• windowlicker [she/her]
    ·
    1 year ago

    why is inclusion in an often patriarchal/misogynistic and conservative institution as marriage the end-all-be-all of queer rights? this is such an annoying talking point from liberals. i have heard american conservatives going on national stages and calling for the complete genocide of trans people, but i have not heard of anything like that from chinese politicians.

    china has a long road ahead in terms of queer rights, but compared to queer rights (and "rights" like the right to get married, right to die in an imperialist war, etc) backsliding in the west, there's a pretty big difference.

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      why is inclusion in an often patriarchal/misogynistic and conservative institution as marriage the end-all-be-all of queer rights?

      Kind of reminds me of the space race and how the USSR had all these amazing achievements but America decided that the winner was the first one to land people on the moon.

    • dokapuff@lemm.ee
      ·
      1 year ago

      I ain't no fucking lib. It's a simple standard of acceptance in society (i.e. gay people get to participate in the same governmental institutions as everyone else).

          • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            ·
            1 year ago

            No sense arguing with tankies. Every take I've seen from hexbear itt is absolute brainrot, and I can't wait until we can block entire instances.

            Signed, A gay, married anarchist

            • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              ·
              1 year ago

              I'm a queer anarchist and I've posted plenty on hexbear, is it possible you only notice the takes that cause you the most instinctive reaction? There is a more diverse array of views there than people on other instances realize I think. And I've seen more constructive discussion there than most places on the internet, including lemmy.world and other instances.

              • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                ·
                1 year ago

                That's great, although I'm not sure how well someone who fundamentally opposes statehood can find much meaningful discourse there.

                Look below, and you'll see tankies accusing me of transphobia and all manner of evil simply because I choose to be married, even though I by no means exclude or invalidate anyone else's relationship.

                It fucking sucks when people can defend a state for excluding gay people (or any people) from rights that others enjoy. It's in itself LGBTphobic. Not me -- them

                • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The only 'tankies accusing' anything I saw in the convo were people mentioning that "marriage is a patriarchal institution", which I don't see how that is calling you a transphobe even if you disagree. Someone did mention trans people don't care about marriage because they are being murdered, maybe that is what you are referring to, it really didn't come off to me like anyone was calling you a transphobe but maybe I'm wrong. I didn't see anyone say that you couldn't be married, or that people can't enjoy having a marriage, to me that is separate from critique of marriage as a patriarchal institution. But yeah, I don't know why anyone would defend a state for anything. That's part of why I do feel the need to engage with more 'state-friendly' socialists, to figure out what about it seems necessary to them, or if there is some greater flaw with my anti-state belief.

                    • brain_in_a_box [he/him]
                      ·
                      1 year ago

                      authoritarian regimes

                      As opposed to those non-authoritarian regimes that you, as a self proclaimed anarchist, definitely believe in.

                    • autismdragon [he/him, they/them]
                      ·
                      edit-2
                      1 year ago

                      Damn you got really mad at someone for saying that they are interested in why pro-state socialists feel that way and want to learn. Why does someone wanting to learn make you so angry? Maybe because you're closed minded and refuse to listen and learn in the slightest?

                      Someone with as much obvious privilege as you, who wields it in conversations freely, calling others priviledged for the mere act of engaging with people who think differently than them is quiet rich.

                      ETA: I think you need to maybe think about introspecting instead of lashing out when someone accuses you of being a priviledged white gay westerner "pulling up the ladder". Because that is a quiet common phenomenon (see men like Pete Buttigieg for example). White gays who aren't poor saying "ok, we won marriage equality, dont care about the rest of it" is very frequent and you ARE acting like that in this thread.

            • kristina [she/her]
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Hexbear has the largest number of trans people than any other instance lmao

              Yet another gay trying to split away from the T rather than trying to understand why so many trans people hold views like this

            • autismdragon [he/him, they/them]
              ·
              1 year ago

              As an anarchist you should agree with "marriage is a patriarchal institution" since that take was pretty much invented by anarchists.

            • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The critique of marriage as a patriarchal institution was invented by anarchists lmao. I'm just a "tankie" but I'm well read on anarchist lit, why aren't you as an anarchist?

                • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I'm not aware of any queer anarchist critiques that don't acknowledge that marriage, especially as recognized by the state, is a patriarchal institution, they just go on to elaborate how that can be subverted within queer culture. Do you have any links or recommendations for writings that argue that marriage recognized by the state isn't a patriarchal institution at all?

                  • GenderIsOpSec [she/her]
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    dw they'll get back to you after they write their own.

                    it's going to be Harry Potter but Harry is gay, nothing else changes

              • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                What the fuck are you talking about, Jesse?

                Edit: I believe trans people should have equity too, and the freedom to enter into whatever type of relationship that they so choose, whatever that may look like. Ironically, it's you who are trying to invalidate other people's relationships. I'm doing nothing of the kind.

      • kristina [she/her]
        ·
        1 year ago

        No it isn't lmao. I care more about housing rates among LGBT people, China and Cuba are high on that list.

        Signed: yet another hexbear trans user. Weird how so many trans people on lemmy are hard left 🤔

          • Maoo [none/use name]
            ·
            1 year ago

            If that's the kind of logic that convinces you of things, you should check out all of the other people saying the same thing as me.

            Basically your one job as a leftist when it comes to capitalist propaganda is to not unquestioningly repeat it and guess what you're doing, lib. And it's in the realm of orientalism to boot. Not exactly distinguishing yourself.

    • AlpineSteakHouse [any]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      why is inclusion in an often patriarchal/misogynistic and conservative institution as marriage the end-all-be-all of queer rights?

      Legal protections mostly. If you get married, you have a right to see your spouse in the hospital. Otherwise, they're just another person even if you've been living together for 50 years. You also have a right to inheritance, the right to receive pensions and 401k, etc etc. An unmarried partner is essentially left with nothing unless explicitly stated in a will and even then they don't have all the legal protections.

      Imagine living with someone for 20 years and they get into a car wreck, you can't see them before they die because you're not married. You get kicked out of your home because legally you're just a roommate and have no right to stay in that house. Then, all the money your partner invested goes to their shithead parents who kicked them out as a child. None of that would happen if you were married.

      Marriage is an outdated contract but the functions it provides are still important to society.

      Edit: Obviously I support China but marriage isn't just a "proof of love" or some other sentimental thing.