Advertisement

Normalizing Heterosexuality in the 1996 House of Commons Debate on Bill C-33

Chapter
  • 157 Downloads
Part of the Schriftenreihe der Internationalen Frauenuniversität »Technik und Kultur« book series (SIFU, volume 6)

Abstract

On April 29, 1996 Allan Rock, the then Minister of Justice and member of the governing Liberal Party, introduced Bill C-33, an act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, to the 35th Parliament (House of Commons Debates1, 1996, p. 2070)2. Bill C-33 was designed to include sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination in areas covered by federal jurisdiction (Chotalia, 1997, xlvii). The bill passed after third reading on May 9, 1996 (Debates, 1996, p. 2569) and was finally assented to on June 20, 1996 (Statutes of Canada 1996, chap. 14).

Keywords

Sexual Orientation Sexual Attraction Official Report Common Debate Federal Jurisdiction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature

Government documents

  1. Bill C-33: An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, 2“d Session, 356 Parliament. In Statutes of Canada 1996. Chap. 14 (pp. 1–2).Google Scholar
  2. Canadian Human Rights Commission. (1983). Annual Report 1982. Ottawa: Canada Communication Group.Google Scholar
  3. Canadian Human Rights Commission. (1996). Annual Report 1995. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.Google Scholar
  4. House of Commons Debates, 2“d Session, 35`h Parliament (1996, April 29). In Official Report (Hansard). Vol. 134, No.43: Ottawa: Canada Communication Group.Google Scholar
  5. House of Commons Debates, 2“d Session, 35`h Parliament (1996, April 30). In Official Report (Hansard). Vol. 134, No.35. Ottawa: Canada Communication Group.Google Scholar
  6. House of Commons Debates, 2“d Session, 356 Parliament (1996, May 7). In Official Report (Hansard). Vol. 134, No.41. Ottawa: Canada Communication Group.Google Scholar
  7. House of Commons Debates, 2“d Session, 35`h Parliament (1996, May 8). In Official Report (Hansard). Vol. 134, No.42. Ottawa: Canada Communication Group.Google Scholar

Bibliographical references

  1. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Chotalia, S. P. (1996). The 1997 annotated Canadian Human Rights Act. Scarborough: Carswell Thomson.Google Scholar
  3. Hemmings, C. (1993). Resituating the bisexual body: From identity to difference. In J. Bristow & A. R. Wilson (Eds.), Activating theory: Lesbian and gay legal equality (pp. 118–138 ). London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
  4. Hunter, N. D. ( 1991, Summer). Marriage, law, and gender: A feminist inquiry. In Law and Sexuality, 1, pp. 9–30.Google Scholar
  5. James, C. (1996). Denying complexity: The dismissal and appropriation of bisexuality in queer, lesbian, and gay theory. In B. Beemyn & M. Eliason (Eds.), Queer studies: A lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender anthology (pp. 217–240 ). New York, London: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Katz, J. (1997). “Homosexual’ and ”Heterosexual“: Questioning the terms. In M. Duberman (Ed.), A queer World: The center for lesbian and gay studies reader (pp. 177–180 ). New York, London: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Kinsman, G. (1996). The regulation of desire: Homo and hetero sexualities (2nd., rev. ed.). Montreal, New York, London: Black Rose Books.Google Scholar
  8. Nordahl, R. D. (1995). Ronald Dworkin and the defense of homosexual rights. Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, 8, 1, pp. 19–48.Google Scholar
  9. O’Brien, C.-A. & Weir, L. (1995). Lesbians and gay men inside and outside families. In N. Mandell & A. Duffy (Eds.), Canadian families: Diversity, conflict and change (pp. 111–139 ). Toronto: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  10. Ochs, R. (1996). Biphobia: It goes more than two ways. In: B. Firestein (Ed.), Bisexuality: The psychology and politics of an invisible minority (pp. 217–239 ). Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Phelan, S. (1995). The space of justice: Lesbian and democratic politics. In A. R. Wilson (Ed.), A simple matter of justice? Theorizing lesbian and gay politics (pp. 193–220 ). London, New York: Cassell.Google Scholar
  12. Rayside, D. (1988). Gay rights and family values: The passage of Bill 7 in Ontario. Studies in Political Economy, 36, 2, pp. 109–147.Google Scholar
  13. Rayside, D. M. (1998). On the fringe: Gays and lesbian in politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Rubin, G. (1993). Thinking sex: Notes for a radical theory of sexuality. In H. Abelove & M. A. Barale & D. M. Halperin (Eds.), The lesbian and gay studies reader (pp. 3–44 ). London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Sanders, D. (1994). Constructing lesbian and gay rights. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 9, 2, pp. 99–143.Google Scholar
  16. Weeks, J. (1990). Coming Out: Homosexual politics in Britain from the nineteenth century to the present (rev., updated ed.). London, New York: Quartet Books.Google Scholar
  17. Zinn, R. W. & Brethour, P. P. (1996). The law of human rights in Canada: Practice and procedure. Aurora: Canada Law Book.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2002

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations