Author:
Onishenko Dawn,Caragata Lea
Abstract
PurposeFollowing the landmark 2003 Ontario Court of Appeal decision legalizing same‐sex marriage, some same‐sex couples sought to formalize their unions through legal marriage. The purpose of this paper is to explore the personal and political reflections of recently married same‐sex couples on the meaning of their marriages for themselves, their partners, their community as well as the implications for progressive social change in the broader social world.Design/methodology/approachAn ethnographic approach was employed to semi‐structured in‐depth qualitative interviews with six lesbian and gay couples.FindingsAn emerging thesis is that, while seeking access to a most conventional and conformist institution, same‐sex couples inadvertently become “cutting edge” couples as they make public their declarations of love and commitment and model new and challenging notions of marriage.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper provides a snapshot of a small number of interviews that took place approximately 11 months after the Ontario Court of Appeal decision.Practical implicationsLaw should take into account the importance of social and legal recognition of marriage for all. The heteronormativity of marriage is thus challenged from within, to make these types of marriages truly cutting edge.Originality/valueThe paper provides evidence of the personal and political reflections of people who had the choice to get married and did, at a time when this was seen as really cutting edge. Few personal accounts exist which provide a picture of the continued importance of marriage to human beings.
Reference60 articles.
1. Boswell, J. (1995), Same‐Sex Unions in Premodern Europe, Random House, New York, NY.
2. Boyd, S. (1994), “(Re)Placing the state: family, law and oppression”, Canadian Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 39‐73.
3. Boyd, S. (1999a), “Family, law and sexuality: feminist engagements”, Social and Legal Studies, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 369‐90.
4. Boyd, S. (1999b), “From outlaw to in law: bringing lesbian and gay relationships into the family”, Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 31‐53.
5. Boyd, S. (2004), “The perils of rights discourse: a response to Kitzinger and Wilkinson”, Analysis of Social Issues and Public Policy, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 211‐17.