Sunday, September 9, 2007
What does Free Love have to do with Same Sex Marriage? and why have feminists engaged both?
Estelle Freedman puts gay marriage into various feminist histories, as does George Chauncey. Which historical moments do they tell stories about and why? Compare Chauncey's Why Marriage argument to Freedman's in "Boston Marriage, Free Love, and Fictive Kin." Be ready to talk about the historical investments feminists have had in reframing marriage. Goggle "free love" and check out "Queer Loving" on ResearchPort. Check out the link captioning the picture above for links to African women blogs and consider what transnational feminisms have at stake.
Create some research webs linking spots on the internet and bring them in to class to share.
This is the place to contribute Chauncey inspired materials: violated assumptions lists, summaries, and other ideas and associations.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
christine c said...
George Chauncey’s “Why Marriage?” briefly outlines the history of institutionalized and legalized discrimination of LGBTQ people and LGBTQ couples in order to assert that the legalization of gay marriage is a necessary step in the direction of equality. While the book does contain criticisms of marriage, especially from the feminist perspective, it is clear that Chauncey is in favor of legalizing gay marriage in order to promote social, political, economic, and personal freedom of LGBTQ people.
Chauncey uses his background as a historian to demonstrate to the reader the numerous struggles of the gay social community. In nineteenth and twentieth century America, LGBT people were not only considered social outcasts, but faced discrimination within or expelled from “straight” social establishments such as clubs and bars. Mostly gay bars or clubs, or “straight” establishments that allowed the presence of an LGBT person or people, were harassed and often shut down by police. Legally, gays were stripped of personal rights, and anti-sodomy laws were specifically aimed towards LGBTQ people. Towards the end of the book, Chauncey goes on to contrast and compare the LGBTQ struggle for equality with the Civil Rights movement, pointing out similarities while noting that it would be unfair to both cause to say that one was equal to the other as far as struggle or triumph. Interestingly, the author links the more recent Marriage Defense Act, which outlines that the government only recognizes a marriage if it is solely between a man and a woman, to earlier social standards and political acts that worked against interracial marriage.
The clarification of marriage as an important gay rights issue was demonstrated through the author’s explanation of the roles that the prevalence of AIDS and the growing number of gay parents. Each of these topics played important parts in the increasing amount of tolerance and acceptance of gays in society and of the idea of gay marriage as a possibility. On completely different levels, they helped to humanize the image of the LGBTQ person to the average American. It is clear that the political legalization of gay marriage would increase the amount of social equality over time, as a legal marriage, equivalent to that of any available to a straight couple, would reflect tolerance and acceptance in society, and increasing equality. If LGBTQ people began to be treated as “normal”, as “citizens”, as being relatable, they become less of the “other” or “alien”, social equality would significantly increase. Chauncey approaches the topic of marriage as an issue of social equivalence, and effectively argues his points while taking in other perspectives within the LGBTQ community.
Insights Gained From the “How to Read” Handout
1. Analyzing the “form” of the text
- George Chauncey is trained academically
- Historical background of events (discriminatory social, political, or economic
policies) is given
- Divisions and subdivisions between topics are made and organized to convey
specific opinions and points
- The context of the writing is very academic and serious; strong assertions are
made through a clear argument that effectively addresses the opposing opinions
as well as dissent within the affected communities
2. Who is speaking, and who is not?
- Scholarly author
- Writer is directly involved in the LGBTQ community and so has a better
understanding of issues surrounding gay marriage than the average person
- LGBTQ voice is speaking
- Creates a safe space for the reader of the text
- Race and class are often not referenced
Additional Topics for Discussion
1. Gay rights in contrast with Civil Rights- what is the perspective of those involved in earlier Civil Rights movements in regards to gay marriage? Do they consider gay rights a civil rights issue? Is it widely recognized?
2. From where was the myth of queer people being child molesters derived? Are lesbians and transgender people as discriminated against on this basis as gay men are?
3. Did anti-sodomy laws apply to all unmarried couples? How could the authorities prove any related crime?
4. It is interesting that the image of the threat of a child molester was recycled from Roma people and other groups that have been discriminated against. The recycling of stereotypes and terminology seems to be a trend in American history when officials are trying to “other” a group.
5. What other types of AIDS discrimination was there?
6. Has the depictions of gay couples within the media helped or hurt the push for the legalization and/or social acceptance of gay marriage?
7. I would like to discuss the idea of marriage as a patriarchal structure from a feminist perspective, looking at the pros and cons of each side and see how the historical framework of marriage has transitioned over time as well as what it is like now.
VIOLATED ASSUMPTIONS:
1) All gay couples would be in favor if gay marriage legalization even if they had disagreements with the concept of marriage.
2) I did not expect the AIDS epidemic to have the affect that it did as far as the change in public opinion.
Summary #1: Why Marriage by George Chauncy
Gay marriages have come a long way since the 1920’s. Many governmental policies, groups, and coalitions have come together to say no to homosexuals. Earlier in the 20’s and 30’s, homosexuality was not accepted let alone the marriage of homosexuals. Gay businesses such as bars, and business associations were illegal and had limited access to the public. Many issues of harassment were often occurring, and signs such as If you are Gay, Please Stay Away, or We do not serve homosexuals were put up in restaurants. Homosexuals were looked upon as minorities and gained no respect in the public. Chauncy breaks down the pivotal points in which gays have gone through in order to gain their rights in marriages.
It wasn’t until the “identity movement” in the Second World War that brought about change to the oppression of gays. The most influential movement that allowed the gays to gain some voice was the black civil rights movement. Gays came together by taking over public beaches, going to bars, throwing open gay parties, etc. In the 60’s and 70’s, the gay movement broke out in celebrations stating their homosexual difference. The gay community, and African- American community stayed hand in hand to represent cultural difference. Soon after, rioting occurred and police tried to arrest people such as gays, drag queens, and hustlers. The gay liberationist began to plan new organizations and the old traditions of gay life separated into three ways.
The first way old traditions of gay life came back was through the rebirth of feminism. By analyzing their oppression, gays and lesbians were able to look into a different light by looking into their sex roles between men and women. The influence on feminism helped broaden gay and lesbian politics and presented supoort of heterosexual superiority. The second way was for gays and lesbians to stick together. Lesbians had their own feminist bookstores, music festivals , magazines, in continuing feminist politics. The main goal was to have a community that sticks together. There were newly established gay caucuses in unions, church choirs, and even a gay version of the Olympics. The last way old traditions came about were for the gay community to be open to heterosexuals. The term “coming out of the closet” became known in the 1960s and was a crucial liberation.
As time pasted, and many political war fares went on, it was the 90s that sprung the gay community into action. Many states such as Hawaii, Connecticut and Massachusetts became progay. Many found it unnecessary to hide their true identity as being gay. This change had caused the notion of marriage to change. Marriage became a vital part in public and private rights that allowed same sex marriages to increase due to economic and legal consequences. Marriage soon became to be seen as a fundamental civil right. As gender to husband and wife declined same sex marriage seemed more open. Same sex marriages were able to break through due to the termination of gender roles. The roles as to what a husband should do, or the roles as to what a wife should do were intermixed.
Today gay marriages are more common than ever before. There are those who still fight against gay marriages; however there are those who rightfully respect the decision of homosexuals. The debate of gay marriages will always be expected.
How to Read Handout: Why Marriage by George Chauncey
Biographical:
George Chauncy is a professor at the University of Chicago teaching American History. He studied twentieth century U.S. history and gay and lesbian history and received his doctorate in history at Yale in 1989. He has taught for fifteen years at the University of Chicago and other schools such as Rutgers, New York University, and the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris. Chauncy has been involved with numerous major court cases involving gay and lesbian rights. In this book, and looking at his past education studies, it is evident that Chauncy has a passion for lesbian and gay rights.
About the book:
This book was written in 2004 by George Chauncey. The blurbs on the back were form E.J. Graff, from OUT Magazine. He states that the book was “Breathtaking…[a] brilliant, slim, and nuanced volume.” The New York Times said “A wonderfully readable account of how the issue emerged..[that] thoroughly debunks the myths of ‘traditional’ marriage.” The Baltimore Sun quotes “ Essential in the current public debate”. This book was produced here in the U.S. I think it could be published in Europe, and other nations were homosexuals are prevalent.
Form of text:
This book is historical and informational. Chauncy first talks about the history of gay marriages and then talks about how far gay marriages have progressed. Many political issues were also laid down such as laws, that were passed or rejected. The mood of this book was exhaustively data-filled. I felt like all Chauncy did was put in data after data. There wasn’t much opinion in the book, but more of historical facts. I feel as though this book was biased because it always pinpointed to gays and their rights. Chauncy did add in the perspectives of heterosexuals however in a negative light. I feel as though more diverse opinions should have been brought up, and not just the opinions of heterosexuals.
The basic context in this book was equality and marriage for homosexuals. There were other minority groups that were discussed such as the black civil movement which aided the gay movement into light.
Class Discussion:
1) Do you think this book is biased?
2) Chauncey ends with a clear note that gay marriages will always be a debate, did he really come to a conclusion to this book?
3) What were some surprising facts that you found out in this book?
4) Are you for and against gay marriages?
5) If you were to meet Chauncey, what would you ask him?
Violated assumptions #2: Chauncey: Why Marriage
1) Through the footsteps of African America, Jews, Chicanos, Jews and Italians oppressions, gays were able to speak out.
2) Governmental Policies put a ban to all gays when serving in office. President Eisenhower particularly was against gays serving in the government.
3) Homosexuality was known as a mental disorder, however in 1973 it was removed from the list at the American Psychiatric Association
4) It was the gay community that sought out to help with AIDS in the 80’s and early 90’s.
Violated Assumptions:
1. Homosexual discrimination has largely existed on cultural and social levels
2. Proffesional and scientific authorities are sources of reliable information
3. Advances in women's rights often do not hold much relevance for gay rights movements
4. Bill Clinton was consistantly and genuinely dedicated to helping achieve gay rights
5. Because of the principle of "gay pride" there is not much emphasis on assimilation among gay communities
List of Topics
•“Demonization of homosexuals”
•Gay Marriage/ Separation of Church and State
•Homosexuality in the early 20th century
•Homosexuality treated as a mental disorder
•Lesbian and Homosexual relationship being labeled as second class to heterosexual relationships
•Homosexuality and religion
•Early Gay rights movements of the 20th century
Summary
The issue of gay marriage has more recently become serious topic in politics because it conflicts with the sacred institution of marriage being between a man and woman. As a result of this much of the LBGT community has gotten backlash from many religious officials. Chauncey’s book “Why Marriage” presents a brief overview of the history of gay rights in the US and the budding gay culture of the early 20th century. He explains that there is little account for homosexuality in US history and homosexuality/ lesbianism was something that was virtually erased from America’s past. His first chapters introduced to the reader to the realities of being gay in early 20th century America. He later in the book addresses the issues of gay marriage and the rights to having the full benefits that heterosexual couples enjoy.
Chauncey’s argument is simply the argument for human rights and he compares the struggles of the Gay rights movement to that of the Civil Rights movement that took place in the 60’s. He concludes his book with various stories taken from homosexual and lesbian couples that have experience inequalities associated with the recognition of their unions. He further concludes that homosexual/lesbian relationships are viewed as second class or less than heterosexual couples because they lack the ability to reproduce. Moreover he explains that there are homosexual/lesbian couples that do have children and denying these couples their rights would greatly affect their children.
Violated Assumptions
•It did not surprise me that most of the history concerning the gay culture of the early 20th century and late 19th century were virtually erased from US history. America founded on Protestant heterosexual ideals view homosexuality as something to be suppressed, ignored, and overlooked.
•It also did not surprise me that homosexuality was viewed as a mental disorder but I was disturbed by how many homosexuals and lesbians were put into mental institutions because of a sexual preference.
•I was also shocked that many homosexuals and lesbians were denied equal opportunities for employment. Many homosexuals were fired or dismissed from their jobs when their sexual orientation was brought to light.
•I was also very unaware that homosexuality was even a huge issue in the early 20th century. I knew it to some degree had existed, but it seemed that before WWII homosexuality was something that was done behind closed doors. According to Chauncey it seems that this culture thrived in New York during the 1930’s Jazz era.
1. SUMMARY AND RELEVANCE
The overall objective of George Chauncey’s “Why Marriage?” is to recount the various events throughout history that have brought us to the present stage in the gay marriage debate. Chauncey begins by providing a sort of generalized history of “Anti-Gay” discrimination in which he describes the systematic legal discrimination of gay people in the 1920’s and 1930’s as well as their more cultural demonetizations. Chauncey then shifts to the subsequent empowerment of the gay movement as inspired by the civil rights movement. He references the positive influence of the Black Arts movement on gay culture, the feminist movement’s help in developing a critique of gender roles as well as a strong network of organizations, and even the surprising support extended by some churches. It is not until the third chapter that Chauncey even references marriage. In this chapter he lists the main ways in which the general institution of marriage has changed, and in turn made gay marriage even imaginable. This discussion provides a good segway into the specific reasons that gay marriage became a goal for homosexuals. Among his most central explanations, Chauncey references the legal and emotional vulnerabilities many gay people faced as a result of the AIDS crisis as well as the custody issues and other injustices that resulted from the “lesbian baby boom.” Furthermore, Chauncey explains how the judicial publicity of many of these cases helped humanize homosexuals and the struggles they faced without the right to marry. Chauncey ends with a discussion of the present history of gay marriage. The majority of this discussion is spent explaining the current divide between modernists and fundamentalists. While modernists have come to accept the fact that homosexuality is a state of being and therefore that homosexuals should not face discrimination, fundamentalists continue to maintain a more outdated and traditional view that homosexuality is a sinful choice, and therefore does not deserve to be validated through gay rights. Chauncey also reminds us that the present fear of gay marriage is not far removed from the past fears of interracial marriage, and that what we must see from this connection is that opposition of gay marriage is actually fear of the integration of a minority group into mainstream society.
As a class centered around reconceptualizations of society, this book fits perfectly into our agenda, specifically exploring social injustices outside the realm of women. Reading about the discrimination homosexuals have faced is a perfect example of this sort of broader exploration. Although it is also important to recognize that even in learning about the injustices of other oppressed groups, the discussion of women’s oppression remains extremely relevant. Chauncey frequently related the feminist struggles to defy gender roles with the struggles of homosexuals. Thus, Chauncey’s work single-handedly proves how our study of “alternative communities and visionary actions” helps enrich our own visions for feminism.
2. “HOW TO READ” EXERCISES
While reading I largely utilized the active reading exercise. I underlined points that I thought best captured the spirit of a given chapter and at the end of each chapter reviewed the points all together. In this way I was able to maintain a general understanding of the book’s direction, and avoid getting bogged down by the abundance of facts and statistics. Usually when I read books like Chauncey’s that provide a lot of information to prove a few main points I get overwhelmed. I usually try to remember every minor statistic at the expense of following the larger ideas. However, this exercise provided me with a better strategy, specifically focusing on the main ideas of a book while regarding the statistics as enrichment.
3. DISCUSION TOPICS
• While I found many of Chauncey’s points to be well explained, I often found his explanations repetitive
• Chauncey’s decision not to address gay marriage specifically until the fourth chapter was unique and strategic.
• I was often confused by Chauncey’s recounting of court cases.
• I thought Chauncey was very good supporting his arguments regarding fear, which is often an obscure concept, with relevant factual information
• I was surprised by the University of Chicago magazine’s description of Chauncey as shy, while his written statements are so bold.
• I was also surprised to learn that Chauncey’s father was a Presbyterian minister, because of Chauncey’s somewhat negative attitudes towards religious ideals. However, I quickly came to see how this inspired Chauncey after reading that his father was asked to resign after expressing support for Brown v. Board of ed. at the pulpit.
• The book provided me with a clear understanding of the connections between women’s rights and gay rights, which previously had been vague
Violated Assumptions #2
1. After reading chapter 4 “Why Marriage Became a Goal” my assumption that wills and making people beneficiaries on insurance policies safeguarded partners from having to deal with contestation of authority issues regarding their partner was violated.
2. I assumed someone so renowned for his study of lgbt would not make unsupported statements, such as the one made in chapter 2 regarding the progress of gay rights, “None of this change is inevitable, just as none of it is irreversible” (Chauncey, 23).
3. I assumed that the reason the lgbt movement progressed was from involvement in political organizations. Not one on one contact, as explained in chapter 2 like “their efforts to change people around them transformed gay movement into a mass movement.” (Chauncey, 47)
4. In chapter 4 it stated, “Old social patterns, in which former sexual partners became friends and many men sustaining emotional ties were with a small group of friends of instead of single partners were celebrated,” I assumed this was a modern idea not old school.
Chauncey summary:
Chauncey writes to give the reader an understanding of how anti-gay legislation can affect even those not targeted by it (i.e. heterosexual couples). He prefaces the book by explaining how anti-gay discrimination can affect other unmarried couples: by depriving them of benefits attached only to marriage. Chauncey continues on to a history of the gay rights movement in order to explain how gay marriage became a major issue in the struggle for gay rights.
Chauncey’s explanations of the effects of the AIDS crisis and the lesbian baby boom answer the question of why gay marriage became an issue for gay activists in the first place. He also includes a history of the public’s changing attitudes towards gay people, which gives the reader an understanding of why gay marriage hasn’t been pushed until recently, as well as insight into what the future could hold in terms of gay rights.
Because he includes history of other minority groups in the United States, Chauncey gives hope to those fighting for gay marriage. He points out that many laws used to prevent interracial couples from marrying have since been overthrown. Coupled with tracing the history of the gay movement, Chauncey gives a positive outlook on the future of gay rights while encouraging the reader to be active in learning about the gay rights movement.
Chauncey
part 2 (How to read hand out)
I researched the biography of George Chauncey and found that he is a history professor at Yale. He has also testified as an expert witness in court cases dealing with gay rights, and also wrote the Amicus Curiae brief in Lawrence v. Texas. He is also the recipient of several fellowship awards.
Biographical information about Chauncey strengthened my opinion of the text. Of course, I want to believe any historical arguments that are made in the context of supporting gay marriage, but in order to use Chauncey’s historical framework in my own discussions with people, it’s important that I be confident the information is valid. Because Chauncey is a professor, has been used as an expert witness, and is widely respected, I trust that the information he provides us with is legitimate.
Part III
•I liked how the book made reference to historical inequalities in American society (e.g. laws against interracial marriage). I think it strengthened my ability to make an argument for gay marriage to someone who does not support equal gay rights.
•It bothered me that Chauncey was so centered on gay identity rather than individual rights. While gay people are certainly targeted as objects of discrimination, I think identity is much more subjective than he allowed it to be. I think he appealed to an audience that would embrace an argument of sexual orientation as biologically determined (e.g. you are either straight or gay, you’re born that way and it’s a natural part of your identity, and I understand that this may be the appeal he needed to make to those people. However this approach leaves out important groups of people – potentially those who identify as queer or bisexual. I think he could have done a better job of approaching the subject as a violation of a right rather than a violation of an identity. He did not address the issue of being a person who might want to marry someone of either sex – in which case the law would sometimes support this person and sometimes discriminate against him/her.
•Chauncey did an excellent job of historicizing the need for gay and lesbian people to achieve the benefits attached to marriage (e.g. health care, burial rights, spousal inheritance). I gained a deeper understanding of why domestic partnership rights or legal documents (such as powers of attorney, wills, etc) just cannot add up to the benefits attached to marriage. Additionally, I felt his explanation strengthened my ability to argue for creating a new system of legitimizing relationships and kinships, while still keeping me positive about the fight for marriage rights.
Violated Assumptions
1. In the preface (xi), I was surprised to read that an Ohio constitutional amendment that intended to keep gay partners from obtaining benefits linked to marriage actually resulted in a Judge throwing out a domestic violence felony charge on a man who was accused of physically abusing his girlfriend on the grounds that domestic violence protections did not extend to unmarried couples. I’ve never thought about the implications anti-gay politics could have on non-gay couple; I just assumed the issue was only relevant to gay people.
2. I was surprised to read that the U.S. State Dept. fired more homosexuals than communists (p.6) during the McCarthy Era. From a previous class, I was aware that McCarthyism linked homosexuality and communists, so I knew that the firings did affect more than just suspected communists. However, I had no idea how large scale the firings of “suspected” homosexuals were.
3. Learning that the word “gay” was originally used to protect lesbians and gay men from the hostility of those around them was new to me. I was surprised that I did not know this before, but the explanation made sense to me.
4. While I knew that public support for gay marriage had grown in recent years, I was amazed to learn that even while 44 percent of individuals (in 2002) found homosexuality to be an unacceptable “lifestyle,” 86 percent still believed that homosexuals should have equal rights in terms of job opportunities. Maybe I do not give the public enough credit? I know there are some issues that I may not personally agree with but that I still think are political rights we are entitled to, so I can appreciate that some people may not view homosexuality as acceptable but can still respect individuals’ rights.
Summary #1
Part 1
Summary:
The book Why Marriage? by George Chauncey chronicles the history that led to the contemporary legal battle for legalizing same sex marriage, including why and how it became a forefront issue. The first chapter, “The Legacy of Antigay Discrimination” informed the reader about how all the anti-gay legislation of the past has been basically forgotten. It recounted how the U.S. Department fired more gays than communist, how even after prohibition ended it still was illegal to serve the lgbt community alcohol, and how gay men were systematically denied their civil rights. The second chapter, “Gay Rights, Civil Rights” discussed how the lgbt used the black civil rights movement. It also describes how the movement shifted from trying to prove lgbt community was just like everyone else to embracing the differences as a part of empowerment. The fact that stunned me the most was that while most heterosexuals’ expressed moral disapproval, that they are supportive of lgbt civil rights. It also drove in the principle point that lgbt community suffered the same oppression that other minority groups were subject to, closely chronicling connections between the civil rights of slaves and the lgbt community.
In the third chapter, “How Marriage Changed” described specific changes in the institution of marriage itself that have made it more amendable to same including same sex couples. The four factors were: the right to choose one’s marriage partner, how traditional marriage roles have evolved legally and within the home, how marriage has become the center for allocation of public and private rights and benefits, and lastly the fact that the power of religious groups to impose marriage rules on other has declined. The fourth chapter, “Why Marriage Became a Goal” explained the different opinions within the lgbt community on the right for lgbt couples to legally marry, which demonstrated the heterogeneous opinions that exist within the community. It places the lack of rights, benefits, and security that partners are denied when their significant others become ill, die, etc at the root of why legalization of marriage has become a necessity. It also specifically details how the AIDS epidemic not only emphasized this, but the self-reliance necessary within the lgbt community when dealing with the AIDS epidemic. The last chapter, “ The Present as History” just summarized modern day issues. Most importantly it clearly stated the principle point that the freedom to marry is regarded as a fundamental civil right and is a symbol of a full equality and citizenship within a nation.
Part 2&3
About the Author:
This info helped me understand that he’s very knowledgeable on the topic, considering he testified in the landmark case and works for an Ivy league university. It also showed that he’s well respected and actively involved within in fighting for lgbt rights consider the fact that he is the lead author of the Historians Amicus Brief in Lawrence v. Texas the landmark case overturning the nation’s sodomy laws.
About the Publisher:
Learning about the publisher helped me to understand that while they are a major distributor they are looking for quality work not necessarily work that would lack quality but be very profitable. The reason the publishing company was started made me have a higher level of respect for the company and specifically look for books that are published by them because there motto that “an innovative model is possible, where the power of the group supports editorial freedom, creative energy, and quality publishing” coincides with my personal beliefs.
Related Court Cases:
Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), which was a United States Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of a Georgia sodomy law that criminalized oral and anal sex in private between consenting adults. Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case. In the 6-3 ruling, the justices struck down the criminal prohibition of homosexual sodomy in Texas. Allowed me to have background legal knowledge on the progression of lgbt rights in the law.
Topics to Discuss:
· How a mass movement was formed out of person to person interaction
· How and why the AIDS epidemic has influenced the push for marriage
· The influence of other political movements such as black civil rights movement and feministm
Violated Assumptions:
1. Assumption: I realized that homosexual people have faced great discrimination throughout history; however, I did not know the true extent of the systematic governmental discrimination.
I was shocked to discover the many injustices that homosexual people faced in the 20th century. Several things in particular surprised me. First of all, I couldn’t believe that Hollywood films were prohibited from including gay or lesbian characters, discussing gay themes, or even referring to the existence of homosexual people in our country. Secondly, I knew that President Eisenhower had banned homosexuals from government employment, but I did not know that the State Department systematically fired more homosexuals that communists during the McCarthy era. Finally, I didn’t realize that in the 1950s, there were no gay business associations or gay bars advertising in newspapers. The presence of homosexuals in an establishment made that establishment “disorderly.”
2. Assumption: All churches or religious affiliations have always been opposed
to homosexuality and gay marriage.
Before 1980, some religious affiliations did support gay rights and some even held gay meetings in their churches. These affiliations included Lutherans, Unitarians, Methodists, the Church of Christ, Protestants, and Presbyterians. Catholics even allowed a gay Catholic group for a while called Dignity. However, it was soon forbidden by higher Catholic officials. Other denominations were strongly opposed to legal discrimination against homosexuals.
3. Assumption: The AIDS acronym had always been the name for the illness of
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome and it was not always thought of as a homosexual issue or as being caused by homosexuals.
Before the title of AIDS came about, the syndrome was called GRID, which stood for Gay-Related Immune Deficiency. In the 1980s, society thought that the disease affected only homosexuals and Haitians. People never thought that the “general public” was at risk for getting AIDS. I also previously thought that as soon as the government became aware of the virus, they started acting on it. I realized that it wasn’t until six years after the virus was discovered that the government actually began addressing the issue.
4. Assumption: Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush had addressed and recognized, but not necessarily helped or included, homosexuals during their presidencies.
I couldn’t believe that President Bill Clinton in 1992 was the first president to acknowledge homosexuals even being a part of society. He had little experience with gay issues as a governor in Arkansas, but he included gay people in his “vision” for America and was the first president to actually meet with and welcome various gay groups into the Oval Office.
Summary of "Why Marriage"
George Chauncey gives a detailed argument in support of same-sex marriage in his book, “Why Marriage.” First of all, Chauncey introduces the issue of same-sex marriage on a positive note of writing how much society has progressed in its opinions of same-sex marriage and other gay issues. Chauncey then begins the book with a history of the struggle for not only same-sex marriage, but also gay rights as a whole. The examples of discrimination that homosexuals have faced throughout history, especially in the past fifty years, would be shocking to even the most educated person. We see throughout the book, especially in the beginning, the significance of other movements, such as the feminist movement and the civil rights movement, in helping homosexuals to rise above the discrimination and to ultimately, fight valiantly for their cause. Chauncey also discusses the history of the struggle to bring AIDS to the forefront as not only as a homosexual issue, but as an issue that everyone must deal with.
In the next part of the book, Chauncey discusses many of the ways in which the fundamental structure of marriage has changed in favor of gay marriage. For example, interracial marriages were not allowed in past. Marrying someone of a different religion was looked down upon, if not completely illegal. However, both of these examples have changed to be somewhat more accepted in society today. Chauncey argues that by looking at trends, it is hopeful that same-sex marriage will become more acceptable. We then are given the reasons that homosexual do want to get married and be together legally in the eyes of the government and others of society. Chauncey gives us several examples of committed couples wanting to officially become married. Finally, Chauncey discusses the current issues at hand and what can be done to allow same-sex marriages by looking at the political, religious, and social aspects of our country in relation to the same-sex marriage issue. As someone who before felt somewhat informed on this highly contested issue, I have certainly become more knowledgeable about the argument from Chauncey’s book, “Why Marriage.”
How to Read
In regards to the “How to Read” handout, I tried to put into practice several of the suggestions for how to read more actively. First of all, I usually try to highlight whatever I’m reading. This usually does cause me to go back over the sentence or paragraph that I have previously read in order to highlight. However, when reading “Why Marriage”, I highlighted important points and then also went back and actually wrote down the important points at the end of each chapter. I also wrote down ideas to expand on what Chauncey wrote. Another way I incorporated the “How to Read” suggestions was by looking at the biography and background of the author. I found that Chauncey is able to give much of the historical background of the gay rights struggle because he is a professor of history at Yale University. Chauncey has credibility in the political side of the issue as well. He has been an expert witness in several major gay rights cases and wrote the Amicus Brief in the court case of Lawrence vs. Texas. These were just two suggestions from the “How to Read” article that I used while reading this book.
Discussion Questions
There were several topics brought up in the book that I would like to further discuss in class. As a Government major, I am interested in the political aspect of the same-sex marriage issue. I want to know more about governmental involvement in gay rights affairs before President Clinton and what exactly President Clinton did in order to change the tides and renew the struggle. Another thing I am interested in learning more about is the involvement of Jerry Falwell and the Christian right in basically negatively influencing millions of people to oppose gay rights and same-sex marriage. Going along with religion, as a practicing Catholic, I am curious as to how I can bring my feminist beliefs along with my belief in same-sex marriage and gay rights into my practice of Catholicism, when the Catholic church is extremely anti-feminist and anti-gay. Finally, I am interested in the issue of AIDS and how people who lived through the early 1980s felt about this struggle. It amazes me that the government would wait for six years before finally addressing the issue and I am curious as to how not only homosexuals, but other people in general handled this injustice. These are just several issues discussed in the book which sparked my interest and which I would like to discuss with people my own age as well as older people who have lived through much of this struggle with gay equality.
Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate Over Gay Equality written by George Chauncey describes the history that has set the stage for the debate over gay marriage today. The book begins with a history of gay and lesbian individuals in the US and their struggle to enter and gain acceptance in the public sphere. Up until the 1930s during the great depression gay and lesbians were not viewed with such critic and demonization. During the great depression there was a push for traditional families when men lost their jobs and no longer had the same role in their family and found homosexuals to be a threat. Continued discriminatory practices continued in the following decades and gay clubs and restaurants were closed and individuals presumed to be homosexual were jailed. During the 1950’s Broadway plays were band from having gay themed plays and an agreement was made in Hollywood not to represent gay characters or issues. During the 1970’s public opinion was shifting and heterosexual couples were living together before marriage. Birth control was gaining popularity and sex was being viewed as a means of pleasure and not just for reproduction. During the 1980s through the 1990s the AIDS epidemic started and gay men were both stereotyped and feared as being diseased by the public and healthcare workers. Gay men came together with the support of female activists who had experience in health due to work in the women’s movement to battle discrimination. In 1987 78% of the US viewed homosexual relations as wrong. During the 1990s gay characters could be seen in the media and movies such as Philadelphia were hits and gay support was increasing significantly. In 1993 the military enacted a “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy on homosexuality forcing many gay individuals to lead a double life. Chauncey now describes marriage and how it has evolved overtime from a system of control where people wed for political reasons and one could not choose a partner to a system of love and compassion. Since the nineteenth century marriage has evolved and the freedom to choose a partner is viewed as a right, gender roles with in married families have changed and no longer need a stereotypical “man” or “woman”, marriage is economically beneficial and often necessary, and is thought of less on the basis of religion, even though some churches do allow it. Marriage is desired by gay and lesbian couples because without the privilege they are second class citizens with no rights and protection if a partner becomes ill, as seen in the AIDS epidemic, or dies along with protection for their children. In 2004 gay couples receive the right to marry in Massachusetts and California along with other counties throughout the US. Gay couples flocked to get married but this ability to wed was short lived when President Bush two weeks later set forth a constitutional amendment to end gay marriage.
During this reading I focused on taking notes throughout. I found this to be very helpful. I continually was writing down facts that I found to be interesting and important. By doing so I would naturally take a moment to reflect on what I was writing down and its significance to the overall issue of gay marriage. I found this to be very helpful in understanding the context of this book. There was a lot of information presented and many different movements were occurring simultaneously so I benefited from taking short breaks to layout what I had learned within the greater picture. If I found entire pages to have importance I would fold down the top of the page so that I would know to come back to it as a reference. The tone of this book was informative and I did not find it to be biased. Being unbiased was important to me because I believe individuals from any walk of life would benefit from this book and not feel as if they were being attacked. I liked the way Chauncey approached the subject from a very factual and less philosophical frame. When reading similar information on gay marriage the argument tends to be emotional and philosophical but the factual way this book was presented was much more informative and beneficial to me as a reader.
Topics to discuss:
1) How the AIDS epidemic affected gay culture. Gay individuals were affected personally, socially, economically, and politically. Gay individuals were personally affected because the majority of those infected with the disease were gay men. These men suffered from health issues and had to pay inflated amounts for healthcare because pharmaceutical companies did not want to treat a “gay” disease with equality. Healthcare professionals were also scared of the disease. Gay individuals were targeted as social outcasts and heterosexual people did not want to eat or drink from where an individual with AIDS may have eaten or drank from. Gay partners had no right to visitation and upon death lost financial stability and security. Politically it was used as another way to prove gay inferiority.
2) Gay characters in the media – Is this as great as it seems? While I believe it is great that gay characters and themes are portrayed in the media I still find that most of these characters are very stereotypical. Shows like “Will and Grace” are positive but I do not think it is positive when I hear girls say, “Oh, I need to find a gay friend.” Assuming that all gay men are the same, like fashion, and care about the same things that they see on TV is not representative of gay men as a whole. I believe that now gay characters have made it into popular media diversity within the gay culture would be a beneficial next step forward.
Violated Assumptions:
1) Birth control does not affect gay individuals. I did not recognize that sexual freedom found within heterosexual couples could correlate with sexual freedom experienced within same sex couples.
2) That during the 1930s-1970s being gay was viewed as being a molester. This idea surprised me because gay stereotypes I have are very feminine and not being able to control urges is not a current feminine quality.
3) That men sought out male prostitutes rather than female to protect against STDs in the early to mid 20th century. I have heard of a subculture, like in prison, where men can do “gay” acts but not be gay but I thought that was a recent development.
4) Marriage is a way to make some couples better than others. I have not always been the biggest supporter of marriage and I never could figure out why but I like the way this is phrased and it made me really think about the system of marriage and how it is economically and politically used.
Summary:
In this book, George Chauncey guides us through the criticisms of marriage from a feminist standpoint and the struggle that LGBT went through and still go through throughout the course of history. Many things and attitudes have changed towards same sex marriage, but at the same time it is still a struggle. Gay marriage is continually criticized and looked down upon, especially by religion because they argue that gay marriage is a violation of the institution of marriage.
In the beginning of the book Chauncey talks about the history of how the US has treated and perceived the LGBT community. The Lawrence decision that occurred in the spring of 2004 to extend privacy rights to homosexuals produced an outrageous outcry by congressmen and religious leaders. They were upset and worried about what was going to happen next, such as same-sex marriage. Chauncey claims that no historical study can resolve the debate over marriage, but the AIDS epidemic amongst the gay community and the boom in gay parenting is important to see why we are at this point today.
Marriage has changed a lot since the beginning, and the changes are making marriage more appealing and urgent for gay people. People who are against gay marriage are the people that can’t except the changes that are occurring in the institution of marriage. The freedom to choose one’s marital partner became a fundamental civil right. Chauncey expresses his belief for gay people to have the right to marry each other and have the same rights as heterosexual married couples.
Chauncey also relates the struggle of gay marriage to feminist problems and the civil rights movement. There is a history of the struggle of the gay community, just as there is a history of feminists and the struggles that minorities went through to be seen as equal human beings. Times have changed a lot. Chauncey emphasizes the importance of why gay marriage should be.
How to read handout:
Biography:
George Chauncey is a professor of history at Yale University. He is best known as the author of Gay New York. Professor Chauncey has been involved in several major court cases and public debates bearing on the rights of lesbians and gay men. He has also authored or joined amicus briefs and affidavits on the history of marriage or antigay discrimination submitted in several state court cases in which same-sex couples have sought the right to marry. He was also involved in the Lawrence v. Texas case which overturned the nations remaining sodomy laws. He was a big activist in obtaining rights for the gay community.
-By knowing about his background it has made me realize why he wrote this book.
Form of the text:
The form of the text is in a book, which is in the genre form of almost a history book. This book is not totally like a history textbook, but it contains a lot of information on the history of the struggle of gay marriage. This book is almost a timeline of what has occurred in the past and how things have changed. It is kind of hard to pin point an exact genre to put this book into.
Topics to discuss:
1) Shouldn’t the AIDS crisis have deterred gays from wanting to get married instead of attracting them?
2) What do you think is going to happen to gay marriage in the future.
3) Is the push for gay marriage going in a positive or negative direction.
Violated Assumptions list:
1) I didn’t know that the civil rights movement had such a great impact on the gay rights movement.
2) AIDs crisis attracted gays to want to get married.
3) Homosexuality was considered a mental disorder/
Why marriage is a thorough and factual journey through the history of gay rights and liberation in the U.S. It provides a flawless depiction of the struggle endured by the pioneers of the sexual liberation movement. Following a summary of the earliest assaults against gay rights, Chauncey discusses the evolution that the movement underwent as social climates began to change within the civil rights movement of the 70’s and 80’s.
Along with the progress made through a new social consciousness Chauncey discusses how the priorities and tactics of sexual liberationists changed over this time as well. For example, he notes that early activists protested with overt and somewhat separatist strategies while later advocates expressed an intention to blend in with normative society. These later groups in some ways denounced the efforts of those who represented the more extreme and stereotypical members of the alternative lifestyle movement.
In conjunction with this history of consecutive events and mile stones, so to speak, the author went on to discuss correlations between civil rights movements and the struggle for “gay” liberation. The recount went through the history of different gay rights organizations modeling their infrastructure after some successful civil and black rights groups. With this similarity Chauncey begins a discussion about the comparisons seen across different movements while at the same time respecting the unique position of the gay rights movement, specifically the struggle for marriage equality.
The book closed with two chapters that drove the point home about the future of gay marriage. First with a chapter about why marriage had become the goal and then with a summation of how the said history and its modern understanding weighs on the success of this struggle. One specific reiteration of this author throughout the book was that history is not inevitable and success is entirely in the hands of liberationists today. The past and the present were fused together to clear a road for the present and this author made a convincing argument for the acknowledgement of this history as consequential to it’s future.
My personal opinion of this piece was that it provided an unbelievably thorough representation of the overall struggle for marriage equality. Despite the sometimes daunting nature of such a text its context was invaluable and will serve as a great reference on the history of gay rights. I particularly liked the correlations made between the black civil rights movement and the gay liberation movement in conjunction with the evolution of religious priorities and positions. Another argument that I was considering for the first time was the use of forgotten history to corroborate current arguments against marriage equality. I for one, until now, had been in this group Chauncey speaks of whom have ignored the importance of this history and its implications but now hold a deeper understanding of the big picture and what it means for the future.
This book has brought up many issues that could be discussed in class. I understand conversations on such topics may come down to personal opinions, feelings and experiences on the matter, but with the completion of this book I am excited to see where else we can take this discussion. The plethora of facts and arguments provided by this author have opened the doors to develop conversations concerning legal measures, liberation tactics, comparison between old and new circumstances alike, etc. My specific appreciation in discussing this topic would come from an exploration of the recent concessions made by those organizations or individuals whom have staunchly opposed the fight for marriage equality.
Violated Assumptions
1. I was surprised to see such a strong correlation between the black rights movement and gay rights movement as it appears that homophobia in the black community has been quite prevalent in some cases.
2. I previously thought that it was just enough to care about the issues rather than understanding the ins and outs of that specific history.
3. I had not realized how much actual litigation had taken place against the rights of gay and lesbian individuals since the beginning of this struggle. I had assumed that the tactics might be somewhat overt as they are today.
Violated Assumptions
1. Chauncey points out how quickly the general public is the accepting the need to give rights to members of the queer community. I was absolutely shocked that the transition was happening so quickly. I assumed that large social changes would need significantly more time before a noticeable and traceable difference would occur.
2. I can’t believe that Hollywood could just ban all forms of queer membership in the media. This seems as if it would be against free speech rights. The incredibly restrictive nature of American society never ceases to amaze me.
3. I know I should have thought of this before but lesbian divorce and child custody just hadn’t occurred to me. The non-paternal mother has little recourse against the paternal mother if she decides to separate and refuse visitation rights. This is a small and specific injustice that never occurred to me as being an issue. I think I just assumed that members of the gay community would be more communicative and less vindictive of each other.
4. Chauncey discusses the etymology of the word “gay”. The great lengths that members of the gay community went through to conceal their sexuality not only seems foreign to be but also very striking. Having grown up as a champion of the things that make me different I can’t imagine trying to hide those portions of me or being ashamed of who I am. No one should have to feel ashamed.
Summary
In his book “Why Marriage?”, George Chauncey chronicles the history of gay rights and activism, focusing specifically on the United States. He begins his tale by demonstrating how far the movement has come in such a short period of time and by pointing out how far is still left to go. He chronicles why it is so important to have a conceptualization of the history of the gay rights movement to understanding this hot topic issue of gay marriage. His thoughts can be readily summed up in a quote from page 12, “And forgetting this history weakens the gay movement internally as well, because it cannot understand where it is today unless it understands how it got there.” Chauncey’s next task is to show how we actually got to the “San Francisco of 2004, where the mayor issued thousands of marriage licenses to same-sex couples” (page 23). He discusses the emergence of a gay identity movement and the emergence for the necessity of civil rights. Chauncey has neatly set up the scene to propound his thoughts on gay marriage.
Chauncey next describes how the institution of marriage has changed and how that change allows for argument (both inside and outside of the queer community) about gay marriage. Next, he outlines the reasoning behind why marriage became a goal. He talks about how gay partners became tired of the difficulties they encountered when they split, tried to adopt children, requested joint medical benefits including hospital visits, and sought tax breaks, just to name a few. Eventually the debate led to marriage, or something equivalent to it, as a goal for the gay community. Finally, George Chauncey concludes by discussing the present state of gay marriage in our society. He talks about the personal experiences of gay men and women receiving marriage licenses. He talks about political and social ramifications. Chauncey brings his book together be demonstrating the power of an institution like marriage to both bind us together and tear us apart.
Insights
• Summarizing at the end of chapters and sections proved to be very helpful for me to get a true grasp of what the main arguments were.
• Writing personal responses in the margins frequently helped me clear my thoughts. For example, at the top of page 13 where Chauncey is talking about the exaggeration of gay history I realized that for modern society we both developed the problem and the solution, or at least, have started working toward a solution. Granted, this is the main argument of his first chapter, but I got there before he said it outright!
• While not a result of the “How to Read” handout, I did have a fun insight that related to Violated Assumptions. Recently, I became aware of my assumption that all members of the queer community were progressive in their ideologies and that they spent significant time thinking about issues that frequently were ignored by heterosexuals. In a quote from Karen on page 143 about marriage she says, “We’re progressive people who have really thought a lot about what the pros and cons are of this, which is something that I don’t think a lot of heterosexuals think about.” While I would have read over this statement several weeks ago and not thought anything of it, I know realize the inherent assumption in both Karen’s logic and my own.
• Understanding the background of Chauncey really helped to provide a framework for his book. I feel that the most important part of his background was his involvement in the amicus brief in the landmark Lawrence vs. Texas case. It not only helped to understand his work better but also served to give him a significant amount of credibility with regard to his fact checking and arguments.
• Although not explicitly mentioned in the “How to Read” handout, I have taken to circling and highlighting words that I don’t know. I have found that this increases my vocabulary and general understanding of the text. One example, from page 22, is the word “animus” meaning hostility or ill-feeling.
Topics and Questions to Discuss
• How do we remedy Chauncey’s statements regarding the growing number of people that are outraged by the injustices faced by gay couples with the recent ruling of the Maryland court and others around the country?
• The Freedman article about free love uses the term in a significantly different way than I found elsewhere. Compare “free love” in Freedman’s sense to the polyamorous sense of “free love” as seen in this Boston Pheonix article. http://bostonphoenix.com/archive/features/98/10/15/POLYAMORISTS.html What does this mean about “free love” specifically and about the multiplicity of terms in general?
Summary
The argument of marriage for lesbians and gay men has become a hot topic in today’s society and George Chauncy’s Why Marriage discusses why. Chauncy begins the book with the history of prejudice against homosexuals, reaching back as far as the turn of the century. He discusses all of the laws that the government set to ensure unequal rights for people that were seen as “sexual deviants.” The novel then turns from the overview of history to an in depth look at attitudes towards homosexuality throughout the decades. Around the turn of the century the gay community was more accepted. It was seen as a sub culture of the Jazz community. Many activist groups were more concerned with stopping prostitution than bothering with homosexuality. This history section moves through the post Second World War era where homosexuality was seen as a mental illness. Chauncy uses this to explain why so many homosexuals decided to hide their life styles. Moving further into the 1960s and 1970s the connection between the gay and lesbian movement and the civil rights movement is discussed. After this, the Reagan administration, which called for a nuclear family and the AIDS epidemic appeared around the tine that homosexuals, mostly gay men, were blamed for child molestation and violence. The movement of the book continues through to today and the leaps and bounds that the homosexual community has made in overturning restrictive laws and being more out in the public eye. This allows for the subject of gay and lesbian marriage. The chapter, How Marriage Changed, discusses the changes in marriage in the last few decades and how these changes have opened the world of marriage up to the homosexual community. The end of Chauncy’s argument discusses the goals of the homosexual community and how the fight going on now will change the future for homosexuals.
How to Read
1) The book first outlines the shocking laws, then the history, then the reasons for why marriage should be open to homosexuals.
2) George Chauncy is a history professor, which would be why he includes historical fact.
3) He always gives an example, such as the changes in marriage, then lists the changes and then discusses them in detail, helping the reader understand.
4) The first chapter goes over history and each paragraph starts with the phrase “fifty years ago.” This gives a time and the ability for the reader to compare to the present.
5) I used the technique of underlining key words or phrases that were shocking or that were important to the body of the text which helped in summarizing the novel and allowed me to see the things that I found interesting or that could be a violated assumption.
Class Discussion
1) Why is it that all of the laws against homosexuals are “forgotten” in history?
2) I thought that it was interesting that Chauncy references the fact that the gay man was seen as a “sissy man” and yet when it came to blaming men for child molestation and violence, it was gay men that were being changed.
3) Words used to discuss the homosexual community – “gay” was not a term for homosexuality until after the 1970s and people used it as a code word.
4) Discuss the four changes in marriage – the ability to marry whoever you want, the switching of gender role stereotypes in the home, public and private rights and benefits, and one religious group not imposing marriage rules on another – and why these have opened the opportunity for homosexuals to fight for marriage.
violated assumptions
0) I thought that it was interesting that Chauncy references the fact that the gay man was seen as a “sissy man” and yet when it came to blaming men for child molestation and violence, it was gay men that were being changed.
1) I did not expect to learn about all of the laws that were restrictive towards gay men and lesbians because we never hear about them.
2) I did not know that homosexuality was looked at as a mental illness.
3) I was unaware that the homosexual community had such a force at the turn of the century. People discuss the suffrage movement and civil rights, but not the firght of homosexuals.
4) I was unaware that President Clinton had done so much to help the gay and lesbian community in changing laws and appointing openly gay public officials.
Part I
Why Marriage?
Written By George Chauncey
George Chauncey gives readers a historical overview of the political development for gay equality in the United States. Chauncey clearly articulates important historical accounts from the 19th to the 21th century pertaining to the indoctrination of marriage in society especially through gender lens, which is an unlikely perspective found in traditional historical texts.
According to Chauncey, marriage became a primary institution to allocate state and private benefits. At one time in society, marriage was the only contractual agreement a woman could consent to, but only to secure the turn over of her property to her husband in exchange for protectionism. Division of labor affected much of the marriage laws until the law changed and declared the right to marry one’s partner of choice became a fundamental civil right. This propagated newer egalitarian marriage laws, whereas, in the past “marriage was one of the primary social institutions through which gender differences and inequality were produced…….it now became a relationship between equals”(66, 70Chauncey). The allocation of benefits became a primary role for marriage especially since healthcare and other benefits were not socialized, it became the employer’s responsibility to offer benefits but usually only to the male dominated work force. Women stayed home and were dependent on their husband’s benefits but were only entitled to these benefits through them. Therefore, marriage is about equal benefits and entitlement to individuals in a marital contract, this right should not exclude non heterosexual relationships. This propels gay right activists to demand for the same equality and not be discriminated against because of their sexual or gender orientation. This is a primary premise of Chauncey's book, but also the continuous discrimation inflicted by the government against LGBT people.
Part II
I focused on the historical and gender aspect of the book. I recognized many of the fallacies I grew up with regarding marriage and all the hang ups I still have over marriage.
PART III
1) I would like to discuss in further the laws that pertain to civil unions and how they can be advanced.
2)Discuss the importance of marriage in current times, is marriage really necessary.
VIOLATED ASSUMPTIONS:
1) All LGBT want to get married
2) Marriage is all about love not benefits.
3)The struggle for equal rights for LGBT people has been easy.
4)The law protects all
Part I
Why Marriage?
Written By George Chauncey
George Chauncey gives readers a historical overview of the political development for gay equality in the United States. Chauncey clearly articulates important historical accounts from the 19th to the 21th century pertaining to the indoctrination of marriage in society especially through gender lens, which is an unlikely perspective found in traditional historical texts.
According to Chauncey, marriage became a primary institution to allocate state and private benefits. At one time in society, marriage was the only contractual agreement a woman could consent to, but only to secure the turn over of her property to her husband in exchange for protectionism. Division of labor affected much of the marriage laws until the law changed and declared the right to marry one’s partner of choice became a fundamental civil right. This propagated newer egalitarian marriage laws, whereas, in the past “marriage was one of the primary social institutions through which gender differences and inequality were produced…….it now became a relationship between equals”(66, 70Chauncey). The allocation of benefits became a primary role for marriage especially since healthcare and other benefits were not socialized, it became the employer’s responsibility to offer benefits but usually only to the male dominated work force. Women stayed home and were dependent on their husband’s benefits but were only entitled to these benefits through them. Therefore, marriage is about equal benefits and entitlement to individuals in a marital contract, this right should not exclude non heterosexual relationships. This propels gay right activists to demand for the same equality and not be discriminated against because of their sexual or gender orientation. This is a primary premise of Chauncey's book, but also the continuous discrimation inflicted by the government against LGBT people.
Part II
I focused on the historical and gender aspect of the book. I recognized many of the fallacies I grew up with regarding marriage and all the hang ups I still have over marriage.
PART III
1) I would like to discuss in further the laws that pertain to civil unions and how they can be advanced.
2)Discuss the importance of marriage in current times, is marriage really necessary.
VIOLATED ASSUMPTIONS:
1) All LGBT want to get married
2) Marriage is all about love not benefits.
3)The struggle for equal rights for LGBT people has been easy.
4)The law protects all
What is the significance of marriage in today’s society? The word “marriage” carries different implications for various cultures, generations, and communities. In the novel Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality, author George Chauncey takes on the daunting task of attempting to define what marriage is and why it holds significance specifically for the homosexual community. Chauncey also exposes the historical discrimination that homosexuals faced throughout the history of the United States of America, pointing out the flaws in the government and the unjust laws and precedents set by policy makers. By revealing the history of discrimination against homosexuals in the U.S., Chauncey also builds a foundation of sympathy and support upon which he further compels the reader to join in on today’s societal debate over marriage in the homosexual community.
Why Marriage begins with gripping and revealing evidence about the history of prejudice against homosexuals in the U.S. Surprisingly, the discrimination felt by homosexuals throughout U.S. history was not only inflicted by the masses; rather, Chauncey discloses the governmental bans and limitations on the homosexual community, an example of such being in 1953, when “president…Dwight Eisenhower issued an executive order that banned homosexuals from government employment, civilian as well as military, and required companies with governmental contracts to ferret out and fire their gay employees” (6). Chauncey takes a close look at the extent and types of prejudice and injustices homosexuals faced from the early twentieth century up until the present day, specifically comparing gay rights to the civil rights movement. Moreover, he makes a significant observation: that the “history of antigay discrimination…is almost entirely forgotten. But calling this a forgotten history is really too benign. It’s more accurate to say this history of discrimination has been erased from the historical record, and that the erasure itself has been a central element of antigay politics” (12). Chauncey continues on to explain that marriage carries a different meaning for each person and that very interchangeable definition of marriage has changed throughout the course of time as well.
Chauncey explains that marriage is a significant issue for the homosexual community because the matter with marriage no longer lies within the lack of its definition. Rather, the problem within the homosexual community and not legally being permitted to get married is that such a legal impediment is a violation of a homosexual person’s civil rights. Hence, society must look beyond the issue of gay marriage as a concern strictly regarding marriage; in reality, the inadmissibility of a gay marriage is a reflection of a government that is not being tolerant and just to each U.S. citizen’s basic civil rights.
Keeping the “How to Read” concepts in mind when reading Why Marriage, I went about researching the life of author George Chauncey. Born into a Presbyterian family, Chauncey learned from his father to fight the injustices he saw within his surroundings. Revealing the fact that he is gay in college, Chauncey went on to become a historian and writer as an adult. Chauncey’s background and current career certainly come across in his writing; however, rather than using his emotions to get the argument of the novel across to his audience, Chauncey uses a stronger tool: historical evidence. Rather than hone in on his own sexual orientation and his struggles throughout life, Chauncey uses historical evidence to draw his audience to his point of view. As a historian, Chauncey exposes the intolerance and injustice of the U.S. toward homosexuals in the last century. By doing so, he leaves his audience the liberty of forming their own opinion in terms of what they believe to be just and unjust.
Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality is a novel that clearly depicts and shapes the debate over gay marriage in today’s society. Although a person living in the U.S. would like to think that he/she lives in a tolerant society, this novel forces one to step back and truly reconsider such a notion. One is forced to wonder how it is that this country has been built to honor the civil rights of each individual, yet denies the institution of marriage to its homosexual citizens. In a most dignified and academic way, Chauncey compels his audience to step back and realize that in retrospect, the U.S. has not honored its civil rights guarantees to all of its citizens. By doing so, Chauncey educates his reader and also compels him/her to empathize with and truly under the situation that the gay community in the U.S. faces on a day-to-day basis.
----------------------
Violated Assumptions #2: Why Marriage? The History Shaping Today’s Debate over Gay Equality by George Chauncey
1)I was surprised by the amount of historical evidence Chauncey provided about antigay discrimination, simply because I assumed I knew a good amount about U.S. history, since history is my favorite subject.
2)I was surprised by the extent to which many policy makers, such as Eisenhower, went to in order to further spread antigay discrimination because I assumed/expected such prejudice from many of the people living in the U.S., especially in the early 20th century, but not from well-educated leaders of the country.
3)I was surprised and intrigued by Chauncey’s comparison of gay rights to the civil rights movement because I had not really thought of it in such a context before.
4)I was surprised that Chauncey’s work was so academically inclined; by that, I mean that he did a good job of keeping his personal biases and emotions out of this novel. I was surprised by this because I would expect that someone who has suffered some of these injustices (being that he is gay himself) would show more emotion and passion in his work. But, he stuck to the historical and social context of his novel rather than giving in to emotions.
5)I was surprised by some of the historical facts that Chauncey provided, such as the Catholic group that supported gay rights because I assumed that in Catholicism, homosexual behavior and inclination was forbidden.
Post a Comment