Thesis (Ph.D. Law)--University of Waikato, 2009. / Title from PDF cover (viewed December 10, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 501-535)

The purpose of this study is to examine domestic violence as it occurs in same-sex male relationships. Data were collected by in-depth interviews with twenty-five gay males, who were between the ages of 23 and 43, and who had previous experience being in a homosexual relationship where domestic violence was present. The major findings of this study include the respondents': 1) definitions of domestic violence and abuse; 2) the type of domestic violence or abuse personally experienced; and 3) reasons they believe domestic violence or abuse occurs in these types of relationships. This study illustrates the need for further research in this area of domestic violence and for programs or services targeted for this specific population.

Thesis (M.A.)--Concordia University, 1998. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 88-104).

Increasingly, same-sex couples are choosing to become parents. According to Patterson (1992, cited in Mallon, 1997), it is estimated that in the United States of America alone, there are between six and 14 million children being raised by gay and lesbian couples. This study explored the experiences of same-sex parents as they moved through the adoption process, and once they had become parents. Two couples (a gay male couple and a lesbian couple) were interviewed. The study used an ecological theoretical framework in order to understand the myriad influences on the individuals' and couples' experiences. The Voice-Centred Relational Method (Mauthner & Doucet, cited in Ribbens & Edwards, 1998) was used to analyse the data qualitatively. Major themes that emerged from the data include the ways in which parents negotiate roles with partners, the impact of societal reactions (and heteronormativity) on the couples, the quality of relationships between family members and the influence that these had on the couples' experience of parenting. / Thesis (M.A.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, 2007.

In this thesis I explore the implications of the extension of 'spousal' status to samesex couples from the perspective of queer people who experience intersectional or complex oppression. This study is grounded in a rejection of the necessity or efficacy of attempting to understanding the oppressions facing queer people from only one perspective. I reject the notion that such a simplistic approach to understanding oppression is conceptually honest. Put simply, I argue that what is often characterised as a purely 'gay and lesbian' approach to reform—namely, the consideration of only oppression related to 'sexual orientation' or 'heterosexism'—is in reality the prioritisation of the limited perspective of those who only experience systemic disadvantage related to their race. These people are a small minority of queer people. Unlike many other academics and activists, I do not conclude with a 'yes' or 'no' response to the question of whether same-sex spousal status should be sought. The analysis presented in this thesis does not permit such a final conclusion for three reasons. First, I argue that the implications of the extension of spousal status vary depending on the institutional context; in other words, the extension of spousal status is very different in the context of social assistance law as compared to the provision of employment-related benefits. Secondly, I argue that the extension of spousal status also varies among queer people; for example, the implications of the extension of spousal status to poor queers are vastly different from those who are wealthy. Thirdly, I argue that the decision to support the extension of spousal status to same-sex couples is inherently political; this decision cannot be immunised from political challenge on the basis that it is derived from some allegedly objective legal or socio-scientific calculus. Although I have endeavoured adopt a inter-disciplinary approach, this thesis does focus on legal rights discourse. To my mind, this focus is appropriate given the emphasis on 'rights talk' and the assumed benefits of formal equality within the community of academics and activists working on queer issues. In various parts of this thesis, I focus on the approaches of activists, academics, judges and legislators to the issue of the rights of queer people and the nature of equality. Ultimately, I conclude that until we begin to appreciate the complexity of the oppressions facing queer people, and avoid the false prioritisation of a 'purely gay and lesbian oppression' perspective, we will be unable to work in coalition or to effect progressive social change.

Thesis (Honors)--College of William and Mary, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 74-82). Also available via the World Wide Web.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Delaware, 2008. / Principal faculty advisor: Ronet Bachman, Dept. of Sociology & Criminal Justice. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--Concordia University, 1998. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 88-104). Also available electronically via World Wide Web in PDF format.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 2007. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

In this thesis I explore the implications of the extension of 'spousal' status to samesex couples from the perspective of queer people who experience intersectional or complex oppression. This study is grounded in a rejection of the necessity or efficacy of attempting to understanding the oppressions facing queer people from only one perspective. I reject the notion that such a simplistic approach to understanding oppression is conceptually honest. Put simply, I argue that what is often characterised as a purely 'gay and lesbian' approach to reform—namely, the consideration of only oppression related to 'sexual orientation' or 'heterosexism'—is in reality the prioritisation of the limited perspective of those who only experience systemic disadvantage related to their race. These people are a small minority of queer people. Unlike many other academics and activists, I do not conclude with a 'yes' or 'no' response to the question of whether same-sex spousal status should be sought. The analysis presented in this thesis does not permit such a final conclusion for three reasons. First, I argue that the implications of the extension of spousal status vary depending on the institutional context; in other words, the extension of spousal status is very different in the context of social assistance law as compared to the provision of employment-related benefits. Secondly, I argue that the extension of spousal status also varies among queer people; for example, the implications of the extension of spousal status to poor queers are vastly different from those who are wealthy. Thirdly, I argue that the decision to support the extension of spousal status to same-sex couples is inherently political; this decision cannot be immunised from political challenge on the basis that it is derived from some allegedly objective legal or socio-scientific calculus. Although I have endeavoured adopt a inter-disciplinary approach, this thesis does focus on legal rights discourse. To my mind, this focus is appropriate given the emphasis on 'rights talk' and the assumed benefits of formal equality within the community of academics and activists working on queer issues. In various parts of this thesis, I focus on the approaches of activists, academics, judges and legislators to the issue of the rights of queer people and the nature of equality. Ultimately, I conclude that until we begin to appreciate the complexity of the oppressions facing queer people, and avoid the false prioritisation of a 'purely gay and lesbian oppression' perspective, we will be unable to work in coalition or to effect progressive social change. / Law, Peter A. Allard School of / Graduate