Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

Just read Cari Carpenter's article ["To Wed or Not to Wed: Cari Carpenter's Diary," Update Spring 2006] and wanted to drop you a quick line in response.

I can completely empathize with her as I am in a very similar situation. My partner and I have been living together since September 1997 and have so far resisted the pressure to get married. But as time goes on, there is increasing pressure as more and more of our friends marry people they've only known a few months, plus we become more aware of the legal implications. It doesn't seem right that they should get all these legal benefits which are denied to us because we refuse to participate in an institution designed to ensure the continuation of a patriarchal, heterosexist, capitalist society.

While reading Cari's article, I was encouraged by feeling that we're not alone. The more of us who stand up against these inequities, the better chance we have of actually changing something. I was taking inspiration from Cari's experiences and hoping for valuable advice about how to cope with the pressure, etc.

It was with profound disappointment that I reached the end of the article and read that Cari and her partner did cave in to the pressure and decided 'if you can't beat them, join them.' It may be true that the vast majority of heterosexual couples decide to marry, even if they claim to be opposed to it, so I suppose from this point of view the article depicts the reality of our society, but society's rules can be challenged if enough people stand together.

...

Every heterosexual couple who claim to be opposed to marriage, but do it in the end just because it makes their lives easier, are part of the problem, not the solution. Every wedding supports and reinforces the legitimacy of the system of marriage, and makes it harder for couples who can't or don't want to marry. You are no longer in a position to argue against it.

...

Cari's claim that 'our solace is in knowing that we define our relationship entirely apart from its legal status' is something I've heard from married friends who still consider themselves as somehow 'alternative' or 'nonconformist,' and it just doesn't wash. If you do decide to take the easy way out, you are in the comfortable position of reaping the benefits of marriage, while still paying lip service to the idea of 'alternatives to marriage.'

...

Sincerely,
Jessica Mordsley

Editor's note: due to space limitations some lines of the original letter were omitted. No words have been changed from the original.

Alternatives to marriage, is a broader category than merely cohabitation, or even coupledom, either gay or straight.

For millions of unmarried people, single means solo, unpaired. In economic, social, political, and religious terms, uncoupled singles are often left holding the short end of the stick. Uncoupled singles, the truly single, are left out of family-friendly initiatives, that seek to include nontraditional families. De facto equality, will require that neither marital, nor relationship, status affect a person's rights or responsibilities.

Childless, uncoupled individuals are at the bottom of the totem pole, with needs that tend to be unaddressed. Advocacy for unmarried people, should include them. Equality of gender, sexual orientation, and marital and relationship status, must be inclusive of everyone, even those without family affiliation.

Organizations like AtMP can lead the way, in promotion of genuine equality for all people, who are outside traditional family lifestyles.

- Jake Daubney, St. Paul, MN