Marriage and mateship
Last week the NSW Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby (GLRL) went to Canberra to discuss marriage equality with Federal politicians and other community organisations. Judging by the number of organisations in attendance, marriage equality is gathering political currency in the mainstream.
Perhaps the most heartening outcome was that the politicians in attendance resolved to seek support across all parties.
Whether your life choices mean you are personally more, or perhaps like myself less, inclined to walk down the aisle is not really at the core of the marriage equality debate. At this moment our friends and family who, in the words of the great philosopher Beyoncé, like it and want to put a ring on it, can’t.
For us non-marrying types it seems too easy to continue on our merry way because we feel marriage equality doesn’t affect us. We want no part in that exclusive club. All the while our friends and family who want to put “that ring on it” are being told a big fat no to their big fat wedding, Greek or otherwise.
Politics, like marriage, can be viewed as an exclusive club. In ancient Greece practice of politics used to be reserved solely for the privileged.
But while politics may have changed, the rules of friendship are the same. If your mates can’t get in the club, you’ll be damned if you are going to stand by and let the injustice pass.
Senator Sarah Hanson-Young is one of those mates who has started to make some noise around Marriage Equality, including introducing an amendment bill that is now tabled in parliament. So while Sarah is getting her pollie mates together, we need to be getting our mates together.
We have spent months researching and piloting a community campaign training program based on successful campaigning models overseas. We invite you to participate. The training is free and open to all GLRL volunteers, those who want to get married and those who support the idea that white goods are cheaper than flights to Spain.
Join the campaign and become a GLRL volunteer today: [email protected]
info: Rathana Chea (newly elected) GLRL Co-convenor
@Michael, you have missed the whole point of the debate, as do many others. The issue is not about civil unions vs marriage, nor monogamy vs open relationships – it is about the removal of inequality in our laws that discriminate against us as GLBTIQ people. Yes, we should all support the removal of discrimination wherever we find it, and especially in our laws, only then can we all live as we choose to individually.
Yes of course it is an exclusive club: gay men marry and get husbands and within weeks are trawling beats, the internet and sex clubs for twinks and muscle boys. I can see your point about Boyance, put a ring on it, but whilst many want that security and everything that marriage legally brings, as long as the morals police, snow white gays who tell us what to do that we have to live this white picket fence monogamous relationship (or an open one if we do not want that), then I won’t support gay marriage equality. You write that us non-marrying kinds need to support it. I won’t. Not until gay men stop telling each other how to live. If you want a ring on it (why god was that song written?) fine, you want your relationship recognised great, you want your kids (or poodles) fantastic, but if hubby and you want to sleep with others (or not) that is fine. But you won’t get my support for it until the activists (Sydney based of course tell everyone else what to do) let me marry and have sex on the side and mind their own business, OR, let me have an exclusive relationship. Don’t push an agenda that marriage = monogamy because every couple I know including the ones going into over 20 years and more do others. Get your right to marry but it has to stay out of the relationship the last thing I want is some marriage foresaking all others thing when I know gay men are not like that.