3 ms·
A) It's not always about sexuality. B) What does "imposing a category" even mean? Nobody is forcing you to identify as anything. Very few of my gay friends wil
by duaneb 10y ago
A) It's not always about sexuality.
B) What does "imposing a category" even mean? Nobody is forcing you to identify as anything. Very few of my gay friends will self-identify as queer.
I identify as queer. I find a lot of strength from the fact that I don't need to neatly fit onto the kinsey scale, and I hope that you can remember the discomfort of "Smear the Queer" to reach out to all the people and interests who were neglected in the gay marriage campaign.
If you are interested in learning more (I suspect from your confrontational attitude you are not), I highly recommend "Against Equality: Queer Critiques of Gay Marriage".
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- duaneb 10y ago> That's hilarious. Leaving the (almost entirely upper-middle-class) ivory tower of po-mo navel-gazing and self-righteousness, getting married actually makes a very significant difference to some of us in the real world. Hence my recommendation; it's not anti-marriage in the sense of commitment or benefits. And I don't think marriage is a fundamental right; even defining it satisfactorily casually (let alone legally) to married people is impossible. The concrete rights that matter are legal benefits, and those still exclude poly people and people wishing to grant rights to relative or non-humans. Gay marriage only included gay people. It is inherently a bigoted institution while it retains any emphasis on heteronormativity (now extended to gay people, who are honorarily heteronormative under the law) or religion (i.e. all the opposition to gay marriage).