-->

Sunday, 23 June 2013

Shooting fish in a barrel - more homophobic bullshit

Among the waves of homophobic bullshit that have been bombarding us during the fight for marriage equality, another the group made of concerned Christians and assorted dusty Tories and church people (usual suspects for hatred) have taken out a full page advert in the Times (which will, apparently, take money from anyone) on 10 reasons why treating gay people and gay relationships equally with straight folks is naughtybadwrong and why we should continue to be treated as lesser than the precious straighties and their eternal privilege.

As can be imagined, these 10 points are complete and utter bullshit. Let’s take them one by one.

Intact biological families provide the gold standard for the wellbeing of children

Says who? Families with loving parents are the gold standard for the wellbeing of children. Intact biological families made of two abusive arseholes who hate each other are not the gold standard. One person having eggs and the other having sperm and them completing the not-so-difficult task of bringing that sperm and egg together does not a gold standard parent make.


Children have a human right to be nurtured by both their biological parents.

Nope – adopted children have no right to anything from their biological parents. Biological parents of divorced families can have limited – or no – access to their kids. Your parent(s) could be dead. In fact, at no time and in no place does a child ever get a RIGHT to their biological parents if those biological parents have said “screw this, I don’t want kids”. Or if those parents have been deemed unfit to raise kids. The closest you get is an adoptive “child” having the right to see their birth certificate at 18 – which is stretching the definition of “nurtured”.


Gay parenting by definition denies the child from having one or both biological parents.

You’re assuming that both (or either) biological parent of these kids are alive. Or want to know the kids. In fact, this whole argument is based on the idea of gay parents swooping on happy dappy perfect straight nuclear families and stealing the kids which happens NEVER. Gay parenting happens through sperm donation, surrogacy, adoption, fostering, children from past relationships – or various other ways that are all linked by the fact those children/foetus/sperm/eggs don’t have 2 biological parents setting up a healthy happy dappy family.

But that’s aside from the fact that 1-3 here are all IRRELEVENT because child rearing is NOT linked to marriage. If a straight couple is infertile? They can get married. If a straight couple is utterly unfit to raise a child? They can get married. If a straight couple is avowedly child free? They can get married. We do not have a requirement of parenthood in our marriage laws. Marriage exists completely without babies.

Marriage and parenthood Are. Not. Linked. And that’s aside from the fact all of this bullshit applies equally to straight adoptive parents, step parents and anything other than these bigots oh-so-precious biological nuclear families.


Popular support for the bill is based on the unfounded theory that people are ‘born gay’.

Every reputable psychiatric organisation in the world recognises that being gay is an inerrant part of a person that cannot be changed – and should not be tried. “Unfounded” is a stretch to say the least. And popular support for the bill is based on a strong sense that treating people like shit for who they love is wrong. We call it basic compassion.


All school children will be taught that as adults they can have marriage relationships with either men or women.

And this is a problem? They CAN have marriage relationships with either men or women. Why is teaching children the truth a bad thing? Would you prefer we lied to them? Hah, course you would.


Adolescents commonly experience temporary same-sex attraction: this does not mean they are gay

They do? Speak for yourself. I have only ever experienced attraction to the same sex – it’s permanent. I’ve never had even a temporary tickle for women. Is this part of the facts pulled out of your arse section of the argument again? Besides which – and what does this have to do with the price of tea in china? Why does temporary sexual attractions of adolescents mean a damn thing for marriage?


There is no evidence that SSM (same-sex marriage) strengthens marriage. In Spain marriage rates fell precipitously.

Spain’s marriage rates have been falling constantly for a long time: see this is a common trend throughout the western world. Also, correlation =/= causation. You may have missed it – but Europe’s in something in an economic depression at the moment. And, again, I’m assuming these bigots don’t plug into reality very often so may have missed the fact that Spain is one of the hardest hit of all EU countries. Y’know what makes people put off getting married? Or causes many relationships to break down? Why yes, that would be poverty! Not being able to afford a wedding, or have a stable enough life to contemplate marriage.

It’s also telling that the bigots have focused on Spain and not, say, Netherlands or Belgium (marriage rates going up!).

But let’s scrap all that and add a “so what?” I’m sorry, what do these BIGOTS marriages do to strengthen marriage? What about straight folks who divorce and re-marry so many times they get a bulk discount at the wedding registry? Why is MY marriage subject to some nebulous “does it strengthen marriage” test when straight folks face no such hurdle? Why is my family subject to a general public good reqirement?


Behind this bill is a militant move to deny gender difference.

Tell me more about this gender difference. And then tell me how this bill denies it? Because this sounds an awful lot like wifey being barefoot and pregnant while hubby goes out as the bread winner. This is just a random non-sequiter


‘Equal love’ leads to unequal marriage.

What does this even mean? Can someone translate this into something that resembles sense. What’s an “unequal marriage” and how is it linked to equal love? Is this just a random word game?


Civil partnerships already provide all the legal and financial benefits of marriage for gay people.

Not quite – pension benefits for one. And international recognition.

And separate but equal just leaves the doorway open to apply laws differently. As well as give societal approval to bigotry. You have deliberately created a lesser institution for gay people because you consider us toxic to marriage. You consider us toxic. The law is written to regard us as toxic. This is extremely damaging to our wellbeing and the respect we and our relationships can expect to receive in society in general. This is official state sanction of homophobia – so long as the state decides it’s ok to treat us as less than straight folks, then it sends the message that such treatment is ok. This is one of the foundations on which homophobia is built – a commonplace acceptance of gay people and gay love as lesser.



In theory, I guess I should be happy that those who oppose my humanity use such tired, weak, pathetic arguments – but I am so tired of shooting down this crap.