RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

01/17/2013

The absurdity of 'interchangeability'

by Jeremy Hooper

Of all the ridiculous conservative arguments, this one always drops my jaw:

Screen Shot 2013-01-17 At 3.37.25 Pm

How, exactly, does same-sex marriage speak to interchangeability anymore than different-sex marriage? In every form of marriage, a man or a woman joins with a man or a woman because either a man or a woman is the gender to whom he or she is drawn. Yes, one can be attracted to both genders—but again, bisexuals might enter into a same-sex or a different-sex union. None of it speaks either or in support or against marriage equality.

I am married to a man because I, a man, am attracted to men. I even "tested" my capacity for interchangeability, back in my youthful days of yore, when dying my hair random colors, gorging on junk food, and smooching on females were things I would still entertain in the name of bodily experimentation. Findings: I look better as a (now-graying) brunette, my abs look better sans the Snickers, and my mister happy is well, happier, when it's with a mister. The way I'm oriented does not leave any room for interchangeability. I love women but I've only ever been in love with a man.

The reason you support the freedom to marry is precisely because you realize that gay people are not able to change and like something that they were not born to like any more than straight people can. Supporting marriage for same-sex couples does not mean mean viewing ever human being as a stand-in for one another—it simply means viewing our spectrum of humanity for what it really is. And that, my friends, is the problem with the thinking of Peter Spriggs, Chris Marlinks and Steven Crowders of the world: they want to interchange their exclusive version or normalcy with the one that actually surrounds us, and we refuse to play-act alongside them.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails