uncollectedminds

Just another WordPress.com weblog

Angry Black Lady Chronicles

Head Explosion Countdown: 3…2…1…

I can’t even begin to grasp the fuckery that abounds in Sam Shulman’s latest article in The Weekly Standard“The Worst Thing About Gay Marriage.” Read it.  And be prepared to weep.  Or if your brain can’t handle that much pressure, I’ll sum up his points:

  • Women are all sluts whose sexuality must be controlled by men.
  • Men must protect women’s vaginas from intruders, because we womyns are just too damn precious and slutty to be able to fend for ourselves.
  • The only way to protect women from descending into sluttitude is to marry us.
  • Men “resignedly” and “heroically” marry us so we won’t have sex with our fathers and sons and so they, the horny bastards they are, won’t give in to the temptation to fuck their moms.
  • Gay folks don’t suffer the “onerous obligations” that come with marriage the way straight folks do: Monogamy.  Suffering the presence of your partner’s in-laws.  Turkey on Thanksgiving.  Not fucking one’s mom.
  • Gay marriage will become irrelevant the way black folks wearing daishikis with Fight the Power fist hairpicks shoved in their afros are irrelevant.

Here’s a snippet of Shulman’s asshattery:

Consider four of the most profound effects of marriage within the kinship system.

The first is the most important: It is that marriage is concerned above all with female sexuality. The very existence of kinship depends on the protection of females from rape, degradation, and concubinage. This is why marriage between men and women has been necessary in virtually every society ever known. Marriage, whatever its particular manifestation in a particular culture or epoch, is essentially about who may and who may not have sexual access to a woman when she becomes an adult, and is also about how her adulthood–and sexual accessibility–is defined. Again, until quite recently, the woman herself had little or nothing to say about this, while her parents and the community to which they answered had total control. The guardians of a female child or young woman had a duty to protect her virginity until the time came when marriage was permitted or, more frequently, insisted upon…

This most profound aspect of marriage–protecting and controlling the sexuality of the child-bearing sex–is its only true reason for being, and it has no equivalent in same-sex marriage. Virginity until marriage, arranged marriages, the special status of the sexuality of one partner but not the other (and her protection from the other sex)–these motivating forces for marriage do not apply to same-sex lovers.

Second, kinship modifies marriage by imposing a set of rules that determines not only whom one may marry (someone from the right clan or family, of the right age, with proper abilities, wealth, or an adjoining vineyard), but, more important, whom one may not marry. Incest prohibition and other kinship rules that dictate one’s few permissible and many impermissible sweethearts are part of traditional marriage. Gay marriage is blissfully free of these constraints. There is no particular reason to ban sexual intercourse between brothers, a father and a son of consenting age, or mother and daughter. There are no questions of ritual pollution: Will a hip Rabbi refuse to marry a Jewish man–even a Cohen–to a Gentile man? Do Irish women avoid Italian women? A same-sex marriage fails utterly to create forbidden relationships. If Tommy marries Bill, and they divorce, and Bill later marries a woman and has a daughter, no incest prohibition prevents Bill’s daughter from marrying Tommy. The relationship between Bill and Tommy is a romantic fact, but it can’t be fitted into the kinship system.

Third, marriage changes the nature of sexual relations between a man and a woman. Sexual intercourse between a married couple is licit; sexual intercourse before marriage, or adulterous sex during marriage, is not. Illicit sex is not necessarily a crime, but licit sexual intercourse enjoys a sanction in the moral universe, however we understand it, from which premarital and extramarital copulation is excluded. More important, the illicit or licit nature of heterosexual copulation is transmitted to the child, who is deemed legitimate or illegitimate based on the metaphysical category of its parents’ coition.

I honestly don’t even know what to say.


I just…


ts-headexplode


[via Jezebel]

Advertisements

June 3, 2009 - Posted by | Angry Black Lady Chronicles, Culture Critic, Politiks | , , , , , , , , , ,

9 Comments »

  1. Maybe this article was leftover from April Fool’s day?

    Comment by Mae | June 3, 2009 | Reply

  2. Sigh.
    It’s like he’s really arguing for the abolishment of marriage between *anyone* by using such archaic reasoning. (not his intent, I’m sure) Because, if I refuse to accept his arguments, (which any self-respecting child of the current era must?) then I must also refuse the validity of any marriage system. I refuse to be controlled, considered unable to control myself, or in need of protection. Therefor, I would refuse to enter into such a relationship because, thank god, now and in America, I can opt out and not be a pariah, starve, be ritually raped by my village elders, set on fire, or any of the other delightful realities of other cultures.
    But, if I decide that marriage is (in this day, age and culture) about love and the personal decision between two mature, rational beings, and NOT any of the things he lists, then I can not only allow myself to get married, but allow anyone to marry anyone else who also meets those criteria (love, rational, willing, etc.). But he can’t accept that because it opens the door to what he hates, and so instead he swings wildly for another explanation.
    It’s so sad that in their rabid desire to oppress others, they cast their net so wide as to include their own wives and daughters in the insanity. What fuckwittery.
    I mean, do these people think these things out to their rational conclusions, at all?? Or am I the only one that likes to take theories and run them to ground?
    If some asshat is going to make a argument against gay marriage, I wish they’d just keep it strictly religious or political, and not try to drag women’s issues into it. I can disagree but still respect *those* opinions. But, when they stray into supporting nonsensical ancient reasoning which is really about control of property, inheritance and male pride, then I just want to reach for a brick. …ok, I have to stop now. I apologize for the foaming of the mouth and crazy-eye.

    Comment by Roxydarling | June 3, 2009 | Reply

  3. I second Roxy…since she basically took the words right out of my mouth.

    Comment by AdmittedlyAddicted | June 4, 2009 | Reply

  4. I just wanted to pop by and say he can go “licit” himself. Ugh. I will be frank, I only got about 2 paras in. When your most important point, that marriage is foremost concerend with female sexuality, is so fucking wrong, well, the rest of your asshattery isn’t worth my time.

    Comment by HolyChow | June 4, 2009 | Reply

  5. Sorry, need to clean the brain splatter off my monitor.

    Comment by TT2 | June 4, 2009 | Reply

  6. This man would be such a wonderful study for Frued. He seems to have so much pent up anger/sexual desire for mothers and all women in general.

    Comment by blah | June 4, 2009 | Reply

  7. This is why I love Roxy so much. ::slow clap::

    Comment by Cait | June 4, 2009 | Reply

  8. I ended up writing a four page facebook note just to cleanse myself of my own brain explosion.

    I’ve been mildly pissed off at the world ever since reading it though.

    Comment by TheHobo | June 4, 2009 | Reply

  9. How in the hell did this even get published? This seems like it would be the death nail in any publishers coffin. Unless you’re trying to cater to a bunch of closeted angry homosexuals with a prediliction towards sociopathic tendencies and perverse sexual tension directed towards thier mother, this doesn’t seem like something that would win you a Peabody

    Comment by blah | June 4, 2009 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: