Straight Fear
Two major negative news items yesterday:
1. As much as I hate the fact that state laws don't currently allow for gay marriages, I can't truly fault the CA court for this ruling, since they were simply interpreting the law as it stands. It sucks, it's unfair, it's just plain wrong, but until the Legislature gets off its butt and makes some changes, there's not much than any local officials can do. I admire Newsom for his actions, for making a statement, for challenging the stupidity of the law, for bringing this ridiculous discrimination to light. And I'm hopeful that ongoing challenges and lawsuits will prove that the state constituion doesn't allow for marriage discrimination (on the model of the MA SJC decision).
On the other hand, the CA court should not have invalidated the licenses that were issued. Can you imagine how that feels? To suddenly be told, "Oh, we're sorry. Your relationship doesn't count after all. Nope. Doesn't matter that you've been together for 50 years. You're not a real couple. Sorry. You'll have to give back all of those rights that little scrap of paper granted to you. No big deal, really. After all, aren't you used to this sort of discrimination? Your people have been hiding and putting up with it for years. You should be used to this sort of treatment by now."
Lovely, isn't it?
2. On a weirdly almost-related note, Governor McGreevey of New Jersey comes out as gay and in practically the same breath declares that he will resign and step down from his office on November 15th. Umm. So it's acceptable for a man with a history of groping and other similarly questionable behavior towards women to be elected governor of a state several times larger than NJ but it's not acceptable for a gay man to be governor?
One of the articles I read mentioned several other problems with McGreevey's administration - questionable practices or appointments - but none of these problems led to his feeling a need to resign. And let's think about all of the men in power who have been discovered to have had extra-marital affairs with women. A fairly substantial list, I'd wager. Yet how many of these men felt compelled to resign their positions??? So is it simply the gender that makes all the difference?
It really all comes down to straight fear. To be more specific, the vast majority of heterosexuals are frightened by anyone different, by anyone who dares stray off the straight and narrow path. I don't understand this fear. GLBTQ people aren't trying to take anything away from their non-GLBTQ neighbors. We don't want anything special or different - we just want to enjoy the same quality of life, with all of its ups and downs, goods and bads. Why is that so hard to understand? Why are so many straights so threatened by the thoughts of two women in love? Of two men joined in marriage? Of GLBTQ elected or appointed officials?
It's a bit like the male anti-choice protestors at PPMM. They're so adamant about preventing abortion that they don't consider the many other reasons why women (and men) use PPMM's services. It's amazing that the thought of women's exercising control over their bodies and their right to choose strikes such fear into the hearts of these men.
The saying "We fear what we don't understand" doesn't offer sufficient justification for these actions, for the discrimination routinely committed against women and GLBTQ people. There are lots of things I don't understand, but I simply remain puzzled and frustrated, not frightened. And certainly not so filled with fear that I must take action against others in an unforgivable attempt to suppress and quash anyone or anything that doesn't fit within my own worldview of right and wrong.
George Orwell's pigs would be delighted.
"All animals are equal. But some are more equal than others."
- CA court ruling that SF Mayor Gavin Newsom can't perform gay marriages and that the previous marriage licenses issued are invalid
- NJ governor resigning after coming out as gay
1. As much as I hate the fact that state laws don't currently allow for gay marriages, I can't truly fault the CA court for this ruling, since they were simply interpreting the law as it stands. It sucks, it's unfair, it's just plain wrong, but until the Legislature gets off its butt and makes some changes, there's not much than any local officials can do. I admire Newsom for his actions, for making a statement, for challenging the stupidity of the law, for bringing this ridiculous discrimination to light. And I'm hopeful that ongoing challenges and lawsuits will prove that the state constituion doesn't allow for marriage discrimination (on the model of the MA SJC decision).
On the other hand, the CA court should not have invalidated the licenses that were issued. Can you imagine how that feels? To suddenly be told, "Oh, we're sorry. Your relationship doesn't count after all. Nope. Doesn't matter that you've been together for 50 years. You're not a real couple. Sorry. You'll have to give back all of those rights that little scrap of paper granted to you. No big deal, really. After all, aren't you used to this sort of discrimination? Your people have been hiding and putting up with it for years. You should be used to this sort of treatment by now."
Lovely, isn't it?
2. On a weirdly almost-related note, Governor McGreevey of New Jersey comes out as gay and in practically the same breath declares that he will resign and step down from his office on November 15th. Umm. So it's acceptable for a man with a history of groping and other similarly questionable behavior towards women to be elected governor of a state several times larger than NJ but it's not acceptable for a gay man to be governor?
One of the articles I read mentioned several other problems with McGreevey's administration - questionable practices or appointments - but none of these problems led to his feeling a need to resign. And let's think about all of the men in power who have been discovered to have had extra-marital affairs with women. A fairly substantial list, I'd wager. Yet how many of these men felt compelled to resign their positions??? So is it simply the gender that makes all the difference?
It really all comes down to straight fear. To be more specific, the vast majority of heterosexuals are frightened by anyone different, by anyone who dares stray off the straight and narrow path. I don't understand this fear. GLBTQ people aren't trying to take anything away from their non-GLBTQ neighbors. We don't want anything special or different - we just want to enjoy the same quality of life, with all of its ups and downs, goods and bads. Why is that so hard to understand? Why are so many straights so threatened by the thoughts of two women in love? Of two men joined in marriage? Of GLBTQ elected or appointed officials?
It's a bit like the male anti-choice protestors at PPMM. They're so adamant about preventing abortion that they don't consider the many other reasons why women (and men) use PPMM's services. It's amazing that the thought of women's exercising control over their bodies and their right to choose strikes such fear into the hearts of these men.
The saying "We fear what we don't understand" doesn't offer sufficient justification for these actions, for the discrimination routinely committed against women and GLBTQ people. There are lots of things I don't understand, but I simply remain puzzled and frustrated, not frightened. And certainly not so filled with fear that I must take action against others in an unforgivable attempt to suppress and quash anyone or anything that doesn't fit within my own worldview of right and wrong.
George Orwell's pigs would be delighted.
"All animals are equal. But some are more equal than others."
posted by jms | 10:24 AM
1 Comments:
LNJ said-
Really, REALLY liked the Orwell smack! Well written and thought. Thanks again, for the weekend. :)
Post a Comment
<< Home