Question from a straight guy about gay marriage

djk1000

I was chatting with a friend a couple of days ago and the subject of gay marriage came up. We both agreed that if it's what the lgbt community want, then we'd be voting for it if the time came. No objection whatsoever to the concept.

But then we started talking about why it seems to be such an issue and why it seems to be the focus of the mainstream lgbt lobby, to the exclusion of most other things at the moment. So that's my question to you guys really, I just don't get why the lgbt community is putting so much energy into this when civil partnership confers the same legal rights.

Why can't civil partnership be your thing? It just seems like if you could pick one thing to fight hard for, it wouldn't be this, but something like parental rights in gay relationships and equal status for gay civil partnerships in adoptions, or whatever else it may be.

Marriage to me is a religious construct these days, since the mainstream religions wouldn't accept it no matter if the legal definition was changed, then it might as well be called civil partnership.

Hopefully this doesn't come across as ignorant or stupid, it's an honest question.

Sonics2k

In a word, it's about Equality.

I'm not gay, but my parents are, and I was raised here in Cork gay community.

I've known couples who have been together for over 20 years, have a home, jobs and everything else. But when it comes to legal recognition, they are mostly brushed aside by the State.

When people who support Gay Marriage say marriage, they don't mean it in the religious sense, more in the legally binding sense.

For the record, civil partnership does not offer the same legal rights, that's the problem.

floggg

1. Circa 150 legal differences between civil partnership and marriage.

2. Not a religious concept - why should I be denied civil rights because of somebody else's religious beliefs (which would in no way be affected by giving me those rights).

3. The water fountains the blacks drank from in the 60' in the USA were the same as the ones the whites drank from. It was all water after all.

Why did they waste so much time campaigning for desegregation then?

Same with the ban on inter-racial marriage. The good bible fearing people of America thought god didn't want blacks and white to marry. Why wouldn't the mixed race couples defer to their religious beliefs and break up/live their lives in secret?

On a more macro level it's important not least because having the State treat LGBT people and their relationships as less than ideal or those of their straight brothers and sisters it sends a message out to LGBT people and homophobes alike that there is something wrong with being LGBT.

The idea that I should have to accept inequality out of deference to somebody's religious believes is offensive. The are entitled to their religious views but that doesn't mean that the state should place a greater value on their right to hate than my right to dignity and respect.

oisindoyle

djk1000 wrote: »

I was chatting with a friend a couple of days ago and the subject of gay marriage came up. We both agreed that if it's what the lgbt community want, then we'd be voting for it if the time came. No objection whatsoever to the concept.

But then we started talking about why it seems to be such an issue and why it seems to be the focus of the mainstream lgbt lobby, to the exclusion of most other things at the moment. So that's my question to you guys really, I just don't get why the lgbt community is putting so much energy into this when civil partnership confers the same legal rights.

Why can't civil partnership be your thing? It just seems like if you could pick one thing to fight hard for, it wouldn't be this, but something like parental rights in gay relationships and equal status for gay civil partnerships in adoptions, or whatever else it may be.

Marriage to me is a religious construct these days, since the mainstream religions wouldn't accept it no matter if the legal definition was changed, then it might as well be called civil partnership.

Hopefully this doesn't come across as ignorant or stupid, it's an honest question.

Well firstly I and most gay people prefer to call it MARRIAGE EQUALITY not GAY MARRIAGE...I just had my lunch a few minutes ago I dodnt have a "gay lunch"..
Bit surprised to be hoest with your question ,,,it comes across as "sure the gays have civil partnership what more do they want ",,,

Well as I said we want what YOU HAVE ,,,EQUALITY ,,,its that simple ..

Why is it an issue ? well I would have thought equality IS a major issue ..

Theres a HUGE difference between marriage and CP theres something like 160 differences ,,,dont ask me to name them all, maybe go to the marriage equality website and have a look ...

Marriage isnt all about relegion ,,there are many many hetrosexual couples who have civil marriages,thats what I want and theres nothing wrong with that .
Marriage equality is a civil matter not a religious one

Annasopra

Civil partnership does not offer the same legal rights as civil marriage

Most lgbt people want civil marriage not religious marriage

I agree with the general point you are making - I think the concentration on marriage means that many other lgbt rights issues get overlooked or ignored - there are many other problems facing lgbt people - employment equality, sexual health, transgender health, mental health, education

A national lgbt survey in 2008 showed that actually lgbt people were more worried about workplace rights/equality and safety from violence/bullying

The main focus on marriage equality has been because we have two pressure groups solely lobbying and organising and protesting in favour of marriage equality. They have managed to put it on the political agenda.

Ciaran0

djk1000 wrote: »

I was chatting with a friend a couple of days ago and the subject of gay marriage came up. We both agreed that if it's what the lgbt community want, then we'd be voting for it if the time came. No objection whatsoever to the concept.

But then we started talking about why it seems to be such an issue and why it seems to be the focus of the mainstream lgbt lobby, to the exclusion of most other things at the moment. So that's my question to you guys really, I just don't get why the lgbt community is putting so much energy into this when civil partnership confers the same legal rights.

Why can't civil partnership be your thing? It just seems like if you could pick one thing to fight hard for, it wouldn't be this, but something like parental rights in gay relationships and equal status for gay civil partnerships in adoptions, or whatever else it may be.

Marriage to me is a religious construct these days, since the mainstream religions wouldn't accept it no matter if the legal definition was changed, then it might as well be called civil partnership.

Hopefully this doesn't come across as ignorant or stupid, it's an honest question.

You've actually kinda answered your own question there. You see parental rights and issues with adoption and all that are tied in with marriage equality. It's not just the one issue that's being pushed for, it's the whole lot of them.

Annasopra

The op is asking genuine questions and seems to want to learn about the issue. I don't think people should get snappy or offended.

djk1000

Sorry, maybe I confused the issue. What I'm really trying to say is if there is a list of say 50 things that need to be done to bring full and equal rights to the lgbt community(simplistic I know), why is marriage number 1?

Is it not better to chip away at the many other issues around this (as mentioned before, such as adoption and parents rights) first? Are there not many things that could be changed to get you 90% of the way there without having such a fight to get it, then and only then, fight hard for the last 10%.

I'm asking because I read a lot about equal marriage rights, but I've yet to see a detailed piece about why it's numero uno on the list? As a group, there are finite resources available to tackle the problems of inequality, it just seems to me that the pursuit of equal marriage rights is more emotive than logical right now?

The reason I'm asking is that I'd just like to be better informed, whether you like or not, this is a topic of conversation at the moment, and the people pushing it have not done a good job of explaining why it's so important. If people like me (and others reading the post) can answer that question, then maybe the % of people pro marriage equality will move to a point where the Government has to move on it.

oisindoyle

mango salsa wrote: »

The op is asking genuine questions and seems to want to learn about the issue. I don't think people should get snappy or offended.

I dont think anyone is getting "snappy" or "offended".All the replies are pretty valid and clear

oisindoyle

djk1000 wrote: »

Sorry, maybe I confused the issue. What I'm really trying to say is if there is a list of say 50 things that need to be done to bring full and equal rights to the lgbt community(simplistic I know), why is marriage number 1?

Is it not better to chip away at the many other issues around this (as mentioned before, such as adoption and parents rights) first? Are there not many things that could be changed to get you 90% of the way there without having such a fight to get it, then and only then, fight hard for the last 10%.

I'm asking because I read a lot about equal marriage rights, but I've yet to see a detailed piece about why it's numero uno on the list? As a group, there are finite resources available to tackle the problems of inequality, it just seems to me that the pursuit of equal marriage rights is more emotive than logical right now?

The reason I'm asking is that I'd just like to be better informed, whether you like or not, this is a topic of conversation at the moment, and the people pushing it have not done a good job of explaining why it's so important. If people like me (and others reading the post) can answer that question, then maybe the % of people pro marriage equality will move to a point where the Government has to move on it.

Theres nothing emotive about wanting equality .
Equality is not an issue for straight people but it is for gay people ,surely thats important ? Can you not see that ?

Annasopra

oisindoyle wrote: »

I dont think anyone is getting "snappy" or "offended".All the replies are pretty valid and clear

As always any comments or feedback on moderation should be through private message or on the feedback forum.

djk1000

oisindoyle wrote: »

Theres nothing emotive about wanting equality .
Equality is not an issue for straight people but it is for gay people ,surely thats important ? Can you not see that ?

Yeah absolutely it's important and I think we all know that it will happen in time, I'm just saying that being pragmatic and accepting that politicians greatest fear is to be seen as courageous, it will take quite a bit of time.

Why not channel resources into other fights. Why isn't the fight about improving the rights given to civil partners? If you polled the country, I'd say there would be much greater support for improving civil partnership rights than there would for allowing non heterosexual marriage, I'm just talking about picking your battles, in time a move to equality in marriage will be much easier to make happen.

Annasopra

oisindoyle wrote: »

Theres nothing emotive about wanting equality .
Equality is not an issue for straight people but it is for gay people ,surely thats important ? Can you not see that ?

I don't really agree with that. Lot's of straight people believe in equality and have friends and family members who are lgbt. It's an issue for them because of friends and family. In addition straight trans people are affected by this badly as well.

Annasopra

djk1000 wrote: »

Yeah absolutely it's important and I think we all know that it will happen in time, I'm just saying that being pragmatic and accepting that politicians greatest fear is to be seen as courageous, it will take quite a bit of time.

Why not channel resources into other fights. Why isn't the fight about improving the rights given to civil partners? If you polled the country, I'd say there would be much greater support for improving civil partnership rights than there would for allowing non heterosexual marriage, I'm just talking about picking your battles, in time a move to equality in marriage will be much easier to make happen.

There is background lobbying going aroind some of the issues you mention. Minister Shatter recently said he would bring forward legislation regarding children of civil partners.

Support for marriage equality has been growing amongst the general public and politicians for sometime now.

oisindoyle

mango salsa wrote: »

I don't really agree with that. Lot's of straight people believe in equality and have friends and family members who are lgbt. It's an issue for them because of friends and family. In addition straight trans people are affected by this badly as well.

What dont you agree with? My point is straight people have equality therefore its not an issue for them ,whereas gay people are lookig for equality

Annasopra

oisindoyle wrote: »

What dont you agree with? My point is straight people have equality therefore its not an issue for them ,whereas gay people are lookig for equality

Did you not read my post fully?

oisindoyle

mango salsa wrote: »

Did you not read my post fully?

Yes i did thats why I asked the question I did

Annasopra

oisindoyle wrote: »

Yes i did thats why I asked the question I did

I strongly believe equality is an issue for everyone. I don't believe in equality only being a concern for minorities - Equality for travellers and migrants and women and trans people are issues that concern me even though I am not a traveller or migrant or a woman or transgender. Equality for lgbt people is an issue for society in general not just for lgbt people. It shouldn't be pigeonholed into only something concerning lgbt people.

ongarboy

I think as Mango said, it means that it is an issue for straight people who have loved ones who are discriminated against for being LGBT (it's also an issue for anyone who cares about equality for all). If you had a child or sibling who was disabled and discriminated against as a result, would you say it's their issue and not yours because you are not the one with the disability or being directly discriminated?

Conor30

@djk1000

To be honest, it's hard to know where to start really! To summarise, gays simply want equality. Civil partnership is inferior to marriage as it has over 150 differences. Civil marriage would confer a lot more legal rights as well as better protection for a child that a gay person might have.

Marriage might be a religious concept for you if you're a very religious person, but the truth is marriage is not a religious thing necessarily. Lots of straight couples all around the world have civil marriages every day and not a church in sight. The 'gay lobby' (to use your term) is merely seeking CIVIL (ie non-religious) marriage!! If various Churches agree to marry same-sex couples in addition to opposite-sex couples (as some are), then that's THEIR business and the LGBT community is NOT actively campaigning for that!

Would you be happy to just have a civil partnership and not have the option to marry? Didn't think so.

floggg

OP if you view it as a matter of equality (as I and many other do), do you not think it is adding insult to injury by saying not only are we not treated equally but that we are getting ahead of ourselves asking for full marriage equality and should be happy to get our rights slowly and incrementally.

As to the point that there are other LGBT fights to fight, I honestly think that securing marriage equality would be one of the greatest possible ways of securing full equality and elimination of discrimination.

Discrimination exists because people see LGBT as lesser, or deviant etc. I think as long as our relationships are officially seen as second class there will always be an element of "abnormality" about LGBT people (given that LGB at least are essentially defined by those relationships). Recognising at an official level that LGBT families are equal and entitled to the same dignity and reflect as heterosexual families would go a long way to ending the perception of otherness about us.

If kids grow up and see normal, healthy mundane families, and get to interact with LGBT parents they'll see that there is nothing wrong or to be feared about LGBT people.

You can bring in laws against discrimination but it won't necessarily change attitudes or prejudices. Discrimination will still continue.

I think marriage equality does however have the power to change hearts and minds and thus will go a long way to ending discrimination.

PS - have you ever been discriminated against? Because the very idea that I'm viewed as less than purely because of something beyond sexual orientation which is behind my control is kind of sickening.

oisindoyle

mango salsa wrote: »

I strongly believe equality is an issue for everyone. I don't believe in equality only being a concern for minorities - Equality for travellers and migrants and women and trans people are issues that concern me even though I am not a traveller or migrant or a woman or transgender. Equality for lgbt people is an issue for society in general not just for lgbt people. It shouldn't be pigeonholed into only something concerning lgbt people.

Yes I understand where you are coming from but in this context i.e civil marriage ...straight people have that ,,gay people dont ,,thats why we want equality .

Beruthiel

djk1000 wrote: »

I just don't get why the lgbt community is putting so much energy into this when civil partnership confers the same legal rights.

It does not confer the same legal rights, if it did, it would be called marriage.

Marriage to me is a religious construct these days

Marriage existed long before religions took it under their wing.
I got married two years ago, no religion was involved.

Just because I'm hetro, I get to be married and my gay friends don't.
Tell me why I got to be so privileged?
I see this issue as no different than telling a black man in the 60's that he should be happy with sitting at the back of the bus.
I'm white, so I get the front.
I'm hetro, so I get the privilege of being allowed to marry.

Equal rights.
Some of us being more equal than others.

How sad and petty it is that this is even still an issue. That some parts of society are so insecure in themselves that they feel the need to repress others for being different.
Time for certain sections of the human race to get over themselves and move on.
This should not be an issue, we have more important things on this planet to be worrying about!

djk1000

Ok, I think I'm learning here :-)

So, it's really about equality, plain and simple. I thought that it was more around the term "marriage" but it's probably more to do with the fact that denying the term to same sex couples is defacto not equal, therefore even though the term itself isn't so important, what it symbolises is..

Beyond the symbolism, it's about equality under law, no matter what you want to call this formalising of a relationship between two people. So many rights are bestowed on married people due to the wording of our constitution, that civil partnership can never really be a legal equal.

Am I on the right track?

How sad and petty it is that this is even still an issue. That some parts of society are so insecure in themselves that they feel the need to repress others for being different.
Time for certain sections of the human race to get over themselves and move on.
This should not be an issue, we have more important things on this planet to be worrying about!

Agreed!!!!

floggg

djk1000 wrote: »

Ok, I think I'm learning here :-)

So, it's really about equality, plain and simple. I thought that it was more around the term "marriage" but it's probably more to do with the fact that denying the term to same sex couples is defacto not equal, therefore even though the term itself isn't so important, what it symbolises is..

Beyond the symbolism, it's about equality under law, no matter what you want to call this formalising of a relationship between two people. So many rights are bestowed on married people due to the wording of our constitution, that civil partnership can never really be a legal equal.

Am I on the right track?

Bingo.

Separate but equal is (generally) not equal.

I guess the anti equality lobby have been successful in their attempts to distort thr debate by using terms like "gay marriage" or talk of changing the institution of marriage. We don't want gay marriage - we want marriage equality. And we don't want to change the institution of marriage - we just want to participate in it.

DubArk

djk1000 wrote: »

Yeah absolutely it's important and I think we all know that it will happen in time, I'm just saying that being pragmatic and accepting that politicians greatest fear is to be seen as courageous, it will take quite a bit of time.

Why not channel resources into other fights. Why isn't the fight about improving the rights given to civil partners? If you polled the country, I'd say there would be much greater support for improving civil partnership rights than there would for allowing non heterosexual marriage, I'm just talking about picking your battles, in time a move to equality in marriage will be much easier to make happen.

Because it’s like we’re in some Sub Section on Civil Rights issues. It sounds like we can have some of our rights but not all of them but in time they may come our way if we wait. I’m sick of waiting. We should be entitled to the same rights as any citizen no matter what colour, creed, gender or sexual orientation. All of us should be in the eyes of our state completely Equal. This is such an important issue to me and many others in same sex relationships.

I am a second class citizen in my own country and the people who live next door to me have more rights than me! Why? Because…. I fell in love with another human that happens to be the same sex as me. People have a problem with that, that’s the bottom line. That’s why the state mustn’t allow us to be treated any differently and as long as they still do they're condoning the bigots. It’s all about inclusion not segregation.

djk1000

Thanks for the help all, very informative.

Embarrassing to say but no matter how well read or educated, if you're a straight white middle class male, sometimes issues around inequality can be hard to truly understand, since there is no context or first hand experience. I often find that those lobbying for equality (not just marriage equality) tend not to explain it well to people like me.

Hope I didn't offend along the way!

D.

floggg

As long as you are trying to learn you are doing better than most.

Though yes - I know from my friends that a straight white middle class male from a western Christian background often has difficulty understanding why minorities get do concerned about inequality or discrimination.

djk1000

floggg wrote: »

As long as you are trying to learn you are doing better than most.

Though yes - I know from my friends that a straight white middle class male from a western Christian background often has difficulty understanding why minorities get do concerned about inequality or discrimination.

Not exactly my point, I understand inequality quite well thanks very much. I just didn't understand why marriage was seen as such an important example of inequality when many others exist.

oisindoyle

djk1000 wrote: »

Not exactly my point, I understand inequality quite well thanks very much. I just didn't understand why marriage was seen as such an important example of inequality when many others exist.

Take some time out and look through the website below

http://www.marriagequality.ie/

floggg

Maybe I should have phrases it better. While you may understand inequality as a concept, do you understand what it feels like to be unequal?

P.S. I'm not trying to be critical. I just mean its hard to understand something you haven't experienced for yourself.

Conor30

DubArk wrote: »

Because it’s like we’re in some Sub Section on Civil Rights issues. It sounds like we can have some of our rights but not all of them but in time they may come our way if we wait. I’m sick of waiting. We should be entitled to the same rights as any citizen no matter what colour, creed, gender or sexual orientation. All of us should be in the eyes of our state completely Equal. This is such an important issue to me and many others in same sex relationships.

I am a second class citizen in my own country and the people who live next door to me have more rights than me! Why? Because…. I fell in love with another human that happens to be the same sex as me. People have a problem with that, that’s the bottom line. That’s why the state mustn’t allow us to be treated any differently and as long as they still do they're condoning the bigots. It’s all about inclusion not segregation.

Well said. And we pay the same taxes so why should we have the same rights too?!

Conor30

djk1000 wrote: »

Thanks for the help all, very informative.

Embarrassing to say but no matter how well read or educated, if you're a straight white middle class male, sometimes issues around inequality can be hard to truly understand, since there is no context or first hand experience. I often find that those lobbying for equality (not just marriage equality) tend not to explain it well to people like me.

Hope I didn't offend along the way!

D.

No harm. At least you're informing yourself! Gays deserve the same right to be as equally miserable in marriage as their straight counterparts!

stephen_n

oisindoyle wrote: »

What dont you agree with? My point is straight people have equality therefore its not an issue for them ,whereas gay people are lookig for equality

There are plenty of straight people that don't have equality for various reasons! Gay people are not the only ones who are discriminated against!

MagicMarker

stephen_n wrote: »

There are plenty of straight people that don't have equality for various reasons! Gay people are not the only ones who are discriminated against!

Check out the name of the forum you're in and the topic being discussed and you'll realise that oisindoyle is referring to the fact that straight people can marry as they please. What oisindoyle is not saying is that there is that there is no discrimination outside the LGBT community, which is what you seem to think he is saying.

Aurongroove

yeah, for example, if gay people could undergo a state marriage (like athiest couples do) then that would be equal rights.

Chuchoter

stephen_n wrote: »

There are plenty of straight people that don't have equality for various reasons! Gay people are not the only ones who are discriminated against!

Everytime I hear someone say that I literally want to set myself on fire. Could you possibly miss the point more than you just did?

In any case, I think gay marriage is a symbol more than anything else. If we get it, it means at least in a legal sense, we are equal. I know that doesn't reflect the day to day experience of most gay people, I know it doesn't make up for the systematic erasure people experience and the microaggressions in everyday life, but it reflects a society that at least in theory, recognizes we are people and are relationships are as valuable as theirs.

HOWEVER, I do take issue with the blinkered approach of the gay rights movement as it tends to be led and made up of largely middle class, white gay men. I'm sure its not done on purpose, but it totally ignores trans rights, it ignores the imbalances of power within the community, it ignores the problems of gay youth and it ignores the massive health problems from substance abuse to sexual health to access to education. I'm worried that when gay marriage eventually passes, people will become complacent and 'straight society' will be sick of listening to us complaining.

stephen_n

MagicMarker wrote: »

Check out the name of the forum you're in and the topic being discussed and you'll realise that oisindoyle is referring to the fact that straight people can marry as they please. What oisindoyle is not saying is that there is that there is no discrimination outside the LGBT community, which is what you seem to think he is saying.

I am well aware of the name on the forum but clearly you are not aware of context!

Annasopra

Chuchoter wrote: »

HOWEVER, I do take issue with the blinkered approach of the gay rights movement as it tends to be led and made up of largely middle class, white gay men. I'm sure its not done on purpose, but it totally ignores trans rights, it ignores the imbalances of power within the community, it ignores the problems of gay youth and it ignores the massive health problems from substance abuse to sexual health to access to education. I'm worried that when gay marriage eventually passes, people will become complacent and 'straight society' will be sick of listening to us complaining.

I kind of agree with you but there are lots of women involved in rights groups such as Marriage Equality, LGBT Noise, NLGF and in many other groups

The main gay rights organisation GLEN is you are quite correct mainly white middle class non disabled men.

stephen_n

Chuchoter wrote: »

Everytime I hear someone say that I literally want to set myself on fire. Could you possibly miss the point more than you just did?

.

The point is that, someone who is straight comes on with a valid question and gets attacked because some people believe, they have a monopoly on descrimination. The point is that if you really want equality dismissing people out of hand who try and understand that, is surely not the best approach.

Captain Graphite

djk1000 wrote: »

Embarrassing to say but no matter how well read or educated, if you're a straight white middle class male, sometimes issues around inequality can be hard to truly understand, since there is no context or first hand experience. I often find that those lobbying for equality (not just marriage equality) tend not to explain it well to people like me.

Y'know, sometimes when I see references to the "straight white middle class able-bodied male" on forums like this it annoys me, because there's almost an underlying implication that someone fitting this description is supposed to feel guilty about who they are. Sure, Johnny Straight White Upper Class Male may not face inequality or discrimination at any deep level, but he could have a million and one other health/financial/family problems that no-one on this forum faces. But none of this is ever taken to consideration when it comes to LGBT issues; instead a whole misguided "us vs. them" attitude forms.

Just because someone may not experience inequality doesn't mean that they're ignorant of it. Like I'm white but I can obviously see that racism is wrong without having to experience it (which I did a little when I was in China!) So don't feel like you have to explain and justify not being a minority, or feel anyway guilty about that!

Hope I didn't offend along the way!

D.

Again, don't be apologetic for simply asking questions. If anyone took any offence from your posts then they are simply the kind of person who actively looks for things to get offended about.

Chuchoter wrote: »

HOWEVER, I do take issue with the blinkered approach of the gay rights movement as it tends to be led and made up of largely middle class, white gay men. I'm sure its not done on purpose, but it totally ignores trans rights, it ignores the imbalances of power within the community, it ignores the problems of gay youth and it ignores the massive health problems from substance abuse to sexual health to access to education. I'm worried that when gay marriage eventually passes, people will become complacent and 'straight society' will be sick of listening to us complaining.

Are you suggesting that white middle class gay men shouldn't be allowed to be concerned about issues that affect them? That they should abandon fighting for things like marriage equality because they're just not oppressed enough to bother listening to? The whole "I'm more discriminated against than you are" one-upmanship really pisses me off. It's got to the stage where everytime I see the word privilege I, as you say, "literally want to set myself on fire."

As far as trans rights goes, there's not always complete overlap between LGB issues and T issues, so it can't be that surprising that organisations like GLEN will have different focus from, say, TENI. It's not like a big bad group of white gay men are gagging trans rights groups and banning them from speaking out! As for gay youth, in this country at least there are loads of organisations out there that can offer advice and support to young people in need, and all their contact details are much more publicised and easier to find than 10 years ago.

Plus there was the whole It Gets Better thing....but of course that was mainly established by *gasp* a white male, so it's essentially worthless right?!

mango salsa wrote: »

The main gay rights organisation GLEN is you are quite correct mainly white middle class non disabled men.

I don't know too much about GLEN but I fail to see any problem with that whatsoever, unless they explicitly discourage others not fitting that description from joining. If the organisation is mostly made up of straight white middle-class non-disabled men, then maybe the reason for that is that more white middle-class non-disabled men actually got off their asses and joined than other groups of people.

Besides, going solely on statistics, I can't imagine there are too many non-Caucasian, working class, disabled lesbians in Ireland! :pac:

oisindoyle

stephen_n wrote: »

The point is that, someone who is straight comes on with a valid question and gets attacked because some people believe, they have a monopoly on descrimination. The point is that if you really want equality dismissing people out of hand who try and understand that, is surely not the best approach.

With the greatest of respect but it seems you are not reading this thread at all .

No one "attacked " the OP whatsoever,he asked a question and many responded ,no where were the responses an attack on his question .

Your comment "because some people believe they have a monopoly on discrinmination" is just laughable and beggars belief

Yes we want equality but again NO ONE dismissed the OP question .

Perhaps you should re read the whole thread again

mistress_gi

If you don't know ask and that is what the OP did, well done! this will give people an opportunity to not only explain the issues but also their position! Excellent thread

stephen_n

oisindoyle wrote: »

Well firstly I and most gay people prefer to call it MARRIAGE EQUALITY not GAY MARRIAGE...I just had my lunch a few minutes ago I dodnt have a "gay lunch"..
Bit surprised to be hoest with your question ,,,it comes across as "sure the gays have civil partnership what more do they want ",,,

Well as I said we want what YOU HAVE ,,,EQUALITY ,,,its that simple ..

Why is it an issue ? well I would have thought equality IS a major issue ..

Theres a HUGE difference between marriage and CP theres something like 160 differences ,,,dont ask me to name them all, maybe go to the marriage equality website and have a look ...

Marriage isnt all about relegion ,,there are many many hetrosexual couples who have civil marriages,thats what I want and theres nothing wrong with that .
Marriage equality is a civil matter not a religious one

I would say that the first highlighted part including the need to shout is hostile.

Clearly you didn't read what the OP posted for the second reply I have highlighted, he was asking why the one issue (marriage) on the spectrum of equality for gay people ranked so importantly and you ignore that. The question was not why equality is important but the first half of your reply chooses to ignore that and go on the attack.

oisindoyle wrote: »

Theres nothing emotive about wanting equality .
Equality is not an issue for straight people but it is for gay people ,surely thats important ? Can you not see that ?

Do I need to pint out whats wrong here?

oisindoyle wrote: »

With the greatest of respect but it seems you are not reading this thread at all .

No one "attacked " the OP whatsoever,he asked a question and many responded ,no where were the responses an attack on his question .

Your comment "because some people believe they have a monopoly on discrinmination" is just laughable and beggars belief

Yes we want equality but again NO ONE dismissed the OP question .

Perhaps you should re read the whole thread again

See above!

Annasopra

Captain Graphite wrote: »

I don't know too much about GLEN but I fail to see any problem with that whatsoever, unless they explicitly discourage others not fitting that description from joining. If the organisation is mostly made up of straight white middle-class non-disabled men, then maybe the reason for that is that more white middle-class non-disabled men actually got off their asses and joined than other groups of people.

Besides, going solely on statistics, I can't imagine there are too many non-Caucasian, working class, disabled lesbians in Ireland! :pac:

It's an EQUALITY organisation that purports to represent LGB people with regard to EQUALITY issues. I'm sorry but I don't happen to think that an organisation that is mainly made up of a few middle class men and that does not encourage broader participation fully understands the concepts of equality; What about gender proofing and poverty proofing of civil partnership and marriage laws? What about the fact that actually the 2008 survey showed that most LGBT in Ireland felt that workplace equality and community safety were much more important than marriage equality?

http://www.mamanpoulet.com/marriage-not-so-much-a-burning-issue/

There have been and are women involved in GLEN but we shouldn't overlook that there has also been a lot of disquiet from women who have resigned from their board

http://www.mamanpoulet.com/lesbian-and-gay-politics-and-agendas-milking-it/

Silly comments about there being very few "non-Caucasian, working class, disabled lesbians in Ireland" do nothing to prove your point

There are plenty of working class gay men for whom poverty is an issue.

Conor30

stephen_n wrote: »

The point is that, someone who is straight comes on with a valid question and gets attacked because some people believe, they have a monopoly on descrimination. The point is that if you really want equality dismissing people out of hand who try and understand that, is surely not the best approach.

Personally speaking, I wouldn't have thought the OP was attacked at all. Maybe I'm quite thick-skinned though.

Conor30

Anyway, there's no point squabbling amongst ourselves, that won't achieve marriage equality or any other kind of equality!

Captain Graphite

mango salsa wrote: »

It's an EQUALITY organisation that purports to represent LGB people with regard to EQUALITY issues. I'm sorry but I don't happen to think that an organisation that is mainly made up of a few middle class men and that does not encourage broader participation fully understands the concepts of equality; What about gender proofing and poverty proofing of civil partnership and marriage laws? What about the fact that actually the 2008 survey showed that most LGBT in Ireland felt that workplace equality and community safety were much more important than marriage equality?

http://www.mamanpoulet.com/marriage-not-so-much-a-burning-issue/

What about it? A quick look at the GLEN site sees pages dedicated to both workplace issues and safety (admittedly the safety & policing one says "coming soon") But it's not like every single gay rights group out there is completely ignoring everything other than marriage equality. I suspect the main reason marriage equality has been so high profile recently is because it's so close to coming through, and a big push is needed to finally bring it over the line. You can't fight every single battle at the same time.

And can you please show me where GLEN have blatantly "not encouraged" others from participating? 'Cause I don't see any "no trans, socio-economically disadvantaged or ethnic minorites plz thnx" disclaimer on their site.

Silly comments about there being very few "non-Caucasian, working class, disabled lesbians in Ireland" do nothing to prove your point

*sigh* I should have thought the :pac: at the end would have made it obvious that I wasn't being entirely serious there. Sorry for trying to lighten the mood, but as a white middle-class (upper-working class, more specifically) male I need a little light relief sometimes from all that oppressing I'm guilty of....

There are plenty of working class gay men for whom poverty is an issue.

And there are plenty of working class straight men and women for whom poverty is an issue. Should the gay rights movement be expected to fight for them also? I guess this is the problem with gay rights, trans rights, feminism etc. Should all these causes just be tied together in a huge general human rights group fighting for equality for everyone? Or is it far simpler and more practical to just fight for your own cause while ignoring the plights of other groups?

DubArk

Endless bickering just killed this good thread. :rolleyes:

RIP

oisindoyle

stephen_n wrote: »

I would say that the first highlighted part including the need to shout is hostile.!

Well given that it was my reply to the OP I think I know whether it is hostile or not and it's not ..and the need to shout ???? Huh?????

stephen_n wrote: »

Clearly you didn't read what the OP posted for the second reply I have highlighted, he was asking why the one issue (marriage) on the spectrum of equality for gay people ranked so importantly and you ignore that. The question was not why equality is important but the first half of your reply chooses to ignore that and go on the attack.

And I answered it ,because at present the main issue like it or not within the gay community IS equality ,,it was a perfectly logical reply to the OP .
And there was NO attack

stephen_n wrote: »

Do I need to pint out whats wrong here?



See above!

Eh ,,yes you do actually ,....

I would suggest you stop trying to nit pick and looking for an argument.No one attacked the OP all replys were to the point ,The OP from what I read never thought he /she was being attacked nor did others.
Only you did !!!

stephen_n

oisindoyle wrote: »

Well given that it was my reply to the OP I think I know whether it is hostile or not and it's not ..and the need to shout ???? Huh?????

Eh ,,yes you do actually ,....

I would suggest you stop trying to nit pick and looking for an argument.No one attacked the OP all replys were to the point ,The OP from what I read never thought he /she was being attacked nor did others.
Only you did !!!

Capitalizing words is the text equivelant of shouting!

If I was the only one who thought it why was there a mod warning?

The OP never questioned the validity of the search for equality but you have consistently acted and responded like he did!