Poet and
memoirist Mark Doty didn’t want to marry his partner.
Sure, they were in love and there were benefits to be
had, but Doty was afraid that legal recognition might
change his relationship. Then he realized that
it’s the other way around: that his union, and others
like it, will likely change the institution of
marriage -- forever.
I never had the
least desire to get married. Since neither church nor
state had ever been, to put it mildly, supportive of my
relationships, why on earth should I want them
involved? Like many gay men, I relished the sense of
freedom and improvisation that came from not having my
relationship defined from the outside. No scripted
expectations, no predetermined path. Wasn’t it
invigorating, and didn’t it somehow feel more
alive that way?
So it was with a
certain degree of surprise that I found myself looking
at the sweet flood of news pictures from San Francisco,
during the first flourish of same-sex weddings there,
and feeling -- well, sweet. Handsome young guys
holding each other and weeping. Tender, mature women
who’d been together for years embracing with
confidence and delight. Who could look at these images
and not be moved? It’s the pleasure of seeing our
relationships honored in the public arena, seeing these
loving couples validated by their inclusion in the
daily news, after our long histories of erasure.
Still, I thought, it’s not what I really want for
myself.
Then I got a new
job, in an academic community whose values are
progressive and humane, and for the first time in my working
life I was offered same-sex partner benefits. The only
catch: We needed to have a legally recognized
relationship.
Let me be
perfectly clear: If I were going to marry anybody,
I’d marry Paul. In a practical sense, I already
had. We’ve been together for 13 years; our
lives and work are intertwined. We know all the same people.
We share a long, elaborate frame of reference, a mutual
history. I am no longer at all clear who I’d be
if he wasn’t around. Not to mention the fact
that he is smart, devilishly handsome, an entertaining
companion, funny, loyal to a fault, and a wonderful
writer. He’s an excellent travel companion,
likes people and animals, and has eyes of a startling beauty
and clarity -- as if you can simply look right down into
him, when you are so inclined. But what would we gain
by getting married? What would be any different, other
than my job benefits?
We checked into
domestic-partnership registration, only to learn that in
New York City, where we live, putting our relationship on
the books wouldn’t provide us with much. The
major benefit: If one of us were incarcerated, the
other would be allowed to visit. Paul gets a bit wild,
but I don’t think Rikers Island is in his future.
Marriage was clearly the way to go, especially since
New York’s bold new governor has decreed that
our state will recognize same-sex marriages sealed in
California, and now, it seems, those from
Massachusetts too.
But did we really
want to participate in this dusty old institution, with
its oppressive history and its hidebound conventions? I
feared that marriage would define us, and not the
other way around.
Click here to follow The Advocate on Twitter.
Page 1 of 3