Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Moraes, Raquel
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Camino, Leoncio
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista Direito GV
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66576
Resumo: In May 2011, the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) recognized same-sex unions as a family entity, what sets new directions to the homosexual movements in Brazil. However, even though this institutional milestone indicates a paradigm shift, it is noticeable that unfavorable notions on same-sex relationships and the rights of sexual minorities are still being spread throughout society. Aiming to outline how law and legal institutions have influenced people’s social life, this paper presents an empirical study on the discourses used by STF ministers in their decisions. Based upon the assumptions of critical discourse analysis, an evaluation has been made on the justifications given to the votes. The results indicated the existence of arguments that varied from the recognition of equality to the emphasis on difference, proving that, even though the decision was unanimous, there is still much to be conquered towards the accomplishment of equality.
id FGV-2_367d7726f1cb2620f9ccadd5a8d71800
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/66576
network_acronym_str FGV-2
network_name_str Revista Direito GV
repository_id_str
spelling Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in BrazilHomoafetividade e direito: um estudo dos argumentos utilizados pelos ministros do STF ao reconhecerem a união homoafetiva no BrasilSame-sex unionsSTF’s decisionArgumentsCritical discourse analysisEmpirical studyUnião homoafetivadecisão do STFargumentosanálise crítica do discursoestudo empíricoIn May 2011, the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) recognized same-sex unions as a family entity, what sets new directions to the homosexual movements in Brazil. However, even though this institutional milestone indicates a paradigm shift, it is noticeable that unfavorable notions on same-sex relationships and the rights of sexual minorities are still being spread throughout society. Aiming to outline how law and legal institutions have influenced people’s social life, this paper presents an empirical study on the discourses used by STF ministers in their decisions. Based upon the assumptions of critical discourse analysis, an evaluation has been made on the justifications given to the votes. The results indicated the existence of arguments that varied from the recognition of equality to the emphasis on difference, proving that, even though the decision was unanimous, there is still much to be conquered towards the accomplishment of equality.Em maio de 2011, o Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) reconheceu a união homoafetiva como entidade familiar, imprimindo novos rumos à causa dos movimentos homossexuais no Brasil. Contudo, apesar de esse marco institucional indicar uma mudança de paradigma, verifica-se que as concepções desfavoráveis sobre a homoafetividade e os direitos das minorias sexuais continuam sendo difundidas discursivamente pela sociedade. Objetivando delinear como o direito e as instituições jurídicas estão influenciando a vida social das pessoas, este artigo apresenta um estudo empírico acerca dos argumentos utilizados pelos ministros do STF em sua decisão. Tomando por base as premissas da análise crítica do discurso, realizou-se uma avaliação das justificativas dadas aos votos. Os resultados indicaram a existência de argumentos que variaram desde o reconhecimento da igualdade até a ênfase na diferença, mostrando que, apesar da unanimidade na decisão, ainda há muito o que conquistar para a efetivação da diversidade.Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas2016-09-02info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66576Revista Direito GV; Vol. 12 No. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 648-666Revista Direito GV; Vol. 12 Núm. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 648-666Revista Direito GV; v. 12 n. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 648-6662317-6172reponame:Revista Direito GVinstname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)instacron:FGVporhttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66576/64196Copyright (c) 2017 Revista Direito GVinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMoraes, RaquelCamino, Leoncio2019-08-14T13:49:51Zoai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/66576Revistahttps://direitosp.fgv.br/publicacoes/revista/revista-direito-gvPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br2317-61721808-2432opendoar:2019-08-14T13:49:51Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil
Homoafetividade e direito: um estudo dos argumentos utilizados pelos ministros do STF ao reconhecerem a união homoafetiva no Brasil
title Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil
spellingShingle Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil
Moraes, Raquel
Same-sex unions
STF’s decision
Arguments
Critical discourse analysis
Empirical study
União homoafetiva
decisão do STF
argumentos
análise crítica do discurso
estudo empírico
title_short Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil
title_full Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil
title_fullStr Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil
title_full_unstemmed Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil
title_sort Same-sex relationships and law: a study on arguments used by STF’s ministers when recognizing same-sex unions in Brazil
author Moraes, Raquel
author_facet Moraes, Raquel
Camino, Leoncio
author_role author
author2 Camino, Leoncio
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Moraes, Raquel
Camino, Leoncio
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Same-sex unions
STF’s decision
Arguments
Critical discourse analysis
Empirical study
União homoafetiva
decisão do STF
argumentos
análise crítica do discurso
estudo empírico
topic Same-sex unions
STF’s decision
Arguments
Critical discourse analysis
Empirical study
União homoafetiva
decisão do STF
argumentos
análise crítica do discurso
estudo empírico
description In May 2011, the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) recognized same-sex unions as a family entity, what sets new directions to the homosexual movements in Brazil. However, even though this institutional milestone indicates a paradigm shift, it is noticeable that unfavorable notions on same-sex relationships and the rights of sexual minorities are still being spread throughout society. Aiming to outline how law and legal institutions have influenced people’s social life, this paper presents an empirical study on the discourses used by STF ministers in their decisions. Based upon the assumptions of critical discourse analysis, an evaluation has been made on the justifications given to the votes. The results indicated the existence of arguments that varied from the recognition of equality to the emphasis on difference, proving that, even though the decision was unanimous, there is still much to be conquered towards the accomplishment of equality.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-09-02
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66576
url https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66576
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/66576/64196
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Revista Direito GV
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Revista Direito GV
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Direito GV; Vol. 12 No. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 648-666
Revista Direito GV; Vol. 12 Núm. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 648-666
Revista Direito GV; v. 12 n. 3 (2016): set-dez. (25); 648-666
2317-6172
reponame:Revista Direito GV
instname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
instacron:FGV
instname_str Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
instacron_str FGV
institution FGV
reponame_str Revista Direito GV
collection Revista Direito GV
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br
_version_ 1798943709751934976

Registros relacionados