While I would agree that legally entangling oneself to another person seems to be the opposite of liberating I think the ability to do so is, in fact, liberating.Originally Posted by bae
While I would agree that legally entangling oneself to another person seems to be the opposite of liberating I think the ability to do so is, in fact, liberating.
Setting "marriage" as the goalpost for queer progress I think is a mistake. It's assimilation into an oppressive patriarchal and racist system, a system in which queers will always be marginalized.
It's like saying "Jews are now allowed to go to Catholic Church, as long as they behave like Catholics and cease bothering us with their odd ways".
http://www.againstequality.org/stuff...-gay-marriage/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...queer-critique
It's like saying "Jews are now allowed to go to Catholic Church, as long as they behave like Catholics and cease bothering us with their odd ways".
They tried something like that in Spain. It didn't end particularly well.
Per the first article, I'm "queer" because I haven't embraced societal norms re marriage, etc. That's a new perspective.
You might enjoy this, Jane:
KCLS has it in electronic format, and I'm in queue. Thanks!
I've got the book on reserve at the library. It's not being used so I should have it by this weekend.
That said, my first thoughts are 1) most LGBTQ people aren't that radical. 2) change is hard. Getting society to make a massive change like deserting marriage is not likely to happen in my lifetime (although who knows. Getting society to agree that gay people should be allowed to get married was not something I expected to happen in my lifetime). 3) if/when SO is suffering his finally illness (given his health history I expect I will have to deal with this) I hope his next older sister has absolutely no say in his medical treatment. She tried to convince their very ill father to start having more pointless blood transfusions because she couldn't accept his decision to die. It'll be tough enough to deal with her desire but if she actually has power to make that desire happen if/when SO is at that point I'll be devastated because I know that's not what he would want. For better or worse marriage mostly prevents that from happening.
marriage has mostly been unappealing to me as a woman, a few thousand years of patriarchy will do that I guess.
Trees don't grow on money
As a resident of South Bend, I would like to say, don't believe the hype. If you want a good paying job, you drive to Elkhart. I've watched this town go from Maybery to Gothem. Our homeless shelter is so awesome, people come from all over to stay there. And they bring their drugs and crime with them. November of 2016 we had a tent city https://www.southbendtribune.com/new...007926c55.html under a bridge near the baseball stadium. If this is our idea of Progress, God Help this nation.
Likewise. The only advantage I could see was that I'd probably have a nicer house.
Really good marriages can be transcendent--uplifting and transforming for both parties--but I haven't seen many of those.
Word is, marriage is less and less popular among Millennials; certainly reproducing is.
I keep hearing people use the word “adulting” as if growing up was optional.
Marriage, faith, family, career and even friendship exceeding the acquaintance level seem to be not worth the effort and risk it takes. I don’t see how so many people can refuse to invest in their own happiness without guaranteeing themselves a miserable life.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote