Gay Marriage Fallout

by W.F. Price on November 15, 2012

After dozens of tries, gay marriage finally squeaked out an electoral victory here in Washington state, thanks in large part to a six-to-one funding advantage provided courtesy of one-percenters like Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos (Amazon.com) and Jim Sinegal (Costco).

I don’t think gay marriage will make much of a difference to society in general. We’ve already crossed the cultural Rubicon, so what does it matter? If anything, the government never should have gotten into the marriage business in the first place, and if it hadn’t gay “marriage” would be a moot point. Marriage is the kind of thing that should be defined by culture and custom rather than the state, but we’re stuck with the government regulating it now, so it was probably inevitable that some strange things would happen to the institution somewhere along the line.

However, it will make a difference for the people who actually (unwisely) get involved in a gay civil marriage, because they will suddenly become subject to the same kind of tangled mess that so many straight couples get into. For lesbians, it will be a particularly big problem, because of custody issues and precedents. What will happen with lesbian couples is that judges will take the birth mother of any children as the default mother, and the other woman as the “father.” We all know what fathers face in divorce, so it isn’t going to be pleasant for lesbian partners who are not the birth mother when there’s a divorce. Furthermore, I can imagine all sorts of contention and intrigue involving children.

Let’s say a lesbian woman is in a gay civil marriage, and she chooses to save time and money, or maybe she just wants to have some fun on the side (many “lesbians” actually do sleep with straight men from time to time), and gets pregnant in the cheap, conventional way — by penis. When pregnant she assures her partner that the child will be theirs, but neglects to tell the man she’s pregnant, or her partner how she got pregnant — let’s say she lied and said she used donor sperm. Later, she files for divorce and initiates a paternity suit against the biological father at the same time in an effort to kill two birds with one stone (deep-six the lesbian lover’s custody chances and get child support at the same time). In the meanwhile, the non-maternal partner had legally adopted the child. But the man never knew he had a kid, and after he’s hit with the paternity suit he gets involved and sues for visitation, arguing that he should have a right to see the child he didn’t know about. If you’re a judge, how do you settle this? Does the non-maternal lesbian pay child support and keep visitation rights, or does the father take on that role? What does the judge do about the adoption? Does the child have the right to a relationship with his biological father, or a non-related lesbian “father?” And keep in mind that this is simply one of many possible permutations of the custody problem that could arise in lesbian civil marriages.

Gay men will be able to avoid this, but they aren’t going to marry at the same rate as lesbian women. They also are not going to adopt very much (it’s expensive and a hassle), and since they can’t get pregnant they’ll have far, far fewer children than lesbian couples. However, they will have another problem to deal with: property disputes. When gay men split up in a relationship that doesn’t involve a civil contract, they are forced to be reasonable. I keep mine, you keep yours, etc. When lawyers get involved, it is going to complicate matters. I expect this issue will limit gay male civil marriage and therefore divorce, but in cases where it does occur it will likely precipitate a fair amount of conflict and lead to a greater incidence of inter-partner violence.

So, now that gays have civil marriage, they will be subjected to the same laws that make straight divorce such a painful, drawn out mess, and the “benefits” they gain from official civil marriage won’t be worth the extra trouble (most marriage benefits have already been significantly watered down and now extend to unmarried partners as well).

The only significant result of the new law will be that gays will now have a greater incidence of domestic violence, more custody litigation, and much higher legal expenses.

The lesson:

Be careful what you wish for

{ 43 comments… read them below or add one }

TiredGuy November 15, 2012 at 17:49

“What will happen with lesbian couples is that judges will take the birth mother of any children as the default mother, and the other woman as the “father.””

There have already been cases like this on the international stage and no, the lesbians have no problem. They just find the nearest man and put the blame and responsibilities on him. I read about a case in england where the sperm donor was the closest man, so when the lesbian couple divorced, he had to pay.

Soon you probably won’t even have to be related to women and you’ll still be forced to go to jail for a crime the woman committed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer November 15, 2012 at 18:23

From the title I initially thought this essay was about the “top” having difficulty keeping his purple-helmeted love missile from slipping out of his husband’s distended anus, but on closer inspection realize it’s about those notoriously violent lesbians experiencing traditional white male divorce traumas.

Maybe it was from an old joke “What do you do in case of fallout?” but I can’t remember the punch line. Something about re-inserting.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Huck Finn November 15, 2012 at 18:45

“many “lesbians” actually do sleep with straight men from time to time”
– Yes, they do (big smile).

Will the biological dad (who was raped of his sperm) owe back pay for when he was not paying child support before he learned he was a father in the first place? That could possibly bankrupt some men and even land some in jail if unable to pay. Wow, this really is a hot potato.

I know a gay man who lived with and dated another gay man for a number of years. While not technically married the judge still ordered him to pay a settlement to his ex-lover when he left.

Some gay men do seek out surrogate women to have their own biological child.

The lesson for men is to guard their sperm. Consider making a deposit for your own future use only into a sperm freezer, and then get a reversible vasectomy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed November 15, 2012 at 19:14

“What do you do in case of fallout?”

“re-insert, take shorter stroke.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rebel November 15, 2012 at 20:45

There are those disadvantages and perhaps there are even more.

But just take a hard look at the mountain of additional cash gay marriage will put into the state’s coffers, mountains of mmmoney, the enormous pile of money for the judges and the lawyers. Cash galore!!

Marriage and divor$e are a matter of $$$$$ mmmmoney, sweet money. What el$e could matter ?.

Throughout the ages, marriage has always been a question of money.
Look nowhere else!

In earlier times, the poor didn’t use to marry. They had no money.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
joeb November 15, 2012 at 20:46

This is going to be so cool two lesbians fighting over some guys kid . I can see the stats going throw the roof , Murder rate up , Domestic violence rate up , depression rate soaring .
Not really there still only 4% But there are lessons to be learned from are gay brothers . Like how 4% of the people can get the rest of us to be so tolerant .
How do they get the funding . We couldn’t fund a barn dance ,Maybe we should just write them a nice letter and ask them for some help organising .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rebel November 15, 2012 at 21:02

“Some gay men do seek out surrogate women to have their own biological child.”
* * * * * * *
Ever stopped and think about the selfishness of the gesture?

Wouldn’t it be nice if one could ask a child-to-be if he/she wants to come into this world before conception takes place?

When one “gives life” to a little child, who thinks of the consequences?
Giving “birth” has as many consequences as “giving death”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Jimbo November 15, 2012 at 21:21

Come on people. Gay marriage? It’s a little like women and the vote. The men that granted them the right never thought ahead to where it was going to lead. Homosexuals wanted to be tolerated, then prideful, then actually become know as being “gay”, then their lifestyles accepted as equal to that of heterosexuals (anyone here ever hear of AIDS, Gonorrhea, Syphilis, hemorrhoids, colon problems, rectal problems etc. etc. etc. that everybody has to pay to provide medical care for?) Then they wanted to be able to get married. But, the will of the people was wrong on the issue, so the homosexuals had to work non-stop to change the will of the people and are now succeeding. Doesn’t anyone ask themselves “where is it all going to lead?” Doesn’t anyone wonder if there couldn’t be something to be learned from the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah? (Made up cities or not?) Why not marry more than one person? Why not marry siblings? Why get married at all? Why not get married to your son or daughter? Why not get married to your dog? Homosexual marriage is like a canary in a coal mine. Allowing homosexuals to get married is like seeing a canary die. Even if the minors can’t see the gas or smell the gas, they know something is rotten in the air that will kill them if they don’t take protective measures. The same is true with homosexual marriage. It is a sign.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Nemo November 15, 2012 at 21:25

If you think about it, forcing gays to suffer from the family court meat grinder as much as straights is more of a “hate crime” than opposing gay marriage.

I suppose we’ll see some articles about how “hateful” straights are “persecuting” gays in family courts and divorce courts soon.

Equality – true legal equality, not the a la carte version feminists and gays prefer – will open quite a few eyes among the “progressive” cliques.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
George November 15, 2012 at 23:26

Rebel, no one asks the child-to-be. Ask what? Many parents have kids for selfish reasons. What are the consequences?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Malcolm James November 15, 2012 at 23:30

In a recent case a lesbian social mother was treated better than fathers in a custody battle in the UK when the judge ruled that the birth mother had engaged in parental alienation and refused to allow the birth mother to deny the children contact with the social mother. This came from a judge who has plenty of form in anti-father decisions.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2229774/Judge-warns-bitter-lesbian-mother-200-000-10-year-custody-battle-stop-poisoning-children-ex-lover.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
CyclotronMajesty November 16, 2012 at 00:03

No it’s a disaster. Society is gonna learn the hard way, like it insists every time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
CyclotronMajesty November 16, 2012 at 00:06

The only reason homosexuals continue and continue and continue to push into mainstream society is because they parasite off of the sexual health of others to sustain their perversions.

Gay marriage isn’t the end of the Gay Agenda.
Pretty soon, everyone is going to be homosexual,
and watching gay sex on prime time TV every day.

Of course nobody will believe it until it happens.
But sooner or later everyone will be either gay or ostracized.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Opus November 16, 2012 at 01:51

We do not allow, marriage here – yet – between two people of the same sex (and for what it is worth I regard such an arrangement as about as plausible as the concept of a married bachelor) but even before ‘civil partnerships’ were invented, the State still took an interest in the financial affairs of those who cohabited, and I must tell you that easily the bitchiest, most pathetic ‘divorce’, I ever was involved in was between two males. I felt certain that the entire matter would be sorted out in minutes had I been able to get the two of them in the same room and then lock the door, but, as it was, injured pride [what an appropriate word] on both their parts meant that the only winners were the lawyers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
American November 16, 2012 at 05:32

Malcomb James says “Lesbian mothers treated better in court than Father”.
American say, Of course they are, the Gender, Gender-Raunch community has an army of lawyers specifically oriented to protect gays and lesbians from even the slightest inconveniences, while there are no organised hetero-male protectors in the legal establishment.
As the world turns, and the perversions in American law enforcement that now persecute the US hetero-male become ever more poisonous, we will see more and more young men going gay to protect themselves.
VERY IMPORTANT HERE….The US Gender-raunch “Empowerment” community think they are winning the “war on hetero-dominance”, of which i will say, the media blitz they have deployed has had some success.
But you see the more successful the “Gender-raunch Empowerment community” are in perverting American law enforcement into persecuting any man who dares dates a women, the more they are invariably digging a whole for themselves.
Only after the complete collapse of marriage in the US will the female population feel the need to again legally protect the individuals in the traditional marriage, and it will be the man that will need more protections from the new “pervert courts” that are wrecking him.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
American November 16, 2012 at 05:38

Homosexuals have a literal Army that is specifically oriented to protect gays and lesbians from the slightest forms of discrimination, while the hetero-male has no legal army that protects him in his “hetero-relations”. In fact, not only is the hetero-male un-protected, he’s being persecuted by a law enforcement system that gets federal funding for his head as a “manufactured arrest statistic”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Masked Stranger November 16, 2012 at 05:55

@Jimbo
“Come on people. Gay marriage? It’s a little like women and the vote. The men that granted them the right never thought ahead to where it was going to lead. Homosexuals wanted to be tolerated, then prideful, then actually become know as being “gay”, then their lifestyles accepted as equal to that of heterosexuals (anyone here ever hear of AIDS, Gonorrhea, Syphilis, hemorrhoids, colon problems, rectal problems etc. etc. etc. that everybody has to pay to provide medical care for?) Then they wanted to be able to get married. But, the will of the people was wrong on the issue, so the homosexuals had to work non-stop to change the will of the people and are now succeeding. Doesn’t anyone ask themselves “where is it all going to lead?” Doesn’t anyone wonder if there couldn’t be something to be learned from the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah? (Made up cities or not?) Why not marry more than one person? Why not marry siblings? Why get married at all? Why not get married to your son or daughter? Why not get married to your dog? Homosexual marriage is like a canary in a coal mine. Allowing homosexuals to get married is like seeing a canary die. Even if the minors can’t see the gas or smell the gas, they know something is rotten in the air that will kill them if they don’t take protective measures. The same is true with homosexual marriage. It is a sign.”

You’re acting like marriage is so special. I hate the topic of gay rights because people seem to get so emotional and lose all logic. I also hate the topic of marriage for the same reason. The true reason for marriage isn’t love,being with that special someone, happiness, or sex. Marriage is just an economical and status building arrangement. It’s also used to raised productive citizens. If you look at history, marriage was also used for political gain. To me, marriage is a nice business scheme where it is all about the status and wealth.

Instead of complaining about marriage, you need to complain about the idea that everything must be equal or forced to be equal. That is the idea that is fueling the gay rights movement. If you can way a find a way to fight “egalitarianism gone wild”. You might be able to reverse this madness.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Masked Stranger November 16, 2012 at 06:11

@CyclotronMajesty
“The only reason homosexuals continue and continue and continue to push into mainstream society is because they parasite off of the sexual health of others to sustain their perversions.”

I really doubt that is the reason they push for acceptance. First off, your conjecture is way out there. I know for a fact that the reason gay people push for acceptance is because they want to fit in to mainstream society. Another reason is because of their childhood. I think that the hardcore gay activist was mostly the introverted child that couldn’t fit in with their respective same-sex peer. And they were probably made fun of because they were slightly odd. Or the child that feel they disappointed their father or father figured in some way. Now they push gay power to extreme to get back at all the people in their life that gave them misery. That’s what why most gay pride parades tend to have a shock value in them. I liken them r to the nerds who get into power and want people to know that they’re a powerful figure.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
American November 16, 2012 at 07:19

The gender, gender-raunch community are not “Empowering” themselves by extolling the virtues of gender-raunch.
They are “Empowering” themselves by “Inflaming” the public with perverse and “manufactured law enforcement statistics”.
I believe the American gender-raunch community “Inflaming” their way to Empowerment with “manufactured law enforcement statistics”, will be a lesson to other nations to keep their law enforcement out of the “Manufactured statistics” business.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
keyster November 16, 2012 at 08:03

Here in Colorado we’ve elected the States first openly gay speaker of the House since the majority is now Democrat. (Our Governor is OBSESSED with legalizing civil unions) He was elected, not because he was the best, most logical choice, but because gay civil unions is a bigger deal here than legalizing pot, which also just happened.

He was on a local talk radio show (talking gay issues of course) and a very astute caller asked him, “Are you sure you want to legalize Gay marriage, because marriage brings a whole other level of govt control into your lives that you might not really want?” To which Mr. Speaker was caught completely flatfooted in response and they went to commercial break. IOW, gays aren’t even considering the unintended consequences of Equality with breeders.

New precedents will be set, which will in turn actually benefit men by eliminating the current bias against them vis a vis women. It’s already happening. Good lawyers are on the case.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
joeb November 16, 2012 at 09:01

Isn’t this what we MRA’s want . To have a surrogate mother and then have the Mother go away. In most cases the Kids are better off , Society is better off and We can start to dismantle the HHS beast we have built .
The whole idea of Gay marriage shines a big light on the idea that there is a better way . Any man that’s been woken to the sound of the Female menstrual cycle and endured three days of constant bitching know deep down in his thought He said to himself . “My family would be great if not for that “.
I think obtaining a child to raise is the first human rights violation men endure , Held hostage from the get go , The cost of new shoe’s and cars to keep her happy is the second . When the kids really just want to fishing with there Dad .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
El Bastardo November 16, 2012 at 09:10

@Jimbo

Many ask where it will lead; none of them are listned to. You are at the receiving end of an unscientific, but popular movement; one which when faced with the real science shows that homosexuality is not natural but pathological. Like how they sidestepped the challenges of the first couple DSM written decades ago; they used politics rather than answer the questions.

The gay movment is merely doing what it has always done. Divert attention away from the science to try to convince people they are “people too!”

Newsflash I know. The thing is not that people don’t consider them human, now or in the past; it is that people have always viewed them s wierd and twisted. In other words; the proud owner of a twisted pathology that has done the moral equivalent of cancer to their psyche. Manifesting itself physically in the flesh; AIDS, colon cancer, feces bacteria in the bowels, and a whole myraid of other things. Yum!

All we can do now is watch as nature runs its course. Hopefully, we preserve true history and our words enough that the generations in the future will do as the ancient italians did after the fall of Rome. View it, accept the changes; be glad the “rulers” are no more, and get back to working their fields.

Honestly, the common man and his family after the fall of Rome had better times under the Germanic tribes, Horde, and others. When the new rulers took over; they wanted to increase their wealth; and only fought their battles locally. They did not steal the young “conscript them” and send them God knows where.

So these “peasants” were encouraged to get on with their life and did not face the rape and harrassment the wealthy did. Also, they were no longer killed for those wealthy idiots lustful and moronic ambitions. Later the new rulers lustful and moronic ambitions; but I digress.

For example; it is strongly held that much of the “religious” belief of the pharoahs of ancient Egypt did not correlate with the common Egyptians. Yet those poor bastards; and worse those who were enslaved had their blood and death “guarantee the afterlife” of a few.

Kinda reminds me of the idiots voting in our country does it not? We vaguely see the things they do; yet won’t benefit when it all falls to the ground; yet we keep them there?

History does repeat itself despite our “modern and progressively enlightened” mentality today. Wonders never cease.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
CyclotronMajesty November 16, 2012 at 10:39

@ Masked Stranger

“I really doubt that is the reason they push for acceptance. First off, your conjecture is way out there. I know for a fact that the reason gay people push for acceptance is because they want to fit in to mainstream society. ”

Exactly they want access to the zeitgiest of empathy for their perversions. And yes my model of reality is way out there… cuz reality is quite strange, if anyone who cares to notice… but there is a thing called collective consciousness, and mass hysteria, this shared group mind and group feeling. That is what they want to parasite with their sexual perversions. It’s a kind of sympathetic magic so to speak. Black sexual magic.

Yes all that shit is real.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Tam the Bam November 16, 2012 at 11:06

El B: ” the common man and his family after the fall of Rome had better times under the Germanic tribes, Horde, and others. When the new rulers took over; they wanted to increase their wealth; and only fought their battles locally. They did not steal the young “conscript them” and send them God knows where. “ plus being the kind of guys they were, they wanted to keep all that fighting and slaughtering and “glory” to themselves. Peons and other mere pedestrians not allowed.
Yes, it may seem incredible to us, but the fact is, dark-age and medieval serfdom and foreign-controlled feudalism were actually seen as a far better deal by the erstwhile native-born subject of the most “advanced” civilisation on the planet.
Whose elites, in their insensate greed, had reduced the indomitable iron-hearted free peasant citizenry, who’d literally conquered the world on their behalf, into utter poverty and propertyless debt bondage, and not through main force, but legal trickery and debasement of the currency.
Unable even to feed their families they frequently had to sell themselves and their kin as casual labour or serfs or into prostitution, while their (legally) confiscated land, formed into huge ranches and country estates, was worked by hordes of wretched, disposable foreign slaves in inhuman conditions on behalf a tiny, unimaginably “wealthy” , usually absentee landlord aristocracy who regarded anyone but themselves as not even fully human, to be used (inevitably sadistically) as they saw fit.

Of course, that could never happen here. We’re all modern now. Got laws and rights and votes and everything ..

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
El Bastardo November 16, 2012 at 12:04

LOL @ Tam The Bam

Yup; Yup; and Yup.

As people start to learn the real history of things, if ever; our society would maybe be angry enough to storm DC. Our government has studied history though; and studied it well!

They now use it most effectively to keep their own people black, white, or otherwise; divided, and conquered.

How better to stop us from stopping them than to make us all a “class” of citizen and keep all sides against the middle. The middle now; like the past 50-180 years has been the white middle class male. Our ruing white aristocracy has used us on the ground; so as better to keep their bloody hands out of the limelight. Now they have found a “new face” to join their ranks in the formof a half African-half white whose white half owned five slaves at their height; and his African half came from the Luo tribe who were known historically as incredible enslavers and sellers fo their own kind! Two things stand out to me; those in power only draw from their own (see, they really are not racist; just picky on ideology); and the other is that between welfare vs slavery; whether white or black the “slaveowners” descenents have been highly creative in denying in their mind that the slaves have never left the plantation. They merely made the plantation a metaphorical place. Quite sad really how the ost educated society, supposedly; refuses to know itself In fact we loathe ourselves in so many ways. IF we actualy studied ourselves we would possibly be the “tolerant utopia” the disingenuous liberals brag about. Truly not caring what we looked like, or what our differences are; because true history shows we are all the “sons of toil.”

The absentee lanlords of the modern era are far more “creative” and “progressive” with the treatment towards their “slave” labor! They make them think they have rights and ownership; sad, but true. Coming from the liberal education I did; that was a hard pill to swallow. I did, and I value people more now than otherwise; because I can truly see the person; or call them on their shit!

Pretty soon though in the next decade, maybe two; they are going to need a new scapegoat. Should be pretty interesting to watch; whether total collapse or slow drift into irrelevance. Keep in mind I said interesting; not plesureable.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
MRAwesome November 16, 2012 at 12:19

So will lesbians trying to get alimony from each other finally shine some light on the law? Or generate enough screaming to change it? Lesbians might be few in number but they are politically powerful.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Ode November 16, 2012 at 15:43

Gay people already get to:
1. live together
2. do whatever they want in the privacy of their bedrooms
3. engage in financial agreements with their partners like: joint bank accounts, home mortgages, etc…

Basically gay people are NOT oppressed. In fact they are a priveleged group in the USA. They get to enjoy 99% of everything that straight people get to do minus the potential legal liabilities that straight men have to deal with. I would be more than happy to legally trade places with gay people.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader November 16, 2012 at 20:04

I very much doubt that any number of homosexual men or women will suffer from Marriage 2.0 as millions of men do. The evidence from Europe is clear: when “marriage” is available, fewer than 5% of homosexuals will take advantage of it, and most of them lesbians. Probably 1% of gay men will get “married”.

Despite the much touted “10% ” number, homosexuals amount to all of 3.5% or so of the population. Do the math. What is 5% of 3.5%? It is effectively zero.

So all marriage licenses have to be changed to “Partner A” and “Partner B”, and all birth certificates have to abolish the words “father” and “mother” to make a tiny percentage of the population happy, for a moment. The groundwork has been laid for polymarriage, and won’t the divorce courts love that to death? Who gets custody of a child born by Parent A who was made pregnant by the semen of Parent B, but the child was mainly raised by Parent C?

One thing is certain: no matter what, the men will pay. That’s the fundamental rule of this modern matriarchy, no matter what It’s The Man’s Fault And He Must Pay, always.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
JFinn November 16, 2012 at 21:09

Gay men are men. If they are even 2 percent of men, that makes 70 million of our brothers.

“homosexuality is a choice” = “all people are bisexual” = “I am sexually attracted to people of my own gender”

Well, I am not sexually attracted to men. So I know it isn’t a choice. Even in the most extreme situations, where caged straight men are separated from women – a small minority of them become attracted to men (only after many years of separation.) Yet these same men are still far more attracted to women and do “go back” once released from prison. Do you think the so called “gay lifestyle” is being enforced upon society in anywhere near the same fashion as prison? Even if it were, it wouldn’t take.

We owe it to our gay brothers, who have suffered immensely for thousands of years, to protect them. To be pressured by society to be intimate with a person you’re not attracted to is revolting and rapey. They were even sent to the holocaust. Whereas the Jews had to where yellow stars, the gays had to wear pink triangles. Allowing them to marry(it’s insulting they even need to ask for permission, much less fight for permission. They are men. They are fucking entitled.) is an important step to make society view these millions of men as normal people.

Certainly lesbians have been viciously oppressed in history as well. It’s difficult to side with them, considering they have opened war against men and injected a certain kind of hatred into feminism: the kind that views men as dirty immigrants who are stealing their women. The kind that views heterosexual intimacy as “male = predator, female = victim.” One day, gay men will wake up and question why homophobia runs a hundred times stronger against men than against women. They’ll realize that homophobia is mostly just a subset of misandry, and that lesbians enthusiastically contribute to it, especially when it comes to hatred of the sexuality of males. The gay-lesbian community comprises of people who barely hang out together.

I come from a fundamentalist religious society. I’ve heard an endless amount of women express their hatred of gay males, citing that a child needs a mother. These women have free will and independent minds. They are not brainwashed by a male-dominated society. They are lazy bums who recognize how well “patriarchy” benefits women and enslaves men in impoverished societies. Especially when it comes to bearing the brunt the violence that stems from conflicts over the rate of production of goods and services, their distribution, borders and resources, cultural zealotry, etc.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gilgamesh November 16, 2012 at 21:46

Lesbians were allowed to act openly in the victorian era. There may have been one or two violent crimes against them but nothing systematic.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gx1080 November 17, 2012 at 03:54

Gay marriage is not about being equal, is about striking against the Church. Leftists have always hated religious institutions that help people to rise against their autoritharianism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Nathan November 17, 2012 at 07:54

“Does the non-maternal lesbian pay child support and keep visitation rights, or does the father take on that role? What does the judge do about the adoption? Does the child have the right to a relationship with his biological father, or a non-related lesbian “father?”’

It’s not really that complicated. One year after an adoption is finalized it can’t be challenged by anyone for any reason. So, the paternity suit against the bio dad is a moot point. He’s got no visitation rights and no child support obligations. The judge makes a decision as to which lesbian parent is the best suited to take care of the child and that parent gets custody.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price November 17, 2012 at 17:01

One year after an adoption is finalized it can’t be challenged by anyone for any reason.

-Nathan

It would be interesting to see what would happen if you brought that kind of case before a jury. Although technically one may not be able to nullify the adoption, parental rights can be terminated at any time if a parent is found “unfit.” If the rights are terminated, the adoption is effectively nullified. Fathers’ parental rights are terminated all the time. Why not lesbians’, too?

I bet you cash money that a lot of juries would happily terminate a lesbian’s parental rights if she were not the birth mother.

Joeb November 17, 2012 at 17:22

I guess we will see a lot of decisions unfold right before are eyes concerning Gay marriage , I think we will all need to be prepared for some more social injustice .
Follow the money will become more pronounced . If the Government can make a buck by ruling one way or another , They will for the betterment of society , “Im gagging on that; We all know it will be to secure their rule and Job .
The advancement of the civil religion( no power greater than the state )will take the first cut .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jack Donovan November 17, 2012 at 18:36

Great summary; re-posting elsewhere. After the warm fuzzy of “equality” wears off, the only people who will really benefit from gay marriage are banks and lawyers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jack Donovan November 17, 2012 at 18:40

And W.F. Price (and others) are right about homosexual men probably not getting involved in marriage very often. Recently, I’ve been on the pick-up phone apps, and while I have a lot of funny observations I’m not going to share, I will say that half of the participants are in “open” relationships. Homosexual men are no more interested in strict monogamy than their hetero contemporaries would be if they had more options.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Danny November 18, 2012 at 15:29

‘We owe it to our gay brothers, who have suffered immensely for thousands of years, to protect them.’

No living gay man has suffered for thousands of years has he? People don’t tend to live that long. Very few of them are old enough to have been alive back when sodomy was illegal in the US and gay men dated and married women. So let’s not do what feminists do and make out that people suffer directly from what happened long before they were alive.
I have nothing against gays, I don’t care what anyone does with their life. I still don’t owe anyone for what my ancestors did or didn’t do to them.

‘To be pressured by society to be intimate with a person you’re not attracted to is revolting and rapey.’

I’m straight and I’ve fucked quite a few revolting women I wasn’t remotely attracted to, because I’d had a long dry spell or just split up with someone. Guess how much sympathy I’ll get for my rapey experiences?

‘Certainly lesbians have been viciously oppressed in history as well.’

No, they haven’t.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
brigadon November 18, 2012 at 20:08

Actually, the Gay Men’s movement was thoroughly taken over by lesbians decades ago. Most gay men despise and are disgusted by lesbians… those women are not just perverts, but they are creepy and aggressive as well.

Me, I am looking forward to ‘gay marriage’. I am not gay, but the idea of engaging in a ‘marriage of convenience’ with another guy to raise kids free from twisted feminist attitudes, and still go out alternatively to get laid while sharing the responsibilities of babysitting and parenthood, has a certain appeal when you think it through completely.
Dudes CAN get along long-term with each other as roommates. long enough to raise kids ‘right’ and deal with today’s financial instabilities as a ‘team’. Not to mention you can always find someone to play halo with, and if you get a babysitter you can be each other’s ‘wingmen’.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Mr Kidd & Mr Wint November 19, 2012 at 01:13

Good to see a sensible decision in Washington state. Sadly it’s not the same here in Australia- the leader of the opposition Tony Abutt is so phobic he won’t even allow his side of politics a conscience vote on gay marriage. So Washington State is miles ahead of Australia.
As a couple (yeah same sex) celebrating our 32nd year together today, it’s good to read that many people have “the choice” to marry the person they care about. Hopefully the political homophobes in Australia will become political “no ones” over the next year & Australia will have it’s chance to say “Yes”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Masked Stranger November 19, 2012 at 04:46

“Gx1080
Gay marriage is not about being equal, is about striking against the Church. Leftists have always hated religious institutions that help people to rise against their authoritarianism.”

The Church has history of authoritarianism as well. You really can’t trust any organization and/or institution. Given the right circumstance, the Church’s leaders will betray you in a second.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
T November 21, 2012 at 12:01

To Joeb: Gays are only 3/4s of one percent of the population: gay men are 1%, and gay women are 1/2%, averaging out to .075%.

A Harvard-trained, gay sociologist put those numbers out years ago to debunk the lie that gays were 10% of the population.

4%? No, gays are always trying to ‘up’ their numbers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
bruno November 23, 2012 at 05:35

The sooner they get the poison gift of marriage,
the sooner they will get back “into the closet” again.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Towgunner November 27, 2012 at 08:01

In a vacuum gay marriage shouldn’t really matter, after all it boils down to arguing over semantics; just call it a civil union, compromise is compromise. IMO, marriage should be left to institutions like the Church and not the state. Why I don’t support gay marriage in its present form is that its a ruse and part of a much larger agenda who’s goal is anything about love, tolerance or some “right”. Simply, achieving the endstate of marriage is hardly the goal here, rather its about forcing concepts like “normality” and destroying institutions such as Christianity and “hetro-normality”. So, who is really against live and let live, eh? On that basis alone, this is and should be rejected. Focus on the endstate, which is to make us a gay-centric society. Evidence of this is all over the place, something like 40% of all tv characters are now portrayed as gay and, importantly, any resistance to this is met with such a degree of intolerance you might as well be talking to a neo nazi. I don’t want gay MRAs to be belittled by women, after all, that’s why we’re here. We need to stick up for them. But, I don’t want a gay world, and I think most people don’t want that either. Of course, the rebuttal is I’m homophobic (a made up word, which is just an irresponsible use of doublespeak). My answer, no I’m not – see a recent RamZPaul video. I just look at things honestly and the gay culture is not a culture that I would champion…ever. Oh, but whats so bad about it and they don’t hurt no body…blah blah. K, the gay culture hides in plain sight, yet, we’re told to look the other way. So, what will our society be like? Ever been to the castro, provincetown or a gay “pride” parade? That’s it. All I say is that, NO, I do not want to live in a world like that. Judging by the simple fact that homosexuals comprise ~ 1% of the human population, we the people shouldn’t have to be forced to endure this either. So, marriage means nothing here its a trojan horse of sorts, its about imposing a certain culture on the rest of us. Is homosexuality normal? The answer is simple – let people decide and let them decide on their own, unmolested but propaganda. You’ll see that homosexuality is really an extremely touchy subject that literally irks at the core of humans. For men the fear of being sodomized is perhaps one of the highest versus being killed. Sex is general is not some blasé thing, contraception might have alleviated some of the risks, but consider the psychological impact, which we never discuss responsibly as a culture. We wonder why the US and the West is by far the most depressed and mentally imbalanced societies in the world…gee I wonder why? The common ground for people is to have a relatively clean and chaste public forum/culture, that is not too much to ask and if some group claims bigotry or discrimination because of that, well, maybe its their problem and not ours.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: