Same Sex Marriage Debate in Australia

[ALittleBitOfButter]

Some of you may have heard that there's going to be a plebiscite (non binding straw poll of the population type thing) on same sex marriage in Australia.

I haven't ever really been involved in the campaign, it's been bubbling along here for a while. Nor have any of my gay or lesbian friends. Being on the left, we have tended to regard marriage as an irrelevant and outdated patriarchal institution. We don't have the same issues here in Australia, by the way, that Britain does in regards to marriage providing a greater security for SAHMs and mothers. The only legal difference between de facto and married is being consulted when someone is needing medical attention, as far as I know (is this right?).

To be honest I haven't even been following the debate. Since becoming a mother and SAHM I have totally disengaged from the mainstream media, including the Guardian. I can only handle the news if refracted through lefty sources

However you'd have to be living in a volcano to be unaware of the impact of trans ideology on the debate. The 'no' Christian right type of people are focusing on transing of children and stuff in their opposition, and lumping trans ideology in with gays and lesbians.

The yes campaigners are bending over backwards to accommodate trans people by mentioning them at every opportunity when giving speeches and so forth. However, this is not enough. There was an article in the Australian Guardian complaining that trans were not being 'centred' by gays and lesbians in the same sex marriage debate. I think the article complained about 'homonormative' gays and lesbians or something.

Interestingly, this article turned up a couple of days ago in the Fairfax press (main competitor to Murdoch, to the left of it). It would seem that a lot of people are being swayed towards disengaging or voting 'no'. Perhaps some people have been sucked into the 'if we let the gays marry it'll be donkeys next' diatribe, but perhaps others have been put off by the constant drumming of the trans agenda by spokespeople, even when it clearly has nothing to do with same sex marriage. www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/support-for-samesex-marriage-falling-and-no-vote-rising-advocate-polling-shows-20170908-gydnpt.html

Does anyone else have any thoughts or insights?

I think:

• That the plebiscite should not be being held. Equal marriage should be legal, regardless of what the population think. I don't agree that people should have a say over how others live their lives when the matter does not affect them directly.

• That even if you personally don't have much time for marriage as someone 'on the left' you should still be backing the yes campaign. There will be lots of gay Australians who marriage is very important to - and I think that as a progressive it is your duty to help fight for them, even if marriage isn't for you.

• I simply don't understand how trans comes into it and why on earth they need to be 'centred'. Equal marriage would surely afford trans people the same rights as non-trans people. So a legal trans woman would be able to marry their female partner in the same way a born woman would. Trans just isn't relevant here. I totally understand your annoyance at the T again seeking to dominate what are essentially LGB rights issues but if I were you I wouldn't let this stop you from voting yes and recommending that your friends do the same.

I agree with everything that sandsnake has said. I am in Australia and part of the problem is that such are large percentage of the population are religious and that seems to dictate where they stand on the gay marriage issue.

Oh I absolutely support same sex marriage, I was just meaning that the campaign for it over the last several years has not been something that I or any of my friends have been involved in, what with the urgency of refugees, climate change etc. I'll be voting for it.

I agree that there shouldn't be a vote. Public opinion polls have consistently shown strong public support for same sex marriage. That should be enough to save the government the cost and effort! Such a waste. They should be having a plebiscite on whether we should put refugees in concentration camps.

In summary, to be honest I just wanted to create a place to discuss the issue from a gender critical perspective. Can't do that in Australia at the moment! Even clearly gender critical orthodox Marxist friends of mine are too frightened to criticise the trans agenda.

Also I don't need to recommend anyone vote yes. I live in a trendy area and no one who thinks no would dare put their head above the parapet. Categorically, absolutely no one I know or have ever met is a no voter.

That even if you personally don't have much time for marriage as someone 'on the left' you should still be backing the yes campaign. There will be lots of gay Australians who marriage is very important to - and I think that as a progressive it is your duty to help fight for them, even if marriage isn't for you

I disagree. My own view is that marriage is a patriarchal institution and that those who choose it get certain benefits over those who do not. For example, in a few workplaces it's been assumed that marrieds have more right to not working unsociable hours to singles or those of us who are not 'wives'. That's why I support this . I know this isn't a popular opinion on MN, but it is something I feel strongly about.

Spartacus I agree that there should be civil partnerships available to all, with the same legal protection as marriage. I also think that for various people - both gay and straight - marriage itself is important to them and so will always be a firm advocate for equal marriage. I do get your point though.

ALittleBit - yeah I can totally understand why you're not involved in the campaign. It must be so frustrating to have campaigns like this highjacked by the trans activists. As I said in my post above I just don't get how it's relevant. I'm also at a loss to why trans people are meant to be the primary consideration when it comes to LGB issues as well as feminist ones. It makes absolutely no sense.

It is interesting to hear how this is going in Australia, because it does seem that the trans thing really took hugely after Same Sex Marriage became possible - I'm in the UK. It was almost as if the Transactivists were saying, "now it's our turn!" to the original LGB of what is now an alphabet soup. I'm still curious about where all the money and power is coming from though.

As for equal marriage - there is no such thing. It's an oxymoron because marriage is an institution founded upon and which perpetuates inequality. A real turning point for me was when Maria Miller said that marriage is the "gold standard" for relationships and everybody nodded wisely and agreed! What a fucking kick in the teeth for those in civil partnerships with no intention of "upgrading" to marriage and for everyone who is not married for whatever reason. We inferior beings who don't have a husband or wife!

There has never been any debate about what marriage is about, what it's actually for - who benefits and who loses. It was all just about "lurve." Eh, no, it isn't. Otherwise why does the State have any interest at all? It's about sex (good people only have sex within marriage - bad people shag around /s), money - taxes, benefits, pensions etc and the routinely overlooked reality that spouses are financially responsible for each other in a way that cohabitees are not (except the State will happily take money from/give less money to those who cohabit on the basis that they are living together as if they were married, whatever the fuck that is meant to mean) and immigration status.

The Law Society of Canada have produced an excellent document discussing what marriage is and very importantly questioning why States over particular benefits and status to couples in a legally recognised sexual relationship.

Sorry, getting a bit ranty now and my DS has reminded me that I need to go out soon.

Yeah, marriage - abolish it altogether - and instead put in place the means of ensuring fair treatment of adults and children when relationships break down or when someone dies. It's not beyond our wit to do that, and we don't need marriage.

I'm back.

Law Commission of Canada's document is called "Beyond Conjugality". It's quite lengthy, but is the only effort I've seen by any public body to think critically about marriage, its purposes and how it could be replaced or done better in the 21st Century.

Another thing I noticed in the debates and discussions was the way in which same sex marriage became re-labelled and repackaged as "equal marriage". I mean, who would be against equality?

What happened to "liberation"? What happened to dismantling the structures of oppression? When did that movement for real, lasting and significant change stop? And why?

Equality is really just about letting a select few into the place of privilege.

"Gold standard" of relationships, my arse!

www.samesexmarriage.ca/docs/beyond_conjugality.pdf

Beyond Conjugality.

Seeingadistance - thank you for that. I look forward to reading that report and I totally agree with your perspective.

Thank you Seeing. I think you're right too and will have a read.

I'm not sure if the downturn is attributable to any explicit trans ideology female-penis nuttery, but rather a generalised transphobia/homophobia that "the lot of them" are a bunch of freaks, or something. Not helped by the no proponents going on about the dangers of boys being allowed to wear skirts by society, and the yes campaigners mentioning "trans and gender diverse young people" constantly.

When in actual fact, the campaign is all about conservatism. Gays and lesbians who see marriage as an ideal, or the "gold standard". Not that there's anything wrong with that. I think gay and lesbiabism should be completely normalised. (As should gender nonconformity).

This article was printed in The Age a few days ago. It really resonated with me, and shows how isolated gender critical lesbians are. I looked up the author on Twitter and it seems she's a splendid brave TERF. Worth following: Caroline Norma.

The comments below the article are infuriating.
www.theage.com.au/comment/why-should-we-fight-for-marriage-when-its-been-so-bad-for-so-many-women-20170910-gyeej4.html

That was an excellent article.

I'm het, but for me marriage is legal prostitution. I can't count the number of men I have met who resent paying child-support and when questioned it really boils down to the fact that they don't think they should support a woman who they no longer have access to sexually. Everything about V-day makes me barf too - he hands over flowers, lingerie (usually chosen to please him) and chocolates and maybe a rock and she is expected to spread her legs.

I'm het too. If everyone grew up with a father like mine they'd reject marriage too.