Via Franco Folini @ Flickr.
There has been lots of news–mostly bad–about the fight for marriage equality in the States.** Not only do I feel for my many friends who are prevented from legally wedding, I believe that institutionalizing same-sex marriage is crucial if we’re going to actually live our stated “and justice for all” values (the patriarchy-smashing aspect is good, too).
So why aren’t I married? I’m always on about that Dude I live with, right? We just celebrated our 12th Unniversary this weekend (if by “celebrated” you mean said “huh, twelve years…pretty crazy’”). If I’m down with commitment, and I think the right to marry is so all-fired important for queer couples, why don’t I make it legal already?
I could jabber all day about why, but for your reading convenience, I’ll boil it down into three main reasons. Walk down the aisle (of my thinking) with me.
1. I fucking hate weddings. I have always hated weddings, even before a undergraduate research project on the Wedding Industrial Complex revealed how far reaching and insidious it is. Even if you think marriage is nifty, weddings are insipid frippery; they have nothing to do with being in a relationship. I hate the froofed-up pretty princess aesthetic, I hate the Passing of the Woman from dad to dude, I hate all the things you “must” do, like have a guest book, and include your friends reading bad poetry, and make everyone do the Chicken Dance at the reception. I hate that everyone–no, really, everyone–thinks that their wedding was totally original and personalized and equalicious, even though you could set your watch by the lighting of Unity Candles, and virginity fetishism is in full effect and jeezusgawd if I ever hear Canon in D again I will destroy the universe with my explosive scorn. I may have just triggered one thousand defensive “you’re judging me!” comments, but so be it. I’m glad you found a loving companion, but I fucking hate weddings. Even yours.
2. Though I am no libertarian (perish the thought!), I don’t like the idea that government or society-at-large gets to decide that certain relationships count more than others. Even though I know there are all sorts of benefits to being married, I’m not interested in saying “well, before the twenteenth of Smarch our relationship wasn’t real enough, but now the state of Missitucky says it’s okay for you to visit me in the hospital.” That’s straight-up bullshit, and I’m grateful that more and more people are recognizing it as such. Pilgrim Soul has written before about the privileging of hetero love-matches over all other relationships, and certainly we’ve heard from a number of our readers who, like me, are in permanent-but-not-licensed relationships (we are among the 12 million co-habiters in the US), as well as many who would welcome a “non-traditional” living arrangement, like our oft-mentioned Harpy House. Just as [dad + mom + 2.3 kids + golden retriever] is no guarantee of “family,” a marriage license is no guarantee of a mutuality or partnership. (Neither is living together, of course.)
3. And last of all, I don’t want to be married. I really never have. Despite cultural messages overwhelmingly to the contrary, I never daydreamed while growing up about a big rock, a white dress, or being whisked away by Mr. HisLastName. I didn’t dream about finding my Other Half. Hell, I didn’t even dream about being monogamous; I thought a small group of kind/hot/reliable boyfriends, none of whom lived with me, was the best option. (The idea is still has its appeal.) I didn’t–and don’t–want to be a wife, with all of the emotional baggage of that term. I want to be a friend and a lover and a partner.
4. (I lied. There are four.) I’m not religious, so the idea of asking for cosmic approval of my household arrangements is even more absurd than registering with my state. I believe in the existence of the state, at least. The fact is that most religious objection to both same-sex marriage and cohabitation is based on a serious case of obsessive panty-sniffing: somewhere, someone is getting it on, and IT MUST BE STOPPED. My reactionary streak makes me wanna go jump the Dude’s bones whenever I hear that.
* * *
I don’t ever intend to marry, and that puts me in the minority of cohabitors. Although I do get tired of answering The Question (I’ve stopped saying anything about my personal life to students, who, while surprisingly queer-friendly, are invariably shocked, if not scandalized, to think that marriage is not the goal of a relationship). I don’t believe it would deepen my feelings for the Dude or enrich our life together. To the contrary, it would make me feel like my relationship was no longer my own. And if what benefits government and society is “stable committed relationships,” government and society might consider getting the hell out of my–and my queer friends’–way.
I leave you with some of the lyrics to a song that the Dude dug up for me a few years ago: “Darling Annie,” by the still ass-kicking Peggy Seeger (who typically performed it with her longtime love Ewan MacColl):
EM: If you marry me, I’ll give you everything I have;
You won’t ever need to earn a penny
I will be your man and the ring upon your hand
Will show the world that you’re my darling Annie.
PS: Dearest love, I’ll be glad to add your wages onto mine
I can work and keep myself so handy;
You can be my man without a golden wedding band
For I’ll tell the world that I’m your Annie.
Chorus:
For it’s love, love will hold us, love is everything
Who could dream of anything that’s better?
Not the vow, not the string, not the golden wedding ring
Just you, love, you and me together.
Damn, I’m such a softie.
*Title stolen from Dorian Solot and Marshall Miller. The companion site to their book is here.
**I’m hoping that New Jersey Senate gets this issue right before the repugnant Chris Christie takes over as governor next month.
I don’t view marriage, or finding “the one” as an accomplishment worth praising. Nor do I believe in “the one.” In fact I think it’s weird to even congratulate newly married couples.
But are celebrations only for commemorating accomplishments (like graduation)? I’m not defending Throwing Parties as feminist or anything, but I would be interested to know how others would answer that question.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with celebrating an accomplishment, whatever it may be. If you choose not to, fine. But if it’s important to a friend or family member, why not celebrate? It seems very small-minded to say “Well, I don’t share your values/think that’s cause for celebration, so count me out.”
For example, every single member of the Protestant side of my family came to my bat mitzvah, even the ones who were devout churchgoers. They came because they knew how important an occasion it was for me. They could easily have said, “Well, it’s not my religion and the ceremony has no personal meaning to me, so I don’t need to be there.”
I don’t think that one has to be married, or has to baptize a child, or graduate from college. But if one of my friends or family members wants to celebrate those things and throw a party, I’ll be there.
Alternately, if y’all want to declare it Harpy Day and exchange gifts and get drunk and eat cake, I’d come to that too.
Tall said: “Family (the kind created by blood and marriage) is a hugely loaded concept for me, and not in a good way. Family, to me, is a commitment I make in my head and heart, it has nothing to do with laws or blood or a social contracts.”
But exactly! I’m not going to say you should feel one way or another about this, but I do think that people coming together to create a new unit is a cause for joy and an asset to the community. You-and all of us-can define family the way you choose to, and our families of choice are often the dearest ones we have. I say celebrate the way you choose to, and with whom you choose. You and your husband will be a new social unit, and I think it’s a glorious thing.
@PSoul: forgive me if you already know this, but it’s called a shower because the intention was to help the young couple set up their new household by “showering” them with gifts. Nowadays, when so many couples already have their own households, either separately or together, it seems it does seem egregious. But I guess people feel that if they’re going to throw an extravaganza, it should be worth their while.
I’ve been to some lovely showers which were designed to give the bride a chance to be with her female friends and family. I’ve been to a couple of wonderful ones. At one we all gave the bride a gift of a spice, with a card telling her about the history and symbolic meaning of the spice. Another was a chocolate shower, and we gave the bride a small gift of chocolate and our favorite chocolate recipe. She especially liked the chocolate handcuffs.
I’m here to tell you, btw, that being hoisted up on a chair is terrifying. And our kids will just have to suffer through it when it’s their turn. *grin*
SMC: I didn’t mean to imply that you thought that about marriage or whatever, simply that I am uncomfortable with the idea of having a party the reason for which is my romantic status. I feel weird enough hosting a party on my birthday. It feels very self-aggrandizing.
Becky: I have (and will, probably taking on the role of Chief Door Holder or Factotum of Gift-Corralling at Sister and Mister’s wedding this summer) attended and/or participated in all kinds of ceremonies and rites-of-passage for family & friends: that’s part of being family & friends. But I won’t go so far as to provide them with a ritual/spectacle that has no meaning (or a negative meaning) for me, just because I’m “supposed to.”
MM: Aren’t Tall and her Beloved already a social unit?
@sarahmc: Personally I like to think of it as celebrating milestones. But no I’ve enjoyed myself at parties that don’t celebrate anything per se. Like New Years parties for example. I just think, yeah you don’t NEED an “event” to have a party but in day to day life it’s not like people often say to themselves lets have a get together with a large group for the hell of it. I mean maybe they should (maybe some people do and I’m just not friends with them) so it’s nice to have an “excuse.”
@MM – Pshaw, you’re just saying that to scare me so I don’t get married too early. I bet it’s the awesomest.
Also among the traditions: I think the kitubah is a really beautiful part of Jewish marriage, especially with how it’s displayed in the home, etc.
@SarahMC – If you get married after having cohabited, etc., and the relationship is stable and committed, I think that’s sort of an accomplishment — to have put in the energy and time to build a lasting commitment with someone (or several someones). Not that everyone who does so gets married or should have to or whatever, but that doesn’t mean it’s not worth celebrating.
MM-
To echo Dork’s question, why do you think me and my SO are not already a social unit? What does marriage bring to the table that substantively elevates my relationship into something new or better? How will my post-marriage relationship with my SO substantively different from Dork’s 12-year-and-counting commitment to her Dude?
I mean, I understand, it’ll be “new” in the sense that there will be different laws that govern certain aspects of our lives. But so what? To me that’s not a substantive change that deepens our commitment to each other. There’s also the fact that others will see us differently. But I don’t see why that matters, either, because my relationship is with my SO, not with those others. They shouldn’t get to dictate my relationship’s terms or its meaning. No one should feel like they have to marry just so that others will see them as a proper social unit.
If marriage means something to you because of traditions and beliefs that are important to you, that’s fine! I totally understand that, actually (which is why I understand that marriage is important to my SO, even it it’s not particularly so to me). Again, I’ve gone to many weddings, and enjoyed them all. I support my friends’ choices, and I truly celebrate their happiness. All I ask is that they don’t assume that I embrace the same beliefs and traditions that they do, and understand that, because of how I grew up, I have a very different perception of marriage and family. My world looks different than theirs does in that respect, and what’s unambiguously meaningful for them may not be so for me.
@annimal – I don’t know the precise legislative history, but the popular narrative is that post Vatican II/Quiet Revolution Québec went all out on the secular business and got a feminist jones on for their marriage laws in particular. The principle in the civil code is complete equality between the spouses.
@Tall & Dork: I do think you are! It’s not for me to say whether people who share an address are a social unit or not, it’s for them to tell me. Tall, your engaging in the ritual of marriage just gives everyone you invite a moment to celebrate your love for each other. Dork, you know, it’s okay for you (or you and the Dude) to be the center of attention now and again. It’s a joy to make a fuss over someone you love, so it would be gracious of you to let your friends and family do that on occasion. I’ll get off the Mom soapbox now.
There’s an old song that has the lyric “Home is where the heart is/No matter how the heart lives”. I endorse that sentiment completely. However we bring more love into the world, it’s legitimate and honorable.
I’m all for critiquing/opting out of the institution of marriage and the wedding-industrial-complex, but it seems a little harsh to criticize families and friends coming together to celebrate each other. Genuinely happy community occasions are few and far between, unfortunately, and sometimes weddings fit the bill, even weddings with corny and antiquated traditions.
Spark, I wasn’t criticizing friends or family. I’m criticizing “corny and antiquated traditions” that coerce highly gendered, highly discriminatory, and highly consumption-based behavior.
@PhDork: You said about parties: Even that feels…icky to me. Like, “YAY FOR US! WE ARE SPECIAL!” Maybe you meant specific kinds of parties/weddings, not weddings as a rule. This thread started to feel a bit curmudgeonly, but weddings don’t need anyone to stick up for them, so I’ll bow out.
Spark: I am a curmudgeon about weddings. I realize I am in the tiny minority which thinks that being in love, while very nice and a net good, doesn’t make you more important or interesting.
MM: I wouldn’t mind being made a fuss over if I thought the fuss was warranted–like, if I landed an excellent tenure-track job in this crap economy, I would want to celebrate the hell out of that. I would be thrilled to hear kind words of congratulations from friends and family. It would be a tremendous relief and the reaching of a long-held goal.
And sure, it’s nice to throw a party and get everybody together. I love house-warming parties (no gifts) because that’s about your guests: “hey y’all, we care about you and want you to feel welcome in our home. C’mon over and we’ll feed you.” Weddings are about the status of the bride and groom, and it’s a status whose value I question.
I found myself nodding my head and (in my mind) shouting “yes! yes!” and fist-pumping the air as I read this article. It reflects a lot of the discussion going on in my own relationship, and in my own mind (although I’m seriously considering a registry wedding – sign a paper, be happy in myself, and don’t share it with everyone who feels they have some sort of right to celebrate my relationship).
Ultimately, I wonder if you took the big wedding day away from people, how many would still want to Get Married.
I can relate to the emotional baggage of the term ‘wife’. There’s historical baggage as well. I don’t want to be someone’s wife, with all that historically entailed, because with anything other than ‘wife’ I feel I get to define the terms of our partnership more.
And there’s another thing. I believe people can go through life having multiple partners without that making any of those relationships any less worthwhile, any less meaningful, by the simple fact that they’re one of more, or by the fact that they’ve ended. So I’m hesitant to promise something I’m not sure I will fulfill, as if the relationship is worth less because I won’t promise I will try to make it last forever. I want it to last forever, now, and I’m pretty sure I want that in a few years from now. But if that changes, sad as that may be, it’s not necessarily a broken promise to me but more a fact of lives changing, people changing, and a real possibility that I can’t rule out. I’ll try, I know I will, but if we won’t make it I don’t want the extra pain on my conscience of breaking a promise I knew I never entirely believed I could keep.
Though I do wonder if that’s a fear of commitment speaking.
The first paragraph needs in addition: I mean in other people’s eyes.
[...] #Unmarried to each other – um texto que explica muito melhor do que eu poderia (vide post anterior) meu problema com casamentos. É mais um dos meus pontos de vista sobre coisas ridículas que deixam as pessoas horrorizadas. Eu fiquei muito feliz quando a minha irmã decidiu legalizar – porque como exemplifica o texto, é exatamente isso – o relacionamento dela com o obrigatório casamento civil e uma festa simples em casa. Sem vestido branco com cauda, véu e sessões de fotos (ugh). Aliás, nem convite de casamento teve – o casamento foi “organizado” em menos de um mês. O dinheiro que eles gastariam na festa? Minha irmã comprou um carro e eles reformaram a nossa cabana, abandonada há mais de uma década. Ano que vem, vão reformar o elefante branco que é a piscina que vem de brinde com a cabana. [...]
I have a suggestion in line with the back-and-forth about how weddings don’t create or fundamentally change a social unit. Maybe people should have a party immediately when they become a social unit. It makes more sense to announce your change from “single” to “paired” immediately after having that talk. Makes it clear when the relationship officially goes from dating to more. There’s less potential for one person to get further into the relationship than the other when they know there is a clear line that has/has not been crossed.
I lost my husband unexpectedly at 28, and I was glad that we were legally married. It meant that I could get copies of his death certificate, get the death benefit from Social Security, and could access his bank and retirement accounts. After all I had been through, I didn’t need anymore hassles or money woes than I already had.
Of course, it also meant I had to sign for the cremation.
Nimue, I’m so sorry that happened to you. You just described most of the reasons I want to get legally hitched, besides the health insurance and adoption aspects. Like I said earlier, my dude’s mom died very suddenly last summer, and it really brought the importance of all that legal stuff into the forefront. To my knowledge, there isn’t a more patriarchy-friendly alternative to marriage in MN, so I’m happy to take the easy way out for a little peace of mind.
PhDork, are you me? In this post you’ve just articulated stuff I’ve been thinking for lo these 30 years of my adulthood.