US Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage

[FireIceTalon]

It's facetious. This happens to you a lot.

Which is missing the point...

Hollow words from someone who flings political labels around with wild abandon! Heheh.

So you will resort to "gotcha arguments" instead of looking at the larger point I was making? How original.

This is actually something that gets people into trouble big time. Trying to be the Outsider Avenger usually results in '80s-style hero decay into what we might call The Butthurt Reactionary. For instance, I've seen so many allies flip their shit because someone dropped "gay" or "retarded" or "girly" as an insult, and when the Avenger is someone to whom these labels wouldn't be applied, it's frequently an over-reaction. People in those groups can usually more eloquently, and calmly, rebut someone who's being thoughtless or cruel.

When you have to live within a minority group, you get a sense of proportionate and disproportionate reaction. You learn which fights to pick. You eventually know the essential factual details because you live them.* You get a sense of how to react to people to try to reach them, because your goal isn't to be divisive.

* You are missing these in your discussions of LGBT topics.

-Lem

Then we simply disagree here. Using those terms in any context is reactionary, and makes the person using them reactionary - not the person the term is being applied to (whether they are a part of the discriminated group in question or not isn't relevant). Calling something "retarded" is still a discrimination against mentally disabled individuals, regardless of the context it is being used it. The same is true of disparaging comments toward queers, women, or people of color. Further, whether people in those groups can rebut said insults better is hearsay, and is not relevant to the point being made here anyways - and that is that the terms "gay" (outside of the other definition or context of being happy) or "retarded" are discriminatory words regardless of their context. They should be called out as such, by those in the targeted group and outside of it alike.

My original point at the start of this thread: This decision to legalize gay marriage is not equality, it is cultural assimilation, and nothing more. The critique here though, is not of the decision itself, but of its conceptualization to conformity within the current ruling ideology (heternormativety), and the (distorted) way that the discussion of LGBT politics is framed as a result of this dissonance.

You fail to understand the intersectionalism that exists here, and when someone uses that framework to understand something, you have the completely backwards notion that it is they who do not understand the material reality of things. The problem is not with the Marxist framework or its inherent methodology of intersectionality - the problem is, YOU, the viewer, and your incompetence in understanding how class and identity politics (whether queer, gender, or racial) are intersectional. You treat these things as being independent of each other, when they very much aren't, and thus your analysis of the circumstances of queer people is incoherent at best. Lastly, I am not divisive - as a matter of fact, I am critiquing the divisiveness that is bourgeois heteronormative hegemony. If anyone is divisive here, it would be you, since anyone who sees through the folly of your sociological analysis is just a "crackpot".