[Greta Christina] I Do — And Why

As you all no doubt know unless you’ve been hiding under the blankets for the last week and a half, the California Supreme Court recently ruled that the ban on same-sex marriage violates the state Constitution. In a little less than a month, same-sex couples will be able to legally marry in California.

My partner and I are going to be one of those couples.

And I want to talk a little bit about why.

One of the questions that gets raised a lot when the subject of same-sex marriage comes up is, “Why is marriage so important? Why aren’t civil unions or domestic partnerships good enough?”

The usual answers are practical ones. And I’ll certainly second them. Marriage is recognized around the country and around the world, and all its practical and legal rights and responsibilities get carried with you everywhere you go . . . in a way that is most emphatically not true for civil unions and domestic partnerships. Besides, it’s a well- established principle that “separate but equal” is inherently not equal. The very act of saying, “No, you can’t have this thing that everyone else can have, but you can have that other thing we created just for you that’s almost exactly like it — isn’t that special?” It’s the creation of second-class status, pretty much by definition.

But I want to talk about something else today. I don’t want to talk about the legal and practical benefits of marriage. I don’t want to talk about hospital visitation rights, child custody rights, inheritance rights, tax benefits, all that good stuff. That’s all important, but it’s also well-covered ground.

I want to talk about something more intangible. I want to talk about why we’re getting married . . . apart from all that.

Marriage is an unbelievably old human institution and human ritual. My parents did it. My grandparents did it. My great-grandparents did it, and theirs, and theirs. The word and the concept carry a weight, a gravitas, intense and complex social and emotional associations, from centuries and millennia of people participating in it. And as far as I know (admittedly my anthropology is a bit weak), it’s existed in one form or another in almost every human society, in almost every period of human history. There may be exceptions, but I don’t offhand know of any. Getting married means being a link in a chain, taking part in a ritual that’s central to human history and society.

Yes, much of that history and many of those associations are awful. Sexist, propertarian, oppressive. But the evolution of the institution from its complicated and often terrible history into what it is today is part of what gives it its weight. The history of marriage, and its growth away from ownership and towards equal partnership, is the history of the human race’s maturation. Participating in it means participating, not just in the history and the ritual, but in its growth and change.

Civil unions and domestic partnerships just don’t have that.

Let’s look at the recent Supreme Court ruling in California. Let’s look at what it won’t change for my partner and me . . . and what it will.

On a day- to- day level, it probably won’t change much. We’re domestic partners, and California domestic partnership does afford most of the legal rights and responsibilities that marriage offers. Within the state, anyway. As long as we stay in the state, not much changes in any practical sense.

And I doubt that much will change between her and me. We had a commitment ceremony two and a half years ago: a joyful, exuberant, larger- than- we’d expected celebration that we spent many months planning. That ceremony and celebration, and everything we went through to make it happen, did change our relationship, profoundly, and very much for the better. I doubt that our legal wedding in June will have anywhere near that same impact on how we feel about each other.

But it will almost certainly change how we feel about society, and our place in it. And it will change — officially — how society feels about us.

When we get married in June, the State of California will officially recognize that our relationship has the same weight as our parents’ did, and their parents’, and theirs. It will officially drop this “separate but equal” bullshit. It will officially stop seeing us as kids at the little table, poor relatives who should be content with leavings and scraps, second-class citizens. It will officially see us as actual, complete, honest- to- gosh citizens.

Now.

Look at the patchwork of laws around this country regarding same-sex marriage. Look at the states that have banned it, and the ones that have gone so far as to ban the recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other states. Look at the fact that if my partner and I travel to Alabama or Michigan, Alaska or Pennsylvania, or any of over two dozen other states, our marriage will be seen as not having existed at all. Null. Void. Look at the Defense of Marriage Act, passed by Congress and signed by President William Jefferson Clinton in 1996, stating that the Federal government will not recognize same-sex marriages, even if they’re completely legal in the state where they were performed.

What does that tell you about how those states, and the country as a whole, sees us?

That’s the weird paradox of the California ruling. It’s thrilling. It’s unbelievably great news. It’s a huge historical step. But at the same time, it throws the true meaning of this legal patchwork into sharp focus. It makes it that much clearer that queers in this country are, in a very literal sense, second-class citizens. We pay taxes, we serve on juries, we have to obey the same laws that everyone else does . . . but in a very practical, codified- into- law sense, we just don’t count for as much.

Legalizing same-sex marriage isn’t just about the legal and practical recognition of our love and our partnership. It’s about social recognition. It’s about being seen as a full member of society. Kudos for the California Supreme Court for understanding that. Let’s hope the rest of the country figures it out eventually.

Important note: As powerful and historic as this step is, it could be undone. In November, there will almost certainly be an initiative on the California ballot, asking voters to amend the state Constitution and ban same-sex marriage. If you think this issue and this movement are important, please consider supporting Equality California.

This entry was posted on Friday, 23 May 2008 at 12:00 am and is filed under Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.


6 Comments so far

  1. Let me just say, as a straight male resident of *gulp* Alabama… I cannot be more embarrassed of our horrible laws. And I apologize on behalf of our ass-backwards legislation. I will never understand why this is such a big deal. I live up north, in Huntsville, one of the two blue patches in the state, and, while it’s better than the rest of the state, it’s still thoroughly disgusting at times.

  2. I completely agree. Personally, I am against marriage for many of the reasons mentioned here involving the history. I’m also against the legal patchwork of marriage, whether it’s allowed for all or just some. Different places get different rights and responsibilities and NO ONE seems to even know what all those rights and responsibilities are. Plus, I’m against giving “benefits” that only a certain part of the population qualifies for - being single, my partner doesn’t get to visit me in the hospital simply because we haven’t gotten married yet?

    But, aside from that, I whole-heartily support same-sex marriage because of these very points. Marriage is a significant part of our traditions, our history, our culture. And whatever rights citizens are granted in any given culture, those rights should be granted to ALL citizens. Separate but equal is not equal and we already learned this lesson. More than once. But, apparently, the Republican party (yes, I know, some Republicans are not representative of the rest of the party - relax) and the fundies have never cracked a history or an anthropology book in their lives.

    Personally, I want to see the whole marriage deal re-written from scratch. But since that’s not going to happen, I support anyone wanting to get married for the very simple concept that you are just as much a human being and a citizen of this country as anyone else.

    ~Joreth
    www.theinnbetween.net
    http://joreth.livejournal.com

  3. I wouldn’t worry too much about how “the country as a whole sees us.” The legislators responsible for DOMA (and the generals in favor of DADT) are more homophobic than the general population…which itself is slowly trending in the right direction.

    It’s not complacency to note that the backlash against LGBT rights is diminishing over time. I wouldn’t have been this optimistic a decade ago, but marriage equality is all-but-inevitable on a national level in our lifetimes. (We’ll still have to work for it, though!)

  4. As as Brit, I hope the example of California influences our own legislators. Several members of our governent are in same-sex relationships, so maybe change will come sooner rather than later.

    Oh, and will your wedding involve a nice big cake? Somehow that seems important…

  5. yes yes, we must have cake!

  6. […] Congratulations George and Brad, and everyone else (including our very own Greta Christina!) who is getting married today or soon! […]

Have your say

Fields in bold are required. Email addresses are never published or distributed.

Some HTML code is allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
URIs must be fully qualified (eg: http://www.domainname.com) and all tags must be properly closed.

Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted.

Please keep comments relevant. Off-topic, offensive or inappropriate comments will be edited or removed.

  1. Champion is, well, the Champion!

    Champion

    We're ecstatic that Champion, Shine Louise Houston's groundbreaking release from Blowfish Video, won Movie of the Year at the 2009 Feminist Porn Awards! Thanks to the organizers of the awards, and congratulations to Shine!


  2. Recent Posts

    1. [Greta Christina] Porn, Relationships, and What It’s Reasonable to Ask For
    2. [Greta Christina] Is Monogamy Fair?
    3. [Greta Christina] Can Watching Porn Be Cheating?
    4. [Greta Christina] No-Strings Sex, Disappointing Love, and Asking the Wrong Questions
    5. [Greta Christina] My Sexual Resolutions
    6. [Greta Christina] All Boy-Boy Action
    7. [Greta Christina] Why Did Gayness Evolve?
    8. [Greta Christina] The Case of the Missing Bisexual
    9. [Greta Christina] Tears
    10. [Greta Christina] The Learned Fetish

  3. Search the Blog


Close
E-mail It