BretLudwig
June 18th 08, 12:54 PM
Gay marriage in California
>>"California is the ideal place to experiment with a fundamental
redefinition of society's foremost building block, marriage. After all,
there are only 38 million people in California, Californians are famously
level-headed and rational, and Californians don't have any influence over
the media. So, if it turns out a generation from now to have been a bad
idea, no harm done!
My concern, since 2001, is that more gay men would be interested in
getting married (i.e., in a theatrical ceremony) than in being married
(i.e., sexual monogamy). We're talking about some awfully flamboyant
folks: Gay Pride parades could more honestly be renamed Gay Narcissism
parades.
So that the long term danger from gay marriage would likely be to make
more straight guys reluctant to go through the already punitive process of
getting married. Being the groom in a wedding ceremony is a pretty
uncomfortable thing already, but at least it's a guy thing, not a gay
thing. As John Derbyshire quoted me in 2003:
On the other hand, there's a process of gay ghettoization that goes on
when straight men recognize that some institution is disproportionately
attractive to male homosexuals. Broadway, for example, has gone from a
popular national institution to a largely gay ghetto in recent decades.
It's hard to get a serious discussion going of this since nobody wants to
be accused of being homophobic, but I see it everywhere. I don't think
marriages will be popular enough among gays to start this process, but I
worry that weddings will be. It wouldn't take much to get the average
young man to turn even more against participating in an arduous process
that seems alien and hostile to him already. If some of the most
enthusiastic participants become gays, then his aversion will grow even
more.
The subheadline in the LA Times today reveals a campaign by gay leaders
(and, no doubt, their allies in the media) to keep the ceremonies toned
down until after the November California initiative vote:
"Flamboyant images from same-sex ceremonies, activists say, could be
used by opponents to convince California votes that gays and lesbians
shouldn't have the right to marry."<<
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/06/gay-marriage-in-california.html
--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html
>>"California is the ideal place to experiment with a fundamental
redefinition of society's foremost building block, marriage. After all,
there are only 38 million people in California, Californians are famously
level-headed and rational, and Californians don't have any influence over
the media. So, if it turns out a generation from now to have been a bad
idea, no harm done!
My concern, since 2001, is that more gay men would be interested in
getting married (i.e., in a theatrical ceremony) than in being married
(i.e., sexual monogamy). We're talking about some awfully flamboyant
folks: Gay Pride parades could more honestly be renamed Gay Narcissism
parades.
So that the long term danger from gay marriage would likely be to make
more straight guys reluctant to go through the already punitive process of
getting married. Being the groom in a wedding ceremony is a pretty
uncomfortable thing already, but at least it's a guy thing, not a gay
thing. As John Derbyshire quoted me in 2003:
On the other hand, there's a process of gay ghettoization that goes on
when straight men recognize that some institution is disproportionately
attractive to male homosexuals. Broadway, for example, has gone from a
popular national institution to a largely gay ghetto in recent decades.
It's hard to get a serious discussion going of this since nobody wants to
be accused of being homophobic, but I see it everywhere. I don't think
marriages will be popular enough among gays to start this process, but I
worry that weddings will be. It wouldn't take much to get the average
young man to turn even more against participating in an arduous process
that seems alien and hostile to him already. If some of the most
enthusiastic participants become gays, then his aversion will grow even
more.
The subheadline in the LA Times today reveals a campaign by gay leaders
(and, no doubt, their allies in the media) to keep the ceremonies toned
down until after the November California initiative vote:
"Flamboyant images from same-sex ceremonies, activists say, could be
used by opponents to convince California votes that gays and lesbians
shouldn't have the right to marry."<<
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/06/gay-marriage-in-california.html
--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html