Astroturfing the slippery slope
One of the most pervasive arguments against marriage equality goes something like this: “If we allow gay marriage, what will we allow next? Polygamy? Incest? Pedophilia?? MY GOD WON’T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN.”
Calm down, straw-Republican-I-just-made-up-for-debate-purposes. Obviously there are serious practical and moral considerations that prevent things like incest, pedophilia and bestiality (or “man-on-dog,” as Rick Santorum so elegantly described it) from being OK. Polygamy, on the other hand, is clearly the logical next step after gay marriage (according to Straw Republican here).
Here’s why that’s wrong. It’s as simple as the difference between sexual orientation and sexual practice. Everyone has a sexual orientation, whether it’s gay, straight, bisexual, asexual, etc. It refers to the gender or genders to which you are physically attracted (or not attracted, in the case of asexual people). It defines your range of options, and to some extent, your identity. “Gay” is a sexual orientation. “Polyamory” is a sexual practice. Polyamory is something you do, whereas being gay is part of who you are.
People who practice polyamory (straight and bisexual people, at least) still have the option to marry someone to whom they are physically attracted. They can find someone they love and marry him or her. Marrying just one person might not be their first choice, but at least they have a choice. Those who identify as exclusively gay have no choice. The only people to whom they could ever be attracted are the exact same people they can’t marry. Which effectively means that gay people are denied a right that straight people take for granted (and crap all over on a daily basis, I might add). This is why homosexuality and polyamory are not the same.
And the fact that YOU, Straw Republican, believe homosexuality is a sin does not magically make homos hetero or give them the ability to marry someone of the opposite sex. Your religion does not exempt them from equal rights.
This is why I get so angry when conservatives say they’re “against gay marriage, not gay people.” What the hell do you expect your gay BFFs to do, then? Suck it up and marry someone they can’t romantically love? Or just shut up and be content with their status as second-class citizens? Be OK with the fact that they won’t ever have access to partner medical benefits, hospital visitation, even joint guardianship of their kids?
If there are any polyamorists reading this, please chime in. I would love to get your take on this issue (and I hope I haven’t offended you in my zeal to take away the bigots’ slippery slope argument).
October 28th, 2009 at 12:14 am
As a practicing bisexual polyamorist in a group marriage, I agree with the positions on your post. I would add that we, from our perspective, consider ourselves married already; what we don’t have is the same legal rights and recognitions currently reserved for pair-bonded straights. I would also add that many of us consider being poly a behaviorally-based orientation. Everyone has multiple friends, family, children, etc., that we love, without conflict of interest or feeling that our love is somehow diluted by loving more than one person, so to a poly person, saying that we should love one, and only one, romantic significant other feels arbitrary and artificial.
October 28th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Thanks for commenting! I’m not sure if I made it clear that I’m not against legal recognition of poly relationships–I just wanted to emphasize the difference in necessity between straight/bi polys, who have access to the legal benefits of marriage with at least one person, and gay/lesbian folks who can’t access those benefits at all.
October 28th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Thanks for responding! I understood your emphasis, and agree with it; I can pass as straight and pair-bonded with ease (I have a legal wife, and our 2 partners are legally married as well). In both cases, we have options that gays and lesbians don’t (especially here in TX, where they don’t even recognize civil unions), unless they want to live on the down low (legally married to a straight person while having a secret/discrete, gay/lesbian, romantic significant other at the same time).
Many polyamorists, however, experience the “third-wheel effect:” being the third person in a triad in which the other two people are legally married. In this case, the third poly person, I would argue, is EXACTLY in the same position as a gay/lesbian person with regards legal rights and recognition of their status, the systemic dismissal or downgrade of his/her married status in our culture, and the problematic issue of choosing between someone(s) you love, and someone that is appropriate, in order to access the legal/social benefits.