Institute for Marriage and Public Policy.
Post Office Box 1231 • Manassas, VA 20108 • (202) 216-9430 • Email: info@imapp.org


WWW iMAPP

Support iMAPP
Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

Join the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy mailing list
Email:
Weekly Archives

Blogger!



Friday, March 12, 2004

MALE-MALE COUPLES AND COMMITMENT: David Benkof

A common question posed by SSM supporters is, "How does gay marriage hurt straight marriage?" Well, if male-male couplings tend to view commitment in very different ways than male-female couplings do, it seems to me SSM could water down the entire institution in an unhealthy way.

I've been reading David Nimmons' excellent The Soul Beneath the Skin: The Unseen Hearts and Habits of Gay Men (St. Martin's Press, 2002). The author is a gay man who drew together hundreds of social-science studies about gay men to draw some conclusions about the ways in which the gay male community is distinct--it's less violent, for example, and more caring.

Chapter 5 focuses on gay male attitudes toward sex, and it's striking how "commitment" for gay men appears to mean different things than it does for straights:

"Much evidence now demonstrates that non-monogamy is a robust and established cultural practice among us.... A stack of research confirms that about three-quarters of gay men in stable, long-term relationships are consensually non-monogamous, without it necessarily threatening the viability of the couple." (p. 84)

"The sheer numbers of happily open queer couples is a matter of epidemiological fact. But far more interesting are the cultural and ethical implications they pose. Most primarily, what is radical is how openly it is acknowledged.... woven throughout gay communal expectations and habits, we recognize openly that sexual compacts can be part of successful relationships when both participants so choose." (pp. 88-9)

(Note: "sexual compacts" are arrangements like "either partner can cheat, but no kissing" or "only when we're out of town" or "only if we're both there.")

"This amorous clan is consciously, collectively, culturally, and carefully redrafting the covenants we make with each other around fidelity, intimacy, and commitment. We are decoupling notions of shame and guilt, defusing the imperatives of deceit and betrayal which have traditionally welded the seams of committed coupledom." (p. 90)

Certainly there are some gay men who are totally faithful to each other. But does it matter that most are not? In deciding whether to change the definition of marriage, I think it does.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

home | marriagedebate.com | resources | about imapp | contact

Copyright Institute for Marriage and Public Policy