hi kids.
yesterday, after much trepidation, i went to see inlaws and outlaws, an independent documentary at the neon movies.
i didn’t really know what to expect, and i wasn’t really sure i wanted to go to an event sponsored by activism organisations equality ohio (and by extention the human rights campaign) and pflag, but i’m really glad i did. this film portrays with true life relationships what brokeback mountain does with art. it’s gripping and poignant.
through simple, honest and bare storytelling, we meet individual after individual who look just off camera and tell their story of how they met or missed love, how they got married, how much they wished they could, or how they got divorced. sometimes their spouse or partner is sitting next to them, but usually it’s just a lone individual, telling his or her story with such vulnerability.
if you were ever inclinded to belive that the “gay marriage” debate was just an intellectual excercise, that the rhetoric was just a bunch of canned air to bounce around the echo chambers, watch this film and see the real life people that are touched by, and who have to live in the world led by hatemongers santorum, blackwell, and bush, among many, many others.
i really wanted to write an erudite, thoughtful essay about how gay marriage will only effect at most maybe 3% - 5% of the national population, that surely our country can afford to extend equal rights to these families (if the arguement is purely left at the economic level), about how a relative of mine with her five marriages has done more to dishonour the institution of marriage than a few gay marriages ever will, about how there are so many more important national matters to deal with than a few thousand gay marriages–and why do we, as a nation that cherishes the individual, have legal marriage benefits anyway? but i just don’t have the heart for it. i’m haunted by these faces, these stories.
besides, the faf said it better than i could anyway:
. . . {M}ore and more people are looking at these flailing, bigoted politicians who throw down the gay card in desperation to get votes and are asking them one question:
Is that all you got?
Here in the United States, and especially Ohio, we should be furious - furious - that this really is all they’ve got.
Banning gay marriage won’t halt the hemorrhaging of blood and money in Iraq. It won’t make us safe from extremists. It won’t bring healthcare to the millions of uninsured. It won’t create jobs for the poor and hungry. It won’t solve the dispute over immigration. It won’t fix our schools. It won’t stop global warming.
Bringing it up, though, will distract from the real issue: The only thing you’re offering is a stinking pile of bullshit
quoted from thefaf.com post “Anatomy of a blog tempest”
.
Sadly, not all of the politicians are using smoke and mirrors - they are actually speaking to a not-insignificant portion of society that honestly finds homosexuality reprehensible.
I suppose it is, for them, the same as we may feel about bestiality, incest, raping children… Understand, I’m not trying to personally compare the issues, but to some people there is a very real connection, a very real sense that it is just plain wrong. And in the same way that it would be very difficult to imagine society, as a whole, condoning incest, it is equally improbable that these people will change their view any time soon.
On the brighter side, I see society inexorably heading in a more lenient direction. To see the Fallwell’s and Dobson’s spitting bile and hate will seem as quaint to our grandchildren as respected politicians of yesteryear swearing that America will never be integrated with niggers.
Sorry for the long comment.
kom,
yes, i understand that many of the shrillest voices in this “discussion” really do belive that homosexuality and bestiality and incest are all motivated by the same desires, and that they are equally abhorrent.
i know, because i used to be one of those people.
i hated myself then, because i couldn’t understand why i felt the way i did, why i was so different. i was raised apostolic/penticostal and believed the entire doctrine with all my heart. in my incessant thirst for knowledge, to stoke the fires of my belief, i read my king james translation alongside a new international version. cut it any way i wanted to, they both said the same thing about sex and sexuality, when read literally and without parsing for time and cultural differences. in my zeal, i even sent away for one of those “ex-gay” packets listed in the back of the niv translation.
it wasn’t until i left my small, very conservative hometown for a very liberal liberal-arts university did i come to at least positively acknowledge the gay side of me. i didn’t fully come out for many years later, after i left the church for good.
there’s more to this story, and i should save it for a full on post. but it is clear that this issue is a very personal one for me, and one that i have experienced from many sides. what bothers me the most about the current climate is the pettiness of it all:
we have televisions shows like “will & grace” and “queer eye,” capote, brokeback mountain and transamerica made serious bids for oscars this year. ellen is one of the hottest personalities in syndication. if people speak with their dollars, there is a very clear positive outcry for gay folks, yet there are folks champing at the bit to deny us the same things others take for granted.
what really gets me about this movement is how people are profiting from this hate, and how small a matter is really is.
and if rape and incest and bestiality are as reprehensible as being gay, why isn’t there a movement to make a constitutional ban on those?
[…] Lefty asks: […]