The aim of this study is to examine the media coverage of gender-neutral marriage from an intersectional perspective – with particular regard to gender, sexual orientation and religion. By focusing on the spokespeople who appears in the articles we have made an attempt to answer questions regarding who was heard in the debate on gender-neutral marriage and how the homosexual couples are portrayed in relation to the above criteria. The collected material consists of 89 articles, published in 2009, in Swedish newspapers which have been analysed by using quantitative content analysis. Ten articles have also been selected for a critical discourse analysis based on Norman Fairclough’s approach. The study is based on a social constructionist perspective and the assumption that language is of crucial importance when it comes to the creation and maintenance of social categorisation. Theories of gender/queer and intersectionality have furthermore been used to enable us to look at the topic from a multidimensional point of view. The quantitative analysis of the texts shows a great predominance of male spokespersons. Moreover, it appears that religions other than Christianity are largely underrepresented. The same pattern applies to people with homosexual orientation, whom are rarely heard on the issue of gender-neutral marriage. Furthermore, the results show that bisexuals and trans-gendered are almost completely excluded from the debate. The qualitative part of the study points in the same direction. A membership in The Church of Sweden is presented as a natural norm in the case of homosexuality and gender-neutral marriage, and homosexuals with another religion are made invisible or represented as divergent. The texts reveal a tolerance and openness towards homosexuality, but also strong assimilation ideals. The results show that same-sex relationships are portrayed as something the society is expected to accept, but only on condition that they are formed in accordance with the heterosexual norms concerning marriage and relationships, and also follow norms regarding gender and religion.

In the 2004 Presidential Election social and wedge issues were among the most publicized mobilization tools utilized by the Bush Campaign. Specifically, same-sex marriage has been suggested as a key wedge issue that may have mobilized voters, although research differs on its impact. My contention is that these previous studies miss the point with regard to wedge issues, which is that they are useful on persuadable voters, and persuadable voters live in swing states. I estimate a logit model using 2004 American National Election Studies survey data. I utilize voters’ decisions to turn out as the dependent variable and control for respondents’ positions on terrorism, the economy, same-sex marriage, political interest, party identification, and socio-economic status. These findings demonstrate, consistent with my hypothesis, voters in swing same-sex marriage ballot measure states were more likely to turn out. These voters may not have been persuadable, but rather the Republican base.

Marriage is one of the most important socialand legal institutions of humanity. Over time, its concept has varied and has adapted to thesocial and cultural evolution of our societies.In this article, the author proposes a new constitutional concept of marriage, which includes same-sex couples, explaining also the role that the principle of promotion of marriage, protected in the Constitution, plays in its configuration. / El matrimonio es una de las instituciones sociales y jurídicas más importantes de la humanidad. A lo largo del tiempo, su concepto ha variado y ha ido adaptándose a la evoluciónsocial y cultural de nuestra sociedad.En este artículo, el autor postula un nuevo concepto constitucional del matrimonio, el cual incluye a las personas del mismo sexo, explicando también el rol que cumple en su configuración el principio de promoción del matrimonio amparado en la Constitución.

abstract: While acceptance towards same-sex marriage is gradually increasing, same-sex marriage is banned in many states within the United States. Laws that prohibit same-sex couples from marrying have been shown to increase feelings of depression, exclusion, and stigma for same-sex attracted individuals. The intention of this study was to explore the effect both pro- and anti-same-sex marriage advertisements have on heterosexual individuals' implicit attitudes towards same-sex couples. It was predicted that exposure to anti-same-sex advertisements would lead to viewing same-sex couples as more unpleasant and heterosexual couples as being more pleasant. However, heterosexual participants who viewed anti-same-sex marriage ads were more likely to rate heterosexual couples as being unpleasant and same-sex couples as pleasant. It is theorized that viewing anti-same-sex marriage advertisements led heterosexual individuals to report heterosexual stimuli as being more unpleasant compared to same-sex stimuli as a form of defensive processing. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.S. Psychology 2013

Same-sex divorce is on the horizon in light of the 2015 legalization of same-sex marriage. Since most divorce case law is based on heteronormative presumptions, the authors were curious to understand how local district judges would adjudicate a same-sex divorce case involving a child born prior to the legal marriage. A qualitative study was implemented and a convenient sample of four local district judges in Upper East Tennessee were interviewed for this study. Interview questions were submitted to the judges prior to the interview and themes were identified following data collection. None of the judges had adjudicated a same-sex divorce. All of the judges admitted that they were unfamiliar with case law on same-sex divorce and acknowledged that they would most likely default to heteronormative case law. The judges indicated that they have not had any training on the changing case law as it relates to same-sex divorce and custody issues. Implications and future directions for research are discussed.

No description available.

Thesis (PhD)--Stellenbosch University, 2015. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Marriage is regarded as one of the most important and universal cultural symbols of belonging, and incorporates a range of privileges that can be acquired in no other way. It is where relationships of desire, politics and economics are fused into personal and public rituals of socially sanctioned connection and inclusion. Yet it draws new boundaries of social inclusion and exclusion or stigmatisation. In this thesis I use narrative inquiry to investigate how seventeen Capetonian queer couples in committed relationships perceive and experience same-sex marriage, and ask whether the Civil Union Act has given them a greater sense of belonging. Sexuality is deeply politicised through gendered disciplinary regimes that impinge on people’s emotional and intimate lives. Sexual politics in South Africa today emerge from a complex history of the sycretisation of widely varying cultural and political discourses, beliefs and practices wrought through colonialism and post-colonial recuperation. The formal protection of lgbti-q identities in the post-apartheid South African Constitution is the outcome of strategic struggles for lgbti-q recognition as human rights. However, formal rights do not necessarily lead to social inclusion as they may not reflect extant cultural values, hence I use the thicker concept of ‘belonging’ as developed by Yuval-Davis to analyse everyday inclusion—a concept which enables me to understand ‘privatised’ and affective dimensions of citizenship shaped by contexts of care and interpersonal intimacy. Worldwide, marriage has long been a central institution in how societies regulate their social and physical reproduction; but marriage also confers privileges which can be accessed in no other way. As in the West, marriage equality was a key aim for lgbti-q struggles in South Africa. But feminists have critiqued marriage as an institution of gendered hierarchy and a site of profound oppression for women. It is at the centre of the private|public dichotomy, and symbolic of women’s differentiated citizenship through, inter alia, the ideology of ‘women as property’. Hence same-sex marriage is deeply politicised in how it upholds or challenges heteropatriarchy. By looking at how a diverse range of same-sex couples in committed relationships perceive and experience same-sex marriage in South Africa, I unravel the ambiguities and contradictions of marriage as a project of belonging for lesbians and gays. Marriage as a sexual politics of belonging is about how lesbian and gay citizens experience equality and dignity in their everyday lives—recognition of them as citizen-subjects, protection of their intimate relationships as well as their struggles for belonging. I engage with the complex outcomes of colonial conquest and post-colonial recuperation on African sexual identities, before turning to an understanding of queer citizenship. I show how belonging is a much thicker concept than citizenship because it accesses our affective relationships. I proceed to use Nira Yuval-Davis’s framework for analysing belonging. She divides belonging into two streams: facets of belonging relating to identities, social locations and political and ethical values; and a politics of belonging. Struggles for belonging are waged around boundaries of inclusions and exclusions, and only become visible when belonging is contested. Projects for belonging are complex and multi-layered negotiations around the boundaries of belonging. Using narrative inquiry, I present the stories of seventeen couples and six key informants to fashion a narrative about same-sex marriage as a project of belonging. I asked them about coming out, and how they met their partners. They also told me about their relationships with children and significant others. We talked about their perceptions and experiences of same-sex marriage, and their views of the Constitution and Civil Union Act. I also asked about their sense of safety as queers and what they thought needed to be done to help queers belong (more). The participants’ most significant sense of belonging derived from having their rights protected in the Constitution. Their sense of entitlement to be who they are, was the outcome of powerful struggles for recognition. The various couples had been in committed relationships for between 8 and 52 years. Some had made use of the immigration status of same-sex partners to be together, which meant they were instantly thrown into ‘marriage’-like situations. Some didn’t want to get married, but 10 couples were married. Except for two couples, all the couples who got married did it primarily for the tangible benefits associated with marriage: through marriage they established formal kinship relationships linked to property and commitment to care. They were generally not interested in the cultural trappings of ‘weddings’, and had modest and quiet ceremonies. All the married couples affirmed that the Act had given them a greater sense of belonging. While all the participants valued formal recognition through the Constitution, the lack of substantive equality needed to be addressed to ensure future belonging for lgbti-q. I concluded that same-sex marriages are powerful social institutions, capable of either upholding heteropatriarchies through homonormative performances, but also capable of subversions. A foundational challenge comes through disrupting the ‘women as property’ exchange embedded in most marital traditions. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die huwelik word beskou as een van die belangrikste en algemeenste kulturele simbole van samesyn, en behels ’n reeks voordele wat op geen ander manier toeganklik is nie. Die huwelik is die kern waar begeerte, politiek en ekonomie verenig in persoonlike en openbare instellings van gemeenskaplike aanvaarding en verbinding. Terselfdertyd teken dit ook nuwe grense van sosiale insluiting, uitsluiting of stigmatisering. In hierdie tesis ondersoek ek wat sewentien Kaapse queer paartjies in vaste verhoudings dink van gay huwelike en hoe hulle dit ondervind, en ek vra of die Civil Union Act hulle meer samesyn (belonging) laat voel. Seksualiteit is uiters polities omdat dissiplinêre sisteme mense se emosionele en intieme lewes reguleer. Seksuele politiek in die huidige Suid-Afrika spruit uit ’n gekompliseerde geskiedenis van ’n samevloeiing van verkillende kulturele en politiese diskoerse, gelowe en praktyke van kolonialisme en post-kolonialistiese herstel. Die formele beskerming van lgbti-q identiteite in die post-apartheid Grondwet van Suid-Afrika, is die uitkomste van strategiese stryde vir lgbti-q herkenning as menseregte. Nogtans het formele regte nie noodwendig gelei tot sosiale insluiting omdat hulle nie die bestaande kulturele waardes weerspieël nie, daarom gebruik ek die konsep van ‘samesyn’ soos ontwikkel deur Yuval-Davis om alledaagse insluiting te ontleed—’n konsep wat my in staat stel om die ‘private’ en emosionele dimensies van burgerskap, die kontekste van sorg en interpersoonlike intimiteit, te verstaan. Wêreldswyd is die huwelik ’n kerninstelling in die regulering van sosiale en fisiese voortplanting in gemeenskappe. Maar die huwelik verleen ook voorregte wat op geen ander manier verkrygbaar is nie. Soos in die Weste, is huweliks-gelykheid ’n sleutelpunt in stryde vir lgbti-q erkenning in Suid-Afrika. Maar feministe het kritiek gelewer teen die huwelik omdat hulle glo dis ’n terrein vir die instelling van geslagshiërargie en diepgaande onderdrukking van vroue. Dit is die spilpunt waarom die verdeling tussen privaat | openbaar draai, en is simbolies van vroue se gedifferensieerde burgerskap deur, onder andere, die ideologie van ‘vroue as besittings’. Dus is gay huwelike polities ingewortel in hoe hulle heteropatriargie onderskraag of aanvat. Deur te kyk hoe etlike Suid-Afrikaanse paartjies van dieselfde geslag hulle toegewyde verhoudings beskou en ondervind, ontrafel ek die raaisels en dubbelsinnighede van gay huwelike as ’n projek van samesyn vir lesbiërs en gays. Die huwelik as seksuele politiek van samesyn is hoe lesbiese en gay burgers in die alledaagse lewe hulle gelykheid en menswaardigheid beleef—dat hulle as burgers erken word, en dat hulle intieme verhoudings sowel as hulle stryde vir samesyn gekoester word. Ek ontrafel die kompleksiteit van Afrikane se seksualiteite deur die gevolge van koloniale verowering en post-koloniale herwinning aan te pak, voor ek na queer burgerskap kyk. Ek bewys dat samesyn ’n meer betekenisvolle begrip is as burgerskap omdat dit ook ons emosionele verhoudings kan aanspreek. Ek gebruik Nira Yuval-Davis se raamwerk vir die ontleding van samesyn. Sy deel dit in twee strome: fasette van samesyn verbonde aan identiteite, sosiale stand en politieke en etiese waardes; en die politiek van samesyn. Stryde oor samesyn word rondom grense van insluiting en uitsluiting gevoer, en word slegs sigbaar wanneer samesyn bevraagteken word. Projekte vir samesyn is ingewikkeld met veelvoudige onderhandelings rondom grense van in— of uitsluiting. Ek gebruik verhaalontleding om die stories van sewentien paartjies en ses sleutelinformante te omskep in ’n vertelling omtrent gay huwelike as ’n projek van samesyn. Ek het hulle gevra oor hoe hulle “uit die kas geklim” het, en hoe hulle hulle minnaars ontmoet het. Hulle het my ook vertel van hulle verhoudings met hulle kinders en belangrike mense in hulle lewens. Ons het gepraat oor hulle sienswyses oor, en ondervindings van, gay huwelike, en hulle sienings oor die Grondwet en Civil Union Act. Ek het ook uitgevra omtrent hoe veilig hulle voel as queers, en wat hulle dink gedoen moet word sodat queers (meer) samesyn kan ondervind. Die deelnemers se grootse gevoel van samesyn was as gevolg van hulle regte wat gekoester word deur die Grondwet. Hulle gevoel van geregtigheid om te wees wie hulle is, het gespruit uit ’n kragtige stryd vir erkenning. Die verskillende paartjies was tussen 8 en 52 jaar lank in vaste verhoudings. Party het gebruik gemaak van die immigrasie wetgewing vir gay minnaars om saam te bly, wat beteken het dat hulle hulle summier in ‘huwelik’-soortige verhoudings bevind het. Party wou nie trou nie, maar 10 paartjies het getrou. Behalwe twee paartjies, het al die paartjies gesê hulle het hoofsaaklik getrou om die tasbare voordele van huwelike te geniet: deur huwelike kon hulle formele verwantskappe skep met besittings en verpligtings tot sorg. Hulle was oor die algemeen nie geïnteresseerd in die kulturele vertoon van troues nie, en het beskeie en stil seremonies gehou. Al die getroude paartjies het gesê dat die Civil Union Act hulle ’n groter gevoel van samesyn gebring het. Alhoewel al die deelnemers die amptelike erkenning van die Grondwet waardeer het, het hulle gesê dat die gebrekkigheid aan substantiewe gelykheid aangespreek moet word om toekomstige samesyn vir gays te verseker. Ek het tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat gay huwelike kragtige gemeenskaplike instellings is wat heteropatriargieë kan onderskraag deur homonormatiewe gedrag, maar dat hulle ook ondermynend kan wees. ’n Fundamentele uitdaging is die moontlike ontwrigting van ‘vroue as besittings’ onderhandelings wat in meeste huwelikstradisies vasgelê is.

In just over one year since United States v. Windsor— the case invalidating sections of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that defined marriage, for purposes of federal statutes, as the “union of man and woman”— more than a dozen states have had their same-sex marriage bans ruled unconstitutional. This suggests a shift in legal meaning; previously successful arguments against same-sex “marriage” now seem irrational as argumentative ground has shifted. Since favorable rulings redefine “marriage” to include same-sex unions, this thesis analyzes Kitchen v. Herbert, a 2014 legal opinion from the United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit, to understand the rhetorical processes underpinning its redefinitional act. That analysis draws on Kenneth Burke’s theories of entitling and constitutions and discusses the rhetorical concepts of terministic screens, casuistic screens, scope and circumference as key features of the rhetoric of the legal opinions. The findings call for a balancing of deconstructive and conventional approaches to legal discourse. / Includes bibliography. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2015. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

Over the last few decades, there has been a significant increase in the political and public acceptance of gay men and lesbians. However, this trend of acceptance is not a global phenomenon. Currently over 70 countries still criminalise private consensual same-sex intimacy, among which are 11 of the 12 independent Commonwealth Caribbean states. It should be noted that the anti-gay laws of the Caribbean are rarely used to police consensual private sexual activities. Thus, if private same-sex conduct is rarely penalised, why keep the laws in place, especially in the age where such bans are considered a violation of basic human rights? Many policy makers in the region have cited public opinions about homosexuality as a significant barrier to law reform. However, while a common view is that these laws are anchored by public support, very few studies have emerged to test whether the attitudes and behaviours of the general population are in line with this view. Against this backdrop, this thesis analyses attitudes towards lesbians and gay men and their legal rights in the Commonwealth Caribbean. The thesis begins with an analysis of support for the anti-gay laws in Barbados, Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago. The analysis revealed that a majority of the sample supported the maintenance and enforcement of the laws, but did not want same-sex couples to be penalised for having sex in private. This suggests that attitudes may not be as stark as policy makers suggest. The descriptive statistics also show that a significant share of individuals think that the laws (1) reflect moral standards; (2) stop the spread of homosexuality; (3) are important from a public health perspective, and (4) protect young people from abuse. Support for the laws are thus related to beliefs that homosexuality is a 'threat' to the fabric of society. The empirical analysis of support for the laws revealed that religiousness, interpersonal contact and beliefs about the origin of homosexuality were the most reliable predictors of public support. However, age and education were only statistically significant in a few models, and there was no evidence that attitudes varied across religious denominations. This is a contrast to the findings of studies in the West. It was hypothesised that macro-level factors - such as the large share of Evangelicals, anti-gay laws and level of socioeconomic development - could be exerting an influence on attitudes that is stronger than that of these personal characteristics. As such, the study conducted a cross-national analysis of attitudes towards same-sex marriage in 28 countries in the Americas, 6 of which were members of the Commonwealth Caribbean. In general, countries with higher levels of development, smaller shares of Evangelicals and more liberal laws on homosexuality were more approving of same-sex marriage. The results also suggest that the impact of age and/or religion is less prominent in countries with restrictions on same-sex intimacy, lower levels of development and a strong Evangelical presence, confirming the hypothesis that contextual factors could mitigate the impact of some of the individual-level variables. Finally, to get a nuanced view of anti-gay prejudice in the region, a thematic analysis of anti-gay speech in dancehall and reggae - music originating from Jamaica but popular in the region - was presented. The thematic analysis revealed that homosexuality is presented as 'sinful', a 'violation of gendered norms', 'unnatural', a 'threat to society' and a 'foreign lifestyle'. The presentation of homosexuality as a 'foreign' lifestyle suggests that anti-gay prejudice could be related to fears of neo-imperialism and could be a means of rejecting ideological intrusions from the West. This is not surprising, as currently, the fight for the advancement of gay rights is being headed by activists in the West. Based on the thematic analysis, efforts to remove the anti-gay laws should be (or at least appear to be) home-grown to limit public backlash.

While activists and others have argued that the legitimization of biased attitudes and stereotypes by political leaders foments violence against minority groups, criminological research in the U.S. has focused more on "threat" hypotheses that view hate crime as a retaliatory response to perceived gains or encroachment of targeted groups. Another view suggests that heightened public visibility of hate crimes or other bias issues, usually in the form of media coverage, increases hate crimes. This study compares the effect on anti-LGB crimes of events representing political threat (a court decision legalizing marriage equality) and political legitimization of bias (passage of a ban on marriage equality), both of which occurred in California in 2008. The study also tests effects of media coverage prior to the ban on marriage equality. Results showed a statistically significant increase in anti-LGB hate crimes after the ban on same-sex marriage. There was no effect on anti-LGB crime counts after the court decision to legalize marriage equality, or during the media campaign leading up to the vote to ban marriage equality.