Naming, Blaming, and Claiming in Public Disputes

The 1998 Maine Referendum on Civil Rights Protection for Gay Men and Lesbians

Datos Bibliográficos

ID7315403
AutoresCarolyn Wiethoff (Indiana University Bloomington, autor de correspondencia)
Año2003
Volumen44
Número1
Páginas61-82
Fecha de publicación2003-05-20
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaJournal of Homosexuality (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0091-8369 • E-ISSN: 1540-3602
EditorialTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1300/j082v44n01_04
PMID12856756
OpenAlexW1825431597
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas4
Referencias citadas19

On February 10, 1998, voters in Maine repealed a law providing civil rights protection for gay men and lesbians. This article provides an analysis of the argument strategies used by both parties to the dispute, shedding light on the particular tactics that contributed to the repeal. Felstiner, Abel, and Sarat's (1981) sociolegal theory of naming, blaming, and claiming is offered as a lens to examine conservatives' anti-gay rights arguments in the campaign. The theory helps demonstrate how conservatives' argument patterns created narratives that successfully appealed to disparate audiences in Maine, thus garnering sufficient voter support to pass the appeal referendum. I also define weaknesses in GLBT supporters' counter-arguments using this theoretical perspective. Finally, I offer suggestions for argument strategies in future campaigns that could strengthen uncommitted voters' support for gay civil rights initiatives

Criminology · Political science · Sociology · Dispute Resolution and Class Actions · Freedom of Expression and Defamation · Law in Society and Culture · Psychology · Social Psychology