IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socres/v23y2018i1p160-176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Troubling Traditional and Conventional Families? Formalised Same-Sex Couples and ‘The Ordinary’

Author

Listed:
  • Brian Heaphy

Abstract

This article explores the value of the concept of ‘the ordinary’ in analysing formalised couple and family relationships. This is a concept that is coming to the fore in discussions of same-sex relationships. It is often associated with heterosexual tradition, convention, and normativity with respect to the social institutions of marriage and family and has also been defended as representing the everyday politics of contemporary post-traditional, non-conventional, and non-normative couples and families. The article explores the value of focusing on ‘the ordinary’ for connecting what might appear to be contradictory developments in formalised couple and family life by drawing on data from a UK study that was based on both joint and individual interviews with 50 same-sex couples, where partners were aged under 35 when they entered into civil partnership, prior to the availability of same-sex marriage. First, it considers some of the ‘ordinary’ troubles that formalised same-sex couples and families encounter and the ways in which they can be simultaneously viewed as traditionally conventional and post-traditional or non-conventional. Second, it examines how civil partners’ accounts of their ordinary experiences of love and care were underpinned by and troubled traditional meanings and conventional practices associated with married couples’ commitments. Third, it analyses how partners’ comparisons of previous generations’ marriages to their civil partnerships (which they tended to view as ‘ordinary marriages’) appear to trouble traditional conventions as regulative while simultaneously espousing emergent conventions as freeing. Taken together, participants’ personal accounts point to how by focusing on ‘the ordinary’ we can address a characteristic of contemporary family that some commentators have trouble grasping: its double nature. By this, I mean the ways in which family forms and practices can be simultaneously traditional and post-traditional, non-conventional and conventional, as well as troubling of and incorporated into the social institutions of marriage and family. The analysis highlights how the concept of the ordinary provides a way into the double thinking required of sociology to understand marriage and family as contemporary social institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian Heaphy, 2018. "Troubling Traditional and Conventional Families? Formalised Same-Sex Couples and ‘The Ordinary’," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 23(1), pages 160-176, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:23:y:2018:i:1:p:160-176
    DOI: 10.1177/1360780418754779
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1360780418754779
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1360780418754779?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Olena Yatsyna, 2020. "A Family Without Marriage - Marriage Without a Family: The Transition of the Institutional Foundations of the Family and Diversification of Social Reality," Postmodern Openings, Editura Lumen, Department of Economics, vol. 11(3), pages 177-194, October.
    2. Julia Carter, 2022. "Traditional Inequalities and Inequalities of Tradition: Gender, Weddings, and Whiteness," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 27(1), pages 60-76, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socres:v:23:y:2018:i:1:p:160-176. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.