Activist calls time out on marriage debate

Activist calls time out on marriage debate

Montreal-based radical queer Ryan Conrad is not pleased with the state of debate in the gay and lesbian community.

His provocatively titled group Against Equality has been challenging conventional gay and lesbian thinking in North America since its formation in 2009 in response to the gay marriage campaign then being waged in the US state of Maine.

Conrad has been in Australia this month speaking at La Trobe University’s After Homosexual conference to persuade his Australian peers to challenge some of the conventional wisdoms around the same-sex marriage debate.

“In the States in particular it’s pretty nuts how much money is spent [pushing for gay marriage],” Conrad told the Star Observer.

“Some people don’t necessarily have a critique of marriage, but do have a critique of the prioritisation of marriage and the amount of money, time and energy going into those campaigns that might be better put elsewhere.

“Discrimination is wrong, none of us are advocating for discrimination, we’re asking people to look at the issue on a broader level and suggesting everybody [should have the] right to form whatever sort of family structures they want, instead of championing monogamous couples as the only type of formal relationship worth protecting.”

In 2010, Conrad edited an anthology of essays, Against Equality: Queer Critiques of Gay Marriage, and later published Against Equality: Don’t Ask to Fight Their Wars, throwing down a challenge to those supporting the end of the US military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy.

Through a number of dissident writers, the latter anthology contends that the LGBTI community should look at “DADT within a larger critique of US militarism” and that “the LGBTQ community has historically been anti-war, with good reason”, pushing for queers not only to oppose DADT, but the military entirely.

“Why should we champion the civil rights of LGBTIQ at the cost of human rights on a global scale?” Conrad asked.

Conrad has received death threats from within the LGBTI community for his efforts.

“What’s the point in equality when the only way it’s being framed means simply fitting yourself into narrowly defined relationship structures and killing people all over the globe to defend the monetary interests of the corporate elite?” Conrad said.

“If that’s equality, then fuck equality. I prefer a future that is paved with social, economic, and racial justice as its foundation.”
On the other side of the coin, Conrad said he’s also received much support for offering an alternative view on queer issues.

“What we’re essentially arguing is a broadbased economic and social justice movement from the perspective of queer people.

“I think that really resonates with people because queer people aren’t just queer, but also have ethnic, racial and economic identities, so we’re creating connections across different singular identity politics … It’s like arguing to move away from identity politics and to a broader coalition of building social justice.”

Conrad said one of his biggest concerns with gay marriage group-think is that it highlights an increasingly conservative shift in gay and lesbian politics.

“I think the emotional trauma from the AIDS crisis paired with the violently homophobic and serophobic backlash from the religious right set the stage for a much more conservative and assimilationist gay and lesbian politic,” he said.

“We went from demanding the transformation of our society in the ’60s and ’70s to demanding our community fit into the social structures, legal frameworks and cultural traditions of society.

“This conservative turn is quite troubling and I believe having a sense of this history [of] the radical roots of gay liberation is integral to addressing the rather pathetic state of queer and trans politics in the United States and surely a number of other nations.”

You May Also Like

27 responses to “Activist calls time out on marriage debate”

  1. Stuart as for your ad hominem attack on my name…I suggest you look up the last name which has been a nickname for me for years it’s a music thing.

  2. Go Baz! Marriage is silly. The only reason I support it ( gay marriage) is in the hope of getting rid of it. As if heterosexuals enter into it to the exclusion of all others. Yeah right, like the postman, the milkman, the trady, the gym-class instructor, the guy/ doll on the bus/in the office, etc., who are all bits on the side. Like, who’s monogamous? Your parents? Your nan? Bill Clinton?

    And what’s more, who’s really straight? If the true extent of homosexuality were known, we’d see a world where we’d never stop being in each others pants. Now that’s marriage!

  3. Well Davo, in addition to saying marriage is between a man and a woman, the Australian law goes on to say “…to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life”. Hardly a reflection of reality for heterosexual relationships. Funny how there’s all this agitation to get rid of the ‘man and woman’ bit but not a peep about the rest of the silly phrase.

  4. With regards to the USA, marriage is akin to the tail wagging the dog. They have so many areas in which discrimination exists that need to be addressed instead of worrying about marriage.
    That is not the case in Australia. Most of the areas of discrimination have been legally resolved.
    With regards to marriage – My perception of marriage – even gay marriage – is that by marrying and the exchange of rings – that two people are publicly declaring their intents of being in a monogamous relationship.
    If the participants were in an open relationship and intended to remain so, would it be marriage ? Or would it be something else trying to pass itself off as something more acceptable to society in general?

  5. Hi Baz, Abbott’s response was from a question as to why he does not support Same-Sex couples from marrying. It is the consulation prize.

    Cheers,

    Dave

  6. “Tony Abbott told Joy.FM listeners he would look at giving us the protections of the Equal Opportunity Act.”

    As consolation prize for not supporting same-sex marriage? Or was he just throwing out a red herring for the same reason? I’ll give him credit that the EO Act is far more important than marriage. Just why is the latter hogging all the attention? It’s a Trojan Horse that will usher in other law reforms? I can hardly see that going down well with the conservatives. Some of them are reading these comments.

  7. Stuart I find your comment very interesting considering I was not championing the Socialist Alliance party whatsoever…not a fan of them to be honest…or any Party for that matter. I think you failed to see that I mentioned that I do NOT belong to any political party at all. You are merely putting words in my mouth. Not very wise.

  8. You want to fight for real Equal Rights then lets fight for the Equality of the Indigenous population of Australia who are having interventions pushed onto them which are making their lives a lot harder than they should be where there are no similar treatments being given to other minorities in this country. Let’s look at Queer Indigenous issues, let’s look at the Equal Rights of workers to be able to have proper representation and to get a fair deal in their workplace without getting screwed over by their employers and the bosses courts (FWA).

    Let’s look at Equal Rights for all as far as socio-economic justice for all people is concerned and removal of the privileges associated with marriage and for the state to view us as individuals instead of this push to assimilate to the hetero-dream.

  9. Benny Rudeboy I am hardly in the White Middle Class urban areas – I live in a small country town and not a Gay Ghetto, my beloved who writes letters the editor in our local paper is of Chinese origin. Even in Bob Katter’s electorate there are same-sex attracted people calling for marriage equality. Labor has just removed a significant amount of discrimination, and will tell you this when asked about equality. When asked about Marriage Equality, Tony Abbott told Joy.FM listeners he would look at giving us the protections of the Equal Opportunity Act. The simply eloquent quest to remove discrimination for those who want to marry has greatly advanced our Civil Rights. It raised awareness in areas of discrimination in many areas as diverse as Health and Marriage on TV, on radio, and in print media and the web.

    I am not convinced that due to the sexuality of an individual, they would seek anything different then the hopes and aspirations of anyone around them. I am yet to discover some sequence of DNA that forces people to vote Liberal, Labor, of the Greens. Some of us have been united by our sexuality. The calling for Equal Civil Rights comes from the wider community, who through education via radio, the web, TV, print media, and from family and friends of our struggles, are now calling on an end to all discrimination- we have a modern family.

    Giving women greater rights in society did not end all discrimination overnight. There is still much work to be done. But it has greatly improved the freedom women have.

  10. Dave says he “wants people to be able to be themselves”, yet he won’t provide his full name. And Ben barks that the Socialist Alliance Party is about “justice for all”. Well, there’s no justice for nude people, according to the SAP. I asked them if they supported nudity and was told it’s not on their “list of priorities”. That was five years ago.

    Ryan has some interesting ideas and the fact that he’s been subject to death threats from within the glbti community shows we really are equal. Whilst I support queer marriage, I don’t support the institution as such. I think marriage has evolved into a device protecting straight relationships as the “norm” whilst saying any other relationships are irrelevant. Anything that undermines that structure must be a good thing.

    Ryan is quite right about war. It’s not something we should support. It’s not something anyone should support.

  11. I myself am a Radical Queer activist (no I’m not in any party/group) who despises the institution itself and refuses to support the homocons’ (Gay mainstream, bourgeois and conservative) push to join an institution and add another layer of privilege and inequality within the Queer community. Not all of us are in favour of socially oppressive institutions that champion state approved monogamy and many of us think that fighting to have the privileges associated with marriage removed would be a move for REAL relationship equality. The fact is…a very low percent of Australians are getting married, it’s a sinking ship which we shouldn’t be swimming to get onto. Funny how when one of us comes out against marriage altogether we are subject to the empty non-logic of guilt by association and other fallacies.

    Essentially any opinions that are a little bit on the radical side within the Queer community are being silenced by those with another agenda…sounds like a great recipe for totalitarianism among other things.

    The repeal DADT in the US merely allows Gays & Lesbians to openly serve as agents of genocide in the US military…wow how liberating that must be. Just remember that it was the Log Cabin Republicans (Gay Republicans) in the US who pushed fore the removal of the legislation as well as the Log Cabin Republicans who have been pushing for inclusion into marriage. Or David Cameron’s support for marriage “because he is a conservative”.

    The fact is…the inclusion into these socially oppressive institutions actually excludes many more less privileged members of society within the Queer community who have many more pressing issues at hand. It doesn’t solve the issues of economic inequality, it won’t fix the suicide rates (which by the way in Australia, the Queer teen suicide rate is on par with Indigenous youth), it won’t address the issues of homelessness within the Queer community, it won’t end the HIV/AIDS epidemic, it won’t end the Queerphobic violence…etc etc

    Let’s for a minute remember the initial Gay Liberation Front that formed after the Stonewall Riots. They were anti-war, anti-militarism and seeked to abolish all socially oppressive institutions. Look at where we have gone now…pushing for the right to assimilate and slowly destroy the Queer culture and community and being able to celebrate our differences. Refusing to deal with homophobia outside of our Queer, White, Middle Class urban ghettos, ignoring the plight of many others in the community to go and chase the individualist conservative push for marriage…count me the hell out of it…NOT IN MY NAME!

  12. “Forgive me Baz, I am just not getting you on this.”

    Playing dumb does not become you Dave. What about traditions like polygamy as practiced in Chinese, Islamic and Mormon societies? Just as many people pick and choose what to believe in the Bible, you pick and choose what ‘traditions’ suit you. That and your denial to admit blatant contradictions is making you look dishonest.

  13. Conrad doesn’t get it. Obviously he is against (traditional) marriage as such and opposes the military actions of the US abroad. Hence he considers the efforts to allow people to marry and to serve in the army a waste of time. However, no one will be forced to marry and no one will be asked to support American military actions. It is only about ending inequality in these areas. Conrad mixes his personal views with the fight against inequality. And doing so he supports the homophobes who want to deny us equal rights. I find this very stupid and appalling.

  14. His position about DADT type stuff bothers me. Those military folk are less deserving of equality because he doesn’t approve of the army? We’re not some monolith who should be tying unrelated values up with equality like that, very inappropriate.

  15. Oh Ryan, if any man ever asks you to marry him, just say no. Let the rest of us seek what we want to seek, and if we want to spend our time and money doing so, then that’s our call, thanks. I find this energy as much of an obstacle as straights who say marriage equality makes their marriages somehow lesser-than. Equality sets the most people free, whatever the financial or cultural cost.

  16. Sounds like the tired old marxist analysis that had so much appeal to so few people.

    Wrap it in a simple slogan (“social, economic, sexual and racial justice for all!”) and you’ve got the Socialist Alliance Party.

  17. There seems to be an assumption that anyone who believes in marriage equality necessarily believes in monogamy, yet I’ve never heard any marriage equality advocate in Australia openly champion monogamy. Many same sex couples who would get married if they were able to would probably maintain the openness of the relationship they already have after they were married. Some straight people have open marriages. It’s likely that many gay and lesbian people would too if they were actually permitted to be married.

  18. At the end of the day, people should have equal opportunity before the law regardless of their sexuality. It’s really that simple. That’s why so many people who don’t necessarily want marriage for themselves are easily able to support the civil right (and civil rite!) for everyone including gays. We like to think of our country as a naton of the fair go. Aussies are waking up to the fact that banning gays from marriage is not fair, not reasonable, and not necessary. It’s all very well for vocal contrarians to tell their same-sex attracted peers what they should be doing/thinking/feeling but if those views are so detached from, or derisive toward, the accessible needs, wants, hopes and aspirations of their peers, then it seems to me that opinionistas like that are not leaders at all but just another kind of oppressor and odd bedfellow to all those others who would seek to have us treated as less than equal before the law.

  19. Baz are you referring to the tradional Chinese same-sex weddings, or early Rome or ancient Egypt, or the pre-modern Europe? What about the Japanese Samurai weddings, or the Singapore same-sex weddings just over a hundred years ago? Or what about Catholic Spain or even Canada? Is it just marriage you disagree with or the idea same-sex couples get married? Forgive me Baz, I am just not getting you on this.

  20. “…those who want to marry as their fathers or mothers did, as even their Grandparents did…”

    That’s what Magda Szubanski said the other night Dave. I suppose like her you call it tradition too. Except those who defend marriage as between a man and a woman insist that’s tradition. But you’ll probably deny that’s a contradiction too.
    Any wonder progress is so slow when the opponents merely echo each others reasoning?

  21. As Jagger sang; just backdated. Over time movements change. While not being reductive of the issue of self examination, Conrad does present as a village idiot.

  22. Baz I am not with you on this and I see no contradiction, but I welcome your views.

    Restoring the Marriage Act to the pre Howard era, will not mean you have forced marriages, but for those who want to marry as their fathers or mothers did, as even their Grandparents did, they will be able to.

    John Howard excluding GLBTI people from the Marriage Act was always going to cause a stir as it is blatant discrimination. I cannot see how other people marrying who want to, will take your freedom to be yourself away.

  23. Contradictions Dave: “I just want people to be able to be themselves…”. Excuse me, but where’s the freedom to be yourself if monogamous, heterosexual marriage is the benchmark by which you measure equality? Must women look to men to make their own decisions? Do white people set the standard to which other races aspire? Yikes!
    We’ve made no progress if white, male, heterosexuals still rule the world. And it was just such a male – John Howard – who changed the marriage laws in favour of his ilk. You want to be married to be equal to John Howard? No thanks. I’d rather be free of the laws made by people like John Howard. That used to be what fighting discrimination was about. What changed? I coming to the conclusion that 11 years Howard as Prime Minister has given us a generation of arch-conservatives.

  24. Firstly, Marriage Equality exists in Canada, the home of Conrad. But Conrad is arguing that because of the sexuality people have, they would not want be part of the community they live in, like their brother or sister, like their mother or father, like their neighbour, or like their co-workers, or even like their fellow Church Goer.

    When scientist clone gay fruit flies, and get gay fruit flies, some would say they are replicating God’s creation. The behaviour of the gay fruit flies is no different to other fruit flies, except it is same-sex attracted. There is a similar story with mice in a laboratory.

    I am thankful of the Marriage debate. It exposes the hate at the heart of some Church leaders and politicians. It is even putting pressure on Jeff Kennett and his beloved Beyond Blue. It even got Tony Abbott talking about the possibility of including us in the Federal Equal Opportunity Act, and was a significant vehicle for change in aged care services, and health services in general to the GLBTI community – it allowed a lot of people to talk in the media about the many other areas of discrimination. The ALP now says, like a parrot, when asked about Marriage Equality, a conversation about what discrimination has been removed, and what they are working on now. It gets a conversation going about equality and areas of discrimination, and I think that is terrific.

    Now Conrad has his perspective on the way we should live our lives. I welcome that. But I simply do not agree with his assertions that by birth we should hope for a new utopia without Marriage. Those that do, are not just gay as our unmarried Prime Minister can demonstrate. The only difference between us and those gay fruit flies or mice, some of us still face the social construct of discrimination.

    I am not buying because I am gay I should act this way or that way. I just want people to be able to be themselves, and not face discrimination. Marriage Equality will not end all discrimination, but it has already moved us further down the Yellow Brick Road.