School Of Law(UPES)

PROJECT

Subject-Jurisprudence

Topic- Critique on the Law of Homosexuality

Submitted to: Submitted by:

M/s Urvashi Shahi Pulkit Agrawal(R760216082)

Soumik Purkayastha(R760216118)
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express our special thanks of gratitude to our teacher Mr. Abhik
Majumdarand Mr. Saubhagya Sundar Nandaas well as our Vice Chancellor Prof. Srikrishna
Deva Rao for giving us this opportunity of doing a project on “Feminist Critique on the Law
of Homosexuality”. This project helped us in gaining a lot of insight into the feminist school
of thought and the recent trends in the law of homosexuality around the world. The library
resources as well as the e-res0urces came 0f great use t0 us.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ___________________________________________________ 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS ____________________________________________________ 3
OBJECTIVES _____________________________________________________________ 4
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM _______________________________________________ 4
RESEARCH QUESTIONS __________________________________________________ 4
SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS ________________________________________________ 4
METHODOLOGY _________________________________________________________ 5
INTRODUCTION__________________________________________________________ 6
Chapter 1- Sexism Within The Lgbtqi Community __________________________________ 7
Chapter 2- Feminist Critique On Same Sex Marriages ______________________________ 8
Chapter 3- History Of Lesbian And Gay Studies And The Underlying Conflict __________ 11
Chapter 4 -Feminism And Queer Theory ________________________________________ 14
BIBLIOGRAPHY _________________________________________________________ 16
TABLE OF OTHER AUTHORITIES ________________________________________ 17
 OBJECTIVES

 To see how historically the feminist have reacted to the homosexuality movement
 To look into the feminist argument about less significance being given to lesbians
than gays in the homosexual rights movement.
 Tosee the merits of the contention of radical American feminists of being against
same sex marriages all the while being allies to homosexuals.
 To analyse varying approaches to sexual orientation through radical and lesbian
feminism.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

There feminists have always been allies to the homosexuals due to both being citizens
oppressed by the society fighting for their rights and freeing themselves from the crutches of
a patriarchal society. There have been certain issues where certain feminists have difference
in opinion with the homosexual community like that of same sex marriage and unequal
representation of women(lesbians) during the history of securing rights for the homosexual
community.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. How have feminists reacted to the homosexuality movement over the course of
history?
2. How good does the feminist argument about less significance being given to lesbians
than gays in the homosexual rights movement hold?
3. What are the different facets of the argument by radical American feminists of being
against same sex marriages while still being allies to homosexuals?
4. Is sexual orientation an inherent natural aspect of one's self or a product of societal
forces?

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

We have limited the scope of the project to the feminist critique on law of homosexuality
with regards to -

a) Same sex marriages

b) Unequal representation of lesbians in the homosexual rights movement

The project also deals with the historical perspective on law of homosexuality by the
feminists and how it has changed over time. It is limited to a comparative analysis of radical
feminist and queer/lesbian feminists' approaches to notions of sexuality and identity

METHODOLOGY

In order to discuss the feminist critique on law of homosexuality,we will be dealing with the
various judgements given over time which have created these exceptions.The sources referred
under this doctrinal research are both primary as well as secondary which include a majority
of cases. A uniform mode of citation shall be used throughout the project.

5|Page
 INTRODUCTION

Sexuality and the laws relating to it are developing rapidly. However, just like all other legal
research areas, the inherent patriarchy in the system is corrupting the study here too. The
development is heavily inclined towards male dominated methodology and their own
concerns whilst the issues faced by the females continue to remain invisible to the world.

Feminism is an approach aiming at the equality of the genders, socially, politically,

economically and socially. It began as a movement not because of the existence of inequality
but because of the oppression and discrimination that disturbed the world. Sexuality and law
became a subject of criticism since the earliest legislations in favour of homosexuality
addressed the concerns of males alone. In fact, the first law in the UK explicitly legalized gay
male sex only. The law focused only on unequal age of consent and other such things that
were issues faced by gay men. The lesbian women, post the law, started facing issues with
custody of children etc. Therefore, all these lesbian women broke out of the homosexual
movementand instead joined the other heterosexual women in the movement against
patriarchy.

This paper broadly explores the history of the evolution of the struggle for gay and lesbian
rights and the feminist issues associated with the same from the very beginning. Further, it
critiques the same sex marriage and how the laws relating to the same have grave effects on
women's rights. It also deals with various instances of ignorance of lesbian interests in the
LGBTQI Community and lastly examines the effects of several different kinds of feminism
on the laws on homosexuality.
 CHAPTER 1- SEXISM WITHIN THE LGBTQI COMMUNITY

With the progression of societies and sensitization of the world at large, major debates have
been initiated on decriminalization or legalization of homosexuality. The world has come up
with a term for the community as a whole, namely the LGBTQI Community comprising of
lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, queer and Intersex persons. However, in reality it is to
be noted that the interests of these people are shockingly different from each other and might
be conflicting at some points. This chapter discusses the variance in the interests of lesbians
and the issues faced by them.

The feminists have always believed that sexual orientation is a socially constructed
phenomenon and is not inborn.1 This argument was constructed by the lesbian community
since a majority of women shared their experience of moving from a heterosexual to a lesbian
identity.2 This is strikingly different from the arguments made by gay men all around the
world stating that homosexuality was something they were born with, and it was not made.
At present, the aim of abolition of gender is still to be achieved and patriarchy is certainly not
rooted out of the system.3 And therefore, whenever in history the gays and lesbians aligned
together for a movement, the lesbian arguments were lost in the voice raised by gay men,
even though they were backed by empirical data and experiences of several women forming
that community.

Therefore, it crystallizes down to the inherent existence of patriarchy and sexism in the
system. The discrimination faced by lesbians at all levels is because of the normalized
absence of females from all mainstream work. And therefore, everytime the topic is debated
or every time the word “homosexuals” comes up, it’s only gay men that people talk about.
And thus, only the concerns of the gay men are addressed. The entire lesbian movement
becomes invisible to the world due to this issue. Moreover, lesbians are held liable for male
gay practices, both sexual and social, which as the research shows, they very rarely engage
in. Therefore, it’s a trickle-down effect wherein gay men are implicated with practices
usually engaged in by the heterosexual men and then further lesbians are implicated for the
same, since their identity is submerged in these gay men. An example of this is the lesbian
women being denied a custody of their children for years because of arguments like

1
R. Auchmuty, Feminist Approaches to Sexuality and Law (2015).
2
ibid.
3
R. Auchmuty, The Married Women’s Property Acts: Equality was not the issue (Oxford, Hart Publishing
2008).

7|Page
pedophilia. A similar one is all of lesbian concerns being ignored when they stood in unison
to support their ill gay friends suffering from AIDS.4

Furthermore, majority instances of legislation are framed in a way that they only benefit the
gay men. Rather, they are framed with the aim of progression of gay men, which is again, a
result of patriarchy that exists in the head of these legislators themselves. The Civil
Partnership Act, 20045 allows same-sex couples to register themselves as partners and
acquire all rights as a heterosexual married couple. It regulates the property and finances
owned by these couples. However, lesbians as a group didn’t benefit from the law since
majority of them did not have financial property which they wished to pass over.6

Solution: Every time an issue comes on the platter; certain points should be considered
positively. First to check if the situation affects men and women differently. Second if the
law on that stance is different for the sexes. And third, who Is the one benefitting out of the
situation.7For instance while the laws in England for a period criminalized consensual sexual
acts between two males, a shallow effect of it was lesbians facing lesser legal intervention in
their sexual lives.8 However, a graver version was lesbians becoming entirely invisible in this
regime and thus enduring more severe punishments under other sections like sexual assault.9

Furthermore, in dealing with homosexuality in general and this inherent sexism in particular,
we should not look at law as the solution. Existence of laws does not ever lead to abolition of
the crime. However, we need a more holistic, social change presently. 10 A movement that
would bring about a variance in the attitude of the people around. This can only be brought
about through education and sensitization. People of the world, in general, need to be aware
of the concepts of law and sexuality for anything to change.

CHAPTER 2- FEMINIST CRITIQUE ON SAME SEX MARRIAGES

4
N. Cobb, Queer[ed] risks: Life insurance, HIV/AIDS, and the gayquestion(Journal of Law andSociety 2010)
37, 620-50
5
The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013.
6
R. Auchmuty, Out of the Shadows: Feminist silence and liberal law (Sexuality and the Law, Feminist
Engagements, London, Routledge 2007).
7
R. Auchmuty, Lesbian Law, Lesbian Legal Theory (S. Andermahr and G. Griffin (eds)Straight Studies
Modified. London, Cassell 1997).
8
C. Derry, A sort of juridical phantasm’: the criminal law’s (lack of) engagement with lesbianism (Unpublished
PhD thesis, University of Westminster 2007).
9
ibid.
10
supra nt. 1.

8|Page
Feminists have always been allies of the homosexuals mostly due to the oppression faced by
both these sections (women and homosexuals) from the normative patriarchal society.
Feminists have always supported homosexuals in the recognition of their rights and the fight
for equality in its true sense. Feminist jurisprudence on the other hand (which is very
different from feminism) has some objections in the rights demanded by the homosexuals.
Radical School of Feminism, one of the four major schools of feminist jurisprudencebelieve
that same sex marriage which is one of the primary demands of the homosexual community
is not in consonance with feminist ideals.
Radical feminists, particularly American radical feminists have always been opposed to the
institution of marriage. Marriage is viewed by them as an institution that is inegalitarian. The
status conferred to women in a marriage is always lower to that conferred to men. There is a
set gender role narrative which has not evolved over the years and marriage only strengthens
it. For example even if a lot of women are working today, they still have to do household
chores along with their full time job. Failure to do the household chores lets them be viewed
as a failed wife, mother whereas men can only do the bare minimum of working a job and it
is considered to be fulfilment of their part in the institution of marriage and family.
Homosexuals all over the world have been arguing for legalisation of same sex marriages
since many decades now. It is logically the next step after decriminalisation of homosexuality
in the recognition and conferment of rights to them in order to lift them from the status of
second class citizens given to them by the society. The moral dilemma arises right there. How
do feminists support legalisation of same sex marriage when they are opposed to idea of
marriage in the first place?
The supporters of same sex marriage and their argument that marriage will make them feel
ordinary and blend into society along with liberalized, need to understand that marriage
shouldn’t be the pathway to liberalization.11 Marriage as perceived by society believes taht
some relationships are more valid than others. It is a universal patriarchal norm that has been
fed to us over the years in the process making us believe that marriage is a norm and staying
a bachelor(or spinster) is the exception. Marriage runs contrary to two of the primary goals of
the lesbian and gay movement: the affirmation of gay identity and culture; and the validation
of many forms of relationships. Forced assimilation of the homosexual community into the
hetero-normative structure/institution of marriage will only oppress them further. Even today
many people who call themselves liberal and supporters of homosexuality quite often go

11
Rosemary Auchmuty, Same-Sex Marriage Revived: Feminist Critique And Legal Strategy (14 Feminism &
Psychology 2004).

9|Page
ahead and ask a homosexual couple that who is the man/woman in the relationship. Radical
Feminist Jurisprudence believe that gay marriage, instead of liberating gay sex and sexuality,
would further outlaw all gay and lesbian sex which is not performed in a marital context. The
stigma of premarital sex will penetrate the homosexual community too, just like it has
penetrated the heterosexual community wherein women are being shamed for having sex
before marriage.
Postmodern feminist jurisprudence however believes that marriage equality will in fact
shatter the norms of heterosexual family and patriarchy all at once. They are in support of the
homosexual. The idea of marriage as fed to us and to which the radical feminist oppose has
the basic requirement of a man and a woman who eventually have children and the ideal
heterosexual patriarchal nuclear family is complete. However, if marriage equality comes
into picture, it will destabilize the cultural connotation of the term marriage.
The radical feminists support the idea of an alternative arrangement like a civil partnership.
However in the opinion of postmodern feminists this will further create discriminate between
homosexuals as their alternative arrangement shall in no way be the equivalent of marriage
and shall be always lesser in status and importance.12 Marriage equality shall alsobreak the
norms of a patriarchal nuclear family as, between two people of the same sex there is a little
to no chance of discrimination and oppression as one has not been historically and
systemically been oppressed by the other since time immemorial.13
Talking of this debate in the Indian contemporary scenario, recently in the judgement of
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, an argument was advanced by therespondent’s side was
that if Section 377 is declared unconstitutional, the institution of marriage will be
detrimentally affected.Herein the institution of marriage being talked about is the patriarchal
family wherein the women have been oppressed since a long time and have been treated as
second class citizens. Marriage Equality which seems to be the next logical step the
homosexual community in India will be fighting for should become reality in the opinion of
the researcher as it will shatter the norms of the patriarchal nuclear family and also give more
embracement to the gay community. The Indian Feminists should be allies and support the
homosexual community in their fight for equal status in the society which to some extent
shall come with marriage equality.

12
Timothy F. Murphy, Same-Sex Marriage: Not A Threat To Marriage Or Children (42 Journal of Social
Philosophy 2011).
13
'The Marrying Kind? Debating Same-Sex Marriage Within The Lesbian And Gay Movement' (2013) 51
Choice Reviews Online.

10 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 3-HISTORY OF LESBIAN AND GAY STUDIES AND THE
UNDERLYING CONFLICT

Lesbian history, as part of the feminist revision of history, is about recording and analyzing
the past in the light of our understanding of the workings of patriarchy and capitalism. A
lesbian feminist analysis of history focuses on how a patriarchal society molded and
controlled the lives of men and women through its institutions and ideologies over the
centuries. One of these institutions is heterosexuality, which is socially constructed in order
to ensure the subordination of individual women to individual men and thus the perpetuation
of male power. There is a wealth of evidence to show that women who refused to be
subordinate to men in this way constituted a threat to patriarchy, which was perceived, and
were punished accordingly. The sanctions took different forms in different times but
ascribing to such women the label of sexual deviance/immorality/sin, as lesbians, is one
recognizable modern form.
Lesbian history then is not just the study of lesbian lives in the past but also the study of the
heterosexual patriarchy. A society organized in the interests of men. Which determined the
form that they took and the form of their resistance. Lesbian liberation, like women’s
liberation generally, will not be achieved until all the institutions of male power are
overthrown.
The aims of the gay male rights movement are much simpler. By and large it is concerned to
persuade straight society that gay men are as normal and harmless as heterosexuals. Gay male
activists want the right to live as freely and openly as straight people, to have equality in law
and to be able to indulge their sexual practices without sanction. Gay men are clearly critical
of compulsory heterosexuality, but not because it oppresses women. They have no reason to
criticise any other institutions of patriarchy since these work to their benefit.
Mary Hunt explains the difference between the lesbian and the gay male approach in her
discussion of gay movements within religion:
“For most feminists who are lesbian the primary consideration in a patriarchal church is
being a woman. A secondary contradiction is being a lesbian. This is quite different for gay
men because for them the primary contradiction is being gay, while being a man is a source
of sameness in the institutional church. ... It is not possible simply to tinker with one or
another aspect of the church’s teaching about homosexuality as some gay men do. A lesbian

11 | P a g e
feminist critique begins with the same feminist critique which has been levelled by feminist
theologians and activists for the past twenty years.”14
Gay male history reflects the concerns of the gay male rights movement. The editors of
‘Hidden from History ‘concede that “The debate about the nature of lesbian history has
occurred in the context of an extensive feminist theoretical discourse that has no real parallel
among gay men.”15 Certainly not many gay men have given their energies to a critique of
heterosexuality. In fact, one British gay male theorist, Simon Watney, expresses a disdain for
the lesbian feminist critique. He states that it is important to deny that “homosexual desire is
merely learned, and therefore curable by enforced unlearning” and “that no such suggestions
have ever been made about heterosexuality, except by the lunatic fringe of the women’s
movement, remains enormously significant.”16 Such statements illustrate how important it is
to examine carefully the differing analyses of some gay men and many lesbian feminists. It is
possible for some gay male politics to be directed simply towards gaining for gay men more
of the rewards generally given to heterosexual men under male supremacy, with no desire to
undermine the privileges heterosexual men gain from the oppression of women. Since all
lesbians are affected by the oppression of women, whether or not they choose to make
feminist struggle a priority in their lives, the pursuit of liberation in a way that does not seek
to end that oppression is not realistic.
At a recent meeting of the Lesbian History Group,17 one participant talked about a mixed gay
history project in her town where the men wanted to include accounts by pedophiles and
transsexuals while the women did not. While acknowledging the difference between
recording and promoting such issues, she recalled that the disagreement revealed a “political
abyss “between the lesbian and gay members of the group.
Another illustration of this is Jeffrey Weeks’ comment in Coming Out about the different
goals of the men and women in the Gay Liberation Frontin the 1970s:
“The long-term interests of both might be identical the obliteration of sexism but the
immediate needs were different. Women were not centrally interested in lowering the age of
consent or with cottaging.”18

14
Mary E. Hunt, On religious lesbians: contradictions and challenges (Altman et al ) 98.
15
Martin BaumlDuberman, Martha Vicinus& George Chauncy Jr, Hidden from History: reclaiming the gay and
lesbian past (1991) 7.
16
Simon Watney,Policing Desire: pornography, AIDS and the media (University of Minnesota Press 1987) 51.
17
The Lesbian History Group, Not a Passing Phase (London, The Women.s Press 1989).
18
Jeffrey Weeks, Coming Out: homosexual politics in Britain from the nineteenth century to the present (1997)
87

12 | P a g e
The truth is that lesbians were not only not centrally interested in these issues, they had
profound reservations about them.
On 26 June 1991, Tim Barnett, executive director of the Stonewall Group (which campaigns
around gay and lesbian issues), spoke on television on Channel 4.s Out programme of the
classic agenda for change. Cottaging and the age of consent for male homosexuals came at
the top of the list, far above the legal and social position of lesbian and gay partnerships and
parenting issues that affect lesbians as well as gay men at a fundamental level. Once again,
the gay male agenda dominates, and the feminist critique is ignored.
Unless lesbian feminists scotch the essentialist view of sexuality espoused by many gay male
activists and historians, the feminist analysis of the social construction of sexuality will be
undermined, with implications for all feminist studies and campaigns. Likewise, unless we
establish the validity and significance of our analysis, lesbian ideas will always suffer from
the comparative put-down expressed in Raymond de Becker’s throw-away comment in his
mixed gay and lesbian history:
“We shall try to describe along parallel lines the problems of both male and female
homosexuality, although the latter has left fewer traces in history and has hardly formed the
object, like the former, of important philosophical thought.”19

19
Simon Watney, Policing Desire: pornography, AIDS and the media(University of Minnesota Press 1987) 56.

13 | P a g e
 CHAPTER 4 -FEMINISM AND QUEER THEORY

Queer Theory is an integral part of critical theory that emerged out of queer studies and
women studies and focuses on feminist challenges to the notion that gender is an essential
and inherent part of one’s personality. It also encompasses an analysis of socially constructed
nature of sexual acts and identities. The term “Queer Theory” was first coined by the
renowned Italian feminist Teresa de Laurates in the book titled Differences: A Journal of
Feminist Cultural Studies. There exists a prominent debate on whether sexual orientation is
natural to the person or whether it is a product of social construction and is therefore subject
to change. Essential” feminists believe that gender hasan essential nature (e.g. being generous
versus being selfish) and is not influenced by societal forces. On the other hand, queer
theorists have argued that there exists no essential self and that identity is born out of
repeated performative actions that are influenced by social constructions of gender.20”

Queertheorists advocate that gender cannot be restricted to chromosomes, genitals or

hormones but instead it is a product of a variety of social events and strategies. That is being
a man or women are unfortunately the only options available to us as these identities are a
result of social construction and not biological facts.21 Themoreone does the things that a
woman does, the more one feels oneself to “be” a woman and thus one’s identity cannot be
said to be a biological certainty. For instance, gender identity is widely accepted as a social
grid that teaches young children to identify themselves and behave as either a girl or a boy22.
Queertheory thus establishesthat gender is not something we are born with, it is something
we are born into as a result of our experiences based on the binary man/woman. On the
contrary, feminist theorists refuse to limit women’s liberation to only a “women only” event
as this would perpetuate injustice and not recognize the complexities of oppression.
Theydefend anotion of a binary man/ woman system that is a synthesis of biological facts23.
They argue that without a binary system of gender, one could neither experience sexism (how
could one know what a woman is?) nor homophobia (how could one imagine partners of the
"same sex" if there were an unlimited number of options?).”

Theorists such as Elspeth Probyn and Diana Fuss articulated that pleasure must not be
restricted along the lines of one single identity. Accordingly, the desire that produced an

20
Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique (New York, Dell Book 1996), 370-371.
21
Mary Daly,Beyond God the Father (Boston, Beacon Press, 1973), 14, 37.
22
Alice Echols, Daring to Be Bad: Radical Feminism in America (Minneapolis, Minnesota Press 1989) 4-5, 240.
23
Marilyn Frye, The Politics of Reality (Freedom, Crossing Press) 1.

14 | P a g e
interest in having sexual pleasure with other women must not be repressed in a box of lesbian
identity. Probyn advocated that we cannot live our lives within the boundaries of such
24
categories as our desires and identities often transcend such boundaries. Therefore, instead
of having closed, policed lesbian communities, Probyn” suggested that such communities
must be flexible to include even those who experience even temporarily or imaginatively
lesbian desire. This would result in a wider community with a political effectiveness that
would not have been possible in a closed and smaller community.25”

There also exist serious distinctions between radical feminists and lesbian feminists. The first
noticeable difference can be observed in their varying interactions with men. Majority of the
radical feminists view men, even gay men as if they were the enemy and thus any form of
coalition with gay men is not encouraged26. On the other hand, queer and feminist lesbians
have formed coalitions with gay men especially through the AIDS epidemic that made gay
men seem more vulnerable and less of an enemy. Throughorganizations such as Queer
nation, ACT-UP and Sex panic, feminist lesbians and gay men have come together to
challenge the foundations of therepressive “normal”. Furthermore, contrary to lesbian
feminists, skepticism about sexual activity dominated much of radical feminism. Some
radical feminists also suggest that any penetration during sex was patriarchal and needed to
be eliminated. On the other hand, lesbian feminists encourage all forms of consensual sexual
activity. They not only challenge the construction of female andmale as “normal” but also
promote the idea that sexuality has no “normal” parameters at all 27. Queer theory and lesbian
feminism has thus successfully challenged the radical feminist attribution that nurture of
children and preserving home and neighborhood are naturalized women’s activities.”

Inorder to truly work towards eradication of gender discrimination around the world,
feminists today must attend to emerging concepts of queer and lesbian feminism. Rather than
deliberating over whether an approach is queer/lesbian politics or feminist, we need to
recognize that both interpretations are necessary and ought to exist side by side.”

24
Biddy Martin, Femininity Played Straight: The Significance of Being Lesbian (New York, Routledge 1996)
142, 151.
25
Diana Fuss, Identification Papers (New York Routledge 1995) 123, 124.
26
Sarah Schulman, My American History: Lesbian and Gay Life during the Reagan/Bush Years (New York,
Routledge 1994) 67-68.
27
Pat Califia, Public Sex : The Culture of Radical Sex (San Fransisco, Cleis Press 1994) 25.

15 | P a g e
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alice Echols, Daring to Be Bad: Radical Feminism in America (Minneapolis, Minnesota

Press 1989) 4-5, 240 ________________________________________________________ 15

Betty Friedan, The Feminine Mystique (New York, Dell Book 1996), 370-371 __________ 15

Biddy Martin, Femininity Played Straight: The Significance of Being Lesbian (New York,
Routledge 1996) 142, 151 ____________________________________________________ 16

Diana Fuss, Identification Papers (New York Routledge 1995) 123, 124 _______________ 16

Jeffrey Weeks, Coming Out: homosexual politics in Britain from the nineteenth century to the
present (1997) 87 __________________________________________________________ 13

Marilyn Frye, The Politics of Reality (Freedom, Crossing Press) 1 ____________________ 15

Martin BaumlDuberman, Martha Vicinus& George Chauncy Jr, Hidden from History:
reclaiming the gay and lesbian past (1991) 7_____________________________________ 13

Mary Daly, Beyond God the Father (Boston, Beacon Press, 1973), 14, 37 ______________ 15

Mary E. Hunt, On religious lesbians: contradictions and challenges (Altman et al ) 98. ___ 13

Pat Califia, Public Sex : The Culture of Radical Sex (San Fransisco, Cleis Press 1994) 25 _ 16

R. Auchmuty, Feminist Approaches to Sexuality and Law (2015). _____________________ 7

R. Auchmuty, Lesbian Law, Lesbian Legal Theory (S. Andermahr and G. Griffin
(eds)Straight Studies Modified. London, Cassell 1997). _____________________________ 8

R. Auchmuty, Out of the Shadows: Feminist silence and liberal law (Sexuality and the Law,
Feminist Engagements, London, Routledge 2007). _________________________________ 8

R. Auchmuty, The Married Women’s Property Acts: Equality was not the issue (Oxford, Hart
Publishing 2008). ___________________________________________________________ 7

Sarah Schulman, My American History: Lesbian and Gay Life during the Reagan/Bush Years
(New York, Routledge 1994) 67-68 ____________________________________________ 16

Simon Watney, Policing Desire: pornography, AIDS and the media (University of Minnesota
Press 1987) 51 _____________________________________________________________ 13

Simon Watney, Policing Desire: pornography, AIDS and the media (University of Minnesota
Press 1987) 56 _____________________________________________________________ 14

The Lesbian History Group, Not a Passing Phase (London, The Women.s Press 1989) ___ 13

16 | P a g e
 TABLE OF OTHER AUTHORITIES

Statutes

The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 ______________________________________ 8

Journal

N. Cobb, Queer[ed] risks: Life insurance, HIV/AIDS, and the gayquestion (Journal of Law
and Society 2010) 37, 620-50 __________________________________________________ 8

'The Marrying Kind? Debating Same-Sex Marriage Within The Lesbian And Gay Movement'
(2013) 51 Choice Reviews Online _____________________________________________ 10

Timothy F. Murphy, Same-Sex Marriage: Not A Threat To Marriage Or Children (42 Journal
of Social Philosophy 2011). __________________________________________________ 10

Research Publications

C. Derry, A sort of juridical phantasm’: the criminal law’s (lack of) engagement with
lesbianism (Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Westminster 2007). _________________ 8

Rosemary Auchmuty, Same-Sex Marriage Revived: Feminist Critique And Legal Strategy
(14 Feminism & Psychology 2004). _____________________________________________ 9

17 | P a g e