{"id":38448,"date":"2018-03-22T18:02:05","date_gmt":"2018-03-22T07:02:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nofibs.com.au\/?p=38448"},"modified":"2019-04-13T23:49:37","modified_gmt":"2019-04-13T13:49:37","slug":"from-this-day-backwards-burgewords-on-the-long-journey-to-australias-first-lesbian-marriage","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/from-this-day-backwards-burgewords-on-the-long-journey-to-australias-first-lesbian-marriage\/","title":{"rendered":"From this day backwards: @burgewords on the long journey to Australia’s first lesbian marriage"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"

Elaine Crump and Sharon Dane.<\/p><\/div>\n

\nHere we were on the other side of the world not being able to have clarified which of our relationships was valid.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

WHEN Australian same-sex couples were finally granted equal access to the Marriage Act in December 2017, the widespread expression of relief was tempered by a growing awareness of a legal minefield.<\/span><\/p>\n

Brisbane couple Elaine Crump and Sharon Dane let the emotions in, but the status of their long-term relationship remained in limbo. Like many same-sex couples seeking legal documentation during the interminable wait for Australia to pass marriage equality, Elaine and Sharon had already taken their chances in countries where equality was accessible.<\/span><\/p>\n

The pair first solemnised their relationship with a civil partnership at the British Consulate in Brisbane during 2006 <\/span>\u2014<\/span> in fact they were the first lesbian couple to do so in this country<\/a> \u2014 but neither could have predicted that was merely the start of an arduous legal journey.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIt gave us some credibility among our family and peers,\u201d Elaine, a tradesperson, remembers.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe were no longer just a couple living together but had some form of formal recognition, albeit in another country; and both our families are British.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThere was a level of excitement about it, as it was something we were finally sharing together that others were able to take for granted.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"

Sharon Dane and Elaine Crump.<\/p><\/div>\n

Sharon, a psychology researcher, agrees: \u201cThere was no other way back then of us formalising our relationship\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe only thing we had to show we were a couple prior to that was a \u2018stamp duty free\u2019 declaration form from the Department of Transport.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cAs we were British citizens, we felt that at least we were being legally recognised in a country that was part of our identity,\u201d she adds.<\/span><\/p>\n

According to Sharon, just before the couple were civilly-partnered, staff at the consulate required them to officially acknowledge that they understood the ceremony was not a marriage. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThat was hard to swallow,\u201d she says. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe were well aware of that, but to have it emphasised on our special day was upsetting.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The \u2018Best Wedding\u2019<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The ceremony attracted significant media attention during the Beaconsfield Mine collapse in Tasmania. Elaine and Sharon recall the sudden scrutiny brought on by the media\u2019s need for alternate content during the lengthy wait before the trapped miners were brought to the surface.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe allowed the media into that occasion and there was a sense of politics about it which somewhat detracted from the very personal nature of what we were doing,\u201d Elaine says. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cFor this reason, I drew the line in not allowing the media at our reception.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sharon believes the spotlight came as a result of being one of the first same-sex couples to enter into a UK civil partnership in Australia. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cInterestingly, we weren\u2019t allowed many people to attend the ceremony at the consulate, only immediate family and our witnesses,\u201d she says.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cSo there wasn\u2019t that sense of celebration you would normally experience at a wedding. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cInstead, the media filled the room taking photographs.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWhile this took away from some of the personal nature of it, it also gave it some sense of celebration, with it being acknowledged as something historic and special.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

According to Elaine, the bulk of the ceremony was at home with close friends and family: \u201cI do remember my mum saying it was the best wedding she had ever been to.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Time Capsule<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

By 2008, overseas civil partnerships between same-sex couples were still not recognised in Queensland. That process would not begin until 2011 or be settled into law until 2016.<\/span><\/p>\n

Elaine and Sharon\u2019s relationship recognition had therefore reached an impasse, but they saw an opportunity in another country.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cPart of it was opportunism, as Sharon had to go to Rhode Island for a conference and I decided to go with her for a holiday,\u201d Elaine recalls.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe decided we would use the opportunity to drive up to Canada to marry, as it was another step in our journey. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cMarriage felt far more normalising. It would allow us to say we are married couple now, not civilly-partnered. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe could come home and say that at least somewhere in the world we are a married couple.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sharon remembers her critical concern was about she or Elaine dying before they had the opportunity to marry or have a civil partnership recognised at home.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIf that happened, you couldn\u2019t turn back the clock,\u201d she says.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThere would be no way of the surviving partner showing we were ever married.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI felt it was like putting it in a time capsule, ready to pull out once the laws had changed. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIt was also because people got it when you said you were married, they didn\u2019t get it when you said you were civilly-partnered.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Marriage Activists<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n
\"\"

Sharon Dane speaking at a PFLAG Brisbane event.<\/p><\/div>\n

By the time of Elaine and Sharon\u2019s 2008 marriage in Toronto, Canada, the couple had become involved in marriage equality activism, although both remember how entering into their second relationship certification was not in any way political.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe were doing it for us,\u201d Sharon says. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cHowever, letting the media tell our story was politically motivated, as we wanted to get the message out there that we were a normal couple that just wanted to be treated like everyone else.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Elaine agrees: \u201cFrom a political perspective it was great that our ceremonies helped highlight the issues in the press.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sharon\u2019s role as a psychology researcher working on the relationships and wellbeing of LGBTIQ Australians was extended into her activism, which strengthened her views on why having the choice to marry was so important. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cAs the research strongly indicated, it was simply about being respected and included in society,\u201d she says. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe desire to marry was a personal one, but to have the choice was critical in terms of feeling treated as an equal.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

Spare Bunk<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Elaine and Sharon met through the Brisbane entity of the social group Older Wiser Lesbians (OWLS).<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI was away in Darwin on a work trip and when I came back Sharon was a new member and we became friends,\u201d Elaine says.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cEventually, and when I was no longer in a relationship, we found a mutual attraction to each other.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sharon recalls the pivotal weekend the relationship began: \u201cA group of us women went camping at a lake. Elaine had a small sailing boat which you could sleep in. Everyone was deciding what tent they were going to sleep in and Elaine said \u2018I\u2019ve got a spare bunk in my boat\u2019. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWell I quickly put my hand up for that offer, and just as well, as it was in that boat where we expressed a mutual attraction,\u201d she adds. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThat was almost 17 years ago. We no longer have that boat but a picture of her hangs proudly in our house as a reminder.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"It\u2019s Complicated<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

After their 2008 Canadian marriage, Sharon and Elaine continued to campaign for marriage equality in Australia<\/a>, including staunch opposition to the Turnbull Government\u2019s planned plebiscite on the human rights issue throughout 2016.<\/span><\/p>\n

According to Sharon, their interest in laws regarding civil unions and same-sex marriages across the world made the couple aware that it wouldn\u2019t be possible to have two formal relationships \u2014 even if to each other \u2014 recognised in the same country.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cAs the UK later changed its laws in 2014 to recognise overseas same-sex marriages, we started to wonder which of our two relationships \u2014 the civil partnership or the Canadian marriage \u2014 it would recognise,\u201d she recalls.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cTo complicate matters further, Canada changed its laws in 2014 to recognise an overseas civil partnership as equivalent to a marriage, with a Canadian lawyer advising us that our civil partnership would be viewed as the true marriage because it happened in 2006, two years prior to our 2008 Canadian marriage.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The couple quickly realised they were in the same position as countless other same-sex partners in Australia: in need of legal and\/or consular advice about the status of their relationships.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe first contacted the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the UK government,\u201d Sharon says.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThey told us that it was complicated because we didn\u2019t live in England and therefore they weren\u2019t sure which of our relationships was valid. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThis meant we were not allowed to have our civil partnership converted to a marriage in case the Canadian marriage had rendered the civil partnership void in the UK.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The couple corresponded with the United Kingdom Government for over three years while remaining in what they describe as \u201clegal limbo\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cFinally, they agreed that if we could seek the expert opinion of specialists in English family law, they would consider our case,\u201d Sharon recalls.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThis was a costly exercise that we feel we should not have had to go through. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe felt we had no choice but to pay for the services of a London lawyer specialising in same-sex marriage law.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sharon did an internet search for \u201cFamily Law, England, LGBT\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cLuckily we found A City Law Firm, a wonderfully supportive and knowledgeable legal firm in London,\u201d she remembers.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThey, with counsel on the matter from a barrister, made it clear to the UK government that it was our Canadian marriage that was void under English law, not our civil partnership.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

Reality Check<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The reality set in: Were we really legally married?<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Sharon was present in the House of Representatives at Parliament House, Canberra, when marriage equality was voted on and passed on December 7 that year.<\/span>In late 2017, the Turnbull Government conducted a compulsory postal survey to gauge public sentiment on allowing same-sex couples equal access to the Marriage Act.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI remember calling Elaine right after and us crying over the phone, and that we were ecstatic this had happened,\u201d she says.\u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI think the passing of the law at that time was when I experienced the huge emotional outpouring.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cBut then within a week of that, the reality set in: Were we really legally married? <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThat put a real damper on things.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

According to Sharon, words can\u2019t adequately describe the frustration and powerlessness that she and Elaine went through while they waited on a response from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cHere we were on the other side of the world not being able to have clarified which of our relationships was valid,\u201d she says. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThis meant we couldn\u2019t confirm if we were already married, nor could we get married in Australia in case the Canadian marriage was deemed valid. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI couldn\u2019t help but feel bitter, as if we had the right to marry in Australia in the first place we would not have had to have gone through this unnecessary stress and expense, which was of no fault of ours but as a consequence of same-sex marriage laws changing around the world.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

When the news finally came through from the UK government in February, 2018, that the couple could convert their civil partnership to a marriage, Sharon and Elaine recall being overwhelmed with joy and relief, particularly because the certification was back-dated to take into account the total number of years of their marriage.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThis was the relationship we entered into first, 12 years ago, and the one that involved all our friends and family in Australia,\u201d Sharon says.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIt was the one with a wedding album, flowers, a cake and our loved ones.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sense of Peace<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n
\"\"

Elaine and Sharon with their new certificate.<\/p><\/div>\n

This year, Elaine and Sharon returned to the British Consulate in Brisbane to have their 2006 civil partnership converted to a marriage that was automatically recognised in Australia.<\/span><\/p>\n

The certification was likely to have recorded theirs as the first lesbian marriage in this country.<\/span><\/p>\n

For Elaine, the overriding feeling was relief: \u201cIt\u2019s been such a battle for so long,\u201d she says.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe finally know it\u2019s legally binding and recognised in the place we call home.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWhen we go out now and introduce each other as \u2018this is my wife\u2019, I don\u2019t get that feeling that people think \u2018oh yeah that\u2019s nice, but they are not really married\u2019. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cAfter all these years of exclusion, I\u2019m able to say \u2018yes I\u2019m part of this, I am legally married, you are my wife\u2019.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Sharon recalls the conversion as an experience of happiness on two fronts, the \u201chuge relief\u201d of ending a drawn out legal battle, and that having the marriage recognised in Australia gave the couple \u201cclosure and a sense of peace\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cAll the boxes are now ticked,\u201d she says.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThere is no more fighting on an Australia level, no more fighting on a British level, or any other level. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe are now like any other couple who can say \u2018okay we are married\u2019 and that\u2019s the end of it.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Photos: Alison Pike and Stephen Pike. This article also appears on Michael’s website<\/a>.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Here we were on the other side of the world not being able to have clarified which of our relationships was valid. WHEN Australian same-sex couples were finally granted equal access to the Marriage Act in December 2017, the widespread expression of relief was tempered by a growing awareness of a legal minefield. Brisbane couple […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":38473,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[3434,585,855,854],"tags":[3287,3286,856,3195,421,3285],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/SHARON-AND-ELAINE-NO-FIBS-2.png?fit=799%2C400&ssl=1","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3t0mw-a08","jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38448"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=38448"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38448\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/38473"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=38448"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=38448"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.nofibs.com.au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=38448"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}