma professora lésbica no ambiente escolar. Trata-se de uma pesquisa de natureza qualitativa, e de perspectiva sociológica, que dialoga com estudos nacionais e internacionais já realizados sobre o tema, com base no debate sobre gênero, sexualidades e heteronormatividade. Foram entrevistadas seis professoras da rede pública (estadual ou municipal) de São Paulo, estando elas em atividade em três cidades: São Paulo, Diadema e Praia Grande. A partir de um roteiro semiestruturado, a pesquisa teve por objetivo compreender como essas docentes lidam com essa informação de suas vidas pessoais no ambiente escolar e quais seus principais obstáculos e medos. Os resultados da investigação mostram que, no lugar de uma invisibilidade suposta inicialmente, ganhou destaque a busca de uma visibilidade pedagógica, ou de uma tentativa consciente de construir uma possibilidade de existência legítima no ambiente escolar. Trata-se de um ser e estar na escola como docente que, por si só, traz uma aspiração e uma realização pedagógicas: a de construir uma visibilidade que garanta legitimidade para a existência lésbica. / The purpose of this doctoral research is to understand the different meanings of being a lesbian teacher in the school environment. It is a qualitative research and, of a sociological perspective, it dialogues with national and international studies already carried out on the subject, based on the debate on gender, sexualities and heteronormativity. Six public school teachers (state or municipal) from São Paulo were interviewed while they were teaching in three cities: São Paulo, Diadema and Praia Grande. From a semi-structured script, the research aimed to understand how these teachers deal with this information of their personal lives in the school environment and what your obstacles and fears would be. The results of the research show that, instead of an invisibility, initially supposed, the search for a pedagogical visibility, or a conscious attempt to construct a legitimate possibility of existence in the school environment, was highlighted. Wich means that being in a school as a teatcher, brings, itself, a pedagogical aspiration and a accomplishment: building a visibility that guarantees legitimacy for the lesbian existence.

Submitted by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2015-05-26T12:46:51Z No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação -Tanieli de Moraes Guimarães Silva - 2015.pdf: 1311221 bytes, checksum: 5f3fdff2059ba15d5c75dbab0211f9fa (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2015-05-26T12:49:47Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação -Tanieli de Moraes Guimarães Silva - 2015.pdf: 1311221 bytes, checksum: 5f3fdff2059ba15d5c75dbab0211f9fa (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-05-26T12:49:47Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação -Tanieli de Moraes Guimarães Silva - 2015.pdf: 1311221 bytes, checksum: 5f3fdff2059ba15d5c75dbab0211f9fa (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-03-23 / Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Goiás - FAPEG / This work aims to reflect about lesbian existences daily violence and “handlings”, from life trajectories of women who have affective-sexual relationships with other women in Goiânia. The main theoretical axis consists of theorizations from Butler (2000; 2010) about gender and sexuality, Das (1999) about violence, and Ortner (2007) about agency. The method used is the Life History and the ethnographic, with participant observations carried out in bars, nightclubs, houses, among other spaces, and semi-structured interviews with ten women from 24 to 30 years old. Through the life stories presented, it is possible to see that lesbian women are marked, in a more or less intense and direct way, by daily violence, which can be embedded in all of their contexts. Two of them are problematized here: the family and the religious ones. Faced at this reality, lesbian women have to “handle things”, in other words, they have to develop strategies and abilities to defend themselves. Therefore, “handling” is a form of agency, a resistance to a heteronormative society that insists on forcing a coherence among sex, gender, desire and sexual practice. However, there is a relation of desire-violence-guilt that permeates most of the trajectories presented here, which makes it evident that resisting is not an easy task. / Este trabalho objetiva refletir sobre lesbianidades, violências cotidianas e “manobras”, a partir de trajetórias de vida de mulheres que se relacionam afetivo-sexualmente com mulheres em Goiânia. O eixo teórico central é constituído por teorizações de Butler (2000; 2010) acerca de gênero e sexualidade, de Das (1999) sobre violência, e Ortner (2007) acerca de agência. O método utilizado é o da História de Vida e o etnográfico, tendo sido realizadas observações participantes em bares, boates, casas, entre outros espaços, e entrevistas semiestruturadas com dez mulheres de 24 a 30 anos. Por meio das histórias de vida apresentadas, é possível perceber que mulheres lésbicas estão marcadas de forma mais ou menos intensa e direta por violências cotidianas, sendo que estas podem estar inseridas em todos os seus contextos, sendo que dois desses serão problematizados aqui: o familiar e o religioso. Frente a essa realidade, mulheres lésbicas têm que “manobrar as coisas”, ou seja, precisam desenvolver estratégias e habilidades para se defender. Assim, a “manobra” é uma forma de agência, é resistência frente à sociedade heteronormativa que insiste em forçar uma coerência entre sexo, gênero, desejo e prática sexual. Porém há uma relação entre desejo-violência-culpa que perpassa a maioria das trajetórias aqui presentes, o que evidencia que resistir não é tarefa fácil.