Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I should add at this point that given the high divorce rate and the incidence of "open" marriages, whether intentional or not, the issue of fidelity doesn't mean all that much to me, or likely to a lot of us. Civil unions, gay, straight or even asexual, don't cause any problems with me.
But does anyone here have the unmitigated gall to tell us that the current campaign of harassment against bakers, bridal salons etc, run by known devout Christians is anything but a grasp for revenge against what many LGBT militants view as a "perfect enemy".
Please don't try to convince me that it's because the opposition "broke the law"; that "law" was formulated as deliberately as any legislation designed to subvert voting rights for Afro-Americans in the segregated South.
No. Again, it doesn't matter anyway. Not sure what would make a gay couple any different and all mighty marriage-wise vs a straight couple.
A lot of things would. The dynamics would be different as it's two same sex people marrying each other, not people of different genders.
A number of gays have been disowned by their families and even when do have families their gay life is kept separate from their straight life. In-laws may not be in the picture, and even if they are certainly not to the extent that they are in some straight marriages.
I find that gay couples are more likely to have open relationships than straight couples.
Since they are same sex they are likely to have a lot more overlap in friends than straight couples. This difference in social life can affect relationship dynamics.
Last edited by NyWriterdude; 07-04-2015 at 11:38 PM..
The 20 year old, submissive or not, might just marry some rich old fart and hope for a speedy death or a generous settlement at the divorce.
I agree, aging gay couples will be the immediate beneficiaries of legal gay marriage, but the devil in the details may prove to be gay divorce. Gay marriage is so new, even in the states where it has existed, that there is little tracking on the divorces and proponents of gay marriage would rather treat the divorces as a separate issue. Divorces have long been considered a serious aspect of straight marriages. A divorce can't happen unless there was a marriage. They would seem to be connected, but many people recently seen dancing down 5th in their underwear waving a rainbow flag bristle at the mention of gay divorce.
Diamonds to donuts divorce wont be as prevalent in the gay community as it is in straight marriages. Heterosexual romantic relationships are very different from gay ones....the underlying motivations for the relationships in the first place are very different. Two gay guys who want to get married are still just two guys. With hetero marriages you're dealing with women and all of their vagaries. Most hetero divorces are prompted by women believe it or not.
Why does one injustice invalidate another? I think society can deal with basic civil rights for gay people *and* racist policing. There is no need to visit one issue at a time--we can multitask.
I think the point is that there is the equivalent to what is called something like "donor fatigue" or "compassion fatigue." There is a finite amount of money, of people, and really even of attention span, in a way. Multitasking has been shown to be a myth in our workday life, and I suspect it's the same in our activism life.
It seems to me that logically a person would theoretically do best spending on what will entail the biggest benefits for the greatest amount of people. The number of gay is smaller than the number of blacks, which in turn is smaller than the number of women. Yes, there are all kinds of benefits to marriage, but partial obstacles to marriage seems to me a lesser injustice than barriers to voting for black citizens.
It's kind of sadly amusing to me that now there's agitation on behalf of transgendered discrimination, which I assume is probably even a smaller subset of people.
The number of gay is smaller than the number of blacks, which in turn
is smaller than the number of women.
And that's why they are all called MINORITIES and need laws to protect them from the tyranny of the majority.
Quote:
The media wants you to think that gay issues matter more than black
issues.
Well, let's keep it fair then. Now the media can devote its full attention to allowing blacks the right to marry one another.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
