Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Jumping the state sanctioned broom

So we are getting married. Again. This time the state of Iowa is invited. Scully and I married six years ago. Our ceremony was outside. There was a stunning sunset. We called the four corners, were tied together with a lasso, exchanged coins, jumped a broom and bound our hands & fates together.

With all that, who would have missed a teeny, tiny bit of government recognition?

Well we did. So here we go again.

You can pick up forms in three weeks and I think we are going to move quickly. I am joyous, stunned, proud of iowa, nearly speechless, grateful to the queers who endured the hateful rhetoric. . .

And with all of that said, I do think marriage is kind of weird. I don't think it is the be all/end all of queer equality or ending homophobia. It is not the battlefront that I would have chosen and it is not the battlefront that I have devoted much personal energy towards.

But it is also not really me that thinks marriage is weird. Just listen to the folks who were trying to "protect" marriage. This is what they think its good for.

In prior court proceedings, Polk County lawyers had offered five main rationales for the law banning gay marriages:

  • to maintain traditional marriage,

  • to promote the optimal environment for raising children,

  • to promote procreation,

  • to promote stability in opposite-sex relationships,
  • and to conserve state resources such as tax breaks.

Lets break these down.

Traditional Marriage--Yes. Please. Let's stick with tradition. Which tradition, you ask? How about one that allows a twelve year old girl to be married off to a 50 year old man? Yes, please! Tradition is good!

A quick side note on this one. I do wish the white queer groups would stop using interracial marriage analogies to try and logic people through this argument. Rather than helping people reason it only invites more emotion and reveals just how blindingly white most queer groups are. Why not talk religion? For real. Avoid the whole is it/isn't it a choice (who cares anyway!) question and use a religion analogy. It does go against some people's religious definition of marriage for a Muslim to marry a Wiccan. It does not & should not matter to the state--even though religion is something that can be changed. It is nobody's business and if a church disagrees with it then they do not perform that marriage. I think it's a much better analogy.

Raising children--Okay, let me try and do this one without being too bitchy. So if I was married to a man things would be better for the kids because there'd be more pornography around the house? It seems I've been confused about what we've been doing around the fruitbasket. I thought we were promoting an optimal environment for children. Forget all the endless reading of Mi Carrito over and over and over and OVER again. Forget ABCFroog! Forget the seedlings by the window, the expensive organic apples, the stomping in mud puddles. What we need is a man! If all these homophobe groups are worried that Thumper won't learn how to pee standing up they can relax. I'm a dyke. I've peed standing up my whole life.

Promote Procreation--because the human species is in jeopardy of dying out. For real, though, anyone who had the misfortune of being around me when I was on the crazy-woman-juice would know better than to suggest I hadn't done my bit to keep the human race going--queer or no.

Stability in opposite-sex relationships--Look. If your hetero relationship is threatened by the mere presence of queers you are in a whole lot of trouble. I'd think you'd want us getting married so there'd be less temptation for you to stray. "Poor heterosexuals. They can be swayed so easily." How is it that the homophobes haven't come after these lawyers for using this as one of their points?

And finally, tax breaks. Because this is the best way to decide anybody's civil rights.

So why are we doing this anyway?

Because this is the first time the government has acknowledged that we are a family with all the bliss and shit that carries. I don't think the queer rights movement should be all about achieving "straightland" and I'm not interested in "acting normal."

But Scully and I have obligations to each other. We have obligations to our kids. We live up to and struggle through those obligations every day. I just think we deserve the same government recognition of that. And maybe a tax break.

No comments: