Powered by Google
Home
Listings
Editors' Picks
News
Music
Movies
Food
Life
Arts + Books
Rec Room
Moonsigns
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Personals
Adult Personals
Classifieds
Adult Classifieds
- - - - - - - - - - - -
stuff@night
FNX Radio
Band Guide
MassWeb Printing
- - - - - - - - - - - -
About Us
Contact Us
Advertise With Us
Work For Us
Newsletter
RSS Feeds
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Webmaster
Archives



sponsored links
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
PassionShop.com
Sex Toys - Adult  DVDs - Sexy  Lingerie


   
  E-Mail This Article to a Friend

Sexual ceiling (continued)


Teaching courses on gay and lesbian issues at Dartmouth College over the past five years, I suddenly realized that last year’s freshman class was born in 1986. This means that they grew up in the shadow of the full-blown AIDS epidemic in the United States, which was continually connected with gay-male sexual behavior. It also means they grew up in a media culture increasingly comfortable with depicting homosexuality. They grew up watching tapes of Tootsie and The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, and they were 12 when Will and Grace premiered on television, in 1998. Hell, forget Will and Grace; at the same age, thanks to Bill and Monica, they even learned the details of oral sex on the evening news. Why Wait Till Marriage? Indeed.

They also grew up with the idea that same-sex marriage was an actual possibility during their lifetimes. In 1986, the Lesbian and Gay Rights Project of the ACLU suggested that the time had come to launch the fight for marriage equality. By 1993, the battle for same-sex-marriage rights in Hawaii was headline news. Since that time, the issue has grown larger than its proponents or critics could have imagined. It is now — like it or not — the most salient political and cultural gay-rights issue.

Before the current shift in HIV-prevention education and before the advent of same-sex marriage, it was a hallmark of queer life that sex had positive value and that gay relationships — which, by necessity, existed outside of legal matrimony — were as valuable, moral, and honorable as any connubial union. The discussion has now changed from encouraging people to engage in and enjoy sex, to how to control sexual activity. HIV-prevention discussions that should be about safe sex now focus on having less sex. Discussions that were once about how to explore one’s sexuality through various types of relationships are now about how (presumably monogamous) marriage should be the goal of all lesbians and gay men. Goodbye, sexual liberation; hello, strict sexual regulation.

The connection between AIDS and marriage here is not incidental. When the AIDS epidemic exploded, one of the first responses to it, both within and outside the queer community, was to urge gay men to stop having sex and to enter into monogamous relationships. Even after the specifics of AIDS transmission became known (sometime in the mid 1980s), much AIDS education focused not on simply promoting "sex safe" practices, such as condom use, but on curtailing sexual experience altogether. For many gay male commentators, such as Larry Kramer, Bruce Bawer, and Gabriel Rotello, the curtailment of sexual activity was the only "cure" for the AIDS epidemic.

When the same-sex marriage debates began to escalate in the early 1990s, the "pro-marriage" arguments became eerily similar to the previous arguments about AIDS. Marriage, many of its proponents argued, would help end the AIDS epidemic because it would give gay men the option — even the mandate — to pair up and be monogamous. As noted legal scholar and distinguished same-sex-marriage proponent William N. Eskridge Jr. wrote in his 1996 book The Case for Same-Sex Marriage: From Sexual Liberty to Civilized Commitment: "Human history repeatedly testifies to the attractiveness of domestication born of interpersonal commitment, a signature of married life. It should not have required the AIDS epidemic to alert us to the problems of sexual promiscuity and to the advantages of committed relationships. A self-reflective gay community ought to embrace marriage for its potentially liberating effect on young and old alike."

WHEN I TALK to my gay and lesbian students and other young queer people, there is no doubt that they are in favor of marriage equality. It’s a no-brainer: why shouldn’t there be equality under the law? But very few of them actually seem interested in getting married, now or later. That’s true of both gay men and lesbians, although the women are more inclined to consider marriage in the future. Such ambivalence stands in sharp contrast to my heterosexual students, many of whom expect to get hitched sometime in the near future and some of whom have even made plans to do so after graduation.

So what’s the problem? Young queer people are growing up and trying to figure out what sex and relationships are all about. It is both an exhilarating process and a confusing one. I think most young people know that there are two paths — parallel, but quite different — that will help them gain the life experience they need to find a happy, contented, exciting adult sexuality. The first is a vibrant, active, experimental, and wide-ranging sex life with a number of people, through which they will start that endless journey to better and more fulfilling sexual experience. The second is an ongoing, maturing relationship with one, or maybe more, persons, through which they will discover not just the moral pleasures of an expanding emotional relationship, but the physical pleasures that come with it. Most of us — excluding, of course, the president and a significant part of the religious right, which favors abstinence-only sex-ed — have come a long way from Why Wait Till Marriage? and Evelyn Millis Duvall’s advice that both women and men benefit from premarital chastity. We know that people get better at sex not only by having a range of sexual experiences, often with different people, but by thinking and talking about sex — about what they like and want and expect and can give. That is the conversation that gay men and lesbians as a community are not having now, and that is being stifled by the power and the enormous consequence that the same-sex-marriage debate — drained of sex — has assumed in our politics and lives.

Michael Bronski’s last book was Pulp Friction: Uncovering the Golden Age of Gay Male Pulps (St. Martin’s Press, 2003). He can be reached at mabronski@aol.com

page 2 

Issue Date: March 25 - 31, 2005
Back to the News & Features table of contents
  E-Mail This Article to a Friend
 









about the phoenix |  advertising info |  Webmaster |  work for us
Copyright © 2005 Phoenix Media/Communications Group