Sunday 29 November 2009

Enough fitting in-time for society to start fitting around us!


It wasn’t that long ago that the idea of non-heterosexual civil unions would have been considered unthinkable. Fifteen years ago, when I was getting together with Partner the idea that a queer couple might have their partnership recognised and protected in law just like any straight couple was something that seemed an impossible thing to happen in our lifetimes. Over the years neither of us have felt a pressing desire to nail each other into a legally and financially binding agreement. However, just 4 years ago when Civil Partnerships were sprung on us- almost out of the blue- it did seem like ‘a good thing’ in terms of equality and human rights. Surely shouldn’t we have equal access to those rights, privileges and protections that our straight peers take for granted? I thought so then but now I’m not so sure!

I’ve been reading recently about the history of the Gay Liberation movement in the USA. It started in the early 1950s with the formation of the Mattachine Society, a group of gay men whose aim was to politically organise to overcome discrimination against queer folk as a minority group. From the early days of the movement there was an immediate split. There were the assimilationists in one group aiming to win equality with straight society and dreaming of fitting into society as it stood. In the other group were the radical faeries. They believed that queer folk were fundamentally different, that we couldn’t, and shouldn’t, fit in and that society needed to change radically to fit around us.

The gay political agenda ever since has been largely driven by the assimilationists and with every new milestone we become more and more equal. We now have an equalized age of consent, abolition of Section 28, equal rights to parenting as fosterers, adopters or as biological parents.

As the years have flown by since that very first CP, I’ve attended ceremonies of friends who were clamouring to be one of the first as a political act, friends who wanted to show the straight world that they could do a CP knees-up more lavish and camp than any straight wedding could hope to be, and most recently friends who are tentatively entering into legal arrangements as the only way of finding out if a relationship with a foreign national is based on love or simply their partner’s desire for British citizenship.

With equality comes acceptance and an experience of what it feels like to be part of the majority. My problem is that the more I feel like we’re just like everyone else, the less we have our vantage point of being on the margins and the more we loose our ability to hold a mirror up to straight society to help it see what it might do differently. Our different-ness has always been our most unique value and we’re now in danger of loosing it. Maybe now we’re almost equal it’s time to pull back from the assimilationist’s equality agenda and start focusing on our radical uniqueness for a change!

4 comments:

  1. My take on your dilemma is that everything is different in the gay world (which is NOT monolithic but made up of a dazzling array of variations)--the mores are different--and it is we who define who we are, not straight society.
    The majority of gay marriages/civil unions/partnerships I know of do not conform to the heterosexual model.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Will
    Thanks for your comment!
    I agree with you that the gay world is fabulously different but once the law changes- no matter how you might not wish to conform- you are dragged into the consumerist business of being coerced into spending vast amounts on a lavish ceremony and there is also the legal 'protection' for the division of material wealth should the relationship break up.
    I prefer to remain on the margins and forego this right. Maybe we'll have a lavish party to celebrate 15/20 years of being together in spite of not having attempted to mimic our straight brethren. If our relationship comes to an end- maybe we will be able to exemplify how best to reach an amicable division of what we own based on our love for each other and an authentic desire for the other to be happy.
    Ok if you need citizenship to continue your relationship-do it! If you aren't sure that your partner will give you a fair deal when the relationship ends- do it.
    But don't do it because that's what everyone else does. Now we can do it, not doing it can be a powerful political act.
    :-)
    GS

    ReplyDelete
  3. GS,

    Your post is thoughtful, and rings with truth. Here's a slightly different slant.

    I'm a civil partner, because my bloke and I needed it for his immigration purposes to the EU. A simple visit to the notary's office. Though our notary tried to foist it on us, we had no ceremony; no vows, kiss at the end, or other sentimental claptrap. I went back to the office afterwards.

    What we do with our bodies and emotions is our own business; a radical idea in a world where one's sex life needs to be declared in public if your relationship is to be protected. And, of course, that's exactly what a marriage ceremony does.

    If it were possible to extend our civil union to include a "marriage", my partner and I would forego it. Even moreso, a "wedding", with all its excruciating baggage.

    Let the way you live your lives be the public declaration of your love. That's the real celebration. Not the cake, the limo, the tuxedoes, and the drunken guests.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey Headbang8
    Thanks for your generous comment.
    I love your pragmatic approach and the way you resisted notary's encouragement to emulate a marriage.

    "Let the way you live your life be the true celebration of your love!"

    That is so true and is worthy of being printed as a T-shirt slogan and compulsorily worn by all present at civil partnerships throughout the world!
    I agree- forget the rest of the trappings. Your love for each other is all that matters!
    I wish you both well
    :-)
    GS

    ReplyDelete