Marriage: A System of “Haves” and “Have-Nots”

In is almost hard to believe that even the institution of marriage, which is supposedly based upon love and respect, can create such unjust lives for those who are excluded from it. This institution further has the power to label some forms of relationships as acceptable, while leaving others to suffer from social ridicule and destruction. Moreover, even though women obsess and attempt to perfect their own weddings (starting circa age 7), this institution is highly patriarchal.

Overall, marriage creates a realm of “haves” and “have-nots” in society through a privilege gap. Those who are married are able to inherit the belongings of their spouses after death, while those who are not are left in the dust. Those who are married gain tax and healthcare benefits, while those who are not are forced to pay much more toward these services. Those who are married have the option of participating in a wedding culture, while those who are only offered civil unions will never be able to try on wedding dresses or wear rings without feeling like outsiders.

Personally, I admire Andrea Vaccaro for the anecdotes she provided in her excerpt about marriage, “Soldier in a Long White Dress.” Here, is an example of an extremely strong woman who believes so deeply about the cause of legalizing gay marriage that she is willing to take on the role of a battered soldier, standing up for herself while being beaten down by the system. As a straight female, Vaccaro’s piece made me realize just how privileged I am to even have the option of marriage in my life. My friends and I have had countless discussions about our future wedding plans and themes, and Vacarro’s piece even made me slightly ashamed of spending so much time thinking about these details of our lives.

Even though there is a major problem with excluding any couple from marriage who desires one, Paula Ettelbrick claims that before we legalize gay marriage, it is necessary to disrupt the privileges that this service provides, thus acknowledging the rights of those who are not able to receive this public bond. She further states that legalizing gay marriage will not make it any more “acceptable” to be gay in society, and that justice will only reign once homosexuality is not only accepted, but is supported as well. Thus, we need to broaden the goals of gay liberation before solely fighting for gay marriage alone, while simultaneously lowering the idea of marriage itself from its pedestal.