Wikidata:Property proposal/Same-sex marriage

same-sex marriage or partnership possibilities edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Place

Not done

Description	possibility in this country or subdivision to marry or legally live together as two people of the same gender
Represents	same-sex marriage (Q17422)
Data type	Item
Domain	Countries or subdivisions
Allowed values	same-sex marriage (Q17422), civil union (Q41075), Unregistered cohabitation (Q7897362), novalue
Example	Netherlands (Q55) → same-sex marriage (Q17422) Germany (Q183) → civil union (Q41075) Israel (Q801) → Unregistered cohabitation (Q7897362) Poland (Q36) → novalue

Motivation

I think this is an interesting topic for a large group of people, that deserves a structured data approach here on wikidata. One may argue that there is more to say about right, for instance add a value that homosexual activity is prohibited in a country. But I think for clarity and purity reasons that should not be included, as sexual activity is not entirely the same as marriage or living together. Lymantria (talk) 17:47, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Comment "Civil union" is not marriage, and referring to it as such is considered offensive (or insensitive) by some people, in countries where same sex couples may register for such a union, but not marry. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:52, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Suggestion for a better title? I think the description is clear enough, that not only the possibility for an actual marriage is meant. Lymantria (talk) 17:58, 27 July 2016 (UTC) I gave it a try. Lymantria (talk) 18:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment maybe "same sex partnerships" would be better, allowing for multiple values where e.g. marriage and civil unions coexist. An alternative way of modelling this would be to have properties "marriage available to" (values "hetrosexual couple", "homosexual couple", "polygynous man", etc), "civil unions available to" (values "heterosexual couple", "homosexual couple", no value, etc) each qualified with "minimum age". Thryduulf (talk) 23:12, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - We recently got a new property for minimum age in marriage. From what I know, there is an option to add qualifiers for men and woman if they are not the same. If there are other minimum ages for same sex marriage/unions, we maybe could find a qualifier for that too. And we have not fully got a definition of "marriage" yet. A civil union (Q41075) here have exactly the same rights and obligations as a traditional marriage. Even cohabitation (Q49800) have some legal rights, even between people who do not have a sexual relation between each other. We also have to find out what "marriage" is. Is it the cermony or the legal part? Last time I discussed it, there were different opinions about that. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:31, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      - What counts as marriage, and what rights and obligations it brings, differ between places and between times (e.g. being married or being single was a requirement for women to vote, see e.g. Bulgaria in w:Women's suffrage#Timeline). Whether civil unions differ from marriage in anything but name also varies between time and place, currently in the UK same-sex couples can choose either a civil union or marriage but opposite-sex couples do not have the option of a civil union. There are often different rules for transgender people as well, so "same sex marriage" is a bit limiting, ditto with polygymous marriages which are/have been allowed in certain times and places. I was thinking that a single "formal union" property with a value for "marriage", "civil union" etc, would work but I keep running in to needing qualifiers of qualifiers. As for marriageable age (P3000) I don't see that as necessary in almost any model as minimum age (P2899) as a qualifier to the type of union works better (had I been aware of the proposal I would likely have commented to this effect there), particularly as there is no equivalent property for civil unions, formal cohabiting, etc. Thryduulf (talk) 11:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Just a side-note: a same-sex relationship is not necessary a homosexual one, as it may include bisexual or homoromantic asexual people, not to mention marriages of convenience. Similarly an opposite-sex couple is not necessarily a heterosexual one. And there are countries where there are more than two legal genders. Nothing's binary when it comes to this. – Máté (talk) 04:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think it's best to represent these kinds of laws with a property that included in the country in question. It would be better to have this represented by concepts. ChristianKl (talk) 14:55, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment maybe this could be expanded to include any sort of recognized domestic relationships, e.g. common law marriage.
--- Jura 16:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as proposed. Given how complicated marriage and related statuses are I think it would probably be best to have items for "marriage in $country" and "civil unions in $country" that includes a minimum age and any other requirements (e.g. gender, parental permission, etc) with start and end times. These items should be linked to the country page, maybe with a new property if there isn't a suitable existing one (I've not looked hard). Thryduulf (talk) 10:10, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Non consensus to create. Lymantria (talk) 11:57, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]