Why the Disagreement Over the Biblical Witness on Homosexual Practice?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Why the Disagreement Over the Biblical Witness on Homosexual Practice? WHY THE DISAGREEMENT OVER THE BIBLICAL WITNESS ON HOMOSEXUAL PRACTICE? A Response to Myers and Scanzoni, What God Has Joined Together? ROBERT A. J. GAGNON Why is the debate in the church about homosexual practice so difficult to talk about, to do scholarship about, and, for some, to decide about? Why have we reached a seeming impasse? Although the answer to how the church might resolve these difficulties is, practically speaking, hard to discern, the why question is relatively easy to figure out. It boils down to this: Christians come at the issue from different angles. What it does not boil down to is this: the biblical witness and its hermeneutical (i.e. interpretive) application are ambiguous. The bulk of this article will be devoted to explaining this latter point; namely, why there really are no substantive exegetical and hermeneutical arguments for claiming that Scripture does not give us a decisive witness against homosexual practice per se. To make this point, we will examine the attempt to circumvent the biblical witness in the 2005 book by David G. Myers and Letha Dawson Scanzoni, What God Has Joined Together? A Christian Case for Gay Marriage.1 Before we do that, however, we will explore how proponents and opponents of homosexual unions have different hermeneutical “graduated scales,” or ranked interests, for their views. I. Inverted Hermeneutical Scales2 Christians find it difficult to resolve their disagreements about homosexual practice because they have different starting points and so come at the issue from different angles. Essentially, the anti-“homosex,”3 pro-complementarity, or pro-structuralist side of the homosexuality debate in the church is best served when it formulates the following arguments, in this order of significance: 1 Published by HarperSanFrancisco (HarperCollins). 2 I am unaware of any other scholar who has constructed the “graduated scale hermeneutic” that I put forward here. Of course, deep-structural differences between anti-homosex and pro-homosex camps have been noted before, but just not in this way. 3 It is not easy getting the right nomenclature down to define the different camps in the homosexuality issue. I often use the term homosex as convenient shorthand for homosexual practice (i.e. as a noun) or, more particularly, for that which pertains to homosexual practice (i.e. as an adjective). The term also rightly focuses the debate on behavior rather than on acceptance or rejection of persons. It is so much easier to refer to a pro-homosex position/person and an anti-homosex position/person than to have to spell out every time “a position that accepts committed homosexual unions” and “a position that is averse to homosexual 19 1. Scripture: Scripture shows consistent, strong, absolute, and countercultural opposition to homosexual practice. It is, in short, a core value in scriptural sexual ethics. The scriptural witness against homosexual practice is inclusive of caring homosexual unions and forms of homosexual practice involving some degree of congenital causation. The closest analogues to the Bible’s opposition to homosexual practice are the Bible’s opposition to adult incest and the New Testament’s opposition to polygamy; in other words, forms of behavior that society today still proscribes. A similar argument may be made from church tradition (church fathers on). 2. Philosophic reason (a nature argument): Transparent observation of the complementary features of man and woman in the material order of nature make evident that homosexual unions are structurally incongruous (cf. the nature argument in Rom 1:24-27). A same-sex union does not pair sexual counterparts or “other halves.” Biologically related impulses are less reliable indicators of what is natural than the compatible structures of maleness and femaleness. This too is the view of Scripture. 3. Scientific reason: Homosexual behavior is characterized by higher rates of problems as regards sexually transmitted disease, depression and suicidality, high numbers of sex partners over the course of life, and short- term sexual unions. These problems, which occur at markedly different rates for homosexual males and homosexual females, are attributable, at least in significant part, to biological differences between men and women and the absence of a moderating, other-sex influence in homosexual practice per se.” Some ‘pro-homosex’ advocates express offense at the term but this seems to be due, in part, to the way in which it defines the debate as a debate about being for or against practices rather than for or against persons. The terms pro-homosexual and antihomosexual unfairly claim the high ground for proponents of homosexual practice by suggesting that they alone are about the business of loving homosexual persons. In fact, I would argue that those who oppose homosexual practice with a view to reclaiming lives for the kingdom of God are the ones that truly love persons who experience same-sex attractions. Whereas homosexual can be construed as a reference to homosexual behavior or homosexual persons, ‘homosex’ can only be interpreted with reference to homosexual acts. It is also important to note that the term homosex did not originate with me but rather with proponents of homosexual practice (for web links see the insert “Why use the word ‘homosex’?” on my homepage at http://www.robgagnon.net/ ). I don’t like the nomenclature traditional and progressive because (1) the terms do not specify what people are allegedly traditional or progressive about, (2) I don’t hold the position that I do merely because it is traditional (scriptural would be more accurate) and (3) I don’t wish to concede the point that affirming homosexual practice is in any sense an act of progress. I also don’t use the terms non-affirming and affirming because (1) like traditional and progressive they do not specify the object of one’s disposition, (2) non-affirming as a term with largely negative connotations does not adequately describe a position that aims at affirming the true sexual self created by God and re-created in Jesus Christ, and (3) I have no wish to concede the point that proponents of committed homosexual unions are affirming in the truest sense, any more than I would wish to label the Corinthian position toward the incestuous man in 1 Cor 5 as affirming. 20 relations.4 Moreover, science has failed to show that homosexuality is an inevitable consequence of birth or in all respects culturally immutable. 4. Experience: Personal encounters with, or at least awareness of, individuals whom God appears to have ‘healed’ of same-sex attractions give hope for transformation. At the same time, however, it is unscriptural to define transformation as requiring the eradication of all unwanted impulses. Jesus’ call to discipleship as a death to self is a call to self-denial in the midst of contrary impulses. The pro-‘homosex,’ pro-affect,5 or anti-structuralist side, for its part, formulates the following arguments, in this order of significance: 1. Experience: Personal encounters with, or at least awareness of, well- adjusted homosexual persons, who appear unable to change their sexual orientation and are in a caring homosexual relationship, provide persuasive evidence for the acceptability of homosexual relations. 2. Scientific reason: Science has shown that a homosexual orientation is often significantly influenced by congenital factors and very resistant to change. At least some of the problems associated with homosexual practice are attributable to the lack of societal supports for committed homosexual unions. Moreover, harm is not inherent. 3. Philosophic reason: The quality of affective bonds in a homosexual union trumps any formal/structural requirements.6 Moreover, the biologically related character of homosexual orientation makes homosexual expression “natural.” 4. Scripture: While a small number of passages in Scripture appear to oppose homosexual practice, these passages do not oppose caring homosexual relationships between homosexually oriented persons. Moreover, Scripture’s focus on the command to love and its special concern for the oppressed leave room for support of loving homosexual unions. Changes in the Bible’s views on slavery, women’s roles, and divorce/remarriage give hermeneutical license for developing a new perspective on homosexual practice. 4 No consensual sexual relationship, including incestuous and polyamorous unions, inherently leads to scientifically measurable harm in all circumstances to all participants. It is enough to establish disproportionately high rates. 5 “Affect” with the stress on the first syllable. By “pro-affect” I mean an emphasis on the subjective, emotional character of a bond as opposed to an emphasis on objective, structural aspects of embodied existence such as the obvious holistic complementarity of the two sexes. 6 I am indebted to Prof. Clayton Croy for the nomenclature of “formal” expectations of marriage (gender, relatedness, number, age, species), as opposed to “qualitative” expectations (love, faithfulness, mutual support). My own usual terms are “structural” and “affective” respectively. 21 Some will rightly see in the four-part structures above a sort of modified Wesleyan Quadrilateral. The differences are twofold: (1) I have lumped tradition in with Scripture as a secondary element; and (2) I have split the category of reason into “philosophic reason” and “scientific reason.” These modifications more accurately reflect the distinct types of arguments used in the debates about homosexual
Recommended publications
  • Alexander the Great and Hephaestion
    2019-3337-AJHIS-HIS 1 Alexander the Great and Hephaestion: 2 Censorship and Bisexual Erasure in Post-Macedonian 3 Society 4 5 6 Same-sex relations were common in ancient Greece and having both male and female 7 physical relationships was a cultural norm. However, Alexander the Great is almost 8 always portrayed in modern depictions as heterosexual, and the disappearance of his 9 life-partner Hephaestion is all but complete in ancient literature. Five full primary 10 source biographies of Alexander have survived from antiquity, making it possible to 11 observe the way scholars, popular writers and filmmakers from the Victorian era 12 forward have interpreted this evidence. This research borrows an approach from 13 gender studies, using the phenomenon of bisexual erasure to contribute a new 14 understanding for missing information regarding the relationship between Alexander 15 and his life-partner Hephaestion. In Greek and Macedonian society, pederasty was the 16 norm, and boys and men did not have relations with others of the same age because 17 there was almost always a financial and power difference. Hephaestion was taller and 18 more handsome than Alexander, so it might have appeared that he held the power in 19 their relationship. The hypothesis put forward here suggests that writers have erased 20 the sexual partnership between Alexander and Hephaestion because their relationship 21 did not fit the norm of acceptable pederasty as practiced in Greek and Macedonian 22 culture or was no longer socially acceptable in the Roman contexts of the ancient 23 historians. Ancient biographers may have conducted censorship to conceal any 24 implication of femininity or submissiveness in this relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This PDF File
    Psychology, Community & Health pch.psychopen.eu | 2182-438X Conference Abstracts Oral Presentations 1st International Conference on LGBT Psychology and Related Fields – Coming out for LGBT Psychology in the current international scenario (Lisbon, Portugal, 20-22 June 2013) Psychology, Community & Health, 2013, Vol. 2(2), 58±197, doi:10.5964/pch.v2i2.70 Published: 2013-6-10. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Table of Contents Abstracts Overview.................................................................................................................................................................................. 58 Abstracts.................................................................................................................................................................................................. 69 Author Index............................................................................................................................................................................................ 195 Abstracts Overview A Cross-Cultural Study of the Positive and Negative Aspects of Being LGB.......................................................................................... 69 Jenna Marie Strizzi, Inmaculada Fernandez Agis, Raquel Alarcón Rodríguez, Tesifon Parrón Carreño
    [Show full text]
  • LGBT Identity and Crime
    LGBT Identity and Crime LGBT Identity and Crime* JORDAN BLAIR WOODS** Abstract Recent studies report that LGBT adults and youth dispropor- tionately face hardships that are risk factors for criminal offending and victimization. Some of these factors include higher rates of poverty, over- representation in the youth homeless population, and overrepresentation in the foster care system. Despite these risk factors, there is a lack of study and available data on LGBT people who come into contact with the crim- inal justice system as offenders or as victims. Through an original intellectual history of the treatment of LGBT identity and crime, this Article provides insight into how this problem in LGBT criminal justice developed and examines directions to move beyond it. The history shows that until the mid-1970s, the criminalization of homosexuality left little room to think of LGBT people in the criminal justice system as anything other than deviant sexual offenders. The trend to decriminalize sodomy in the mid-1970s opened a narrow space for schol- ars, advocates, and policymakers to use antidiscrimination principles to redefine LGBT people in the criminal justice system as innocent and non- deviant hate crime victims, as opposed to deviant sexual offenders. Although this paradigm shift has contributed to some important gains for LGBT people, this Article argues that it cannot be celebrated as * Originally published in the California Law Review. ** Assistant Professor of Law, University of Arkansas School of Law, Fayetteville. I am thankful for the helpful suggestions from Samuel Bray, Devon Carbado, Maureen Carroll, Steve Clowney, Beth Colgan, Sharon Dolovich, Will Foster, Brian R.
    [Show full text]
  • Everything You Wanted to Know About Transgender Studies but Were Afraid to Ask Clara Reeve
    humanities Article “More and More Fond of Reading”: Everything You Wanted to Know about Transgender Studies but Were Afraid to Ask Clara Reeve Desmond Huthwaite Faculty of English, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TN, UK; [email protected] Abstract: Clara Reeve’s (1729–1807) Gothic novel The Old English Baron is a node for contemplating two discursive exclusions. The novel, due to its own ambiguous status as a gendered “body”, has proven a difficult text for discourse on the Female Gothic to recognise. Subjected to a temperamental dialectic of reclamation and disavowal, The Old English Baron can be made to speak to the (often) subordinate position of Transgender Studies within the field of Queer Studies, another relationship predicated on the partial exclusion of undesirable elements. I treat the unlikely transness of Reeve’s body of text as an invitation to attempt a trans reading of the bodies within the text. Parallel to this, I de- velop an attachment genealogy of Queer and Transgender Studies that reconsiders essentialism—the kind both practiced by Female Gothic studies and also central to the logic of Reeve’s plot—as a fantasy that helps us distinguish where a trans reading can depart from a queer one, suggesting that the latter is methodologically limited by its own bad feelings towards the former. Keywords: Clara Reeve; Female Gothic; trans; queer; gender; embodiment The “literary offspring of the Castle of Otranto” had, and continues to have, something Citation: Huthwaite, Desmond. 2021. of a difficult birth.1 In its first year of life, the text was christened twice (titled The Champion “More and More Fond of Reading”: of Virtue in 1777, then Old English Baron in a revised 1778 edition); described alternately Everything You Wanted to Know as a transcription, a translation, a history, a romance, and (most enduringly) a “Gothic about Transgender Studies but Were story”; attributed to “the editor of the PHOENIX” and then to Clara Reeve; and subjected Afraid to Ask Clara Reeve.
    [Show full text]
  • Pedagogy and Homosexuality in Ancient Greece 1. Pederasty and Pedagogy 2. the Myth of the Three Sexes (Halperin 19) 3. Does Homo
    Pedagogy and Homosexuality in Ancient Greece 1. Pederasty and Pedagogy It is clear from a variety of sources that from the Archaic period onwards, pederasty (or adult male to male child love/sex) was part of the gymnasia and hence the educational system. Usually this took the form of intercrural sex, foreplay, and gift- giving to boys. 2. The myth of the Three Sexes (Halperin 19) According to Aristophanes [in Plato's Symposium], human beings were originally round, eight-limbed creatures, with two faces and two sets of genitals--both front and back--and three sexes (male, female, and androgyne). These ancestors of ours were powerful and ambitious; in order to put them in their place, Zeus had them cut in two, their skin stretched over the exposed flesh and tied at the navel, and their heads rotated so as to keep that physical reminder of their daring and its consequences constantly before their eyes. The severed halves of each former individual, once reunited, clung to one another so desperately and concerned themselves so little with their survival as separate entities that they began to perish for lack of sustenance; those who outlived their mates sought out persons belonging to the same sex as their lost complements and repeated their embraces in a foredoomed attempt to recover their original unity. Zeus at length took pity on them, moved their genitals to the side their bodies now faced, and invented sexual intercourse, so that the bereaved creatures might at least put a temporary terminus to their longing and devote their attention to other, more important (if less pressing) matters.
    [Show full text]
  • Stein CV2018
    ARLENE J. STEIN Department of Sociology, Rutgers University 045 Davison Hall, Douglass Campus, New Brunswick, NJ 08901 [email protected] EDUCATION 1993 Ph.D., 1985 M.A., Sociology, University of California, Berkeley 1980 B.A. History, Amherst College APPOINTMENTS Professor, Sociology, Rutgers University, 2011- Associate Professor, Sociology, Rutgers University, 2001-11 Graduate Faculty, Women’s and Gender Studies, Rutgers University, 2001- Associate Professor, Sociology, University of Oregon, September 2000-June 2001 Assistant Professor, Sociology, University of Oregon, September 1994-June 2000 Lecturer, Sociology, University of Essex (UK), January 1993-July 1994 RESEARCH INTERESTS Gender, sexuality, intimacy, LGBT studies, political culture, subjectivities, social movements, collective memory, public sociology, ethnography, narrative analysis. PUBLICATIONS Books Unbound: Transgender Men and the Remaking of Identity, Pantheon, 2018. Gender, Sexuality, and Intimacy: A Contexts Reader (Jodi O’Brien, co-editor), Sage, 2017. Going Public: A Guide for Social Scientists (with Jessie Daniels), University of Chicago Press, 2017. Reluctant Witnesses: Survivors, Their Children, and the Rise of Holocaust Consciousness, Oxford University Press, 2014. PROSE Award in Sociology and Social Work, Honorable Mention. Shameless: Sexual Dissidence in American Culture, New York University Press, 2006. A. Stein - 2 January 19, 2018 Sexuality and Gender (Christine Williams, co-editor), Blackwell, 2002. The Stranger Next Door: The Story of a Small Community’s Battle Over Sex, Faith, and Civil Rights, Beacon Press, 2001. Ruth Benedict Award, American Anthropological Association. Honor Award, American Library Association. Gustavus Myers Human Rights Book Award, Honorable Mention. Sex and Sensibility: Stories of a Lesbian Generation, University of California Press, 1997. Excerpted in 10 volumes in US, UK, Germany.
    [Show full text]
  • Nf28 10Reviews 0
    THE TROUBLE WITH NORMAL Michael Wyeld Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal: An Argument About Homosexuality, Picador. London 1995, £14.99 hardback. The press have begun to use Andrew Sullivan as a touchstone and soundbite whenever the need to discuss 'the homosexual question' arises. He has become so recognisable as a celebrity, particularly in the United States, that he has joined the likes of Miles Davis, John Wayne, Sonic Youth and Leonard Bernstein in posing for advertisements for clothing giant The Gap. The press release for his book, written by Sullivan's press agent at Hobsbawm l\1acaula) Communications Limited, introduces the themes evident in press reviews. which creates a series of questions in its own way. For example, do the pres� actually read the books they review? The implication in press release is that Sullivan, the editor of the New Republic, is now a welcome spokesmodel for homosexuals in Europe and America. Andrew Sullivan . has written the most important book about homosexuality ever to be published: Virtually Normal, a crystal-clear exploration of the arguments about homosexuality from the Catholil Church to today's liberal and conservative politics. In this era of controversy about homosexuality, from gay marriage to gay, in the military, Andrew Sullivan's Virtually Normal will set off an unprecedented debate. In the corporate publicity business anything can be made to seem credible and interesting, so it is no surprise that after actually reading Sullivan's book, it i� nothing like 'the most important book about homosexuality ever to be published.' Nor does the book discuss 'the controversy about homosexuality.
    [Show full text]
  • "Gay Community, Gay Identity and the Translated Text"
    Article "Gay Community, Gay Identity and the Translated Text" Keith Harvey TTR : traduction, terminologie, rédaction, vol. 13, n° 1, 2000, p. 137-165. Pour citer cet article, utiliser l'information suivante : URI: http://id.erudit.org/iderudit/037397ar DOI: 10.7202/037397ar Note : les règles d'écriture des références bibliographiques peuvent varier selon les différents domaines du savoir. Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter à l'URI https://apropos.erudit.org/fr/usagers/politique-dutilisation/ Érudit est un consortium interuniversitaire sans but lucratif composé de l'Université de Montréal, l'Université Laval et l'Université du Québec à Montréal. Il a pour mission la promotion et la valorisation de la recherche. Érudit offre des services d'édition numérique de documents scientifiques depuis 1998. Pour communiquer avec les responsables d'Érudit : [email protected] Document téléchargé le 12 février 2017 03:07 Gay Community, Gay Identity and the Translated Text Keith Harvey [...] until we organise ourselves block by neighbourhood by city by state into a united visible community that fights back, we're doomed. (Larry Kramer (1985) The Normal Heart: Act Two, Scene Thirteen, London, Methuen, p. 77) [...] le traducteur est cet individu qui représente, dans sa pulsion de traduire, toute une communauté dans son rapport avec une autre communauté et ses œuvres. (Antoine Berman (1984) L'Épreuve de Vétranger: culture et traduction dans l'Allemagne romantique, Paris, Gallimard, p. 283) In this article1, I wish to argue that the translation of texts whose subject matter is homosexual experience and struggle raises complex issues with regard to the notions of "gay community" and "gay identity".
    [Show full text]
  • LGBTQ History Cards
    LGBTQ History Cards Antinous, a 19-year-old man who Francis Bacon, a noted gay man was the Roman Emperor Hadrian’s who coined the term “masculine favorite lover, mysteriously dies love,” publishes “The Advancement in the Roman province of Egypt. of Learning—an argument for Richard Cornish of the Virginia After finding out about Antinous’s empirical research and against Colony is tried and hanged for death, Hadrian creates a cult that superstition.” This deductive sodomy. gave Antinous the status of a god system for empirical research and built several sculptures of him earned him the title “the Father of throughout the Roman Empire. Modern Science.” The first known conviction for Thomas Cannon wrote what may be lesbian activity in North America Thomas Jefferson revises Virginia the earliest published defense of occurs in March when Sarah law to make sodomy (committed homosexuality in English, “Ancient White Norman is charged with by men or women) punishable by and Modern Pederasty Investigated “lewd behavior” with Mary mutilation rather than death. Vincent Hammon in Plymouth, and Exemplify’d.” Massachusetts. We’wha, a Zuni Native American from New Mexico, is received by The Well of Loneliness, by U.S. President Grover Cleveland Henry Gerber forms the Society for Radclyffe Hall, is published as a “Zuni Princess.” They are Human Rights, the first gay group in the US. This sparks great an accomplished weaver, potter, in the United States, but the group legal controversy and brings the and the most famous Ihamana, a is quickly shut down. topic of homosexuality to public traditional Zuni gender role, now conversation.
    [Show full text]
  • Literary Modernism, Queer Theory, and the Trans Feminine Allegory
    UC Irvine FlashPoints Title The New Woman: Literary Modernism, Queer Theory, and the Trans Feminine Allegory Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/11z5g0mz ISBN 978081013 5550 Author Heaney, Emma Publication Date 2017-08-01 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California The New Woman The FlashPoints series is devoted to books that consider literature beyond strictly national and disciplinary frameworks, and that are distinguished both by their historical grounding and by their theoretical and conceptual strength. Our books engage theory without losing touch with history and work historically without falling into uncritical positivism. FlashPoints aims for a broad audience within the humanities and the social sciences concerned with moments of cultural emergence and transformation. In a Benjaminian mode, FlashPoints is interested in how liter- ature contributes to forming new constellations of culture and history and in how such formations function critically and politically in the present. Series titles are available online at http://escholarship.org/uc/fl ashpoints. series editors: Ali Behdad (Comparative Literature and English, UCLA), Edi- tor Emeritus; Judith Butler (Rhetoric and Comparative Literature, UC Berkeley), Editor Emerita; Michelle Clayton (Hispanic Studies and Comparative Literature, Brown University); Edward Dimendberg (Film and Media Studies, Visual Studies, and European Languages and Studies, UC Irvine), Founding Editor; Catherine Gallagher (English, UC Berkeley), Editor Emerita; Nouri Gana (Comparative Lit- erature and Near Eastern Languages and Cultures, UCLA); Susan Gillman (Lit- erature, UC Santa Cruz), Coordinator; Jody Greene (Literature, UC Santa Cruz); Richard Terdiman (Literature, UC Santa Cruz), Founding Editor A complete list of titles begins on p.
    [Show full text]
  • Perceived Homosexuals: Looking Gay Enough for Title VII Brian Soucek
    American University Law Review Volume 63 | Issue 3 Article 2 2014 Perceived Homosexuals: Looking Gay Enough for Title VII Brian Soucek Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Soucek, Brian. "Perceived Homosexuals: Looking Gay Enough for Title VII." American University Law Review 63, no.3 (2014): 715-788. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Perceived Homosexuals: Looking Gay Enough for Title VII Keywords Appearance discrimination, Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VII, Discrimination -- Law & legislation, Assimilation (Sociology) -- Social aspects, LGBT people -- United States -- Legal status, laws, etc., Gender stereotypes -- Psychological aspects, Human sexuality & law This article is available in American University Law Review: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr/vol63/iss3/2 SOUCEK.OFF.TO.WEBSITE (DO NOT DELETE) 4/2/2014 2:43 PM PERCEIVED HOMOSEXUALS: LOOKING GAY ENOUGH FOR TITLE VII BRIAN SOUCEK* Under the conventional view of Title VII, gay and lesbian workers can bring discrimination claims based on gender stereotyping but not sexual orientation. This Article analyzes 117 court cases on gender stereotyping in the workplace in order to show that the conventional view is wrong. In cases brought by “perceived homosexuals,” courts distinguish not between gender stereotyping and sexual orientation claims, but between two ways that violations of gender norms can be perceived: either as something literally seen or as something cognitively understood.
    [Show full text]
  • British Conservatism, Family Law and the Problem of Change
    PSA Annual Conference 2014, Midland Hotel, Manchester Conservatives and Conservatism Specialist Group Panel One: Constitutionalism, Rights and the Law in British Conservatism From ‘Pretended Family Relationship’ to ‘Ultimate Affirmation’: British Conservatism and the Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Relationships Andrew Gilbert Principal Lecturer in Law, Anglia Ruskin University PhD Candidate, Faculty of Laws, UCL The legal regulation of the family in a liberal state often gives rise to controversy. It is also an area where conservative commitments to tradition and institutions are tested in the face of (proposed) innovations in family law and policy. How to deal with non- heterosexuality has been a particular source of tension within the body of postwar Conservatism, laying bare the authoritarian and libertarian dispositions at war in its members. This paper will first sketch out the Conservative Party’s record on homosexual law reform since the 1980s, and then go on to consider arguments around the legal recognition of same-sex relationships in relevant political thought. This discussion will then inform the examination of the Civil Partnership Act 2004 and the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act. The article concludes by observing that, while there were some similarities in the Party’s approach to the two Bills, conservative arguments in favour of the legal recognition of same-sex relationships were more readily articulated in the civil partnership debates chiefly because it was seen as an evolutionary innovation and there was no existing institution which would be the subject of change. How Conservatives perceived notions of change in the legislation was indicative of whether the Bills would attract their support (and vice versa), signifying the limited utility of a classical conservative understanding of change as a practical theory for supporting major social developments.
    [Show full text]