SHAMarriage INEquality

SHAMarriage INEquality

A provocation, and my thoughts for the record

(Rant warning) 


All people are equal.

That's why I don't believe that the state should be able to assign any person's financial status' on the basis of their relationship status. 

I heartily disagree with gay marriage. 

I heartily agree with marriage equality in this way only: there should be no marriage, or at least no state or legal element to marriage. For anyone. 

Let me explain...

The only practical purpose of state sanctioned marriage is to further consolidate our complex and weblike community into nuclear style 'heteronormative' (shudder) family units, principally as a means of controlling and manipulating the finances of the members of those units and of society as a whole. I fundamentally disagree with this.

The fight for "marriage equality" is deeply conservative. Shame faux-liberal marriage equality crusader!! What happened to the fight for 'Ms' and for no legal status of marriage?!?!? Is the fight for 'Mx' honestly taking all of your energy? Come to that can we not do away with socionymic's all together?  (I think I just made up a word.)

In a basically liberal society, particularly Australia right now, anyone is free to actually create whatever family unit they want - so if you really want to get married just fucking do it. Why do you need the state’s approval? Literally the only reason is so that you can have access to each other’s money either in life or after death, and be burdened by each other’s income in life (via lack of access to welfare) and debt after death (via debt transfer). 

Hospital visitation is a fun human interest story, admitttedly horrible for the minority of un-prepared cases for whom it’s an actual issues. Formally register you de-facto relationship and it won’t ever be an issues. Hold a single joint anything that exemplifies your de-facto status and it won’t be an issue. 

Furthermore what happened to the fight for real queer rights? The right to live unattached to an “ampersand-and-other-half", the right to be promiscuous, unattached, alternative, free-loving? the difference between Joe & Eve and Joe & Steve is a negligible technicality compared to the difference between Joe & Either and FUCK YOU TELLING ME HOW TO LIVE. 

And stop calling it 'marriage equality' - if it was truly marriage equality it would include polyamory, and women & dogs, and men & trees, and Fathers & Daughters, and Mothers & Sons & Daughters & Fathers, and yes even adults & children. There I said it. If you want true marriage ‘equality’ Cory Fucktardi was right, your campaign should be to lower the age of marriage-consent to anyone who can physically annunciate the words ‘I do’.

What the current campaign does is extend the privilege of marriage to a section of queer people who have the economic (class) or cultural (social/racial/religious) incentive to buy (pun intended) into a basically colonialist, classists, racist, patriarchal institution, thereby strengthening that very institution and further ostracising those who don’t; marginalising those who are already the most vulnerable and disadvantaged, and inviting (mostly) rich white cis faggots into the Patriarchy tent. Whoopdy fuckidy doo.

In the same way that inviting women-who-display-the-worst-qualities-of-masculinity into politics (*cough*Hillary*cough*) is not a win for feminism, this is not a win for LGBTIQHowmanymorefuckinglettersdoweneedcanwenotjustgowith “Queer" rights. 

I work in the arts where rich white cis faggots have run our particular patriarchal tent for about a hundred years, and you know what? In the arts, as elsewhere, the poles and flaps of that particular tent still suck. What happened to ripping down the tent? And what happened to a few people having the balls and brains to call out this nonsense, rather than towing the line we’ve been fed by our "one inch from the status quo should satisfy you” overlords. Wake up faggots and dykes and bitards and trannies and herms and freaks (The FDBTHF+ community)! You're being fucked in the ass!! (and not in the good literal way, no no, in the bad metaphorical way.)

All of this said….. I completely appreciate the fact that we’re now so far from societally abandoning marriage entirely that, yes, anyone who is enough of a cuck to want to get legally married in the first place should be able to join the devil’s chorus if they want. I will of course vote yes inany stupid rigged Postal Parasite that may eventuate. Please forgive me if I don’t also massacre my beautiful profile picture with some ugly frame that was clearly created by a cis-white-man with no sense of the fabulous and every sense of the universally palatable (BLEH!!). 

Sleep well, and if you have any respect for your Queer foreparents do so with anywhere between 0 and 46 partners and do it without the sanction of the state. 

Charles SandersComment