Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Oh Well, I Guess Civil Unions Will Do

Articles like these where"marriage defenders" brag about how totally amazing marriage is for "couples" always chap my ass because, naturally, they don't mention the fact that there are many same-sex couples who would sure like to get married and take advantage of all of these grand benefits.

The existence of LGBT people and our lack of access to marriage is rendered completely invisible as Mona Charen tells us that getting married will solve America's financial ills, "stupid." For instance, some snippets from the article:

"marriage is one of the surest ways to escape poverty"

"cohabitation doesn't begin to confer the benefits that marriage does"

"Married men earn between 10 and 40 percent more than their single counterparts with similar educational and job histories."

"A study of 7,608 household heads between 1984 and 1989 found that those who married saw income increases of 50 to 100 percent, and net wealth increases of 400 to 600 percent."

"Married people were also less likely to suffer from depression and other forms of mental anguish....Remaining unmarried or getting divorced seems to result, on average, in a deterioration in mental well-being"

Wow, marriage sure sounds fantastic!

I can't wait to- oh, she actually is only talking about man-woman marriage? And so the soft bigotry of heterocentrism continues.

Also, look again at the statistic about how married men earn so much "more than their single counterparts with similar educational and job histories." Notice how rather than questioning whether unsavory discrimination against singletons (and gays and women) is occurring, this possible discrimination in favor of married men is touted as a benefit of marriage.

The financial (and possibly unearned) privilege associated with being a man in a heterosexual marriage goes completely unchallenged. Rather than confronting male dominance and privilege, look how the heterocentrist narrative colludes with it.

No comments: