Gay Activist Admits She Regrets Her Gay Marriage and Divorce
Maran talks about the thicket of changing laws that governed her divorce, about how the domestic partnership she and her wife had before the wedding made their divorce more complicated. And, most tellingly of all, she opens up about how she felt like a letdown to the other same-sex couple whose trails she and her wife blazed. In her words:
Theology professor Danny Burk had an interesting take on Maran and her heartbreaking admission. On his website, he writes:
Maran talks about the thicket of changing laws that governed her divorce, about how the domestic partnership she and her wife had before the wedding made their divorce more complicated. And, most tellingly of all, she opens up about how she felt like a letdown to the other same-sex couple whose trails she and her wife blazed. In her words:
In many cities over many years, my wife and I had marched for marriage equality. We’d argued with the haters and we’d argued with the gay people who said that legal marriage would co-opt us, diminish us, turn us into a caricature of “normal” married people. We swore we could enjoy the rights only marriage conferred and still have our gender-fluid commitment ceremonies, our chosen-family configurations, our dexterity at turning friends into lovers and vice versa.
Divorce felt like more than a betrayal of my wedding vows. It was a betrayal of my people and our cause.
Divorce felt like more than a betrayal of my wedding vows. It was a betrayal of my people and our cause.
Theology professor Danny Burk had an interesting take on Maran and her heartbreaking admission. On his website, he writes:
She admits that she and her partner never wanted the norms of marriage, but only the rights of marriage. As a result, she regrets her gay marriage only because it made breaking-up more difficult. Divorces are expensive and messy, and it turns out that both marriage and divorce cramped her gender-fluid “dexterity at turning friends into lovers and vice versa.”
I appreciate Maran’s candor in this article. I do think it is revealing. I suspect that many of those who marched for legal gay marriage in our country weren’t really that concerned about adding traditional marriage norms to gay relationships—norms of permanence, covenant, fidelity, etc. What they wanted was social acceptance of their relationships as they were already configured—many of which were admittedly “monogamish” rather than monogamous. The legal recognition served to remove a stigma, not to convert “dexterity” into permanence.
I appreciate Maran’s candor in this article. I do think it is revealing. I suspect that many of those who marched for legal gay marriage in our country weren’t really that concerned about adding traditional marriage norms to gay relationships—norms of permanence, covenant, fidelity, etc. What they wanted was social acceptance of their relationships as they were already configured—many of which were admittedly “monogamish” rather than monogamous. The legal recognition served to remove a stigma, not to convert “dexterity” into permanence.
