Marriage is a necessity? - Page 6

Originally posted by: Beyond_the_Veil

On a similar note, I also find it interesting how people who say marriage is an outdated institution and needs to be done away with are the same ones who would fight teeth-and-nail for social acceptance for gay marriage. To me marriage is not a necessity but it's not outdated either.

To me it is like this.

I don't believe in religion. I find religion to be an archaic institution. But I still support freedom of religion and people's rights to their beliefs. I don't think any religion should be discriminated against.

Similarly.

I don't like marriage. I find it to be an outdated institution. But I still support equal rights for people to marry whom they love. I don't think gay people should be discriminated against.

It depends.

If you belong to desi family then marriage is extremely important if you want to live a respectable life. I can sugar coat stuff but any relationship outside of marriage is looked down at and is not considered proper.

In west it is more open and people will not look down at you. They just have totally different values.

In both cases it is not a necessity.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

To me it is like this.

I don't believe in religion. I find religion to be an archaic institution. But I still support freedom of religion and people's rights to their beliefs. I don't think any religion should be discriminated against.

Similarly.

I don't like marriage. I find it to be an outdated institution. But I still support equal rights for people to marry whom they love. I don't think gay people should be discriminated against.

Originally posted by: Beyond_the_Veil

Yeah but there seems to be a group who just opposes marriage based on traditional (often regressive) notions they've read over the media and support gay marriage for rebellious reasons or to set themselves apart, rather than actually sitting down and think about it ya know what I mean.

It's like they go "Marriage!! Are you freaking kidding me?! It's from the 1960s, just get over it and start living a meaningful life without getting through meaningless rituals and money making businesses and no need to bring God into your personal bedroom" and on the other hand would fight to death supporting gay marriages, saying "Marriage is more than rituals, a contract, it's the union of two God given souls, it's made it heaven, etc" (basically same arguments they've used against marriage now they are using it for it now).

But I understand your point.

Originally posted by: Beyond_the_Veil

Yeah but there seems to be a group who just opposes marriage based on traditional (often regressive) notions they've read over the media and support gay marriage for rebellious reasons or to set themselves apart, rather than actually sitting down and think about it ya know what I mean.

It's like they go "Marriage!! Are you freaking kidding me?! It's from the 1960s, just get over it and start living a meaningful life without getting through meaningless rituals and money making businesses and no need to bring God into your personal bedroom" and on the other hand would fight to death supporting gay marriages, saying "Marriage is more than rituals, a contract, it's the union of two God given souls, it's made it heaven, etc" (basically same arguments they've used against marriage now they are using it for it now).

But I understand your point.

I have a stance very similar to what you describe. So let me explain my stance a bit. I do find marriage archaic in many ways. I don't like the rituals around it. I don't like how culturally it becomes the be all and end all, especially for women. I think people have reduced it to a hollow contract of conveniences rather than be a relationship of love and commitment. That is why I support gay marriage to culturally shift marriage towards being an expression of commitment. Also marriage will always be valid in the sense that it gives legal and other rights/protections which even gay people deserve.

Make sense?

[RTH] ^ I already said I understand what you meant. But then it's not marriage so much you dislike but traditional notions and archaic values/customs attached to marriage that you despise. If gay marriages also suffer from the same problems (the top slamming the bottom, and all that shiz), will that solve problem with associated with marriage?

Originally posted by: Beyond_the_Veil

"because the whole idea of a gay lifestyle can challenge heteronormativity and monogamy in so many interesting and productive ways, but the mainstream gay rights movement is all about having the right to get married just like straight people do."

I think I lost you there. Care to elaborate?

On a similar note, I also find it interesting how people who say marriage is an outdated institution and needs to be done away with are the same ones who would fight teeth-and-nail for social acceptance for gay marriage. To me marriage is not a necessity but it's not outdated either.

In the end it's important to have a good relationship over legal formalities and cultural rituals. But doing the latter are by no means outdated; and much, in the same way, living together is by no means following an uncultured lifestyle. Whatever floats your boat. Just be honest, truthful and don't harm others. One should have the right to marry or not marry.

By heteronormativity, I mean a set of social standards or norms that dictate gender roles and as an extension of these perceptions of gender roles, marriage and family structure (including who performs the "free" labour of child-bearing, house-keeping, etc.). I think heteronormativity is problematic, because gender roles are an effect of social training and not necessarily purely dictated by biology the way we are led to believe. I'm using heteronormativity as a concept here, not stating that all straight people are stereotypes or that straight couples live rigid lives and wholly accept regressive social norms.

So my point in my original post was that "queerness" -- let's say queerness and not homosexuality, because there are queer people who identify as bisexual, there are transgendered people, and other categories as well -- can produce an interesting challenge to monogamous heteronormativity. Because queer relationships do not necessarily follow from the same stereotypical hetero concept of men/women having specific, fixed roles in a relationship. It's a myth that all queer relationships follow a hetero mould. Some might, but I think the truth is that people want to believe that because they are so committed to believing that heterosexuality is more acceptable. I also think queer relationships can challenge monogamy, because I believe that monogamy is a product of heteronormativity, and is moreso a form of social control over women and their bodies, their reproductive capacity, etc.

But, the reality is that marriage is a concept that carries so much weight in our society and so much legitimacy, that the "gay rights movement," -- let's say "gay rights movement" instead of lumping all queer activism, queer feminist activism, into one category -- advocates for gay marriage rights as the number one political issue. My point was that marriage is so important socially, and confers so much legitimacy upon not just a relationship, but also upon those who can enter into such a contract, that we have to conclude that it is a social "necessity," despite our individual preferences or choices.