Marriage and why gays ‘don’t cut it’

‘Love is a many splendid thing, love lifts us up where we belong … All you need is love’    Elephant Love Medley, Moulin Rouge

In all this debate about marriage equality, I think the one resounding question we have to ask is what the institution of marriage is supposed to represent. Is it about procreation? Is it a legal way to bind two families’ finances? Is it a way of ensuring our partner receives our pension in the event of our death? Or is it, as many would like to believe, a commitment between two people brought on by the sanctity of love?

Above all else, is it strictly between a man and a woman? It seems opponents of equal marriage can only justify their argument on the basis that marriage is about the family. That only one man and one woman can produce a child, and as such, only a union between the opposite sexes can constitute a marriage. No talk of whether infertile heterosexuals should be banned from marriage. Or those who would rather pursue a life without children. No recognition either, that gay people can have families, although that brings up a whole other debate.

Possibly the most outrageous argument against marriage equality has been the suggestion that it would lead to a rise in the number of homosexuals roaming the planet. This phobia has been so exacerbated as to suggest everyone, upon marriage equality, would suddenly turn gay, and quite unscientifically, be able to procreate a host of homosexual generations. And all this ‘logic’ from the same campaigners that believe homosexuality is unnatural. It seems to me, opponents have never read a science book or tapped into the hundreds of species around the world that display homosexuality.

I can understand that it has taken centuries for people to publically acknowledge the existence of gays, but there is no disputing the fact that we have always been there, and always will be. What I cannot fathom is the Christian argument against homosexuality. Anyone who has read the bible, such as myself, will know that Jesus never spoke a bad word about gays. Yet the pope gave his blessing to the Ugandan politician trying to make the “Hate the Gays” bill pass to make homosexuality potentially punishable by death. And we can’t forget the biblical undertone too, that the apostle Paul himself was batting for the pink team.

Let’s get this straight, so to speak – homosexuality is not evil, is not wrong and is not about sexual deviance. As Harry Potter’s Daniel Radcliffe recently pointed out, there’s no difference between gay male sex and straight anal sex. And it’s not as though heterosexuals stick to a rigid missionary position with the lights out and “no orgasms please”, so in that sense, what is so wrong with homosexuality? It, alongside heterosexuality, is simply a variation. But again, I can’t stress enough how sex is no more significant in a gay relationship than it is in a straight one – so why the obsession? It seems to me, straight homophobes are the most preoccupied with homosexual acts.

Marriage, in my opinion, should be about love. Scepticism says love wears off, and maybe it does, but sceptics have no right to decide who gets to test that theory. If you believe marriage is about family then you have to make divorce, where a child is present, illegal. By the same logic of the opponents, you have to make extra-marital affairs a punishable crime. Only then, will the nuclear family have any chance of surviving – much to the detriment of human happiness. I have little faith in any government or, to be honest at this stage, any religion, in making a decision not based on its own gains. So it is up to us, the people – gay, straight, bi, trans – to stand up and do what makes people happy – that is love. I haven’t heard love used as reason to oppose marriage equality – why, because no organisation views that as the basis of marriage. And yet, we are supposed to walk down the aisle with that being the only reason for swapping vows. What a contradiction? And if marriage is all about money, I still don’t see why gays can’t financially secure the person they cherish the most in the world when straights can.

A mere debate over marriage equality simply points out that the world has yet to respect that gays are capable of the same levels of emotion as straights. Otherwise this wouldn’t be up for discussion, and that is a sad result for humanity.

‘Oral sex is great for mental health’ apparently

Anybody questioning the media’s role in gender construction and acceptable male and female behaviours should take a look at what the tabloids choose to publish. Now you might say tabloids are “trashy” papers, but the fact remains they have devout readers and a strong following. That’s why it’s more than a little disappointing when the likes of the Daily Mail and the Sun decide to run articles seemingly indicating the health benefits of oral sex.

The online sites of the newspapers ran the headlines Semen is “good for you” (the Sun) and Semen is “good for women’s health and helps fight depression” (the Daily Mail). It seems that since the articles were published on August 21^st, the oral sex angle has been somewhat toned-down in the titles. What is important to note is that the news sites opted to take an obscure angle on a study carried out in the US ten years ago.

Researchers examined the responses of less than 300 anonymous college women on condom use and how they measured on a depression questionnaire. Effectively, it was discovered that women who had sex without condoms tended to be happier. However, the study, published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behaviour, acknowledged its many flaws. Once such loophole includes the possibility that unprotected sex is more common among women in relationships, which could indicate why they were less inclined to be depressed than their single peers.

The tabloids’ failings did not stop there. New research from Australia recently revealed fetal development is decreased by up to 15 per cent in mice from obese fathers. This suggests obesity among males leads to poorer development in babies, with the findings also indicating they have a reduced chance of impregnating their partners. A Google search will quickly reveal that no popular British news site ran this story. Nothing about how the modern man should cut down on his fast-food diet for the sake of his potential kids. Yet there are dozens of stories about how women must control their size, weight and work schedules to ensure their children get the best start to life.

Gender biased?

Well there is no doubt sex sells and a headline purporting the benefits of fellatio is bound to draw readers’ interest. But there are side-effects, such as teenagers thinking it’s best to dump advice on rubber use. What is most important though is the question why we still accept the objectification of women on a daily basis?

Westerners look to eastern cultures to lay blame for the mistreatment of women. One of America’s “greatest” arguments for invading Iraq and Afghanistan has been the liberation of women (despite the systematic rape that is standard in warfare). Take a look at the clothing of girls on a Saturday night – can you really argue they are not treated as sexualised commodities? The only difference in some eastern cultures is that female sexuality is repressed. The one pervading likeness is that women’s sexuality is only ever illustrated for the benefit of men. The blame doesn’t lie with teenage girls and boys. But the rest of us are culpable.

Expanded analysis on the US study can be read from the NHS.

Taylor cause for Irish cheers and tears

How could winning one gold medal send a nation into such an eruption of celebration given that countries like China and the US are nearing 100 on the Olympics table?

Perhaps it’s down to the fact Ireland has a population of around 4.5 million compared to 1.34 billion for China and more than 311 million for the US.

Is that why we got so irate when the Daily Telegraph described Katie Taylor as British just a day after she took down Team GB boxer Natasha Jonas 26-15 in the quarter-finals?

Other nations might look at Ireland and see a country famed for famine, corruption, soaring debt and British colonialism.

There’s no doubt the old stereotype of the drunken Irish is holding strong, with Australian journalist Peter Hanlon recently reprimanded for frequent references to “intoxication” in an article on Taylor’s London success.

I too, almost fell out with a friend who could not understand why Ireland was blowing its own trumpet over one small piece of gold.

Forget austerity, 800 years of invasion and a language arguably on the brink of extinction.

Seeing a Wicklow woman pound her way to the top of the international boxing arena with such modesty and authority made us proud.

It was not necessarily her success that won us over, but the grace and humble demeanour she maintained the whole way through it.

That is what we want the world to understand about us.

Psychological Tricks

Psychological Tricks.

Economic what now?

Ross O’Carroll-Kelly describes it as the economic blah blah blah, which sounds about right. How many of us really understand the ins and outs of the financial crisis? Sure, we know the banks are to blame, and there’s no doubting the government’s accountability, but what really happened? Michael Lewis takes a stab at explaining the Irish demise in a wider look at the downfall of the eurozone in his book ‘Boomerang’. While it borders on insulting for those of us who “caused” the crash, it does offer some accessible insight into the finer details.

To start with, Icelanders, Greeks and the Irish are presumably singled out due to the fact the book was published before the Portuguese, Spanish or Italian economies were implicated. Lewis points a finger at the culture of tax evasion in Greece, where tax collectors were demoted to back offices for suggesting a business wasn’t paying its dues. There’s really no arguing with the fact the country didn’t pay taxes, as illustrated by its spiralling debt. But dubbing an entire nation “lazy” serves to undermine Lewis’ argument.

The journalist then lands on the shores of the Emerald Isle – where leprechauns abound but national pride is in short supply. Lewis said himself that during the Celtic Tiger the Irish were busy “trying not to be Irish”. Perhaps a shrewd observation from an American on the outside looking in. So he explains developers were building property where there was no demand. The country was run amuck by greedy businessmen with little understanding that no one actually wanted to live in a rain-soaked land of misery and good humour. Not even generation y – who led the most recent exodus.

It’s fine to say that Ireland got too big for its boots – if you’re Irish. It’s harder to accept someone else’s criticism of your country. Especially when they are suggesting we stubbornly cling to our national identify by speaking Gaeilge in the Dail. While Lewis managed to grip the cause of Ireland’s fiscal troubles, he failed to grasp our true spirit. He stuck to stereotypes about the Irish without questioning their validity. It seemed he confused our piss-taking nature with stupidity.

Lewis details a student protest in Dublin where opponents of college fees hit the city’s streets to say no. One clever chappy clearly thought it would be funny to inject some Irish humour into the mix by carrying a banner that read: “Down with this sort of thing.” The sentiment was lost on Lewis. Had he ever heard of Father Ted, he would have understood the statement. Our resolve is that there’s little we can do about the economic blah blah blah.

He astutely notes that we Irish hide our anguish in jokes. Alas, he failed to see that in his own experiences.

Still, his take on the economic crash is worth a read.

My virtual Me

Reblogged from Joanna's Thoughts:

There are 2.1 billion Internet users worldwide, 555 million websites, more than 800 million Facebook accounts, 225 million Twitter accounts, over 164 million blogs - those numbers are still growing. Do our social networking sites show the truth about us? Is it possible to hide our weaknesses and highlight our strengths on every single profile we have on Twitter, Pinterest, LinkedIn, Facebook and Myspace?

Read more… 255 more words

Great piece on social media and identity

It is about art.

It is about art..