Random thought crossed my mind while reading another thread.
Several so-called "gay" thinkers (really, iden y politicians) have emphasized the transgressive nature of sexuality, i.e., it breaks the norm of heterosexual relations, is "different," is " ," etc. etc.
Marriage is not just a religious union, but overlaid with social and legal and economic ramifications. And it serves a particularly important role in population management.
Bringing the different/ /non-normal gay iden y within the fold of marriage is to reduce/tame/normalize the difference/threat to the norm the gay represents. Marriage is phobic.
Seems a lot simpler just to think in terms of consenting adults being able to enter into whatever social/legal/economic arrangements they wish without the government's interference.
True, but I don't think that's the way marriage is perceived
How does it play a role in population management?
The story goes: find woman, get married, have kid.
Perceived by whom?
American society, generally
Americans don't want govt in their bedrooms, but "Christians" want govt in everybody's bedrooms to impose/enforce "Christian" morality and ethics on everyone.
btw, the "Christians" intend to stop contraception when used for recreational sex. That's a wonderful way for Repugs to convert women to voting Repug.
aka, War on Contraception
I'm not surprised how you distract a critique of neo-liberal at udes towards marriage-equality into something wholly inane and irrelevant.
The bitter irony behind boutons is that he/she/it is just as brainwashed by ideology as the so-called "repug bubbas" he rails against. One sheep is red, the other is blue.
You are pretty ignorant aren'tcha, bud?
Don't understand the OP at all. If it's trying to argue that legalizing gay marriage is phobic, then that's really dumb. God bless.
believe it or not, may be beyond your comprehension, but not every post is to the OP. I was responding to:
"consenting adults being able to enter into whatever social/legal/economic arrangements they wish without the government's interference."
same-sex marriage is not a threat to YOUR "norm" or anybody else's norm.
So take YOUR norm of YOUR ethics and YOUR morality and stick it up your ass. You might like it.
There have been political theorists and philosopher's who've advanced the idea that gay iden y threatens mainstream American judeo-christian culture. According to this culture, gays don't fit the norm because they don't bang chicks. They're wholly other to how the majority of Americans view their sexual iden y. And because they're different, a majority of Americans view the gay as a threat (this much should be obvious).
Marriage is a way to make the gays more like normal judeo-christian Americans. They couple-up in a monogamous relationship, adopt a kid, and for all intents and purposes act like straight people. This is a way to "tame" gay iden y and make it seem more palatable to the majority.
It's all about money brah. sexual couples want the same benefits and handouts from Uncle Sam that straight couples get. It's nothing about equality or any of that hippie bull . They just want their handout and they want it now. And go ahead and bash this out of this post.
So making sexuality more accepted, or "palatable," is fundamentally phobic.
If by theorists, you mean evangelists, then yes, I've heard them advance that idea as well.
They are only a only threat to ignorant idiots' comfort zone.According to this culture, gays don't fit the norm because they don't bang chicks. They're wholly other to how the majority of Americans view their sexual iden y. And because they're different, a majority of Americans view the gay as a threat (this much should be obvious).
Marriage is a way to make the gays more like normal judeo-christian Americans. They couple-up in a monogamous relationship, adopt a kid, and for all intents and purposes act like straight people. This is a way to "tame" gay iden y and make it seem more palatable to the majority.
Did you make this up on your own?
Michel Foucault, Judith Butler, Wendy Brown, Slavoj Zizek to name a few. I wouldn't call any of them evangelical. They're pretty much the opposite.
Perhaps, but you've described a majority of America.
that's not really how the Christmas story goes.
It's an attempt to make gays be like straight people. It's an attempt to eviscerate what makes gays different and normalize them to be like straight people. That's phobic to say the least.
"It's an attempt to make gays be like straight people.
holy , you're nuts. You write letters to Glenn Beck complimenting his paranoias?
For crying out loud, just cut to the chase. Can I eat at Chick-Fil-A or not?
What was the name of the fried chicken/turkey joint? gobble-n- ?
Meh. I'm not sure any of those have said sexuality threatens judeo christian culture.
Foucalt was gay, right? I think if anything, he would say that judeo christian culture oppresses sexuality
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
