4
THE CHICAGO MAROON | VIEWPOINTS | November 19, 2013
Marriage is only the beginning Mainstream LGBTQ movement overlooks other important issues in emphasizing marriage equality Kris Rosentel Viewpoints Contributor On Tuesday, November 5, the Illinois legislature passed a bill legalizing same-gender marriages. After its passage, I was bombarded with celebratory and supportive responses from many of my progressive, straight, cisgender friends: “Have you heard the good news?” “I’m so happy for you!” “It’s about time!” “Your gay wedding will be so classy.” These friends are under the impression that marriage equality is the sole solution—a happy ending—to LGBTQ oppression and thus that I, as a member of that community, would be overjoyed with the passage of this bill. But here’s the deal: I’m a queer man who doesn’t support the marriage equality movement. I do think same-gender couples should be treated equally under the law. I also think they should have access to many of
the benefits that come with marriage. And who knows, perhaps I’ll even get married someday in order to take advantage of those benefits. However, what I mainly take issue with is the mainstream gay movement’s approach to marriage equality advocacy. This movement, which is largely led by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), has adopted a strategy that idolizes normative family models within the institution of marriage, ignoring non–marriage equality LGBTQ issues and pushing the most marginalized groups within the LGBTQ community further to the fringes. A quick look at the HRC, Lambda Legal, and other mainstream gay organizations’ websites makes the idolization of traditional family structures obvious: They generally feature photos of well-dressed couples, often with children, holding hands or with their arms around each other, paired with rhetoric
Vulnerability can be seen as failure here PRETEND continued from page 3 wise things get too real. We get so close to the edge of vocalizing these shared feelings, but we always back away, because it’s too scary to admit that we’re scared, and because we can’t commiserate over them together, they’re all the more terrifying to deal with in this false sense of isolation. Even though I am privileged to have these four years of my life to figure things out, and even though college is the time to be confused and directionless, I still feel like I can’t allow myself that time in the face of the overwhelming pressure to perform all the rituals of maturity, despite the fact that they lack any substance. In the end, though, it’s useless— the result is not the appearance of adulthood, but rather that of a child lugging her mother’s briefcase. And because everyone seems to be attempting these same rituals—in many cases more successfully—even attempting to create a space for vulnerability feels like a failure when I’m trying so hard to do well in school, set myself up for a job after graduation, and measure up to those who seem to effortlessly have everything figured out. So I keep chugging on, comparing inner feelings of inadequacy to the outward appearance of others’ success, inevitably coming up short every time. Clair Fuller is a second-year in the College majoring in gender and sexuality studies.
SUBMISSIONS The Chicago Maroon welcomes opinions and responses from its readers. Send op-ed submissions and letters to: The Chicago Maroon attn: Viewpoints 1212 East 59th Street Chicago, IL 60637 E-mail: Viewpoints@ChicagoMaroon. com The editors reserve the right to edit materials for clarity and space. Letters to the editor should be limited to 400 words. Op-ed submissions, 800 words.
focused on love and care giving. Through this depiction, these organizations are creating a new gay ideal: upper-middle-class, loving, monogamous couples who keep their sex lives private. The creation of this ideal inherently leads to the stigmatization of alternative gay lifestyles. Promiscuity, overt sexuality, polyamory, and single life are all being shamed within the contexts of the gay community. In other words, the mainstream gay movement is forcing gay people to conform to heteronormative family structures in order to fit into a “we’re no different than straight people” narrative—a narrative that is generic and straitlaced enough to resonate with mass audiences while flying under the guise of progressivism. What may be even more troubling than this conformist pressure is the relative disregard of LGBTQ issues that are not related to marriage. These in-
clude high rates of homelessness among LGBTQ youth; the inaccessibility of existing resources such as HIV testing, counseling, and LGBTQ social groups to people of color and/or lowincome status; lack of adequate and accessible health care for both HIV-positive people and trans* people; strict immigration policy that makes it difficult for LGBTQ people to leave behind persecution in their home countries; the rarity of gender-neutral bathroom options; and high levels of violence against LGBTQ inmates, especially trans* inmates, within the prison system. The HRC and other mainstream LGBTQ organizations perpetuate the myth that these issues will be solved when marriage equality is achieved because benefits will be accessible through marriage and homophobia will be eradicated. This argument is flawed on many levels. First, it overlooks the fact that marriage
equality will do nothing for single LGBTQ people and that many of these issues, including LGBTQ youth homelessness and prison violence, are hardly addressed by marriage benefits. Second, it suggests that acceptance of gay people will trickle down from state recognition of same-gender marriage and that people will thereby stop being homophobic. This makes about as much sense as saying that Roe v. Wade would end misogyny or that the Civil Rights Act would end racism. Furthermore, in a manner typical of the mainstream LGBTQ agenda, this argument doesn’t even address transphobia. Along with the disregard for many such LGBTQ issues by the marriage-centric movement comes the further marginalization of trans* people, bisexual people, people of color, and people of low-income status. Examples of this abound—for instance, last spring, during the De-
fense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Proposition 8 hearings, an HRC staffer asked a man to remove his transgender pride flag from a marriage equality rally because it did not “coincide with the message of the demonstration.” In a similar vein, the HRC recently asked a Latino speaker at a marriage equality rally to avoid discussing his experiences as an undocumented worker because it didn’t want to complicate the narrative. By silencing voices and hiding identities, the mainstream movement at best tokenizes minority groups and at worst ignores them entirely. The LGBTQ community is about much more than the fairy tale weddings of Neil Patrick Harris and Ellen DeGeneres. It’s about time we started acting like it. Kris Rosentel is a secondyear in the College majoring in gender and sexuality studies and public policy.
“Efforts to combat rape culture are swamped by this negative view...” LIPS continued from page 3 proving of my choice of fit, what impact are my skin-tight jeans really having on your existence? Perhaps the most important bit and the one I’m most concerned about: Isn’t this judgment pressure for me to cover up and conform to a traditional set of morals just as insidious and prejudiced as the pressure for you to show some skin? At the end of the day, this whole debate is about choices, both yours and mine, and our right to make them on our own. Everybody has a right to choose their beliefs, what they wear, and when to leave a frat party. Or not leave. Or not believe. And that’s totally fine. Recognizing that a situation is not in accordance with your own morality and having the courage to pull yourself out of it are hugely commendable. But condemning me for not sharing that view and for wearing spandex? That’s not commendable. That’s judgmental and intolerant and a huge part of the reason we as a community
have such a hard time having a real discussion about real issues facing our population. Efforts to combat rape culture are swamped by this negative view of other students and religious radicalism grows out of this intolerance. A toxic environment is developing and I don’t want to be a part of it. Let me take a moment and place a caveat on this whole diatribe: This is in no way meant to excuse genuinely offensive behavior. There’s no place for prejudice and hatred. Things that do have a tangible effect and violate a person’s right to choose her own lifestyle are exempt from the rant in which I’m engaging. That type of behavior violates the contract of mutual respect for which I’m vouching. Why is my body suddenly a political arena, even when there isn’t an externality to my choice of leggings? In this respect I agree with Katz’s point: We all experience that feeling at some point. And it’s absurd. But doesn’t condemning and judging the spandex-rocking population in
her article only exacerbate the issue? Respect my right to wear spandex and hook up and I’ll respect your right to wear a more conservative skirt. Allow me to make my choices. No one has to participate with me, but I must be given the opportunity to choose my own lifestyle. This is a community that fosters open discourse and discussion—there’s no room for condemnation of a lifestyle choice that inflicts no harm on others. This is a community of acceptance and respect. I’m not asking for your stamp of approval. No stamps needed here. Stick to your guns. Stand up for yourself. But I am asking for you to respect me enough to let me do the same, and to let me live my life. Do not condemn the quality of my being based on the choices I make that don’t affect you. Let me rock my crop top, please and thank you. Haleigh Miller is a second-year in the College majoring in public policy.