Opinions

[aishah]

to me, states' rights issue essentially means separate but unequal. either they are rights we should have or they are not. if you look at the civil rights movement, in terms of laws actually being enforced, people's rights were not ensured until it was treated as a federal issue.

too tired to deal with the rest right now - bed night.

[Cin]

I don't believe federally recognized marriage for same sex couples means equality for queers.

I don't believe legislation giving me the right to marry whom I choose makes homosexuality acceptable in the eyes of Mr. & Mrs. Straight America.

I don't believe gay marriage will change society's belief there exists only two sexes and two genders and that even within that extremely tight structure there will continue to be no mix and match.

I don't believe winning the battle for gay marriage federally will somehow increase in numbers or in enthusiasm those kinds of queers who believe the best course to achieving equality is to tip toe quietly, blend in as best you can and attract as little attention as possible and who blame the rest of us for the hold up. I think you either are that or you are not that.

I don't believe that there is a danger of being mainstreamed or normalized or a purposeful goal by a certain segment of the queer population to mainstream or normalize that is in any way meaningful enough that I want to give up the opportunity to receive the immigration freedoms and social security benefits that federally sanctioned marriage will allow (and the 1000 other benefits).

I don't believe federal marriage equality reifies or has an affect whatsoever on existing oppressive structures in our society. Oppressive structures in our society are already as real and concrete as they can get. My gaining the right to federally sanctioned marriage will not affect that.

I don't believe a push for gay marriage is a push for the idea of a “normalized” gay person.

I don't believe a desire for marriage equality or a desire to marry is heteronormative or will set up a dichotomy of “good queers”/”bad queers” or will align me with the mainstream lgbtq movement in general or with their attempts to say “we’re just like middle/upper class white straight families.

I don't believe that I have anything in common with middle/upper class white families be they straight or gay, period, whether or not federal marriage for same sex couples ever happens. Or that I ever have to in order to enjoy the benefits of federally sanctioned marriage.

I don't believe that mainstream movements of any type are going to help me or queers like me (or people like me in regards to mainstream movements not of the queer variety) except by accident or by incidental and unavoidable trickling down. It would not be anyone’s goal in a mainstream movement, even a mainstream movement for and about marginalized people to help the most marginalized of its people. Once a movement achieves mainstream status it’s probably sold its soul to the devil for the privilege and it’s time to find another movement. However this will not stop me from enjoying any human or civil rights they win for their mainstream queers.

I don't believe any politician ever has as his/her goal to help the least powerful in society. Again though I will enjoy any rights they get standing up for or next to the marginally powerful movement in my group of marginalized people.

I especially don't believe that human or civil rights won today won’t have to be fought for and won again. I need only to look at the current attack on women’s reproductive rights happening in the US today to have that underscored emphatically.

I do believe that there is interconnectedness to achieving equality. Any gain clicks another piece in place. And while it is certainly not desirous, necessary or even really possible for everyone to become mainstream nor is it acceptable to be defined or valued by one’s ability to closely resemble society’s definition of normal, there is a benefit to gaining any human or civil right that will, above and beyond any trickle down effect, bring a group of individuals closer to being seen as people deserving of basic human and civil rights (which is different from being seen as mainstream or normal). It will also shine a light on the reality that one segment of society is without the basic human and civil rights most take for granted.

I also believe that the fundamental inequality inherent in our societal structures makes me closer in class and in political purpose to a poor straight person than it does to a middle class queer.

[BullDog]

The more I think of same sex marriage supposedly being a class issue the less it makes sense to me. This isn't just in response to things aishah has said because I have heard it outside of BFP too.

Let's say you have a wealthy gay male couple and a poor lesbian couple. Who do you think needs legal protection for their relationship more?

The wealthy couple can hire attorneys, tax accountants, financial planners, estate planners etc etc. What sort of access does the poor couple have?

[Cin]

Originally Posted by BullDog

The more I think of same sex marriage supposedly being a class issue the less it makes sense to me. This isn't just in response to things aishah has said because I have heard it outside of BFP too.

Let's say you have a wealthy gay male couple and a poor lesbian couple. Who do you think needs legal protection for their relationship more?

The wealthy couple can hire attorneys, tax accountants, financial planners, estate planners etc etc. What sort of access does the poor couple have?

You know that's exactly what I was thinking but I feel like I must be missing something. And as a poor, definitively marginalized, quite the opposite of mainstream, butch woman who has never been confused with a middle/upper class white queer, I keep trying to understand what I am missing. Growing up how I did and being poor all my life I usually grasp stuff like this but I'm not seeing how marriage equality whether or not it is an over emphasized and over valued issue can be anything but a good thing for me. Plus it opens up coming back to the US as an option.

[BullDog]

I certainly get that white and middle class issues often dominate and others have to continue to fight to be heard and have their issues part of the movement as well. We only have to look to feminism to clearly see that.

However the way same sex marriage is described as a white, middle class issue truly makes no sense to me. As Cheryl said, what about low income people who lose their partner and then don't have access to social security benefits that a heterosexual would have?

[Cin]

And for same sex marriage to have any benefit for me personally it has to be federal. Yet I see each victory in each state as a stepping stone.

Maybe it is to some degree an age thing. I've seen so much change that I never even imagined I would that I probably don't have the same kinds of expectations as someone from a generation that grew up hearing queer and rights in the same sentence. I think the shape of the hate and prejudice you experience twists your expectations. When I was a teenager I thought it was a great weekend if I escaped getting the shit kicked out of me at some bar by some fun loving dudes who thought it was a big joke to call me little man and play hacky sack with my head. Not that stuff like that still doesn't happen it's just a bit of a different climate today. I never imagined I would get to marry the woman I loved. I want my basic human and civil rights too, but I'm prepared for it not to be an express ride.

[aishah]

i don't expect it to be an express ride, either - i don't know any younger (or for that matter older - 40-50+) activists (at least in the communities i am part of) who do. most of us have experienced hate and prejudice (not to mention loss of jobs, loss of loved ones, violence against loved ones, violence against us, etc.). i respect that it was much harder decades ago. but most of us know this shit is still hard.

i don't believe marriage itself is solely a white, middle-class issue. i do believe white, middle-class folks dominate the conversation (at least in the u.s.) and that that is part of why marriage is the single issue. and part of the media piece is projecting an assimilationist/mainstreamed idea of what queer is (usually white, middle-class, and monogamous), and i think that does some harm to the rest of us in terms of marginalizing us further (regardless of whether we have legal protection for our marriages).