Out in the Mountains
“,3 .

   
   

akng rwn Rules

by Jim Roche

My teenage daughter finally asked me
the big question, “Are you and David going
to get married?” I said we hoped to, pretty
soon. We just hadn’t worked out all the
details. Then she asked, “Whose going to
wear the dress?” I hear comments like that
all the time. When I speak on gay issues at
colleges and universities someone inevita-
bly asks me a similar question, like, “Well
who’s, you know, dominant?” Or some-
thing even more direct like, “Who likes
being on top?” The list of questions that
would amuse you goes on and on. Gays and
lesbians, it seems, are a real mystery to
most people. What we do, how we act, what
we think and feel. But a more important
point is that so many people seem to think
that a relationship, gay or straight, means
someone on top and someone on the bot-
tom. Something inherently unequal. Oppo-
sites attract is the theory I guess. And that's
why so many gay and lesbian people don’t
want to have anything to do with marriages
or weddings or anything similar. It just
seems to reflect the worst that heterosexual
relationship have to offer - inequality and
oppression. So, why would two gay men or
two lesbian women want to have anything
to do with one of the most oppressive and
hierarchical systems around?

As a couple there are certain things that
my lover David and I want to share. Time
together. Interests. Friendships. We al-

ready share lots of things, but because
we’re gay we can't share some things with-
out a hassle. Like health benefits. Legal
rights to belongings, property and so on. If
one of us were to become ill the other might
not be included in choosing a doctor or
hospital or treatment. Those decisions
might be relegated to “immediate family
members”. We might not even be allowed
to visit each other.

Now there are legal ways around most,
but not all, of this. Wills, powers of attorney
and probate forms. But after all is said and
dome, it would still be a relationship that is
legalized in spite of the community we live
in instead of with its help. It’s still second
class citizenship no matter how you look at
it. Slowly we are beginning to get our rights
here and there across the country. But a
growing number of people oppose our
rights to state sanctioned or church sanc-
tioned relationships.

Why do they make life harder for us
because we’re gay or lesbian? What's
threatening to people who oppose actions
like the San Francisco domestic partner-
ship act, church recognition of gay relation-
ships and so on? They feel we gay and
lesbian couples threaten the “institution of
the family.” But how can we threaten fam-
ily because we want to be a family? Sounds
sort of crazy, doesn't it?

Our idea of family, one that many gay
and lesbian people accept, is one that is in

EV»:

-- ooxa - ‘REC Da-
~-pes=uoDu:;Ai.s -- ‘F’OS‘I'eR5~

{YONES

 I 3 7lEmor.5a. *brucI:aIeboro,\)r..
mom-aw
on

 

NOWO4

""BUTTDNS~ CARD:--‘BUN\PeR 51'! cr<eP5-firfiwpq film-nag’, jxIqr_jtbt‘icg

10

 

direct opposition to the status quo. Tradi-
tionalists see family as a pre-established
pattern into which each individual fits. In a
family you have and know your place. And
our concept of family, the gay and lesbian
concept, is one in which we easily switch
roles and often do it for what appears as no
other reason than fun. Taking this lightly,
as we sometimes do, is even more upsetting
to traditionalists. We switch roles, we make
up new ones and we relate to each other
from the same role or no role at all. It’s a
concept of family based upon mutuality.
Equality. Individuality. Gay couples can be
both masculine and feminine. Same with
lesbian couples. We act like men, and we
act like women. Sometimes we act like
something in-betvveen. We totally destroy
the boundaries that traditionalists rely on to
keep the present system of “family” going.
It doesn’t matter to us, and as a matter fact,
after years of dealing with such stere-
otypes, we have fun with those rules and
enjoy testing those limits. My daughter is
right to wonder who’s going to wear what.
Who knows’?

We are a threat to the family. A threat
to its oppressive male oriented foundation.
A threat to its dominance oriented mental-
ity. To its set rifles and regulations. But in
spite of what marriage and family has
grown to represent to many of us gay and
lesbian people, marriage, church unions or
domestic partnerships demonstrate that we
can keep the best of relationships going
while we toss out what isn’t of any value.
As time goes on and gay and lesbian rela-
tionships in all their different fonns are
recognized by city and state governments,
churches and organizations like the Cali-
fornia Bar Association, we will help rede-
fine marriage. Redefine relatinship. Whatl
hope people will learn from watching us is
that we bring more to relationships than the
roles we are supposed to play, or the clothes
we’re supposed to wear.

©Jim Roche, 1990 "Gay Briefs"