Ratto
link
fedilink
16
edit-2
2M

Maybe I’m missing something but surely a step towards a socialist society is education including education around not only this but frankly deprogramming the reactionary idpol of conservative ideals relating to it amongst other things?

Like what’s it to someone else if a same sex couple gets married? Surely that reactionary bs needs to be addressed immediately and as a result of this, same sex marriage would be one of the first things implemented as a result?

Personally, I’d prefer just abolishing marriage as a concept. If people want to live together, they can do that; if they separate, they’d be guaranteed new homes within a few months, so one or both could move. I suppose some might find it useful to have a contract for how personal property would be redistributed after separation, but that certainly shouldn’t be limited by gender

Frankly, I don’t see that as realistic. However, I do understand the sentiment. The reason why I don’t think it’s realistic is because there are near zero instances of any society(tribal or not) on earth that doesn’t have any sort of concept of marriage. Anthropologically, it isn’t something that is compatible with how we humans organize ourselves. But yeah, the gender distinction is just dumb. There is zero practical difference between a gay couple and a straight couple that doesn’t want or can’t bear children.

I was mainly talking about the legal institution, which just seems unnecessarily complex and exclusionary, not necessarily the concept of two-person relationships. I don’t think that legal relationships should be limited to two people, even if it’s only relevant to a tiny minority. (Although this is mostly just semantics – it could still be called “marriage”)

I think this needs to be decided by the people of that country. Personally i don’t see why not, it would take virtually no effort, it would be a simple stroke of a pen. But if there is significant popular resistance it will take some time to win people over, and in the meantime i don’t think it’s a priority unless marriage is associated with concrete material benefits (tax breaks, etc.). Otherwise it’s just symbolic. I would say it is much more important for same-sex couples to be immediately granted full equality in adoption rights. That to me seems of much more practical importance than a piece of paper or a religious ceremony.

Subjecting the rights of a historically marginalized group to the popular vote has not proven to produce progress for those groups.

Civil liberties that don’t risk the stability of socialism should definitely be first priority imo.

@Doctor_Robotnik@lemmygrad.ml
creator
link
fedilink
-1
edit-2
2M

deleted by creator

No no, I’m saying same sex marriage is an important right and there is no reason not to have it immediately.

@Doctor_Robotnik@lemmygrad.ml
creator
link
fedilink
11
edit-2
2M

deleted by creator

KiG V2
link
fedilink
42M

I have no examples that come to mind but I read PurpleHat’s first comment the same way and I agreed with it. With the idea that perhaps there could hypothetically be a country that was tepidly willing to accept socialism but which saw queer rights as unacceptable. Again I can’t think of any countries like this but I have heard in general of places in the Middle East that, after years of being imperialized, have come to associate queerness with an uppity middle class of Western-imperialist friendly hipsters, people who haven’t been inoculated against socialism but who have been misled into associating queerness with their invaders and foreign oppressors.

That is not to say that I don’t think same-sex marriage is important, but it’s a matter of pragmatism and critical support, just like how we may temporarily find ourselves supporting people like Modi or Erodgan etc. when it comes to anti-imperialism even though these people are fascists. I would rather get A and fight to get B as well then give up on A unless I can get B with it immediately. Open to discussing it further though.

Yeah I’ve read some other comments and realized that maybe enacting rights that don’t materially change people’s lives aren’t as important to enact straight away. Especially if there is still a large reactionary force it’d probably be better to educate them before provoking them. I think it’s extremely important to protect gay/trans rights, but marriage in particular (and maybe some other things) that don’t make people’s lives all too much better could wait until socialism is more stable. I’m open to changing my mind though if someone has a counterpoint.

Marriage is a patriarchal arraingment. MAYBE you can get a stste grant for starting a family. Why should couples get a fsvorable leg up by thr state against single people?

Ratto
link
fedilink
4
edit-2
2M

Agreed, this is why I didn’t (still dont) want to get married because the history and sexism associated with it didn’t gel with me. They aren’t my possession and I don’t own them. The connotations and sexism that underpin marriage historically are disgusting. My partner is pretty adamant though that we will so 🤷 social expectation got hands I guess.

People aren’t ready to drop marriage yet I feel (look at the cheeky down vote someone gave this comment for one) and I find that even with the most progressive people that marriage is so hardcoded into people as a step that must be taken to demonstrate love.

Only compounding this is the economic benefits of marriage vs not and there’s that cultural element in the UK that civil partnership somehow doesn’t mean you love each other as much which is fucking dogshit but people do subscribe to that and it pisses me off when they say such flippant things knowing full well they didn’t let queer people marry till very recently relatively.

Edit: that said I’m coming at this from a very Anglo perspective so I can’t speak for other cultures regarding it.

Edit 2: oh lol I got a downvote as well 😊

Yeah, I agree. Honestly, Im coming more from it from a legal sense and state recognition and all the trappings of financial and tax responsibilities as opposed to non married people.

Other than bringing children into the world or adoption; I see no reason why married people and single people should be considered differently or particularly under the law.

Now ceremonies professing one’ s eternal love for another should just be a thing people do as a matter of culture and celebrating the joy of love and companionship.

Ratto
link
fedilink
1
edit-2
2M

100% and I agree with everything you’ve said. Can’t really say any more I just agree with what you’ve said.

There should definitely be considerable state financial assistance for families with children.

@ledward@lemmygrad.ml
link
fedilink
8
edit-2
1M

deleted by creator

Discussion Community for fellow Marxist-Leninists and other Marxists.

Rules for /c/communism

Rules that visitors must follow to participate. May be used as reasons to report or ban.

  1. No non-marxists

This subreddit is here to facilitate discussion between marxists.

There are other communities aimed at helping along new communists. This community isn’t here to convert naysayers to marxism.

If you are a member of the police, armed forces, or any other part of the repressive state apparatus of capitalist nations, you will be banned.

  1. No oppressive language

Do not attempt to justify your use of oppressive language.

Doing this will almost assuredly result in a ban. Accept the criticism in a principled manner, edit your post or comment accordingly, and move on, learning from your mistake.

We believe that speech, like everything else, has a class character, and that some speech can be oppressive. This is why speech that is patriarchal, white supremacist, cissupremacist, homophobic, ableist, or otherwise oppressive is banned.

TERF is not a slur.

  1. No low quality or off-topic posts

Posts that are low-effort or otherwise irrelevant will be removed.

This is not a place to engage in meta-drama or discuss random reactionaries on lemmy or anywhere else.

This includes memes and circlejerking.

This includes most images, such as random books or memorabilia you found.

We ask that amerikan posters refrain from posting about US bourgeois politics. The rest of the world really doesn’t care that much.

  1. No basic questions about marxism

Posts asking entry-level questions will be removed.

Questions like “What is Maoism?” or “Why do Stalinists believe what they do?” will be removed, as they are not the focus on this forum.

  1. No sectarianism

Marxists of all tendencies are welcome here.

Refrain from sectarianism, defined here as unprincipled criticism. Posts trash-talking a certain tendency or marxist figure will be removed. Circlejerking, throwing insults around, and other pettiness is unacceptable.

If criticisms must be made, make them in a principled manner, applying Marxist analysis.

The goal of this subreddit is the accretion of theory and knowledge and the promotion of quality discussion and criticism.

Check out ProleWiki for a communist wikipedia.

bottombanner

  • 0 users online
  • 11 users / day
  • 27 users / week
  • 99 users / month
  • 582 users / 6 months
  • 6 subscribers
  • 1.54K Posts
  • 5.14K Comments
  • Modlog