SAME-SEX MARRIAGE RIGHTS UNDER SIEGE
Mandate is clear: beat back Bush/Kerry attacks
By LeiLani Dowell
If ever there were an example of the capitalist media as an
instrument of the state, this year's post-election coverage,
with special emphasis on same-sex marriage, speaks volumes. In
a clear attempt to demoralize progressives, especially the
lesbian, gay, bi and trans movement, the media are accusing
this movement of paving the way for George W. Bush's victory in
the presidential election.
For example, a Nov. 7 article by the Asso ciated Press,
headlined, "Election devastates gay community," tells of
Democratic politicians wagging their fingers at the movement
for fighting for same-sex marriage "too fast, too soon." The AP
goes so far as to suggest that LGBT people across the country
are planning some sort of mass exodus from the United
States.
Exit polls, the media claim, overwhelmingly show that "moral
values" won the vote for Bush, with same-sex marriage as the
main issue. On its face this argument makes little sense,
considering that John Kerry opposed same-sex marriage too, and
never took a stand against discrimination. At first Kerry said
that states should be able to decide the issue for themselves.
Then he endor sed an attempted ban on same-sex marriage in his
home state of Mas sachusetts, the one state where same-sex
marriage has become a hard-won reality.
But what does it mean that voters in 11 states voted for
initiatives against same-sex marriage? When polls suggest that
the major ity of the people favor equality for LGBT people,
what does it mean that laws were passed in some states that
even deny civil unions and domestic partnership benefits?
In a time of growing economic hardship and a shrinking
social "safety net," when people fear a loss of jobs, lack of
health care, and a general lack of control over their lives,
the family unit gains in importance as an area of stability.
This is true for same-sex couples who want some economic
stability, as well.
However, the ruling class tries to stoke up fear of gays and
the "dissolution of the family" as a distraction from its own
respon sibility for these economic and social problems, just as
it does with the "war on terror."
Role of patriarchal family
In "The Roots of Lesbian and Gay Oppression," author Bob
McCubbin chronicles the rise of the patriarchal family unit as
a result of the accumulation of wealth in society. Unlike the
communal, matriarchal societies that had previously existed,
McCubbin points out, the patriarchal family and state
regulation of sexuality served the interests of the emerging
ruling class as society began to be divided into haves and
have-nots.
He also discusses the use of anti-gay prejudice in the epoch
of imperialist wars, proletarian revolutions and national
liberation movements, when the billionaire capitalist class
uses every means at its disposal to divide the workers by
sowing sexual prejudices that breed confusion, frustration and
fear.
Despite all the talk of demoralization after the Nov. 2
elections, progressive forces sprang into action the very next
day. Largely successful anti-war and anti-Bush rallies were
held across the country on Nov. 3. Activists across the
country, including LGBT activists, are organizing a Stop the
War Week of actions for Dec. 3-11, and are already preparing
for a counter-inauguration on Jan. 20.
In New York, a Town Hall meeting on the elections was held
at the LGBT Community Center on Nov. 9. Well over 250 people
attended. Rather than depression, the mood in the
standing-room-only event was one of anger and resistance.
Significantly, panelists as well as participants stressed
the need to make links among all communities--people of color,
immigrants, women and more--to resist the repression and
discrimination that has been further "legalized" in this
election.
Discussing whether laws and elections reflect national
realities, Trishala Deb of the Audre Lorde Project and the
South Asian Lesbian and Gay Alliance offered the example of the
Reconstruction era in the United States. She pointed out that
what followed the Reconstruction period was Jim Crow laws, an
extreme increase in lynch ing, segregation--and then the civil
rights movement. She pointed out that every progressive change
brought about in the United States has come from a grassroots
movement, and not from voting booths.
The elections, contrary to what the corporate media would
have people believe, were not a mandate against same-sex
marriage and for war. If anything, the elections proved
conclusively that, in the words of Frederick Doug lass, "Power
concedes noth ing without a demand."
If anything, they were a mandate to the people of the United
States to keep up the struggle in the streets against oppres
sion, bigotry, rac ism, sexism and war. It is a mandate that
the movement is already responding to.
Reprinted from the Nov. 18, 2004, issue of
Workers World newspaper
This article is copyright under a Creative
Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)
HOME
:: U.S. NEWS ::
WORLD NEWS ::
EDITORIALS ::
SUBSCRIBE ::
DONATE
Email
this article
Printable
page