Author
|
Topic: Can Marriage Be Saved?
|
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195
|
posted 21 June 2004 07:33 PM
I thought this was really interesting. quote: If you believe social conservatives, marriage in America has been under dire assault for more than a century--from adultery, divorce, feminism, birth control and now, apparently, gays and lesbians, who on May 17, the day Massachusetts began recognizing same-sex marriages, joined this at once venerable and fraught institution. Conservatives have a point; the percentage of married Americans has been in steady decline for decades. And yet, as the annual June hordes at the altar and the dramatic struggle for gay marriage attest, marriage continues to occupy a dominant position in American society. How does one make sense of this confusing marital landscape? We asked a range of writers and scholars to offer their thoughts. Should marriage be abolished? Reformed? How is it that marriage--despite its routine and oft-documented failures--persists as the focus of both our personal aspirations and political struggles?
Responses from Ellen Willis, Randall Kennedy, Edmund White, Martha Fineman, Laura Kipnis, Nora Ephron, Patricia Hill Collins, Judith Butler, Susan Brownmiller, Michael Bronski, E.J. Graff, Michael Eric Dyson, Judith Stacey, Jo Ann Wypijewski, Hilton Als. The Nation: Can Marriage Be Saved? A Forum
From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195
|
posted 22 June 2004 01:25 AM
Sorry if this spoils the levity, but in the interest of enticing folks into the content of the link, I thought I would snip a part of Laura Kipnis's entry: quote: If modern marriage has transpired into a social institution devoted to maximizing obedience and the work ethic while minimizing freedom and mobility, to renouncing excess desires (and whatever quantities of imagination and independence they come partnered with) in exchange for love and companionship, clearly there are social advantages here: The psychology of marital stasis is remarkably convergent with that of a cowed work force and a docile electorate. Who needs a policeman on every corner with such emotional conditions in effect? Given that "wanting more freedom" is the contemporary euphemism for leaving such marriages, the ascendancy of gay marriage as a political demand has a depressing side to it. Resource distribution issues aside (which could be the case, were this the political fight being fought instead), the mainstreaming of homosexuality aside (with the kissing up to mainstream values it necessarily entails), of all possible social claims to advance, why this one now? If "wanting more freedom" were treated as a serious political question rather than a euphemism, no doubt different social claims would be forefronted. (Working less instead of more?) And should such claims be advanced, what other social contracts and vows might be up for re-examination, what other unrewarding social institutions would have to start watching their step?
From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|