Issue Number 1010 | Calling a New Army of Lovers | Advocate.com Calling a New Army of Lovers  | Marriage | Advocate.com

Continental promo
|| Politics > Marriage  ||
 

Calling a New Army of Lovers

In California and beyond, we’re marrying for love. Our time has come. We will not be denied.
From The Advocate  July 1, 2008
 Calling a New Army of Lovers

Four years ago, when the mayor of San Francisco made history by marrying gay folks down at City Hall, his fellow Democrat Dianne Feinstein voiced her displeasure in no uncertain terms. “Too much, too fast, too soon,” was the way she put it, and the ice water in her veins was almost audible. The senator’s 26 years in the national spotlight had been launched by a homophobic assassin, yet she still found a quarter of a century “too soon” for the full establishment of gay civil rights.

How much more time had she needed, for God’s sake? For years Feinstein had seen the full-blown horrors of AIDS and watched same-sex love in action -- sturdy, unwavering, unconditional love -- as LGBT families cared for the dying. She knew as well as anyone alive what we’d endured at the hands of a callous government and organized religious hatred. She had lived through Matthew Shepard’s crucifixion and scores of other antigay atrocities. When exactly, I wondered, would it be convenient for her to stand up for a constituency that had consistently returned her to office?

1010 Armistead Maupin and Christopher Turner wed in 2007 x395 (from Maupin) | Advocate.com
Maupin (left) and Turner wed in Vancouver in February 2007. They plan to remarry in California.

The sad truth is that gay rights has always been the disposable card of liberal politics. The very fact of our existence is still “controversial” even to those who make a noise about being our friends. We’re still the fly in the ointment, the “divisive issue” that can lose an election. Just look at the weak-kneed response from the Clinton and Obama camps when the California supreme court made its landmark decision overthrowing the ban on same-sex marriage. Both candidates hid behind a campaign spokesperson and both reaffirmed their “separate but equal” policies of civil unions, thereby assuming a stance that would keep them in comfy solidarity with John McCain come November. The problem, of course, was that California court had just ruled that separate was NOT equal and never would be, so Clinton and Obama both ended up looking like -- there’s no other way to put this -- pussies. Faced with a major milestone in American civil rights, the Democratic contenders could offer neither congratulations nor condemnations. Like Dianne Feinstein four years earlier, they’d been completely upstaged by the decisive action of braver and wiser souls. 

Page: 1 | 2 | 3
Maupin is on tour for the paperback edition of his ninth novel, Michael Tolliver Lives, Photography courtesy Armistead Maupin.

Reader Comments

These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.

  • Name: Julie Weismann
    Date posted: 2008-06-27 1:43 PM
    Hometown: Eugene, OR

    Comment:

    Armistead your misogyny is showing! "pussies" (couldn't think of something else beside a reference to a vagina?) "gay rights" (not LGBT rights, not gay & lesbian rights, not queer rights?) "and every other gay person" (hmm I guess as a lesbian I am not included here) "we queers" (not that I have a problem with queer, it just seems interesting that you didn't say gay & lesbians - since that is who is getting married in the "same-sex") Its been a while since I have read such clear misogyny from a gay man. How sad! I get "you're" angry that it took so long and happy that "you're" finally married. You seemed to have left out a huge segment of "queers" that are getting married too---lesbians!


  • Name: Noel Van Haver
    Date posted: 2008-06-17 8:41 AM
    Hometown: Antwerp

    Comment:

    Good for you, California! And trust Armistead Maupin to touch every emotion known to man, in this piece. Thanks for that, Mr Maupin. As he correctly writes, it is thanks to all those gay men and women who were brave enough to live the lives they wanted to live, without hiding their very souls, their very essence. I think, though, it is much easier not to live a lie and, well, too bad for those who have a problem with "us" being true to ourselves. They were never worth worrying about to begin with. Applauding you as we speak, a QUEER man from Belgium.


  • Name: David Strand
    Date posted: 2008-06-10 12:01 AM
    Hometown: Minneapolis

    Comment:

    Cynthia McKinney looks likely to be the presidential nominee of the Green Party this year and like all the candidates seeking the Green Party's nomination, she supports full marriage equality without equivocation unlike Obama who believes it should be left to the states. The Green Party of the U.S. has long supported marriage equality for same sex couples in it's national platform as has the Green Party movement since it's earliest incarnations in this country going back to 1983. While 5 or state Democratic parties have recently added support for same sex marriage to their platforms, the national Democratic Party and of course the Republican Party do not support equal civil marriage rights in their national platforms. A Green vote is a marriage equality vote!


  • Name: David Strand
    Date posted: 2008-06-09 11:08 PM
    Hometown: Minneapolis

    Comment:

    Thank you Armistead Maupin! It has been far too long and you are so correct that all too often in politics the lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgender, intersex, queer, two spirit, mahu, same sex loving, or whatever labels are owned or applied to members of our community, we are all too often the first to be "thrown under the bus" by our presumed "allies", dropped as "too controversial." As William Gladstone put it "Justice delayed is justice denied". For those who care about the cause of human rights and peace and justice who say "not now!" I would say we cannot be as effective as advocates of the rights of others as long as our own rights are denied.


  • Name: chris
    Date posted: 2008-06-09 6:42 PM
    Hometown: SF

    Comment:

    Would you crabby commentors all just calm down a little bit? This is a fantastic column penned by one of the best writers of our time and it is right on the money. Thanks Armistead for all you have done and continue to do! "ice water in her veins" god, I love it. You da MASTER!


  • Name: niles
    Date posted: 2008-06-07 1:59 AM
    Hometown: Beverly Hills

    Comment:

    Very disappointed in Maupin for his use of "we queers". Talk about a poor self image. Please, sir, keep your putdowns to yourself and don't include me in them. I am a human being, not a "queer".


  • Name: Barb
    Date posted: 2008-06-05 12:27 PM
    Hometown: Seaside

    Comment:

    I'm here and I'm queer. I own that word, like dyke, and many other words that have been used as weapons against me. I own them and wear them as a badge of honor, as the words themselves transform by our ownership and pride. If someone who is queer is feeling sensitive to that word, they may need to look within for a sign of self-loathing which is a hard battle to win in a world that keeps reinforcing every negative stereotype of an alternative lifestyle. Dear sisters and brothers, you deserve equal rights. It is such a simple concept. Equality .... easy to dismiss if YOU have it; hard to live without if you don't. I stood up for the rights of us queers/lesbians/dykes/transgendered/gay/ folks by marrying my beloved in SF 4 years ago and am heading to the local County Clerk the first day it is possible to get a LEGAL license. For ourselves we do this and for those who follow. Celebration! Joy! Gratitude! GAV for GOV. Best wishes to all new QUEER couples. Love, bb


  • Name: Marina E.
    Date posted: 2008-06-05 8:42 AM
    Hometown: Seattle

    Comment:

    As an owner of a vagina AKA "pussy", I am highly offended that such an accomplished writer (writing about bigotry!) could not find a different word to describe an act of lameness and fear. How about wussies, wimps, scaredycats, timid, etc. Use a thesaurus instead of hatin' on women!! As always, we are still being put down at the bottom of the ladder of respect. Will women ever have a "happy ending"? Shame on you Armistead!!


  • Name: Don Charles
    Date posted: 2008-06-04 8:36 PM
    Hometown: Kansas City

    Comment:

    As long as our enemies think of us as "queers", and we validate their use of that word, as Maupin does in this article, yes, they can deny us a happy ending. The battle for full equality won't be won at the ballot box. It will be won in our own hearts and minds, when we finally realize we are as normal as the grass and the trees and the air. People who think of themselves as "queers" are asking for exclusion.


Back to top

Submit a comment for this story:

*Type your comment here (Required, 1000 characters max. HTML formatting and hyperlinks are NOT permitted.):

*Name (Required): 

*Hometown (Required): 

*E-mail address: (Required, but will not be displayed)

Is this comment for publication? 
Yes   No

Daytime phone number: (Required for print publication only and will not be displayed)

Please enter the words you see in the box, in order and separated by a space. Doing so helps prevent automated programs from abusing this service.

  

If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above. 

All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.

See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.

Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.