Back inna early 90’s, the big push to legitimize gays was the spin that we have all this expendable income and are therefore valuable in U.S. society. The pitfalls with that philosophy was that it wasn’t necessarily true across the board amongst all the gays, and I always wondered “So what? If I don’t have that expendable income, am I less of a person in U.S. society? Do I have to be a rich gay to be a more valued citizen?”
Similarly, today the push for gay legitimization is that we now marry just like everyone else and we can have and/or adopt babies too! My conern is about those unlucky folks who are single, or people who don’t want or can’t have kids. Are these people lesser citizens because they don’t have kids or aren’t married? Just because some gays don’t want to mirror heterosexual fecundity, they aren’t as good as married and/or babied gays?
And the media is eating up (or fabricating) this “trend”. It kind of annoys me, as I don’t feel this generalization applies to me. Frankly, I don’t want kids. I am content that my brother has passed on the family DNA and has produced young creatures somewhat similar to me. I think I’d be a great parent, but at this time I’m enjoying caring for myself and I really value my Jimbo Time. I’d like a partner but that’s not as easy as it sounds or is for some people. And I believe I have witnessed some gays rush into relationships or domesticity at some level to be or feel more legitimate in society. They can’t handle being single, so they rush into relationships whether they’re good for them or not. (See: serial monogamists)
I think the nice part about being gay is that we don’t have to act like a run-of-the-mill breeder. We don’t have to rush to marry after high school, get a divorce, be crushed for a couple of years, and then get married again, wash, rise, repeat. We have different models we can follow. Sure, some of these models or ways of living haven’t been to our benefit (sexually compulsive 70s cruising culture), but some models do work. Like whoring around for a few years before you get hitched, for instance. Playing the field is wise and teaches you who the turkeys are. I also appreciate the lack of pressure to marry that is normally reserved for heterosexuals. There are some benefits to being gay, and lack of expectation for domesticity is one perk among many.
Anyway, I guess what I’m saying is that I don’t think we should push for our rights just because we want to marry, have kids, have extra money, or this or that trait. We should be pushing for equality and rights just because we are gay, not because of what kind of gay we are. Does that make any sense?
Homer says:
It particularly annoys me that the Maggie Gallagher antisame-sex marriage crowd always yaps about how marriage is about procreation and children. If/when I get gay married, I very much doubt that I will be adopting any children (although I suspect I would make an excellent Papa).
July 14, 2010, 4:58 pmPatrick says:
I’m more of a cerial monogamist
July 14, 2010, 9:02 pmSean says:
Before gay marriage was such a big national issue, Darren always used to say that one of the best parts of being gay was never having to go through a wedding. I agree. Weddings are usually noxious. Marriage can be okay, at least for some people.
If gay marriage were legal in Minnesota, I think we’d consider getting hitched–assuming we’d be given the same rights granted to straight couples. To me, that’s the central issue. It’s not about aping conventions of heterosexuality, but rather wanting there to be an acknowledgment that gay partnerships have the same legitimacy under the law as straight relationships. If I’m in a car accident, for example, I want there to be no question that Darren can make decisions for me if I’m not able.
I’m with you on the having kids, Jimbo. Being uncles is enough to keep Darren and me content. And to Homer’s point, I know plenty of straight couples who have decided not to have children. Are their marriages not “real” in Gallagher’s estimation? That’s just as laughable as her position on gay marriage.
July 15, 2010, 2:52 amjeremy says:
Allz I knowz iz, I’m gettin’ murried cuz straights owe me presents. Lots of em.
July 15, 2010, 2:29 pmChuck says:
I never had any interest in marriage or settling down at all until I met one particular man when I was in my 40s. I spend too much time as an attorney dealing with disfunctional breeder couples to ever believe that marriage is right for everyone, but think everyone that wants to should certainly have the right, and am very glad Randy and I were at the right place and right time to become one of California’s 18,000 special marriages.
July 15, 2010, 5:51 pmmike/ says:
i think the word you put in the first sentence is what it’s all about – income!
straight people who are married get all kinds of ’special’ treatment [sound familiar?] especially when it comes to tax breaks and things dealing with money; not just lgbtq but anyone not married should be ticked off about that; the argument as always been that it’s an incentive for people to marry and keep the human race going; no matter how bad a job they are doing;
it’s basically unfair that you and i are paying more because we are not married; i think the best thing is to level the playing field all the way around; something like a flat tax for every person set at something like 16%; no exemptions, write offs, etc, each partner (marriage or civil) pays the 16%; and if they have children, that’s their decision; it’s still 16% for each partner!
now, that would be fair and equal treatment; but watch them scream…
July 15, 2010, 10:49 pmstayve says:
I think part of the expendable income that gays have is due to the fact that we don’t have kids to support. I heard recently that a child costs approximately $300,000 to raise.
July 15, 2010, 11:04 pmGreg says:
In my field of work, I’ve now seen plenty of children physically abused (some didn’t make it). To my knowledge, none of those were injured by homosexual parents. I’m not saying gay parents aren’t capable of abuse (and I don’t plan to have kids) but the strongest argument for gay adoption in my opinion is PLANNED PARENTHOOD. So I’ll fight for whatever it takes to see that more kids end up with people who want them.
July 16, 2010, 4:15 amDaniel Books aka Dax says:
I think that Hetero singles go thru the same thing. WHen they want to remain single or dont want to have kids or dont want to get married, they are looked down on. I think regardless of sexual orientation, its wrong to look down at someone because of that.
I know when Rob and I got married, and made mention we were planing on adoption children we got comments from certain gay folk. Especially when I legally changed my last name to his. A person I no longer associate with once told me that Rob & I were “Breeder wannabes” and that we were becoming the gay versions of “Uncle toms”
Needless to say I ended that friendship.
Personally I believe gay or straight, young or old.. if you wanna stay single, fine, if you wanna get married..fine. If you wanna have or dont wanna have kids fine.. but Everyone should have the right to that choice equally.
July 19, 2010, 6:12 pmMichael Australia says:
I will not support same sex marriage in any shape or form. Many of the above arguements are well articulated and true. Daniel is 100% spot on with the last paragraph, it is all about choice and society must, I know they don’t have to, but must respect the choice. They don’t, and when other gay moralists coupled look down on other gay men for being single. That is what gets my heckles up. They want to be married, have kids (usually poodles), a white picket fence, dinner parties and of course tell everyone else THEY have to be like that and it is so wrong to cheat on your partner. So where do you catch them – usually at leather bars or sex venues with everyone but hubby. Some twink or muscle boy pulls it out and monogamy is forgotten. Not to mention that when they were single they were slutting in the sling one after the other for hours yet now they are ‘married’ you cannot do that it’s wrong disgusting. They have found ‘the one’ which means one plus the entire twink muscle boy population.
Is this homopobic and stereotypical – maybe, yet how come gay men whinge and bitch about paying tax for breeders yet want to be seen by society as ‘clean’ as “i’ve only got one partner” so they can get this holier than thou status of married they can brag to their friends and others at the gay bars “i’m happy and taken” whist collecting phone numbers from twinks and muscle boys then justifying it as ‘we only play together’. Seriously, monogamy and open realtionships are just as controlling and screwed as each other.
Hetrosexuality is looking good by the hour.
July 22, 2010, 12:02 am