A History of Same-Sex Marriage PDF

A History of Same-Sex Marriage
Author(s): William N. Eskridge, Jr.

Source: Virginia Law Review, Vol. 79, No. 7, Symposium on Sexual Orientation and the Law
(Oct., 1993), pp. 1419-1513
Published by: Virginia Law Review
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1073379 .
Accessed: 25/04/2013 14:19
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Virginia Law Review is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Virginia Law
Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A HISTORY OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
Jr.*
WilliamN. Eskridge,
W
INTRODUCTION
lZE'WHA was a keyculturaland politicalleaderin theZuni

v 'community in thelatenineteenth at one pointserving
century,
as an emissaryfromthatsouthwestern NativeAmericannationto
Washington, D.C.1 He was thestrongest,wisest,and mostesteemed
memberof his community.And he was a berdache,a male who
dressedin femalegarb. Such menwerereveredin Zuni circlesfor
theirsupposedconnectionto the supernatural, the mostgiftedof
themcalled ihamana,spiritualleader. We'whawas the mostcele-
bratedZunilhamanaofthenineteenth century.He was marriedto a
man.
Ifeyinwa Olinkelivedin thenineteenth
centuryas well.2She was a
wealthywomanof the Igbo tribe,situatedin whatis now Eastern
Nigeria.She was an industriouswomanin a community wheremost
of the entrepreneurial were seized by women,who
opportunities
therebycame to controlmuchof the Igbo tribe'swealth. Ifeyinwa
sociallyovershadowed herlessprosperousmalehusband.As a signof
* Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center;VisitingProfessor

of Law, New
YorkUniversity Schoolof Law.
ThisArticleoriginated withworkI did in connection withmyongoingrepresentation ofa
gay couple suingthe Districtof Columbiafor a marriagelicense. Dean v. Districtof
Columbia,No. CA 90-13892(D.C. Super.Ct. Dec. 30, 1991),appealdocketed,No. 92-737
(D.C. Ct. App. June2, 1992). Criticallyusefulprimarysourceleads were providedby
Professors WilliamLeap andGeoffrey Burkhart, bothanthropologistsat AmericanUniversity,
and by FatherAlexeiMichalenko, theChaplainat theGeorgetown Law Center.
University
I receivedveryhelpfulcomments on earlierdraftsof thisArticlefromMarc Arkin,Yair
Chamudot, SylviaLaw, BillNelson,MittRegan,David Richards,andnumerous participants
at presentationsofthisArticleto theSexualOrientation and theLaw ReadingGroupofthe
Gay and Lesbian Attorneysof Washington, D.C. (GAYLAW), the student-sponsored
Frontiers ofLegalThoughtConference at theDuke Law School,theGeorgetown University
Law Center, theFordhamUniversity SchoolofLaw,theNewYorkUniversity SchoolofLaw,
andtheSymposium on SexualOrientation andtheLaw sponsored bytheVirginiaLaw Review.
I For an accountofWe'wha'slife,see Will Roscoe,The Zuni Man-Woman29-52(1991).
2 Fora descriptionofIfeyinwa's life,seeIfiAmadiume, Male Daughters,
FemaleHusbands:
Genderand Sex in an AfricanSociety48-49 (1987).
1419

1420 Law Review
Virginia [Vol.79:1419
herprosperity and socialstanding,

Ifeyinwaherselfbecamea female
husbandto otherwomen.Her epithet"Olinke"referred to thefact
thatshe had ninewives.
Sergiusand BacchuswereRomansoldierswholivedin thefourth
century.3Theyweremalelovers.Yet it was fortheirChristian faith
thattheywerepersecuted by theRomans. Ultimately, Bacchuswas
torturedto deathby theintolerantRomans. Accordingto Christian
tradition,
Sergius'faithfalteredwiththedeathof his lover,onlyto
returnwhen Bacchus appearedto him in a visionand implored,
"Your rewardwillbe me,"meaning thatthecouplewouldbe reunited
in heavenshouldSergiusmaintainhis faith.Sergiuskeptfaithand,
likehis mate,died a martyr.DuringtheMiddleAges,therelation-
shipofSergiusand Bacchuswas considered an exemplarofcompan-
ionatemarriage,or marriagebased upon agapic love and mutual
respect.
The storiesofWe'wha,Ifeyinwa Olinke,and Sergiusand Bacchus
resonatestrangely inmodernAmericanears. Culturally,mosttwenti-
eth-centuryAmericansconsidermarriageto be an institution that
intrinsicallyinvolves different-
rather than same-sex partners.
AlthoughsomeAmericansare willingto toleratesame-sexrelation-
ships,and evento givethemsomeeuphemistic sanction,fewconsider
themto be "real"marriages.The law reflects
theseculturalattitudes.
For example,the most recenteditionof Black's Law Dictionary
defines"marriage"as the"legalstatus,condition,or relationof one
man and one womanunitedin law forlife,or untildivorced,forthe
dischargeto each otherand the community of the dutieslegally
incumbent on thosewhoseassociationis foundedon thedistinctionof
sex."4
This culturaland legalconsensusdenyingthelegitimacy ofsame-
sex marriages has beenundersiegeforovertwenty years. Sincethe
StonewallriotsofJune1969,5gaymen,lesbians,and bisexualshave
3 Theirstorywill be told in JohnBoswell,What God Has JoinedTogether: Same-Sex

Unionsin the ChristianTradition(forthcoming 1994) (on filewithVirginiaLaw Review
Association).
4 Black's Law Dictionary972 (6th ed. 1990) (emphasisadded); accord 3A NormanJ.
Singer,SutherlandStatutoryConstruction? 68.02(5thed. 1992);52 Am. Jur.2d Marriage
? 1 (1970).
5 The StonewallRiotsoccurredon thenightsofJune27 and 28, 1969,whenthegayand
lesbianpatronsoftheStonewallBar fought backagainsta routinepoliceraidofthebar. See
TobyMarotta,The PoliticsofHomosexuality 71-99(1981).

1993] Same-SexMarriage 1421
come out of the closetand claimedour identity in greatnumbers.

Manyoftheseindividuals haveformed same-sexrelationships, which
members ofthegaylesbian community havelongreferred to as "mar-
riages."A numberofthesecoupleshaveinsistedthatthestaterecog-
nizethesemarriages on thesametermsthatit recognizes different-sex
marriages.At present,however,stateshave refusedto recognize
same-sexmarriages, and noneofthepublicizedlawsuitsseekingsuch
recognition has yetsucceeded,norhavesimilarlegislative efforts.
Opponentsof same-sexmarriageargue that the concept is
oxymoronic.Marriage,theysay,mustinvolvea man and a woman
because(1) thatis thedefinitionalessenceofmarriage, (2) theJudeo-
Christian requiresit,and/or(3) themodernWestern
tradition nation-
statehas structuredsocietyaroundtheassumption thatonlydifferent-
sexmaritalunionsareallowed.Proponents ofsame-sexmarriage dis-
pute and oftenridiculetheseassertions.Thus far,neitherside has
analyzedthesearguments in the contextof the historyof marriage
itself.That is theprojectof thisArticle.
PartII, theheartof thisArticle,recountsthehistory of same-sex
marriage, synthesizingscholarship inthefieldsofsocialanthropology,
ethnography, mythology, comparative literature,
sociology,and eccle-
siasticalhistory.Mostofthescholarship is ofrecentvintage, reflect-
ing the post-Stonewall interestin the topic.6 This contemporary
literaturetendsto be sympathetic to gaylesbianconcerns, and much
of it is writtenby openlybisexual,lesbian,and gay scholars.The
samecan be said of thisArticle,forI also sharethemethodological
perspective ofthisnewscholarship-socialconstructionism-which I
explainin PartI.
A socialconstructionisthistoryemphasizes thewaysin whichmar-
riageis "constructed" by societyovertime,with"exclusions"from
6 Socialanthropologistsbecameinterestedin thisphenomenonearlierthanhistorians,
legal
scholars,and others.Considerthefollowing findings:
In 49 (64 percent)of the76 societiesotherthanour ownforwhichinformation is
available,homosexualactivitiesof one sortor anotherare considerednormaland
sociallyacceptableforcertainmembers ofthecommunity.
... In manycasesthis[same-sex]
behavioroccurswithintheframework ofcourtship
and marriage,themanwhotakesthepartofthefemalebeingrecognized as a berdache
and treatedas a woman.In otherwords,a genuinemateship is involved.
ClellanS. Ford& FrankA. Beach,Patterns ofSexualBehavior130-31(1951) (surveying the
sexualpractices,mores,and institutions
of76 societies)(footnote
omitted).

1422 Law Review
theinstitutionbeingviewedas reflecting largersocialpowerrelations.

Thus,theexclusionofsame-sexcouplesfrommarriage in Americais
an expression ofoursociety'spersecution ofsexualorientation minor-
ities-lesbians,gaymen,and bisexuals.Our insistence thatmarriage
be an optionavailableto us is partofan historical processby which
thevictimsofsociety'sdividing practice(sexualdeviation)havecome
to resistand defythepowerofthatstigma.ThisArticlesituatesthat
resistancein thelargerhistory ofWesternculture'sshifting attitudes
towardsame-sexintimacy, and in the evenlargercontextof other
cultures'morefavorable attitudes towardsame-sexintimacy.
PartIII explorestheimplications ofthishistory, address-
initially
ing debateswithinthe gay,lesbian,and bisexualcommunity about
whether we evenshouldbe seekingtherightto marry(I arguethatwe
should),and thenturning to thelegalarguments developedin PartI.
The historyhas both "defensive"and "offensive" argumentative
power.It revealsthetraditional arguments againstsame-sex marriage
to be seriously thedefinitional
defective: argument essentializingmar-
riagearoundmale-female intimacy is factually wrong;theargument
fromJudeo-Christian tradition is hypocritical, givenearlyChristian-
ity'stoleranceof same-sexintimacy; and thepragmatic argument is
revealedto restupona normatively questionable statusquo.
The history ofsame-sexmarriage also has offensive,or affirmative,
persuasive power.I offer it to thelesbian,bisexual,and gaycommu-
nityas partof a collectiveeffort to retrieve our history, whichhas
beensuppressed and denied.And I offer it to thelegalcommunity as
partof our largernarrative:same-sexunionshave been a valuable
institutionformostof humanhistoryand in mostknowncultures.
Socialandreligious moresin mostcultures, including Western culture
at certaintimes,havevalorizedsame-sexunionsformostofthesame
reasonstheyhave valorizeddifferent-sex unions. Cultures,such as
thatoftherecentWest,thatdenysame-sexunionsdo so to suppress
and persecutea homosocialminority. The processof suppression is
an uglyone. For thesamereasonsthatlaw endeditsprohibition of
interracialmarriagesin 1967,itshouldenditsprohibition ofsame-sex
marriages now.

I. THE LEGAL ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
The intellectual
debateoversame-sexmarriagein Americanlaw
has been a twenty-year conversation largelyconductedwithinthe
framework ofliberaltheory.The post-Stonewall periodofgayrights
activismthrusttheissueontothenation'spolicyagenda,as gayand
lesbiancouplescame out and beganto insiston legalrecognition of
theirrelationships.These couples and theiradvocatesrelied on
rights-orientedarguments, assertingthatsame-sexcouplesare not
materiallydifferentfromdifferent-sexcouplesandshouldtherefore be
giventhesamelegaltreatment as a matterofconstitutional or statu-
toryright.
These argumentshave recentlysucceededin gainingsame-sex
couplessomeofthesamebenefits regularlybestowedupondifferent-
sexcouplesin theprivatesectorand underlocaldomesticpartnership
ordinances.Theyhavethusfarbeenunsuccessful, however, in gain-
ingstate-wide recognitionofsame-sexunionsas marriages.The rea-
sons givenby opponentsof same-sexmarriageare also groundedin
liberalrhetoric.Withrespectto the institution of marriage,these
opponents argue,same-sexcouplesaresimplynotsimilarto different-
sexcouples.Becausemarriage definitionally,
morally,and practically
requiresa manand a woman,thereis no constitutional or statutory
"right"forsame-sexcouplesto marry.
Whyhaveliberalarguments beenso unavailing forthoseadvocat-
ing same-sexmarriage?Social constructionist thoughtsuggeststhat
liberaltheory'shostilityto same-sexmarriagederivesnot fromany
internallogic but insteadfromculturalattitudes-specifically, the
wayAmericansocietyhas constructed bothmarriage and homosexu-
ality.Justas interracial
marriage was portrayedin sucha wayas to
isolateAfricanAmericansfrommainstream society,so prohibitions
againstsame-sexmarriagehelpto preserve thesubordination ofgays,
lesbians,and bisexualswithinsociety.Nonetheless, just as therewas
no neutralwayforliberaltheory tojustifyprohibiting
interracial mar-
riageyesterday,so thereis no neutralwaytojustify prohibiting same-
sex marriagetoday.
A. LiberalArguments forSame-SexMarriage
Before1969,thenotionof a same-sexcoupleentering intostate-
sanctioned
marriage
seemedculturally and legallyimplausible
in this

1424 Law Review
country.Even thoughmanysame-sexcouplesin Americanhistory

enteredinto the functional equivalentof marriageor, surprisingly
enough,were legallymarried,thesetraditions were suppressedor
ignored.The Stonewallriotschangedall that,however, as gaymen,
lesbians,and bisexualscameoutoftheclosetin substantial numbers.
Manyofthesenewly-liberated couplesformed openlycommitted rela-
tionshipsfunctionallysimilarto different-sexmarriages.As partof
this demand for acknowledgment or acceptance,many activists
soughtlegalrecognition of same-sexmarriages on thesametermsas
different-sex
marriages, as part of a generalmovementto end all
formsofstatediscrimination againstlesbians,gaymen,andbisexuals.
For twenty years,gayactivistshaveconfronted thelegalsystem-
mainlythecourts-demanding thatit end its discriminationagainst
same-sexmarriages.Threetypesof arguments have been made in
supportofthesedemands.7First,staterefusalto recognizesame-sex
marriagesviolatesthe rightto marry,whichthe SupremeCourt
inferredfromtheDue ProcessClause in Lovingv. Virginia.8 Loving
invalidatedstatelawsprohibiting different-race
marriages in response
to arguments thattheyviolatedAfricanAmericans'rightto equal
protectionand interracial
couples'dueprocessrightto marry.Subse-
quent caseshaveemphasized thatthefreedom to marrythepersonof
one's choosingstandsas a fundamental due processrightrecognized
forpoor peopleand evenprisoners and thatthisrightcan onlybe
abridgedto further an important or compelling stateinterest.9Gay
activistsand friendlycommentators arguethatby refusing to allow
same-sexcouplesto add a legalsanctionto theirrelationships, states
violatesame-sexcouples' constitutional rightto marry,a position
7 For sourcespresenting the rights-oriented

arguments, see Nan D. Hunter,SherrylE.
Michaelson& ThomasB. Stoddard, The RightsofLesbiansand Gay Men:The BasicACLU
Guideto a Gay Person'sRights75-78(3d ed. 1992);AlissaFriedman, The Necessity forState
Recognition of Same-SexMarriage:Constitutional Requirements and EvolvingNotionsof
Family,3 BerkeleyWomen'sL.J. 134 (1987-88);Rhonda R. Rivera,Our Straight-Laced
Judges:The LegalPositionofHomosexualPersonsin theUnitedStates,30 HastingsL.J.799,
874-78(1979); EditorsoftheHarv.L. Rev.,SexualOrientation and theLaw 95-101(1990).
8 388 U.S. 1 (1967).
9 See Turnerv. Safley,482 U.S. 78 (1987) (holdingthat the state cannot,without

compellingreason,forbidprisoninmates frommarrying whilein prison);Zablockiv. Redhail,
434 U.S. 374 (1978) (finding
thatthestatecannotforbida personwithoutstanding support
obligations
fromremarrying); Boddiev. Connecticut,
401 U.S. 371 (1971) (declaring
thatthe
statecannotcondition divorceuponpayment offeesthatpoorpeoplecannotafford).

whichis just as irrational
as previousstateactionprohibiting differ-
ent-racemarriages.10
In addition,gaylegaltheoristsand feministshave arguedthatby
prohibiting same-sexmarriage, statesengagein sex discrimination,
therebyviolatingthe federalEqual ProtectionClause and/orstate
equal rightsamendments.11 Althoughthestatewillgivea marriage
licenseto virtuallyany woman-man couple,no licensewill be dis-
pensedto anywoman-woman couple. As a consequence,thestateis
discriminatingagainstthe lattercouple simplybecausethe second
partneris a womanand nota man. That,theargument goes,is de
juresexdiscrimination,whichis unconstitutionalunlessjustifiedbya
compellingstateinterest.A deeperformof the sex discrimination
argument, developedby SylviaLaw, is thatanyeffort by thestateto
hardwiresex differences into the conceptof marriageperpetuates
traditionalsex-basedstereotypesofman-as-breadwinner and woman-
as-housekeeper.12Same-sexmarriage is required
bya genderless Con-
stitutionpreciselybecause it unlinksfunctionalroles fromsex
stereotypes.
Finally,undera gayliberal
analysis, same-sexmarriages
prohibiting
is invalidpreciselybecauseit discriminatesagainstlesbianand gay
couples.Manyscholars13andsomejudges14havearguedthatstatutes
10 See Friedman, supranote7, at 155-57;HermaH. Kay, PrivateChoicesand Public

Policy:Confronting theLimitations ofMarriage, 5 Austl.J.Fam. L. 69 (1991);Editorsofthe
HarvardLaw Review,supranote7, at 95-98.
11See SylviaA. Law,Homosexuality and theSocialMeaningofGender,1988Wis.L. Rev.
187,218-21,230-33;ClaudiaA. Lewis,Note,FromThis Day Forward:A FeminineMoral
Discourseon HomosexualMarriage,97 Yale L.J. 1783(1988).
12 Law, supranote11,at 232.
13 The mostsustainedcase forstrictscrutiny is made in Carol S. Steiker,Note, The
Constitutional Statusof Sexual Orientation:Homosexuality as a SuspectClassification,
98
Harv. L. Rev. 1285 (1985). For otherscholarlyworkson this issue,see JohnH. Ely,
Democracyand Distrust162-63(1980); BruceA. Ackerman, BeyondCaroleneProducts, 98
Harv.L. Rev.713 (1985);ElviaR. Arriola,SexualIdentity andtheConstitution: Homosexual
Personsas a Discreteand InsularMinority, 10 Women'sRts. L. Rep. 143 (1988); Richard
Delgado,Fact,Norm,andStandardofReview-TheCase ofHomosexuality, 10U. DaytonL.
Rev. 575 (1985); Cass R. Sunstein,SexualOrientation and theConstitution: A Note on the
Relationship BetweenDue ProcessandEqual Protection, 55 U. Chi.L. Rev. 1161(1988). For
an excellent cautionarypiece,see JanetE. Halley,The PoliticsoftheCloset:TowardsEqual
Protection forGay,Lesbian,and BisexualIdentity, 36 UCLA L. Rev. 915 (1989).
14 The leadingjudicialdecisionapplyingstrictscrutinyto sexualorientationclassifications
is JudgeWilliamA. Norris'panelopinionin Watkinsv. UnitedStatesArmy,847 F.2d 1329,
1345-49(9th Cir. 1988),aff'don othergrounds,875 F.2d 699 (9th Cir. 1989) (en banc)
(affirming the panel decisionon the groundof equitableestoppel,decliningto reachthe

1426 Law Review
classifying
individuals on thebasisoftheirsexualorientation should
triggerheightened equal protection scrutiny.Undersuch scrutiny,
state prohibitions of same-sexmarriageought to be invalidated
becauseno compelling stateinterest treating
justifies gaycouplesdif-
ferentlyfromheterosexual couples.Likethesex discrimination argu-
ment,thisclaimcan sometimes be assertedon thebasisofstatutory as
wellas constitutionalrights.A numberofjurisdictions haveenacted
humanrights statutesthatbroadlyprohibit discriminatingagainstles-
bians,gay men,and bisexualson the basis of theirsexualorienta-
tion.15In theDistrictof Columbia,forexample,theHumanRights
Actprohibits thegovernment fromdiscriminating on thebasisofsex-
ual orientationor fromadoptingpoliciesthat have a discriminatory
effectuponsexualorientation minorities.16Becausedenying marriage
licenseshas suchan effect on lesbianand gaycouples,theDistrict's
refusalto issue licensesis arguablyunlawfulsexualorientation, as
wellas sex,discrimination.
Although suchrights-based arguments arenaturally raisedinlitiga-
tioncontexts,lesbianand gayadvocateshavereliedon similarpitches
in lobbyingforsupportin the executiveand legislativebranches.
Activistshave broughttheseconstitutional and statutory arguments
to stateattorneys general,in additionto petitioningstatelegislatures
to adoptstatutesallowingsame-sexmarriages.
constitutionalissues,and withdrawing thedistrictcourtand panelopinions).JudgeNorris'

viewswerefavorably citedin Commonwealth v. Wasson,842 S.W.2d487, 499 (Ky. 1992).
For dictasupporting JudgeNorris'views,see Gay RightsCoalitionv. Georgetown Univ.,536
A.2d 1, 36 (D.C. Ct. App. 1987)(opinionofMack,J.)(en banc).
15 California,Connecticut, theDistrictof Columbia,Hawaii,Massachusetts, New Jersey,
Vermont, and Wisconsinhave statutesprohibiting job discriminationon thebasisof sexual
orientation.See Cal. Lab. Code ? 1102.1(WestSupp. 1993);Conn.Gen. Stat.Ann.?? 46a-
81c (WestSupp. 1993);D.C. Code Ann.?? 1-2501,-2512(1981); Haw. Rev. Stat.?? 368-1,
378-2(Supp. 1992);Mass. Gen. Laws Ann.ch. 151B,? 4 (WestSupp. 1993);N.J.Stat.Ann.
?? 10:5-4,-12 (West Supp. 1993); Vt. Stat. Ann. tit.3, ? 961(6) (Supp. 1992); id. tit.21
?? 495(a), 1726(a)(7);Wis. Stat.Ann. ? 101.22(West 1988& Supp. 1991). The Districtof
Columbia,Massachusetts, NewJersey,Vermont, andWisconsin also prohibit
businesses from
engaging insuchdiscrimination whenproviding inplacesof"publicaccommodation."
services
See D.C. Code ? 1-2519(1981);Mass. Gen. Laws Ann.ch. 272,?? 92A,98 (West1990);N.J.
StatAnn.?? 10:5-4,-12f(West1993);Vt.Stat.Ann.tit9, ? 4502(a) (Supp. 1992);Wis.Stat.
Ann. ? 101.22(9)(WestSupp. 1990).
16 The District'santi-discrimination
ruleswereappliedto Districtgovernment agenciesin
Dickersonv. D.C. Dep't of HumanServs.,No. 89-465-PA(N)(D.C. Comm'non Human
Rights,1991).

B. LiberalArguments AgainstSame-SexMarriage
As ofOctober1993,noneofthelegalefforts to gainstatewide rec-
in
ognitionofsame-sexmarriage theUnitedStates has been success-
fu,1,7
thoughseveralefforts are stillpendingand one (in Hawaii) has
obtaineda rulingthatthestatemustshowa compelling interestforits
exclusionof same-sexcouples frommarriage.Same-sexmarriage
opponents-primarily stateattorneys generaldefending statestatutes,
state courtjudges interpreting and upholdingthose statutes,and
interestgroupopponents(the CatholicChurchand fundamentalist
Protestant denominations)-have arguedthattheconceptis a contra-
dictionin terms.Marriagemustinvolvea man and a woman,they
betweenpeopleofthesamesexsimplycannot
contend:a relationship
be a marriage,as a matterof definition, morality,and Western
practice.
The mainargument againstsame-sexmarriage mar-
is definitional:
riageis necessarily
different-sex and therefore cannotincludesame-
sex couples. Hence,the authorsof any statutethattalksof "mar-
riage"couldhaveonlycontemplated couples,evenifthe
different-sex
statuteis notgendered,i.e.,doesnotuse thespecific terms"husband"
17 For leading judicialdecisionsrejectingarguments forsame-sexmarriage, see Adamsv.

Howerton, 486 F. Supp. 1119(C.D. Cal. 1980),aff'don othergrounds, 673 F.2d 1036(9th
Cir. 1982);Singerv. Hara, 522 P.2d 1187(Wash. Ct. App. 1974);Jonesv. Hallahan,501
S.W.2d588(Ky. 1973);Bakerv. Nelson,191N.W.2d185(Minn.1971),appealdismissed, 409
U.S. 810 (1972); see also Baehr v. Lewin,No. 91-1394-05(Haw. Cir. Ct. Sept. 3, 1991)
(rejectingplaintiffs'
equalprotection claim),vacatedand remanded, 852 P.2d 44 (Haw. 1993);
SuccessionofBacot,502So. 2d 1118,1127-30(La. Ct. App.) (holdingthata mancannotbe a
"concubine"of anotherman),writdenied,503 So. 2d 466 (La. 1987);Jennings v. Jennings,
315 A.2d 816, 820 n.7 (Md. Spec. Ct. App. 1974) (explainingthat "Marylanddoes not
recognize a marriagebetween personsofthesamesex");In reEstateofCooper,564 N.Y.S.2d
684, 687 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1990)(refusing to "elevate[] homosexualunionsto thesamelevel
achievedbythemarriage oftwopeopleoftheoppositesex");Anonymous v. Anonymous, 325
N.Y.S.2d499 (N.Y. Sup.Ct. 1971)(stating that"[m]arriage is and alwayshasbeena contract
betweena manand a woman");De Santov. Barnsley, 476 A.2d 952 (Pa. Super.Ct. 1984)
(holdingthatpersonsof thesamesex cannotcontracta commonlaw marriage); Slaytonv.
Texas,633 S.W.2d934,937(Tex.Ct. App. 1982)(stating thatsame-sex marriage is impossible
in Texas).
The attorneys generalofat leastsix stateshaveissuedopinionsthattheirstates'marriage
lawsprohibit same-sex marriages andcan constitutionally do so. Theyare 190Op. Att'yGen.
Ala. 30 (1983); 1975Colo. AG LEXIS 38; 77 Op. Att'yGen.Kan. 248 (1977); 1978Miss.AG
LEXIS 684; 1976S.C. AG LEXIS 423; 88 Op. Att'yGen. Tenn.43 (1988).

1428 VirginiaLaw Review [Vol. 79:1419
and "wife." Typical is the KentuckyCourt of Appeals' discussionin

Jonesv. Hallahan:18
Kentuckystatutesdo not specifically prohibitmarriagebetween
personsofthesamesex nordo theyauthorizetheissuanceofa mar-
riagelicenseto suchpersons.
Marriagewas a customlongbeforethestatecommenced to issue
licensesforthatpurpose.For a timethe recordsof marriagewere
keptbythechurch.... [Miarriage hasalwaysbeenconsideredas the
unionof a man and a womanand we havebeenpresented withno
authority to thecontrary.
It appearsto us thatappellantsare prevented
frommarrying, not
bythestatutes ofKentucky or therefusaloftheCountyCourtClerk
of Jefferson Countyto issuethema license,butratherby theirown
incapability of entering
intoa marriageas thattermis defined.19
Any argumentfocusingon statutoryinterpretation is naturallydis-
patched by this definitionalapproach, because all of the state mar-
riage statutes-whether gendered or not-employ the term
"marriage."20 Although the Kentucky court relied on historyand
traditionto definemarriage,othercourts have approached the issue
as a functionalmatter,but withthe same result:same-sexunions are
not "marriages" because the purpose of marriage is procreation,
which same-sexcouples cannot accomplish.21
Courts have also invokedthe definitionalargumentas a basis for
rejectingconstitutionalchallenges founded upon Loving's right to
marry. The leading case is the WashingtonCourt of Appeals' deci-
sion in Singerv. Hara,22 whichnot onlyrejecteda federaldue process
argumentbased upon Loving, but also an argumentbased upon the
state equal rightsamendment:
Giventhedefinition
ofmarriagewhichwe haveenunciated,thedis-
tinctionbetweenthe case presentedby appellants[two men] and
18 501 S.W.2d588 (Ky. 1973).

19 Id. at 589 (emphasisaddedand footnote
omitted).
20 See id. at 590 (statingthat "the relationshipproposedby the appellantsdoes not
authorizetheissuanceof a marriage licensebecausewhattheyproposeis nota marriage");
Bacot,502 So. 2d at 1130;Baker,191N.W.2dat 185-86;Singer,522 P.2d at 1191.
21 See Baker, 191 N.W.2dat 186. On thisview,procreation at leastmustbe a potential
purpose.Becausesame-sex couplescannotcreatechildrenbythemselves (a thirddifferent-sex
personmustbe introduced, e.g.,a spermdonoror a surrogate),
definingmarriage in thisway
also excludesdifferent-sex
coupleswhoare unableto bearchildren.
22 522 P.2d 1187(Wash.Ct. App. 1974).

[that]presentedinLoving. . . is apparent.In Loving. .. theparties
werebarredfromentering intothemarriagerelationship becauseof
an impermissibleracialclassification.Thereis no analogoussexual
classification
involvedin theinstantcase becauseappellantsare not
beingdeniedentryintothemarriage becauseoftheirsex;
relationship
rather,theyare beingdeniedentryinto the marriagerelationship
becauseoftherecognized definitionofthatrelationshipas one which
maybe enteredintoonlyby two personswho are membersof the
oppositesex.23
By definingmarriageas essentiallydifferent-sex, the court thus was
able to avoid the charge that the state was creatingan invidiousdis-
criminationby denyinglicensesto same-sexcouples.24
The opponentsof same-sexmarriagehave also attemptedto show
thatdefiningmarriageto includeonlydifferent-sex couples is justified
morally,to preservefamilyvalues and traditionalethical notions.
Accordingly,the second typeof oppositionistargumentinvokescom-
munityvalues, includingthe antihomosexualteachingsof the Old
Testament. The federalcourtin Adamsv.Howerton 25made just such
a definitionalargumentby linkingit to traditionalJudeo-Christian
morality:
The definitionofmarriage,therightsandresponsibilities in
implicit
that relationship,and the protectionsand preferences affordedto
marriage, are now governed by thecivillaw. The Englishcivillaw
tookitsattitudesandbasicprinciplesfromcanonlaw,which,inearly
times,was administered in the ecclesiasticalcourts. Canon law in
bothJudaismand Christianity couldnotpossiblysanctionanymar-
riagebetweenpersonsofthesamesex becauseof thevehement con-
demnationin the scriptures of both religionsof all homosexual
relationships.Thus therehas been forcenturiesa combination of
scriptural
and canonicalteachingunderwhicha "marriage" between
persons of the same sex was unthinkableand, by definition,
impossible.26
23 Id. at 1192.
24 See alsoBaker,191N.W.2dat 186-87,in whichthecourtdistinguished Lovingfromthe
rightto privacycaseson thegroundthatthelatteremphasized procreation's
essential
linkto
marriage.For thisreason,"in commonsenseand in a constitutional sense,thereis a clear
distinction betweena maritalrestrictionbased merelyupon race and one based upon the
fundamental in sex." Id. at 187.
difference
25 486 F. Supp. 1119(C.D. Cal. 1980),aff'don othergrounds, 673 F.2d 1036(9th Cir.
1982).
26 Id. at 1123(footnotes
omitted).

1430 Law Review
More dramatically, the Districtof ColumbiaSuperiorCourt'sdeci-

sioninDean v.District ofColumbia27 invokedpassagesfromGenesis,
Deuteronomy, Matthew,and Ephesiansto supportits holdingthat
"societalrecognition thatittakesa mananda womanto forma mari-
tal relationship
is olderthanChristianity an apparentrefer-
itself,"28
ence to Adam and Eve. Althoughthese decisionsrest upon a
suspiciously sectarianvisionof morality, theycould have invoked
general"familyvalues"to thesameeffect, as othercourtsand com-
mentators havedone.29
Traditional Judeo-Christian morality worksagainstsame-sexmar-
riagein anotherway. Its sexualmoresare reflected in statesodomy
laws-currentlyfound in more than twentystates-which are
invokedin theirrelevant jurisdictions
as a basisforopposingsame-sex
marriages.The DistrictofColumbiaSuperiorCourtinDean believed
thatallowingsame-sexmarriages wouldcontradict expressedpublic
policywherethesexualconductat theheartofthosemarriages was
criminalized.30 The SupremeCourtin Bowersv. Hardwick3'sug-
gestedthat"millenniaofmoralteaching"32 can protectsodomylaws
againstdue processattack.The sameidea is potentially applicableto
marriagerights.
A thirdargument againstsame-sexmarriageappealsto pragma-
tism. Even if unconstrained by formaldefinitions and traditional
27 No. CA 90-13892 (D.C. Super.Ct. Dec. 30, 1991),appealdocketed,

No. 92-737(D.C. Ct.
App. June2, 1992).
28 Id., slipop. at 18-21.A similar tropewas deployedinBaker,191N.W.2dat 186("The
institution ofmarriage as a unionofmanand woman,uniquelyinvolving theprocreation and
rearingofchildren withina family,is as old as thebookofGenesis.").
29 See G. SidneyBuchanan, Same-SexMarriage:The LinchpinIssue,10U. DaytonL. Rev.
541, 567 (1985) ("The majority[of society],therefore, may reasonablybelievethatlegal
recognition of same-sexmarriage. . . wouldimpairtheabilityof opposite-sex marriageto
advancetheindividual andcommunity valuesthatithastraditionally
promoted."); seealsoid.
at 559-60(arguing thatthestateoughttobe abletoimplement community moralstandards by
discouraging conductinconsistent withthosestandards).
30 See Dean, slipop. at 9 ("[L]egislative authorizationofhomosexual,same-sexmarriages
wouldconstitute tacitstateapprovalor endorsement of thesexualconduct,to wit,sodomy,
commonly associatedwithhomosexualstatus-conductdeemedby societyto be so morally
reprehensible as to be a criminaloffensein the Districtof Columbiaand manyother
jurisdictions.") (footnotes omitted).The Districtsubsequently repealedits sodomylaw in
1993,however.
31 478 U.S. 186(1986).
32 Id. at 197 (Burger,C.J.,concurring). Thoughthe ChiefJustice'sphrasingis more
quotable,themajority opinionreliedon a similarargument.See id. at 192-94.

morality, the pragmatist mightstillbe reluctantto allow same-sex
marriagesif such marriageswouldproveimpractical or unjustified
undera socialcost-benefit analysis.JudgeRichardPosner'sSex and
Reasonpresents just sucha pragmatic case againstpermittingsame-
sex marriageat thistime.33Recognizingsame-sexrelationships as
marriagewould be problematic, he suggests,becauseit would "be
widelyinterpreted as placinga stampof approvalon homosexual-
ity."34Moreover,such recognition would carryan "information
cost"in thatthesocialvalueofknowing someoneis marriedwouldbe
somewhatreducedas thetermis broadened.35 Finally,acknowledg-
ing same-sexmarriageswouldhave a varietyof "collateraleffects,
simplybecausemarriageis a statusrichin entitlements," manyof
whichwerenotdesignedwithsame-sexcouplesin mind.36
This lastpointis themostimportant.If thestatesuddenlyrecog-
nizedsame-sexmarriages, employers wouldhaveto rethink whether
to providefringe benefitsoncemanyoftheirnewlymarriedgayand
lesbian employeesclaimed spousal coverage. Legislatureswould
becomeembroiledin a spate of controversies about which(if any)
marriageentitlements theywoulddenyto same-sexcouples. If any
entitlementsweredenied,stateattorneys generalwouldthenbe faced
withtheprospect oflitigatingtheconstitutionality
ofsuchdiscrimina-
tion. Finally,stateagenciesandprivateemployers wouldhaveto per-
formnewcost-benefit analysesto recalibratethehealthcare,spousal
leave,and otherbenefits nowaccordedmarriedcouples.
For thePosnerianpragmatist, evenifthemoralobjections to same-
sex marriagehavebecomeattenuated afterStonewall,theconceptof
different-sex
marriageis so culturally embeddedin our society-and
interwoven throughout its social and economicinstitutions-that
policymakers (especiallyunelectedjudges) cannot simplylegalize
same-sexmarriagesand expectthatsocietywill acquiescewithout
33 RichardA. Posner,Sex and Reason311-13(1992).

34 Id. at 311. JudgePosnerdoes notdiscusstheargument that,by permittingconvicted
rapists,spouseabusers,and misogynists to marrytheirvictims,the statemightbe widely
interpreted as placinga stampofapprovalon rape,spouseabuse,and misogyny.
35 Id. at 312. JudgePosnerconcedesthatdenying same-sexmarriagescarrieswhat I
considerto be evenmoresevere"information costs"forthosein a same-sex
union:theparties
cannotsignaltheirlevelofcommitment by getting
marriedor deliberating
theissue.
36 Id. at 313. This pointis reviewedcriticallyin WilliamN. Eskridge,Jr.,A Social
Constructionist CritiqueofPosner'sSex and Reason:StepsTowarda GaylegalAgenda,102
Yale L.J.333,352-59(1992).

1432 Law Review
experiencingturmoiland disruption.On theotherhand,pragmatic

abovemightbe viewedlessas argu-
concernssuchas thosearticulated
mentsagainstsame-sexmarriage simpliciter,
and moreas arguments
thatthisnew institutioncannotbe thrustupon societyabruptlyby
unelectedjudges. Instead,advocatesshouldadvancetheidea incre-
mentally,starting
withdomesticpartnership and working
ordinances
up to same-sexmarriages overtime.
C. Towarda GaylegalResponse:Social Constructionism

In responseto the definitional,
moral,and pragmaticarguments
discussedabove,thegaylegalcommunity anditsallieshavedeveloped
liberalmeta-arguments.The mainpitchhasbeenlibertarian: thestate
shouldallowpeopleto marrywhomever theydesireso longas there
are no gravethird-partyeffectsof a tangibleand significant nature.
Undera libertarian view,the definitionalargument is circular-the
state cannotdefendits prohibition of same-sexmarriagessimply
becauseitdoesnotbelievethemtobe marriages.Casesupholding the
rightto marryrequirethestateto providean independent reason,one
grounded uponthird-partyharmsand notjustmoraldisapproval37 or
a sectarianunderstandingofmarriage.38 Also,as a practicalmatter,
stateprohibitionofsame-sexmarriageservesnoneofthefamilyval-
ues trumpetedbythosewhoresisttheinstitution. Bydenying gayand
lesbiancouplesthe legal protections and householdstability facili-
tatedby marriagelaws,thestateonlyimpedesour abilityto create
"familieswe choose."39
These libertariancounterarguments have been uniformly unsuc-
cessful,forreasonshavingto do withprecedent (theBowersproblem
withanyargument based on theDue ProcessClause),thedoctrinal
weaknessoftheright-to-marry lineofcases,' and culturalresistance
37 Thisis supported notonlybyLovingv. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1966),whosevalidationof

different-racemarriages cameinthefaceofwidespread socialdisapproval,butalsobyPalmore
v. Sidoti,466 U.S. 429 (1984),whichheldthatmajority "prejudice"generallycouldnotbe the
basisforstatepenalties.Id. at 434. Bothcases expressly disapproved ofstateactsimposing
punishment as a meansbywhichto accommodate racialprejudice.
38 See Sherryl E. Michaelson,
Note,ReligionandMorality A Reexamination
Legislation: of
Establishment ClauseAnalysis,59 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 301,307-11(1984).
39 See Friedman, supranote 7, at 160-69;see also Kath Weston,FamiliesWe Choose:
Lesbians,Gays,Kinship(1991) (coiningthephrase).
40 See EarlM. Maltz,Constitutional ProtectionfortheRightto Marry:A Dissenting View,
60 Geo. Wash.L. Rev. 949 (1992).

to theveryideaofsame-sexmarriage generallyand "homosexuals" in
particular.Perhapsa betterlineofliberalmeta-argument is theegali-
tarianpitch:it is discrimination, pureand simple,to denysame-sex
couplesthe same marriagerightsas different-sex couples. Denying
same-sexcouplesmarriagelicensesis a clearcase of discrimination,
thereforedirectlyimplicating theEqual Protection Clause,whichren-
dersanygendered statepolicysuspect(or quasi-suspect).The policy
of the Equal ProtectionClause is also strongly implicated, because
such discrimination is animatedby thesortsof irrational prejudices
and genderstereotypes thathavebeenclearedawayin othercontexts.
Bowersby its termsdoes notapplyto equal protection claims. The
Hawaii SupremeCourtrecently accepteda versionoftheegalitarian
argument, whiledecisivelyrejectingthe libertarian pitch,and has
requiredthestatetojustifyitsexclusionofsame-sexcouples.41
ExceptfortheHawaiidecision,egalitarian claimshavesuffered the
samefateas libertarian ones. A difficulty
theyshareis thatbothoper-
ateundera faiththatourliberalpolitywillassurebisexuals, gaymen,
and lesbiansthesame"neutral"protection ofourautonomy (thelib-
ertarianpoint)and the same "neutral"protection againstarbitrary
classifications
(theegalitarian point)thatare assuredall citizensin a
liberalpolity.Yet liberalism has had no biteforus: our liberty has
been definedaway by denyingour capacityformakinga marital
"choice,"and our equalityhas beencompromised by makinghomo-
sexualitya suspect"group"ratherthan a suspect"classification."
Thisposesa challengeforthegaylegalcommunity-to escapeconfin-
ing liberalconceptualizations of our position.Social constructionist
theoryhas provideda different way to conceptualizethe case for
same-sexmarriage.
At thesametimethegaylegalcommunity was struggling to obtain
equalrights,wewerealso engagedinan intellectual struggle to under-
standwhyAmericansocietyhas beenso hysterically hostileto us.42
Whatemergedfromthisstruggle was widespreadagreement among
gaylesbianintellectuals thatsexualorientation as a category is socially
constructed,and thatthemodernWest'sobsessionwiththatcategory
41See Baehrv. Lewin,852 P.2d 44, 67 (Haw. 1993).

42Thislatterstruggle
has manyparallelswithfeminist andcriticalracetheory
and,indeed,
wasinfluencedheavilybyfeminist
thought inparticular.See,e.g.,GayleRubin,ThinkingSex:
Notesfora RadicalTheoryofthePoliticsofSexuality,in Pleasureand Danger267 (CaroleS.
Vanceed., 1984).

1434 Law Review
is partof a complexweb of attitudesand institutions thatworkto

subordinate wholegroupsofpeople,including straight,bisexual,and
lesbianwomenas well as bisexualand gay men.43Thereis now a
substantial literature,groundedin philosophy, history,anthropology,
and sociology, thatdevelopssocialconstructionist theoryas a wayof
thinkingabout culturegenerally,and sexualityand marriagein
particular.
Social constructionism providesa framework forevaluating same-
sex marriagesthat differs fromtraditionalliberalthought.This
framework can be expressedas threehypotheses.First,marriageis
nota naturally generated institutionwithcertainessentialelements.
Instead,it is a construction thatis linkedwithotherculturaland
social institutions,so thattheold-fashioned boundariesbetweenthe
publicand privatelifemeltaway. Second,thesocialconstruction of
institutions likemarriage is notand cannotbe neutral, forit involves
theplayingoutofa society'spowerrelationships. Categoricallydeny-
ingsame-sexmarriage relatesnotonlyto thenotionthatprocreation
is essentialto marriage, butmoredeeplyto Americans' fearsofhomo-
sexuality(itselfan historically recentconstruct),
just as denyingdif-
ferent-race marriagewas relatedto Americans'racialanxieties(also
an historical construct).Third,thesocialconstruction ofmarriage is
dynamic.Linkedas it is to otherinstitutions and attitudes,marriage
willchangeas theychange.Conceptualized aroundcertainpractices
dividingsociety'sconstituents, marriageshould change as the
subordinated groupsidentify theirownoppression anddecideto resist
it.
Thesesocialconstructionist hypotheseshavemanyimplications for
the legal debateover same-sexmarriage,but I can hardlyexplore
those implications withoutoffering some evidencesupporting the
hypotheses themselves.As evidence,I offer thefollowing history of
same-sexunions.
43 For theleadingsources, see 1 MichelFoucault,The HistoryofSexuality(RobertHurley

trans.,PantheonBooks 1978)(1976); MaryMcIntosh,The HomosexualRole, 16 Soc. Probs.
182 (1968),reprinted in The Makingof theModernHomosexual30-49(KennethPlummer
ed., 1981); see also Formsof Desire: Sexual Orientation and the Social Constructionist
Controversy (EdwardSteined., 1990) (exploringsocial constructionism);
SexualMeanings:
The CulturalConstruction of Genderand Sexuality (SherryB. Ortner& HarrietWhitehead
eds., 1981)(same).

II. SAME-SEX UNIONS IN OTHER TIMES AND OTHER CULTURES
Ifonereadonlylegalmaterials, onewouldthinksame-sexmarriage
an historicaland culturaloddity,if not freakish and perverse.Yet
historians,socialanthropologists,and scholarsofcomparative litera-
turehavebeenwriting aboutsame-sexmarriage formostofthiscen-
tury,with a boomletin the last two decades. Same-sexunions
groundeduponaffection, sexualattraction, or a mixturethereof are
commonplacein humanhistory,and the following accountis my
effortto introduce thisscholarship to a legalaudience.
Severalgeneralpointsshouldbe madeat theoutset.ThestoryI am
goingto tellis episodicand fragmentary. A thorough history ofmar-
riageitselfhas yetto be written," and mayneverbe written, because
therecordsofpeople'severyday livesno longerexistor existin hard-
to-decipher form.45 A history of same-sexunionswillbe evenmore
fragmentary, becausesame-sexrelationships have notcomprised the
predominant formof mateshipin mostculturesand havebeensys-
tematically suppressed in theWestforseveralcenturies.
Anothercomplication involvesterminology. Humanrelationships
and companionships assumeas manydifferent formsas therearesoci-
eties,and generalizing aboutinstitutions acrossculturesis perilous.
Nonetheless, employing somecategoriesmayhelpto makesenseof
thedata. I shallthususe theterm"same-sexunions"to referto any
kindofculturally or legallyrecognized institutionwhereby peopleof
thesamesex are bondedtogether in relationshipsforsexualor other
reasonsofaffinity. Includedwithinthegeneralcategoryofsame-sex
unionswillbe same-sex"relationships," whichare culturally butnot
legallyrecognizedin the society,and same-sex"marriages," which
are givensomekindoflegalrecognition.46
44 However, therehavebeenmanyexcellent monographs. E.g.,JamesA. Brundage, Law,

Sex,and ChristianSocietyin MedievalEurope(1987);JohnR. Gillis,For Better, For Worse:
BritishMarriages,1600to thePresent(1985); David Herlihy,MedievalHouseholds(1985);
SarahB. Pomeroy, Goddesses,Whores,Wives,and Slaves(1975); TamaraK. Hareven,The
HistoryoftheFamilyand theComplexity ofSocial Change,96 Am. Hist.Rev. 95 (1991).
45 Thuswe do notknowwhenmarriage becameinstitutionalizedin mostsocieties,
or even
theextentto whichhistoricalmarriage-likeinstitutions
resemblemarriagestakingplacetoday
in current
Western society.
46 Comparemy approachwiththe more liberalapproachtakenby JohnBoswellin
Christianity,
SocialTolerance,and Homosexuality 26 (1980):
No marriages in ancientsocietiescloselymatchtheirmodernequivalents.Most were
vastlymoreinformal; someweremorerigid.... No precisecriteria couldbe specified

1436 Virginia
Law Review [Vol.79:1419
Functionalcategoriesmay also be useful,bothdescriptively and
normatively.47"Transgenerational" unionsreferto intimate pairings
ofpeopleofdifferent generations or at leastsignificantly
different
ages
or levelsofmaturity. Theseunionstypically involvea matureperson
and a youthfuloneand tendto be temporary For these
relationships.
reasons,such relationshipsare morenormatively questionablefrom
theperspective of Westernvalues,thoughtheymayservea cultural
purposefromthepointof viewof thesocietiesin whichtheyoccur.
Transgenerational relationshipsare oftenlinkedwithmarriage, as a
preparationforor a complement to one's different-sexmarriage,for
example."Transgenderal" unionsinvolvetwopeopleofthesamesex,
one of whomassumessome of the rolesand characteristics of the
oppositesex. Theseunionscan taketheformof eitherrelationships
or marriages.Berdachemarriages, such as that of We'wha,were
transgenderal.Note thattransgenderal unionsacceptsociety'scon-
ceptsof gender(forthemostpart). Froma feminist pointof view,
theserelationshipsmightbe questionable.Finally,a "companionate"
union,suchas thatbetweenSergiusand Bacchus,involvesa same-sex
couple, each partnerhavingequal statusand neithernecessarily
assumingthe role or identityof the oppositesex. Companionate
unionsare mostsimilarto thosethatare typically valorizedby most
modernWesternperspectives.
For narrativeconvenience, I haveorganizedthehistory ofsame-sex
unionsintothreesegments: first,
thepre-modern antecedentsofWest-
ern(European)culture;second,NativeAmerican, Africanand Asian
cultures,witha focuson thetreatment of same-sexunionspriorto
Westernization;and,third,themodernperiod,in whichWestern cul-
turecameto dominatetheworld.The first twosegments revealthat
in manycommunities, includingpre-modern Westernsociety,same-
sex marriageflourished. However,in themodernperiod,our third
segment,one findsthatsocietygenerallyhas suppressedsame-sex
marriage.
as constituting
a "legal"marriageduringmostoftheperiodofthisstudy:twopeople
who livedtogether permanently
and whoseunionwas recognized by thecommunity
were"married."
47 For a discussionof thesetypological
terms,see generallyDavid F. Greenberg,The
Constructionof Homosexuality25-77 (1988) (providinga leading social historyof
homosexualityand distinguishing
homosexual relationships
on thebasisoftherelativesocial
statusesofthepersonsinvolved).

A. Same-SexUnionsin Pre-Modern Cultures

Western
The earlyEgyptian andMesopotamian societiesthatareconsidered
important antecedentsforWesterncultureapparently notonlytoler-
atedsame-sexrelationships, butalso recognizedsuchrelationshipsin
theirculture,literature,
and mythology. Evidenceof same-sexmar-
riageis at bestindirect
in theseancientsocieties,
however.One finds
slightlystronger and moredirectevidenceof same-sexmarriages in
Greekand earlyRomanculture,in imperialRome,and in Western
EuropeformuchoftheChristian MiddleAges.
1. TheAncientNearEast (Egyptand Mesopotamia)

Becausethereareso fewsurviving recordspertaining to family and
sexualmatters, we knowlittleof themostancientcultures'specific
practices,
namely,thoseof Egypt,Mesopotamia, and theirenvirons.
However,afterexamining thefewpertinent records(includinglegal
documents),as well as the literature,myths,and artifacts of this
period,one mighttentativelyconcludethatmostancientculturesdid
not prohibitsame-sexrelationships,nor did manystigmatize them.
Althoughtheevidenceis debatable,someoftheancientculturesmay
have treatedsame-sexrelationshipssimilarly to marriages involving
different-sex
partners.
The evidenceofmaritalpractices-whether fordifferent-or same-
sex unions-is particularlysparseforEgypt;fewrecordsilluminate
theintimate practicesof theregion,and no authoritative legaltexts
survive.Yet someartifactshavedepictedsame-sex couplesinfamiliar
poses, perhapsprovidingevidencethat Egyptiansocietyat some
pointsin its historywas acceptingof same-sexrelationships. For
example,a tombfortwo male courtiers of theFifthDynasty(circa
2600 B.C.) includesbas-reliefs
of the "two men in intimateposes,
holdinghands,embracing, nosestouching,"48posesthatarestrikingly
moreeroticthanthosedepictingdifferent-sex couplesin Egyptian
tombs.49Socialhistorian David Greenberg arguesthatthemenwere
loverswhosesame-sexrelationship was apparently acceptedby the
state,becausethePharaohprovidedtheirtomb. Indeed,thetombof
48 Id. at 130.
49 Id. Thisis significant
inpartbecauseEgyptian
tombartofthatperiodwasalmostalways
stiffly
posed,evenforhusband-and-wife figures.

1438 Virginia
Law Review [Vol. 79:1419
at least one Pharaoh, the renownedIkhnaton,containsfiguresof the

Pharaoh and his male consortposed even more intimately.50
The most interestingevidence for same-sex coupling in ancient
Egypt is indirect. Afterlivingfor several generationsin Egypt,the
Israelitesfledthatland, ultimatelysettlingin Canaan. Their religion
was a conscious reaction to Egyptian customs,includingsame-sex
marriages,it appears. Chaptereighteenof Leviticusadmonishesthe
Israelitesto avoid the "doings of the land of Egypt,whereinye dwelt
... neithershall ye walk in theirordinances."51 Subsequentpassages
in chaptereighteenidentify specificpractices:"Thou shaltnot lie with
mankind,as withwomankind:it is abomination."52The implication
that same-sexintimacywas common in Egypt (and Canaan) is con-
firmedby the Sifra,an exegetic midrash interpreting the book of
Leviticus. The Sifrasays of chaptereighteen:
A. If "You shallnotcopythepracticesoftheland of Egypt... or
oftheland ofCanaan,"
B. mightone thinkthattheyare notto buildtheirbuildingsor
plantvineyards as theydid?
C. Scripturesays,"norshallyoufollowtheirlaws":
D. "I havereferred onlyto therulesthatweremadeforthemand
fortheirfathers and theirfathers'
fathers."
E. And whatwouldtheydo?
F. A manwouldmarrya man,and a womanwouldmarrya
woman,a manwouldmarrya womanand herdaughter, a
womanwouldbe marriedto twomen.
G. That is whyit is said,"norshallyoufollowtheirlaws."53
50 An unusualdegreeofintimacy is alsoshownindepictions ofKingIkhnaton (1379-1362

B.C.) and hisson-in-law and probableco-regent Smenkhare. Theyare showntogether
nude-a convention quite rare in Egyptianrepresentations of royalty.On a stele,
IkhnatonstrokesSmenkhare underthechin. Smenkhare is giventitlesofendearment
thathad beenusedpreviously forIkhnaton's concubines and queen.
Id. This evidenceis suggestive butnotconclusiveas to a same-sexunion. It shouldalso be
notedthatby the timeof IkhnatonEgyptiantombart offered figuresthatwereless stiffly
posed.
51 Leviticus18:3(KingJames).
52 Id. 18:22;see id. 18:24,27 (admonishing theIsraelitesfrom"theseabominations" that
defiled"thenations,"probably referring to Egyptand thenationsin Canaan).
53 3 JacobNeusner,Sifra:An Analytical 74 (1988) (translating
Translation Chapter193,
entitled"ParashatAhareMot Parashah"8). I am greatlyindebtedto Yair Chamudotfor
bringing thismaterialto myattention.

Thisevidencesuggests a stronger possibilityofinstitutionalizedsame-

sex intimacy or evenmarriage in Egyptand Canaan,thoughit is not
conclusiveevidenceto thateffect.
Similarto evidencein Egypt,GreenbergreportsthatMesopota-
mianmonarchs, notablyKingZimri-Lim ofMariand KingHammu-
rabiof Babylon,had maleloversakinto wives:
Thatthere wasnoreligious prohibitionagainst
homosexuality isclear
notonlyfrom theexistenceofcult[homosexual] butalso
prostitution,
from thetextofanAlmanac ofIncantations,whichcontains prayers
favoring,onan equalbasis,theloveofa manfora woman, a woman
fora man,anda manfora man.54
In thethirdmillennium B.C. generally,maritaland familialrelations
weremostlyfluid,withancientrecordsrevealingwomenmarrying
morethanonehusbandandoftentakingan important roleinaffairs."
AdditionalevidenceforMesopotamian morespertaining to same-
sexrelationships can be foundinthemostcelebrated oftheMesopota-
mianmyths, theepicofGilgamesh.Written through a collectivepro-
cess over severalgenerations, the epic describesthe relationship
betweenGilgamesh, thegreatpowerful rulerofUruk,and Enkidu,a
malecreatedbythegodsto divertGilgameshfromwreaking havocin
theworld.56Gilgameshand Enkidubecomecomrades,friends, and
probably lovers57 beforeEnkidudiesat thehandsofthefates.Classi-
cistDavid Halperindescribestherelationship:
Enkiduis often calledGilgamesh's "brother"(ahu). Moreover, Gil-
gamesh's forEnkidu
feeling isexplicitly
modeled onsexualattraction:
inthetwodreams thatpresage thearrivalofEnkidu,Gilgamesh takes
pleasureinhisvisionofEnkiduas ina woman(though hedoesnot
takesuchpleasure inEnkiduhimself whenthelatter finally
arrives).
The crucialphraseoccursonlyonce(in theseconddream)in the
extantfragments oftheOldBabylonian version,
buttheAssyrian ver-
sionpicksitupandrepeats itrelentlessly.
Thephrase itself
hasbeen
variously rendered:E.A. Speisertranslates,"[I lovedit] and was
drawn toitas though toa woman," whereas Jeffrey
Tigayprefers, "[I
lovedit,andlik]ea wifeI caressed it." Whatevertheexactmeaning
54 Id. at 126 (footnote

omitted).
55 See GerdaLerner,The Creationof Patriarchy
68-75(1986).
56 See generally H. Tigay,The EvolutionoftheGilgameshEpic (1982) (tracingthe
Jeffrey
historicaldevelopment ofthestoryof Gilgamesh).
57 Id. at 184 n.22.

1440 Virginia
of theproblematic termhababu,itsimplication is notin doubt:the
wordthatdescribesGilgamesh'santicipated attraction to Enkiduis
attraction
also usedto describeEnkidu'santicipated to theprostitute
fromUruk,withwhomhe matesforsixdaysandsevennights.When
Enkidudies,moreover, Gilgameshmournsforhimlikea widow(lit-
erally,"a wailingwoman")and veilshis corpseas ifit werea bride.
The pointoftheseanalogiesto kinand objectsofsexualdesireseems
to be thatEnkidu'sfriendshipaffordsGilgamesha proleptic tasteof
the pleasuresof humansociality,includingmarriageand paternity
58
Becausetheepic of Gilgameshwas a collectiveprojectand achieved

greatpopularity in ancienttimes,onemightinferthatitsglorification
of same-sexrelationships had some resonancein the culturesof
ancientBabyloniaand Assyria. If so, Mesopotamianculturehad
someappreciation notonlyforcompanionate same-sexrelationships,
but also forthenotionthatsuch relationships wereintimateunions
closelyakinto different-sex marriages.
Furtherevidenceofsame-sexrelationships maybe foundin Meso-
potamianstatutes, whichhavebeenpreserved, escapingthefateofthe
lost Egyptianlaws. None of Mesopotamia'searlylegal codes-the
Laws ofUrukagina(2375B.C.), theLaws ofUr-Nammu(2100B.C.),
the Laws of Eshnunna(1750 B.C.), the Laws of Hammurabi(1726
B.C.), and the HittiteLaws (circa 800 B.C.)-prohibitedor disap-
provedof same-sexrelationships,59 even thoughsex and marriage
wereotherwise heavilyregulated.Indeed,the HittiteLaws can be
readto suggestthatsame-sexmarriagewas legallyas wellas cultur-
allysanctioned in at leastsomepartsofancientMesopotamia.Table
I of the HittiteLaws regulatedmarriage, specifically
the husband's
paymentofbride-price to thewife.' Althoughit was assumedthat
thisregulationappliedto theadvantageoffreeHittitecitizens, special
provisionsin Table I afforded explicitlegal authorityforslavesto
obtainbridesin this way; otherwise, slaves apparentlycould not
marry.For example,section34 provided:"If a slavegivesthebride-
priceto a womanand takesheras his wife,no-oneshall[makehim]
58 David M. Halperin,
One HundredYearsofHomosexuality
81 (1990)(citations
omitted).
59 Greenberg,
supranote47, at 124-25;see also The AncientNearEast: An Anthology
of
Textsand Pictures133-67(JamesB. Pritchard ed., 1958)(reproducing
someofthesestatutes
in Englishtranslations).
60 See EphraimNeufeld, The HittiteLaws 8-11(1951)(translating
someoftheHittiteLaws
regulatingmarriage).

surrender her."61 By one reading,section36 thenprovidedthat,"[I]f
a slavegivesthebride-price to a freeyouthand takeshimto dwellin
his householdas spouse,no-oneshall [makehim]surrender him."62
For mostof thiscentury, therehas been controversy overwhether
thisis thecorrectreadingofsection36.63 If thequotedreadingwere
correct,a maleslavewithmoney(thebride-price) to pay fora male
spousecoulddo so andexpectthatthetransaction wouldbe enforcea-
ble at law. And,ofcourse,ifa slavewereallowedto do this,itwould
go withoutsayingthata freeHittitecitizencoulddo thesame.
2. ClassicalGreeceand Pre-Christian
Rome
In contrast
to thespeculative
evidencereported aboveforsame-sex
relationships (and possiblymarriages)in Mesopotamia,there is
stronger proofthatclassicalGreekculturewas keenlyinterested in
and developedculturalnormsto governsame-sexrelationships. To
illustrate,exemplarsof both companionateand transgenerational
same-sexrelationshipsmaybe foundin Plato'sSymposium,64 written
in thefourth centuryB.C. Apparently theearliestknownsystematic
treatiseon thesubject,theSymposium is a dialoguebetweenSocrates
and othersin "the praiseof Love,"65 withlove and relationships
betweenmenitsprimary focus.The firstspeechpraisingloveis that
of Phaedrus,who championstransgenerational male-malerelation-
61 Id. at 10.
62 Thisis mytranslation and understanding ofthetext,as wellas thereadingacceptedby
Boswell,supranote46, at 20-21& n.39 (citingbothconcurring and dissenting authorities),
whodisagrees withthereadingpreferred byNeufeld:"If a slavegivesthebride-price to a free
youthand takeshimto dwellin his householdas husband[ofhis daughter], no-oneshall
surrender him." Neufeld,supranote 60, at 10-11(also citingconcurring and dissenting
authorities).The bracketed portionis an interpolation byNeufeld, whoadmitsas much. Id.
at 151. He also reports thatmostprevious scholarshadinterpreted ? 36 as a statesanctionfor
homosexualrelationsamongslaves,and that"such a relationship amongfreemendid not
requireanyspeciallegalprovisions."Id. BoswellrejectsNeufeld'sspeculations as a strained
effortbya modemhistorian to readhis ownprejudices intoanotherculture'stext.Boswell,
supranote46, at 20-21. Boswell'sreading, in turn,is rejected
in Greenberg, supranote47, at
125n.3.
63 See Greenberg, supranote47, at 125n.3.
64 Plato,Symposium, reprintedin On Homosexuality: Lysis,Phaedrus, andSymposium 103
(BenjaminJowetttrans.,withselectedretranslation, notes,and introduction by Eugene
O'Connor,1991).
65 Id. at 110 (line 177e).

1442 Virginia
ships.66Phaedruscitesas theultimatein love and commitment the

maximthat"[hlovewillmakemendareto die fortheirbeloved;and
womenas wellas men."67He goeson to provideas one exampleof
thissacredcommitment Alcestis'willingness
to die forherhusband
Admetus,68 and as anotherAchilles'willingness
to die forhis lover
Patroclus.69By couplingtheseexamples,Phaedrussuggeststhatthe
husband-wife relationshipand the Achilles-Patroclus relationship
couldbe consideredfunctionally
similar,
butwerealso formally differ-
ent becausethe former was a marriagewhereasthe latterwas not,
quite.
Pausaniasnextspoke,delivering an impassioned defenseof com-
panionatesame-sexrelationships:
Thosewhoare inspiredby thisloveturnto themale,and delightin
himwhois themorevaliantand intelligent nature;anyone mayrec-
ognizethepureenthusiasts
intheverycharacter oftheirattachments.
For theylovenotboys,butintelligent beingswhosereasonis begin-
ningto be developed,muchabout the timeat whichtheirbeards
beginto grow. And in choosingthemas companions, theymeanto
be faithful
to them,and to pass theirwholelifewiththem,and be
withthem..70
LaterPausaniaspraisesthemanwholoveswith"theloveofthenoble
mind,whichis in unionwiththe unchangeable, is everlasting.
"71
Like Phaedrus,Pausaniasseemsto be assuminga societywheresuch
love betweenmen is valuable and lasting,but not necessarilya
marriage.
The fourth speech,presentedbyAristophanes, is themostinterest-
ingbecauseit setsfortha theorynotonlyoflovebutoftheoriginsof
human sexual biologyand desire.72Accordingto Aristophanes,
humanswereoriginally rotundgiantswitheightappendages(four
arms,fourlegs)and twosetsofsexualorgans-eithertwomalegeni-
talia (male giants),or two femalegenitalia(femalegiants),or one
66 See id. ("For I knownot any greater

blessingto a youngman beginning lifethana
virtuouslover,or to theloverthana belovedyouth.")(line 178c). This is also a themeof
Plato'sPhaedrus,reprinted in On Homosexuality,supranote64, at 43.
67 Plato,supranote64, at 111 (line 179b).
68 Id. (lines179b-c).
69 Id. at 112 (lines179e-80b).
70 Id. at 113-14(lines181c-d) (footnote
omitted).
71 Id. at 116(line 183e).
72 See id. at 121-26(lines189c-93e).

femaleand one male (androgynous giants).73Vexedby themischief

fomented bythesegiants,Zeus cutthemall in half,Apollolaterper-
formingreconstructive surgeryon the halved, formerly gigantic
humans. The divinecleavingyieldedthreetypesof humans,those
originallyfromthe femalegiants,thosefromthe male giants,and
thosefromtheandrogynous giants.74 Sexualityis eachhuman'seffort
to findand matewithhis or herliteral"otherhalf."75Aristophanes
concludeshis speechwitha classicstatement ofcompanionate love:
[W]henone of them[boyswhohavereachedmanhood] findshis
otherhalf,whetherhebe a loverofyouth ora loverofanother sort,
thepairarelostinanamazement ofloveandfriendship andintimacy,
andonewillnotbe outoftheother's sight,as I maysay,evenfora
moment: thesearetheywhopasstheir liveswithoneanother ....76
AlthoughPlatois thefirstsystematicthinkeraboutsexwhosework
hisviewsarenottransparent,
has survived, andtheSymposium might
be interpreted in lightofPlato'sotheressays,especially
differently the
Laws and the Republic. The Laws revealsan ambivalenceabout
same-sexeroticattraction, and the Republicvalorizesan idealized
formof love over a physicalform. In the Symposiumitself,the
speechof Diotimaassertsthatlove startswiththelove of beautiful
malebodiesbutmaturesintoloveofabstraction, especiallybeauty.77
Drawingfromtheseotherworks,Gregory VlastosinterpretstheSym-
posiumto reflectPlato's philosophicalattractionto the procreative
73 Id. at 121-22(lines189d-90b).
74 Id. at 122-24(lines190c-92).
75 As Aristophanes putit:
[S]o ancientis thedesireofoneanotherwhichis implanted in us,reuniting
ouroriginal
nature,makingoneoftwo,andhealingthestateofman. Each ofus whenseparated is
buttheindenture ofa man,havingonesideonlylikea flatfish,andhe is alwayslooking
forhisotherhalf.Men whoare a sectionofthatdoublenaturewhichwas oncecalled
androgynous are lascivious;adulterers
are generally
ofthisbreed,and also adulterous
and lasciviouswomen:thewomenwhoarea sectionofthewomandon'tcareformen,
buthavefemaleattachments; thefemalecompanions areofthissort.Butthemenwho
area sectionofthemalefollowthemale,andwhiletheyareyoung,beinga pieceofthe
man,theyhangabouthimand embracehim,and theyare themselves thebestofboys
and youths, becausetheyhavethemostmanlynature.
Id. at 123-24(lines191d-92)(footnotes omitted).
76 Id. at 124 (lines192b-c).
77 See Gregory Vlastos,PlatonicStudies40-41 (1981).

1444 Law Review
and not just the homoerotic

ideals in love, clearlyheteroerotic,
dimensions.78
HistoriansofclassicalGreeceand itsromantic consider
institutions
the Symposiumto reflectthe ambivalentbut acceptingattitudes
towardsame-sexrelationships prevailing in at leastsomeoftheGreek
city-states.
No law prohibited same-sexrelationships, and, indeed,
theywereinstitutionalized forfreemalecitizens,who wereexpected
to courtand havea relationship witha boyin theirearlyadulthood.
Althoughmosthistorians havenotventured to considerthesetrans-
generational
unionstobe marriages, theyhaveassertedthattheywere
oftenthe functionalequivalentsof legalizedmarriages.Kenneth
Dover,theleadinghistorian of Greeksexualmores,arguesstrongly
for "common ingredients"betweendifferent-sex marriagesand
ancientGreeksame-sexrelationships, citinga formal"courtship" by
the dominantparty(the husband/man) towardthe receptiveparty
(the wife/boy) and the expectation thatthe receptivepartywould
respondto advancescoyly,thatis,notembracing thembutnotother-
wise discouraging the suitoreither.79As is oftenthe case in tradi-
tional heterosexual marriages,the familybecame involvedin the
receptiveparty'sdecisionwhetherto accept the dominantparty's
advances.80Finally,bothtypesofrelationships metwithsocialdisap-
provalifsexualrelationsoccurredoutsideoftheacceptedcourtship-
to-wedding-vow relationship.8'Doveralso describes ritualizedsame-
sex transgenerationalcourtship in Crete,whichotherhistorians have
characterizedas same-sex"marriages."82 Eva Cantarellabelievesthat
some of the lesbianrelationships arisingout of femalecollectives
(thiasoi)were"initiation marriages," institutionally similarto male
same-sexrelationships describedby Dover.83
The mythicalAchilles-Patroclus relationship also showshow the
ancientGreeksconsidered same-sexunionsto be notso distantfrom
theirdifferent-sex marriagecounterparts.Halperin,for example,
78 See id. at 40-42; see also Eva Cantarella,Bisexuality

in the AncientWorld 61-63
(Cormac6 Cuilleaniintrans.,1992)(describing theprocreative natureofsexualpleasurein
Plato's Laws).
79 See K.J.Dover,GreekHomosexuality
89-91(1978).
80 Id. at 89-90.
81 Id. at 90.
82 See id. at 189-90;
Boswell,supranote46,at 54 (citingL.R. de Pogey-Castries,
Historiede
L'AmourGrecdans L'Antiquit6 42-46 (1930)).
83 See Cantarella, supranote78, at 81-83.

findstheAchilles-Patroclus
relationship
constructedout ofthesame
notionsofkinshipand sexualimagery thatwerediscussedearlierwith
respectto theGilgamesh-Enkidu relationship:
Patroclusperforms manyofthefunctions forAchillesthata wifeor
femaledependent normally performsintheHomericworld:forexam-
ple,he placesfoodbeforeAchilleswhenthetwoof themare dining
aloneand,whentheyare entertaining guests,it is Patrocluswhodis-
tributes
thebread... ; Patroclusalso makesup a sparebedforPhoe-
nixwhenAchillesgiveshimthenod.... The conjugalassociations,
however, workreciprocally: at Patroclus'sfuneral,Achilles,as chief
mourner, cradlestheheadofhisdeadcomrade,thesamegesture that
is performedby[Queen]Andromache at Hector'sfuneral.So each,in
a sense,is wifeto each.84
HalperinarguesthattheAchilles-Patroclus
relationshipis something
morethantransgenerationalboy-love,becauseit is notclearwho in
therelationship
is theboyand who is theman.85He concludesthat
same-sexGreekrelationshipswereoftenmorelikemodemcompan-
ionatemarriagesthan the Greeks'own institution of different-sex
marriage,in whichthehusbandand wifehad littleemotionalaffinity
and the husbandhad greatfreedomto engagein outsidesexual
liaisons.86
The consensusamongmodernhistorians is thatrepublican Rome,
likeclassicalGreece,was tolerant
ofsame-sexrelationships.87 More-
over,theRomansmayhaveaccordedsomesame-sexunionsthelegal
or culturalstatusof marriages.To takeone earlyexample,Cicero,
the greatRoman lawyerand orator,persuadedCurio the Elder to
honorthedebtsthatCurio'sson had incurred on behalfofAntonius,
to whomtheson was,in Cicero'swords,"unitedin a stableand per-
manent justas ifhehadgivenhima matron's
marriage, stola."88 Cic-
84 Halperin,supranote58, at 84.
85 Id. at 86.
86 Id. at 85-87.
87 Contrary to someearlierbeliefs,
itnowappearsthatthelawsofrepublican Romedidnot
prohibitsame-sexrelationships.See Cantarella,supra note 78, at 106-14;Saara Lilja,
Homosexuality in RepublicanandAugustanRome130-31(1983);Paul Veyne,Homosexuality
in ancientRome,in WesternSexuality:Practiceand Preceptin Past and PresentTimes
(PhillipeAries& AndreBejineds.,Anthony Fostertrans.,1985).
88 Boswell,supranote46, at 69 (quotingCicero's
Philippic).In theoriginal,
thequotation
reads,"Te a meretricio quaestuabduxitet,tamquamstolamdedisset, in matrimonio
stabiliet
certocollocavit."Id. at 69 n.37. As Boswellpointsout, thestola was garbdistinctively
reserved fora marriedRomanwoman.Id.

1446 Virginia
ero's legalisticadvice suggeststhat same-sex relationshipswere not
only socially accepted among at least some segmentsof Roman soci-
ety,but thattheyalso potentiallycarriedwiththemlegal obligations
and consequences,and hence were marriagesas I am usingthe term.
Records describingRoman social customs during the imperial
periodsurvivein fargreaternumber,at least in partbecause many,if
not most, of the emperorsenjoyed well-documentedrelationships-
some ofthemlegallysanctionedmarriages-withothermen. The evi-
dence suggeststhat duringthe same generaltime framewhen com-
panionate long-term marriages were being institutionalizedfor
different-sex couples,89they were likewisebecomingmore common
for same-sex couples, who were enteringinto relationshipsakin to
those discussedin Plato's Symposium. Medieval historianJohnBos-
well describesthe period:
By thetimeoftheearlyEmpirethestereotyped rolesof [sexually
active]"lover"and [sexuallypassive]"beloved"no longerseemto be
theonlymodelforhomosexual lovers,and evenemperors abandoned
traditionalsexualrolesformorereciprocaleroticrelations.Many
homosexual relationships
werepermanent and exclusive.Amongthe
lowerclassesinformal unionslikethatof Gitonand Encolpiusmay
havepredominated, butmarriages betweenmalesor betweenfemales
werelegaland familiar amongtheupperclasses.... [B]ythetimeof
theearlyEmpirereferences to gaymarriages are commonplace.The
biographer ofElagabalusmaintains thataftertheemperor's marriage
to an athletefromSmyrna,anymalewho wishedto advanceat the
imperialcourteitherhad to havea husbandor pretendthathe did.
Martialand Juvenalbothmentionpublicceremonies involving the
families,dowries,and legalniceties.It is notclearthatonlyaristo-
cratswereinvolved: a cometplayeris mentioned byJuvenal.Martial
pointsout thatbothmeninvolvedin one ceremony werethoroughly
masculine("The beardedCallistratus marriedtheruggedAfer")and
thatthemarriage tookplaceunderthesamelaw thatregulated mar-
riagebetweenmenand women.
Nero marriedtwo menin succession,bothin publicceremonies
withtheritualappropriate to legal marriage.At leastone of these
unionswas recognized by Greeksand Romans,and thespousewas
accordedthe honorsof an empress.... One of the men,Sporus,
accompaniedNero to publicfunctions, wherethe emperorwould
89 See 3 MichelFoucault,The History

ofSexuality
72-80(RobertHurleytrans.,Pantheon
Books 1986)(1984).

embracehimaffectionately.
He remainedwithNero throughout
his
reignand stoodby himas he died.90
Boswellalso citesexamplesfromRomanwriters describingmarriages
betweentwo women,91 thoughfemalesame-sexunionswereappar-
entlymuchlesscommonbecausewomenhad fewereconomicoppor-
tunities,
and less socialand legalfreedomthanmen.
Same-sexunionswerenotedin popularRomancultureand litera-
tureas well. The novelBabylonica,an earlyversionof the pulp
romance,had a subplotinvolving thepassionofEgypt'sQueenBere-
nice forthe beautifulMesopotamia,who was snatchedfromher.
Afterone of the Queen's servantsrescuedMesopotamiafromher
abductors,"'Berenice marriedMesopotamia,and therewas war
between[theabductor]and Bereniceon her account.'"92 Of even
greaterrenown,the EmperorHadrian'slove forAntinousattained
thestatusoflegend,acclaimedforgenerations in sculpture,
architec-
ture,painting,coins,andliterature.93
Boswellsuggeststhatthepopu-
larityof Hadrianand Antinousas a couple,
mayhavebeendueinsomepartto theprevalence ofsame-sexcouples
in popularromanticliterature
ofthetime.Everywhere in thefiction
oftheEmpire-fromlyricpoetryto popularnovels-gaycouplesand
theirloveappearon a completely withtheirheterosex-
equal footing
ual counterparts.94
3. Christian
Romeand theMiddleAges
The late RomanEmpiregrewless tolerantof homosexualunions
thaneithertheRepublicor theearlierEmpirehad been,and in 342
A.D. adopteda statutethatseemingly-but
perhapsfacetiously-pro-
claimedthatthosewho enteredintosame-sexmarriageswouldbe
subjectedto "exquisitepunishment."95
Whilethe statutereinforces
90 Boswell,supranote46, at 81-82(citationsand footnotes

omitted).
91 See id. at 82-83.
92 Id. at 84 (quotingPhotius'Bibliotheca).
93 See RoystonLambert,Belovedand God: The Storyof Hadrianand Antinous(1984);
Marguerite Yourcenar, Hadrian'sMemoirs(1957).
94 Boswell, supranote46,at 85-86.FollowingCantarella,
supranote78,at 155-56,I would
readBoswell'sclaimsconservatively.
95 The statutereads:
Whena man"marries"inthemannerofa woman,a "woman"aboutto renounce men,
whatdoeshe wish,whensex has lostitssignificance;
whenthecrimeis one whichitis
notprofitable
to know;whenVenusis changedintoanotherform;whenloveis sought

1448 Law Review
the impressionthatsame-sexmarriageswerenot uncommonin the

Roman Empire,it also evidencesan anxietyaboutsame-sexunions
thatsurelypredatedthe fourthcentury.At the end of the second
century, forexample,Plutarch'sMoralia includeda dialoguefilled
withinvectivebothforand againstsame-sexrelationships,suggesting
thattheirproprietywas a matterofsomecontroversy. A subsequent
anonymous Affairs
dialogueentitled oftheHeart96 was fairlysympa-
butsharplydistinguished
theticto same-sexrelationships themfrom
marriage.97
MichelFoucaultsuggests
The latephilosopher-historian thatimpe-
rialRome'sanxietyaboutsame-sexrelations was relatedto theinsti-
tutionalizationof companionatemarriage,duringwhich period
procreationbecameintertwined withsexualpartnership.98 Thereis
probablya connection betweenthestatuteof 342 A.D.'s anti-homo-
sexualtoneandtheincreasing influence duringthelate
ofChristianity
Empire.99Partlyinspired by its Judaic the
heritage, earlyChristian
traditionadvocated companionatedifferent-sex marriage,which
servedprocreativepurposes,andwas ambivalent aboutsame-sexrela-
l
tionships.1 The early church fathers-mostnotablyClement,
and notfound?We orderthestatutes to arise,thelawsto be armedwithan avenging

sword,thatthoseinfamous personswhoarenow,or whohereafter maybe,guiltymay
be subjectedto exquisitepunishment.
Greenberg, supranote47, at 229 (translating theTheodosianCode 9.vii.3(Pharr,1952:231-
32)). Cantarellaarguesthatthisstatuteonlypenalized"passive"homosexual behaviorand
thatnubereshouldbe translated as "couples"and not"marries."See Cantarella, supranote
78, at 175-76.
96 See Foucault,supranote89, at 211-27(discussing AffairsoftheHeart).
97 Boswellsetsforth thejudgment at theendofthedialectic:
"Marriageis a boonand a blessingto menwhenit meetswithgoodfortune, whilethe
love ofboys,thatpayscourtto thehalloweddues of friendship, I considerto be the
privilegeonlyofphilosophy.Therefore all menshouldmarry, butletonlythewisebe
permitted to loveboys,forperfect virtuegrowsleastofall amongwomen."
Boswell,supranote46, at 127 (quotingAffairs oftheHeart).
98 See Foucault, supranote89,at 72-80;seealso PeterBrown,The BodyandSociety:Men,
Womenand SexualRenunciation in EarlyChristianity 16 (1988) (describingtheemphasison
procreation).
99 The Emperor Diocletionpersecuted theChristians in thelate thirdcentury.Whenhe
diedin 306A.D., theEmpireplungedintooneofitsbythenfrequent civilwars.Constantine I
reunited theEmpireunderhis reignfromtheperiod324-37A.D. BecauseConstantine had
convertedto Christianity in 312, its officialinfluence was assuredduringhis reignand
continued in somedegreeor anotheruntilRomefellin 476.
100See generally Brown,supranote98 (tracingearlyChristian attitudes
towarddifferent-
sex and same-sexrelationships).

Jerome,Origen,and Augustine-developed a philosophyof sexual

abstinency thatproblematized any sexualactivitydone forpleasure
itself.But other,non-Christian in Roman society-Stoi-
traditions
cism, Neo-Platonism, Manicheanism-similarly urgedthat "inter-
coursewas supposedto take place onlyso as to producechildren.
The couple mustnot makelove forthe sake of pleasurealone."101
The asceticmovements in thelaterEmpirewereat bestambivalent
aboutsame-sexintimacy.Some Manicheans,forexample,criticized
same-sexintimacy fornotservingto procreate, whileothersfoundit
acceptablebecauseit "did not partakeof the falseaura of sanctity
whichmaritalsexuality used to seducetheunwary."102
The collapsingRoman Empiregrewincreasingly inhospitableto
same-sexunions,and afterRome's fallstateattitudestowardsuch
unionsdeteriorated dramatically.In the surviving EasternEmpire,
the Justinian Code of 533 A.D. flatlyoutlawedsame-sexintimacy,
placingit in the same categoryas divorceand adultery 103-all of
whichviolatedtheChristian idealofcompanionate mar-
different-sex
riage.104 In whatremained oftheWesternEmpire,theVisigothstate
in Spaincriminalized same-sexintimacy around650 A.D.,105though
mostof the otherGermanicstatesshowedlittleinterestin either
advocatingor decrying same-sexrelationships.106At firstglance,it
wouldappearthatthesame-sexunionsoftheearlierRomanEmpire
all but died out duringthe earlyMiddle Ages, whendifferent-sex
companionate marriage and a philosophyofsexualabstinencebecame
thenorm.A closerlook revealsthestoryto be a morecomplicated
one.
The complication owes muchto the Roman Catholicand Greek
OrthodoxChurches'conflicting responsesto same-sexunions:their
abstractnotionsofthepropriety ofsame-sexmarriage differed mark-
101 Id. at 21; see Boswell,supranote46, at 128-31.

102 Boswell,supranote46, at 129.
103 Cantarella,
supranote78, at 181-86.
104 Id. at 209-10.
105 See The Visigothic
Code (SamuelP. Scotttrans.& ed., 1910)(translating
theedictin
TitleV, ? VI oftheCode).
106 See Boswell,
supranote46, at 176-79.BoswellspeculatesthattheGermanictribesthat
invadedtheWestern Empiretoleratedhomosexual inat leastsomecircumstances,
activities id.
at 183-85,andthatsomeofthetribemembers mayhaveenjoyeda transgenderal rolesimilarto
thatofNativeAmerican berdaches,"andsuchrelationships
mayhavebeeninstitutionalized as
'marriages' amongthem."Id. at 184.

1450 Law Review
edlyfromtheiractual responsewhenconfronted by same-sexinti-
macy. Duringthe earlyand high Middle Ages, the Churchwas
spiritually
criticalofsame-sexintimacy becauseit couldnotresultin
procreationand constituted sex outsideof thethen-establishedideal
of companionate marriage.Paradoxically, the Churchwas in some
respectstolerantof same-sexunionsin practice,especiallythose
withinitsownclergy.Homoeroticfeelings repeatedlyarosebetween
teachersand students, clericsand theirfellows,and priestsand aco-
lytes,yearningswhichare documented in a proliferation
of love let-
ters,poems,and storiesoriginating fromtheearlyand highMiddle
Ages.107
Moreimportantly, in theearlyMiddleAgestheChurchdeveloped
institutions-memorialized in liturgiesthat were includedin the
Church'sformalcollections-thatcombinedthe Church'sspiritual
commitment to companionate relationships
withitsmembers'desire
to bondwithpeopleofthesamesex. Existingscholarship documents
the existenceof Roman Catholicand Greek Orthodoxritualsof
"brother-making," "enfraternization,"and "spiritual brother-
hoods."108 Ceremonies creatingthesebrotherhoods weresometimes
performed formalemissionaries beforetheyembarkedon theirmis-
sions,as wellas forothermaleswhowishedto formalize theirfriend-
ships. Accordingto Churcharchives,theseearlyceremonies were
structuredas follows:
* The couplestandin front ofthelectern,
on whichare placedtheGos-
pel and a cross. The olderof thebrothers
standsto theright.
107 See id. at 186-94.For example,thepriestAlcuin(themostimportant intellectual

figure
in thecourtofCharlemagne) wrotea bishop:
I thinkofyourloveandfriendship withsuchsweetmemories, reverend bishop,thatI
longforthatlovelytimewhenI maybe ableto clutchtheneckofyoursweetness with
thefingers ofmydesires.Alas,ifonlyitweregranted to me,as itwasto Habakkuk, to
be transported to you,howwouldI sinkintoyourembraces, . . . howwouldI cover,
withtightly pressedlips,notonlyyoureyes,ears,andmouthbutalso youreveryfinger
and yourtoes,notoncebutmanya time.
Id. at 190(quotingandtranslating theletter).Mostofthelettersandpoemsarenotso openly
eroticas this.
108 See, e.g., Pavel Florenskij,
La Colonnae il Fondamentodella Verita521-25(Pietro
Modestotrans.& ElemireZolla intro.,1974)(describing theceremony and itsliturgy).The
ReverendAlexeiMichalenkooriginally broughtthismaterialto myattention and has also
suppliedmewithcopiesofGreekOrthodox liturgies,
bothintheoriginal Greekandtranslated
intoLatin. The translations in textare myrenderings of the Latin,checkedagainstthose
providedby ReverendMichalenko.

* The ceremony startsoffwithprayersand litaniescelebratingearlier

examplesof same-sexcouplesor friends in theearlyChurch.
* The coupleis girdedwitha singlebelt,signifying theirunionas one,
and theyplace theirhandson theGospeland receivelitcandles.
* The priestreadsfromoneofPaul's epistles(1stCorinthians 12:27)and
theGospel(John17: 18-16),followedby moreprayersand litanies.
* The assembled areledintheLord'sPrayer, followedbyHolyCommu-
nion,theEucharist, forthecouple.
* The priestleadsthecouplearoundthelectern, each holdingthehand
oftheother,whiletheassembledsinga hymn.
* The coupleexchangea kiss,and theserviceconcludeswiththesinging
ofPsalm 132:1("Beholdhowgoodand sweetit is forbrothers to live
as one.'').109
Significantly,this early brotherhoodliturgywas acted out in a cere-
monythatwas virtuallyidenticalto the liturgylaterdevelopedby the
Church fordifferent-sex marriages.
The main difference betweenthe brotherhoodliturgyand the one
originallyused to wed different-sex couples was that the former
emphasizedthe companionate11I ratherthanthe procreative111
nature
of the relationship.Hence, ratherthan oratingon procreation,one
versionof the enfraternization liturgyread:
O Almighty Lord,youhavegivento manto be madefromthefirst in
Your Image and Likenessby the giftof immortallife. You have
willedto bindas brothersnot onlyby naturebut by bondsof the
spiritYourmostcelebratedApostlesPeter,theChiefofthemall,and
Andrew; James and John the Sons of Zebedee; Philip and
Batholomew.You madeas verybrothers YourHolyMartyrs Sergius
and Bacchus,Cosmasand Damien,Cyrusand John.BlessYour Ser-
vantsunitedalso that,not boundby nature,(theybe) joined with
bondsoflove. Grantthema lovemutualand withoutoffense and a
brotherhood upsetby naughtof hatredall the days of theirlives,
through themightofYour All-HolySpiritand through theinterses-
sionofour All-Holyspotlessever-Virgin
Lady ....112
09 Florenskij,
supranote108,at 523-24.
110See Psalms132 (KingJames).
1"' See Psalms127 (KingJames).
112 RitualaeGraecorumComplectens Rituset OrdinesDivinaeLiturgiae707 (R.P. Jacobi
Goared. & trans.,reprinted
in 1960). A completetranslation
ofanotherversionoftheliturgy
is appendedto thisArticle.

1452 Law Review
The precisesignificance oftheseenfraternization remainsto

liturgies
be determined.They mayhave been littlemorethansend-offs for
missionaries. In lightoftheearlyChurch'sasceticapproachto sexu-
ality,it seemsdoubtfulthattheseceremonies contemplatedsexual
unions. But recentresearchby Boswell
Professor arguesthat these
ceremonies representeda moregeneralacceptanceofsame-sexunions
by theearlyChurch.
In 1989,Boswellclaimedin printthat:
Gay clericsapparentlytookpartin homosexualmarriageceremonies,
whichwerewidelyknownin theCatholic worldfrom the fifth
cen-
turyon. Such ceremonies wereperformed in Catholicchurchesby
whatthecommunity
priestsand eitherestablished regardedas mar-
riages,or commemorated in both cases in
special friendships,
devoutlyChristian terms.113
Boswell'sclaimwas baseduponinformation acquiredwhileresearch-
ing medievalChristianliturgicalcollections,evidencethatwill be
revealedin a forthcomingbook.114Boswellhas reportedly uncovered
manuscript versionsof Christiansame-sexmarriageliturgiestaken
fromcollectionsfound in librariesand ecclesiasticalcollections
throughout Europe. Referencesto same-sexmarriageceremonies
werediscovered inlegaltextsfromthefourth through thesixthcentu-
ries,as werereferencesto theactualperformanceofsuchceremonies
occurring throughthenineteenth
in thefifth centuries.Boswelldis-
tinguishes betweentheenfraternization describedabove,of
liturgies
whichscholarshave knownand writtenforsome time,and these
newly-discovered marriage liturgies, the
whichhe believesto confirm
existenceof genuine,Church-sanctioned 5
same-sexmarriages."
113 John Boswell, Homosexualityand Religious Life: A HistoricalApproach,in

Homosexuality in thePriesthoodand theReligiousLife3, 11 (Jeannine Gramicked., 1989).
114 Boswell,supra note 3. In thiswork,Boswellwill describesame-sexcompanionate
marriageliturgiesintheChristianChurchfromthefifth through thenineteenthcenturies.My

descriptionof someof thebook'sfindings is baseduponhis 1989article,see Boswell,supra
note 113;a videotapedspeechby Professor Boswellon theliturgiesentitled"1500 Years of
BlessingGay and LesbianRelationships: It's NothingNewto theChurch"[hereinafter "1500
Years of Blessing"](availablefromtheWashington chapterof Integrity,
a gayand lesbian
Episcopalgroup);and correspondence withProfessor Boswell.
115 Boswellclaimsthatone can distinguish thetworeadilyenough,basedupontheprecise
wordingused in the liturgies,theirtitles,and theirplacementin liturgicalcollectionsand
indices.See Boswell,1500YearsofBlessing,supranote114.

If Boswell'sclaimsare borneout, theywould reconcilethe old
Romantradition ofsame-sexmarriagesstillpopularwhenChristian-
itywas spreading throughouttheEmpireand theChurch'semphasis
on companionate marriageas themodelforChristiansociallifeand
itsspiritualization
oftheinstitution
ofmarriage.As to thelastpoint,
theRomanCatholicChurchdid notmakedifferent-sex marriagesac-
ramental,celebratingHoly Communionand performing the cere-
monyat the Churchaltar,untilthe thirteenth century,whereas
Boswellmaintainsthatsame-sexmarriages weresacramental in the
earlyMiddleAges. Whenhis long-awaited book is published,Bos-
well'sevidenceand thesiswillsparkfurtherresearchefforts.
B. Same-SexUnionsin Non-Western
Cultures
Thereis verystrongevidencedemonstrating theexistenceofsame-
sex unions,including legallyrecognizedmarriages, in NativeAmeri-
can,African, and Asiancultures, evidencewhichis especially striking
priorto thosecultures'domination by WesternEurope. As before,
mysourcesincludetraditional historical
records,suchas contempo-
raryaccounts,artifacts, myths, and stories,thoughthebestevidence
tendsto be the workof social anthropologists and ethnographers,
who,through theirfieldworkin non-Western cultures,havebeenable
to retrieve
muchofthesecultures'pre-Western traditions
and institu-
tions. Amongthe mostfrequently recurring of theseinstitutions
is
same-sexmarriage.
1. NativeAmericanCultures
Althoughfewwritten recordsof pre-ColumbianNativeAmerican
culturesare accessibleto us, we do have the benefitof histories
thosecultureswritten
describing by Spanishexplorers,
missionaries,
andbureaucrats.
116 Thesesourcesprovideearlyaccountsofsame-sex
unions in the Americas.'17 For example,Francisco Lopez de
116 MostofthesourcesI shallreferto in thetextare collectedand translated

in Francisco
Guerra,The Pre-Columbian Mind(1971);see also Jonathan N. Katz,Gay AmericanHistory
281-334(rev.ed. 1992)(collecting
originaldocuments on thehistory of "NativeAmericans/
Gay Americans:1528-1976").
117 In thequotations
thatfollow,theSpanishobservers referto same-sexunionsin marital
terminology. Thismayreflecttheirprojection
ofWestern normsontoNativeAmericans.The
morerecentworkof socialanthropologists, however, givesme greaterconfidence thatthese
relationships
wereindeedmarriages.

1454 Law Review
Gomara'sHistoryof theIndies (1552), proclaimedthat"'the men

marryothermenwho are impotent or castratedand go aroundlike
women,perform theirdutiesand are used as such and who cannot
carryor use the bow.'"'"18 Alvar Cabeza de Vaca also witnessed
unionsbetweensame-sexcouples,statingin Narrative oftheExpedi-
ofCabeza de Vaca (1542) thathe "'saw a man
tionsand Shipwrecks
married to another man.' "119 Juan de Torquemada, in the
MonarchiaIndiana (1615),describeda commoncustomwhereby
"parents[gave]a boyto theiryoungson,to havehimfora woman
and to use him as a woman;fromthatalso beganthe law thatif
anyoneapproachedtheboy,theywereorderedto payforit,punish-
ingthemwiththesamepenaltiesas thosebreaking ofa
thecondition
marriage."
120
Same-sexunions betweenwomen were also reported.Pedro de

Magdlhaes'TheHistories ofBrazil(1576) describesNativeAmerican
womenin northeastern Brazilwho "giveup all thedutiesofwomen
and imitatemen, and followmen's pursuitsas if theywere not
women.... [E]achhas a womanto serveher,to whomshesayssheis
married,and theytreateach otherand speakwitheach otheras man
and wife."121
Whatthese(and other)accountsdescribeis theberdachetradition
in the Americas,which was institutionalized in the Indies and
throughout whatis now theUnitedStates,as well as in theAztec,
Mayan,and Incan civilizations.The NativeAmericanberdacheis a
person-male or female-whodeviatesfromhis or her traditional
genderrole, takingon some of the characteristics and perceived
responsibilities
oftheoppositesex. The berdachedoes not,however,
crossgenderlinesso muchas mixthem.Indeed,manyNativeAmeri-
can culturesconsideredberdachesto be a thirdsex.122Most impor-
tant for the presentstudy, berdaches(like We'wha) married
118 Guerra,supranote 116,at 85 (quotingFranciscoL6pez de G6mara,History of the

Indies(1552)).
119 Id. at 67 (quoting
AlvarCabeza de Vaca, Narrative
oftheExpeditions
and Shipwrecks
ofCabeza de Vaca (1542)).
120 Id. at 173 (quoting1 Juande Torquemada,MonarchiaIndiana422 (1615)).
121 2 Pedrode Magilhaes,The HistoriesofBrazil88-89(JohnB. Stetson,
Jr.trans.,1922)
(1576).
122 See CharlesCallender & Lee M. Kochems,Men and Not-Men:Male Gender-Mixing
Statusesand Homosexuality, in The Many Faces of Homosexuality: Anthropological
Approachesto HomosexualBehavior165(EvelynBlackwooded., 1986).

individualsof thesamesex,and thosetransgenderal marriages were
wellrecognized by NativeAmericanlaws and cultures.123
Outsiders'depictionsoftheNativeAmericanberdachehaveoften
been coloredby theiranti-homosexual attitudes.The accountsof
Spanishauthorssuchas thosequotedaboveusuallyexpressed shock,
invoking NativeAmericansame-sexunionsas evidenceofthesecul-
tures'barbarism,whichtheysoughtto correct.Untilthetwentieth
century, accountsby Westernanthropologists suppressedthe tradi-
tion.124The first
detailedacademicstudyfocusing on NativeAmeri-
can same-sexunionswas GeorgeDevereux'sarticleon theMohave
berdaches.125Devereuxreportedthatgender-crossing, homosexual
men (alyha) and women(hwame) had long been toleratedby the
Mohave,and thattheirsame-sexmarriages wereinstitutionalized
and
sociallyaccepted.Thus,undertribalcustomand law alyhamarried
(and divorced)men,126andhwame married(and divorced)women.127
Ethnographers and anthropologists
studyingthecultureand evolu-
tionof variousNativeAmericantribesthroughout thiscentury dis-
covered similar berdache institutions.
128 Drawing from earlier
123 Id. at 172-75.

124 E.g., AlfredL. Kroeber,
The Arapaho,18 Bull.Am. MuseumNat. Hist. 1, 19 (1902)
(describingberdaches"marriedto men").
125 See GeorgeDevereux, Institutionalized
Homosexuality oftheMohaveIndians,9 Hum.
Biology498 (1937).
126 The courtshipprocesswas usuallya briefone,in whichthesuitorwouldflirtwiththe
alyha. "At dancesevenboyswhohad no intention ofmarrying an alyhaplayedaroundwith
them,as thoughtheywereflirtatiouswomen.'In theendsomeofthemmadeup theirminds
to becomethehusbandsof an alyha.'" Id. at 513. Therewerea numberof advantages for
menwhomarried an alyharatherthana woman.For example,"[o]ncetheyweremarried the
alyha made exceptionallyindustriouswives." Id. "Divorcingan alyha was not an easy
matter," however,becausetheywerestrongand "'mightbeatyouup.'" Id. at 514.
127 "The hwamegottheirwivesusuallyat dancesor by visiting girlsand marriedwomen
duringtheday.... The hwamewereexcellent providersand tookpridein dressing
up their
wives.... Hwameweredivorcedbytheirwivesmoreoftenthantheydivorcedthem."Id. at
515.
128 In additionto those discussedin text,leadingmonographs on Native American
berdaches includeCharlesCallender& Lee M. Kochems,The NorthAmericanBerdache,24
Current Anthropology 443 (1983);DonaldG. Forgey, The Institution
ofBerdacheAmongthe
NorthAmericanPlains Indians,11 J. Sex Res. 1 (1975); W.W. Hill, Note on the Pima
Berdache,40 Am. Anthropologist 338 (1938); W.W. Hill,The Statusof theHermaphrodite
and Transvestite in Navajo Culture,37 Am. Anthropologist 273 (1935); Nancy0. Lurie,
WinnebagoBerdache,55 Am. Anthropologist 708 (1953); Elsie C. Parsons,The Zuni
La'Mana, 18Am.Anthropologist 521(1916);MatildaC. Stevenson, The ZuniIndians,in The
Twenty-Third Ann.Rep. BureauAm. Ethnology 3 (1904);JamesS. Thayer,The Berdacheof
theNorthern Plains,36 J.Anthropological
Res. 287 (1980);HarrietWhitehead,The Bow and

1456 Virginia
accountsas well as his own fieldwork, WalterWilliams'The Spirit

and the Flesh synthesizes existingscholarshipprobingthe Native
Americanberdachetradition.129 On thebasisoftheseaccounts,Wil-
liamsconcludesthatberdaches havebeenan acceptedand in factval-
ued partof cultureand law in a largemajority of NativeAmerican
tribes.130 Most academic attentionhas been focused on male
berdaches,like We'wha,who frequently becamereveredleadersin
theircommunities. Often,a malechildis consciously raisedto be a
berdache,who assumesa specialrole in the community, mediating
betweenthespiritualandphysicalworlds.131Marriages betweenmen
and male berdacheswerewidespreadamongNativeAmericancul-
tures.132As a generalmatter, same-sexmarriages tendedto conform
to the traditionalNative Americanmarriageparadigm,in which
laborwasdividedbetweenthewife,whokepthouse,andthehusband,
who huntedand directedthe household.133The menwho married
male berdacheswereusuallyattractedto womenas wellas to men
and werenotthemselves considered berdaches.Manysuchmenpre-
ferredberdachewivesforeconomicadvantages, as berdachesnotonly
woulddo thehousework, butwouldhelpwithhunting and othertra-
ditionallymale activitiesas well. Othersbelievedthatmarrying a
berdacheguaranteedgreatermaritalstability, whilestillothercon-
theBurdenStrap:A New Look at Institutionalized Homosexuality in NativeNorthAmerica,

in SexualMeanings,supranote43, at 80.
129 See WalterL. Williams, The Spiritand theFlesh:SexualDiversity in AmericanIndian
Culture(1986).
130 See id. at 41-43.
131 Id. at 44-57.
132 "In a massivesurvey ofnorthernCaliforniaIndiancultures conducted in the1930s,all
butone ofthegroupswhorecognized a berdachestatusalso recognized marriage to a 'normal
man.'" Id. at 110 (citing20 ErminieW. Voegelin,CultureElementDistributions 134-35
(1942)).
133 In a marriage betweena mananda berdache, theberdachesupplieswomen'sworkand
a network ofkin,likeanyotherwife.... A berdachewifeoffered thesameeconomic
advantages ofanyotherpolygymous marriage.Whileit is truethata berdachecannot
reproduce, manyofthereports ofsuchmarriages mention thatthehusbandalreadyhad
children, eitherthrougha previousmarriageor by takinga berdacheas a secondor
thirdwife. But withadoptionbeingso commonlyaccepted,childrenmay evenbe
gainedby the berdache.Thus, the same advantagesof heterosexual marriagealso
accrueto themanwhomarriesa berdache.
Id. at 112.

ventionalmen pursued male berdacheson the basis of simple sexual

attraction.134
Although they have received less academic attention,female

berdaches in most
comprisedan equally importantculturalinstitution
Native American communities. Like her male counterpart,the
female berdacheassumed many of the responsibilitiestraditionally
performedby the opposite sex, including huntingand heading a
household. Additionally, she would commonly marry another
woman.135 Evelyn Blackwood's detailed study136shows that female
berdachesand woman-womanmarriageswere integralto women's
status in most Native Americancultures:
NativeAmericanbeliefsaboutsexualityare reflected in themar-
riagesystem.Theoristssuch as Gayle Rubinhave implicated mar-
riageas one of the mechanisms thatenforceand definewomen's
sexuality.According to Rubin,thedivisionoflabor"can . . . be seen
as a tabooagainstsexualarrangements otherthanthosecontaining at
leastone man and one woman,thereby enjoiningheterosexual mar-
riage." Yet in certainNativeAmericantribesothersexualbehavior,
both heterosexual and homosexual,was availableand permissible
withinand outsideof marriage.Homosexualbehavioroccurredin
contextswithinwhichneitherindividualwas cross-gender norwere
suchindividuals seenas expressing cross-genderbehavior.... Fur-
thermore, throughthe cross-gender role,womencould marryone
another....
NativeAmericanideologydisassociated sexualbehaviorfromcon-
ceptsofmaleandfemalegender rolesand was notconcerned withthe
identityofthesexualpartner.The statusofthecross-gender female's
partner is tellingin thisrespect.She was alwaysa traditional female;
thatis, two cross-gender femalesdid not marry.Thus, a woman
couldfollowthetraditional femalegenderrole,yetmarryand make
134 Id. at 114-15.

135 Thus,Williamssays:
What about the wivesof the amazon? WomanChief,like the otheramazons,
evidentlyhad no difficulty
finding womento marry....
Withtheexception of theamazon,womeninvolvedin a relationship withanother
femaledid notsee themselvesas a separateminority
or a specialcategoryofperson,or
indeedas different
inanyimportant wayfromotherwomen.Yet,theywereinvolved in
lovingandsexualrelationshipswiththeirfemalemates.Iftheirmarriage to an amazon
ended,thentheycouldeasilymarryheterosexually ....
Id. at 246-47.
136 See EvelynBlackwood, Sexuality and Genderin CertainNativeAmericanTribes:The
Case of Cross-Gender Females,10 Signs27 (1984).

1458 Virginia
love with anotherwoman withoutbeing stigmatizedby such
behavior.
137
AlthoughBlackwood-likeotherscholarswho have made similar

observations138-doesnotclaimthatNativeAmericanculturenever
imposedrolessubordinating women,she arguesthatthe abilityto
enterintosame-sexmarriages expandedwomen'srangeofoptionsin
an importantway.
2. AfricanCultures
Africanculturesoffera particularly
interesting
varietyofsame-sex
unions,includingtransgenerational
ones(typically
man-boyrelation-
ships) and transgenderal unionssimilarto the Native American
berdachetradition.Africanculturesalso offera variantof trans-
genderaland/ortransgenerationalunionnotencountered in theWest
or in NativeAmericanculture thetradition offemale-husbands,or
woman-marriage. Recall Ifeyinwa
Olinke,discussedin theIntroduc-
tionof thisArticle.
a. Transgenerational
Unions(Boy Wivesand Mummy-Daughter
Relationships)
Earlyscholarlyworkson transgenerational
unionsfocusedon those
relationships
cultivated
amongmen. Most prominently, anthropolo-
gistE.E. Evans-Pritchard
documented theinstitution
of "boywives"
for militarymen among the Azande in what is now Sudan.139
Accordingto Evans-Pritchard,the Azande consideredthe relation-
shipa "marriage"bothlegallyand culturally:
I havepointedly usedtheterms"wife,""husband,"and "marriage,"
for,as thetextswillmakeclear,therelationship was,forso longas it
lasted,a legalunionon themodelofa normalmarriage.The warrior
paidbridewealth (somefivespearsor more)to theparentsofhisboy
and performed servicesforthemas he wouldhavedonehad he mar-
riedtheirdaughter; ifhe provedto be a good son-in-law
theymight
Id. at 35 (footnotes
137 omitted).
See JudyGrahn,Another
138 MotherTongue:GayWords,GayWorlds49-72(1984);Paula
G. Allen,Lesbiansin AmericanIndianCultures,3 Conditions
67 (1981); BeatriceMedicine,
"WarriorWomen"-Sex Role Alternatives forPlainsIndianWomen,in The HiddenHalf:
Studiesof PlainsIndianWomen267 (PatriciaAlbers& BeatriceMedicineeds., 1983).
139 See E.E. Evans-Pritchard,
SexualInversion
AmongtheAzande,72 Am.Anthropologist
1428-34(1970).

1993] Same-Sex Marriage 1459
laterreplacetheson by a daughter.Also, ifanotherman had rela-

tionswithhisboyhe could,I was told,sue himat courtforadultery.
... A boywas addressedbyhisloveras diare"mywife,"and the
boy addressedhimas kumbami"myhusband.". . . The boysper-
formed manyofthesmallerservicesa womanperforms dailyforher
husband,suchas gathering gathering
leavesforhis ablutions, leaves
forhis bed, [and] drawingwaterand breakingofffirewood forhim
.... Withregardto thesexualside,at nighttheboysleptwithhis
lover,who had intercoursewithhimbetweenhis thighs ....140
Otheranthropologists have reportedfindingsimilarinstitutions in

otherAfricansocieties.141
Quite underemphasized have been analogousinstitutions among
women.Especiallyinteresting along theselinesis Judith Gay's study
of"mummy-baby" gamesamongBasothogirlsin Lesotho.142In con-
trastto womenin manyotherAfricansocieties, thosein Lesothoare
vulnerable,
particularly both economically and socially,becausethey
aredependent uponmaleswhotendto be employed as migrantwork-
ers. For thesewomen,relationships outsideof marriageserveas
important supportnetworks, and younggirlsare initiatedintosuch
beginning
relationships with"mummy-baby" gamesplayedin their
gradeschoolyears.In a mummy-baby relationship,an oldergirl,act-
ingas "mummy," developsan intimate, maternalassociationwitha
youngerone,thebaby. Typically, themummypresentsgiftsto the
baby,who reciprocates by obeyingand respecting themummy.The
twoshareemotionaland informational exchanges, and are physically
intimate,relationswhichsometimes includesexualintimacy.Rather
thandisplacing marriage,theserelationships helpto prepareyounger
girlsformarriage,includingits rockier moments. ThoughGay's
explorationis the mostthorough, otherscholarshave documented
similarfemale-femalefriendships in otherAfricansocieties.143
140Id. at 1429-30.
141 See WalterCline,Notes of the People of Siwahand el Garah in the LibyanDesert
(Leslie Spier ed., 1936); Edmund Leach, Marriage,Legitimacy,Alliance, in Social
Anthropology boymarriage
176,210(1982)(discussing intheSiwahOasisin WesternEgypt).
142 See Judith Gay, "Mummiesand Babies"and Friendsand Loversin Lesotho,in The
ManyFaces of Homosexuality, supranote122,at 97.
143 See,e.g.,John KinshipAmongst
Fictitious
Blacking, GirlsoftheVendaoftheNorthern
Transvaal,59 Man 155(1959).

1460 Law Review
b. Transgenderal
Relationships
Transgenderal unionshavealso beendocumented forsomeAfrican
societies.For example,"[t]hemugawe,a powerful leaderof
religious
the KenyanMeru,is considereda complement to themale political
leadersand consequently mustexemplifyfemininequalities:he wears
women'sclothingand adoptswomen'shairstyles; he is oftenhomo-
sexual,and sometimes marriesa man."1" Anthropological studies
suggest similar berdache traditionsamong the Kwayama and
Ovimbunduin Angola,the South AfricanZulu, the Ba-kongoin
Zaire,theNandiofKenya,theDinkaand NuerofSudan,theKonso
and Amharaof Ethiopia,theOttoroof Nubia,theFantiof Ghana,
theThongaof Zimbabwe,theTanala and Bara of Madagascar,the
Wolofof Senegal,and varioustribesin Uganda.145
c. WomanMarriageand FemaleHusbands
A formofsame-sexunionthatmaybe uniqueto Africancultures is
theinstitution
of"femalehusbands"or "womanmarriage."Notedas
a merecuriosityby earlierresearchers,
theinstitution
was notgiven
muchseriousattentionuntilitwaspublicizedwithintheanthropolog-
ical communityinthe1930sbyEileenJensen KrigeandMelvilleHer-
skovits.146Evans-Pritchardprovidedan earlydescription
of woman
marriage:
Whatseemsto us,butnotat all to Nuer,a somewhat strangeunion
is thatin whicha womanmarriesanotherwomanand countsas the
ofthechildren
pater[father] bornofthewife.Suchmarriages areby
no meansuncommon in Nuerland,and theymustbe regardedas a
formof simplelegal marriage,forthewoman-husband marriesher
wifein exactlythesamewayas a manmarries a woman.... We may
perhapsreferto thiskindofunionas woman-marriage.
A womanwhomarriesin thiswayis generally barren,and forthis
reasoncountsin somerespectsas a man.... [I]fshe is richshemay
marryseveralwives.Sheis theirlegalhusbandandcandemanddam-
ages iftheyhaverelationswithmenwithoutherconsent.She is the
pater[father]oftheirchildren,
and on themarriages oftheirdaugh-
144 Greenberg, supranote47, at 60.

145 See id. at 60-61.
146 See MelvilleJ.Herskovits,A Noteon "WomanMarriage"in Dahomey,10 Africa335
(1937); EileenJ.Krige,Noteon thePhalaborwaand TheirMorulaComplex,11 BantuStud.
357 (1937).

tersshereceives
"thecattleofthefather,"
andherbrothers andsis-
tersreceivetheothercattlewhichgo to thefather'ssidein the
distribution
of bridewealth. are calledafterher,as
Her children
thoughshe werea man,and I was toldthattheyaddressheras
"father."147
Krigedescribeswomanmarriageas "the institution by whichit is
possiblefora womanto givebridewealth for,and marry, a woman,
overwhomand whoseoffspring to a
she has fullcontrol,delegating
male genitorthe duties of procreation."1148 Krige suggeststhat
womanmarriageis "closelyboundup withrightsand dutiesarising
fromthesocial structure" of theculture,a "flexible
institution
that
can be utilizedin a numberof different waysto meeta numberof
different For example,in Africancultureswhere
situations."1149
womenoccupya highpositionand can acquireproperty or other
formsof wealth,womanmarriageis one way thata womanmay
strengthen her economicpositionand establishher "household."
IfeyinwaOlinke,whosetalewas recounted in theintroduction,
was a
powerfulandprosperous womanwhoadvancedherpositionbytaking
manywives.
Woman marriageswere not uncommonin Africa. "The term
female husband . . . refersto a woman who takes on the legal and
social roles of husbandand fatherby marrying anotherwoman
accordingto theapprovedrulesand ceremonies of hersociety.She
maybelongto anyoneofover30 Africanpopulations," writesDenise
O'Brien.50 She reportsthattheinstitution
is mostpopularin three
partsofAfrica:(1) WestAfrica,especiallyNigeriaand Dahomey,151
(2) SouthAfrica,including
theSouthernBantuuponwhomO'Brien
147 E.E. Evans-Pritchard,Kinshipand MarriageAmongtheNuer 108-09(1951).

148 Eileen J. Krige, Woman-Marriage, with Special Referenceto the Lovedu-Its
Significance fortheDefinition
ofMarriage,44 Afr.11, 11 (1974).
149 Id. at 29.
150 DeniseO'Brien,FemaleHusbandsin Southern BantuSocieties,
in SexualStratification:
A Cross-Cultural View 109(AliceSchlegeled., 1977).
151See id. at 110; Amadiume,supranote2; Laura Bohannan,DahomeanMarriage:A
Revaluation, in Marriage,
Family,and Residence85 (Paul Bohannan& JohnMiddleton eds.,
1968),reprinted from19 Africa273 (1949); Herskovits,
supranote146.

1462 Law Review
and (3) East Africa153and the Sudan.154 In contrastto
reports,152
Krige's view that woman marriageempowerswomen,O'Brien
helpskeep womenin theirsubordinate
believesthatthe institution
place. Womanmarriage, sheargues,is usuallya socialadaptationby
whicha male-dominated societyallowspowerful wealthywomento
takea leadership
role,butonlyiftheyassumethesocialroleofa man,
actingas husbandand father.155
3. AsianCultures
Institutionalized same-sexunionshistoricallyexistedthroughout
Asian culturesin one or moreof the formsalreadydescribed:the
berdachetradition oftransgenderalsame-sexmarriage(similarto that
existingin NativeAmericanculture),companionate same-sexmar-
riage(likethatcontemplated in Plato'sSymposium), and thetrans-
generational tradition
of boy wives(also foundin Plato and widely
practicedin ancientGreece). In some cultures,includingChinese
society,all three of these types of same-sexrelationships have
flourished.
156
a. Transgenderal
Unions(IndianHijras)
In manyAsiancultures,
theberdachetradition
was quitestrong,
its
adherents
oftenformingtransgenderal
same-sexunions:
AmongthePaleo-Siberians(Chukchee,Koryak,Kamchadal,Asiatic
Eskimo),male shamanswereorderedby a femalespiritto dressas
women.As thespiritoftenbecamea supernaturalspousewho was
jealousofearthly
women,manyoftheshamansacquiredmalesexual
partnerswho had intercourse
withthemanally,and mostof them
marriedothermen.157
152 See O'Brien,supranote150,at 110;Krige,supranote148.

153 See O'Brien,supranote 150, at 110; H. Huber,"WomanMarriage"in Some East
African Societies,
63/64Anthropos 745-52(1969);ReginaS. Oboler,Is theFemaleHusbanda
Man? Woman/Woman MarriageAmongtheNandiof Kenya,19 Ethnology 69 (1980).
154 See O'Brien,supranote150,at 110;Evans-Pritchard, supranote147.
155 See O'Brien,supranote 150,at 122 (conceding thatKrige'sdescriptionmayholdfor
WestAfricanfemalehusbands,forit seemsthatwomenin thissocietycould attaingreat
wealthwithoutsacrificingtheirroleas women).
156 See BretHinsch,PassionsoftheCut Sleeve:The Male Homosexual Tradition
in China
11-13(1990). See generallyStephen0. Murray,OceanicHomosexualities 151-256(1992)
(describing"gender-defined
homosexuality in Asianoceaniccultures").
157 Greenberg, supranote47, at 58.

For example,thecourtshipand marriageof Chuckchee"softmen"

has beendescribedas follows:
Themarriage [betweena softmanandhishusband] isperformedwith
theusualrites, andI mustsaythatitforms a quitesolidunion,which
oftenlaststillthedeathofoneoftheparties.Thecouplelivemuchin
thesamewayas do otherpeople.Themantendshisherdandgoes
hunting andfishing, whilethe"wife"takescareofthehouse,per-
forming all domestic andwork.Theycohabit
pursuits ina perverse
way,modoSocratis, inwhichthetransformed wifealwaysplaysthe
passiverole.158
In Vietnam,India,Burma,Korea, Nepal,theAustralIslands,New
Zealand,and theCook Islands,a similarly strongberdachetradition
endured,withChinesesocietycountenancing a weakerconvention
practicedby eunuchs(castratedmaleschargedwithmanagingimpe-
rialharems).The mahusofeighteenth-century Tahitiweredescribed
in termslikewiserecallingtheberdacherite. The mahusweremen
whonotonlydressedin femalegarb,butalso engagedin worktradi-
tionallyperformed by women,such as caringforbabies,keeping
house,and braidingpalm leaves. Tahitianculturedid not merely
acceptthemahus,butreveredthem,eachdistrict claimingonedesig-
natedmahu and theprincipalchiefstakingthemas wives.159
Probablythebestdocumented exampleof transgenderal marriage
in Asia takesplaceamongthehijrasof India,160impotent or emascu-
latedmenwho takeon femalegarband demeanor.The hijrasearn
theirlivingby collectingalms and performing forcurrency at wed-
dings,births,and festivals.Interviewsby Serena Nanda confirm
many(butnotall) earlierstudiesindicating thatthehijracultureis
one of institutionalized homosexuality, withmarriage'sculturaland
linguistictrappings adoptedbymostofitsparticipants. Quotingfrom
thehijras,Nanda describestheirsexualrelationships:
158 7 Waldemar Bogoras,The JesupNorthPacificExpedition: The Chukchee451 (reprint

1975) (Franz Boas ed., 1904-09);see also Williams,supranote 129,at 252-54(describing
Bogoras'workand providing accountsof "softmen"in othereasternSiberiancultures).
159 Greenberg,supranote47,at 58-59.The bestsourceforthemahutradition is RobertI.
Levy,The Community FunctionofTahitianMale Transvestitism, 44 AnthropologicalQ. 12
(1971).
160 See SerenaNanda, The Hijras of India: Culturaland IndividualDimensionsof an
ThirdGenderRole, 11 J. Homosexuality
Institutionalized 35 (1985). The articlehas been
expandedintobookform.See SerenaNanda,NeitherMan Nor Woman:The HijrasofIndia
(1989) [hereinafter
The Hijrasof India].

1464 Law Review
Virginia [Vol. 79:1419
Thereare twomodesofsexualrelations amonghijras.One is cas-

ual prostitution,
theexchangeofsexualfavorswithdifferent menfor
a fixedsumofmoney,and theotheris "havinga husband.". . .
Shakuntalaclearlyexpresseda feminine
genderidentityandwas,in
fact,thepersonwhocameclosestto whatwouldbe calledin thewest
a transsexual
thatis, experiencing
himselfas a "femaletrappedin a
malebody.". . . She is currently
involvedin a long-term,
monoga-
mousrelationship witha youngmanwholivesin herneighborhood
and whomshe hopeswill"marry"her....
Havinga husbandis thepreferred forthosehijraswho

alternative
engagein sexualrelations.Manyofmyinformants have,or recently
had, a relatively permanentattachment to one man whom they
referred to as theirhusband.Theymaintainwarmand affectionate,
as well as sexuallysatisfying
and economically relation-
reciprocal,
shipswiththesemen,withwhomtheylive,sometimes alone,or some-
timeswithseveralotherhijras.161
b. Companionate
Unions(China)
Companionatesame-sexmarriages,like transgenderalunions,were
also common in Asia, theiroccurrencebest documentedin Chinese
society. Literarysources fromthe Zhou Dynasty (1122-256 B.C.)
contain examples of open affectionbetweenmen; like the Mesopota-
mian myth of Gilgamesh, some of the accounts describe the love
shared between same-sex couples in terms akin to those used to
recountthe love exchangedbetweenhusbandand wife.162 According
to the officialhistories,tenof China's Han Emperors(206 B.C. to 220
A.D.) enjoyedmale lovers,pursuingopen same-sexliaisonssimilarto
those enjoyedby theircontemporary Roman counterparts.163Gener-
ally, these liaisons should not be considered same-sex marriages.
Rather,the Han Emperorwould marrya woman to bear him heirs
and take on one or more male favoritesas lovers. But the leading
scholar of Chinese sexuality,Bret Hinsch,believesthatHan society's
toleranceof homosexual relations,the custom of male pair bonding
161 Nanda,The HijrasofIndia,supranote161,at 44-45.

162 See Hinsch,supranote156,at 15-33(describing thehomosexual traditionsoftheZhou
Dynastygenerally); id. at 24-25(providing
thebestexampleofa storyrelating
a companionate
relationship,i.e.,theloveofWangZhongxianforPan Zhang).
163 See id. at 34-50(listing theemperorsand theirmalefavoritesand recountingsomeof
theirstories).

and itscelebrationin poetryand otherliterature,
and men'sincorpo-
rationoftheirmaleconcubines intotheirhouseholdare "cluesto the
originsofpracticesthatlaterdevelopedintosame-sexmarriages.""M
Evidence of institutionalized same-sexmarriagesin China is
clearerduringthe Yuan and Ming Dynasties(1264-1644),thebest
evidencecomingfromthewidelyreadseventeenth-century storiesof
Li Yu. Manyofhisstoriesspeakopenlyofsexualrelations and com-
panionatelove affairsbetweenmen,165a practiceparticularly associ-
atedwithFujianand otherprovinces in SouthernChina. In at least
one story,Li Yu describesthetragicromanceoftwomen,Jifang and
Ruiji,who become"husbandand wife." In describing thecouple's
wedding,Li Yu goes out of his way to emphasizethatthe couple
adheredto theformalrequisites ofmarriage, suchas bride-price and
thevariousweddingrituals,givingsomeindication thatsimilarsame-
sex marriageswerecommonin SouthernChina and perhapselse-
wherein the region.166HinschinfersfromLi Yu's tale and other
evidencethat"menapparently foundit desirableto construct homo-
sexualrelationshipsalongthelinesofheterosexualmarriage,"167 espe-
cially in Fujian, but furthernotes that same-sexrelationships
elsewherewerecelebratedas "brotherly" unions,swornfriendships,
and evenadoptions168-closebutplatonicrelationships reminiscent of
164 Id. at 50.

165 See e.g,Li Yu, A TowerfortheSummerHeat (PatrickHanan trans.,1992).
166 See Hinsch,supranote 156,at 127-29(discussing the couple'sstory).See generally
JamesMcGough,DeviantMarriagePatternsin ChineseSociety,in Normaland Abnormal
Behaviorin ChineseCulture171(ArthurKleinman& Tsung-YiLin eds., 1981)(tracingthe
typesofmarriages in Chineseculture).
167 Hinsch,supranote 156,at 129; see also id. at 132-33(providing furtherevidenceof
formalized same-sexmarriage in Fujian). ProfessorMcGoughstatesthat
Whatis ofinterestis theinstitutionalization
and permanence ofsuchrelationships.
Thereis somefragmentary information tendingto support[thestory's]claimthatthere
wereinstitutionalized,
marriage-like,malehomosexual unionsin China.
It seemsfairlyclearto me,then,thattherewereat leastin late Mingand Ch'ing

China institutionalized
relationships
betweenmales in some areas, and that these
relationships
wereoftenexpressedintermsofmarriage andcarriedoutinsome[sic]the
socialformsconnected with"regular"marriage.
McGough,supranote 166,at 187-88;see also Jonathan D. Spence,The MemoryPalace of
MatteoRicci226-31(1984)(reaching thesameconclusion);
VivienW. Ng,Homosexuality and
theStatein Late ImperialChina,in HiddenfromHistory:Reclaiming theGay and Lesbian
Past 76 (MartinN. Duberman,MarthaVicinus& GeorgeChauncey, Jr.eds., 1989)(same).
168 See Hinsch,supranote 156, at 131-32(describing
brotherlyrelationships,adoptive
relationships,and a "ceremony forswearingfriendship").

1466 Law Review
theearlyChristianChurch'senfraternization ceremonies.Although
theManchusoftheQingDynastysoughtto discourage same-sexrela-
tionships,outlawinghomosexualbehaviorin 1740, thesealliances
continuedforcenturiesafterpeakingin theseventeenth century.169
Less is knownof femalesame-sexunionsin China. Although
Hinschcreditsaccountsof woman-woman unions(whichhe consid-
ers to havebeenmarriages) formedduringtheQingDynasty,170 the
firstwell-documentedunionswerethoseassociatedwiththe "mar-
movement"
riageresistance and earlytwentieth-cen-
171 in nineteenth-
turySouthernChina. The development of China'sinternationalsilk
industry duringthisperiodhelpedmanywomento attaineconomic
independence.Afteracquiringthisnewly-found freedom, thousands
ofwomenrenounced marriage and became sou hei.172Upon deciding
to becomesou hei,a womantooka formalceremonial vowto remain
unwedat leastfora time,movedoutofherparents'house,and built
"spinsterhouses"withothersou hei. Thesewomenformed"sister-
hoods" in whichsmall groupsof women(typicallyfiveto seven)
would bond togetherfor mutualsupportand affection.Andrea
Sankarreportsthatphysicalas wellas emotionalbondsoftendevel-
oped betweentwoor threeofthesisters.173
Hinschis preparedto go further thanSankar,claimingthatsister-
sharedmanyattributes
hood relationships ofmarriage.
Withinthegroup,a lesbiancouplecould chooseto undergoa mar-
riageceremony in whichone partnerwas designated as "husband"
and theother"wife." Afteran exchangeof ritualgifts,thefounda-
tionof the Chinesemarriageceremony,a feastattendedby female
companionsservedto witnessthe marriage.These marriedlesbian
couplescouldevenadoptfemalechildren,whoin turncouldinherit
familypropertyfromthecouple'sparents.174
169 See Ng, supranote167,at 87-89.

170 See Hinsch,supranote156,at 177.
171 See Marjorie Topley,MarriageResistancein RuralKwangtung, in Womenin Chinese
Society67 (MargeryWolf& RoxaneWitkeeds., 1975).
172 The termliterally means"'self-combers,' to thefactthattheycombedtheir
referring
ownhairin thefashionof marriedwomenratherthanallowingit to be doneforthemin a
marriageceremony."AndreaSankar,Sistersand Brothers, Loversand Enemies:Marriage
Resistance in Southern Kwangtung,in The ManyFaces ofHomosexuality,supranote122,at
69, 69.
173 See id. at 78-80.
174 Hinsch,supra note 156, at 177-78;see also McGough,supra note 166, at 185-86
(providing anotheraccountof same-sexunionsforwomenin China).

Unions(Japanand Melanesia)
c. Transgenerational
Transgenerational same-sex unions traditionallyexisted in a
number of Asian societies,as well as in Melanesia and Australia.
Feudal Japaninstitutionalized transgenerationalhomosexuality,espe-
cially in its samurai class of warriors.175 During the Tokugawa
period, and especially during the seventeenthcentury,these trans-
generationalrelationshipswere recordedin literaryand otherdocu-
ments. What the Japanese called "boy love" is described in
particularlygreatdetail in Ihara Saikaku's The GreatMirrorof Male
Love, whichhas been translatedand presentedto an English-speaking
audience by Paul Gordon Schalow. In his introduction,Schalow
says:
Sincemalelovewas a normalcomponent it was
ofmalesexuality,
governed verymuchlikethosegoverning
byethicalconstraints sexual
relationsbetweenmen and women,particularly in the samurai
class.... [T]hebeginning betweena wakashu[boy]
ofa relationship
and an adult samurai was normallyaccompaniedby a formal
exchangeofwritten a mar-
and spokenvows,givingtherelationship
riage-likestatus. The verbalexchangeof vows was formulaic and
involveda promiseto lovein thislifeand thenext(one stepbeyond
our "till death do us part"). The wakashuSannojo's vow with
Kan'emonrecordedin [story]2:3, "His Head Shavedon thePathof
Dreams,"is fairlytypical:
"Promiseme yourlovewillneverchange,"Sannojosaid.
"It willneverchange."
"Promiseneverto forget me."
"I willneverforget you."
sexwas onlyone elementoftheman-boy

As in marriage, relation-
ship. The adultmalelover(calleda nenja) was supposedto provide
Professor
175 Greenbergelaborates:
A samuraiwarrior wenttobattleaccompanied bya favoriteyouth,
whoalsoservedas a
sexual partner;for manyhe may have been the primary, thoughnot necessarily
exclusive,
sexualoutlet.Literary sourcesdepicttherelationships
as highlyromantic,
sustainedby undyingloyalty.Sometimessamuraisfoughtduels on behalfof their
lovers.The relationships
werenotonlyaccepted,butconsidered extremely desirable,
in thoseregionsofJapanwherephysicalstrength
especially and military
prowesswere
highlyprized.
Greenberg,
supranote47, at 260; see also Murray,supranote 158,at 111, 130 (describing
"boywives"ofsamuraiin pre-nineteenth-centuryJapan).

1468 Law Review
socialbacking,
emotional anda modelofmanliness
support, forthe
boy.In exchange, theboywasexpected tobe worthyofhisloverby
beinga goodstudent ofsamurai manhood.'76
Whatis striking aboutJapanesetransgenerational same-sexunionsis
notso muchtheirrhetorical linksto marriageas theirimportance as
initiationrites.In thisregard,theseunionsaresimilarnotonlyto the
boyloveoftheGreeksandtheboywivesamongtheAzandewarriors,
butalso to themummy-baby gamesamongBasothogirls.
The best documented exampleof briefsame-sexrelationships as
ritesof initiationhas beenthe"ritualizedhomosexuality" developed
byaboriginal populations ofAustraliaandtheislandsofMelanesia.177
Ritualizedhomosexuality is the termanthropologist GilbertHerdt
usesto describetheeventswhereby a boyentering manhoodengages
in a short-term sexualrelationship withan olderman. By implanting
his semenwithintheboy,theolderman is thoughtto empowerhis
youngerpartner, helpinghimto completethejourneyto virility and
manhood.Accordingto Herdt,aboutfifty Melanesiansocietiesprac-
ticesomeformofritualizedhomosexuality.
In somecommunities, theritualizedman-boy relationship servesas
a preludeto a traditionaldifferent-sexmarriage.ShirleyLindenbaum
has foundthat"[a] moststriking aspectofsocialorganization in soci-
eties with ritualizedmale homosexuality concernsthe overlap
betweenmarriageand homosexualrelationships."'78That is, by
inseminating a boytheoldermalenotonlyfacilitates theboy'spas-
sage into manhood,but also prepareshim forhis marriageto a
woman. Manyof theMelanesiansocietiesinstitutionalizing thisrit-
ual treatmarriage notas an exchangerelationship involving thepay-
mentofbride-price, butas a complexmethodofbondingtwofamilies.
In keepingwiththisnotion,someofthesecultures requirea boyseek-
ing to enterintomarriagewitha womanto submitsexuallyto the
woman'sbrother."Thus,lifeforce(as semen)flowsbetweensame-
176 Paul G. Schalow,Introductionto IharaSaikaku,The GreatMirrorofMale Love 1,27

(Paul G. Schalowtrans.,1990).
177 See generally
GilbertH. Herdt,RitualizedHomosexualBehaviorin theMale Cultsof
Melanesia,1862-1983, in RitualizedHomosexuality in Melanesia1 (GilbertH. Herdted.,
1984) (discussinganthropologicalevidenceof ritualistic
same-sexpracticesin Melanesia);
GilbertH. Herdt,GuardiansoftheFlutes:IdiomsofMasculinity (1981) (documentingsuch
practicesin Sambia).
178 ShirleyLindenbaum, Variationson a SociosexualThemein Melanesia,in Ritualized
Homosexuality, supranote177,at 337,343.

sexand different-sex
partners, and groupsin com-
linkingindividuals
plexchainsofmutualdependencyand obligation.''79
C. Same-SexUnionsin theModernWest
The modemWest-the cultureofwhichwe are thebestinformed
-is historically
peculiar,expressing hysteriaaboutsame-sexintimacy
and seekingto suppresssame-sexunionswitha fervor notfrequently
observedin othercultures.Paralleling thestoryofthatsuppression is
theWest'sconstruction ofinversion, sodomy, andhomosexualityover
time.Becauseitsconstruction ofhomosexuality coincidedwithWest-
ernEurope'sdomination of theworld,theWest'speculiarities have
had a disproportionate
influence on humanhistory, withgreatsocial
consequences fornon-Western societiessuchas thosesurveyedin the
previousSection.
1. The West'sSuppression
ofSame-SexUnions
The turning pointin theWest'sattitudes towardsame-sexunions
or marriagescan be locatedin thethirteenth It was then
century.180
thatmanyseculargovernments enactedtheirfirstlaws prohibiting
sodomyand that the existinglaws came to be more stringently
enforced.In an analogousfashion,the Churchbegan to take a
strongerstand againstsame-sexintimacy,and leading scholastic
thinkerssuchas AlbertusMagnusand ThomasAquinassystematized
theological
arguments againstsuchbehavior.In contrast to therela-
tivelyopenand tolerantattitudes expressedduringtheeleventhand
twelfthcenturies,Europe after1200 acted in an increasingly per-
secutorialmannertowardany kind of behaviorthat transgressed
established
genderlines,including notjustsame-sexintimacy butalso
aggressive,
independent behaviorsuchas crossdressing bywomen.'8'
179 Id. at 345.

180 See Boswell,supranote46, at 269-332;Greenberg,
supranote47, at 268-92(concerning
thelateMiddleAges),301-46(concerning theearlymodemperiod);Judith C. Brown,Lesbian
Sexualityin Medievaland EarlyModernEurope,in HiddenfromHistory, supranote167,at
67, 72.
181 For a documentationofmedievalattitudes
towardcrossdressing,see VernL. Bullough
& BonnieBullough,CrossDressing,Sex, and Gender45-73(1993) (notingthatmale cross
dressingwas viewedas veryproblematic throughmostof medievalperiodand thatfemale
crossdressing was oflessconcerngenerally,
butwas fearedwhenusedto assertfemalepower,
as was thecase withJoanofArc in thefifteenthcentury).For a discussionoftheEuropean
witch-craze, whichprovidedsocietywith a means by whichto scrutinizeindependent,

1470 Law Review
Huon of Bordeaux,an early thirteenth-century versionof the

Frenchromance,illustrates thispoint.182 Ide, thework'sfemalepro-
dressedin man'sgarband surreptitiously
tagonist, employed herskill
as a warrior
withsuchproficiency so as to earnhernotonlya knight-
hood,butalso thehandof theemperor's daughterin marriage.Ide
wentthrough withthemarriage ceremony butlaterrevealedthetruth
to herbride,whotattledto herfather.Condemning thepossibility of
"boggery"betweenthe two women,the emperordecreedthatIde
mustbe burnedto death.ThoughIde was savedat thelastminuteby
metamorphosizing intoa man,the drasticpunishment imposedfor
herpredicament was consistentwiththeharshened thirteenth-century
attitudestowardssame-sexintimacy and crossdressing.
Whythisshiftin attitudes occurredis notclear,butit can be said
thatitcoincidedwiththequickening ofa culturein theWestthatwas
urban,bourgeois,and statist.This contemporary urbanculturecre-
ated moreoccasionsforpeopleto find,pursue,and enjoysame-sex
partners,and theincreasing economicopportunities availableto the
bourgeoisiegavesubstantialnumbers ofmenmorefreedom to choose
and diversify
thenatureoftheirsexualliaisons,to includesame-sexas
well as different-sex
experiences.Althoughurbanizationallowed
manymento enterintoand enjoysame-sexrelationships, it also ren-
deredsuch activitymoreprominent and potentially destabilizing.183
Same-sexrelationships formerly practicedprimarily in the discreet
closetsofnunneries,
monasteries, and royalcourtswerelesslikelyto
remainunobservedin this bustlingurbanenvironment, becoming
moreopenor apparent, and thereby moretroubling.
At thesametimethaturbanization forcedsocietyto facethisand
otheraberrations,
suchas spinsters, religiousnonconformists, and the
like,powerfulnation-and city-stateswereemerging in theWest. The
threateningwomenand spinsters, see H. R. Trevor-Roper,The EuropeanWitch-Craze ofthe

Sixteenth and Seventeenth
Centuries, in The EuropeanWitch-Craze of the Sixteenth and
Seventeenth Centuries
and OtherEssays90 (1969) (notingthattheintellectual originsofthe
earlymodemwitch-craze werelaid in theperiod1200-1500, markinga dramaticshiftfrom
earlierattitudes
thatrefused
to believein witches).
182 See Huon of Bordeaux(Sir JohnBourchier & Lord Bernerstrans.,1895).
183 See LawrenceStone,The Family,Sex and Marriagein England1500-1800, at 215-18
(1977) (arguingthatthesovereignty of the statewas linkedin popularimagination to the
sovereigntyofthefatherheadinga family ofobedientwifeand children and that,hence,any
attackon the nuclearfamilyduringthisperiodwas viewedas a politicallyand socially
destabilizing
event).

politicalpowerstakingthisnew formflexedtheirmusclesagainst
aberrant groups,and stateaggressiondirectedagainstJews,heretics,
and witchesbecameprominent after1200.184Guido Ruggiero'shis-
toryofsexcrimesin Venicecharacterizes thepersecutionofsame-sex
behavioras, literally,
a "witchhunt,"reflectingboththecontempo-
raryanxietiesand theawesomepowerofthenewLeviathan.'85
Jews,heretics, witches,and invertsencounteredsimilarhistorical
patternsofidentification,
segregation,
andharassment. Thoughmedi-
eval societydisapprovedof certainformsof conduct,including
expressionofhereticalbeliefs,
devilishbehavior,and sodomy,before
1200 no systematic theoryexplainedwhy certainacts were pro-
scribed,and such conductwas penalizedmildlyand episodically.
After1200,however,medievalthinkers developedtheoriesthatren-
dered nonconforming behaviorsalarmingthreats,and societies
accordinglybeganto penalizenonconforming conductmoresystem-
aticallyand harshly.Real historicalparallelsto the storyof Ide
abound.JoanofArc,forexample,was burnedat thestakeforengag-
ing in a laundrylist of interrelatednonconformities-heresy(she
bypassedtheChurchand claimedto speakdirectly withthespiritual
184 Boswellsuggests thatthestate'sact ofrepressingsame-sexrelationships was

probablycloselyrelatedto the generalincreasein intolerance of minority groups
apparentin ecclesiasticaland secular institutions throughout the thirteenth and
fourteenthcenturies.Crusadesagainstnon-Christians and heretics,the expulsionof
JewsfrommanyareasofEurope,theriseoftheInquisition, efforts
tostampoutsorcery
and witchcraft,all testify
to increasing
intoleranceofdeviationfromthestandardsof
themajority,enforceable forthefirsttimein thenewlyemerging corporate statesofthe
HighMiddleAges.
Boswell,supranote46, at 334;see also Greenberg,supranote47, at 279 (discussingtheintol-
eranceof homosexuality emerging in thethirteenthcentury);VernL. Bullough,Postscript:
Heresy,Witchcraft,and Sexuality, in SexualPractices& theMedievalChurch206 (Vein L.
Bullough& JamesBrundage eds.,1982)(discussingtheassociationofforbidden sexualitywith
heresyand witchcraftin thetwelfth and thirteenth
centuries);
Trevor-Roper, supranote181,
at 110-15(notingthatforpurposesofmedievalscapegoating, witchesandJewswerevirtually
interchangeable,
bothrepresenting socialnonconformity).
185 See GuidoRuggiero, The Boundaries ofEros:Sex Crimeand Sexuality in Renaissance
Venice140(1985) (footnotes omitted):
Outsiderssexually,fromthe perspective of the threatened dominantculture,both
witchesand homosexualsengendereda fear based, on the one hand, on man's
powerlessnesstostandup totheirseemingly growing powersand,on theotherhand,on
God's threatened wrathagainstsocietiesthattoleratedsuch ungodlyways. In both
cases man had the powerto literallyburnthe dangerout of society. . . Both
homosexuals andwitcheswere,in a way,amongthefirst victims
ofa moreaggressively
organizedsocietyflexing itsnewmusclesofdiscipline and control.

1472 Law Review
world),witchcraft (the voices she heardand followedwere called

demonic),and inversion(her dressingas a man defiedgender
roles).186
Duringtheearlymodemperiod(about1400-1700), society'sobses-
sionwithbad conductgavewayto an obsessionwithbad categories of
people. Attention shifted frompersecuting specificconductevincing
hereticalbeliefsto identifying and excluding"heretics," fromforbid-
dingdemonicbehaviorto identifying and excluding"witches,"and
frompenalizing inverted sexualbehaviorto identifying and excluding
"inverts," or peoplewhoengagedin crimesagainstnature(bestiality,
sodomy,and so forth).Eventually, isolatedprosecutions ofindividu-
als engagingin bad conductgave way to hysterical persecutorial
crazesthatsweptup throngs ofpeoplein popular,ecclesiastical, and
officialdragnets.
Thus,same-sexunions,whichhad beenviewedas merelyproblem-
aticduringtheMiddleAges,werebelievedin theearlymodemperiod
to constitutea severethreatto thesocialorderand thenow-powerful
state. For example,evenas Montaignewas reporting thatsame-sex
marriages wereperformed in Romein theChurchofSt. Johnduring
the 1570s,'87 otherobservers reported thatsomeofthemalecouples
marriedin St. John'swerelaterburnedin thecitysquare.'88Also set
in motionin theWestwas a spiraling and somewhatparadoxicaldis-
coursedetailing,highlighting, and condemning same-sexrelations.
Fascinatedbythevariety ofsexualexperiences, butat thesametime
repelledbya forcethatmightdestabilize marriage and reduceneeded
population, Westernpriests, bureaucrats, and moralists engagedin a
chattycampaignto cleansetheircommunities thatsucceededin forc-
ing same-sexcouplesunderground, whileat thesame timeuninten-
tionally feedingpeople's interestin inverts. Historianshave
documented communities (or ghettos)of male and femaleinvertsin
Europe'smajorurbancentersduringtheearlymodernperiod.189
186 See Marina Warner,Joanof Arc (1981). I also considerGeorgeBernardShaw's

screenplay strikingly
insightful
on thispoint.See GeorgeB. Shaw,SaintJoan:A Screenplay
101-02(BernardF. Dukoreed., 1968).
187 See Michelde Montaigne, Journalde Voyageen Italiepar la Suisseet l'Allemagne en
1580et 1581,at 231 & 481 n.515(CharlesDedeyaned., 1946).
188 See Spence,supranote167,at 226.
189 See, e.g.,Theo van der Meer,Tribadeson Trial:FemaleSame-SexOffenders in Late
Eighteenth Century Amsterdam, in ForbiddenHistory:
The State,Society,andtheRegulation
of Sexualityin ModernEurope 189 (JohnC. Fout ed., 1992); RandolphTrumbach,Sex,

Duringthenineteenth century, theWestwentone stepfurther in

its categorizationgame. The invertbecamethehomosexual,'90 as a
newbreedof doctor-"sexologists"---came to see sexualaffinity not
justas a wayto categorize andstigmatize a personforhisor heractiv-
ities,butas a "sexualorientation," an essentialpartofone'spersonal-
ity and physical make-up. And because a "normal" sexual
orientation was heterosexual, beingphysically attracted to peopleof
the same sex becamenot onlya homosexualorientation but also a
sexual "deviance,"a medicaldisease. Because physicalor mental
deviationsmightbe treatable,the doctorreplacedthe bureaucrat
(who had earlierdisplacedtheinquisitor) as society'spoliceofficer.
By deeminghomosexuality a disease,themedicalprofession contrib-
utedto a newwaveofhysteria andpersecution in theWestduringthe
middlepartof thetwentieth century, a reactionthatwas especially
vehement in theUnitedStates.
Unlikeculturesin theAmericas,Asia, Africa,and Australia,the
modernWesthas not beenhospitableto same-sexunions. Yet the
West'shostilereactionto same-sexunionsand its state-sanctioned
suppression of themaffected othercultures'attitudestowardsuch
unions.Justas Western-nation-states in theearlymodernperiodcon-
quered the New Worldand killedmostof its people,colonizedand
enslavedAfrica,and cartelizedand evangelizedAsian cultures,so
theyexportedtheiranti-homosexual attitudesand aggressively sup-
pressedthesecultures'indigenous attitudes and institutions.
Thus,theSpanishpersecuted theberdachetradition in whatis now
LatinAmerica,191 withtheUnitedStatessupporting a lessconcerted
campaignagainstsuchrelationships as it strippedNativeAmericans
oftheirlandand culture. 192 Slavetraders and colonialadministrators
Gender,and SexualIdentity in Modem Culture:Male Sodomyand FemaleProstitution in

Enlightenment London,in ForbiddenHistory, supra,at 89.
190See JeffreyWeeks,Sex,Politics,and Society:The Regulation ofSexualitySince1800,at
102-03(1981);GeorgeChauncey, Jr.,FromSexualInversion to Homosexuality:
Medicineand
theChangingConception of FemaleDeviance,in Homosexuality: Sacrilege,Vision,Politics
114 (RobertBoyers& GeorgeSteinereds., 1982-83).
191 See Guerra,supranote116,at 221-25.
192 See Williams,supranote129,at 175:
Male marriages,and berdachesthemselves, could not surviveundisturbed when
representatives
of theestablishedsocialorderarrived.Theirhistory afterthefrontier
era is partofthewiderstoryoftheeffect ofAnglo-American dominance on American
Indianculturesgenerally.It is a storyof culturalrepressionby thechurchand the
state,leadingto the declineof the old ways,and an acculturationto thenew alien

1474 Law Review
(includingsame-sexfamilyinstitutions)
brokeup familyinstitutions
in Africaand sometimesdisruptedeconomicpatternsthat gave
womenstandingand authority to commandfemalemarriages.Mis-
sionariesin Africa,China, Japan,Melanesia,and othercultures
viewofsexuality
Christian
rigid,official
imposedan increasingly and
marriage upon"converted"peoples, and
discouraging sometimesper-
secutingtraditional includingsame-sexunions.193
practices,
2. TheSurvivalofSame-SexUnionsin theWest
Althoughthe modemturnin Westernattitudesand theirascen-
dancyin theworldsurelythreatened same-sexrelationshipsand mar-
riages,Westerncondemnation did notendthem, eitherin Europeor
the restof the world.194Same-sexunionsnot onlysurvivedduring
thisperiodof repression,but flourishedevenin the West,albeitin
differentways at differenttimes. Throughoutthe modem period,
same-sexunionshave flourished at thefringesof society.The most
waysin whichsame-sexunionshave persisted
interesting havebeen
thathaveundermined
thoseinstitutions linesofgenderidentification
in themodernera.
a. Same-SexRelationships and BostonMarriages
Women'ssame-sexunionsin themodernperiodhavebeendiffer-
entlysituatedfrommen'suntilthiscentury.In thesixteenth century,
theSeigneurde Brantomewroteofsexbetweenwomenwitha toler-
ance he wouldnot have shownformale sodomy.195 The apparent
reasonforthisanomalyis thathe,likeothers, viewedonlyintercourse
as sex,finding potentially
same-sexrelations threateningonlywhena
peniswas involved.Thusadultery was wrong,and malesodomyvir-
tuallyunspeakable.But undertheviewsprevailing in thesixteenth
century, nothingwas at stakewhena womancavortedwithanother
womanbecauseintercourse, per se, could not take place. Indeed,
values. But it is also a storythatis markedby a surprisingcontinuedpersistenceof

NativeAmericantraditions, evenintothecontemporary era.
193 See, e.g., Spence,supranote 167, at 227-32(notingthatthe Jesuits' persecution of
Chineseand Phillipino citizensforhavinghomosexual relationswas acceptablein Asia).
194 Accordingto Boswell,for example,Roman Catholicand Greek Orthodoxpriests
continued to perform same-sex marriageceremonies
intothenineteenth century.See Boswell,
1500Years ofBlessing,supranote114.
195 See Seigneur de Brantome, LivesofFair& GallantLadies 131-34(A.R. Allinsontrans.,
1933).

Brantomeeffervesced that manyhusbands"were rightglad their
wivesdid followafterthissortof affection ratherthanthatof men,
deemingthemto be thusless wild."1196
Thus, female-female intimaterelationships could be conducted
openly,becausewomenwerethemselves consideredsexuallymargi-
nal. HistorianLillianFadermanhas documented dozensofexamples
of intense,marriage-like friendships betweenpairsof women;these
same-sexrelationships flourishedfromtheRenaissanceto thetwenti-
eth century.197Passionatefemale-female friendships
genuinely took
offas a socialphenomenon in theeighteenth century,whenwomen's
needsforintellectualand emotional respectfaroutstrippedtheability
of socializedmalesto meetthoseneedsand whenmanywomenhad
the economicmeansto be independent of men. For manywomen,
thesefemalefriendships generated a greatdeal moreemotional inten-
sitythantheycouldfindin marriages.'98 For example,thecelebrated
"Ladies of Llangollen,"Sarah Pononsbyand Eleanor Butler,dis-
guisedthemselves as menand elopedtogether in 1778. Theysettled
downin LlangollenVale in 1780and sharedeverymomenttogether
forthenextfifty-threeyears.199 Their"Davideanfriendship" (as poet
Anna Stewardtermedit2") becamea celebrated romantic ideal,and
theladies'friendWilliamWordsworth describedthemas follows:
"Sistersinlove,a loveallowedto climb
Ev'non thisearth, abovethereachoftime. "20'
The ladies'unionis thebestdocumented ofthisperiod,butFaderman
has foundevidenceof many otherromanticfemalerelationships
occurring throughout thelate eighteenth century.202
These relationships proliferated in the nineteenthcentury,as
women'sexpandedeconomicopportunities gave themgreaterfree-
dom to marryor not and to fashiontheirown personalrelation-
196 Id. at 131.

197 See LillianFaderman,Surpassing the Love of Men: RomanticFriendship and Love
BetweenWomenfromtheRenaissanceto thePresent(1981).
198 Id. 74-84.
199See ElizabethMavor,The Ladies of Llangollen:A Studyin RomanticFriendship

(1971).
200 See Faderman, supranote197,at 121.
201 Id. (quotingWordsworth).
202 Id. at 125-43."Whatromantic friends
wantedwasto sharetheirlives,to confide
in and
trustand dependuponeach other,to be therealwaysforeach other."Id. at 142.

1476 Law Review
ships.203The inhabitantsofthisera evencameup witha namefora

"long-term monogamous relationshipbetweentwootherwise unmar-
riedwomen"-a "Bostonmarriage," so-calledbecausetheserelation-
shipswereso similarto thelivesofa femalecouplein HenryJames'
1885novel,TheBostonians.24Bostonmarriages wereverypopular
amongwell-educated, womenin particular.
professional
The emotional,and perhapssexual,needsthatBostonmarriages
filledforwomenfoundparallelsin male companionate relationships
duringthenineteenth century.Males finding themselves in frontier
communities without womenformed personal,and oftensexual,part-
nershipswith other men-includingcommunitiesof pirates,205
hoboes,206cowboys,207 and miners.208In thenineteenth
century, male
romanticrelationships-likeBoston marriages-werenot uncom-
mon. For example,Thomas Wentworth Higginsonwroteof his
Harvardclassmate,WilliamHenryHurlbut,"I neverlovedbut one
male friendwithpassion-and forhimmylove had no bounds-all
thatmynaturalfastidiousness andcautiousreserve keptfromothersI
pouredon him;to saythatI wouldhavediedforhimwas nothing.I
livedforhim . . .'209 Notwithstanding thispassionatelanguage,
thereis no evidencethatHigginsonand Hurlbutengagedin sexual
203 Id. at 178-89.

204 Id. at 190-230.For descriptions
of similarrelationshipsin thetwentieth
century,see
Leila J. Rupp,"ImagineMy Surprise":Women'sRelationships in Mid-Twentieth
Century
America,in HiddenfromHistory, supranote167,at 395.
205 See B.R. Burg, Sodomyand the Perception of Evil: EnglishSea Rovers in the
Seventeenth-Century Caribbean(1983); see also Williams,supra note 129, at 153-57
(describing pair-bondingamongpiratesas "de factomalemarriages").
206 See JosiahFlynt,HomosexualityAmongTramps,in Studiesin thePsychology of Sex
359 (HavelockEllis ed., 1942).
207 See Williams,supranote 129,at 162 (reporting thatcowboypartners formedstable
"male marriages");id. at 169-74(explainingthatcowboyswould oftensettledown into
"Indian-white malemarriage"withberdaches).
208 See T. DunbarMoodie,Migrancy andMale Sexuality on theSouthAfrican Gold Mines,
in HiddenfromHistory, supranote167,at 411 (describing
"minemarriages" in whichmale
'wives of themine"wouldbe sexuallypassivepartners in lovemaking and wouldperform
traditionalwifelychores).
209 RobertK. Martin, Knights-Errant
and GothicSeducers:The Representationof Male
Friendship in Mid-Nineteenth-Century
America,in HiddenFromHistory, supranote167,at
169,179.

thoughthereis suchevidenceforothermale-bonded
activities, friends
of thatera.210
The poetWaltWhitmansoughtto describethis"manlylove,"this
"love ofcomrades"in theforty-five Calamuspoemspublishedin the
1860 editionof Leaves of Grass.211 Thoughmodestlyclosetedby
today'sstandards, Whitman'spoemswerescandalousin theirsexu-
allyliberatory message:
Clearto menow,standards notyetpublished-clear to methatmy
Soul,
ThattheSoulofthemanI speakfor,feeds, onlyin
rejoices
comrades;
Here,bymyself, awayfrom theclankoftheworld,
Tallyingandtalkedto herebytongues aromatic,
No longer abashed-for inthissecludedspotI canrespond as I
wouldnotdareelsewhere,
Strong uponmethelifethatdoesnotexhibit yetcontains
itself, all
therest,
Resolved to singno songsto-daybutthoseofmanly attachment,
Projectingthemalongthatsubstantiallife,
Bequeathing, hence,typesofathletic
love,
Afternoon, thisdelicious
NinthMonth, inmyforty-first year,
I proceed,forall whoare,orhavebeen,youngmen,
To tellthesecretsofmynights anddays,
To celebratetheneedsofcomrades.212
Whitman was thecentury's masterofan ambivalent, barelyconcealed
homoeroticism.
In 1869,Germanpsychiatrist Carl vonWestphalpublisheda case
studyof a womanwho crossdressedand was attractedsexuallyto
otherwomen.213 Althoughsuchpreferences presented nothingnew,
Westphal'sprognosis did:thewoman,he concluded,was a "congeni-
talinvert"whoseabnormality was notan adaptationto theboringlot
womenfaceddayin and dayout,butwas insteada resultofphysical
210 E.g., MartinN. Duberman,Writhing Bedfellowsin AntebellumSouth Carolina:

HistoricalInterpretation and thePoliticsof Evidence,in HiddenFromHistory, supranote
168,at 153.
211 Justin Kaplan,WaltWhitman: A Life233 (1980).
212 Id. at 44-45 (quotingthefirst
poemin Calamus).
213 See Faderman,supra note 197, at 239 (describing von Westphal'sstudyand its
reception).

1478 Virginia
degeneration and mentalneurosis.214Westphal'sstudyand subse-

quentones conductedby Richardvon Krafft-Ebeling and Havelock
Ellis werea nineteenth-century
sensation,hailedbypeopleinterested
in and frightened
by women'sincreasing liberation
frommen. Once
thecategoryof the "trueinvert"(laterrenamedthe "homosexual")
was createdby these sexologists,same-sexfriendships,heretofore
quaint(forwomen)or "manly"(formen),becamesexualized.Boston
marriages becameobjectsofsuspicionin Europeby 1900,and in the
UnitedStatesby 1920.215Whitman's poetrytookon newmeaning, as
evidencethathe was a "male invert,"a "woman'ssoul in [a] man's
body."216
b. PassingWomenand Same-SexMarriages
Althoughromantic same-sexfriendships
wereonlya culturalinsti-
tution,and Bostonmarriagesnot lawfullysanctioned, some female
couplesoftenlegallymarriedevenin themodemera. Thiswas often
accomplishedthroughthe phenomenonof "passing,"in whicha
womanwouldnotonlydressin men'sclothing, butactuallypassfora
man in severalaspectsof life. Althoughhundredsof womenare
knownto have passedduringthe earlymodemera whenwomen's
aspirationsgrewfasterthanthe opportunities actuallyaccordedby
the storyof Elena de Cespedes(1545-88)is particularly
society,217
interesting.218
Elena escapedfromthe traditionalwomen'sworkof
weavingby dressingand passingas a man,becominga soldier,and
thena tailornamedEleno. Eventually Elenofellin lovewitha peas-
antwomanand obtaineda licenseto marryherafterpassinga physi-
cal inspectiondesignedto establish"his" manhood. Unhappily,
Eleno'sformer loverchallengedtheforthcoming marriageon grounds
offraud,assertingthatthefirstinspection
was simplyinaccurateand
thatEleno was reallya woman. In responseto thischallenge,the
Madrid authority ordereda morethoroughinspectionto be con-
ductedby physiciansand surgeons,who once again pronounced
214 Id.
215 See id. at 239-53, 297-313. After 1920, Freud's theoryof homosexuality as a
developmental snafureplacedthecongenitalist
theoryof Krafft-Ebing.
Id. at 314-17.
216 See Dr. W.C. Rivers,WaltWhitman's in MartinDuberman,
Anomaly(1913),excerpted
AboutTime:Exploring theGay Past 106,108(1991).
217 See Bullough& Bullough, supranote181,at 94-112.
218 See id. at 94-96.

Eleno a man. Followingthemarriage, Eleno was inspectedforyeta

thirdtime,and on thisoccasiontheexaminers determined thatEleno,
thehusband,was a woman.Afterthedamningverdictwas rendered,
Elena was referred to the Inquisition, whereshe was convictedof
devilry.
Elena's case was far fromunusualin the earlymodem period.
Recordskeptby theDutch East India Companyrevealhundredsof
womenwhowerecaughtpassingas menso thattheycouldtravelto
the Indies. Some of thesepassersmarriedmen,but othersamong
themmarriedotherwomen.219Althougha considerable numberof
womenwhopassedas mendidso to attaina moreexciting to
lifestyle,
personalambitions,
fulfill or foreconomicor intellectualreasons,it
appearsthatmanyimpersonated menat leastin partin orderto enjoy
intimaterelationships withotherwomen.Giventhesesubstantial and
variedincentives,it shouldnotbe surprising thatthe earlymodem
periodsaw manywomenpassingas menand a considerable number
of marriages betweenwomen.220 Moreover,a surprisingnumberof
passingwomenfurther crossedtraditionalgenderlinesbyjoiningthe
armedforces, apparently escapingdetectionevenin thecloseconfines
ofmilitary life.221
Womenpassedas menjustas easilyintheUnitedStatesas theydid
in Europefora similarmix of economic,social,and personalrea-
sons.222To illustrate,it is estimatedthatfourhundredwomenpassed
as menin orderto servein theUnionArmyduringtheCivilWar.223
Of the womenwho passed as men,a substantialnumbersought
femalerelationships, and hundreds ofpassingwomenlegallymarried
219 Id. at 97-98. These wereonlythe passingwomenwho werefoundout, usuallyby
accident.Surelythereweremanyotherswhosuccessfully passedand thereforeneverentered

therecords.
220 See id. at 100-03,134-38,164-68.For example,in thelate eighteenthcenturyit was
reported thata passingwomanmarried wives,eachofwhomthought
threedifferent shewas a
man. Id. at 134.
221 Id. at 99-103,157-64;see JulieWheelwright,Amazonsand MilitaryMaids: Women
Who Dressedas Men in thePursuitof Life,Libertyand Happiness(1989).
222 See Katz, supranote 116,at 209-79(devoting an entiresectionto "PassingWomen:
1782-1920"); The San FranciscoLesbianandGayHist.Project,"SheEvenChewedTobacco":
A PictorialNarrative ofPassingWomeninAmerica, in HiddenfromHistory, supranote167,
at 183-94.
223 Bullough & Bullough,supranote181,at 158.

1480 Law Review
otherwomen.224Mary Anderson,forexample,passed as Murray

Hall in New York Cityforthirty yearsbeforeherdeathin 1901.225
Hall madeboatloadsofmoney,was activein TammanyHall politics,
gaineda reputation as a "man" abouttown,and marriedtwice,the
firstmarriageendingin separationand thesecondcut shortby her
wife'sdeath.
An interestinghistoryis thatofNicholaide Raylan,whopassedas
a mannamedNicholasde Raylan,a masqueradethatproveda suc-
cessapparently formostofherdays. Accordingto an accountofher
lifeauthoredby Dr. HavelockEllis:
ShewasborninRussiaandwasinmanyrespects very small
feminine,
and slightin build,butwas regarded as a man,and evenas very
"manly," bybothmenandwomen whoknewherintimately. Shewas
alwaysveryneatindress,fastidious inregardtoshirtsandties,and
worea long-waisted coatto disguisethelinesofherfigure.
Shewas
married twicein America, beingdivorced bythefirstwife,aftera
unionlastingtenyears,ontheground ofcruelty
andmisconduct with
chorusgirls[!]The secondwife,a chorusgirlwhohadbeenprevi-
ouslymarried andhada child,wasdevoted toher"husband."Both
wiveswerefirmly convinced thattheirhusband wasa manandridi-
culedtheideathat"he"couldbe a woman.I aminformed thatDe
Raylanworea veryelaborately constructedartificial
penis.In her
willshemadecareful arrangements to preventdetection
ofsexafter
death,butthesewerefrustrated, as shediedina hospital.226
Accordingto anotheraccountofde Raylan'slife,thetwowiveswere
incredulous thattheirhusbandhad beena womanand expressedno
regrets about their marriages,which they considered quite
satisfactory.227
c. Lesbianand GaySubcultures
The strictrulesregulating
genderand marriageembeddedwithin
and enforcedbyWesternculture,in theUnitedStatesand elsewhere,
inducedthosewho wantedto pursuesame-sexrelationships to find
some means of escapingthe predominant culture'sstrictures.A
224 For several documented see Katz,supranote116,at 225-26,232-38,240-42,

examples,
248-49,250-51,254-79.
225 Bullough & Bullough,supranote181,at 164.
226 Katz, supranote116,at 250 (quotingDr.
Ellis) (footnote
omitted).
227 See id. at 251.

numberofthoseseekingsexualfreedom migratedto thefringes ofthe

frontier,some of who settledin miningcommunities. Othersman-
agedto pursuetheirdesiresbybrandishing genderdisguises(thepass-
ing women) or by prudentlyfashioningseeminglyplatonic
friendships.As modemWesternculturebecameincreasingly inter-
estedin sexualityand strengthened itsaccompanying conceptofsex-
ual "deviance,"moreand morepeoplewho wereprimarily attracted
to individuals
ofthesamesexgravitated to undergroundcommunities
inhabitedby like-feeling residents-i.e.,to subculturesof sexual
inverts,usuallysituatedin urbanareas. Such subcultures existedin
London(the"mollyhouses"),Paris,mostmajorDutchcities,includ-
ingAmsterdam, mostmajorItaliancities,including Venice,and else-
where by the early eighteenthcentury.228 Althoughthe state
authoritiespersecuted thoseseekingrefuge inthesesubcultures, some-
timesruthlessly,peopleattracted to thoseofthesamesexnonetheless
flockedto themin searchof sexualpartners, withwhomtheyoften
formed relationships. On occasionsuchcoupleswerelegallymarried.
Dirk Jaap Noordam,forexample,describesa femalecouple who
managedto marryin theNetherlands inthesixteenth century, as well
as severalfemalecoupleswhotriedto wedbutwereunsuccessful.229
Noordamalso describesmale coupleswho enteredintopermanent
marriage-likerelationships duringthatperiod,and notesfinding at
leastone "marriagecontract"madeby sucha couple.230
As theWest'sconflicted interestin same-sexintimacy intensified,
and especiallyafterit was transformed in thelatenineteenth century
bythesexologists, moreand morepeoplewhodesiredsame-sexrela-
tionsturnedto urbangaysubcultures.For women,thesecommuni-
tiesappearedespecially Thoughwomencouldstillattempt
attractive.
to pass as men,the elaboratemasqueradebecameless necessaryas
228 See generally The Pursuitof Sodomy:Male Homosexuality in Renaissanceand

Enlightenment Europe(KentGerard& GertHekmaeds.,1989)(describing thedevelopment
and existenceof suchsubcultures in fifteenth-
to eighteenth-century
Europe);'Tis Nature's
Fault:Unauthorized SexualityDuringtheEnlightenment (RobertP. MacCubbined., 1987)
(describing samein theeighteenth century).
229 See Dirk J. Noordam,Sodomyin the Dutch Republic,1600-1725, in The Pursuitof
Sodomy,supranote228,at 207,212-13.
230 See id. at 217. Sometimes, peoplein thesesubcultureswoulduse termslike"marriage"
and "wedding"in an ironicor sarcasticway. See, e.g., Alan Bray,Homosexuality in
RenaissanceEngland86 (2d ed. 1986). Brayreports thatin a mollyhouse,the"chapel"was
whereone had sex withone's "husband"on a "weddingnight." Id. I am not including
facetiousor mockingreferences suchas thesein thishistory.

1482 Law Review
women'seconomicopportunities increased.WithBostonmarriages
and passingmoretroublethanit was
despoiledby the sexologists,
worth,womendesiringsame-sexintimacy turnedto lesbiansubcul-
was thatflourishing
turesin the 1920s. The mostvibrantsubculture
in Harlem:
Whilehomosexual menweresometimes beingrunoutofsmallwhite
towns. . . in Harlemtoleranceextendedto sucha degreethatblack
lesbiansinbutch/femme couplesmarried eachotherinlargewedding
ceremonies, repletewithbridesmaidsand attendants.Real marriage
licenseswereobtainedbymasculinizing nameor havinga gay
a first
male surrogateapply fora licenseforthe lesbiancouple. Those
licenseswereactuallyplacedon filein theNew YorkCityMarriage
Bureau. The marriages wereoftencommonknowledge amongHar-
lemheterosexuals.23'
Whilemostupperclasslesbiansin the1920sand 1930sdaredonlyto
continuethe somewhatmutedBoston marriagetradition,if they
choseto pursuesame-sexrelationships
at all,workingclasslesbiansin
the UnitedStatesformedopen "butch-femme" liaisonsthat were
oftencommitted and lasting.232
Male homosexualcommunities also boastedlong-term same-sex
whichwererecounted
relationships, inan earlyessaybyDonaldWeb-
sterCory and JohnLeRoy, who described"mock wedding[s]"at
which"all the formalities
of an actuallylegallycertifiedand relig-
iouslysanctionedceremony copied."233
arecarefully Theycontinued:
Cases have beenknownof an all-malecouple,one of whomwill
don an expensive bridalgown,or iftheyarebothfemales, one ofthe
womenwill wear a tuxedo. Engravedinvitations are sentout, an
elaboratecakeis baked,anda banquetis prepared.Ifa "gay"(homo-
is known,his servicesmaybe sought....
sexual)religiousofficial
231 Lillian Faderman,Odd Girls and TwilightLovers:A Historyof Lesbian Life in

Twentieth-Century America73 (1991); see also Eric Garber,A Spectaclein Color: The
Lesbianand Gay Subculture ofJazzAge Harlem,in HiddenfromHistory, supranote167,at
318 (describing theculturalcontributions
ofthegayand lesbiancommunity in Harlem).
232 Forthebestaccountofthedevelopment ofthebutch-femme seeElizabethL.
subculture,
Kennedy& MadelineDavis, "TheyWas No One to Mess with":The Construction of the
ButchRole in theLesbianCommunity ofthe 1940sand 1950s,in The Persistent
Desire:A
Femme-Butch Reader62 (JoanNestleed., 1992).
233 Donald W. Cory& JohnLeRoy,HomosexualMarriage, 29 Sexology660 (1963). The
nameCoryis a pseudonym, and thenameLeRoyis probablyone too.

Withorwithouttheaidofa religious
official,
however, someform
ofceremonymaytakeplaceinwhichthepartnersvowlifelongdevo-
tiontoeachother,
andthewedding areputinplace.Thebridal
rings
marchis played,whiletheguestsfollowthepatterns of normal
weddings.234
On theeveofStonewall, thatsocial
theauthorsconcludedwithregret
and otherpressuresusuallycombinedto makethesesame-sexmar-
riagesshort-lived.235
3. GayRightsand Same-SexMarriage
The June1969riotstriggered bya policeraidoftheStonewallBar
in GreenwichVillagedid forgay and lesbianliberationwhat the
lunchcountersit-insdid fortheAfrican-American civilrightsmove-
ment:the riotsprovidedmartyrs, demonstrated open resistanceto
oppressive and createda focalpointforfuture
socialpractices, strug-
gle. Althoughthe gay and lesbianrightsmovement in the United
Statesstartedas earlyas the 1950s,it made dramaticprogressonly
after1969.
As lesbians,gaymen,and bisexualshavebecomemoreopenabout
oursexuality, and as ourownsubculture has grown,therehavebeen
morelong-term same-sexrelationships thaneverbeforeinhumanhis-
tory. Many same-sexcouplesconsiderthemselves marriedforall
intentsand purposes,and rabbis,priests, and ministers havemarried
literallythousands of these in
couples religious services.236
Much o
of
the earlydialoguediscussingmarriagewithinthe gay and lesbian
community is capturedin the Mendola Report,237 whichis based
uponMaryMendola'ssurveyofsame-sexcouplesin the 1970s. Her
respondentsoverwhelmingly considered themselves"married."
Mendolasummarizes herfindingsas follows:53% oftherespondents
believedmarriage to constitute
"a commitment betweentwopeople";
12% definedgaymarriageas "an interpersonal relationshipbetween
two menor two women";19% viewedit as "companionship"; and
234 Id. at 660.

235 See id. at 661.
236 See Suzanne Sherman,Introductionto Lesbian and Gay Marriage: Private
Commitments, PublicCeremonies1, 4-7 (SuzanneShermaned., 1992) [hereinafter
Lesbian
and Gay Marriage].
237 Mary Mendola,The Mendola Report:A New Look at Gay Couples 48-53 (1980)
(encompassinga sectionentitled"Gays Define Their Marriages/Relationships").The
materialquotedfromMendola'sintervieweesis dominated
bymarriage metaphors.

1484 Virginia
of both people withinthe

12% focusedon "the self-actualization
relationship.
" 238
The Mendola Report'sanecdotalconclusionsare borneout by
morerigorously conductedempiricalsurveysconceivedduringthe
1970s. One important workstudying gayand lesbiancouplesfound
thattheydevelopeda varietyof relationships, withthoseattaining
"close-coupled"(marriage-like)
stabilityconsideredthe happiestby
the study'sauthors.239Academicand empiricalexaminations of
same-sexrelationshipsconductedin the 1960sand 1970sfoundthem
functionalin andofthemselvesbutterminallyshackledbysocialprej-
udice, legal disadvantages,
and economicdiscrimination.24 One
studysummarized theevidencein thisway:
The gay relationship does not receivethe financialsubsidiesthat
theheterosexual marriageenjoys,in theformsof reducedtaxesand
discountsgivento marriedcouplesby manyprivateassociations and
businesses.... It wouldseemthelack of institutional and financial
supportsto gay marriages, intentionallywithheldby the dominant
heterosexualculture,is a potentialcontributorto theoften-mentioned
instability
and ephemerality of gay relationships.Sinceit has been
foundina variety ofcultures thateconomicandinstitutional supports
contributeto the stability and longevity of heterosexualliaisons,it
wouldseemsomewhat arbitrary to arguethatsuchsupports havelit-
tle relevanceto thecase ofgaymarriages.241
As gay and lesbiancoupleshave cometo formmorelastingrela-
tionships,manyofthemviewingtheirunionsas notmaterially differ-
entfromheterosexual marriages,gaylawhas insistedthatthe state
notonlytoleratesame-sexunions,butrecognizethemas marriages,
or at leastas somethingmarriage-like
throughdomesticpartnership
laws. This bringsour storyback to its starting
point:the various
arguments forand againstrecognizing
same-sexmarriage.
238 Id. at 53.

239 See Alan P. Bell & MartinS. Weinberg, A StudyofDiversity
Homosexualities: Among
Men and Women199(1978).
240 See Joseph Harry& WilliamB. DeVall,The SocialOrganizationofGay Males 80-100
(1978) (encompassing a sectionentitled
"MarriagesBetweenGay Males").
241 Id. at 80-81(citationsomitted).

III. IMPLICATIONS OF THIS HISTORY OF SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
The historical evidencestrongly confirms thesocialconstructionist

hypotheses aboutmarriage.It cannotbe seriously disputedthatmar-
riageis an institution thatis constructed,notdiscovered, bysocieties.
The socialconstruction of marriagein anygivensocietyis fluidand
mobile,and mostsocietieswe knowanything about-includingthe
West-have recognizedsame-sexunions,usuallyincludingsame-sex
marriages, at variouspointsin theirhistory.
ThisPartexplorestheimplications ofsocialconstructionism forthe
same-sexmarriage debate.The first implication is thatthegaylesbian
community shouldthinkcarefully aboutwhether same-sexmarriage
shouldbe on thegaylegalagenda. If marriage is sociallyconstructed
and tiedin withotherinstitutions andpractices,myhistory suggests a
further inquiry:Does thegay,lesbian,and bisexualcommunity want
to participatein thisparticular institution
as constructed today?Pur-
suingthe liberalarguments forsame-sexmarriage, advocatesassert
thatwe oughtto havethesamerights, duties,andobligations as other
citizens.But social constructionism poses deeperinquiries:Is mar-
riageitselfa subordinating institution? Willitcontribute to ourlong-
termhappinessand well-being?What effects mightsame-sexmar-
riagehaveon ourcommunity, ourmovement, and ourlives?I admit
to substantialambivalence on all theseissuesbuton thewholebelieve
thatgaylesbiandoubtsaboutsame-sexmarriageare overstated and
thathavingthemarriageoptionis usefuland productive forus.
If thegaylesbian community continuesto pressforsame-sexmar-
riage,social constructionism undermines the traditional essentialist
arguments posedagainstsame-sex marriage.For example,myhistory
can be offered as proofagainstmostdefinitional arguments: How can
the law denythe existence-indeedthe pervasiveness-of same-sex
marriageas a humaninstitution whenhistoryis repletewithexam-
ples? Moreover, thehistory ofsame-sexmarriage rebutssomeaspects
of themoraland pragmatic arguments as well. Morality,likemar-
riage,is sociallyconstructed. Justas thereis no essentialdefinitionof
marriageas different-sex, so thereis no essentialreadingoftheBible
that is anti-homosexual. For centuries,the Roman Catholicand
GreekOrthodoxChurchesreadtheBiblein waysthattolerated same-
sex couples,and thatearlyreadinghas seena revival.
Perhapsthemostusefullessonof socialconstructionism is strate-
gic. Because anti-homosexual attitudesare deeply embeddedin

1486 Virginia
Americanculture, theyareexceedinglyhardto change.Becausethey

also pervadethelaw,thelaw is also hardto change,notbecauseof
logicbutbecauseofexperience.AfricanAmericans, however, fought
a similarbattlea generation
ago and madeprogress againstsimilarly
ingrained attitudes.The concludingSectionof thisArticleexplores
theparallelsbetweenthecase forsame-sexmarriage and thecase for
mixed-race marriage thatunderlaytheCourt'sconstitutionaldecision
in Loving v. Virginia.
A. ShouldGaylawBe SeekingSame-SexMarriage?
Once marriage is viewedas a constructed witha certain
institution
history,the important issueforus becomesthe following question:
Why should we expendscarce resourcesto expand marriageto
includeus? The arguments in favorof such an effortstrikeme as
compelling:we shouldhavethesamerightsand obligations as other
citizens.Particularcouplesdesireto be married,and marriagecan
serveusefulfunctions forsuchcouples,includingprotection against
unsympathetic blood relativesand a still-hostile
society.242
Nancy
Polikoff'scommentmakes severalweightyarguments againstour
makingsuchefforts.243 I am sympatheticbutunpersuaded.
1. TheMarriage-Is-Rotten
Argument
Marriageis a rotteninstitution,
say manyfeminist
and gaylesbian
intheWest,marriage
scholars.244As constructed involves
hierarchies
thathave systematicallysubordinated
women'spersonal,economic
and socialinterests
to thoseofmen. The Ozzie-and-Harriet
marriage
242 For severalof the differentarguments,see MaryC. Dunlap,The Lesbianand Gay

MarriageDebate: A Microcosmof Our Hopes and Troublesin the Nineties,1 Law &
Sexuality63 (1991); Paula L. Ettelbrick,
Since WhenIs Marriagea Path to Liberation?,
reprintedin Lesbianand Gay Marriage,supranote 236, at 20; RuthannRobson& S.E.
Valentine,Lov(h)ers:Lesbiansas IntimatePartners and LesbianLegal Theory,63 Temp.L.
Rev. 511, 528-40(1990); see also NancyD. Polikoff,This ChildDoes Have Two Mothers:
Redefining Parenthoodto Meet the Needs of Childrenin Lesbian-Mother and Other
NontraditionalFamilies,78 Geo. L.J.459 (1990) (discussing
thequestionofchild-rearing
in
same-sexrelationships).
243 See NancyD. Polikoff, We Will Get WhatWe Ask For: WhyLegalizingGay and
LesbianMarriageWillNot "DismantletheLegalStructure ofGenderin EveryMarriage,"79
Va. L. Rev. 1535(1993).
244 See MicheleBarrett & MaryMcIntosh,The Anti-SocialFamily57-65(2d ed. 1991);
Shulamith Firestone,
The DialecticofSex:The Case forFeminist Revolution141-42(rev.ed.
1971);SylviaA. Law, supranote11,at 197-206;Robson& Valentine, supranote242.

of 1950sbourgeoisAmerica-manas breadwinner, womanas house-
keeper245-cabins womenintoconstraining roles. Moreover,thelegal
structure of marriagehas been the last havenformalignantsocial
practices,includingracism(the prohibition of different-race
mar-
riages),contemptforthe poor (filingfees and otherbureaucratic
obstaclesto marriageand divorce),and abuseofwomen(therulethat
rapecouldnotoccurwithinmarriage) and children(thereluctance
of
the social welfaresystemto intervene whenchildrenare abusedby
theirmiddle-classparents).
One constructionistresponseto themarriage-is-rotten argument is
thatsame-sexmarriagewoulditselfchangetheinstitution. As Nan
Hunterhas argued,same-sexmarriages cannotrecreatethehierarchy
(man as breadwinner, womanas housekeeper)to whichfeminists
objectin traditionaldifferent-sex
marriages.246 Even if one partner
does thebreadwinning and theotherpartnerdoes thehousekeeping,
same-sexmarriageundermines theinvariablelinkageof mento the
first
roleand womento thesecond,247 and thereis someevidencethat
same-sexcouplesin Americaare less likelyto followthetraditional
breadwinner-housekeeper divisionin anyevent.248
The historyof same-sexmarriagetold in thisArticlepersuades
NancyPolikoff againstHunter'sargument, becausemostoftheexam-
ples of same-sexmarriagein othertimesand otherplaces seemto
replicategenderhierarchies.249
Same-sexspousesofRomanand Chi-
neseemperors, boywivesof theJapanesesamuraiand Azandewar-
riors,femalehusbandsin Africa,and theunionsformedby women
passingas menstrikePolikoff (and me) as not onlyreplicating but
apingthe subordination of "wife"to "husband"in theirrespective
cultures.Even the berdachetradition,the so-called"thirdsex,"
245 But did Ozzie havea job? You neversaw himworking, nordid youeversee Harriet
keephouse. Maybethisshowwas quietlysubversive.
246 See Nan D. Hunter,Marriage,Law, and Gender:A FeministInquiry,1 Law &
Sexuality 9, 17 (1991).
247 See id.;seealso Law,supranote244,at 206-12(describinghowthegayrights movement
has transformed societalnotionsofgender);Lewis,supranote11,at 1785n.12 (asserting
that
lesbianmothers, in orderto prevailin child-custody hearings,are oftenforcedto define
themselves as conforming to sexualstereotypes).
248 See The MendolaReport, supranote237; sourcescitedsupranote247.
249 See Polikoff, supranote243, at 1538-40;see also NityaDuclos, Some Complicating
Thoughtson Same-SexMarriage,1 Law & Sexuality31, 47 (1991) (observing thatlegal
recognition ofsame-sex marriages"maycontribute to theentrenchment ofmutuallyexclusive
and immutable categoriesofsexualorientation").

1488 Law Review
appearsto haveyieldedmarriages in whichtheberdachegenerally fell

intothestylizedroleofwife(forthemaleberdache)or husband(for
the femaleberdache). The best examplesof same-sexunionsthat
escapestereotyped genderrolesappearto be thosethatwereinformal
relationshipsand not legallyrecognizedmarriages-thesisterhoods
formedby the Chinesemarriageresistance movement, Bostonmar-
riagesof the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries,and the spiritual
brotherhoods recognizedby the earlyChristianchurch.Yet those
nonstereotypical unionshad littleor no discernibleinfluenceon their
surrounding cultures,againcontrary to Hunter'sthesis.
The main problemwithHunter'sthesisis thatit viewscultural
institutions
toosimply.Genderrolesandattitudes towardwomenare
deeplyembeddedin a societysuchas ours,and merelyintroducing a
newinstitution (same-sexmarriage)willnotnecessarily changethose
rolesand attitudes,evenin thelongerterm;indeed,as history shows,
theold attitudes mightabsorbthenewinstitution. But thisproblem
also afflicts
Polikoff'sobjection.Polikoff comesperilously close to
essentializingmarriageas an inherently regressive forin
institution,
doingso shereplicates themistakemadebythejudgesand legislators
who essentializemarriageas different-sex. That Westernmarriages
have traditionallybeenthesocial instrument by whichwomenhave
beensubordinated does notmeanthatmarriage"causes"thatsubor-
dination.Women'ssubordination may be more deeplyrelatedto
socialattitudesaboutgenderdifferences thanto theformalconstruct
of marriageper se. If thatis true,same-sexmarriagedoes notbuy
intoa rotteninstitution;
it onlybuysintoan institution thatis chang-
ing,as women'srolesand statusare changingin our society.
2. TheAnti-Assimilationist
Argument
A second argumentagainstpursuingsame-sexmarriageis that
attaining
thatgoalmightwelldeclawgaylesbian radicalism.250
To the
extentthatgaylawseesitselfas a movement to destabilize
traditional
legaland culturalnorms,adoptingsame-sexmarriageas a goal may
sounda distinctretreat,expendingvaluableefforts
to achievea rela-
tivelyconservativegoal whoseattainment wouldtendto "domesti-
250 See Duclos,supranote249,at 47; Ettelbrick,

supranote242,at 26; see Polikoff,
supra
note243,at 1541,1546,1549-50.

cate" thegayrightsmovement.251 Indeed,itis argued,theprocessof

seekinglegally-recognized same-sexmarriageinvolvescompromising
gaylesbianradicalism,becauseadvocateswill invariably findthem-
selvespressured to putforward or as witnesses
as plaintiffs at legisla-
tivehearingsgay and lesbiancoupleswho mostresembleOzzie and
Harriet.252Moreover, itis fearedthattheprocessofcompromise and
assimilationwouldonlyworsenifwe win,as we willhavecreateda
giantfunnelchanneling gay,lesbian,andbisexualenergies fromactiv-
ism to homemaking. Justas our radicalismwas suppressedby the
tyranny oftheclosetbeforeStonewall, so itmightagainbe suppressed
by a tyranny of the kitchenand gardenonce same-sexmarriageis
legalized.
Thisis an interestingcritiqueofsame-sexmarriage as an aspiration
forthegaylesbian rightsmovement.The objectionromanticizes the
movement, however,whichis not nearlyso radicalas Polikoff and
othersenvisionit. My history ofsame-sexmarriageoffers equivocal
support,at best,forthe anti-assimilationist position.On the one
hand,Ifeyinwa Olinke,We'wha,and theLadies ofLlangdollenwere
notrevolutionary butI doubttheywouldhavebeenanymore
figures,
radicalhad theynot been ableto formlastingtieswiththeirsame-sex
mates. On theotherhand,same-sexmarriages have includedmore
thantheirshareofgenderrebels-thePharaohIkhnaton, themythic
Gilgamesh,various Roman emperors,women passing as men
throughout history, theprotagonists in thestoriesofLi Yu, hijrasin
India, Harlemlesbiansin the 1920s,and the marriageresisters of
modemChina. Most importantly, marriagemightbe a refugefor
visionaries.Sergiusand Bacchuswerefortheirtimeradicals,because
theywereChristians.Theirrelationship supportedtheirChristian
activism,and it was onlythroughthelove of BacchusthatSergius
was able to keepfaith.To the extentthatmarriagecreatesa legal
refugefromthosewho wouldpersecutebisexuals,lesbians,and gay
mentoday,it maybe a usefulhavenforthecommitted gayradical.
251 Cf. Louis M. Seidman,Brownand Miranda,80 Cal. L. Rev. 673 (1992) (describing
a
senseofambivalence towardBrownanditsparadoxicaleffects
on AfricanAmericans' struggle
forrights).
252 Ozzie and Harriethavealwaysstruckme as a ratherandrogynous coupleanyway.If
youputOzzie in a dress,he wouldbe hardto distinguish
fromHarriet;thereverseis trueif
youputHarrietin a suit. Note,too,theopenandrogyny oftheirtwograndsons.

1490 Virginia
Social constructionism raisesotherinteresting questionsaboutthe
anti-assimilationist
argument.We aregenderrebelsbecausethatrole
has beenthrustupon us by oppressivedividingpractices,including
legaldiscriminations liketheexclusionfrommarriage.Ifthosedivid-
ingpracticeswereto collapse,we mighttendto meldbackintosoci-
ety'smainstream, whichdoesnotinevitably strikemeas baleful.To a
certainextent,theanti-assimilationistargument is fueledbytheanger
of thebabyboomers,who grewup in an anti-homosexual environ-
mentand havefoughtthehardbattlesagainsta compulsory hetero-
sexualitywhosehallmarkis theweddingphoto. For thatgeneration
(mineandPolikoff's), ourdifferenceis essential,
a factorthatwasper-
haps necessary to getus organizedforthehard,confrontational bat-
tlesthatwerefought.This maybe in theprocessof changing.The
nextgeneration has grownup in an environment wherehomosexual-
ityis not so strange,and theymaybe correspondingly less enraged
thanmy generation has been. Whilemanyformaland operational
discriminations remain,the gaylegalagenda should probablynot
assumethatgay separatismor a lesbiannationis the wave of the
future.
Yet thatdoesnotmeanthatgaylesbian culturewillaltogether cease
to be distinctive.
One feature ofourexperience has beenan emphasis
on "familieswe choose" (anthropologist Kath Weston'sfelicitous
phrase)ratherthanmarriage as a wayofthinking aboutourrelation-
ships.253Weston'sconceptionof "familieswe choose"derivesfrom
the "comingout" experience, an intenseand oftendifficult timefor
lesbiansandgaymenbecauseitplacesat riskourpreexisting bloodor
familyrelationships. Mothers,fathers, brothers, sisters,or spouses
mayrejecta previously belovedrelativeonce theyare toldofheror
hissexualorientation. Thus,theemotional supportneededto survive
comingoutderivesfrom"families we choose"andthose"whochoose
us"-supportiverelativesand friends.Choice and its acceptance
froma varietyofsourcesreplacesbloodand legaldutiesas thechief
tiesin thelivesofgaymenand lesbians,and thishas affected gayand
lesbianapproachesto relationships and unions. Our relationships
253 See Weston,

supranote39 (suggesting
a conceptual
framework the"comingout"
linking
experience,the formation
of lastinggay and lesbianrelationships,
and the institution
of
marriage).

tendto includemorepeople-close friends andthecommunity as well
as thetwopartners-andto be morefree-floating.
Our emphasison familieswe choosefuelsthegaylegalinterest in
domesticpartnership (whichis easierto enterand leave and which
requiresfewerdutiesandobligations thanmarriage) as a betterwayof
protecting manyof our relationships thansame-sexmarriage.Does
the preference of manyfordomesticpartnerships thenobviatethe
needforsame-sexmarriagerights?I thinknot. To theextentthat
comingoutto one'sfamily is lesstraumatic todaythanit has beenin
thepast,Weston'sphenomenon maynotbe as applicableto thenext
generation as it has beento mine. And,in anyevent,I believethat
marriage is an optionthatoughtto be availableto us whenwe choose
ourfamilystructure. The mainsharedvaluedistinguishing marriage
frominformal relationships
or domesticpartnerships is commitment.
Althoughmarriageis nottheonlywaycommitment can be demon-
stratedin a relationship,the rightsand dutiesattendant upon mar-
riagearetheclearestsignsofcommitment oursocietyhas. Amongits
manyfunctions is marriage's
roleas a socialinsurancepolicy.Espe-
ciallyintheshadowoftheAIDS epidemic, thereis valueinan institu-
tion that entailssuch formaland legallybindingcommitments
betweenthepartners.
3. TheNewInsidersArgument
The anti-assimilationistargumentfoldsinto a slightlydifferent

argument:once marriagebecomesan optionfor lesbianand gay
couples,therewillbe a selective
assimilation, in whicha newgroupof
culturalinsiders
willpeeloff,leavingtheremainder as permanent
out-
siders.254Undercurrent law,all same-sexcouplesare legaloutsiders,
our relationshipsinvalidand unrecognized.If same-sexmarriages
becamelegallyauthorized, manylesbianand gaycoupleswouldtake
advantageof thenewopportunity to gainsomedegreeofimmediate
culturalrespectability. Over time,these marriedcouples might
becomeinsiders,theirpreviously illicitsexuality
suddenlysanctioned
underthebubbleofmarriage.The restofthegay,lesbian,and bisex-
ual community wouldremainoutsiders.
254 See Ettelbrick,

supranote242, at 23-24;Robson& Valentine,
supranote242, at 538
(citingEttelbrickand othercommentators).

1492 Law Review
Not onlywouldcreating a newsetofinsiderssplitthelesbian,gay,

and bisexualcommunity, but criticsbelievethatit similarly would
divideit alongfamiliargender,race,and class lines. Affluent white
male couplesare particularly to
likelyto exercisetheoption marry
becausetheyhave the mostto gain,accordingto some critics.In
additionto claiminga lion's shareof tangibleemployer-subsidized
spousalbenefits,gaycouplesarealso morelikelytobenefit in termsof
social acceptability,
signalingto theoutsideworldthattheyare not
"promiscuoushomosexuals."In contrast,criticsfearthat lesbian
couples,possibly,and less affluent couples,certainly,wouldbe less
likelyto exercisethe rightto marry,in partbecauseit wouldyield
thema muchsmallereconomicpayoff.2"In thisway,legallyrecog-
nizingsame-sexmarriagecould exacerbatealreadyexistingtensions
withinthegay,lesbianand bisexualcommunity.
I am underwhelmed by thisargument.Justas I am dubiousthat
recognition of same-sexmarriageswould immediately changethe
institutionof marriage, I am equallydubiousthatsuch recognition
wouldlegitimate same-sexcouplesin theeyesofhomophobic neigh-
bors. The hostileneighbor is morelikelyto changehisopinionon the
basisofactuallyknowing peoplewhoareopenlygayorlesbian,andto
theextentthatsame-sexmarriage mightemboldensuchcouplesto be
open,thentheinstitution mighthelpall gaymen,lesbians,andbisex-
uals. Moreover, thereis no evidence suchas polls,surveys, or theo-
retical models-suggestingthat the marriageoption would be
disproportionatelyexercised byrichgaymenthanbymenandwomen
of color,lesbians,or less affluentbisexualsand homosexuals.Lesbi-
ans are oftenthe plaintiffs in same-sexmarriagelawsuits,and the
overwhelming majorityof same-sexcouples who have actually
obtainedmarriagelicensesin the UnitedStateshave been women,
includingwomenpassingas menand lesbiansofcolor.256
The legitimateconcernofthenewinsidersargument is thatpreju-
dice is multilayeredand synergistic in America. Beinga woman,a
personof color,and a lesbiantriggers morehurtful prejudicesthan
justbeinga gayman. Buttheavailability or nonavailability
ofsame-
sex marriagedoes notaffect thatreality.The gaymanon averageis
255 If one has no job, or has a lowerpayingblue-or pink-collar

job, thereare fewifany
employer-subsidized spousalbenefits.Also, thereare evenfewerwaysthatgreatersexual
respectabilitywouldadvancethesetypesofcareers.
256 See sourcescitedsupranote231.

stillin a betterposition,
whether he can getmarriedor not. The gay
manis lesslikelyto commithimself to genderand racediscrimination
issuesthanis thelesbianor thepersonofcolor,againwhether or not
he can get married.The gay man is alreadymorelikelyto be an
insider.Allowinghimto marryanothermanwillnotchangethat.
On thewhole,I believethatgaylawshouldseeklegalrecognition of
our same-sexrelationships on thesametermsthatthestateprovides
fordifferent-sex couples. Those termsshouldincludenotjust mar-
riage,whichis themoreattractive optionformanysame-sexas well
as different-sex whichis the
couples,but also domesticpartnership,
most attractive optionformanydifferent-sex as well as same-sex
couples.
B. TheIllegitimacy
of Traditional
Legal Arguments
Against
Same-SexMarriage
If same-sexmarriagestilloughtto be a plankin thegaylegalplat-
form,thereremainsthe problemof persuadingstraightsocietyto
acquiescein it. Recall thethreetraditionalarguments againstsame-
sex marriage, eitheras a matterof statutory rightor constitutional
mandate:same-sexmarriage(1) is inconsistent withthenature,his-
tory,and/oressenceofmarriage, (2) is contraryto community values
andtraditional moralteachings,and (3) wouldbe disruptive to settled
expectations.My historyof same-sexmarriagehelpsus to evaluate
thesearguments. My bluntassessments: The definitional
argument is
a lie. The moralteachingsargument is hypocrisy.The pragmatism
argument is morequaintthancogent.
1. TheDefinition
ofMarriageArgument
Social constructionism'scentraltheme-thatmarriage, like other
culturalinstitutions,
is a socialand nota naturalcreation-isat war
with the definitionalargument.257 Even my fragmentary history
refutesany argument positingthatmarriage, fromAdam and Eve
onward,has been different-sex. In fact and in history,same-sex
unions have been legallyand culturallyrecognizedas marriages
amongtheHittites(possibly), in ancientGreeceand Rome,in Native
257 Cf. Nan D. Hunter,

supranote246 (demonstrating
theincoherence
of the viewthat
legallycreatedmarriagesmustinvolve different-sex
couplesowingto some metaphysical
natureofmarriage).

1494 Law Review
Americancultures, all overAfricaandAsia,andevenin themedieval

and modemWest.
My historyof same-sexunionsalso undermines variousstrategies
essentializingmarriage aroundconceptssuchas procreation and gen-
der. Procreation has occurredthroughout history without thebenefit
ofmarriage, and thereare manyothersocialrolesthatmarriage has
traditionallyplayedat one timeor anotheraroundtheworld,includ-
ingsustaining economicdivisions oflabor(NativeAmerican berdache
marriagesand variouswarriormarriagesin Africaand Tokugawa
Japan),kinshiptiesand coalitions(Melanesianritualizedhomosexu-
ality),and affectional bonds and mutualemotionalsupport(early
Christian enfraternization ritualsand morerecentBostonmarriages).
All oftheseaimshavebeenservedbymarriage in theWest,and mar-
riage'sstrength as an institution has been its abilityto servemany
differentneedsandto evolveandadaptovertime.Thereis no histori-
cal reasonwhyWesternmarriagecannotadapt to includesame-sex
couples. Not onlyis procreation not a competent categoryaround
whichto regulatemarriage,but,even if it were,same-sexcouples
could stilljustifytheirown desireto marry.Recall thattheprecise
reasonforwomanmarriagein Africansocietieswas to procureheirs
forwealthywomenwhocouldnotbearchildrenthemselves.
Neitherdoes genderproveto be a naturalorganizing category for
defining marriage,because gender(like marriage)is sociallycon-
structed.258 No naturalreason holds that one's gendermust be
equivalent to one'sbiologicalsex,as theextraordinary historyofcross
dressingand passingreveals.259 Nor is thereany reasonto concep-
tualizejusttwogenders;theberdachetradition enduring in hundreds
of culturesworldwidesuggeststhattheremaybe thirdand fourth
gendersbeyondmale and female,and thata multiplicity of genders
enrichesa society.Thus,we shouldnotbe surprised thatevenwhen
themethathasalreadybeendevelopedinfeminist
258 Thisis an important For
scholarship.
a varietyofviews,seeJudithButler,GenderTrouble:Feminism andtheSubversion ofIdentity
(1990); AnneFausto-Sterling,
MythsofGender:BiologicalTheoriesAboutWomenand Men
(1985); Luce Irigaray,
This Sex WhichIs Not One (CatherinePortertrans.,1985);Nature,
Cultureand Gender(Carol P. MacCormack& MarilynStrathern eds., 1980).
259 Whatis so remarkable aboutthehistory of crossdressing(exhaustively assembledin
Bullough& Bullough, supranote181)is thatitwasso easyto getawaywith,becauseclothing
and behaviorare morereliableindicatorsof genderthangenitaliaare. That thousandsof
womenhave been able to pass as men in the close confinesof the armedforces,see
Wheelwright, supranote221,is remarkableevidenceofthis.

cultureshavedefined marriage as theweddingofa "husband"and a
"wife,"theyhave nonetheless recognizedas marriagesrelationships
involving"boy wives"(as in classicalCreteand the East African
Nuer),"femalehusbands"(variousAfricancultures),and berdache
"[male]wives"and "[female]husbands"(pervasively in NativeAmer-
ican tribesand in manyAsian societies).Simplyput,husbandand
wife,likemale and female,are constructed categoriesthatneednot
correspond to biologicalcategories.26
Such evidencerequiresopponentsof same-sexmarriageeitherto
abandontheiressence-of-marriage argument or to formulate it more
narrowly.Perhapsthemostthatcan be said is that,in thehistory of
theUnitedStates,marriage has alwaysbeenrestricted to different-sex
partners.Butthisargument is nottrue,either.NativeAmericancul-
turesin the United States have continuedto recognizesame-sex
berdachemarriages.We'whaand his husbandwerebothAmerican
citizens.Moreover, passingwomen,suchas Nicholaide Rayan,have
frequently marriedotherwomenin thiscountry, and hundredsof
same-sexcoupleshave similarly obtainedmarriagelicensesfromthe
state,a factbrought to mindbytheseriesoflesbianmarriages in Har-
lemduringthe 1920s. To myknowledge, noneofthesame-sexmar-
riagesdescribedin my surveywas evernullified by the stateafter
beingexposedto publicattention.Finally,it has been shownthat
countlessgayand lesbiancoupleshavebeenmarriedin religious cere-
moniessinceStonewall;thousands,forexample,weremarriedin a
mass ceremonyon the NationalMall duringthe 1987 March on
Washington.
Opponentsare thenleftwithonlyone definitional argument, that
no official
act oflegislationor highcourtdecisionhas eversanctioned
a same-sexmarriage occurring in theUnitedStates.Butthisis a cir-
cular argumentin a constitutional case, wherethe legitimacy of a
state'spracticeis questioned.Is it legitimate forthestateto prohibit
one class of peoplefromgetting married?To say thatthestatewill
notgivemarriage licensesto same-sexcouplesbecausetheyby "defi-
nition"cannotbe married, and thento supportthatdefinition byref-
erenceto thestate'straditional refusal,is notonlyviciouslycircular
butdissolvesthelineseparating law fromfiat.
260 Biologicalcategories
are themselves
muchless binarythantheWesthas traditionally
assumed.See supranotes217-27and accompanying text.

1496 Virginia
Thisis precisely
thepointofconstitutional challengesto traditional
statelaws excludingsame-sexmarriage:to giveofficialdom a chance
to re-examine a receivedtradition.Such a rethinking oughtto be
impelledbythehistory ofsame-sexmarriage.A similarreassessment
is precisely
whatoccurredwhenthecommunity ofsocialanthropolo-
gistscameto noticeAfricanwomanmarriages: thediscovery impelled
themto reconsider howtheytraditionally defined the"essential"fea-
turesofmarriage.26'
One officialpublication,Notesand Queries,definedmarriagein
1951 as "a unionbetweena man and a womansuch thatchildren
bornto the womanare the recognizedlegitimate offspring of both
partners."262 This definition
was a culturalstatement as muchas a
professional yardstick,and anthropologists familiarwith African
same-sexmarriagetraditions in particular
seizeduponthedefinition
and discreditedit. Accordingly, Edmund Leach, a noted social
anthropologist, suggestedthatmarriagebe defined morelooselyas a
bundleofrightsthatsocietyassociateswithintimate relationships.263
Someanthropologists objected,arguingthatsucha definition was too
open-ended, and KathleenGoughproposedto definemarriageas "a
relationshipestablishedbetweena womanand oneor moreotherper-
sons,whichprovidesthata childbornto thewomanundercircum-
stancesnotprohibited bytherulesoftherelationship, is accordedfull
birth-statusrights."264
Leach respondedthatthisdefinition was too restrictive in lightof
male-male marriagesalso documented in Africa;he assertedthat"all
universaldefinitionsof marriageare vain,''265 arguingthatmarriage
couldonlybe defined as one or moreofthefollowing: (1) therights
and duties inheringin spousedom,(2) the personalrelationship
betweenpeopleconsidered spouses,and/or(3) relationships and alli-
261 For accounts

ofthedebate,see Alan Barnard& Anthony Good,ResearchPracticesin
theStudyof Kinship89-91(1984); EdmundR. Leach,SocialAnthropology 176-203(1982);
10 Int'l EncyclopediaSoc. Sci. 8-18 (1968); E. KathleenGough,The Nayarsand the
DefinitionofMarriage,89 J.RoyalAnthropological Inst.23, 23-24,32-33(1959).
262 RoyalAnthropologicalInst.,Notesand Querieson Anthropology 110(6thed. 1951).
263 See EdmundR. Leach,Polyandry, Inheritanceand theDefinitionofMarriage,53 Man
182,183(1955).
264 Gough,supranote261,at 32.
265 EdmundR. Leach,Rethinking Anthropology 105(1961).

ances createdor cementedby espousal.266Eileen JensenKrige,

authoroftheearliestworkto focuson femalehusbands,maintained
that "[m]arriagecan take widelydifferent forms,even sometimes,
withinthesamesociety,each involving categoriesof rights
different
and duties"and "maybe entereduponbypeopleofthesamesex."267
The Krige-Leachapproachto marriageis now the moreaccepted
amonganthropologists, and thereseemsto be no greatreasonforlaw-
yersnotto followit as well. Ironically,
bytreatingmarriage as creat-
duties,and relationships
ingrights, thatrelateto demonstrated social
thisdefinition
functions, seemsmorelawyerly thanthemetaphysical
procreation-based
description foundin legalsources.
2. TheMoral Tradition
Argument
Social constructionism and the historyof same-sexmarriagedis-
cussedabove suggestdifficultieswithdelegitimizingsuch marriages
on moralgrounds,especiallythoseinvoking theJudeo-Christiantra-
dition.268To beginwith,it mustbe recognizedthat"tradition"is
and therefore
itselfa construction an arenaforcontest.Moreimpor-
tantly,arguments based upon a univocalChristiantraditionagainst
same-sexmarriages are undermined byhistory.RomanCatholicand
GreekOrthodoxChurchesperformed ritu-
same-sexenfraternization
als for centuries,glorifiedthe same-sexintimacyof Sergiusand
Bacchus,and openlypublishedsame-sexunionliturgies in theiroffi-
cial collections.Though controversial,Boswell'sclaim that these
churchesalso performed same-sexmarriageceremonies is supported
by some independenthistoricalevidence,such as Montaigne's
accountof sucha marriagewithintheVaticanitself.
The modemRomanCatholicChurchand manyProtestant denom-
inationsremainadamantin theirbeliefthat marriagerightsand
266 Leach,supranote261, at 182-83;accordBarnard& Good, supranote261, at 89-91;

RodneyNeedham,Remarkson theAnalysisofKinshipand Marriage, in Rethinking Kinship
and Marriage5-8(RodneyNeedhamed., 1971).
267 Krige,supranote148,at 34.
268 Theseproblems coexistalongsidetheobviousonesinvolving theAmericanpracticeof
separatingchurchand state. Evenduringitsmostclerically inclinedperiodsas a "Christian
Nation,"theUnitedStateshas neverconsidered itselfboundby bibicalmarriagepractices.
For example,thoughpermitted by all Americanjurisdictions,
divorceis contraryto biblical
teaching.In contrast,
polygamy-prohibited in all Americanjurisdictions-was permitted in
theteachings of theOld Testament.In any event,efforts to engraftJudeo-Christianideals
ontostateregulationwouldrunafouloftheEstablishment Clause.

1498 Virginia
dutiescan onlybe enjoyedby a different-sex couple,but theirown

positionis susceptible analysis.Recall that
to social constructionist
the WesternChurch'shardenedattitudeagainstsame-sexintimacy
cameonlyafterthenation-andcity-states emerging inthelateMiddle
Ages beganto targetand suppressnonconforming conduct.In my
view,theChurchwas inducedintoadoptingits extremely intolerant
stance,notbyanycarefulexamination of Scriptureor Churchtradi-
tion,butas a resultofcoercionemanating fromsocietyand thestate
that pressuredthe Churchinto cooperatingwiththe anti-Semitic
pogroms, theantifemalewitchhunts,and theanti-invert persecutions
of the late Middle Ages and the earlymodem era. Conversely,
becausethe secularreasonsjustifying society'searlierhysteriahave
beendiscredited or shownto be obsolete,thistraditional intolerance
towardssame-sexcouplesis nowstrongly contested withintheJudeo-
Christianfaith.Religiousleadersacceptingsame-sexmarriageare a
growing minority.Same-sexmarriages havebeenperformed in virtu-
ally all of the majorJudeo-Christian religiousdenominations and
havebeenspecifically sanctioned by manyofthem.269
The plaintiffsin the Dean case, seekingrecognition of same-sex
marriagesin the Districtof Columbia,soughtout the opinionsof
local religiousleaderson the issue of sanctioningsame-sexmar-
riage.270 Withoutasserting thatourswas a representative sampleof
religiousleaders,I findthe responsesto be significant in several
respects.First,the priests,ministers, rabbis,and lay leaderswho
respondedstruggled withthisissuefromwithintheJudeo-Christian
tradition and concludedthatsame-sexmarriages are consistentwith
its foundations.Some,such as the District'scongregation of Syna-
gogue Bet Mishpachah,believethat,althoughmuchof the Scrip-
ture27'arguesagainstsame-sexmarriage, thoseadmonitions-such as
the ones in Leviticus-mustbe reinterpreted in lightof modem
understandings.272 Others,such as ReverendJohnMack of the
269 See Lesbianand Gay Marriage,supranote236,at 5 (notingthatsame-sex are

marriages
allowedin Reformed Jewish,UnitarianUniversalist, Episcopalian,Lutheran,Presbyterian,
and Methodist congregations,
amongothers).
270 The responses werecollectedand filedas Appendices12-22to theMemorandum on the
History ofSame-SexMarriagethatI drafted forplaintiffs
inDean v. DistrictofColumbia,No.
90-13892(D.C. Super.Ct., filedSept.4, 1991)[hereinafter Appendices].
271 Recallchapter18 of Leviticus.See textaccompanying notes51-52.
272 See Letter fromMichaelD. Garbus,VicePresident, ReligiousAffairs,BetMishpachah,
to JudgeShellieBowers,D.C. SuperiorCourt(Aug. 21, 1991)(on filewiththeVirginiaLaw

UnitedCongregational ChurchofChrist,findthescriptural tradition,

especiallyitsemphasison love forone's fellowhumans,to be gener-
ally supportive of churchsanctionforsame-sexmarriage.273 Rever-
end WilliamCareyof the fundamentalist PentecostalChurch,who
has studiedtheBiblein itsoriginallanguages, concludesthattheanti-
homosexualglossplacedon somepassageswhentranslated intoEng-
lish is not faithfulto the originaltext. Recallingthatthe prophet
Daniel and theBabylonianeunuchAshpenazwerejoinedin whathe
considersa same-sexmarriage specificbiblicalevidenceof favored
same-sexunions-Careyarguesthatsame-sexmarriages are faithful
to thebiblicalconceptsofcommitment and love.274
clericalsympathy
Interestingly, forsame-sexmarriageoftenarises
outofdenominations thathavecriticized same-sexintimacy themost
severely.ReverendCarey,a Protestant fundamentalist,is an exam-
ple. Strikingly,same-sexmarriages are once againbeingperformed
by ordainedpriestsrepresenting the Roman CatholicChurch.One
suchpriest,FatherJamesMallonofPhiladelphia, viewstheChurch's
thinking concerning matrimony sinceVaticanII as retreating from
ReviewAssociation) (App. 16):"Jewish traditionhasevolvedoverthecenturies andmillennia

to meetour people'schangingneedsand circumstances." The letterreportsthatJewish
congregations aroundthecountry havebeenperforming same-sex marriages"overthelasttwo
decades." Id.; see also Rabbi Yoel H. Kahn,The Kedushahof HomosexualRelationships,
Addressat the CentralConference of AmericanRabbis(May 26, 1989) (on filewiththe
Virginia Law ReviewAssociation) (arguing fromtheTorahandfirst principles
ofJudaism that
intimacy inGod's shadowandnotprocreation is theessenceofmarriage (kedushah);thatGod
createsnothing in vainand does notdespisegay,lesbian,and bisexualdisciples;and thatthe
Reformedtraditioncannot in consciencetreat homosexualcouples differently from
heterosexual couples);Lewis J. Eron,Homosexuality and Judaism, in Homosexuality and
WorldReligions103 (ArleneSwidlered. 1993) (discussingthe traditional Jewishviewof
homosexuality as "willfull
indulgence"andnotingthatmanyJewstodayareseekingnewways
to includehomosexuals).
273 See Letterfrom Rev. JohnH. Mack,Minister, FirstCongregational UnitedChurchof
Christ,to JudgeShellieBowers,D.C. SuperiorCourt(July31, 1991)(App. 13) (on filewith
theVirginiaLaw ReviewAssociation):
In myopinion,it is extremely easyto interprettheprofound teachingsofourreligious
scripture to applyto same-sexrelationships. It is extremelydifficult
to findclear
condemnation ofthemwithinthereligious literature.Andthesystemic persecution of
thosewho findromanticlove witha personof the same sex violatesvirtually every
majorlaw and teachingofbothJudaismand Christianity.
Id.
274 See Letter fromRev.WilliamH. Carey,Pastor,Lighthouse ApostolicChurch,to Judge
ShellieBowers,D.C. SuperiorCourt(Aug. 1, 1991)(App. 19) (on filewiththeVirginiaLaw
ReviewAssociation).ReverendCareyalso relieson Boswell'swidely-reported researchthat
theCatholicChurch"routinely performed weddingceremonies forhomosexual couples." Id.

1500 Virginia
theChurch'slong-standing demandthatmarriage be linkedto procre-
ationand endorsing marriageas a lovingcovenantbetweentwopeo-
ple, an evolutionthat Father Mallon believesvalidatessame-sex
unions, which he has performed.275 Father John McNeill, an
acclaimedCatholicscholar,justifieshis favorableviewof same-sex
marriage byinvoking theChristian Church'searlyliturgies sanction-
ing same-sexmarriage, and he himselfcelebratescommitment serv-
ices forsame-sexcouples.276
These Catholicscholarshave not been alone in grounding their
willingnessto consecrate
same-sexmarriages on a newunderstanding
ofearlyChurchpractices.Similarly, theNationalCapitolPresbytery
statesin a recentpamphletaddressing theissue:
Whatwas thehistorical Christianpositionon heterosexualmarriage
and blessingof same-sexunions?
JohnBoswell,Chairmanof theHistoryDepartment of Yale Uni-
versity,
will publishresearchon thisquestionin late 1991. While
translating
old Vaticanmanuscripts,Boswelldiscovered100distinct
ceremoniesusedbythechurchtoblesstheunionofsame-sexcouples.
The same-sexceremonies werelocatedwithinthe same sectionsof
books containing marriageceremonies.Officialchurchceremonies
forsame-sexcoupleswereusedovera periodof 1500years,beginning
in the5thcentury.277
Notably,a similarprocessofreinterpreting
same-sextraditions
is tak-
ing place withinsomefactionsof the traditionally
anti-homosexual
MormonChurchas well.278
275 See LetterfromFatherJamesP. Mallon, Dignity,to

JudgeShellieBowers,D.C.
SuperiorCourt(July29, 1991)(App. 14) (on filewiththeVirginiaLaw ReviewAssociation)
(attaching "DignityPhiladelphia:GuidelinesfortheRiteofUnion/Covenant Liturgy").
276 "Commitment serviceshavebeenpartof theChurch'sritualssincethethirdcentury.
(In fact,scholarshaveproofthatthesesame-sexritesweretheoriginalsourceofheterosexual
marriageritualswhentheywerefirstintroduced in the thirteenthcentury.)"Letterfrom
FatherJohnJ.McNeilto JudgeShellieBowers,D.C. SuperiorCourt(undated)(on filewith
theVirginiaLaw ReviewAssociation)(includinga commitment ritualwhichhe uses). See
generallyDenise Carmody& JohnCarmody,Homosexuality and Roman Catholicism, in
Homosexuality and World Religions,supra note 272, at 135 (providingthe historical
background to RomanCatholicattitudestowardhomosexuality and expressinghope that
thoseattitudes are softening).
277 NationalCapital Presbytery, QuestionsBeforethe Churchon the Issue of Union
Ceremonies forGay and LesbianCouples(1991).
278 See Antonio A. Feliz,OutoftheBishop'sCloset81-83,93-94(2d ed. 1992). The author
arguesfromevidencein MormonarchivesthatJosephSmith,the founderof Mormonism,
"sealed"mento menand blessedintimate relationshipsbetweenthem.Feliz was a closeted

Second,thelettersindicatethatthesechurchesand religiouslead-
ersare specifically
seekingto withdraw religioustraditionas a justifi-
cationforthesecularpersecution oflesbians,gaymen,and bisexuals.
Theseleadersseetheopportunity to reassesssame-sexmarriage favor-
ablyas onewaybywhichto reinterpret thattraditioninlightofestab-
lishedreligiousthemessuch as lovingcommitment, equality,and
nondiscrimination. Thus,we receiveda numberoflettersfromvari-
ous QuakerMeetingsthathad considered whether to perform Quaker
marriage ceremonies forsame-sexcouples.279 The prevailingthemeof
theseletterswas thatit is unjustto treatlovingand committed same-
sex couples differently fromheterosexual couples.280Presbyterian
ReverendCarla Gorrell'sletterlikewiseasks"whenwillourciviland
religioussystems takethelead to overcomeunreasoned prejudice, as
was necessaryin earlier movementsfor African-American and
womens rights?"281
Third,theseletterssuggestthatthedecisionto recognizesame-sex
marriage shouldbe embracedas a tremendous opportunityforreform
and notfearedas a difficultand disturbing problem.Methodist Rev-
erendRichardStetlerputit mosteloquently:
Shouldsociety allowtwomenor twowomento marry? Frommy
I believean opportunity
perspective, is hereforthecourtto seta
valuableprecedent.
.. . Permitoneexamplewhichis all toocommonplace.A yearago,
a colleague
ofminewatchedtwopeople'slivesbecometornapartby
our legalsystem.One was dyingof AIDS whiletheother-the
caregiver-remained
helplessto makeanydecisions on hislover's
behalfbecausehewasnotconsidered"family."Thecaregiverstrug-
gledwithagencyafter
agencyall tonoavail.Finally,
whenthepart-
ner withAIDS died,his matestoodby whileall the funeral
gaybishopin the MormonChurchand had access to theequallyclosetedarchives.After

comingout,Feliz was separatedfromtheMormonChurch,and I assumethattheChurch
does notagreewithhis viewoftheevidence.
279 See,e.g.,Letter fromPeggyMonroe,Oversight Committee, University
FriendsMeeting,
to JudgeShellieBowers,D.C. SuperiorCourt(Aug. 2, 1991)(on filewiththeVirginiaLaw
ReviewAssociation).
280 See, e.g., id. (statingthat theirchurch"believesit is in keepingwith
the Quaker
testimony ofequalitythatlovingrelationships betweentwopeoplebe acknowledged,accepted,
and caredforwithoutdistinction to sexualorientation").
281 LetterfromRev.CarlaB. Gorrell,Minister, Westminster Presbyterian
Church,toJudge
ShellieBowers,D.C. SuperiorCourt(Aug. 5, 1991)(App. 20) (on filewiththeVirginiaLaw
ReviewAssociation).

1502 Law Review
arrangements weremadeby the biologicalfamily, arrangements
whichwereagainst thedeceased's
desires.Thefamily proceededto
takeall ofthedeceased'sbelongings.All thecaregiverwanted were
mementos oftheirlivestogether,
butthefamily, outitsdenial,
living
lefthimwithnothing butmemories.282
This letterand all therestare a testament to a socialconstructionist
understanding of religioustradition:like social attitudes,religious
beliefsare themselvessituatedin historyand are therefore fluid.The
fluidityofreligiousbeliefshighlightstheresponsibility ofthefaithful
to interpretthemin waysthatare productive and nothurtful.Such
an opportunity hasbeenpresented inthe1980sand 1990s,andleaders
such as ReverendStetlerare reinterpreting theirfaithin waysthat
inspire.
3. ThePragmatism
Argument
The pragmatist can respondthatitis all welland goodthatthereis
nothingnewaboutsame-sexmarriage, and thatsocietyand religion
maybe in theprocessof reacquainting themselves withthatinstitu-
tion,but same-sexmarriagewould still requirethat the law be
changedto permitit. Such a change,thepragmatist reminds, would
profoundly upset many people,who are shockedby the idea of
expandingmarriage,and unsettleemployment and otherarrange-
mentsthathaveevolvedduringa periodin whichitwas assumedthat
marriagewas limitedto heterosexualcouples. Pragmatismthus
emphasizes theweb-like and interdependent natureofculturalinstitu-
tions,and arguesthatbecauseso manyof our culturalfoundations
and beliefsare interconnected, state-sponsored changecan onlybe
incremental ifstability
and society'sfaithin itsinstitutionsare notto
be undermined.In short,let societycome to acceptsame-sexmar-
riage,and thenthelaw mayfollow.283
At thedescriptive level,social constructionism is similarto prag-
matismin thatbothconsiderall socialinstitutions and attitudes inter-
connected.At thenormative level,however,social constructionism
partscompanywithpragmatism in its evaluationof an institution's
282 LetterfromReverendRichardE. Stetler,

Minister,Capitol Hill UnitedMethodist
Church,to JudgeShellieBowers,D.C. SuperiorCourt(August13, 1991) (on filewiththe
VirginiaLaw ReviewAssociation).
283 Thisis explicit
inPosner,supranote33,at 313(endorsingdomestic partnershiplawsbut
reluctanttoadoptsame-sex marriage),andimplicitinthejudicialdecisions
discussedinPartI.

legitimacy.Thisis becausesocialconstructionism considerslegalcat-
egoriesto be notonlysociallycreated,buttypically developedas part
of a patternof scientific
classifications
and dividingpracticeshaving
the effectof subordinating certaingroupsin society. Withinthis
understanding, a legal definitionof marriageto excludesame-sex
couplesconstitutes a dividingpracticebywhichcertaingroupsin our
societyexercisepowerovergaymen,lesbians,andbisexuals.284 Justi-
fyingsuch dividingpracticesis oftentimes normatively As
difficult.
recentlyas the 1960s,widelyacceptedscientific argumentswere
voicedsupporting the marginalization of "sick homosexuals"from
"normal"society.Yet in thelasttwenty yearsthosearguments have
collapsedlike a foldingchair,and one exclusionafteranotherhas
fallenunderthe determined assaultof now-mobilized lesbians,gay
men,bisexuals, andourallies.285 Maritalexclusionis themaindejure
discriminationagainstus thatremainsat thestatelevel. It is norma-
tivelyunjustifiedas a denialof our rightsas citizensand oughtto
fall-on constitutional groundsifnecessary.
Socialconstructionism furthersuggeststhatpragmatism, whenrea-
sonablyexercised, cannotlongtoleratedividingpracticesonce they
havebeen"exposed."Thatis, socialdividingpracticesand scientific
classifications
do morethansubordinate; oftentimes,theyimpelthe
subordinated peopleto formtheirown groupidentity and, at some
point,to resistbeingcategorized by revealingthatno legitimate rea-
sonjustifiesdenying themtheirfundamental rightson thebasisof a
particularcharacteristic. Whenthathappens,as it did forAfrican
Americans, forwomen,and nowforbisexuals,gaymen,and lesbians,
thepragmatist needsto endorameliorate theoffending categorization
ifshewantsto headoffsocialturmoil.Thereis an excellent conserva-
284 See generallyPaul Rabinow,Introduction to The Foucault Reader 3, 7-11 (Paul

Rabinowed., 1984)(discussingFoucault'sviewsthathumansocietyisolatescertainsubgroups
as a meansofdominating them).
285 Mostsodomy lawsarenoweitherrepealed, unenforced,or enforcedwithsomeeffort to
applythe law to bothheterosexual and homosexualsodomy.The abilityto excludegay,
lesbianand bisexualimmigrantsunderfederalimmigration law was essentially
voidedbythe
PublicHealthService'srepudiationof thelegislation
in 1979and itsformalrepealin 1990.
Securityclearancediscrimination
on groundsofsexualorientation greatlydiminishedin the
1980sand willprobably be formally
(butperhapsnotfunctionally) endedduringtheClinton
Administration.

1504 Law Review
tivecase to be madeforpermitting same-sexmarriage,286and society

mustcometo recognizethatsooneror later.
Of course,pragmatism can argueforlaterratherthansooner,pre-
ferringincremental changeto immediateaction.Indeed,thosefavor-
inga slowevolutioncan appealto myhistory ofsame-sexunionsfor
support.Thoughtheirebbingand flowing in differentsocietieswas
sometimesabrupt-different emperorsin ancientChina and Rome
encouragedverydifferent maritalpracticesat court,forexample-
moreoftentheydevelopedgradually, responding to otherslow-mov-
ing social changes. Yet I would respondto such argumentsby
appealingto analogy,specificallyby examiningAmericansociety's
experience withtheabrupttermination ofitsprohibition ofdifferent-
race marriages, an eventto whichI nowturn.
C. Lovingand theMiscegenation
Analogy
Lovingv. Virginia,287 theprincipal
case establishing thedue process
rightto marry, also providesthebestanalogyforgaylaw'sviewthat
the practiceof excludinglesbianand gay couplesfromstate-sanc-
tionedmarriageshould be abruptlyratherthan graduallyended.
Social constructionism providesa differentaccountof Lovingthan
does traditionaltheory,an account that makes Loving a more
favorableanalogyforthosequestioning statelaws prohibiting same-
sex marriage.
Lovingis mainlyan equal protection case. The Court'sdiscussion
ofthe"rightto marry"is an alternative holding, comingat theendof
its opinionand occupyingless than a page in the UnitedStates
Reports.288 The primary holdingof theCourtwas thattheVirginia
antimiscegenation statutewas a racialclassificationand thatthestate
offered "no legitimate purposeindependent of invidiousracial dis-
criminationwhich justifiesthis classification. "289 Althoughthe
Court'sequal protection holdingwas contrary to thespecific expecta-
tionsoftheframers oftheFourteenth Amendment, it is analytically
robustbecauseit implements thecentralpurposeoftheReconstruc-
286 See Andrew

Sullivan,HereComestheGroom:A (Conservative)
Case forGayMarriage,
New Republic,Aug. 29, 1989,at 20.
287 388 U.S. 1 (1966).
288 See id. at 12.
289 See id. at 7-12.

tionAmendments, to removelegaldisabilitiesgroundeduponrace.290
Butthestrength ofLoving'sequal protection analysisrendersvulner-
able its doctrinally
weakerdiscussionof the due processrightto
marry.AlthoughtheSupremeCourthas expandedLoving'srightto
marryto otherclassifications,
including theright'smoor-
prisoners,291
ingin substantivedue processmakesit a fickledoctrine, and one that
traditionalthinkingseemsunlikely to expandto protectgayand les-
biancouplesstigmatized bytheCourt'ssubsequent decisioninBowers
v. Hardwick,whichrefusedto expandthe substantive due process
rightofprivacyto protectsame-sexintimacy.292
Whereasthetraditional accountofLovinginvitesone to disaggre-
gatetheequal protectionand due processstories,thesocialconstruc-
tionistaccountof Lovinginsiststhattheyare bothelementsof the
samestory.293 Whatwas underattackin Lovingwas an essentialism
aboutrace and marriage, and Virginiadefendedits statuteprecisely
alongthoselines. According to thestate,raceis a fundamental divid-
ingcharacteristiccreatedby God:
"AlmightyGodcreated theraceswhite,black,yellow,malayandred,
andheplacedthemonseparate continents.Andbutfortheinterfer-
encewithhisarrangements therewouldbe no causeforsuchmar-
riages.The factthathe separatedtheracesshowsthathe didnot
intendfortheracestomix."294
290 Lovingis hardto defend as derivingfromtheFramers'"originalintent"in enacting the

Reconstruction Amendments, becausewhentheywereadoptedthestatesprohibited different-
race marriages, as ChiefJusticeWarren'sopinionrecognized.See id. at 9. Instead,his
opinionrestedupontheFramers'generalpurpose,i.e.,to removethelegalvestiges ofslavery.
For moreon theissueoforiginal intent,
seeAlexander M. Bickel,TheOriginalUnderstanding
and theSegregation Decision,69 Harv.L. Rev. 1 (1955);Anthony E. Cook,The Temptation
and Fall oftheOriginalUnderstanding, 1990Duke L.J. 1163.
291 See Turnerv. Safley,482 U.S. 78, 94-99(1987).
292 478 U.S. 186, 194 (1985) ("[T]o claimthata rightto engagein [sodomy]is 'deeply
rootedinthisNation'shistory andtradition' or 'implicit
intheconceptoforderedliberty' is,at
best,facetious.").
293 For thestory thatfollows, see generallyRobertJ.Sickels,Race,Marriage, andtheLaw
(1972) (summarizing thehistoryof antimiscegenation laws); A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr.&
Barbara K. Kopytoff, Racial Purityand InterracialSex in the Law of Colonial and
Antebellum Virginia, 77 Geo. L.J. 1967(1989) (discussing thehistorical
development ofanti-
miscegenation statutesand relatedlaws as a meansof maintaining white"racialpurity");
HerbertHovenkamp,Social Scienceand Segregation BeforeBrown,1985 Duke L.J. 624
(arguingthatthejurisprudence of race relationsin the late nineteenth
and earlytwentieth
centuriesreflectedtheprevailing scientific
viewsaboutseparation oftheraces).
294 See Loving,388 U.S. at 3 (quotingthe Virginiatrialcourt'sopinionupholding the
statute).

1506 Law Review
Basedon thisunderstanding ofrace,theVirginiaSupremeCourtheld

thatthestatemusthavethepower
to regulate
themarriage so thatitshallnothavea mongrel
relation
breedofcitizens.We findthereno requirementthattheStateshall
notlegislate
topreventtheobliteration
ofracialpride,butmustper-
mitthecorruption ofbloodeventhough it weakenor destroy
the
quality
ofitscitizenship.295
Decisions upholdingantimiscegenation statutesin other states
emphasizedthe same religiousand "scientific" arguments.296 For
example,the Georgia SupremeCourt upheld its statutein part
because"amalgamation of theracesis . . . unnatural," yieldingoff-
springwho are "generally sicklyand effeminate, and ... inferiorin
physicaldevelopmentand strength,to the full-bloodof either
race,9297and in partbecause
equality[oftheraces]doesnotinfactexist, andnever can. TheGod
ofnature madeitotherwise, andno humanlawcanproduce it,and
no humantribunal canenforce it. Therearegradations andclasses
throughout theuniverse.Fromthetallestarchangelin Heaven,
downto themeanest reptile
on earth,moralandsocialinequalities
exist,andmustcontinue to existthrough all eternity.298
The TennesseeSupremeCourtemphasized thenecessity ofsuchlaws
"[t]o preventviolenceand bloodshedwhichwouldarisefromsuch
cohabitation, distasteful
to our people,and unfitto producethe
humanrace in anyofthetypesin whichit was created."299
WhatLovingwas rejecting, therefore,was notan abstractclaimof
statepowerbut an ideologyof whitesupremacy.300That ideology
createda group-consisting mainlyofAfricanAmericans-andthen
295 Naim v. Naim, 87 S.E.2d 749, 756 (Va.) (upholding the same anti-miscegenation
statute),vacated,350 U.S. 891 (1955).
296 It is statedas a wellauthenticatedfactthatiftheissueof a blackmanand a white
woman,and a whitemanand a blackwoman,intermarry, theycannotpossiblyhave
any progeny,and such a fact sufficiently justifiesthose laws which forbidthe
intermarriage ofblacksand whites....
Statev. Jackson, 80 Mo. 175,179 (1883). See generally
Paul A. Lombardo,Miscegenation,
Eugenics,and Racism:HistoricalFootnotesto Lovingv. Virginia, 21 U.C. Davis L. Rev.421
(1988) (explaining howeugenicswas usedto supporttheact struckdownin Loving).
297 Scottv. Georgia,39 Ga. 321,324 (1869).
298 Id. at 326.
299 Lonas v. State,50 Tenn.287,299-300(1871).
300 See Loving,388 U.S. at 11.

soughtto isolate that group frommainstream society. Antimis-
cegenation statutes
constituted onedividing practiceusedbythestate
to isolateand marginalize blackcitizens.By invalidating thelaw,the
Courtrejectedstateefforts to createa casteofsecond-class citizensby
excludingthemfromtherightto marry.
The similaritybetweenprohibitions of different-race and same-sex
marriagesshouldnow be clear. Virginiaand otherstatesreliedon
preciselythesamedefinitional (marriage has neverincludeddifferent-
race couples),morality-based (God ordainedthis),and pragmatic
(people would be upset)arguments to prohibitdifferent-race mar-
riagesthatstatesnowinvoketo prohibit same-sexmarriages.All of
theseare nice liberalarguments, and theyall restupon uglysocial
constructions. Justas whitesupremacy is the ideologythatunder-
girdsexcludingdifferent-race couplesfromthe institution of mar-
riage,homophobia is theideologythatundergirds excluding same-sex
couplesfromthatsame institution. Bothtenetsrestupon hateand
fear,seekingto isolatea groupofworthy peoplefromfullcitizenship.
Once thoserepressed bydividingpracticessuchas thisone recognize
thattheirisolationis unnecessary as well as hurtful, theyresistit.
And once theyresist,thereis hell to pay untilthe systemrelents,
whichit oughtto do promptly.
The systemcan do so based uponLoving. One lineof argument,
suggested bySylviaLaw and AndrewKoppelman,301 is thefollowing:
A prohibition againstsame-sexmarriageis a facialgenderclassifica-
tionbecausethe licenseis deniedto a female-female couplesimply
becauseoftheirgender(a female-male couplewouldbe treateddiffer-
ently).302Sucha genderclassification, liketheracialclassification in
Loving,triggers heightened scrutinyundertheSupremeCourt'sequal
protection jurisprudence, thoughgendercategories receive"interme-
diate" scrutiny, whereasrace categoriesreceive"strict"scrutiny.303
The stateclassification cannotsurviveintermediate scrutiny because
itsjustifications
forprohibiting same-sexmarriage restuponan ideol-
301 See Law, supra note 11, at 230-33;Andrew

Koppelman,Note, The Miscegenation
Analogy:SodomyLaw as Sex Discrimination, 98 Yale L.J.145(1988);seealsoJamesTrosino,
Note,AmericanWedding:Same-SexMarriageand theMiscegenation Analogy,73 B.U. L.
Rev.93 (1993)(comparing theeffortto legalizemixed-race withtheongoingstruggle
marriage
to legalizesame-sexmarriage).
302 Id. at 149-53.
303 Id. at 154-57.

1508 Law Review
ogy of homophobiaand rigidgenderstereotypes.3" That the state
classification
may also denypeople theirdue processfundamental
rightto marryreinforces the need forthe Courtto invalidatethe
classification.
African-American and gaylesbianefforts to integratemarriage
sharea deep similarity,therefore. That is notto say,however,that
thereare no differences betweenLovingand the same-sexmarriage
cases, the primarydifference beingthatLovingfollowedBrownv.
Board of Education , whereasthe recentsame-sexmarriagecases
followBowers.Brown,a civilrightstriumph thatsoundedthedeath
knellto theideologyofwhitesupremacy as a matter ofstatepolicy,at
leastas a matterof statepolicy,foreshadowed Loving. In contrast,
Bowerscan be readto standforthetriumph (perhapstemporary) of
an ideologyofhomophobia as a matterofstatepolicy,leavingsame-
sex marriageadvocatesstrandeduntilBowersis overruled.Even if
Bowerswereoverruledand a gaylegalversionofBrownadoptedby
the Court,the argumentforrecognizing same-sexmarriagewould
stillremainincomplete ifLovingis anyguide. Important to theLov-
ing analysis-and one reasonwhyit took the Courtthirteen years
afterBrownto reachtheissue306-wastheCourt'sobservation that
statestatutesprohibiting different-race
unionshad,by 1967,become
theexceptionratherthantherule.307
Notwithstanding thesedifferences,the Lovinganalogyhas been
acceptedby the Hawaii SupremeCourt. In Baehr v. Lewin,308 the
Courtvacateda trialcourtdecisiondismissing a constitutional
chal-
lengeto thestate'sprohibition ofsame-sexmarriages and remanded
the case to allow thestateto presenta compelling stateinterest
to
justifyitsgenderedclassification.309Howeverthatcase is ultimately
304 Id. at 158-62.

305 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
306 The BrownCourthad an opportunity to strikedownVirginia'slaw in Naimv. Naim,
350 U.S. 891 (1955) (vacatingand remanding the case to the circuitcourtdue to the
"inadequacyoftherecord"),butduckedtheissuebecauseofpragmatic fearsthatanyorder
wouldbe openlydisobeyed intheSouth.See BernardSchwartz, SuperChief:EarlWarrenand
His SupremeCourt158-62(1983).
307 Loving,388 U.S. at 6 & n.5 (reporting
thatin 1967only16 statesprohibited different-
race marriages, and thatbetween1952 and 1967, 14 statesrepealedtheirprohibitions of
different-racemarriages).
308 852 P.2d 44 (Haw. 1993).
309 See id. at 67.

decided,it suggestsseverallessonsforthegaylegalstruggle forsame-

sex marriages.One is thatthedue processrightto marrychallenge
continuesto be an uphillbattle.All of thejusticesvotingin Baehr
rejectedtheplaintiffs'
due processchallenge, althoughfourofthefive
votingjusticeswere open to some kind of equal protection chal-
lenge.310From a social constructionist pointof view,this makes
sense: stateprohibitions againstsame-sexmarriageare "classifica-
tions"designedto hurta category ofcitizenswho do notwarrantit.
A further lessonfromtheHawaii litigation maybe thatconstitu-
tionalchallengesin statecourtsmaybe moreproductive thanfederal
challenges.State courtsare not obligatedto followBowers,and
indeedseveralhavestruckdowntheirsodomylaws.31'Starting from
constitutional scratch,the genderdiscrimination argumentbased
uponLovingis morepowerful if the audienceis not favorably dis-
posedtowardBowers.Baehrtookprecisely thisapproach.312
A concurring opinionin Baehr favoreda remandto consider
whethersexual orientation is a classification that should trigger
heightened scrutinyunderthe Hawaii Constitution.313 Some state
courtshaveappliedheightened scrutiny to sexualorientation classifi-
cations,314and I considera sexualorientation discrimination argu-
menta complement to the sex discrimination argumentLaw and
Koppelmanhavesetforth.A gap in theanalogytoLovingis thatthe
connectionbetweenthe discriminatory classification
(sex) and the
harm(reinforcing genderstereotypes) is abstractand hardto connect
310 See id. at 55-63(rejecting

plaintiffs'
dueprocessargument); id. at 63-67(holdingthatsex
is a suspectclassundertheHawaiiConstitution). Fivejudgesparticipated inoralargument on
thecase: ActingChiefJusticeRonaldT.Y. Moon and JusticeStevenH. Levinson,regular
members oftheCourt;appealscourtJudgesJamesS. Burnsand WalterM. Heen,designated
to serveinplaceoftwoJustices whorecusedthemselves; andretired JusticeYoshimiHayashi,
temporarily assignedto filla vacancyon theCourt. Levinson,Moon,and Burnsvotedto
vacatethetrialcourtopinion;Levinsonwrotetheplurality opinion,id. at 48-70,joinedby
Moon; Burnsconcurred in theresult.Heen wrotea dissenting opinion,id. at 70-74,which
Hayashiwouldhavejoined,buthisassignment ranoutbeforetheopinionswerefiled.Justice
Paula A. Nakayamalaterparticipated in the case, votingwiththe pluralityand thereby
makingit a majority opinion.
311 Somestateshad struck downtheirsodomylawson privacygroundsbeforeBowers,see
Peoplev. Onofre, 51 N.Y.2d 476 (1980),andat leastonestatehas struckdownitssodomylaw
on stateprivacygroundsafterBowers.See Kentucky v. Wasson,842 S.W.2d487 (Ky. 1992).
312 See Baehr,852 P.2d at 48-70.
313 See id. at 69-70(Burns,J.,concurring in theresult).
314 See Kentuckyv. Wasson,842 S.W.2d 487 (Ky. 1992); Gay RightsCoalitionv.
Georgetown Univ.,536 A.2d 1 (1987) (en banc).

1510 Law Review
withlegislativemotivations. Judgesmayfinditdifficult tounderstand

howdenying twogaymentherightto marryis drivenbyan ideology
thatoppressesstraight women.
That is whySylviaLaw's formulation of theargument is particu-
larlyimportant, forshe arguesthatwhatundergirds theprohibitions
againstsame-sexmarriageis an ideologyof "heterosexism. "315 The
ideologyis an essentialism of gender,in whichwomenare naturally
heterosexual andnaturally desirousofmarrying men,whichnaturally
resultsin theirbearingchildren.Bydefining marriage as "essentially"
and necessarily different-sex, marriagein a
thestateis essentializing
waythatreinforces traditionalgenderroles. Law argues,and I agree,
thatthe Equal Protection Clause's prohibitionof unjustified gender
discrimination implicatesstateexclusionsofsame-sexcouples.
The historyof same-sexmarriageprovidessome supportforthis
reading,thoughthematteris complicated.Ancientcultures(Egypt,
Mesopotamia, Greece,and Rome) maintained strictpatriarchal lines
of authority overwomenyetalso toleratedsame-sexunionsamong
men,whichfitintotheprevailing patriarchy. Morerecentexperience
revealsa connection betweenintolerance ofsame-sexunionsand sup-
pressionof women-witchhuntsof invertsas well as spinstersin
earlymodem Europe,the colonial attackson women'seconomic
opportunities and femalehusbandsin Africa,and evenrecentlesbian-
baitingaddressedto feminist leaders-andbetweentolerance ofsame-
sex unions and increasingopportunities for women-including
berdacheunions among Native Americans,woman marriagein
Africa,and themarriageresistance movement in China.
Based on thisevidence,I wouldnotarguethatthereis an "inher-
ent" connectionbetweensame-sexmarriageand women'sequality
becauserecognizing male-maleunionsand even "harmless"female
friendships can contributeto genderhierarchy. Butunderthepartic-
ular circumstances of our culture,I would suggestthatthereis a
directlinkbetweentyingwomento thekitchenand ostracizing same-
sex couplesfromthebedroom.
CONCLUSION: GAYLESBIAN HISTORY AND LAW
Historyis one ofthewaysa dominant itssubor-

groupperpetuates
as though
dinationofothergroups.Bytellingthestoryofitstriumph
315 See Law, supranote11,at 232; Lewis,supranote11.

it werenatural,inevitable, and good,thedominant groupcan induce
the restof us to acceptits domination.Whena suppressedgroup
becomesconsciousofitsunfairsubordination, oneresponseis to write
its own versionof history.This Articleis an exercisein such
counterhistory, froma gaylesbian perspective.
Counterhistory is a wayfora suppressed community to claimour
own identity.By reinterpreting tradition,we are constructing our
presentsituationand inviting theformation ofcommunity. By link-
ingourpresent experiences ofintimacy withthoseofothercultures as
well as thoseof Westernculture,we gaina moreprofound senseof
rootedness-andgreaterconfidence in our defianceof dividingprac-
ticesthatseek to excludeus as God's children.By examining the
manydifferent wayshumanculturehas constructed same-sexunions,
we can betterdecidewhichconstructions bestserveour purposes.
Mainstream cultureand law shouldalso be attentiveto counterhis-
tory.Whena grouplikegaymenandlesbiansrecognizes theinjustice
of its exclusionand mobilizesagainstit, the smartthingformain-
streamsocietyto do is accommodate thegroup.Admittedly, thepro-
cessofaccommodation suppresses ofthoseforwhomthe
theinterests
exclusionofsomehelpsconstitute theirvisionofa good society.As
to them,I wouldsaythata matureconstitution is onethatdependson
commitment and cooperation,and not exclusionand persecution.
Rethinkyourviewsinlightofourhistory, so repletewithexamplesof
intimacy and sharing.The greatest valueofcounterhistory is to sug-
gestwaysin whichminority practices-likesame-sexmarriage-have
beenvaluableand productive acrosstimesand cultures.

1512 Law Review
Virginia [Vol. 79:1419
APPENDIX
The Office
fortheEstablishment
ofSpiritualBrotherhood
The Officepresentedbelow has ancientroots in ecclesiasticaland
secular law. It is foundin many codices and we have taken it from
the best ones.
The priestbegins with the Blessing,the "All Holy Trinity,"the
"Our Father . . . For Thine is the Kingdom." Then he says with
measuredpace, "O Lord, save your people and bless your heritage."
Those who are to be joined in fraternalunitystand,theirhands on the
Holy Gospel, while holdinglightedcandles. The priestcontinues:
Glory... 0 HolyApostles...
And now. . . 0 Lord at theintercession...
And thenthe Great Litany:
Let us prayto theLord in peace.
For thepeace fromabove...
For thisholyhouse...
For theArchbishop ...
For theservants of God whohavecometo be blessedand fortheir
lovein Christ,let us prayto theLord.
That therebe giventhemtheknowledge ofApostolicfriendship, let
us prayto theLord.
That it be theirsto be worthyto thegloryin thePreciousCross,
letus prayto theLord.
That theyand we be deliveredfromall affliction, anger,and
necessity ...
Help us, save us, havepityforus, 0 MostHoly,Most Pure.
The exclamation: For to You belongall Glory...
Let us prayto theLord:
o Lord,our God, You willthesalvationof us all; as You have
commandedus to love one anotherand to forgive one anotherour
offenses,do nowwithkindness, 0 Lord,granttoYourservants joined
to each otherwitha spirituallove,who have come to Your Holy
Templeto receivetheBlessing, a soundfaithand a sincerelove. And
as You gavepeaceto yourHolyDisciples,so also giveall thingsnec-
essaryfor salvationand bestowlife everlasting.For You are a
merciful and graciousGod and to You we ascribeGlory. To the
Fatherand to theSon and to theHoly Spirit.
Let us prayto theLord:
0 Lord God almighty, Creatorof Heavenand Earth,You made
man in Your Image and Likeness.You joined yourHoly Martyrs

Sergiusand Bacchusto each otheras brothers,

notbynature,butby
faithand thebondoftheHolySpirit.0 Lord,havingsentthatYour
Same Holy Spiritupon Your servantswho have comeby Grace to
thisHolyTempleto receivea blessing,grantthema firmfaithand a
lovewithout dissimulation,
without mistrust to turnto one
or offense
another,forYoursis theKingdomand thePowerand theGloryof
theFatherand of theHoly Spirit,nowand forever and through the
ages.
A table has been preparedin the middle of the Church, and the
Holy Gospel is set upon it. The couple kiss each other while the
priestsings:
By thebondofloveboundto one another, theApostlesconsecrating
themselves
to Christ,theLord ofAll, wentforthto announcepeace
withbeautiful
feet.
The Priest:
May God havemercyon us . . . and therest.
Source:RitualaeGraecorum Complectens RitusetOrdinesDivinaeLiturgiae

707(R.P. Jacobi
Goar ed. & trans.,reprinted
in 1960). Thisis mytranslation
fromtheLatin,checkedagainst
thatofThe MostReverend Jonah,BishopofBerkeley.FatherAlexeiMichalenko, theChap-
lain of the GeorgetownUniversity Law Center,originallybroughtthis materialto my
attention.


A History of Same-Sex Marriage PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

A History of Same-Sex Marriage PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A History of Same-Sex Marriage PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A History of Same-Sex Marriage

Author(s): William N. Eskridge, Jr.

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

lZE'WHA was a keyculturaland politicalleaderin theZuni

* Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center;VisitingProfessor

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

herprosperity and socialstanding,

3 Theirstorywill be told in JohnBoswell,What God Has JoinedTogether: Same-Sex

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

come out of the closetand claimedour identity in greatnumbers.

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

theinstitutionbeingviewedas reflecting largersocialpowerrelations.

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

I. THE LEGAL ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

country.Even thoughmanysame-sexcouplesin Americanhistory

7 For sourcespresenting the rights-oriented

9 See Turnerv. Safley,482 U.S. 78 (1987) (holdingthat the state cannot,without

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

10 See Friedman, supranote7, at 155-57;HermaH. Kay, PrivateChoicesand Public

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

constitutionalissues,and withdrawing thedistrictcourtand panelopinions).JudgeNorris'

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

17 For leading judicialdecisionsrejectingarguments forsame-sexmarriage, see Adamsv.

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

and "wife." Typical is the KentuckyCourt of Appeals' discussionin

18 501 S.W.2d588 (Ky. 1973).

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

More dramatically, the Districtof ColumbiaSuperiorCourt'sdeci-

27 No. CA 90-13892 (D.C. Super.Ct. Dec. 30, 1991),appealdocketed,

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

33 RichardA. Posner,Sex and Reason311-13(1992).

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

experiencingturmoiland disruption.On theotherhand,pragmatic

C. Towarda GaylegalResponse:Social Constructionism

37 Thisis supported notonlybyLovingv. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1966),whosevalidationof

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

41See Baehrv. Lewin,852 P.2d 44, 67 (Haw. 1993).

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

is partof a complexweb of attitudesand institutions thatworkto

43 For theleadingsources, see 1 MichelFoucault,The HistoryofSexuality(RobertHurley

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

44 However, therehavebeenmanyexcellent monographs. E.g.,JamesA. Brundage, Law,

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

A. Same-SexUnionsin Pre-Modern Cultures

1. TheAncientNearEast (Egyptand Mesopotamia)

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

at least one Pharaoh, the renownedIkhnaton,containsfiguresof the

50 An unusualdegreeofintimacy is alsoshownindepictions ofKingIkhnaton (1379-1362

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

Thisevidencesuggests a stronger possibilityofinstitutionalizedsame-

54 Id. at 126 (footnote

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM

Becausetheepic of Gilgameshwas a collectiveprojectand achieved

This content downloaded from 128.233.210.97 on Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:19:26 PM