Abstract
Sociologist Verta Taylor and historian Leila Rupp, who wed in 2008 after 30 years together, complicate the debate between queer critics and supporters of same-sex marriage over the consequences of marriage equality. Sociologist and gender studies scholar Suzanna Walters explores how the framework of tolerance—and the marriage mania that depends on it—actively undermines robust queer inclusion and freedom.
Keywords
Last spring, after we’d worked our way through the critical sociological compendium on marriage, one of the students in my “sexual politics” seminar exclaimed, “are we even for gay marriage?” His fellow students nodded in befuddlement. My home state, Washington, had recently passed a ballot initiative in support of marriage equality and the students at the Jesuit university where I teach like to think they’re on the most progressive side of current social issues. Their puzzlement began early in the term when they realized that I (their openly queer professor) was not an unabashed supporter of same-sex marriage.
Marriage equality has become a front and center social issue and the terrain is changing rapidly in this recent post-DOMA era. Currently 17 states have legalized same-sex marriage through either legislation or ballot measures (or in some cases, both). At a glance, this is reason for celebration. But as the students in my seminar quickly came to realize, the issue is complex. Like most engaging sociology, the movement for marriage equality is rooted in considerations of underlying status and privilege; it abounds with questions of who really benefits and what status quo is being unsettled or reaffirmed. At the end of the seminar several students remarked that the class discussions had enabled them to “take the debate up a notch,” or “shift the paradigm” on the issue.
Toward that end, we invited commentary from three high-profile scholars who each identify as lesbian feminists, but who have different perspectives on the marriage equality movement. We hope that everyone reading these essays, especially students, will recognize that those most closely aligned with social issues—those who occupy marginal positions—may agree that justice is needed, but they don’t necessarily share the same ideas about the path to social reform. It’s complicated and worthy of deeper consideration and debate.
Illustrations by Amanda Lanzone