Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT Cmty - TennisForum.com

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 17th, 2015, 01:19 AM Thread Starter
country flag pov
Senior Member
 
pov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 25,427
                     
Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT Cmty

https://www.vice.com/read/some-on-th...gbtq-community



Given the euphoria that swept across America's LGBTQ community—and throughout the world—after the US Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage from coast to coast last June, you'd think every queer person in the universe couldn't wait to prance down the aisle and tie the knot. And in Canada, the entire issue seems a bit, well, passe, given that we've had legal same-sex marriages for over a decade.

But some queers have expressed ambivalence, and even some irritation, about quite so much political and financial energy being channelled into the long, drawn-out fight to legalize such unions. Marriage, they point out, has a long and problematic legal history, one that includes the notion of a wife being akin to property, not to mention the exclusion of interracial marriages.

And as we're seeing with the arrest and subsequent release of Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refused to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and to the ongoing fight for legal recognition of same-sex marriages in Australia (not to mention much of the rest of the world), the issue is far from over.

Ryan Conrad is an activist, author, and doctoral student at Montreal's Concordia University who has written and lectured extensively on the topic, expressing his philosophical and practical reasons for sober second thoughts about that rush to the altar. As he points out, the benefits many are looking for as a result of getting wed are ones that should simply be universal rights. Along with his cohorts at the Against Equality Collective, Conrad has published a number of books challenging libleft gay orthodoxy, including the 2011 volume Queer Critiques of Gay Marriage. Conrad spoke to VICE from his Montreal Plateau apartment.

VICE: There's been a lot of euphoria about the US Supreme Court decision of the summer regarding same-sex marriage. Is the issue behind us?
Ryan Conrad: Well I guess that depends on what you think the issue is. Is the issue making sure that all people regardless of what configuration their family takes have the legal protections necessary to maintain their safety and well-being? Then no, certainly not. If the issue is simply giving same-sex couples access to a deeply inequitable institution that gives benefits to some conjugal couples, primarily those with some form of wealth or property, and penalizes single people and other conjugal couples, particularly those who are disabled and/or on some sort of state benefits (what little still exists in the US), then yes. That has been achieved. But to be clear, while gay marriage activists have been claiming to be fighting for "ALL FAMILIES" they have in fact only been fighting for families that look exactly like the ideal of straight family—an intimate, couple-led household with a few kids. Everyone else can basically go fuck themselves under the current family law regime in the US.

You have argued these extensive legal struggles have actually hurt progress for LGBTQ people...

Again, this all depends on what you consider progress and the LGBT marriage maniacs are not all that interested in thinking critically about what "progress" or "equality" actually means. With gay marriage now the law of the land it has only reinforced the logic that all people should be meeting their needs through the family unit. One need look no further than the outpouring of conservative and corporate support of gay marriage in the pages of Bloomberg, The New York Times, or The Wall Street Journal, where corporate analysts touted gay marriage as a way to get more people off welfare and into so-called "stable" and "respectable" families, all of which is good for business. So this newly retrenched ideology of family throws non-traditional families under the bus—from single parents to polyamorous folks, from adult children who have a live-in elderly parent to blended family households. Not to mention the psychological effect of the monolithic gay marriage campaigns on young queer people who are now subjected to the expectation and pressure to marry. The campaigns for gay marriage have essentially put forth the image that getting married is the way to have a healthy relationship and to be successful and respectable. Let's be real, that isn't going to work out for most people, gay or straight, if divorce rates are any indication—and I'm waiting to see what the fallout will be in the coming years.

You also make the argument that tons of money has been pumped into these legal struggles.

A lot of money has been squandered on these gay marriage campaigns and I think there are growing numbers of people that are sympathetic to this critique. The Human Rights Campaign being the largest and most well-funded nonprofit (quite the misnomer at this point) is hand-in-hand with big business, with their current president making nearly a half million dollars a year in salary. But I worry that focusing just on the disproportionate amount of money spent on gay marriage campaigns and the budgets of these so-called nonprofits that are circulating all this money gets marriage itself as a political goal off the hook. It seems more and more people are able to see gay marriage as maybe not the best priority at this moment, which I generally agree with, but marriage in itself is still a bad goal. Most of us on the queer left want to see an end to marriage privilege and fight for a world where marital status does not impact one's ability to protect their family, access social safety nets, cross national borders, access health insurance, etc. None of these things should be tied to marriage, they should come with our existence as people on this earth much like Chrys Ingraham was arguing well before gay marriage was legalized. And I'm not just some crazy wingnut saying this, so did the Law Commission of Canada and queer feminist family law scholars like Nancy Polikoff and Nicola Barker amongst many others.


Do you understand how some gay people see this as gaining full acceptance from a society?

Sure, but if society is garbage, then full acceptance doesn't mean much, right? As activist and writer Mattilda Bernstein Sycamore asks, "When did our dreams get so small?"

When you lecture about these issues, do people get angry with you? Some people feel very strongly about these battles and victories.

Yasmin Nair and I received death threats on social media because of our work with Against Equality in 2010. Funnily enough, it's not homophobic right-wing Christians that want us dead, but liberal LGBTs. A lot of people take our critique of marriage very personally, as if any of us from the AE collective actually has the time or energy to care about what people do on a personal level. None of us really care about people's personal decisions regarding marriage and love. What we care about is the structural dimension of how these decisions give people access to certain cultural institutions and with that, access to things like economic benefits, healthcare, and immigration. Simply telling people to not get gay-married if they don't like it is idiotic when marriage is the only way to access family law that provides economic and emotional well-being for a family. So no, this isn't about you and your sweatshop-made wedding dresses and blood diamond engagement rings, but about the political and economic context in which your marriage exists. It's why I collaborated with my friend Alexandra Silverthorne on the satirical photo series where I smash up a fictitious gay wedding. People take this critique so personally so I thought I would poke fun at this assumption by giving myself a gay marriage terrorist makeover.

You are in some cases aligned with people who oppose same-sex marriage basically out of homophobia. Does that make you squirm?
The either/or-ness of your question sounds a bit like George W. Bush's "you're either with us or with the terrorists." This kind of comment, which we've heard often, works to disarm any criticism from the left and put a chill on dissent. But this accusation is actually quite humorous to me as well. Against Equality and myself are the religious right's worst nightmares as we do indeed wish to destroy the ideology of family and the State as we know it. So to put us in the same boat with right-wingers, or to suggest that we have internalized homophobia to deal with as some have suggested, doesn't really make sense. Unlike radical feminists of yesteryear who opposed pornography and worked hand in hand with the religious right to criminalize it and present day abolitionist feminists who work with religious fundamentalists to ruin the lives of sex workers, we make no such opportunistic alliances.

Don't you ever want to settle down with a sweet guy, eat crow about what you've said, and exchange rings, then spend your weekends at IKEA and the fruit and vegetable market in between gardening your perfectly-manicured yard?
What I want for my personal life is rather irrelevant. I've been trying to make it clear that my critique and the critiques that many others on the queer left make are about structural inequity rather than personal choices. Plus, if I was ever going to get legally married I'd used it to support a non-status refugee to get their papers, nothing else.

Even if the guy proposing to you is Zac Efron?

What homo doesn't want to pound that fuzzy lil' muscle butt? But marriage? No thanks!



Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
- Martin Luther King, Jr.

Last edited by pov; Sep 17th, 2015 at 01:13 PM.
pov is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 17th, 2015, 01:04 PM
Senior Member
 
So Disrespectful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,244
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT Commu

He should celebrate this victory, and by all means, then lobby for changes to those perceived injustices and/or shortcomings of the US legal system. Holding a grudge against those who have been awarded the basic civil rights they've been fighting for is not a way of moving forward.

"Simply telling people to not get gay-married if they don't like it is idiotic when marriage is the only way to access family law that provides economic and emotional well-being for a family."

Not in my books. How does denying gay couples social welfare, benefit other conjugal and/or single outliers? And perhaps I'm a traditionalist, but I don't see exactly what kind of family model he's pushing for. It would be foolish to argue that children don't benefit from stability.

Daniela Hantuchova.

Casey Dellacqua, Jelena Jankovic, Anna-Lena Groenefeld,
Jelena Dokic, Mirjana Lucic, Sara Tomic, Sloane Stephens
Jarmila Gajdosova, Melanie Oudin, Kaia Kanepi, Alison Riske
So Disrespectful is offline  
post #3 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 17th, 2015, 02:30 PM Thread Starter
country flag pov
Senior Member
 
pov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 25,427
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT Commu

Quote:
Originally Posted by So Disrespectful View Post
He should celebrate this victory, and by all means, then lobby for changes to those perceived injustices and/or shortcomings of the US legal system.
[--]
I think you miss the point. YIn fact, given your comments about family and family-law, I'm certain you do. If you want to get it you can follow the link and read more but a quick summation is that the notions of family you refer to are ones doled out by and codified by the state.

Hmm . .then again I'm now thinking you didn't even read the interview:
Quote:
If the issue is simply giving same-sex couples access to a deeply inequitable institution that gives benefits to some conjugal couples, primarily those with some form of wealth or property, and penalizes single people and other conjugal couples, particularly those who are disabled and/or on some sort of state benefits (what little still exists in the US), then yes. That has been achieved.



Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
pov is offline  
post #4 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 17th, 2015, 03:45 PM
-LIFETIME MEMBER-
 
fufuqifuqishahah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 16,737
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT C

To me, gay marriage has always been an intermediate step to greater acceptance, freedom, and rights

Even though society moves quickly in comparison to before, it is still quite slow.

fufuqifuqishahah is offline  
post #5 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 17th, 2015, 03:56 PM
Senior Member
 
So Disrespectful's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,244
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT Commu

Quote:
Originally Posted by pov View Post
I think you miss the point. YIn fact, given your comments about family and family-law, I'm certain you do. If you want to get it you can follow the link and read more but a quick summation is that the notions of family you refer to are ones doled out by and codified by the state.

Hmm . .then again I'm now thinking you didn't even read the interview:
No, I did read this and I stand by my original point.

Conrad derides same-sex marriage campaigning as an unnecessary pressure or expectation on young homosexuals to settle down in monogamous relationships. Then he insists that structural inequity is the reason for his criticism; that none of "the AE collective actually has the time or energy to care about what people do on a personal level". Why even bring up the subject of divorce then? If he fears same-sex couples will marry due to societal pressure, rather than to gain access to those benefits he raves on about, what does that say about the benefits?

He has a gripe with the system of spousal privilege, yet I fail to see how placing an additional minority under that umbrella of privilege will oppress the outliers any further. For instance, Conrad's colleague, Yasmin Nair argues the point that true equality is allowing people to pass social security benefits on to their best friend. I completely disagree, but even if I didn't, it's extraneous to the gay marriage debate.

My point is, same-sex marriage shouldn't be treated as a contributory factor to singlism. As Olivero says in her essay, 'Yes on Proposition 8', "same-sex marriage is one step toward a broader social justice vision that democratizes access to key resources such as health care and social security beyond (gay or straight) nuptials.”

Daniela Hantuchova.

Casey Dellacqua, Jelena Jankovic, Anna-Lena Groenefeld,
Jelena Dokic, Mirjana Lucic, Sara Tomic, Sloane Stephens
Jarmila Gajdosova, Melanie Oudin, Kaia Kanepi, Alison Riske
So Disrespectful is offline  
post #6 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 17th, 2015, 10:06 PM
Senior Member
 
superstition's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,491
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT C

People like him don't understand the depth of the pair bond. I feel sorry for them.

At the same time, monogamy is pretty much 100% BS. We're jealous but we're not monogamous either.

Marriage is critically important but people also need to be seen as not monogamous. That will make marriages stronger not weaker.

Research shows that the pair bond is the deepest form of intimate non-familial (sibling, parent/child) relationship.
superstition is offline  
post #7 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 18th, 2015, 12:49 PM Thread Starter
country flag pov
Senior Member
 
pov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 25,427
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT C

Quote:
Originally Posted by fufuqifuqishahah View Post
To me, gay marriage has always been an intermediate step to greater acceptance, freedom, and rights
Many people see it that way. There is little doubt that the people who have the perspectives of the interviewee are a minority.



Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
pov is offline  
post #8 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 18th, 2015, 12:59 PM Thread Starter
country flag pov
Senior Member
 
pov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 25,427
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT C

Quote:
Originally Posted by superstition View Post
People like him don't understand the depth of the pair bond. I feel sorry for them.

At the same time, monogamy is pretty much 100% BS. We're jealous but we're not monogamous either.

Marriage is critically important but people also need to be seen as not monogamous. That will make marriages stronger not weaker.

Research shows that the pair bond is the deepest form of intimate non-familial (sibling, parent/child) relationship.
You're completely missing the point. The "pair bond" - which BTW is no better than the quartet bond - is one thing. Loving and making an intense commitment to be with a person is something that has always been available to any tow people. Taking marriage vows has always been available to any two people. What was not available was the legal benefits of a state certified contract.

The state-sanctioned and codified institution has nothing to do with bonding based on love. Sure the two ideally, and often do, overlap but they are completely different things. The institution of marriage grew out of state-sanctioned property rights.

Do you really think that every time two people love and want to be with each other they opt for signing a contract with the state?



Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
- Martin Luther King, Jr.
pov is offline  
post #9 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 18th, 2015, 06:53 PM
And Still I Rise...
 
Smite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 6,748
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT C

After reading the article, I can understand why he's single.

He's a pretentious ass that reeks of bitterness.

S.W | V.W

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf79 View Post
Azarenka is 2-0 against Venus in 2015 despite sticking to that game plan.
...completely forgetting she's 2-4 against Venus overall.
Smite is offline  
post #10 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 18th, 2015, 09:01 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Great Northwoods
Posts: 10,806
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT C

Quote:
Originally Posted by fufuqifuqishahah View Post
To me, gay marriage has always been an intermediate step to greater acceptance, freedom, and rights
It is to my too, although; while I completely understand gay people wanting the right to marry, I didn't think they'd be nuts enough to do it!

Seriously though, this guy sounds like the only thing that will ever make him happy is bitching.

"Fuck, fuck, fuck, fucking fuck, fuck, FUCK!" - Anastasia Myskina

"The noblest work of God? Man. Who found it out? Man." - Mark Twain

"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats." - H.L. Menken
meyerpl is offline  
post #11 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 18th, 2015, 09:06 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 9,004
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT C

Quote:
Given the euphoria that swept across America's LGBTQ community—and throughout the world—after the US Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage from coast to coast last June, you'd think every queer person in the universe couldn't wait to prance down the aisle and tie the knot.

For Dante, it follows then, that the only way to get into Hell is to insist upon it. One must deliberately exclude himself from grace by hardening his heart against it. Hell is what the damned have actively and insistently wished for.

The man that hath no music in himself, nor is not moved with concord of sweet sounds is fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils. The motions of his spirit are dull as night and his affections dark as Erebus. Let no such man be trusted. Shakespeare
HippityHop is offline  
post #12 of 12 (permalink) Old Sep 19th, 2015, 02:55 AM
Senior Member
 
superstition's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,491
                     
Re: Some Radical Queer Activists Still Think Same-Sex Marriage Is Bad for the LGBT C

Quote:
Originally Posted by pov View Post
You're completely missing the point. The "pair bond" - which BTW is no better than the quartet bond - is one thing.
Not according to the research.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pov View Post
The state-sanctioned and codified institution has nothing to do with bonding based on love. Sure the two ideally, and often do, overlap but they are completely different things. The institution of marriage grew out of state-sanctioned property rights.
Nope. Civil recognition strengthens the pair bond by making it more difficult to break it apart. And, obviously, not being denied that civil recognition because you're gay is important.
superstition is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

Registration Image

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome