GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
NAME:
Monique McTaggart
STUDENT ID:
1370043
PAPER:
GEND208
TUTOR:
Rebecca Stringer
DUE DATE:
15/10/2010
WORD COUNT:
2681
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
Same sex marriage refers to a union, either legally or socially acceptable, in which two
people of the same gender are wed. Issues pertaining to same sex marriages are highly
debated in today’s society. Many see it as a religious sin to be homosexual and therefore it is
seen as blasphemous for one to even consider entering a legally binding union when in a
same sex relationship. While religion seems to be a consistent factor in the opposing of same
sex marriages, there is another factor that is as equally as debated and at times overlooked.
This issue refers to the rights to raise children when one is in a homosexual relationship. This
essay will therefore look at the debates surrounding homosexuality and parenthood while
exploring the legalisation of same sex marriages from both a factual and personal opinion
basis.
In Judith Butler’s Is kinship always already heterosexual? A pertinent question is raised as to
the debate surrounding same sex marriages. This question is; what forms of relationship
ought to be legitimised be the state?1 It seems that this is an ideal that is relevant for those
who are on both sides of the debate.
Butler takes an extensive look at the theories against same sex marriages and issues of
adoption from the viewpoint of Sylviane Agacinski. Agacinski is a French philosopher who
follows the psychoanalytical teachings of what is known as Lacanian.
Agacinski is opposed to same sex marriages for many reasons, one of which is that she
believes that, “...gay parenting is both unnatural and a threat to culture in the sense that sexual
difference...is...irrefutably biological [and] gains its significance in the cultural sphere as the
foundation of life in procreation.”2 This notion of foundation refers to the idea that life can
1
Butler, Judith. "Is kinship always already heterosexual?" Differences: A journal of feminist cultural studies 13.1
(2002): 16.
2
Ibid. 29.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
only begin and therefore should only be allowed when there are both masculine and feminine
parties involved simultaneously.3
The overall premise of Agacinski’s concern with same sex couples raising children is based
on an opinion that stems from what is deemed culturally acceptable. It is her opinion that
same sex couples are going against the symbolic order when they are allowed to form
families.4 Seeing as culture dictates that only a man and a woman can have children as it is
biologically viable and culturally sound, Agacinski views any other form of child rearing as
going against the symbolic order. Symbolic order is said to “consist of a set of rules that order
and support our sense of reality and cultural intelligibility.” 5 It seems that this is just another
way of stating that children raised by same sex couples would be far more likely to suffer
psychological issues that would skew their perception of reality disallowing them to be aware
of what is natural in a cultural setting.
She further goes on to suggest that homosexual parenting is an act of violence, something that
is similar to what Patterson states the courts suggest. It is Agacinski’s assertion that children
of homosexual parents will be thrust into a violent upbringing. She states that the practice of
raising children in a same sex parental environment “not only departs from nature and from
culture, but centres on the dangerous and artificial fabrication of the human.”6
In Andrew Sullivan’s edited works, Same-sex marriage: pro & con a reader, Sullivan
showcases debates for and against same sex marriages on the basis of issues pertaining to
religion and parenthood. It is stated that many people are opposed to the legalisation of
marriages on the premise that with same sex marriages comes the ability to grant homosexual
couples the ability to adopt children, a notion that is deemed by some harmful to the human
3
Butler, Judith. "Is kinship always already heterosexual?" Differences: A journal of feminist cultural studies 13.1
(2002): 29.
4
Ibid. 29.
5
Ibid. 29.
6
Ibid. 29.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
rights of children. However, it is noted that there seems to be no exact differences between
children raised in stable homosexual homes and those raised in stable heterosexual homes.7
Maggie Gallagher is against the legalisation of same sex marriages as she views it as a sacred
bond between a woman and a man. This is shown in Gallagher’s piece entitled; What
marriage is for. She is clear in stating that the legalisation of same sex marriages is somewhat
of a selfish act in which it accommodates to the demands of a few yet “it would require
society at large to gut marriage of its central presumptions about family.”8
Gallagher states, and what seems to be a premise for her argument, that,
“the debate over same sex marriage...is not some sidelined discussion. It is the marriage debate...If we
cannot explain why unisex marriage is...a disaster; we have lost the marriage ideal.”9
There are many questions raised by Gallagher that are pertinent to both her argument against
same sex marriages and the issues pertaining to the rights of children. Some of these
questions are; Do children need mothers and fathers, or will any sort of family do? When the
sexual desires of adults clash with the interests of children, which carries more weight,
socially and legally?10 It is in her opinion that by answering these questions, one would alter
the marriage institution as a whole. This is a notion that is based off her assumption that
marriage serves as an “institution for bridging the male-female divide so that children have
loving, committed mothers and fathers.”11
Gallagher also states that legalising same sex marriages would be an injustice to the rights of
children. Her stand against adoption by homosexual couples is clear when she shows obvious
disgust in the prospect of adoption becoming legal for same sex couples when stating that
7
Gallagher, Maggie. "What Marriage is For." Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. A Reader. Ed. Andrew Sullivan.
New York: Vintage Books, 2004. 239.
8
Ibid. 269.
9
Ibid.269.
10
Ibid. 264-265.
11
Ibid. 265.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
“motherless and fatherless families would be deemed just fine.”12 She also makes it widely
known that by legalising same sex marriages and allowing for adoption to ensue, it would
embed in the law that we as a society are more concerned with the desires of adults than with
the wellbeing of children by not allowing them the ‘privilege’ of having both a mother and a
father.13
It is asserted by Gallagher that children, who come from homosexual households, will not be
able to uphold stable marriages of their own when they are older. This is because apparently
as a society, we suggest that being raised by heterosexual parents allows for children to
“aspire to [grow into] the kind of men and women who can [maintain] successful
marriages.”14
A final note from Gallagher on this issue is relative to the notion of children in a societal
context. She says that,
“the marriage idea is that children need mothers and fathers, that societies need babies, and that adults have
an objection to shape their sexual behaviour so as to give their children stable families in which to grow
up.”15
This is an idea that further accentuates her view against the legalisation of same sex
marriages and the eventual legalisation of adoption. This is apparent as Gallagher is simply
saying that same sex marriages contrast this opinion as children raised with homosexual
parents will not be subjected to safe and stable living conditions.
Charlotte Patterson on the other hand advocates for the legalisation of same sex marriages
with the premise of parenthood as a basis for her discussion. Her section in the book is
12
Gallagher, Maggie. "What Marriage is For." Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. A Reader. Ed. Andrew Sullivan.
New York: Vintage Books, 2004. 269.
13
Ibid. 269.
14
Ibid. 266.
15
Ibid. 266.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
entitled; Children of lesbian and gay parents: Summary of research findings. Patterson
discusses the concerns that the courts have with homosexual couples raising children and
then presents her own findings that contrast and nullify those put forward by the courts.
There is a common assertion put forth by the courts that when it comes to “both judicial
decision-making in custody litigation and public policies governing foster care and
adoption”16, it is believed that homosexual couples are not fit to be parental figures. It is also
assumed by the courts that homosexuals are mentally ill in which lesbian women are deemed
less maternal than heterosexual mothers. It is also suggested that homosexual relationships
are somewhat selfish in the sense that “lesbians and gay men’s relationships with sexual
partners leave little time for ongoing parent-child interactions.”17 It is also asserted by
Patterson that these beliefs are yet to be validated by any past or current research.
Patterson breaks her discussion on the courts into three parts bringing forth the main concerns
the courts have with homosexual couples raising children. The first concern stems from the
idea of creating an identity for one’s self. It is stated that the “development of sexual identity
will be impaired among children of lesbian or gay parents”18 An example given, is suggestive
of the notion that being raised by homosexual parents increases your chances of having a
somewhat warped view of your own gendered identity and an overall opinion of the
stereotypical behaviour of genders. In short, it is asserted by the courts that being raised by
homosexual parents would result in a child becoming homosexual themselves.
The second concern put forth by the courts relates to psychological problems. It is stated that
children of same sex marriages,
16
Patterson, Charlotte. "Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents: Summary of Research Findings." Same-Sex Marriage:
Pro and Con. A Reader. Ed. Andrew Sullivan. New York: Vintage Books, 2004. 240.
17
Ibid. 240.
18
Ibid. 241.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
“will be more vulnerable to mental breakdowns, will exhibit more adjustment difficulties and behaviour
problems, and will be less psychologically healthy than children growing up in homes with heterosexual
parents.”19
The third concern is split into two parts. The first is suggestive that children from same sex
marriages will be more likely to have trouble when it comes to creating future social
relationships. This notion means that “children living with lesbian mothers may be
stigmatised, teased, or otherwise traumatized by peers.”20 The second part to this concern
stems from issues pertaining to sexual assault. It is said that children living in households
with homosexual parents are more likely to be sexually assaulted by “the parent or by the
parent’s friends or acquaintances”21 as opposed to those in a heterosexual family setting.
In Patterson’s own research exploring these issues, she breaks sexual identity into three parts:
gender identity, which refers to one’s self-identification as a male or female; gender-role
behaviour, refers to activities or occupations that are regarded by society as masculine,
feminine or both; and sexual orientation which relates to a person’s choice in sexual
partners.22
In relation to gender identity, children aged between 5 and 14 were interviewed and results
showed that developments within households with lesbian mothers was normal to the point
that they were no different to those from heterosexual families. It was concluded that there
was no significant evidence that children raised by lesbian mothers have difficulty creating
their own gendered identities, a notion that also translates to children raised by gay fathers.
Gender-role behaviour studies found that children of homosexual parents were just the same
as those of heterosexual parents. This was found to be the case in relation to toys they would
19
Patterson, Charlotte. "Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents: Summary of Research Findings." Same-Sex Marriage:
Pro and Con. A Reader. Ed. Andrew Sullivan. New York: Vintage Books, 2004. 241.
20
Ibid.241.
21
Ibid. 241.
22
Ibid. 241.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
play with, activities they enjoyed and occupations they wished to pursue. 23 Children who had
lesbian mothers were found to be more aware of their psychological femininity than those
who had heterosexual mothers24, a notion that counteracted the popular belief that
homosexual women lack the ability to be feminine in both demeanour and eventual influence
on their children. Children that stemmed from homosexual upbringings were also found to be
less gender biased when it came to activities than those from heterosexual families. This
therefore meant that both homosexual and heterosexual parents had children that fell within
the normal limits of sex role behaviour.25
The final discovery in relation to sexual identity found that children of homosexual parents
largely described themselves as heterosexual in nature.26 This is to say that children of
homosexual parents were no more likely to be homosexual than those who are from
heterosexual households. A notion that disproves the aforementioned court assumption that
being raised by homosexual parents results in a child becoming homosexual themselves.
Patterson’s research is useful in determining that the queries the courts have in relation to
homosexual parenthood are in fact not valid. There is a large assumption that children who
come from same sex households are more likely to have a diminished childhood in which
depression and social alienation would surely ensue. This is a concept that Patterson
disproves with her case study on children with same sex parents as results show that children
from these upbringings are just as normal as those raised in heterosexual households. A
concept that acts as an advocacy for allowing same sex couples the right to raise children and
create their own families.
23
Patterson, Charlotte. "Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents: Summary of Research Findings." Same-Sex Marriage:
Pro and Con. A Reader. Ed. Andrew Sullivan. New York: Vintage Books, 2004. 237. 242.
24
Ibid.243.
25
Ibid. 243.
26
Ibid. 243.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
In Michael Mello’s Legalising gay marriage, Mello briefly refers to issues of child raising in
same sex relationships. There is a section that is pertinent to the argument of same sex
marriages and in allot of ways, sums up the argument for same sex marriages and the rights
of homosexual couples to raise children. While it is said that opposite sex households are
better for raising children, there is an argument made by the Goodridge court (Vermont,
USA) that acts as a rebuttal to this claim. The argument and summary of the case for same
sex marriage in reference to parenthood is as follows:
“[one must note that] the government, readily concedes that people in same-sex couples may be
‘excellent’ parents. Gay and lesbian couples have children for the same reasons others do – to love
them, to care for them, to nurture them. But the task for same sex couples is made infinitely harder by
their status as outliers to the marriage laws...The marriage ban is what harms the children of same sex
parents. Striking down the ban would help children.”27
There are so many concerns surrounding the raising of children and the impact that
homosexual parents will have on their children’s identities as they grow. However in my
opinion it is not the parents who are doing wrong by their children but society. If we are
constantly telling children that the lifestyle they are living and the homes they are being
brought up in is a moral sin, then we are doing them more harm than good as we are stunting
their abilities to develop and be accepting of who their families are. How can we expect
children to be accepting of their families when we as a society aren’t giving them the ability
to do so? Maybe if homosexual relationships were recognised as a normal partnership, there
would not be so many arguments against the well being of children. It is the quality of a
person who makes a good parent, not the genitalia they may possess. It seems to also be a
case of nature vs. nurture when it comes to raising children. There are plenty of heterosexual
people who are unfit to be parents, yet there is no legal roadblock preventing them from
27
Mello, Michael. Legalizing Gay Marriage. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2004. 9.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
conceiving. How is this anymore moral than the arguments against adoption by homosexual
couples? People need to remove themselves from the 1950s style of thinking and realise that
we are not a perfect society and the stereotypical ‘nuclear family’ that once existed is no
longer a domestic reality.
GEND208: GOVERNING BODIES
Research Essay
1370043
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Gallagher, Maggie. "What Marriage is For." Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. A
Reader. Ed. Andrew Sullivan. New York: Vintage Books, 2004. 264-69.
2. Mello, Michael. Legalizing Gay Marriage. Philadelphia: Temple University Press,
2004. 9.
3. Patterson, Charlotte. "Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents: Summary of Research
Findings." Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con. A Reader. Ed. Andrew Sullivan. New
York: Vintage Books, 2004. 237-43.
4. Butler, Judith. "Is kinship always already heterosexual?" Differences: A journal of
feminist cultural studies 13.1 (2002): 16-29.