LG(BT) Families and Counting

Counting and understanding lesbian and gay families has gained attention over the last decade in popular culture, policy and academic research. Contentious debates on family values and same-sex marriage, increasing rates of social tolerance for homosexuality, and a greater general academic attention on issues of sexual orientation have partially spurred this attention in demographic analysis of lesbian and gay families. It is becoming increasingly clear that sexual orientation and gender identity have an effect on demographic processes and life outcomes. Although not perfect, practically speaking, drawing on nationally representative survey data has allowed us to illuminate the presence of same-sex families and their children.These findings have an iterative relationship with social change, public policy, and increasing tolerance for diversity. This article reviews the recent demographic contributions related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) families. Due to research concentrations, the content of this article mostly addresses what is known about gay and lesbian families, but also offers future directions to fill research voids including a call for greater attention to and visibility for families with bisexual and transgender members.

Legally Straight

Legally Straight offers a critical reading of the legal debate over lesbian and gay marriage in the United States in order to understand how change happened so quickly. The book relies on key judicial opinions to trace changes in our understanding of heterosexuality, as what was once characterized as an elusive object of analysis was brought into the spotlight. Upon closer inspection, it seemed that the cultural value of marriage was becoming tarnished, and the trouble appeared to center around one very specific issue: reproduction. As opponents of lesbian and gay marriage emphasized the link between marriage and accidental pregnancy, the evidence mounted, the arguments proliferated, and resistance began to turn against itself. Heterosexuality, it seemed, was little more than a set of palliative prescriptions for the worst of human behavior, and children became the victims. It thus became the province of the courts to reinforce the cultural value of marriage by resisting what came to be known as the “procreation argument,” the assertion that marriage exists primarily to regulate the unruly aspects of heterosexual reproduction. Our conceptions of children and childhood were being put at risk as gays and lesbians were denied marriage. Writing lesbian and gay families into the law of marriage became the better option.