Follow-Up: Responding to Rachel's Post 10/14/10

I found these articles to be very relevant to what is going on on campus recently. This week is National Coming Out Week, and in my everyday activities, I have been confronted with signs, a list where you can put down your name in support of gays, lesbians, transexuals, etc. and a solitary door in Reid Athletic Center that you can sign and walk through. It is very encouraging for me to see these advertisements that it's ok for students to come out, and that most people will be accepted for doing so. I know that it's very tough for many people to fit in at college, and this movement will hopefully supply a support net to those who have extra challenges in being accepted because of their sexuality.

In doing the readings for week 7, I was very surprised with what I learned about how gays are treated and integrated into the community. In "Since When is Marriage a Path to Liberation", Ettelbrick states how we live in a patriarchy that emphasizes men's dominance over women, and how marriage defines some relationships as more valuable than others. She tells us that "Marriage provides the ultimate form of acceptance for personal intimate relationships in our society, and gives those who marry an insider status of the most powerful kind" (Ettelbrick 306). She also makes the point though that justice would not be gained if same-sex marriage was legalized because there would still be power imbalances between those who are married, whether they are gay or straight, and that law looks to the insiders as the norm. I found it fairly ironic that Ettelbrick was so against the view that it is necessary that gays have the right to conform to marriage because it is the norm, while she speaks about gays and lesbians using the term "we", as if they all share the same view. Just as the justice system should not be able to speak for a group as a whole, I believe that Ettelbrick shouldn't classify gays and lesbians into one group that thinks the same, or use the term "lesbian world", suggesting that lesbians think alike and desire the same things.

I personally believe that same-sex marriage should be allowed, because I don't believe that society should exclude people just because they are different from the "norm". If some same-sex couples desire to be married, I think that they should be allowed to and that it is their right as a citizen. I found it very ridiculous that in the "Same-Sex Marriage FAQs article", couples in a civil union "do not receive any of the more than 1,000 federal benefits and protections of marriage" (Human Rights Campaign 2). It's time that our country stops being exclusive, and accepts people for whom they are in order to give them equal chances in life.