UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones 5-2009 Quest for Quotidian: A National Survey of Non-Heterosexual Attitudes Toward Marriage Troy A. McGinnis University of Nevada, Las Vegas Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/thesesdissertations Part of the Community-Based Research Commons, Gender and Sexuality Commons, and the Philosophy Commons Repository Citation McGinnis, Troy A., "Quest for Quotidian: A National Survey of Non-Heterosexual Attitudes Toward Marriage" (2009). UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones. 1201. http://dx.doi.org/10.34917/2754289 This Dissertation is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Dissertation in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. This Dissertation has been accepted for inclusion in UNLV Theses, Dissertations, Professional Papers, and Capstones by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. QUEST FOR QUOTIDIAN: A NATIONAL SURVEY OF NON-HETEROSEXUAL ATTITUDES TOWARD MARRIAGE by Troy A. McGinnis Bachelor of Arts The University of Texas at Austin 1995 Master of Arts University of Nevada, Las Vegas 1999 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Sociology Department of Sociology College of Liberal Arts Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas May 2009 UMI Number: 3384004 Copyright 2009 by McGinnis, Troy A. INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI UMI Microform 3384004 Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Copyright 2009 by Troy A. McGinnis All Rights Reserved Dissertation Approval The Graduate College University of Nevada, Las Vegas April 14 .2009 The Dissertation prepared by Troy A. McGinnis Entitled QUEST FOR QUOTIDIAN; A NATIONAL SURVEY OF NON-HETEROSEXUAL ATTITUDES TOWARD MARRIAGE is approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology Examination Committee Chair Dean of the Graduate College Examination Committee Member Examination Committee Member Examination Committee Member Graduate College Faculty Representative 1017-52 11 ABSTRACT Quest for Quotidian: A National Survey of Non-Heterosexual Attitudes Toward Marriage by Troy A. McGinnis Dr. Andrea Fontana, Examination Committee Chair Professor of Sociology University of Nevada, Las Vegas Marriage equality remains a legal impossibility for same-sex couples in most states, and opponents are concerned that expansion of marriage to include gays and lesbians would radically redefine the institution. Findings from an online survey of lesbians, gays and bisexuals— a non-random sample of 466 adult men and women age 18 to 74 in 37 states— strongly suggest that many non-heterosexuals' attitudes reflect neither a radical departure from core definitions of marriage, nor a rejection of traditional "family values," but instead signal an assimilationist position favorable to traditional marriage norms rather than a liberationist position critical of the institution. To explain commitment to assimilation among gays, lesbians and bisexuals, a "Pro- Marriage Attitudes Scale" (PMAS) was developed from items currently used in various state surveys that measure values and attitudes indicating support or lack of support for more or less traditional marriage. Sequential regression on the PMAS yielded a model wherein the most powerful predictors of attitudes favorable to marriage were personal religious belief, a commitment to monogamy in practice, an expectation that marriage to a partner would improve quality of life, and a negative view of divorce (adjusted R2=37.5). Neither visibility, community participation, nor queer community integration appeared to influence scores on the PMAS. in Younger, less educated respondents tended to hold stronger pro-marriage attitudes. Assimilationist attitudes are more prevalent among homosexuals and men, while liberationist attitudes are more pronounced among bisexuals and women. Significant differences between bisexuals and individuals who are strictly "homosexual" emerged at all stages of analyses. In regression, "bisexual woman" predicted lower PMAS scores until education and political orientation were controlled in the final model. Results support the "conservative case" for same-sex marriage, which calls for assimilation of gays and lesbians into the US family system by extending the right to marry to same-sex couples. Findings suggest that assimilationist ideology already drives the movement toward marriage among gays and lesbians, and might be a latent function of the decades-long conservative promotion of traditional familism that idealizes marriage. IV TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT iii TABLE OF TABLES viii TABLE OF FIGURES ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS x CHAPTER ONE THE QUEST FOR QUOTIDIAN 1 The Distance from Queer to There 3 Visibility and Family Politics 4 A Test of the Conservative Case 6 Overview of the Study 8 The Quest for Quotidian Online Survey 9 Sampling and Recruitment 12 Measuring Attitudes Toward Marriage 15 Analyses 18 The Organization of this Book 18 Social Contexts 19 Descriptive Data: The Quest for Quotidian Sample 19 Assimilation or Liberation? Analysis of Attitudes Toward Marriage 20 CHAPTER TWO IDEOLOGICAL POSITIONS ON SAME-SEX MARRIAGE 21 Liberal Gay Politics as Resistance 24 Conservative Perspectives on Family Change 25 Fear of Assimilation 31 Pictures from a Normal Life 33 CHAPTER THREE THE LEGAL LANDSCAPE: SODOMY,PRIVACY, AND THE RIGHT TO MARRY 37 Privacy Protections for Non-heterosexuals 39 Political Backlash Against Expansion of Civil Rights of Gays and Lesbians 41 The "Homosexual Agenda": Panics, Parties and Professional Homophobes 42 The Radical Christian Threat: Discrimination or Death, Not Marriage 45 Marriage Rights and Family Rights: Federalism and Discrimination 47 CHAPTER FOUR PORTRAIT OF A QUEER PEOPLE 51 Quest for Quotidian: An American Sample 54 Gender: Bodies and Performance 57 v Gender and Sexuality: Desire, Identity and Behavior 60 Coming Out and Coming of Age 66 Visibility, Age and the Closet 68 Being Out: Perceptions of Openness 71 Being Out: Disclosure of Sexual Identity 73 Out to Friends and Family 75 Out at Work 77 Out in the Community 78 Patterns of Disclosure 78 CHAPTER FIVE LIFE ALONG THE QUOTIDIAN: FAMILY, FRIENDS AND COMMUNITY 81 Children of Marriage 81 Parents' Education 82 Growing up Christian—Or not 83 Current Religious Beliefs and Practices 85 Family Support 86 Coupling and Parenting 88 Education and Student Status 92 Friends and Social Networks 93 Community Involvement and Political Participation 97 Civic Involvement 100 Queer Community Integration 101 Politics and Party 102 CHAPTER SIX NOT-SO-QUEER ATTITUDES TOWARD MARRIAGE 107 The Social Relevance of Marriage 112 Marital Permanence and Durability 116 Different-Sex Relationships 116 Same-Sex Relationships 118 Attitude Measures 119 Marriage and the Welfare of Children 122 Non-Heterosexual Parents in the Sample 122 Children Benefit from Marriage 124 Decoupling Parenting from Marriage? 125 The Centrality of Monogamy to Marriage: Practice and Attitudes 126 Monogamy in Practice 128 Monogamy Among Lesbians and Gay Men 129 Attitudes about Monogamy and Marriage 132 Taking Marriage Seriously 134 Divorce as a Social Problem 136 How Strong is Marriage? 138 Elements of the Pro-Marriage Attitudes Scale 139 Performance and Reliability 140 Effects of Sexual Identity on the Pro-Marriage Attitudes Scale (PMAS) 140 Non-Heterosexuals and the "Normal" Life 142 vi CHAPTER SEVEN MAPPING THE QUOTIDIAN 144 The Strength of Marriage and Assimilationist Ideology 144 Dependent Variable: Pro-Marriage Attitude Scale (PMAS) 144 Influences of Identity 145 Regression Model 1: Analysis and Results 146 Lifestyles and Attitudes Toward Marriage: Community, Religiosity and Monogamy.... 149 Community Integration: Failure and Revelation 149 Strength of Personal Religious Belief 154 Commitment to Monogamy in Relationships 157 The "Tea Room" Revisited: Insights on Monogamy and Tradition 160 Regression Model 2: Analysis and Results 165 State of the Union: Marriage vs Divorce Culture 168 Expectations for Marriage 170 Commitment to Divorce Culture 172 Regression Model 3: Analysis and Results 175 Controls and Biases 177 Queer Social Networks, Christianity, and Politics 177 Social Class: Race, Education and Income 180 Real and Virtual Geography 180 Regression Model 4: Analysis and Results 180 CHAPTER EIGHT TOWARD A RED LETTER DAY 184 Assimilationist Ideology Among