Marriage

I read an article the other day (which I, unfortunately, cannot find) and as the debate heats up for human rights with many states passing marriage equality laws, and transgendered people are no longer considered diseased, and so many other things, I wonder where marriage really fits in. Many people argue that the marriage equality fight is for wealthy white people, not for African Americans, or those living in poverty. Partially, this is an issue because there are fewer straight people in those categories married, and partially this is because, often, the rights gained by marriage aren't as valuable to those groups (ie: shared insurance).

What if you don't believe in God?
Can you NOT get married?

This debate and all of the focus on it, has forced me to examine my ideas on marriage. I am not adamantly opposed to marriage as an idea, if in the future a significant other really wanted to get married I would probably agree to it, but I also don't think it is necessary. Many of these problems could be solved with an acceptance of how life, relationships, and homemaking have evolved in today's world. Often, even in the rich white world, marriage is not necessary. If both members of a relationship (or all three/four?!) have insurance that covers what is needed, and they are able to live comfortably with the demands of today's world, the only problem is post death and hospitalization issues (which can currently be resolved with papers stating what you want to happen). These issues could even be solved by requiring the person to prove their statement that they should get the rights deemed (though this could call for fraud) or requiring that everyone file a paper stating their preferences, perhaps every 5 years, or when they renew their ID cards. For insurance, benefits could be extended to people you are living with and sharing expenses with. This, of course, would mean that sometimes roommates would insure each other, or friends would band together to help each other out, but the overall reduction in health costs could make up for the slight loss. Further, universal health care (which, when administered effectively, can be very successful) would make it no longer necessary to prove "love" when applying for insurance benefits.

Anyway, to get back to feminist rights, marriage was originally a way to keep women suppressed, in a sense, because it allowed the government to only issue ownership rights to men, and provided a way for women to be provided for without providing them any more rights. Today, there are many reasons why someone might not get married but for me, it is mostly that I don't think it is necessary, or even right any more. We should be more concerned about making women a forefront of discussion and ensuring equal pay for women than making sure we look good enough to attract the one guy who will want to marry us. As this article points out, marriage is on the way out anyway.

One of the more inspiring articles/videos I've seen recently was this one, where a couple broke up through song. The song was not inspiring because they are fun/unique, or because they still want to remain cordial even though they are broken up, but what struck me is that they are breaking up because she does not want kids. At one point, she says she didn't want kids, and he says he always thought she would change her mind. For myself, a person not particularly keen on the idea of having children, this song struck a chord (haha). It is absolutely every woman's right to decide if she wants kids, it is also her and her significant other's right to decide if they want marriage and when they want to break it off or if they want to stay together forever. The government, or more-so the church in guise of the government, should not tell me that I have to agree to be with someone forever on their contract in order to be able to see them when they get hit by a car. Nor should the contract then determine that my love for my significant other is better/greater than the love of a couple who has stayed together through sickness and health without a contract. And most importantly, why should we cling to a contract that is outdated and was used to hold down important members of our society.

I would even change these captions to "People with ONLY feminine traits"
and "People with ONLY masculine traits". Everyone has a little of both, just
like Honey Boo Boo said "everyone's a little gay"

I recently finished Gaga Feminism (and while I don't agree with the title, it really wasn't mostly about Lady Gaga), and I think that as sexuality, commitment, and relationships change, so should our definitions of commitment and our ability to accept newly exposed kinds of relationships. I am still against pedophilic relationships (no 45 year old should be romancing a 14 year old, that's even weird if the older person is only 20) mostly for power/submission/abuse of situation circumstances. I think that every person over the age of 17 should be able to get married, or not, and still have the "benefits" that come with marriage today, if they want them. I think it's time to move on from this archaic version of relationships and into the 21st century.