Scan barcode
avrilhj's review
5.0
In the Acknowledgments at the end of 'Why Marriage?', George Chauncey says that he wrote it in three months, and at five chapters and less than 2000 pages,it is more a pamphlet or an essay than a book. This isn't in any way to disparage ''Why Marriage?'; rather it's a reason for anyone interested in the issue of same-sex marriage to pick up a copy and quickly learn a little more about the debate.
'Why Marriage?' tells the history of the American debate, but much of what Chauncey writes will be relevant to other Western countries. In the first chapter, 'The Legacy of Antigay Discrimination', Chauncey reminds readers of how recently homosexuality was not merely disapproved of, but criminalized, and the ways in which various institutions - law, church, medicine, the entertainment industry - policed and persecuted homosexual people. This is a very recent history, the height of homosexual persecution was post-World War Two, but it is a history that has been quickly forgotten.
The irony, of course, is that with increased persecution came increased militancy; and, Chauncey writes: "Long before masses of gay people chose to come out of the closet, the national government played a crucial role in destroying the walls between people's 'public' roles as workers and churchgoers and their 'private' lives as homosexuals." (p. 27) This is the theme of the second chapter, 'Gay Rights, Civil Rights', which examines how America moved from anti-gay discrimination to a situation in which same-sex marriage can even be talked about. Part of it was the creation of a resisting community as a result of persecution; part of it was the influence of feminism and the sexual revolution; part of it was the inspiration taken from "the many social movements [that] called on people to engage in ... risky acts of witness, from sitting at a segregated lunch counter to burning a draft card". (p. 33) But possibly the biggest factor was the crisis caused by AIDS, and by the refusal of the government and public institutions to care for the people affected by it. This led both to an increased mobilization of gay people, and increased cooperation between gay men and lesbian women. "By the mid-1990s, then, lesbians and gay men faced a complex mixture of support and hostility". (p. 56) Without that support, marriage rights for gay couples would be unimaginable.
The third chapter, 'How Marriage Changed' looks at the other reason that same-sex marriage is now at least imaginable: the changing nature of marriage itself. The chapter begins with a paragraph that anyone discussing same-sex marriage should be required to learn off by heart:
'Marriage is constantly changing. Once often polygamous, it is now usually monogamous. Once concerned primarily with the control of labor and the transmission of property, now it is supposed to nurture happiness and mutual commitment. Once governed by custom alone, it has been alternately regulated by kin, slave owners, masters, church, and state. Given the enormous variation over time and among cultures in how "marriage" has organized sexual and emotional life, child-rearing, property, kinship, and political alliances, many anthropologists are loathe to use the term "marriage" at all, since the term's apparently straightforward simplicity hides so much more than it reveals.' (p. 59)
Chauncey then goes on to describe four historical factors that have opened up the possibility of same-sex marriage: the recognition of the freedom to chose one's marriage partner as a civil right; the increasing egalitarianism and gender-neutrality of marriage; the importance of marriage in the allocation of state and private benefits; and the decreasing power of religious authorities to impose their marriage rules on others. Of these four factors only the third, the importance of marriage in allocating benefits, isn't equally important in the Australian context. While marriage still makes some difference to the rights and responsibilities of Australians, it isn't so important in a country with universal healthcare, and one in which age, disability and unemployment benefits are provided by the government rather than employers. Australians do not need to rely on their spouse's employer for healthcare. But the other three factors are just as true in Australia as they are in the USA.
In the fourth chapter, 'Why Marriage Became a Goal', Chauncey explains why support for same-sex marriage went from being a minority position to being widely held by gay and lesbian people. The reason was "two searing experiences of the 1980s that forever impressed on lesbians and gay men the importance of securing their relationships: the devastating impact of AIDS and the astonishing rapid appearance of what everyone soon called the lesbian baby boom". (p. 95) People were unable to be with their dying partners in hospital or organize their funerals because they weren't 'next of kin'; survivors could lose their homes after the death of partner; the non-biological mother could lose custody of their children after the death of the biological mother. Marriage would solve all this by providing legal protections not ptherwise availble, or available only at great cost: "A full set of documents necessary to approximate the protections provided by marriage could cost several thousand dollars; a marriage license might cost $25". (p. 113) Workplace domestic partnership policies solved some problems, but not all: "No domestic partnership policy could provide hospital visitation rights, or social security benefits, or the pension protections available to married couples". (p. 118) So gay people started to fight for the right to marry, and on November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the state start issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, which from May 17', 2004, the state did. More than 250 couples lined up at the steps of city hall in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to receive marriage lisences on that first day, cheered on by a crowd of ten thousand. (p. 138)
In the final chapter, 'The Present as History', Chauncey puts the then-present-moment, 2004, into historical context, looking at what the gay rush to marriage signified; what the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA); and what can be learned from previous marriage debate - the debate over inter-racial marriages, or 'miscegenation'. History teaches that "marriage bans play an integral role in reinforcing broader patterns of inequality". (p. 161) This is why so many same-sex couples seek marriage, as a refusal of second-class citizenship. It is why the Religious Right and other conservative groups oppose same-sex marriage so strongly, because a marriage without a 'husband' and a 'wife' challenges the God-given subordination of women. It is why so many groups, including religious groups, argued so strongly against mixed-race marriage, because such marriages indicated the full and equal citizenship of blacks and whites. History teaches that "the demonization of subordinate groups as sexually aberrant and dangerous has served to justify their subordination. Homosexuals are not the first group to be demonized as sexual sinners and predators". (p. 163) History warns that both the supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage have exaggerated its potential impact. By finally, history encourages us that things can change. "Racism has not disappeared, but the theology of Dr King has triumphed over segregationist theology so decisively that his religious opponents have been almost entirely forgotten". (p. 164) And so Chauncey ends: "nothing in history is inevitable. As always, our future lies in our own hands."
This book is as relevant to Australia as it is to the USA. The Religious Right is much less powerful here than it is there (no matter what the Australian Christian Lobby may tell politicians) but on this topic it has still captured our atheist Prime Minister, while the Catholic Leader of the Opposition takes the official Vatican line. The legal importance of marriage is less in Australia, with very little difference between the rights and responsibilies created by marriage and those created by de facto relationships, and no differences at all when it comes to children. But allowing same-sex couples the equivalent of de facto relationships would still create a second-class of relationship in Australia simply because they would not have the choice that heterosexual couples have between marriage and a de facto relationship. There was less fear about miscegenation in Australia than there was in the USA, in fact at some points in Australia's history 'breeding the colour out' was seen as a way of dealing with Aboriginal people. But Australia's indigenous people also have a history of their marriages not being recognized and their rights as spouses and parents ignored - they too can recognize that the right to marry is an important civil right. The history of the present that Chauncey describes is as important for Australians to know as it is for Americans.
So, for anyone interested in the current debate about same-sex marriage, and particularly for those people who, like me, want the Uniting Church to advocate for and bless same-sex marriages, I heartily recommend this little book.
'Why Marriage?' tells the history of the American debate, but much of what Chauncey writes will be relevant to other Western countries. In the first chapter, 'The Legacy of Antigay Discrimination', Chauncey reminds readers of how recently homosexuality was not merely disapproved of, but criminalized, and the ways in which various institutions - law, church, medicine, the entertainment industry - policed and persecuted homosexual people. This is a very recent history, the height of homosexual persecution was post-World War Two, but it is a history that has been quickly forgotten.
The irony, of course, is that with increased persecution came increased militancy; and, Chauncey writes: "Long before masses of gay people chose to come out of the closet, the national government played a crucial role in destroying the walls between people's 'public' roles as workers and churchgoers and their 'private' lives as homosexuals." (p. 27) This is the theme of the second chapter, 'Gay Rights, Civil Rights', which examines how America moved from anti-gay discrimination to a situation in which same-sex marriage can even be talked about. Part of it was the creation of a resisting community as a result of persecution; part of it was the influence of feminism and the sexual revolution; part of it was the inspiration taken from "the many social movements [that] called on people to engage in ... risky acts of witness, from sitting at a segregated lunch counter to burning a draft card". (p. 33) But possibly the biggest factor was the crisis caused by AIDS, and by the refusal of the government and public institutions to care for the people affected by it. This led both to an increased mobilization of gay people, and increased cooperation between gay men and lesbian women. "By the mid-1990s, then, lesbians and gay men faced a complex mixture of support and hostility". (p. 56) Without that support, marriage rights for gay couples would be unimaginable.
The third chapter, 'How Marriage Changed' looks at the other reason that same-sex marriage is now at least imaginable: the changing nature of marriage itself. The chapter begins with a paragraph that anyone discussing same-sex marriage should be required to learn off by heart:
'Marriage is constantly changing. Once often polygamous, it is now usually monogamous. Once concerned primarily with the control of labor and the transmission of property, now it is supposed to nurture happiness and mutual commitment. Once governed by custom alone, it has been alternately regulated by kin, slave owners, masters, church, and state. Given the enormous variation over time and among cultures in how "marriage" has organized sexual and emotional life, child-rearing, property, kinship, and political alliances, many anthropologists are loathe to use the term "marriage" at all, since the term's apparently straightforward simplicity hides so much more than it reveals.' (p. 59)
Chauncey then goes on to describe four historical factors that have opened up the possibility of same-sex marriage: the recognition of the freedom to chose one's marriage partner as a civil right; the increasing egalitarianism and gender-neutrality of marriage; the importance of marriage in the allocation of state and private benefits; and the decreasing power of religious authorities to impose their marriage rules on others. Of these four factors only the third, the importance of marriage in allocating benefits, isn't equally important in the Australian context. While marriage still makes some difference to the rights and responsibilities of Australians, it isn't so important in a country with universal healthcare, and one in which age, disability and unemployment benefits are provided by the government rather than employers. Australians do not need to rely on their spouse's employer for healthcare. But the other three factors are just as true in Australia as they are in the USA.
In the fourth chapter, 'Why Marriage Became a Goal', Chauncey explains why support for same-sex marriage went from being a minority position to being widely held by gay and lesbian people. The reason was "two searing experiences of the 1980s that forever impressed on lesbians and gay men the importance of securing their relationships: the devastating impact of AIDS and the astonishing rapid appearance of what everyone soon called the lesbian baby boom". (p. 95) People were unable to be with their dying partners in hospital or organize their funerals because they weren't 'next of kin'; survivors could lose their homes after the death of partner; the non-biological mother could lose custody of their children after the death of the biological mother. Marriage would solve all this by providing legal protections not ptherwise availble, or available only at great cost: "A full set of documents necessary to approximate the protections provided by marriage could cost several thousand dollars; a marriage license might cost $25". (p. 113) Workplace domestic partnership policies solved some problems, but not all: "No domestic partnership policy could provide hospital visitation rights, or social security benefits, or the pension protections available to married couples". (p. 118) So gay people started to fight for the right to marry, and on November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that the state start issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, which from May 17', 2004, the state did. More than 250 couples lined up at the steps of city hall in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to receive marriage lisences on that first day, cheered on by a crowd of ten thousand. (p. 138)
In the final chapter, 'The Present as History', Chauncey puts the then-present-moment, 2004, into historical context, looking at what the gay rush to marriage signified; what the Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA); and what can be learned from previous marriage debate - the debate over inter-racial marriages, or 'miscegenation'. History teaches that "marriage bans play an integral role in reinforcing broader patterns of inequality". (p. 161) This is why so many same-sex couples seek marriage, as a refusal of second-class citizenship. It is why the Religious Right and other conservative groups oppose same-sex marriage so strongly, because a marriage without a 'husband' and a 'wife' challenges the God-given subordination of women. It is why so many groups, including religious groups, argued so strongly against mixed-race marriage, because such marriages indicated the full and equal citizenship of blacks and whites. History teaches that "the demonization of subordinate groups as sexually aberrant and dangerous has served to justify their subordination. Homosexuals are not the first group to be demonized as sexual sinners and predators". (p. 163) History warns that both the supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage have exaggerated its potential impact. By finally, history encourages us that things can change. "Racism has not disappeared, but the theology of Dr King has triumphed over segregationist theology so decisively that his religious opponents have been almost entirely forgotten". (p. 164) And so Chauncey ends: "nothing in history is inevitable. As always, our future lies in our own hands."
This book is as relevant to Australia as it is to the USA. The Religious Right is much less powerful here than it is there (no matter what the Australian Christian Lobby may tell politicians) but on this topic it has still captured our atheist Prime Minister, while the Catholic Leader of the Opposition takes the official Vatican line. The legal importance of marriage is less in Australia, with very little difference between the rights and responsibilies created by marriage and those created by de facto relationships, and no differences at all when it comes to children. But allowing same-sex couples the equivalent of de facto relationships would still create a second-class of relationship in Australia simply because they would not have the choice that heterosexual couples have between marriage and a de facto relationship. There was less fear about miscegenation in Australia than there was in the USA, in fact at some points in Australia's history 'breeding the colour out' was seen as a way of dealing with Aboriginal people. But Australia's indigenous people also have a history of their marriages not being recognized and their rights as spouses and parents ignored - they too can recognize that the right to marry is an important civil right. The history of the present that Chauncey describes is as important for Australians to know as it is for Americans.
So, for anyone interested in the current debate about same-sex marriage, and particularly for those people who, like me, want the Uniting Church to advocate for and bless same-sex marriages, I heartily recommend this little book.
yezhik's review
3.0
Essential for anyone thinking of getting married in the U.S. ... gay, straight or otherwise.
More...