ITS JUST COPY AND PASTE
phaoun
mab_assignment.docxSource:
Clarke, V. (2003). Lesbian and Gay Marriage: Transformation or Normalization? Feminism & Psychology 13(4), 519-529. doi: 10.1177/09593535030134016
Annotation:
Victoria Clarke is an associate professor of sexuality studies and teaches about LGBTQ psychology, human sexuality, and gender at the University of the West of England. The purpose of this publication is to analyze various arguments facing the lesbian and gay community for the academic world of professors, college students, etc.
Throughout her essay, Clarke challenged different arguments raised by various authors of several publications. For example in the argument of domestic partnerships acting as an alternative to marriage, Eskridge outlines a ‘menu’ of different partnership recognition options available in the US and in Europe and how it can pave the way for same-sex marriage in the future. Clarke deconstructed Eskridge’s argument but ultimately agreeing that his perspective could possibility benefit social injustices towards the LGBTQ community. The author concluded in favor of same-sex marriage because countries such as the Netherlands and Belgium recognize same-sex marriage and provide the same benefits and responsibilities as heterosexual marriages. From this reasoning, the author supported her conclusion with the assumption that because other countries agree with her viewpoint, other western countries such as England and the United States should do the same.
One of the only fallacies used in the essay involves ambiguous language during the last paragraph where Clarke writes, “Given this rapidly shifting legal terrain, I am disappointed that the marriage debate appears only to be populated by a liberal orthodoxy.” Here, Clarke fails to define what this ‘liberal orthodoxy’ actually is. The entire text uses a wide variety of reliable evidence covering different perspectives in order to ultimately support the author’s conclusion. The information is neither overstated nor simplified, while also not have a bias for the topic. The source is slightly dated, but the information presented is still relevant regardless.
The main strength of the article was that it covered different viewpoints of the topic of same-sex marriage providing the reader a wide range of perspectives. For myself, I came to same conclusion as the author and found that her conclusion was justified and reasonable. The information presented in the topic did not change my initial viewpoint, but it simply added more evidence to validate that viewpoint, with an example being where Clarke describes Eskridge’s argument. Overall, the article was very useful as it helped me understand more about the issues facing same-sex marriage.
As an advocate regarding this issue, I will try to inform people around me about the different issues that the LGBTQ community in hopes of having them better understand their struggles without seeing the community in a negative light. While doing so, I will try to be considerate of their viewpoints if they differ from my own in order to create a useful dialogue to discuss the issue. In addition, I could advocate for change regarding the issue by starting a dialogue with people with different viewpoints on the issue itself. Educating myself more about the issue can contribute to better conversations that could potentially lead to a better understanding about the different perspectives on the topic at hand.
