Discourses of marriage in same-sex marriage debates in the UK press 2011–2014

Abstract

KingdomThis paper interrogates media representations of same-sex marriage debates in the UK using a combination of corpus linguistics tools and close reading, and drawing on Queer Linguistics.Following related work by Baker (2004), Love and Baker (2015), and Bachmann (2011), we analyse a 1.3 million-word corpus of UK national newspaper texts compiled for the Discourses of Marriage Research Group. Our corpus stretches from September 2011 and the announcement of a government consultation on same-sex marriage, to April 2014 when the first same-sex marriages took place. Using a top-down approach we investigate the discourses drawn upon in same-sex marriage debates (as indexed by keywords and key semantic fields) and uncover the binary social categories used to normalise social structures and hold the same-sex marriage debate in place. We also consider which social actors are (not) given a voice and/or agency and discuss how (same-sex) marriage is constituted.

Help me to come out gracefully! Working with lesbian, gay, and bisexual, people affected by cancer to develop a national practitioner guide supporting inclusive care

“…12 This can be problematic, as many LGB people affected by cancer are older and will have lived for significant periods of time where it was illegal to be open about who they are. 13,14 Coming out and correcting health practitioners can be a dilemma for many LGBT people, supported by several surveys undertaken in North America. 15,16 The need to cope with frustration and anger at discrimination and poor experiences in the care setting is also reported within Australian and Canadian studies, with partners feeling unwelcome in consultations, 17 and negative attitudes from staff being reported.…”

Religious lobbying and policy influence: Christian interest group impacts around the legalization of same‐sex marriage in England and Wales

“…Prior research has revealed that many religious groups engaged with this policy debate—albeit usually presenting their arguments in largely secular terms, presumably reflecting secularizing shifts (Browne & Nash, 2015; Kettell, 2013, 2019). Others have found that newspaper coverage prominently featured themes of religion and the church (Paterson & Coffey‐Glover, 2018), parliamentary voting was influenced by religious affiliations (Plumb, 2015), and religious concerns shaped legislative debates and policy outcomes (Johnson & Vanderbeck, 2014)—although these findings were not explicitly tied to interest group lobbying. While opponents ultimately failed to block same‐sex marriage, there is thus evidence of significant nuance beneath the surface.…”

A Dry Branch on the Nation’s Body: The Nation’s Biological Reproduction between Gender and Sexuality

“…5 For an in-depth analysis of the Family Code in terms of same-sex partnership and from the legislative perspective, see alsoRajgelj (2010).6 The threat-discourse is not a specific feature of the Slovene political and civil-society sphere asshown by studies of same-sex marriage related media articles that were implemented abroad. See, for example, Kania (2020),Liebler et al (2009),Paterson and Coffey-Glover (2018).…”