There are probably going to be who disagree with me

[ryuutchi]

I was reading the comments to this lovely blog on Pam's House Blend about a gay couple that went to a friend's wedding, officiated at it, and opened hearts and minds just by being out and loving

Comments

[ryuutchi]

Probably. :/

[boyastridgirl]

http://boyastridgirl.livejournal.com/145148.html

You mean kinda like the conversation I had with my friend who's getting married herself next year, or somewhereabouts?

Yeah, I completely understand.

[ryuutchi]

Yeah. I mean, on a really deep level, it's kind of nice that someone is depriving themselves because I'm deprived-- but that's a really revenge-driven impulse, you know? Wanting to lash out because I've been hurt.

On a less lizard-brain level, though...

[linenoise]

I've been seeing shades of this conversation in other places. "I'm going to disrespect all my married friends by calling their spouse 'partner' instead, because marriage equality hasn't happened yet

[ryuutchi]

I think the difference between this and the "partner" thing, though, is the difference between an oppressed group doing something minor to lash out and the privileged group depriving themselves in a way that mostly just serves to make them feel good.

I think The National Marriage Boycott is trying to make it very public and high-profile so they can make an emotional impact, though.

[offside7]

I definitely understand your reasoning when you say, "I don't want someone to deprive themselves because I do without." But I'm not sure I agree that it's self-centered. (I assume you mean that in a "revolving around them" not "selfish" but either way, it seems like a selfless gesture of solidarity to me, and it probably at the very least gets people around them talking about the issues whenever someone asks, "so, when are you two getting married

[ryuutchi]

I see the teaspoon/drops in a bucket argument, but I stand by my "selfish" comment-- although, you're right and "self-centered" is a better term for it. It's not that a heterosexual couple who chooses not to marry is doing something for themselves without regard for the well-being of others, it's that they're doing something that will make themselves feel emotionally good that doesn't actually have any impact on the oppression of others.

IMO, it also, to use the anti-oppression jargon, has the effect of centering the discussion on the people with privilege-- it becomes no longer about the fact that LGBT persons can no longer marry, but about the straight couples who have the choice not to.

As for "understanding your privilege", I think that if this boycott takes off, it will become a way of "showing solidarity" without actually doing anything to fix the oppression. They are exercising a right without trying to find a way to extend that right to others.

If that makes sense.

[offside7]

I think "self-centered" was a term I borrowed from you. ^_^;;

I think you're right that if someone makes this gesture to make themselves feel good and stop right there without taking further actions, it's probably a self-centered act (especially if they weren't planning on getting married in the first place.) It's almost like saying, "see, now I'm a victim the same way you are, so I don't have to feel bad about your lack of rights."

On the other hand, that's making the assumption that they have stopped right there, but I would think that the kind of person who would state that they're refraining from getting married because others can't is also the sort of person would do other things as well, such as... I dunno, collect signatures or something.

[offside7]

I feel like you're missing the other part of the campaign. I actually joined the campaign because I did not want to support a discriminatory institution. Part of boycotting marriage is wearing a ring that says "Equality" on your left ring finger. This has been a really great conversation starter, allowing me to let others know my story and why I think equal rights are important enough. Conversations have been, in my experience, the most influential tool in fighting for equal rights. It is vital to let people know that these laws hurt their coworkers, family members, and friends

[leticia]

I occasionally feel guilty that society so whole-heartedly /approves/ my union. We're white, Christian, educated-class heterosexuals*. Society APPROVES. We're both even northern/western European stock, so match on sub-race too

[ryuutchi]

All I do by not marrying is confirm their opinion that only godless libruls would care about gay marriage.

Yo play RPGs, like queers, and are probably in favor of nationalized health care. You're still a Godless Librul. But, yes, you're right. ♥

(I'd rather adopt but that's because childbirth looks like it hurts.)

[leticia]

I'm just not entirely sure a) I want to bring kids into the vicious, nasty world, when there are so many children who need love and protection already in it b) that I want to go through childbirth and pregnancy, and c) that I want to be leashed to someone for 18+ years and of course, our society puts all the burden on me; I BELIEVE Brian will carry his share, but... if he doesn't, I'm the one that'll turn into my mother, because I wouldn't have the same option to walk away and screw up. (I love my mother. But I would not want to live her life. I don't want to sacrifice anything near as much as she did.)
Of course, that last is a problem with adopting as well. :)