Against Nature: How Arguments about the Naturalness of Marriage Privilege Heterosexuality

This article examines the public debate over marriage law to investigate how arguments based on claims about what is natural privilege some relationships while stigmatizing others and justifying discriminatory policies toward sexual minorities. Articles about same‐sex marriage appearing in major new...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of social issues 2012-03, Vol.68 (1), p.46-62
Main Authors: Cole, Elizabeth R., Avery, Lanice R., Dodson, Catherine, Goodman, Kevin D.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Child welfare
Child Welfare Services
Ethics
Family Law
Heterosexuality
Homosexuality
Law
Legitimacy
Marriage
Minority Groups
Power
Privilege
Race
Racial inequality
Same Sex Marriage
Sexual orientation discrimination
Sexual Preferences
Sexuality
Social conditions & trends
Social inequality
Social policy
Social status
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This article examines the public debate over marriage law to investigate how arguments based on claims about what is natural privilege some relationships while stigmatizing others and justifying discriminatory policies toward sexual minorities. Articles about same‐sex marriage appearing in major newspapers were content‐coded according to absence or presence of four dimensions of naturalness: change over time, norms, procreation, and welfare of children. Arguments invoking change over time were most frequent (39%), and procreation appeared least (10%). The use of arguments based on the moral status of marriage was associated with the use of each of the four dimensions based on naturalness. Mentions of race, including comparisons to racial struggles, appeared in 20% of the articles, making them just as common as child welfare. Results are discussed in terms of the power of the concept of naturalness to legitimize and maintain privilege, and the intersectionality of race and sexual orientation.
ISSN:0022-4537
1540-4560
DOI:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2012.01735.x