Well, this is a disaster.

[rm]

I joke, a lot, that no one wants to be famous or successful because they're well-adjusted. "None of us, you know, got enough love in our childhoods," I say.

I just figured out why the whole fucking marriage equality makes me so completely aggravated and stressed despite the fact that I'm actually pretty conflicted on the role marriage has both in gay culture and in turning couples of any type from "people in love" into "people obsessed with shoulds." (Obviously this whole mess doesn't do poly and plural marriages any favors either, since one of the main arguments seems to be "we're just gay, we don't fuck dogs or have lots of wives" -- which hello, is two types of totally different Not Okay Statements to Have to Make rolled into one asinine sentence).

I should have been done losing popularity contests in eighth grade. We all should have been done holding in eight grade.

Fuck you, Maine

Fuck you, bigots.

I don't want to catastrophize here, but the Maine situation is scary. Because it allows the bigots to think they have momentum, to think they are right, to think that we are abominations. That's one of those very funny words until it's applied to you.

I'm very scared of the implications of this. I know what anti-gay violence looks like first hand, and I am very concerned we're about to have a lot of it, and not just in Maine. I'm very concerned about what happens after the Obama years, when the backlash puts the bigots back in office right at the top. I'm very scared of the hate crimes law getting repealed; of my gay friends who have been able to marry being in danger because they are down on government paper as officially gay.

If you think I'm paranoid, think back to most of the events leading into and happening during the Bush administration. Right, now if you had called any of that shit back during the Clinton years, people would have said you were paranoid and worse. Yeah... well.... shit.

Comments

[delchi.livejournal.com]

I don't want to paint the devil on the wall, but I do agree that this could be a catalyst for anti-gay violence. I hope that the recent victories in hate crime law will either prevent it, or put a quick stop to it should it start to happen.

What I don't understand is why these things are not challenged as a separation of church and state basis. At the heart of it marriage is a religious affair - and the state only got involved to make money off of the deal ( well ok that may be overly simplistic .... blood testing , registration , etc... ok ok but still ... ).

If the objection against gay marriage is based on religious belief ( and that's the majority of what I hear ) then it should be a matter of religion and not politics/voting. I think this could be a gateway for greater enforcement of separation of church and state. I personally do not want the laws I live under dictated by any one , or for that matter any religion.

Aside, when you say " people obsessed with shoulds " do you mean shoulds as in society says you should ( get married ) or should as in you should in order to secure legal rights ( living wills, property , etc ..) ?

I certainly do not think that my friends , and family-of-choice are abominations ... I think that people who use the legal system to forward their religious beliefs on others are the abominations.

[rm.livejournal.com]

I know a lot of pretty unhappy married people who got married because they should and then had kids or bought a house or whatever all because of "should" without thinking about their actual desires. So I think the fetishization of marriage in our culture is pretty toxic for everyone.

[annlarimer.livejournal.com]

Word. I know plenty of happily married people, but I've seen the damage that "should" can do, even in my own family.

Everybody should have the option to marry, but nobody should have to.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

I think that in order to make that a reality, we need to reverse the damage / expectations that both the media and society have put on people to marry. If we could get more people to unplug and think for themselves I think they would manage to do ok.

[annlarimer.livejournal.com]

What you said.

[blackbird-song.livejournal.com]

Exactly.

[delchi.livejournal.com]

Agreed. This is why I think it's wrong to force people into marriage in order to secure specific rights. Sure, there are ' civil unions ' b ut society in general does not push you towards those.

Also I think that the whole financial market around marriage is pretty disgusting. Starting with the whole DeBeers suggestion that the ring should cost " about 3 months salary ", all the way to people spending outrageous amounts of money on the ceremony, and then ending up living in a shoebox under a bridge.

[ciel-vert.livejournal.com]

This is why I think it's wrong to force people into marriage in order to secure specific rights.

This this this, a million times. And that is the root of the problem. :\

[violetisblue.livejournal.com]

I agree with all of this.

[brewsternorth.livejournal.com]

Also I think that the whole financial market around marriage is pretty disgusting.

That's definitely true.

[5251962.livejournal.com]

Again, agreed. The commenter above me nailed it- you're so right.

[cozzene.livejournal.com]

Perhaps someone will link to it--my Google-greatness is failing me right now--but I think that's part of the premise of the court case that has been filed that may go to the Supreme Court.

[rm.livejournal.com]

It's a case most people expect to fail. And honestly we're better off with the Supreme Court not taking it up than taking it and making an anti-gay ruling that it will take decades to undo.

[cozzene.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty optimistic after reading a lot about the attorneys as well as their argument. The lead attorney is a pitbull when it comes to fighting to keep gov't out of people's lives. He also seems to have quite the personal history of defending the underdog.

[l33tminion]

we're better off with the Supreme Court not taking it up than taking it and making an anti-gay ruling that it will take decades to undo

While I agree that it's possible a gay-marriage case reaching the court now would lead to the court ruling against, I don't necessarily buy that would slow overall progress more than not pushing such a case in the first place. I'm certainly not confident enough to tell someone who wants to be a plaintiff in such a case to not pursue every legal recourse available to them.