MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7161783127 · doi:10.82308/47369

Marriage, Cohabitation, and Family Among Sexual and Gender Minorities in Post-Marriage Equality Canada

2025· dissertation· en· W7161783127 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Winnie Yang

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCohabitationInequalityCensusRace (biology)RemarriageEarningsSexual orientationGovernment (linguistics)Immigration

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This dissertation explores how sexual and gender minorities (SGMs) interpret, experience, and make decisions about marriage, cohabitation, and family in Canada’s post-marriage equality context. Drawing on census, survey, and interview data across three chapters, I engage with theoretical debates regarding the implications of marriage equality for LGBTQ+ people’s household dynamics and cultural beliefs. Specifically, I investigate differences in intrahousehold specialization across institutional contexts among same-sex couples (SSCs) and different-sex couples (DSCs); how traditionalist beliefs are distributed along the lines of gender, sexuality, and marital status; and how cultural assimilation occurs on the ground among LGBTQ+ people in the wake of marriage equality. Taken together, this dissertation advances theoretical understandings of how marriage works and what marriage means at the intersection of gender and sexuality. In the first chapter, I use three waves of the Canadian Census (2006, 2016 and the 2011 National Household Survey) to examine how marriage-cohabitation gaps in intrahousehold labour and earnings inequalities vary across institutional contexts—Québec and the rest of Canada (ROC)—for SSCs and DSCs. Prior research suggests that marriage-cohabitation gaps are smaller in contexts where cohabitation is more prevalent but has overlooked how legal protections (at the contextual level) and gender composition (at the couple level) moderate this association. I hypothesize that these gaps will be larger in contexts where legal protections for cohabitors are less marriage-like. Results show that marriage-cohabitation gaps are generally larger in Québec than English Canada vis-à-vis earnings, but patterns are more heterogenous vis-à-vis labour supply, with only male couples showing support for the hypothesis. This chapter highlights the importance of considering both legal protections and gender composition in examining patterns of intrahousehold specialization. In my second chapter, I use the 2019 and 2021 waves of the Canadian Election Study to examine how “marriage gaps” in individual-level traditionalism vary by gender and sexual identity across three dimensions of personal culture that are foundational to the institution of marriage (political conservatism, support for traditional family values, and gender conformity). Extant scholarship has consistently found that married individuals exhibit more traditional attitudes and beliefs than their unmarried counterparts. However, the realization of marriage equality invites an important but underexplored question: will associations linking marriage to traditionalism also emerge among sexual minorities, the “new” institutional participants? Results show that while marriage gaps often emerge in predictable ways for heterosexuals, patterns among sexual minorities are more uneven—and on occasion, correspond to an inversion of the marriage gap. Notably, married gay men tend to be more politically conservative but less supportive of traditional family values compared to their unmarried peers. By highlighting these heterogeneities using population-level data, this chapter sheds new light on the belief systems of LGBTQ+ people in a post-marriage equality context. In the final chapter, I explore cultural understandings of marriage among LGBTQ+ individuals in post-marriage equality Canada. The cultural assimilation of LGBTQ+ individuals into the heterosexual mainstream has long been debated in the sexuality literature, particularly in relation to marriage equality. However, the concept of assimilation is often vaguely defined, typically treated as an outcome of cultural absorption rather than a complex process of cultural change and perseverance. Drawing on insights from the sociology of sexuality and the literature on immigrant assimilation and ethnic boundaries, I fill these gaps by delineating micro-level assimilatory processes among LGBTQ+ people in Canada. Through analyses of 100 in-depth interviews with participants from a wide range of birth cohorts (1945 to 1997), I identity three interpretive frameworks that participants deploy to understand marriage—civil-rights struggle, individualized, and anti-normalizing—that correspond to three distinct boundary-making strategies at the individual-level: equalization, blurring and contraction. Overall, my results show that despite the general shift towards a post-gay ethos among younger SGMs, pathways of assimilation are more heterogenous and nonlinear than what existing accounts—and conventional wisdom—suggest

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,049
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,356

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0130,002
Communication savante0,0030,001
Science ouverte0,0010,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,033
Tête enseignante GPT0,355
Écart entre enseignants0,322 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→Travaux en français237 207→