The SSM idea is hacked together from the remnants of various academic and highly speculative arguments that conceptually deconstruct the social institution of marriage. But this produces a fragile fabrication, "same-sex marriage", and it depends on the dogma of identity politics to glue it together.
SSM is not an organic social idea and nowhere is it but a marginal practice -- in whatever form -- within the modern homosexual population itself. This is the case even in heavily pro-gay places.
There is a clear conflict of ideas.
Contrary to the SSM campaign, the SSM idea is not one and the same as the marriage idea. Nor does the SSM idea self-justify. Nor does it self-sustain. Its "truth" is not self-evident. It is an idea rich in fatal contradictions and impoverished by the lack of essential features. Its argumentation is self-defeating.
But the hardline SSMers make it abundantly clear that SSM is not intended to sustain itself nor to justify itself. Nor to become a rich depository of meaning that is evident even to the most sympathetic neutral observer. The SSM idea is not intended as a social construct for shaping homosexual behavior. Its purpose, and likely outcome, is not to make the practice of SSM normative for the homosexual population.
The purpose of the SSM idea is to make homosexuality, and especially gay identity, normative for the rest of society. To get from here to there, the marriage idea must be quashed. The SSM idea is driven by a leap of faith in the supremacy of gay identity politics. As I've said before, for these hardliners this is not about justice but about "just us".
And so they arrogantly self-reference and thus reveal the true meaning of their endorsement of the SSM idea itself. It is their idea and they believe, on faith alone, that it is their gift to society.
Of course, it would be a gift imposed rather than a gift freely accepted. And one with repressive reprecussions that they have shown themselves eager to pursue.
0 comments,:
Post a Comment