Wednesday, April 29, 2015

RBG and Marriage Equality

Ian Millhiser: Justice Ginsburg Eviscerates The Case Against Marriage Equality In Just Five Sentences

So American marriage law, and the English law that it was derived from, presumed that the wife was both financially and sexual subservient to the husband. In a world where marriage is defined as a union between a dominant man and a submissive woman, each fulfilling unique gender roles, the case for marriage discrimination is clear. How can both the dominant male role and the submissive female role be carried out in a marital union if the union does not include one man and one woman? This, according to Justice Ginsburg, is why marriage was understood to exclude same-sex couples for so many centuries.

1 comment:

  1. I love this argument and think it's extremely powerful, but haven't seen it used very often by activists. I wonder how it could be integrated into queer and feminist politics in a culturally legible way. Thoughts?