The Psychology of Gay Marriage - Coursework Example

of The Legalization of Same-sex Marriages Living in the twenty first century, it is shameful that certain sections of the society are not allowed to formalize romantic relationships that they are a part of. Such relationships are not allowed as a result of the regressive attitudes that are practiced by the state and the institutions of the state. While homosexuality is not a crime in most parts of the world, marriage of gay couples has not been legalized in many parts of the world. This can be seen as an extension of the discrimination that homosexual individuals have to face in the society. The lack of legalization also results in a lesser number of families amongst the homosexual communities across the world. In a society that still does not recognize any other social unit as much as the family, the lack of recognition for homosexual families can result in psychological problems that may lead to many problems for the individuals involved. This paper shall look at the psychological aspect of the problem and argue that the problems faced by such couples has a lot to do with the lack of legal recognition that they receive at the hands of the state and religious groups that they may be a part of. This paper shall examine the different aspects of the problem at hand and attempt to look at the perspectives that different groups endorse as far as same-sex marriage is concerned. There are several arguments that are used against the institutionalization of gay marriages. One of the most important of such arguments is advanced by religious conservatives who argue that there is a need to improve the health of the institution of marriage. They cite the high divorce rates and the general lack of belief that the youth of today demonstrates in marriage as reasons for it to be preserved as a bastion of heterosexual normativity (Overview of Same-Sex Marriage in the United States). In many of these arguments is visible a strain of religious orthodoxy that bestows n heterosexual marriages the mantle of legitimacy. What is important here is that in such arguments, a marriage is defined as one where there is a certain level of productivity. It is true that same-sex marriages do not result in a traditional production of children. It therefore, is against conventional ideas of a marriage where one of the most important aspects is that of procreation. Heterosexual marriages, according to those who oppose same-sex marriages, weaken the foundations of marriage as a social institution. While looking at children as only part of the reason for marriage, one removes the focus from marriage as an institution meant for procreation. This results in a greater emphasis on individuality and this weakens the concept of the couple as a sacrosanct unit. This can then be considered to be a reason for the frequent breakups of marriages and the condition that children of such marriages find themselves in. Another argument against the implementation of the clause of same-sex marriages is that it is considered to be too divisive to take up. This can be seen in the reluctance that certain institutions of the state have in pursuing it to a logical conclusion (Hope and fear in gay marriage cases at high court). There is a chance that there may be chaos in the violence that may result from the implementation of such a decision. Here, violence is not meant in merely a physical sense. The mental and psychological stress that may result in the people who are homosexual and live amongst a largely heterosexual community is something that is avoidable. Thus, there is the fear of a backlash from communities who feel that their sentiments are not taken into account by the state. This may lead to the breaking of neighborhoods and relationships that are forged without taking into account the sexual orientation of a person. The importance of such relationships cannot be disregarded as they result in many transactions that an individual is a part of. The very economy of a state depends upon the building of such relationships. With the legitimization of same-sex marriages, it is likely that a conservative backlash would unsettle many aspects of the economies of modern life. While this may look like an argument made for the sake of maintaining the status quo and the health of the economy, it is one that cannot be ignored. The very basis of modern life and its economics need to be taken into consideration while formulating any new law that affects it in a major way. The question of existing legality and the psychological effects of it on the lives of people is also something that needs to be taken into account while analyzing the question of same-sex marriages. While under existing law, gay couples are not allowed to acquire legal status, it is possible for the change to happen through an amendment of the existing laws. As a result of this, there are always worries regarding the way in which lawsuits may end (Nagourney). The importance of this lies in the fact that laws are aspects of the modern civilization that affect not only the social and economic aspects of it but also the psychological aspect of it. The limits that are set for a person in his or her consciousness depends on the laws that are a part of the society that he or she lives in. if one such law is changed, it would lead to a realignment of the frames of reference that the person faces. While one may argue that this would apply to every law and not just to laws that are related to same-sex marriages, one also needs to take into account the fact that rules relating to sexuality have a greater impact on the way lives are held. As such, it is important that it is with utmost care that laws regarding same-sex marriages are looked at. One the other side of the fence, one would be able to see that the restriction of the rights of an individual or a couple to acquire recognition for as basic an aspect of their lives as their sexuality is inhuman. This would be a very regressive step to take for the society and the impact of such steps cannot be predicted if one takes a short-term view of the matter. To have the same sexual rights as the other citizens of a country is something that needs to be assured every citizen of the twenty first century. This can be seen in the progressive stance regarding this issue that people of earlier dispensations adopt. The support that John Major provides David Cameron regarding this issue despite being very conservative on others is something that proves this (Why Major backs moderniser Cameron on gay marriage). It is almost unacceptable to be homophobic in today’s society and the fact that it is taboo to make a homophobic remark is something that proves the regressive nature of the ideology. To not allow a certain person the freedom to legally be associated with another in the form that heterosexual individuals are is both cruel and against the spirit of the statutes of freedom laid down in the constitutions of different countries of the world. This needs to inspire people to fight against such regressive social institutions and legalize same-sex marriages. Sexuality is one of the most potent institutions through which the state controls its individuals. By seeking to not provide legality to same-sex marriages, the state seeks to maintain status quo. This status quo is then posited as the normative and any change is deemed unnatural. Michel Foucault posited this theory and looked at the state structures of sexuality as repressive and critiqued the discourse that it gave rise to (6). Same-sex marriages present an immediate threat to this form of the normative and seek to posit as alternate mode of being or an alternate norm. Such norms are then taken out of the sacrosanct cocoons that they are allowed to inhabit and opened up for examination. The discipline of psychoanalysis fulfills this function of not placing everything on a pedestal. The practice of doing so keeps one away from understanding the repression that society unnecessarily imposes upon people. By not allowing them what they feel is a complete expression of their sexuality according to the other norms of the society, the society runs the risk of a community of people who according to the theories of psychology are likely to enter into a state of hysteria. A large number of people who are gay couples who have not been allowed to enter into a marriage formally adopt children so as to lead what they feel is a fulfilling life. By bringing up a child whose parents were not ready to raise, one can argue, is as much of a productive activity as giving birth to a child through a biological process. Thus, accusations of not being productive in a same-sex relationship, one can say, are based on paradigms of productivity that are outdated and outmoded. Such accusations do nothing but to bolster conservative processes of thought that lead to an entrenchment of the status quo. I feel that same-sex marriages ought not to be criminalized and homosexual individuals need to be given the right to legalize their relationship if they so wish. To acquire the legal status that is considered to be normative may take away from the revolutionary potential that homosexuality has to change the normative modes of being in society. However, it also needs to be said that such relationships being legalized does not take away from heterosexual or homosexual individuals the choice to reject the institution of marriage altogether. The provision of such a choice is what needs to be done. In our society, however, apart from the homophobia that people of queer orientations have to face, they also have to face sanctions from religious and social groups that brand them with the mantle of deviants. The choice to be in a marital relationship or not depends upon the individual entering such an alliance. The political implications of the forms of such alliances aside, one needs to look at the aspect of free will and the impact of it upon the minds of the people who are a part of such an alliance. An absence of free will in such an important part of the life of a person leads to mental problems and other complications. There are also other problems that result due to the lack of recognition of such relationships. There is in such situations a greater propensity to have multiple sex partners. While I am not making any form of a value judgement here, the spread of sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS is more likely in cases of multiple partners and the lack of official recognition for any sexual activity. It is now recognized that one of the most important reasons for the spread of the HIV virus is the absence of measures of safety within the sex that is practiced between same-sex couples. By bringing such couples into official lists, the state also acquires the power to control them to a certain extent and know whether they receive the benefits of awareness programs regarding sexually transmitted diseases. Such knowledge is crucial for the state as it requires a population of healthy people who can comprise its workforce. This workforce can then be used for the development of the economy that these very people are a part of. To have a certain degree of control over the amenities that people enjoy is important and allowing same-sex marriages is one way of keeping track of the citizens who are a part of a certain state. The importance of this lies in the fact that such records can be used for the purpose of granting official status to certain sections of the marginalized within the society. Integrating them into the society’s records would be the first step towards integrating them as a community into society. The importance of legislation that authorizes same-sex marriages lies in the fact that it would be able to understand the dynamics of the sexualities that are a part of the society in modern times. Such dynamics present a changed society that is then able to challenge the status quo. While there may be many arguments that seek to present same-sex marriages as an obstacle to the survival and development of heteronormative marriages, the fact remains that they have the revolutionary potential to force a rethinking of the categories that are created through patriarchal institutions and look at alternate forms of marriage and family. It also enables an altering of the paradigms of what is good and what is bad in a marriage. Legalized same-sex couples in marital relationships can thus lead to changes within the structures of marriage and family as institutions. It is thus, the duty of any citizen if any country in the twenty first century to work towards making the world one where the power of choice is still available to every section of the society. This would then make the world a more peaceful and harmonious place to live in. Works Cited Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality, Vol: 1. New York: Penguin, 2000. Print. Nagourney, Adam. “Worry Tempers Joy Over Gay Marriage’s Moment in Court”. The New York Times. 8 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. “Hope and fear in gay marriage cases at high court”. Caribbean Business. 10 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. “Why Major backs moderniser Cameron on gay marriage”. The Week. 10 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. “Overview of Same-Sex Marriage in the United States”. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. 10 Dec. 2012. Web. 10 Dec. 2012. Read More