So little interest here in gay marriage...

[Guest DevonSFescort]

It seems to me that the two most divisive gay issues to hit the (U.S.) national stage in recent years are measures which are universalist in their intent and spirit but in fact directly affect only a minority of gays and lesbians: gays in the military and gay marriage. Whereas other reforms, like repealing sodomy laws or amending non-discrimination laws, are comparatively non-threatening to straight people, both the military and marriage reform campaigns involve opening institutions society sees as sacrosant to people it never dreamed it would have to include. It is for that very reason that passionate proponents of both reforms, like Andrew Sullivan, have argued that they are fundamental to gays' achieving true equality and rising above the tier of second-class citizenship.

 

Strategically, one major concern is that trying to bring about such a radical reform by bypassing the legislative route will likely go the way of gays in the military. Some people may regard "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as a modest improvement, but in practical terms it made things worse: more gays are being kicked out than before it was implementing, and their expulsion is mandated by the law, not merely permitted. I think the backlash against gay marriage could dwarf that against gays in the military. It's also worth noting that it hasn't helped that all our allies have integrated gays into their militaries with no problems, any more than our being the only major industrialized country without a national health care system has caused us to create one. Like it or not, this nation goes as California goes, not as Canada goes, and California has gone the way of HMOs and refusing to recognize gay marriage.

 

On the other hand, California has also gone the way of otherwise embracing gay rights and could conceivably accept civil unions, which hard-core marriage proponents (and opponents) dismiss as "watered-down" marriage. The risk is that the backlash could take civil unions down along with gay marriage. But I couldn't really argue with anybody who said such fears should not be the driving force behind a gay rights movement.

 

Gay marriage is riddled with contradictions. It is the most radical of reforms, but it is also in some ways the most modest, since so few gays actually opt to marry in the few places that allow it. It's a right, like the right to serve in the military, that I suspect most gays instinctively support in principle, but far fewer actually want for themselves or expect to take advantage of. This is not necessarily due to a fear of relationships or pessimism about them but rather to different ways of approaching them, including, for example, a desire to experience multiple relationships over the course of one's lifetime rather than "one true everlasting love." Of course, if gay marriage became a reality that could change over time. Indeed, another argument advanced by gay conservatives like Sullivan is that gay marriage has the potential to reform and domesticate gays by bringing our relationships more in line with heterosexual mores. Many of us aren't so keen about this 'social engineering' aspect of the project and wonder about the extent to which it animates the passions of gay marriage proponents.

 

Where many gays and lesbians are probably most unanimous around the gay marriage issue is in the belief that we should not be excluded from the rights, tax advantageous and other benefits that the government extends to married people. This is why the idea of domestic partners' laws and civil unions holds appeal; one can say "I don't need society's approval or membership in an institution that doesn't want me; I just don't want the government to treat me differently as a result." Indeed, "separate but equal" doesn't sound so bad if allows us to get the legal recognition we need while allowing our own traditions to develop organically.

 

Again, it's not a matter of not believing gays should have the right to marry. It's the feeling that there are other battles which both face shorter odds and which could yield more widespread, practical benefits, and the lack of stomach for a fight that could cause us to lose ground rather than to gain it. That's my guess, anyway.

[woodlawn]

Is it really surprising that on a website devoted to making it easier to hire prostitutes one does not find a great many regular visitors who are interested in a relationship based on genuine emotion and commitment to another person?

[Guest Dan]

>Is it really surprising that on a website devoted to making

>it easier to hire prostitutes one does not find a great many

>regular visitors who are interested in a relationship based on

>genuine emotion and commitment to another person?

 

Woodlawn, I think you've pretty much hit the nail on the head with taht one!

 

 

Dan Dare

http://meetlocalmen.com/mlm/dandarela.html :-)