transdada

poetics, time, body disruption and marginally queer solutions

Tuesday, February 24, 2004

and this from: Jonathan Alexander-

kari--
I sincerely respect both your feelings and your position...and I share
them--to a great extent. I have had, though, a slightly different
reaction. I'm sitting at my desk this afternoon wondering the
following...So, OK, we'll have a constitutional ammendment that essential limits the rights of part of our population. Whats our response? For me, I want to go home, talk to my partner, talk to the lesbian couple down the street, and say--hey, let's all get married. My partner and I could each take a lesbian as a *wife,* with pre-nups drawn up CAREFULLY. If my partner loses his job, then the lesbian he marries can extend her medical benefits policy to him (and I would agree, pre-nuptially) to pay for them myself. Other scenarios and provisions would have to be argued out, but what the fuck? This seems to me to be a particularly QUEER solution, if handled correctly to protect all of our interests. Even MORE QUEER would be our INSISTENCE on LOUDLY and VOLUBLY announcing what we're doing as a model for others. To wit: so, Mr. President, you want to limit marriage to a man and a woman? Well, go ahead. Gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, and the transgendered will all get married, and we'll fuck up your concept of marriage both right and left. So FUCK YOU.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home