Days before the NY marriage decision

As the decision on the NY gay marriage case is expected to be delivered in the next day or so, Lady M and I are once again preparing a "speech" of sorts for an impending rally. It is to be read in alternating voices, beginning with Lady M. Below is draft one... if you have any suggestions, let us know!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

When my 22-year-old brother introduces Puck to his college friends, he is apt to use a string of colorful descriptive phrases including, but not limited to, “Meet Puck, my sister’s partner, girlfriend, lesbian-lover … bitch-sort-of-thing.” Over the past 9 years we’ve also utilized a store of relationship labels ranging from the ever-popular “roommate” to “best friend with benefits” to “incestuous sister.” My Dad introduces Puck as my “partner in crime,” “faithful companion,” or the “Squanto to my Lone Ranger.” My Mom, up until recently, introduced her as my “friend.”

My father has 6 siblings, all married. On his side, I have 12 aunts and uncles and 17 cousins. My cousin Krista took to introducing Lady M to people as my “wife” out of a pure love of shock value. Jena, herself a lesbian, married to a man, with two children, prefers to call her my “woman” while her children, ages 12 and 9, grew up considering Lady M to be just another cousin. Uncle Brian has caught me off guard on multiple occasions by asking “Where’s the other half?” prompting me to look around curiously to see if something is missing, and my grandmother has often remarked how nice it is that I have a “travel companion” on my frequent overland adventures. Aunt Kathleen has taken Lady M in as her own, calling her “my other niece” but, to the majority of my rather religious, slightly conservative Irish Catholic family members, she is simply “Lady M.”

It’s not fair, that heterosexual couples are so often denied the use of such ingenious, euphemistic monikers. No one ever refers to, say, my father’s new wife as his “girlfriend,” “lady lover,” or “cellmate.” The teacher across the hall, who married last fall, never has folks hedging awkwardly to come up with a descriptive for her new husband – something clever and benign like calling him her “laundry partner” or “guy she cooks and cleans for.” No, for straight couples there are crystal clear nouns that progress from girlfriend/boyfriend, to fiancé, to husband/wife/spouse to widow/widower. Where’s the fun in that?

It almost seems a shame, after so much creative energy has been extended to the invention of such new and interesting designations, to accept something as dull as “marriage” to describe our relationships; yet it seems to be exactly that “thing” which is being simultaneously withheld from and forced upon us.

“So, are you guys married?”

We get this question ALL the time, from an assortment of relations and acquaintances with mind-bogglingly diverse ideologies: the leftist, politically active Teach for America colleague; the street-smart lesbian in the classroom down the hall; the yoga loving, organic food munching straight guy; the barely twenty liberal arts student; a republican, Fox news informed cousin. All of these well-intentioned people, who mean only to express their support and affection in popping the marriage question – how should we answer? How do you answer?

Saying “no” invariably brings forth an array of startled responses, ranging from shock and awe that two people, together for 9 years, haven’t bothered to get married (unaware, obviously, that we can’t) to an embarrassed, “Well, you know what I mean,” when the aforementioned legal hurdle is pointed out. “Why don’t you get married in Canada/Massacusettes/Vermont/Connecticut?” is a common, meant-to-be-helpful suggestion, offered up as if we merely hadn’t thought of it yet while others encourage us to get married anyway, to have a commitment ceremony, not for the rights, but for the presents and the possibilities of a double bridal registry.

Answering “yes” is even worse. Let’s start with the fact that it would be wholly untrue. Add to that, the warm, fuzzy, status-quo-stabilizing illusion that people are likely to perpetuate when they are lead, misguidedly, to believe that their two beloved, dependable, loyal lesbian comrades enjoy the same rights, privileges and status of their straight compatriots. It’s alright that you can’t get married in New York; just go to Canada – see problem solved? Feel better now? Personally, I cannot see fit to contribute to this false consciousness.

Even more perplexing than figuring out what to say is trying to puzzle out why it is that so many people feel it necessary for us to conform to a construct they refuse to make available—why they feel it is necessary for me to have some sort of ceremony or big event before they are able to view my relationship as equally valid so long as, of course, that ceremony or event isn’t an actual marriage, because that would be immoral. As I continue to discuss the topic with people who profess themselves to be supportive of our right to have rights but too “old fashioned” or “conservative” or “religious” or “traditional” or “conventional” to support our right to marry, I find myself baffled by what seems to be a cultural trend requiring straight people in a queer’s orbit to schizophrenically request consummation while denying the most direct legal route.

Try this experiment at home, or school, or at the office: when in mixed company, refer to the spouse of a newlywed individual as his or her respective boyfriend or girlfriend. Before you have a chance to finish your sentence, someone (perhaps even a chorus of voices) will interject the correction: “You mean her husband,” or “You mean his wife.” The reaction is instantaneous. It’s reflexive. There’s just something about marriage that invokes this kind of spontaneous emotion – even from colleagues that barely know one another, let alone family members and close friends. Bridal registries, and health insurance aside, this particular brand of recognition can only come from a legitimate, government sanctioned marriage. Period.