Marriage is still the wrong goal


Referendum measure 74 recently passed in Washington State by a slight margin.  Huge amounts of money and resources were poured into the campaign, however, “[m]arriage still sucks. Its the wrong way to distribute health care, immigration status and care. Its not working for straight people. Its a technology of racialization and colonialism. And its a method of control where people a certain family form is incentivized while others are demonized and endangered. Just a reminder.”

About these ads
This entry was posted in What's up in Seattle. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Marriage is still the wrong goal

  1. Reblogged this on karlitoweb and commented:
    Good point here. Why are we so hell-bent onto entering into a legal contract that has an average 50% chance of being broken by one party or the other? And why do we even NEED legal pieces of paper to be “married”, anyway? For whose benefit are these legal contracts entered into, really? – k

  2. treepretty says:

    Hey,

    Thanks for posting this! It was definite food for thought. I don’t have time for as long a reply as I’d like, but I have a few thoughts I want to share.

    1. I am for an end to marriage both because it’s patriarchal and because I am against the state and therefore don’t want it regulating our sexuality and family relations.

    2. I was for Referendum 74 (which legalized gay marriage in Washington State) and am glad it passed.

    I agree with the critiques that marriage is not the right solution to problems around health insurance, immigration, etc. That’s because revolution is the solution to those problems. I do think plenty of queer folks — again, not just gay white men — are also for gay marriage because they want to get married. Or they want their friends to be able to, or whatever. Marriage does carry enormous emotional weight in pretty large segments of society, and I don’t want to just write that off.

    I guess what I’m getting at is that, while mainstream LG(sometimes BT) organizations that fight for gay marriage are pretty white and middle class, and carry a lot of those values in the way they organize and what they fight for, we shouldn’t assume that all queer people of color and working class folks aren’t for gay marriage and don’t aspire to it for themselves.

    I like how Lou talks about this in the essay “Beyond Gay Marriage and Queer Separatists”.

    On a final note, I can’t read the text below “We don’t want to marry, we just want to fuck”, but I gotta say that poster kind of alienates me. It has a radicaler-than-thou tone which is exactly the kind of thing I want to avoid in these sorts of discussions, which is maybe the main point of my reply.

  3. sixathome says:

    I think that this radical poster will/can drive those away from socialism/communism that may have been nearing it as a viable needed path sanity.
    “On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.

    The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital. ” Communist Manifesto
    There is a difference between prolitariat marriage/family and the bourgeois. I as a youth would have felt the same as those posters,sort of. But as a mother and spouse I am inclind to be repelled. It is not because I beleive the state should have a say in my life but as I see a community that must deal with the results of perhaps a rash young adult not wanting to think of the future of the community let alone him/herself. I see this poster as radical but it is not revolutionary. I will say,however that sometimes it takes shock to get the masses to see and react.

  4. sixathome says:

    I had another thought… that these posters were up by provacateurs that strived to make communism/Marxism/socialism a bad or twisted belief. The mis information on Marx is rampaant and this smacks of the Right telling the masses what MArxism is.

    • Phil West says:

      I entirely agree with you on this, sixathome. There are many self-identified radicals who have never read a word of Marx, Engels, or Lenin, don’t understand their ideas, and don’t want to learn. These three men were the most profound revolutionaries of all time, and their ideas pave the way for the proletarian revolution and the liberation of humankind from class society and slavery of all forms. To ignore their work, to be content with mistaken ideas about them, is to be a radical-identified hypocrite, one who is unworthy of making any real revolution at all.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s