« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
04/25/2014
Obtuse conceit, thy name is NOM
Check out how the pro-discrimination special interest group the National Organization For Marriage sets up its latest e-letter letting its supporters know that they're still around (who could blame them for not knowing?):
Dear Marriage Supporter,
Sometimes, a married couple in trouble will seek counseling and be encouraged to "role play" during the session. They try to step into one another's shoes and see things from the angle and point of view of the other.
This can be a useful technique for improving understanding and communication in a relationship. But it also hints at a fundamentally important reality about families: moms and dads play distinctly different and important roles, and both are worthy of appreciation in the unique parts they play, in their marriage and in their relationships to their children.
This role playing wouldn't have any value if there wasn't anything distinguishing the two: they wouldn't have any cause to "step into the role of the other" if they were simply interchangeable.
However, one of the confusions that arises about marriage when it is redefined is precisely that it mashes together the roles of moms and dads into one indistinguishable and interchangeable idea.
KEEP READING: Role Playing [NOM]
What a dim setup. I'm pretty sure that gay couples, married or otherwise, are also encouraged to role play during counseling sessions. Why do the members of the couple need to be of the opposite sex in order for the idea of stepping into one's shoes to work?
What "distinguishes the two" members of the couple is that they are two independent people with their own ideas, views, backgrounds, moral compasses, goals, etc. NOM makes it sound like the penis and vagina are the only thing that differentiates one person from another. Which is likely how NOM sees the world, judging by the myopic framework that they've attempted to turn into a movement. But wow, it's so deliriously limited. So ridiculously reductive. So dim.
Your thoughts
comments powered by Disqus
