Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T12:04:10.552Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Why Marriage?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2012

Marsha Garrison
Affiliation:
Brooklyn Law School
Elizabeth S. Scott
Affiliation:
Columbia University Law School
Get access

Summary

In a well-known New Yorker cartoon, a man and a woman sit together on a couch, clearly in the midst of a conversation about marriage for gay and lesbian couples. “Haven't they suffered enough?” one of them asks. Although the cartoon characters jest, the question of why gay people are fighting so hard for the right to marry is a serious one. After all, marriage rates have been dropping steadily in the United States and in much of the world, and divorce rates remain high. Why, then, are lesbians and gay men fighting so hard to join an institution that appears, by most indicators, to be on the decline?

There is no single answer to this question, of course. Political ideology and social experiences are important determinants of any given person's position, and individuals’ positions are often complex, with overlapping justifications. From among the many possible reasons, this chapter looks closely at several leading responses to the “Why bother with marriage?” question. Building on these responses, the chapter also offers an analytic framework for understanding contemporary marriage debates and a foundation for thinking about how marriage might fare as we move beyond the current crossroads.

Note that the inquiry here is not about why a particular gay or lesbian couple might want to get married. That question, for most couples, is answered by reference to love rather than rights; by desires for binding familial commitments rather than concerns about the signaling effects of legally recognized marital status. At an individualized level, one could answer the “why bother with marriage” question simply by saying that marriage has traditionally been, and continues to be, what adult couples seek when they want state sanctification of their relationships, and that same-sex couples are simply asking for what different-sex couples already have.

Type
Chapter
Information
Marriage at the Crossroads
Law, Policy, and the Brave New World of Twenty-First-Century Families
, pp. 224 - 240
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alternatives to Marriage Project. (n.d.) 2011 http://www.unmarried.org/legal-financial-f.a.q.html
Anderson, E. 2005 Out of the Closets and into the Courts: Legal Opportunity Structure and Gay Rights LitigationAnn ArborUniversity of Michigan PressGoogle Scholar
Arkles, A.Gehi, P.Redfield, E. 2009 The Role of Lawyers in Trans Liberation: Building a Transformative Movement for Social ChangeSeattle Journal of Social Justice, 8 579Google Scholar
Baker, P. 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/11/us/same-sex-marriage-support-shows-pace-of-social-change-accelerating.html
Bernard, T.S. 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/09/business/some-companies-want-gays-to-wed-to-get-health-benefits.html
1986
1954
Buckborough, A. 1990 1989 343
Cahill, C.M. 2005 Same-Sex Marriage, Slippery Slope Rhetoric, and the Politics of Disgust: A Critical Perspective on Contemporary Family Discourse and the Incest TabooNorthwestern University Law Review, 99 1543Google Scholar
Calmes, J.Baker, P. 2012 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/us/politics/obama-says-same-sex-marriage-should-be-legal.html?pagewanted=all
Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute. (n.d.) 2011 http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/table_marriage
Cox, B. 2000 But Why Not Marriage: An Essay on Vermont's Civil Unions Law, Same-Sex Marriage, and Separate but (Un)equalVermont Law Review, 25 113Google Scholar
Currah, P. 2006 Gender Pluralisms under the Transgender UmbrellaCurrah, P.Juang, R.M.Minter, S.P.Transgender RightsMinneapolisUniversity of Minnesota PressGoogle Scholar
Duclos, N. 1991 Some Complicating Thoughts on Same-Sex MarriageLaw & Sexuality, 1 31Google Scholar
Emens, E. 2007 Changing Name Changing: Framing Rules and the Future of Marital NamesUniversity of Chicago Law Review, 74 761Google Scholar
Eskridge, W.N.Hunter, N.D. 2004 Sexuality, Gender, and the LawNew YorkFoundation PressGoogle Scholar
Ettelbrick, P.Stoddard, T. 1989 8
Fineman, M.A. 2001 Why MarriageVirginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, 9 239Google Scholar
Fineman, M.A. 2005 The Autonomy Myth: A Theory of DependencyNew YorkNew PressGoogle Scholar
Flynn, T. 2001 Transforming the Debate: Why We Need to Include Transgender Rights in the Struggles for Sex and Sexual Orientation EqualityColumbia Law Review, 101 392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franke, K.M. 2006 The Politics of Same-Sex Marriage PoliticsColumbia Journal of Gender & Law, 15 236Google Scholar
2011
General Accounting Office 1997 www.gao.gov/archive/1997/og97016.pdf
General Accounting Office 2004 www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf
Goldberg, S.B. 2006 An Historical Guide to the Future of MarriageColumbia Journal of Gender & Law, 15 249Google Scholar
Goldberg, S.B. 2009 Marriage as MonopolyConnecticut Law Review, 41 1397Google Scholar
Goldberg, S.B. 2010 Sticky Intuitions and the Future of Sexual Orientation DiscriminationUCLA Law Review, 57 1375Google Scholar
Goodnough, A. 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/30/us/30unions.html
2003
1997
Hunter, N. 1991 Marriage Law and Gender: A Feminist InquiryLaw & Sexuality, 1 9Google Scholar
Hunter, N. 1997 Lawyering for Social JusticeNew York University Law Review, 72 1009Google Scholar
2008
2007
Kim, S.A. 2011 Skeptical Marriage EqualityHarvard Journal of Law and Gender, 34 37Google Scholar
Kurtzleben, D. 2011 http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/07/06/divorce-rates-lower-in-states-with-same-sex-marriage
Leff, L. 2011 http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18016284
2006
1967
1888
1989
2009
New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission 2008 http://www.state.nj.us/lps/dcr/downloads/CURC-Final-Report-pdf
2011 http://www.nyclu.org/marriageFAQ
Newport, F. 2011 http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx
Pearlston, K. 2009 Married Women Bankrupts in the Age of CovertureLaw & Social Inquiry, 34 265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polikoff, N. 1993 We Will Get What We Ask for: Why Legalizing Gay and Lesbian Marriage Will Not “Dismantle the Legal Structure of Gender in Every MarriageVirginia Law Review, 79 1535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polikoff, N. 2008 Beyond (Straight and Gay) MarriageBostonBeacon PressGoogle Scholar
Polikoff, N. 2009 Equality and Justice for Lesbian and Gay Families and RelationshipsRutgers Law Review, 61 529Google Scholar
Rubenstein, W.B.Ball, C.A.Schacter, J.S. 2008 Cases and Materials on Sexual Orientation and the LawNew YorkFoundation PressGoogle Scholar
Sayare, SDe La Baume, M. 2010 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/world/europe/16france.html
Schacter, J.S. 2009 The Other Same-Sex Marriage DebateChicago-Kent Law Review, 84 379Google Scholar
Scott, E.S. 1992 Pluralism, Parental Preference, and Child CustodyCalifornia Law Review, 80 615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, E.S. 2007 A World without MarriageFamily Law Quarterly, 41 537Google Scholar
Selfridge, A. 2007 Equal Protection and Gender Preference in Divorce Contests over CustodyJournal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 16 165Google Scholar
1942
Stein, E. 2009 Marriage or Liberation? Reflections on Two Strategies in the Struggle for Lesbian and Gay Rights and Relationship RecognitionRutgers Law Review, 61 567Google Scholar
Stirnitzke, A.C. 2011 Transsexuality, Marriage, and the Myth of True SexArizona Law Review, 53 285Google Scholar
Tax Problems for Illinois Civil Unions 2011 http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2011/07/05/tax-problem-for-illinois-civil-unions/
U.S. Government Accounting Office 1997 http://www.gao.gov/archive/1997/og97016.pdf
U.S. Government Accounting Office 2004 http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf
Vermont Civil Union Review Commission 2001 http://www.leg.state.vt.us/baker/cureport.htm
Wriggins, J. 2000 Marriage Law and Family Law: Autonomy, Interdependence, and Couples of the Same GenderBoston College Law Review, 41 265Google Scholar
Yoshino, K. 2000 The Epistemic Contract of Bisexual ErasureStanford Law Review, 52 353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1978

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×