LESBIAN COUPLES AND COMMITMENT: David Benkof replies to Michael Triplett

[Eve notes: I wrote about this question here.]

In response to my post about male-male couples and commitment, Michael Triplett wrote, "What Benkof ignores, of course, is that lesbians are actually LESS promiscuous in their relationships then heterosexuals. Under Benkof's theory, therefore, lesbians would actually STRENGTHEN marriage and serve as a model for philandering and noncommiting heterosexuals."

I'm quite aware that lesbians tend toward tight monogamy in their relationships. But my point was not whether SSM would change the average level of exclusivity among married couples. I accept that most female-female relationships incorporate fairly traditional attitudes toward commitment and faithfulness. My point was that there is plenty of research and anecdotal evidence that shows that male-male couples tend to think about their relationships in very different ways than male-female (or female-female) couples. Extending civic marriage to a group that fairly openly celebrates non-monogamy and tends to believe that each couple should set its own creative rules for sexual behavior outside the partnership would seriously undermine the meaning of marriage in the wider society. No amount of female-female very-very exclusive relationships would counterbalance that damage.

(These days, I'm finding that men who used to be very frank with me about their loving-but-open relationships are now taken aback when I suggest that society should treat them differently than male-female married couples committed to monogamy!)

Is it unfair to "punish" lesbians for the infidelity of gay men? Only if the commitment issue were the only reason to oppose SSM. Since the main reason I oppose SSM is so society can continue to privilege the best environment for the raising of children, perceived fairness to adults takes a backseat to the best interests of children in my book.
posted by Eve at 1:33 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home