Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Language and Sexuality
Vol. 6:1 (2017) ► pp.61–89

“Imagine a boy who is adopted by a pair of lesbians (poor little sod)…”

A membership categorisation analysis of online comments on same-gender adoption

| Adam Mickiewicz University Poznań, Poland
The traditional family has always been the preserve of heterosexual couples based on and reinforced by a series of (hetero)normative behaviours. The context of same-gender adoption allows for a reworking of the construct of the modern family and the negotiation of parenting identities moving beyond the traditional system based on gender binarism (Wagner 2014). However, despite legal equality in the areas of adoption and marriage, LGBT people continue to face moral judgement about whether they are suitable parents. Using the insights and methods of membership categorisation analysis (Sacks 1992, Stokoe 2003a, 2003b, 2012), this paper unpacks the ways in which the more conservative parts of the UK’s society construct same-gender parenting as a transgression of the established norms while relying on heteronormative assumptions about categories within the membership categorisation device ‘family’ (Sacks 1992). The paper shows that the gendered meaning ‘locked into place’ (Baker 2000) in those categories is a source of prejudice and a tool to maintain the established heteronormative order.
Keywords: same-gender parenting, heteronormativity, membership categorisation analysis, family, gender, sexuality
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Setting the scene: Same-gender families in the UK
  • 3.Heteronormativity and the (hetero-)performative aspect of family
  • 4.Membership categorisation analysis and the category of gender
  • 5.Data
  • 6.Data analysis
    • 6.1‘Denaturalising’ same-gender families
    • 6.2Emphasising the importance of feminine and masculine role models
    • 6.3Criticising pro-LGBT attitudes
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 22 June 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.6.1.03sok
References (53)
References
Adoption and Children Act. 2002. <[URL]> (March 10, 2014)
Averett, Paige, Strong-Blakeney, Amy, Nalavany, Blace & Scott, Ryan. 2011. Adoptive parents’ attitudes towards gay and lesbian adoption. Journal of GLBT Family Studies 7(1–2): 30–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baiocco, Roberto, Nardelli, Nicola, Pezzuti, Lina & Lingiardi, Vittorio. 2013. Attitudes of Italian heterosexual older adults towards lesbian and gay parenting. Sexuality Research and Social Policy 10(4): 285–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Carolyn. 2000. Locating culture in action: Membership categorization in texts and talk. In Culture and Text: Discourse and Methodology in Social Research and Cultural Studies, Alison Lee & Cate Poynton Cate (eds), 99–113. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2004. Membership categorisation and interview accounts. In Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, David Silverman (ed), 130–143. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Barnardo’s. 2011. Gay adoption in the UK. <[URL]> (March 11, 2014)
Barton, Ellen, Aldridge, Matthew, Trimble, Thomas & Vidovic, Justin. 2005. Structure and variation in end-of-life discussions in the surgical intensive care unit. Communication & Medicine 2(1): 3–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ben-Ari, Adital & Tali, Livni. 2006. Motherhood is not a given thing: Experiences and constructed meanings of biological and nonbiological mothers. Sex Roles 541: 521–531. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, Virginia & Clarke, Victoria. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butler, Judith. 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, Deborah & Kulick, Don. 2006. Heteronorms. In The Language and Sexuality Reader, Cameron Deborah & Kulick Don (eds), 165–168. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Civil Partnership Act. 2004. <[URL]> (March 10, 2014)
Coates, Jennifer. 2013. The discursive production of everyday heterosexualities. Discourse & Society 24(5): 536–552. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daily Mail. 2014. House rules. Mail Online. <[URL]> (September 11, 2014)
Ellen, Thomas. 2009. New legislation sees gay Scottish couples win right to adopt children. The Herald. <[URL]> (March 10, 2014)
Freiberg, Jill & Freebody, Peter. 2009. Applying membership categorization analysis to discourse: When ‘tripwire critique’ is not enough. In Critical Discourse Analysis: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Thao Lê & Megan Short (eds), 49–64. New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Gabb, Jacqui. 2005. Lesbian m/otherhood: Strategies of familial-linguistic management in lesbian parent families. Sociology 39(4): 585–603. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, Matthew & Gough, Brendan. 2011. Magazine and reader constructions of ‘metrosexuality’ and masculinity: A membership categorisation analysis. Journal of Gender Studies 20(1): 67–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hester, Stephen. 1998. Describing “deviance” in school: Recognisably educational psychological problems. In Identities in Talk, Charles Antaki & Sue Widdicombe (eds), 133–150. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Hester, Stephen & Eglin, Peter (eds). 1997. Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Washington, DC: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Hicks, Stephen. 2005. Lesbian and gay foster care and adoption: A brief UK history. Adoption & Fostering 29(3): 42–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, Alexandra Merley. 2011. Motherhood as performance: (Re)Negotiations of motherhood in contemporary German literature. Studies in 20th & 21st Literature 35(1): 74–94.Google Scholar
Hughey, Matthew W. & Daniels, Jessie. 2013. Racist comments at online news sites: A methodological dilemma for discourse analysis. Media, Culture and Society 35(3): 332–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jayyusi, Lena. 1984. Categorization and the Moral Order. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Johnson, Rebecca. 2007. The co-construction of roles and patterns of interaction in family discourse. Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics 7(2): 1–22.Google Scholar
Kitzinger, Celia. 2000. Doing feminist conversation analysis. Feminism and Psychology 10(2): 163–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. ‘Speaking as a heterosexual’: (How) Does sexuality matter for talk-in-interaction? Research on Language and Social Interaction 38(3): 221–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kranz, Karen & Judith Daniluk. 2006. Living outside of the box: Lesbian couples with children conceived through the use of anonymous donor insemination. Journal of Feminist Family Therapy 181: 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lepper, Georgia. 2000. Categories in Text and Talk: A Practical Introduction to Categorization Analysis. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act. 2013. <[URL]> (September 18, 2014)
McCutcheon, Jessica & Morrison, Melanie Ann. 2015. The effect of parental gender roles on students’ attitudes toward lesbian, gay, and heterosexual adoptive couples. Adoption Quarterly 18(2): 138–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Motschenbacher, Heiko. 2011. Taking Queer Linguistics further: Sociolinguistics and critical heteronormativity research. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2121: 149–179.Google Scholar
Motschenbacher, Heiko & Stegu, Martin. 2013. Queer Lingustic approaches to discourse. Discourse & Society 24(5): 519–535. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mullany, Louise. 2007. Gendered Discourse in the Professional Workplace. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nentwich, Julia C. 2008. New fathers and mothers as gender trouble makers? Exploring discursive constructions of heterosexual parenthood and their subversive potential. Feminism and Psychology 18(2): 207–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nilan, Pam. 1995. Membership categorization devices under construction: Social identity boundary maintenance in everyday discourse. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 18(1): 69–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pawelczyk, Joanna. 2013. Coping online with loss: Implications for offline clinical contexts. Language@Internet 10: article 8 [1–21].Google Scholar
Pettigrew, Thomas & Meertens, Roel. 1995. Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology 251: 57–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Populus. 2012. Gay Couples’ Rights Survey. Populus. <[URL]> (March 20, 2014)
Rolfe, Alison & Peel, Elizabeth. 2011. ‘It’s a double edged thing’: The paradox of civil partnership and why some couples are choosing not to have one. Feminism and Psychology 21(3): 317–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rye, B. J. & Meaney, Glenn J. 2010. Self-defense, sexism, and etiological beliefs: Predictors of attitudes toward gay and lesbian adoption. Journal of GLBT Family Studies 6(1): 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel. 2007. A tutorial on membership categorization. Journal of Pragmatics 39(3): 462–482. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlenker, Barry. 1980. Impression Management: The Self-Concept, Social Identity and Interpersonal Relations. Monterey: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Schneider, Britta. 2013. Heteronormativity and queerness in transnational heterosexual Salsa. Discourse & Society 241: 553–571. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Speer, Susan. 2005. Gender Talk: Feminism, Discourse and Conversation Analysis. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, Elizabeth. 2003a. Doing gender, doing categorization: Recent developments in language and gender research. International Sociolinguistics 2(1): 1–12.Google Scholar
. 2003b. Mothers, single women and sluts: Gender, morality and membership categorisation in neighbour disputes. Feminism and Psychology 131: 317–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Moving forward with membership categorization analysis: Methods for systematic analysis. Discourse Studies 4(3): 277–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sunderland, Jane. 2000. Baby entertainer, bumbling assistant and line manager: Discourses of fatherhood in parentcraft texts. Discourse & Society 11(2): 249–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Telegraph. 2010. Moderation FAQs. The Daily Telegraph. <[URL]> (September 11, 2014)
Tracy, Karen. 2002. Everyday Talk: Building and Reflecting Identities. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Wagner, Sarah. 2014. Negotiating a contested identity: Lesbian and gay parents’ definitions of family. PhD dissertation. The University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Mackenzie, Jai
2023. Negotiating normativities of gender, sexuality and the family in gay parents’ small stories. Journal of Language and Sexuality 12:1 ► pp. 23 ff. DOI logo
Saito, Junko
2021. “We’re family”: Japanese Characters’ Categorizations of a Gay Man in a TV Drama. In Linguistic Tactics and Strategies of Marginalization in Japanese, ► pp. 143 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.