Homonormativity, Charternormativity, and Processes of Legitimation - Exploring the Affective-Spatio-Temporal-Fixed Dimensions of Marriage Equality and Charter Schools

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by Ben

Over the past five years, marriage equality and charter schools have become central to political debates on equality and rights. Some argue these policies extend benefits and opportunities to communities historically denied access, promoting liberalism and egalitarianism. This article examines why dominant-culture supporters endorse marriage equality or charter schools despite not directly benefiting. Using queer theory and critical education policy studies, it develops homonormativity and charternormativity, arguing that a legitimation process shaped by affective-spatio-temporal-fixed dynamics explains policy traction in neoliberal contexts.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages27

Reading Time1 h 8 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Core arguments and framing

Concepts: homonormativity and charternormativity

Policy legitimation via affective-spatio-temporal-fixed dynamics

Background: related U.S. Supreme Court decisions

UC Berkeley Berkeley Review of Education Title Homonormativity, Charternormativity, and Processes of Legitimation: Exploring the Affective-Spatio-Temporal-Fixed Dimensions of Marriage Equality and Charter Schools Permalink [https://escholarship.org/uc/item/84b798kq](https://escholarship.org/uc/item/84b798kq) Journal Berkeley Review of Education, 5(2) ISSN 1947-5578 Author Stern, Mark Publication Date 2015-01-01 Peer reviewed [eScholarship.org](eScholarship.org) Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Available online at [http://escholarship.org/uc/ucbgse_bre](http://escholarship.org/uc/ucbgse_bre) Homonormativity, Charternormativity, and Processes of Legitimation: Exploring the Affective-SpatioTemporal-Fixed Dimensions of Marriage Equality and Charter Schools Mark Stern 1 Department of Educational Studies, Colgate University Abstract Over the past five years, marriage equality and charter schools have emerged at the forefront of political conversations about equality and rights. Some argue that these policies extend access to certain benefits and opportunities to historically oppressed communities, thus furthering liberalism and egalitarianism. In this article, I engage these arguments by exploring how and why people from dominant cultures come to support marriage equality or charter schools despite not directly benefitting from these policy initiatives. Drawing upon queer theory and critical education policy studies, I utilize two terms—homonormativity and charternormativity—to describe how public arguments supporting marriage equality and charter schools elevate particular identities and normative behaviors for gay people and people of color. I theorize these similarities to reveal a process of policy legitimation that I call the affective-spatio-temporalfixed—a concept that provides insight into why and how some policies that claim to promote increased equity gain traction in the neoliberal present whereas others do not. Keywords: charter schools, education policy, marriage equality, queer theory, neoliberalism Two years before the decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which made it illegal to deny same-sex couples the right to marry in the United States, the Supreme Court ruled to make access to the federal benefits of marriage a bit fairer. In United States v. Hodges (2013), the Court declared that nontraditional couples should be treated like other legally recognized couples in states with laws extending marriage recognition.2 In particular, 1 Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to: Mark Stern, Ph.D., Colgate University, 13 Oak Drive, Hamilton, [NY 13346. Email: mstern@colgate.edu. I would very much like](NY 13346. Email: mstern@colgate.edu. I would very much like) to thank the editorial team (especially Laura Hernández) and the blind reviewers for insightful and critical feedback that made this paper much more focused and just plain better. My colleagues, Barbara Regenspan and Anna Ríos Rojas, and my students, Kristi Carey, Melissa Meléndez, Natasha Torres, and Sarah Wooton, all read an early draft of this paper and helped me think through points both big and little. 2 I use “marriage recognition” instead of “marriage equality,”“same-sex marriage,” or “gay marriage” inmost places in this paper. Though used frequently in mainstream press and popular nomenclature, I refrain from using the latter terms for particular reasons. I avoid using the phrase “marriage equality” to reserve the term“equality” to mean something beyond formal recognition under the law, which does not ensure that LGBTQ persons will be treated equally under the law or in society at large (e.g., Spade, 2011; Vaid, 2012) . I refrain from using the latter two because they are neither inclusive nor descriptive of the variety of gender Berkeley Review of Education Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 171–196 172 Stern historically non-normative (LGB3) couples that wou

FAQs

What does the article argue about dominant-culture support for marriage equality or charter schools?

It argues that supporters from dominant cultures often back these policies even without direct personal benefit, elevating certain identities and normative behaviors for gay people and people of color.

Which theoretical terms does the author use to analyze marriage equality and charter schools?

The author uses homonormativity and charternormativity to describe how public arguments shape identity and norms in relation to these policies.

What is the affective-spatio-temporalfixed concept used for?

It is used to explain processes of policy legitimation and to clarify why some equity-promoting policies gain traction in a neoliberal context while others do not.

Oct 15, 2026

Upload by Ben