Same‐Sex Couples,Families, and Marriage: Embracing and Resisting Heteronormativity1

This article focuses on lesbian and gay couples and families and the politics of same‐sex marriage. Drawing from the literature on same‐sex couples, same‐sex marriage, and queer theory’s concept of heteronormativity, we argue that gay and lesbian couples and families both affirm and challenge heterosexual and gendered family forms. First, we review literature that discusses how same‐sex relationships and families are similar to and different from conventional heterosexual relationships and families. Second, we discuss the socio‐legal and cultural inequalities faced by LGBT families. Third, we discuss the politics of same‐sex marriage, examining the debate among social conservatives, pro‐marriage activists, and queer critics over the desirability of same‐sex marriage. We conclude that the growing visibility of LGBT couples and families has made their exclusion from the institution of marriage more conspicuous and that recognition of LGBT relationships and families seems likely to increase.     

RISK,MARRIAGE, AND NEOLIBERAL GOVERNANCE: Learning from the Unwillingly Excluded

Drawing from my ethnography of one prominent same‐sex marriage rights organization, I consider how activists' appropriation of a risk‐based political rationality blends utilitarian claims for equal access to self‐governance with moral assertions that posit the conjugal couple as a superior context for governing problems endemic to populations. When constructed according to risk‐based rationalities, marriage operates as a compulsory system that orients subjects to neoliberalism by promising to decrease danger for all of the “gay community,” not just same‐sex couples who marry. Articulating marriage according to a risk‐based political rationality yields a sense of urgency that makes nonconjugal intimacies and alternatives to a neoliberal ethic of care appear untenable. I add to the literature on governmentality by utilizing qualitative methods that uniquely capture the diffusion of governance from experts to social activists who are unwillingly excluded from a form of neoliberal governance.     

Couple Longevity in the Era of Same‐Sex Marriage in the United States

The author used a new longitudinal data set, the How Couples Meet and Stay Together surveys (N = 3,009), to generate the first nationally representative comparison of same‐sex couple stability and heterosexual couple stability in the United States. He measured the association between marriage (by several definitions of marriage) and couple longevity for same‐sex couples in the United States. Reports of same‐sex relationship instability in the past were due in part to the low rate of marriages among same‐sex couples. After controlling for marriage and marriage‐like commitments, the break‐up rate for same‐sex couples was comparable to (and not statistically distinguishable from) the break‐up rate for heterosexual couples. The results revealed that same‐sex couples who had a marriage‐like commitment had stable unions regardless of government recognition. A variety of predictors of relationship dissolution for heterosexual and for same‐sex couples are explored.     

Relationship Education and Therapy for Same‐Sex Couples

The gay and lesbian community suffers higher rates of discrimination, mental health problems, and relationship break‐up than their heterosexual counterparts. In this paper we analyse the challenges confronting same‐sex couples, and the implications for couple education and therapy with same‐sex couples. We describe some similarities in the challenges confronting heterosexual and same‐sex couples (e.g., negotiation of shared realistic relationship expectations, effective communication). These similarities suggest existing evidence‐based approaches to couple therapy and relationship education are likely to assist same sex couple relationships. We also describe distinctive challenges for same‐sex couples (e.g., homophobic discrimination, internalised homophobia, and low support from many families for same sex relationships). These distinctive challenges suggest some adaptation of existing approaches to couple education and therapy could enhance their relevance and effectiveness to same sex couples.     

Money management and views of civil partnership in same‐sex couples: results from a UK survey of non‐heterosexuals

Recent legislation in the UK has extended many of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of heterosexual marriage to same‐sex couples who register their partnerships. Prior to the Civil Partnership Act (2004) however, little was known about financial arrangements in same‐sex couples, nor the extent to which these mirrored those of married or cohabiting heterosexuals. This paper reports the findings from the first large‐scale survey in the UK to investigate finances and civil partnership beliefs in a convenience sample of non‐heterosexuals: 510 individuals, of whom 386 were currently in a same‐sex relationship, participated in the survey. Our findings showed less merging of finances (such as in pooling, allowance, and whole wage systems) than is typical in heterosexual married couples. The results of a series of multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that rating CP as more important, and having both names on the mortgage, significantly reduced the odds of independent (ie, separate) management of finances. Participants were almost unanimous in their endorsement of CP as a form of legal recognition, with a large majority saying that they would also consider it for themselves.     

What,exactly, are we measuring? Examining heteronormativity in relation to same‐gender marriage

Focusing on the relationship between same‐gender marriage and heteronormativity, my objectives in this paper are twofold. First, I examine the scholarly conversation examining same‐gender marriage as a practice that either reinforces or challenges heteronormativity. I agree with the arguments posed by contemporary sociologists that reducing same‐gender marriage to being purely supportive or disruptive of heteronormativity oversimplifies the issue. Next, I critically examine how challenges to heteronormativity are being measured in the context of same‐gender marriage. I argue that future scholarship would benefit from more thoroughly considering how challenges to heteronormativity manifest in different forms and impact the social system of heteronormativity in distinct and varied ways.     

The impact of discernment counseling on individuals who decide to divorce: experiences of post‐divorce communication and coparenting

Discernment counseling is designed to help couples considering divorce arrive at a greater sense of clarity and confidence in their decision making about the future of their marriage. Possible outcomes include making no change to the marriage, divorcing, or attempting reconciliation through couples therapy. To date, no research has been done on whether or not discernment counseling helps couples who decide to divorce with their post‐divorce family life (i.e., coparenting). We surveyed 11 people (from male–female couples) and conducted in‐depth interviews with eight who had undergone discernment counseling and subsequently divorced to see what impact discernment counseling had on their post‐divorce coparenting relationship. We analyzed the data from a phenomenological perspective. Respondents described their discernment counseling experience as helpful for achieving clarity and honesty in the divorce decision‐making process, they shared their appreciation for the structure of the intervention, and indicated that it led to a greater coparental cooperation post‐divorce.     

Congregational Political Activity and Same‐Sex Marriage: Social Movement Theory and Evidence for Contextual Influence

We interpret three strands of social movement theory (social threat, opportunity structure, and resource mobilization) to understand religious congregations' political activity related to same‐sex marriage. Using a unique, national data set from the 2008 presidential election, we show the importance of the anti‐same‐sex marriage discursive opportunity structure (DOS) for facilitating, and occasionally constraining, congregational political activity. Other theoretical factors influence congregations under limited, although important, conditions. Our research develops a nuanced understanding of congregations' roles in social movements that prioritize institutionalized political activity and expands DOS theory in relation to local religious organizations.     

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

Given hostility within segments of LGBT communities toward same‐sex marriage, how do Australian activists justify their efforts toward achieving marriage equality? In this article, we expand the social movement literature by examining how activists construct identity, meaning, and goals in contradistinction to others within the same movement. We draw on interviews with Australian lesbian and gay activists to examine what enables them to pursue the contested goal of same‐sex marriage in light of internal movement critiques that marriage equality will undermine the significance of lesbian and gay identity and impair activism on other issues as a result of the view that equality has been achieved. We expand debates over the post‐gay trajectory of lesbian and gay activism and identity by illustrating how activists attach different, what we term, mobilizing meanings, to the same movement goal which enables them to withstand internal movement critiques. We provide a typology of mobilizing meanings that can be applied more generally.     

“Oh My God,I Sound Like a Horrible Person”: Generic Processes in the Conditional Acceptance of Sexual and Gender Diversity

This article outlines a generic process in the reproduction of inequality that we name “conditional acceptance.” Based on 20 in‐depth interviews with cisgender, heterosexual Christian women who support same‐sex marriage legalization, supplemented with reviews of LGBT, religious, and inequalities scholarship, we demonstrate how members of dominant groups may maintain boundaries that facilitate the persistence of social inequality by conditionally accepting members of marginalized groups. Specifically, our findings suggest that respondents both created the appearance of tolerance and maintained the devaluation of LGBT people by (1) supporting equality with a few caveats, (2) suggesting acceptance of those who cannot help being abnormal, (3) arguing that social change was not their responsibility, (4) defining sexual and gender difference as a personal choice, and (5) asserting that they could hate the sin while loving the sinner. In conclusion, we argue that examining processes of conditional acceptance may provide insight into (1) the persistence of social inequality despite social movement victories, and (2) the importance of integrating existing scholarship focused on sexual, gendered, and religious boundary maintenance.     

Status or Access? The Impact of Marriage on Lesbian,Gay, Bisexual,and Queer Community Change

Drawing on interview and survey research with 116 married and unmarried lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) individuals, this study offers the first systematic data on the relationship between legal marriage and LGBQ community life. The author distinguishes between marital status—being married—and marital access—gaining access to the institution of marriage—as distinct drivers of community change. In contrast to research with heterosexuals, the findings suggest that marital access plays a primary role in LGBQ community change. The different life course trajectories of LGBQ people and their prior experiences of social exclusion alter the relationship between marriage and community. The findings push family scholarship beyond a one‐model‐fits‐all approach to understanding the impact of marriage on community engagement. Taken together, they expand literature on marriage as greedy, the deinstitutionalization of marriage, and marriage and social inclusion as well as offer insights into how LGBQ people understand and enact marriage.     

Minority Stress and Stress Proliferation Among Same‐Sex and Other Marginalized Couples

Drawing from 2 largely isolated approaches to the study of social stress—stress proliferation and minority stress—the authors theorize about stress and mental health among same‐sex couples. With this integrated stress framework, they hypothesized that couple‐level minority stressors may be experienced by individual partners and jointly by couples as a result of the stigmatized status of their same‐sex relationship—a novel concept. They also consider dyadic minority stress processes, which result from the relational experience of individual‐level minority stressors between partners. Because this framework includes stressors emanating from both status‐based (e.g., sexual minority) and role‐based (e.g., partner) stress domains, it facilitates the study of stress proliferation linking minority stress (e.g., discrimination), more commonly experienced relational stress (e.g., conflict), and mental health. This framework can be applied to the study of stress and health among other marginalized couples, such as interracial/ethnic, interfaith, and age‐discrepant couples.     

“I Try Not to Depend on Anyone but Me”: Welfare‐Reliant Women's Perspectives on Self‐Sufficiency,Work, and Marriage*

Welfare reformers sought to reduce “dependency,” or reliance on state‐supported cash benefits and deployed a discourse of “self‐sufficiency” to promote the legitimacy of efforts to remove welfare recipients from publicly funded cash assistance through either wage labor or marriage. We use longitudinal, qualitative interview data collected from 38 initially welfare‐reliant women to examine what self‐sufficiency means to them and their perspectives on how work and marriage affect their ability to be self‐sufficient. Grounded theory analysis revealed that for these women, self‐sufficiency means formal independence from both the state (i.e., Temporary Assistance to Needy Families [TANF]) and men (i.e., marriage). Although they value marriage as an institution and would ideally marry, they do not consider marriage to be a likely route to self‐sufficiency given the pool of men available to them. Rather, they embrace their own market‐based wage labor as the means by which they can attain some measure of independence. Taking our lead from the women in this study, we challenge the emphasis on marriage in current welfare policy. We argue that employment training that results in better jobs for women and men and work supports that make low‐wage work pay are clearly the appropriate direction for policy aimed at the welfare‐reliant and working poor.     

Breaking the in‐group out‐group: shifting boundaries in transnational partner choice processes of individuals of Moroccan,Tunisian, Algerian,Turkish, Punjabi Sikh,Pakistani and Albanian descent in Belgium

The ongoing popularity in some second and third generation migrants in Western Europe of marrying a partner from the countries of origin of their (grand)parents is considered to be problematic for micro and macro level societal integration of some migrant populations. Partner choice and marriage practices in migrant communities are problematized in public, media and political discourses by discriminating them from marriage practices in the ‘native’ population on the basis of three related dichotomies: (1) agency versus structure, (2) us versus them and (3) romantic versus instrumental marriage intentions dichotomies. By means of in‐depth qualitative research methodologies on the partner choice processes of women and men of Turkish, Moroccan, Algerian, Tunisian, Punjabi Sikh, Pakistani and Albanian descent in Belgium and an intersectional theoretical approach, this article aims to deconstruct popular and simplifying dichotomous representations of partner choice processes in these migrant populations. Our study reveals how religious, gender and social class boundaries are stretched to meet personal/individual desires and preferences. Individuals do experience social restrictions when it concerns social group boundaries and the potential partners that they can look for. At the same time individuals are never fully determined by their social environment, they creatively develop strategies to by‐pass certain restrictions and to some extent are able to meet their personal needs while being sensitive to the desires of their social environment.     

The Stability of Same‐Sex Cohabitation,Different‐Sex Cohabitation,and Marriage

This study contributes to the emerging demographic literature on same‐sex couples by comparing the level and correlates of union stability among 4 types of couples: (a) male same‐sex cohabitation, (b) female same‐sex cohabitation, (c) different‐sex cohabitation, and (d) different‐sex marriage. The author analyzed data from 2 British birth cohort studies: the National Child Development Study (N = 11,469) and the 1970 British Cohort Study (N = 11,924). These data contain retrospective histories of same‐sex and different‐sex unions throughout young adulthood (age 16–34) from 1974 through 2004. Event‐history analyses showed that same‐sex cohabitations have higher rates of dissolution than do different‐sex cohabiting and marital unions. Among same‐sex couples, male couples had slightly higher dissolution rates than did female couples. In addition, same‐sex couples from the 1958 and 1970 birth cohorts had similar levels of union stability. The demographic correlates of union stability are generally similar for same‐sex and different‐sex unions.     

Marriage (In)equality: The Perspectives of Adolescents and Emerging Adults With Lesbian,Gay, and Bisexual Parents

The debate over whether same‐sex couples should be allowed to enter into civil marriages continues in the United States. Forty‐nine adolescents and emerging adults (ages 14–29) with lesbian, gay, and bisexual parents were interviewed for the current exploratory study, which examined how individuals perceived themselves and their families as being affected by marriage (in)equality, as well as the factors that shaped their perspectives. More than two thirds of participants voiced unequivocal support for marriage equality, citing numerous legal and symbolic benefits that their families were denied. One quarter of participants articulated critical perspectives of marriage or the fight for marriage equality, while also acknowledging the benefits associated with marriage. As the first study to examine the perspectives of individuals with lesbian, gay, and bisexual parents with regard to marriage (in)equality, this research has important implications for the marriage equality debate and provides a springboard for future studies on this topic.     

The Power and Limits of Marriage: Married Gay Men's Family Relationships

Same‐sex marriage has received much scholarly attention in the United States in the past decade. Yet we know little about how same‐sex couples experience marriage. In this article, I present findings from in‐depth interviews with 32 legally married gay men in Iowa. I focus on their experiences with families of origin and investigate the legitimating potential of same‐sex marriage. The men had high expectations about the power of marriage to help them gain recognition and support, but their experiences with family members were more varied and complex than they expected. Although marriage often led to positive family outcomes, it also commonly had negative consequences, including new and renewed experiences of family rejection. This study complicates ideas about the legitimating potential of marriage for same‐sex couples by illuminating both its power and limits in helping gay men gain status and support from their families of origin.     

Changing Partners: Toward a Macrostructural‐Opportunity Theory of Marital Dissolution

We merge marital history data for respondents in the National Survey of Families and Households with census data describing the sex composition of their local marriage markets and occupations to examine the impact of the availability of spousal alternatives on marital dissolution. Proportional hazards regression models that adjust for left truncation reveal that the risk of divorce is highest in geographically defined marriage markets where either husbands or wives encounter numerous alternatives to their current partner. Couples are also more likely to divorce when the wife works in an occupation having relatively many men and few women, but husbands' occupational sex ratio has no effect on the risk of marital dissolution. The destabilizing effects of the availability of spousal alternatives in the local marriage market and in wives' occupations are equally strong among couples with many and few other risk factors for divorce. Our findings suggest that spouses' structural opportunities to form alternative opposite‐sex relationships are an important factor in explaining why some couples divorce.     

Marriage Rituals as Reinforcers of Role Transitions: An Analysis of Weddings in The Netherlands

Using a nationally representative survey of married couples (N = 572) in The Netherlands, I analyze three characteristics of the contemporary western marriage ceremony: (a) whether couples give a wedding party, (b) whether couples have their marriage consecrated in church, and (c) whether couples go away on a honeymoon. Hypotheses are developed arguing that marriage ceremonies reinforce role transitions in two complementary ways: They reduce uncertainty about the new roles that people will occupy, and they provide approval for norm‐guided behavior. Multivariate analyses support the hypotheses. Elaborate marriage ceremonies are more common among couples for whom the transition to marriage is more drastic, and traditional values in the social context of the couple go hand in hand with a more elaborate marriage ceremony.     

“Everything's There Except Money”: How Money Shapes Decisions to Marry Among Cohabitors

Cohabitation is now the modal path to marriage in the United States. Drawing on data from 115 in‐depth interviews with cohabitors from the working and lower middle classes, this paper explores how economics shape marital decision making. We find that cohabitors typically perceive financial issues as important for marriage, and we delineate several key themes. Whereas some social scientists speculate that cohabitors must think that marriage will change their lives in order to motivate marriage, our findings suggest that cohabitors believe marriage should occur once something has already changed—in this case, their financial status. Our results also imply that political and scientific discourse on financial problems as deterrents to marriage should be broadened beyond a focus on poor unmarried parents.