Getting Beyond Gay Marriage

PUBLISHED APRIL 21, 2008

Imagining a future for myself was one of the hardest things to do when I was first coming out of the closet. Before admitting I was gay, I thought I knew exactly what my ideal future would look like: a large family, a nice house, a good job, and, of course, a loving wife. It was this powerful notion that kept me so fearfully in the closet for so many years. If being gay meant giving up those things, those traditional markers of success and respect, then I wanted nothing to do with being gay. But as my sexuality became something I had to deal with, the conscious and unconscious standards which I held for my idyllic future started to come crashing down around me—and I was devastated.

I remember all the questions that flooded my thoughts. What will my family look like? Will I be able to have children? Where will I be able to live? Do I even want any of those things as they are normatively conceived? But I came to realize more and more that these questions are hardly unique to LGBT people. In fact, many of us—whatever our sexual orientation—leave college disillusioned at the hollowness of traditional expectations for our lives, while simultaneously emboldened by the ability to recognize that we want something different and better for ourselves. Many of us commit to not making the mistakes of our parents, or not to falling for the same illusory goals and norms. In many ways, the power of being queer is being forced to recognize and act on these realizations. LGBT people don’t have a choice.

While non-LGBT people may find marriage disillusioning, coupledom limiting, and heterosexual sexual mores stagnating, they are nevertheless given social capital, societal respect, and communal adulation when they choose to conform. While queer people may lose social capital, economic incentives, and religious honors by being honest about our sexuality, we are forced to deal squarely with traditional practices and go through the arduously authentic process of re-conceptualizing them—a process that often leads to the formation of more individualistic and satisfying relationships and sexual paradigms.

Gay marriage is one of the many re-conceptualized relationships which has come out of this unique LGBT experience. If one of the hardest parts of coming out as gay was imagining a future for myself, a logical goal would seemingly be to expand traditional paradigms like marriage to include LGBT people. And a quick peek into the mainstream gay rights movement would certainly depict this as one of the ultimate goals of LGBT liberation.

Embracing marriage as an LGBT communal goal requires some serious consideration of what marriage both is and does, as LGBT people know all too well the damage and pain resulting from exclusionary hierarchies. Marriage is a system that purposefully doles out honors and admiration for some at the expense of others. It is taken to be a marker of “seriousness” and maturity—while adolescents date, people in serious relationships get married. A married man is a man with responsibility and honor. At its core, marriage superimposes heterosexist social, sexual, and gender paradigms onto its participants. And for playing its game, its participants get showered with social benefits—not the least of which are economic—and this impacts people of all sexual expressions, especially the growing number of us who choose more satisfying non-traditional paths, from living with our boyfriends full-time to experiencing an open relationship. Many Western European countries such as France have led the way in creating non-hierarchical legal relationship paradigms to give rights and responsibilities to a person’s chosen partner(s)—from lover to best friend.

Some claim that same-sex people getting married helps transform a socially constructed institution by expanding its definitions and altering its deeply-rooted heterosexual foundations. As well-meaning as this argument is, it is willfully ignorant of the intense underpinnings of marriage and its deep historical basis. Just because marriage is socially constructed doesn’t mean it will be easily socially reconstructed. LGBT people marrying will be less likely to change the institution of marriage than to be changed by it. Gay marriage advocates are quite right in saying that same-sex marriage in no way threatens the institution of marriage, but actually strengthens and emboldens it.

While the gay rights movement has been quick to adopt marriage as a sign of its own maturation and its own desire to “be just like everyone else,” doing so severely undermines the very things which make being LGBT so powerful. Queerness has meant the ability to create refreshingly new paradigms for some of the most oppressive and narrow of social and sexual expressions. LGBT people have unique moral authority to bring new conceptualizations of gender and sexual expression to everyone, especially straight people. This doesn’t mean that LGBT people can’t or don’t want to engage in traditional paradigms, but rather that we should celebrate our unique ability to explore and create a diversity of options, including traditional ones.

Practically speaking, marriage in America isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. LGBT people should fight for our deserved full and comprehensive marriage rights. But our communal focus should be our unique ability to expand a narrow spectrum and fight for the most oppressed and disadvantaged among us. A focus on marriage runs the risk of overlooking the long list of other issues facing our community, from gentrification of our neighborhoods to our homeless youth. It’s time for all of us to get out of the marriage business and re-engage society with the exceptional, revitalizing new possibilities which queer people bring to the table.

Article Tools:

View Comments ( 4)

Post a Comment

Wonderful writing, Ira. This is an important issue and you dealt with it well.

I thought about this topic last week when some queer sexuality readings came up in one of my classes. How can a government legislate against "same-sex" marriages? The assumption is that one can determine an individual's "sex". If we think of "sex" as one's biological composition, then it is clear that one cannot ever truly know one's sex unless you see them naked or you are a doctor. Rather, we rely heavily upon what West and Zimmerman in 1987 highlighted as the "sex category," that is to say that we can never know someone's sex just by looking at them and that we place people into sex categories based upon their particular gender expression. So the government seems to be more interested in prohibiting folks with the same gender expression from marrying, rather than prohibiting folks with the same sex for marrying, unless one can go into an individual's medical files and determine their sex which would appear to be an invasion of privacy.

So, it's just complicated and it's a lot to think about. Thanks for brining this up!

The government approach is actually much more straight forward and simplistic than you give it credit for. The only question the legislature is interested in is purely chromosomal. That's what creates legal definitions of gender. Once a person is branded with that genetic makeup at birth, the government has no real way of changing that classification. Which, among other things, is a huge problem in the prison system.

The legislature isn't prohibiting folks of the same gender expression from marrying. An XY chromosomal "man" with a male gender expression and an XX chromosomal "woman" with a male gender expression are perfectly welcome to get married. You need a birth certificate to get a marriage license, and that's where the medical history comes in.

As we know, many countries are forbidding the same-sex marriage. However, I think it's really great. I have a friend getting married with the same sex under the help of the site BiLoves, a site for bisexuals and bicurious looking to explore their sexuality. And they live happily and wonderfully.

ira: Congratulations on thinking through the very complicated topic of gay marriage.

In the United States, marriage grants enormous advantages - there are over 1100 different rights that married couples share which are not available to the unmarried. To name just a few, unmarrieds are not able to have survivor benefits to social security, partners of unmarried Federal employees are specifically prohibited from inclusion for Federal employee health insurance; in most states, unmarrieds cannot legally visit their partners in a hospital critical care unit (this right is only available to blood relatives and spouses).

A federal marriage right that overwhelmed my life and the life of my partner Tomas, is that U.S. Immigration does not allow unmarried people (translate this to be gay couples) to sponsor their foreign partners for immigration to the U.S. This unfair policy was a part of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed into law by President Clinton in 1996.

Tomas and I have been in a 100% committed relationship for 7 years; we met when he was a Computer Science student at Calif State University. We were very honest when speaking with the Spanish Embassy at Madrid, but we were flatly turned down. As a consequence, I moved to Spain 2 years ago, deciding that no government in the world was big enough to tell me who I can or cannot sleep with.

Gay marriage is essential for equal LGBT civil rights. While I believe as you do that the approval of gay marriage provides new possibilities to traditional marriage, I believe it will be quite some time before gay marriage is recognized by the majority of states or adopted by federal statutes. It won't help Tomas and me, but perhaps those that follow can avoid having their lives completely turned upside down by homophobic U.S. laws that are unfair to gay couples.

Our thanks to you for speaking out. Gay marriage will only become law if we continue to make others know how important it is for us to have equal rights.

Aaron Ashcraft
Barcelona, Spain

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • You may use <swf file="song.mp3"> to display Flash files inline
  • Allowed HTML tags: <!--pagebreak--><p><br><i><b><a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><!--pagebreak-->
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Security question, designed to stop automated spam bots