Same-sex Marriage in Canada: Assessing the Representational Role of Out Lesbian and Gay MPs

In 2005, Canada opened civil marriage to same-sex couples. Since then, a significant number of studies with different approaches have been published. For instance, Larocque (2006) has told the story of same-sex marriage in Canada. Bannerman (2011), Malloy (2011), and Tremblay (2014) have examined frames mobilized by proponents and opponents during the debates over same-sex marriage. Other voices (Mulé 2010; Onishenko and Caragata 2010; Young and Boyd 2006) have criticized the lesbian and gay movement for seeking access to an institution defined as eminently patriarchal, heteronormative, and even anti-feminist. Whereas Smith (2008) has been concerned with the roles that political institutions have played in the opening of civil marriage to same-sex couples, Pettinicchio (2010) has focused on the role of political parties, advocacy groups, and public opinion in the enactment of “homo-marriage” in Canada. In spite of the richness and diversity of the research, the role that out lesbian and gay members of Parliament (LG MPs) have played in opening civil marriage to same-sex couples is unclear. My objective in this paper is to fill this gap by assessing the representational role of out LG MPs regarding same-sex marriage in Canada. I hypothesize that because of both their lesbian or gay identity and their mandate of representation as legislators, out LG MPs have acted to represent lesbian and gay communities during the House of Commons debates on same-sex marriage by voicing the various positions held by these communities on this issue. Yet this hypothesis hardly seems convincing: all indications are that out LG MPs expressed views in accordance with a strict paradigm of equality and silenced any feminist and queer criticism of marriage and the family. In conclusion, I reflect on the representational roles of out lesbians and gays who are elected federal politicians.