There is no question that the past year has been a historic one in our nation for LGBT rights. Last November, same-sex marriage was enacted in three states by a voter referendum, while a fourth voted down a proposed constitutional amendment that would have prohibited same-sex marriage. Before last year, all previous state ballot initiatives had sought to outlaw same-sex marriage, and they succeeded every time. Multiple polls have shown that for the first time, a majority of Americans support legalizing same-sex marriage.
Two more firsts from Capitol Hill include a sitting president openly declaring his support for same-sex marriage and a Republican senator coming out in favor of marriage equality. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party officially integrated support for marriage equality into its platform and, as two Supreme Court rulings this summer are likely to bolster the ongoing momentum, Democratic lawmakers have been falling over themselves to vocalize support for same-sex marriage, before law and popular opinion render their positions demode.
While these developments are immensely important and stem from the tireless work of countless volunteers and social advocates, the strategies that have been used to bring support for marriage equality to the mainstream may actually hinder the possibility of full equality for much of the LGBT community.
During a rally outside the Supreme Court last month that coincided with oral arguments in the marriage cases, demonstrators urging support for transgender and immigration rights were forced to modify their words or conceal certain insignias that organizers felt were off-topic. Of course, transgender rights are intimately connected to the issue of same-sex marriage, and immigration rights play a major role in the Defense of Marriage Act that was argued before the Court. But the rally's organizers, which included major LGBT political advocacy groups like the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, were wary of confusing the message that has so intricately and so strategically been constructed to maximize support of marriage equality in our country: that gay people differ from straight people solely and exclusively by whom they love.
This is no doubt the case for some LGBT people, but the message greatly simplifies the picture of a community marked by diverse expressions of identity and sexuality. LGBT acceptance and support for same-sex marriage presently hinge on a milquetoast depiction of queerness propagated by LGBT advocacy groups and media portrayals. If LGBT individuals in political advertisements and media products both of which inform our national consciousness are indeed distinguishable from the everyman, they are only ever narrowly and predictably so: meticulously preened gay men and short-haired gay women in slightly boyish clothing (both also typically white), with bisexual and transgender people generally missing from the picture altogether. Though designed to tread most lightly on the average American voter's sensibilities, this depiction silences a body of discourse that is crucial to the well-being of the entire LGBT community just like the Human Rights Campaign (derided by some as the "Human Rights Champagne fundraiser") silenced the legitimate, relevant concerns of LGBT demonstrators last month.
As the American consensus on same-sex marriage continues to evolve, it does so with this narrow, simplified view of queerness in mind. Left remarkably unexamined is the very foundation for anti-gay sentiment in the first place: the rigid expectations of gender roles and gender expression dictated by our culture and society. Even mainstream portrayals of gay couples tend to emphasize a masculine-feminine complementarity. But what of those who fail or refuse to define or express themselves within the confines of a gender binary? What of those who actually do not look or act like an average Jane or Joe next door those of different backgrounds, races and creeds? Not all gay men are Neil Patrick Harris, nor gay women Rachel Maddow, yet these are the archetypes of queerness that have been embedded in our collective imagination.
On a technical level, the rights of all LGBT individuals are advanced by codified rights and protections. But it is only a sliver of the LGBT community that is truly being humanized in the mind of the general public. And rights are only so effective when others may not consider you human enough to deserve them.
