Through the light of donors, activists and lawyers from both sides of Isenberg’s saga, another aspect of the fight for marriage equality becomes clearly evident: its whitewash. Obama certainly plays an important role, but at the core of the narrative almost all individuals – dozens of them – are whites. Issenberg does not shy away from examining the role of race in electoral politics (the defeat of the Black vote against Proposition 8, he concludes, was merely a symptom of a more widespread message problem), but we do not learn why, in fact, Queer black activists were so rare in the upper echelons of marriage battles.
He has long told us the reasons: Apart from widespread racism and transphobia within the mainstream gay rights movement, marriage was always a predominantly white, cijnder issue. “Gay Marriage? Please,” Jasmine canic wrote, A Los Angeles-based political strategist and journalist, following the passage of Proposition 8. “The white gay community is banging its head against the glass ceiling of a room called equality, believing that a breakthrough on marriage will give her equality with heterosexuals. But the right to marry is confronting both Black Gay and Black Straits.” Does nothing to address the problems that come in. Whether a person who is homeless or suffering from HIV, but does not have any health care, or comes out of jail and is unemployed, is actually being of the same sex. Does the person benefit from the right to marry? “
As Isenberg explains, some gay feminists such as lawyer and activist Paula Atelbrick offered early options for marriage, including “making room for broader definitions of family in our society”. In the midst of Behr’s subsequent conservative backlash, however, opponents called themselves the “very strange” position of protecting marriage against the religious right, leading opponents to embrace the cause. But despite Isenberg’s fine-grained coverage of other intra-movement squabbles, “The Engagement” brushes aside many critical criticisms of marriage; Any book that covers Sullivan’s “virtually normal” is called Urvashi Vaid’s “Virtual Equality” (his book is briefly cited), Michael Warner’s “The Trouble with Normal”, and Martha Fineman’s “The. Neutered Mother, The Sexual Family, and “must also present arguments. Other Twentieth-Century Tragedies, ”to name a few.
In his postscript, Isenberg acknowledged that the fight for gay marriage left the LGBTQ community far behind. “Transgender Americans were certainly no better than them,” he writes. This confession raises the question: What was lost in spending untold millions of dollars on gay marriage more broadly than gay emancipation? Given that gays and trans people of color had been offering alternative philosophies of freedom since the beginning of the LGBTQ event, what if we instead focused on the most marginalized members of our community, who The 1969 Stonewall riots line his bodyThe What if, before we got married, we provided housing to American youth experiencing homelessness for the first time, up to 40 percent of whom identify as gay? If we had funneled our resources to protect and elevate Black trans women, who are Now facing an epidemic of violenceThe
In the era of de-Trumpification, the LGBTQ community has the opportunity to consider what it can do now and fulfill that marriage equality has only given taxes and social privileges to those who join that institution Are willing and willing. Meanwhile, Isenberg gave us a valuable lesson: We must choose our battles wisely, as they determine not only our rights but also the boundaries of our political imagination.