BEIJING, August 9 -- It was an act hailed by politicians and activists alike, sweeping aside decades of inequality.
The latest figures reveal that 6,516 same sex couples in the UK have opted to cement their relationships by entering into civil partnerships since the legislation came into force last December. The famous ones, such as Elton John and his partner David Furnish, have captured headlines.
But new academic research into the issue of civil partnerships shows that the revised arrangement, while bringing much needed clarity, has quietly thrown up new problems. Some are political, such as the need to face friends who believe opting for a civil partnership represents "selling out" to heterosexual norms or succumbing to "heteronormativity."
Others involve matters of etiquette. Should a couple who have reached an accommodation with their parents about their sexuality risk that accord by inviting close family to the ceremony? And what about wider family? Is it sensible to have one's friends who approve of a same sex relationship at the same reception as that tipsy, slightly reactionary uncle who probably does not.
Professor Carol Smart, who led the research involving 54 couples, said: "We found that the reasons couples enter into a civil partnership can vary according to their age, whether they have children, their need to access certain legal rights and their views on the institution of marriage itself.
"We found an overall level of acceptance from families. However, at the other extreme some gay men and lesbians experienced telling their families of their plans to be like coming out' again. For some parents it meant that they could no longer assume that their son or daughter was going through a phase' that they would grow out of."
She said friends could also pose problems. "While some could be entirely supportive, others saw it as a capitulation to heterosexual norms and to straight society."
Couples, who were interviewed before and after the legislation came into effect, have chosen a variety of ceremonies including Shamanic, Pagan, Christian and humanist.
Most involved parents or other close relatives in their ceremonies, but 22 per cent decided against inviting parents. "Sometimes this was because parents had never accepted their son or daughter's sexuality and so were unlikely to welcome an invitation. But in other cases individuals did not want to risk homophobic relatives being unpleasant to their other guests at the ceremony," the report says.
"There were also cases where relationships with parents were cordial, but it was feared that an invitation to a ceremony would be "too challenging" and would upset the equilibrium that had been established.
Those who did invite parents said this appeared to have "enhanced their sense of closeness" and put their partners on a new footing with their families. Many male partners are embraced as "sons" rather than "son's in law" while many women were considered sisters rather than "sisters in law".
Those couples who proceeded despite the "heteronormativy" issue did so "either because they felt they had important reasons to marry which would outweigh the criticism, or because they did not agree that by getting married their values would suddenly change."
Most welcomed the financial safeguards achieved by entering into a civil partnership, but 80 per cent said they had made wills to safeguard their partner prior to the legislation taking effect.
The issue of how same sex couples choose to live together remains a contentious one despite the introduction of civil partnerships.
Last week, Justice Potter, the most senior family court judge, dismissed an application from two university professors to have the marriage they entered into in Canada recognised in the UK. The judge ruled that the civil partnership status they enjoyed in the UK gave them all the practical benefits. But his controversial ruling said marriage is a state reserved for heterosexuals.
Most civil partnerships have occurred in the south of England.
(Source: China Daily)
