Each of these three assigned readings really resonated with me in a different way. The first one created a sense of panic and urgency in me. The coparent in a same-sex relationship who is not literally 'birthing' the child can have serious problems becoming a legal part of the child's welfare. If anything happens to the biological mother during this process, the coparent can lose all rights to the child in a court of law. That is frightening because most opposite sex couples do not have to deal with this same fear. They can get married and thus have protective rights over their children. Same-sex couples who can't get married don't have the same security and options so having a child can be a scary process. However, the author noted that legal change is not the 'save-all.' Legal change on its own will not 'create acceptance or transform dominant cultural values.'
The reading by Ettelbrick really upset me. I strongly disagreed with the article. Yes, marriage will not change and fix everything but it CAN fix severe, immediate issues that need to be addressed. Ettelbrick argues that society needs to change its way of thinking first. But while society changes (which could take a hell of a long time), same-sex couples STILL won't have many fundamental rights that they are entitled to as a couple. Marriage would give them these rights (which the third reading outlines). Also, Ettelbrick says that homosexuals are different from heterosexuals and should not be treated equally by fighting for equal marriage rights. Again I strongly disagree. Just because one's sexuality differs, does not make the person different in any other sense. A homosexual couple also wants healthcare benefits and social security benefits. Just because their sexuality differs, does not mean that what the couple wants is different. I do understand that marriage rights won't make everything 'better' but its a real good start. By simply passing same-sex marriage, this would show a change in general opinion towards acceptance and understanding of same-sex relationships. A small shift in general opinion could lead to bigger changes which could ultimately change and shape society's opinion on marriage and thus create true alternatives and reorder our view of the family.
I definitely agree with your response and thoughts about the Ettelbrick reading, though I did not have as strong as a negative reaction to her article. I also think that legalizing gay marriage would be really beneficial to the LGBTQ community by securing all of the legal rights that are currently denied to homosexual couples. Like you I think this legalization would be a good start to promoting societal change in opinion. But I also think Ettelbrick raises a good point that should be considered. She claims that until society becomes more accepting of the LGBTQ community the rights acquired from legalizing gay marriage will not be as meaningful because of high rates of disapproval. Gaining approval and securing rights is definitely a complicated and emotional process. Though I don't foresee immediate change anytime soon, I would hope that as people become more knowledgeable, greater tolerance and acceptance is garnered.
ReplyDelete