ARGUING EQUALITY An Interactive Web Guide To Understanding
And Presenting The Case For Same-Sex Marriage
CHAPTER 3:
SEXISM AND GAY MARRIAGE

In recent years, feminist scholars and gay theorists have developed a body of thought which explores homophobia as a manifestation of sexism. One basic tenet of this line of thought is that strict gender roles, hierarchically constructed, serve to subordinate women to men — economically, culturally, and politically.

In order to maintain the status quo, these gender roles must be strictly adhered to, an adhesion which is maintained by punishing gender non-conformity (effeminacy in men, tomboyish qualities in women) by labeling that non-conformity, stigmatizing it, as “queer.”

Sound confusing? Let’s break it down: Those who have ever watched adolescents on a playground will attest that the boy who wants to play hopscotch rather than baseball will be strictly, and often relentlessly, teased as a “faggot.” Homophobia thus promotes sexism — a fear of being labeled homosexual enforces strict adherence to gender roles, which in turn solidifies male dominance over women.

Deriving from this interplay between sexism and homophobia is a line of argumentation which attacks the ban on same-sex marriage not because it is homophobic, but rather because it is sexist. The Supreme Court of Hawaii illustrated this argument utilizing a simple analogy between a same-sex couple in Baehr v. Miike and a mixed-race couple in Loving v. Virginia.1

In Loving, the court argued, a black woman could marry a black man, but not a white man. The difference was race — indisputable racism. In Baehr, a woman could marry a man, but not a woman. The difference was sex — indisputable sexism.

 

On this basis, just as bans on miscegenation were outlawed as racist, the court argued that bans on gay marriage should be outlawed as sexist. Especially in those states which have adopted the Equal Rights Amendment and subject gender bias to the highest levels of scrutiny, reasoning which exposes the ban on gay marriage as a form of sex discrimination may bear great weight in convincing legislators or judges that same-sex marriage should be declared unconstitutional.

1 Loving v. Virginia was the landmark 1967 Supreme Court case which legalized miscegenation (marriage between individuals of different races) in the United States. Baehr v. Miike was the historic Hawaiian Supreme Court case which would have legalized gay marriage in Hawaii if not for an amendment to the Hawaiian constitution passed by voters in November 1998.
 

.

Leave a Reply