'It's a double-edged thing': the paradox of civil partnership and why some couples are choosing not to have one

Alison Rolfe, Elizabeth Peel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Since their introduction in 2005, thousands of same-sex couples in the UK have had a civil partnership. However, many other couples have chosen not to have one. This qualitative study explores why some same-sex couples are choosing not to have a civil partnership. Seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 people (five couples and two individuals) who identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual, and analysed using discourse analysis. Participants' accounts were characterised by ambivalence about civil partnership, and three main paradoxes were identified: the 'good but not good enough' paradox, the 'unwanted prize' paradox and the 'legal rights v. social oppression paradox. A major source of ambivalence was support for rights but resistance to assimilation into dominant heteronormative cultural frameworks. Participants negotiated this ambivalence in a variety of ways, including considering how to have a civil partnership that is different from 'marriage', and adopting a pragmatic position. The analysis highlights the importance of social recognition and support for a range of relationship forms and identities, as well as for an ongoing critical debate about civil partnerships and same-sex marriage.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)317-335
Number of pages19
JournalFeminism and Psychology
Volume21
Issue number3
Early online date31 May 2011
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2011

Fingerprint

ambivalence
Marriage
Civil Rights
marriage
social recognition
oppression
assimilation
discourse analysis
Interviews
social support
pragmatics
Paradox
Sexual Minorities
interview
Ambivalence

Keywords

  • feminist critiques of marriage
  • same-sex marriage
  • lesbians
  • gay men
  • gay marriage
  • civil partnership

Cite this

@article{2b4c0afc3ec04ed5af8ceceba418e556,
title = "'It's a double-edged thing': the paradox of civil partnership and why some couples are choosing not to have one",
abstract = "Since their introduction in 2005, thousands of same-sex couples in the UK have had a civil partnership. However, many other couples have chosen not to have one. This qualitative study explores why some same-sex couples are choosing not to have a civil partnership. Seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 people (five couples and two individuals) who identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual, and analysed using discourse analysis. Participants' accounts were characterised by ambivalence about civil partnership, and three main paradoxes were identified: the 'good but not good enough' paradox, the 'unwanted prize' paradox and the 'legal rights v. social oppression paradox. A major source of ambivalence was support for rights but resistance to assimilation into dominant heteronormative cultural frameworks. Participants negotiated this ambivalence in a variety of ways, including considering how to have a civil partnership that is different from 'marriage', and adopting a pragmatic position. The analysis highlights the importance of social recognition and support for a range of relationship forms and identities, as well as for an ongoing critical debate about civil partnerships and same-sex marriage.",
keywords = "feminist critiques of marriage, same-sex marriage, lesbians, gay men, gay marriage, civil partnership",
author = "Alison Rolfe and Elizabeth Peel",
note = "Copyright 2011 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.",
year = "2011",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1177/0959353511408059",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "317--335",
journal = "Feminism and Psychology",
issn = "0959-3535",
publisher = "SAGE",
number = "3",

}

'It's a double-edged thing' : the paradox of civil partnership and why some couples are choosing not to have one. / Rolfe, Alison; Peel, Elizabeth.

In: Feminism and Psychology, Vol. 21, No. 3, 08.2011, p. 317-335.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - 'It's a double-edged thing'

T2 - the paradox of civil partnership and why some couples are choosing not to have one

AU - Rolfe, Alison

AU - Peel, Elizabeth

N1 - Copyright 2011 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2011/8

Y1 - 2011/8

N2 - Since their introduction in 2005, thousands of same-sex couples in the UK have had a civil partnership. However, many other couples have chosen not to have one. This qualitative study explores why some same-sex couples are choosing not to have a civil partnership. Seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 people (five couples and two individuals) who identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual, and analysed using discourse analysis. Participants' accounts were characterised by ambivalence about civil partnership, and three main paradoxes were identified: the 'good but not good enough' paradox, the 'unwanted prize' paradox and the 'legal rights v. social oppression paradox. A major source of ambivalence was support for rights but resistance to assimilation into dominant heteronormative cultural frameworks. Participants negotiated this ambivalence in a variety of ways, including considering how to have a civil partnership that is different from 'marriage', and adopting a pragmatic position. The analysis highlights the importance of social recognition and support for a range of relationship forms and identities, as well as for an ongoing critical debate about civil partnerships and same-sex marriage.

AB - Since their introduction in 2005, thousands of same-sex couples in the UK have had a civil partnership. However, many other couples have chosen not to have one. This qualitative study explores why some same-sex couples are choosing not to have a civil partnership. Seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 people (five couples and two individuals) who identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual, and analysed using discourse analysis. Participants' accounts were characterised by ambivalence about civil partnership, and three main paradoxes were identified: the 'good but not good enough' paradox, the 'unwanted prize' paradox and the 'legal rights v. social oppression paradox. A major source of ambivalence was support for rights but resistance to assimilation into dominant heteronormative cultural frameworks. Participants negotiated this ambivalence in a variety of ways, including considering how to have a civil partnership that is different from 'marriage', and adopting a pragmatic position. The analysis highlights the importance of social recognition and support for a range of relationship forms and identities, as well as for an ongoing critical debate about civil partnerships and same-sex marriage.

KW - feminist critiques of marriage

KW - same-sex marriage

KW - lesbians

KW - gay men

KW - gay marriage

KW - civil partnership

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79961178011&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://fap.sagepub.com/content/21/3/317

U2 - 10.1177/0959353511408059

DO - 10.1177/0959353511408059

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:79961178011

VL - 21

SP - 317

EP - 335

JO - Feminism and Psychology

JF - Feminism and Psychology

SN - 0959-3535

IS - 3

ER -