same-sex marriage

Here are my picks of the most interesting feminist news of the morning. Enjoy! And add links I missed to the comments. 

• An artist removes Barbie's makeup! [Sociological Images]

• Guantanamo detainees are still on hunger strike. Here, one detainee writes an essay on how Guantanamo is killing him. [New York Times] 

• The tax law of marriage encourages dual-income couples to not get hitched, but incentivizes marriage for couples with only one income. Does that make any sense? [New York Times] 

• Meanwhile, Uruguay legalized same-sex marriage! [Autostraddle] 

• Speaking of which, marriage is great, but many LGBT people of color could really use some job security, too. [Colorlines] 

• With some Republicans' reversal on same-sex marriage, the GOP is losing some of its homophobic base. [Towleroad]

• Here are 18 illustrated responses to street harassment, including a bunch of great comics. [Buzzfeed]

• This weekend in heartthrob relations: Justin Beiber visits Anne Frank's house and wishes she could have been a Beleiber. [Racialicious] 

• First to Die: On race and horror in Evil Dead.  [Feminist Wire] 

• Rookie rounds up the best coming-of-age movies for teens. Oh, the nostalgia. [Rookie] 

• Ooooo! Absurdly sexist Avengers shirts! [Feministing]

Maybe this is a little premature, but for this week's BitchTapes playlist, I put together a mix for this summer's same-sex weddings. Like the scouts say, "Be prepared!"

Big thanks to Portland's DJ Rhienna for suggesting all the good songs on this list.

BitchTapes: Marriage Equality Playlist from BitchTapes on 8tracks Radio.

Our Popaganda relaunch kicks off with a bang: This episode digs into issues of monogamy. We tend to take monogamy for granted as a goal of relationships, but that's in part because it's an idea that been carefully constructed and policed throughout history. On this 20-minute episode, author of Sex and Punishment Eric Berkowitz explains the strange legal history of monogamy, writer Alex Borinsky discusses the role of monogamy as a political tool in the same-sex marriage debate, and sex educator Tristan Taormino dishes on the logistics of open relationships. Tune in! 

 

Last week, attorney Charles Cooper argued before the Supreme Court that the justices should deny the right for same-sex couples to get married because marriage has traditionally been about procreation. Time for a history lesson, Charles.

Far from being a union of one man and one woman, marriage, for most of human history, has been the union of two men: the husband and father-in-law’s wealth and property. Marriage was a business arrangement in which love was highly incidental. Forget kids or compatibility, the only thing guaranteed going in was a well-negotiated contract.

This week the Supreme Court took up the debate over same-sex unions. As Justice Roberts remarked on Wednesday, political leaders have been “falling all over themselves” to endorse marriage equality. Fine. But why do so many gays and lesbians want their romantic relationships recognized by the state in the first place?

There are, of course, bureaucratic matters: tax breaks, hospital visitations, and other federal benefits many same-sex couples are currently denied. 

But why marriage?

When the principal at 5th grader Kameron Slade's school deemed his speech on same-gender marriage "inappropriate," the Internet took notice. After the online attention it received, Slade was not only allowed to present his heartwarming speech to his classmates at PS 195 in Queens last month, he also delivered it to the New York City Council yesterday.


This kid.

Bristol Palin has a blog post up today on Patheos about how problematic it is that Barack Obama's support of same-sex marriage was inspired by his teenage daughters.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

So reads the text of the Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution. This week, it became a player in the push for same-sex marriage.