Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow
I’m not fighting for access to marriage, and I wish that wasn’t where the gay rights movement was putting most of its effort and resources. (Violence, housing, employment, education, anyone?) But (with apologies to Groucho Marx), if someone is trying to keep me out of this club, I want in. How dare anyone say that I don’t deserve access to marriage and all it brings? How dare they say I, and my relationships, aren’t good enough?
I’d just prefer that LGBTQ people be recognized and accepted for being human beings, period. And that all human beings, regardless of relationship status, are assured their rights. That’s why I’m not celebrating the president’s “evolution.”
|
I agree mostly with the author. I don't think the drive for marriage equality in the US is particularly healthy or productive as far as gaining equality for all queer people and the diversity of struggles we continue to face globally. In Canada and other nations around the world, same-sex marriage has been legal for some years now. The consequence is that all those who were all "ra-ra gay rights" when marriage equality was by and large the only issue anyone put on the table, all went away once marriage equality had been achieved. These are mostly white, able-bodied, normative well off gays and lesbians who fit/want the picket fence ideal. And so discrimination and violence against queer people of colour, working class or homeless queer people, queer people with disabilities etc. get completely ignored. The movement really has learned very little from the mistakes of second wave feminism and its white middle class-centrism.
So in the context of the US president's support for gay marriage...I think it's a non-issue. If he supports equality for all American citizens, then it should have been assumed that he supports gay marriage. But at the same time, I wouldn't say its out of the blue either. Even before he was elected he had expressed support for same-sex marriage, and throughout his time as the American president he's repealed DADT...so I don't think he's necessarily changing his opinions for election purposes. He seems to be expressing something he's always been fairly open about. So as I said above...seems like a non-issue only made an issue by normative gays who have a very simple perspective of what queer rights mean and who it encompasses, and by religious fundies who freak out and cry Armageddon every time a politician speaks out against homophobia, anti-woman attitudes or racism.