Model: Lady Chrome. How can LADY Chrome be a Rat KING? Ummm, she identifies as genderfluid, that’s how ahead of the curve she is. Not at all locked into your rigid constructs.
I’ve been trying to get back into a regular routine since we returned from the Artless mini tour, but adhering to the regular routine leaves me reminded how exhausted I am in any free moment, especially since that weekend was pretty much on the go. We returned by bus Sunday to be let off in the city in the height of Pride Day revelry and rainbows everywhere. Also to see a group of homphobic boys harangue a group of girls coming from the parade, for being lesbians. The girls may have been lesbians, or bi, or pansexual, or they may have been straight and just going to the parade. It really didn’t matter, and it really wasn’t as crystal clear as the fact that the boys were assholes. Simultaneously, Eric got into a stare-down with a guy who thought he could “bully the cripple” as Eric put it. The guy backed down and the girls held their own against the homophobes, but I had already got pushed into my bad head space about humanity. On the tour we had discussions with Mykel Board about the many Artless lyrics that lampooned the over-the-top posturing of what are called tongue-in-cheek the “social justice warriors”(I don’t know what they called them back when those songs were written.) Here–well, that sort of posturing and academic finger wagging would still no doubt prove useless, but really, why is it 2013 and portions of the human race are still attempting to intimidate others into the sexuality they think they should have, and disabled people into invisibility? On a Pride weekend following a landmark decision in regards to same-sex marriage? Which brings me to another loagy-headed point:
Shortly before leaving I began to notice people on Facebook, in reaction to this decision, decrying marriage altogether. Whatever. If you don’t like marriage, don’t get one, to paraphrase the pro-choice slogan. It wasn’t even disgust over the other things the Supreme Court pulled, like eroding our Miranda Rights (remaining silent can now be incriminating, you heard that, right?) or the Voter’s Rights Act. Outrage over those things would be understandable. Instead I encountered people saying marriage should be outlawed altogether, or in one case that it was a “foul institute”. So what got me about this? Apart from the absurdity of outlawing it when a big part of the push for marriage equality was to be afforded protections for life partners when the family may not be so tolerant? Or the idea that marriage is synonymous with some 1950’s Beaver-Cleaver lifestyle, and not whatever those in the marriage make of it? I think it’s the knee-jerk reaction of people who identify as free-thinking and progressive. Labeling someone’s relationship as “foul” – if that word had been applied to polyamorists, or people who date casually, or asexuals, or hookup culture, the person saying it would be called out as a moralizing prig trying to police others’ lives. And rightfully so. But saying it about people who choose to marry is a-ok? Why? Because it’s common? Viewed as standard? Not outre enough? Marriage may not be for everyone. Nothing is. That doesn’t make it “foul”.
I suspect that some people though, it’s not really social change they want to see. They just need to feel iconoclastic and one step ahead of everybody else. As same sex marriage gained mainstream acceptance, those who embraced it because they genuinely believed people should have this right if they so choose were pleased, but it no longer fit that little niche for self-styled iconoclasts. So they moved along to this, complete with value judgments and name calling.
Ok, this is off my chest now. Goodnight.