Gay Marriage

     The journey towards companionship and lasting fidelity is a struggle for many. Religion, therapy and changing social media have had mixed effects. In many ways people are liberated by being allowed to be people. In their natural state humans will seek one another and sort out their affections, reaching a harmonious state. In the give and take of emotional adaptation is the ebb and flow of we as individuals. Thus the greater self is brought for us the collective, the couple or the triumvirate or more. The institutions of monogamy and marriage served their financial and land-yielding purpose during feudal times, and failed to provide an open area of communication and equality for lovers. Instead the strict adherence to the social principles of monogamy and the institution of marriage led to people being misled. It was only natural to assume that following these institutions would mean passion would remain regular, that discovering each other each day would yield to cool discourse and spontaneous mini-adventures blossoming, truly enriching life in the grand adventure and quiet moments. For centuries archaic principles failed to produce these results. It seemed only natural thus to cling even more tenaciously thereof, fuck it, make up new clauses in gospel, produce cultural banner bait, anything to cement the dogma. So in modern times where a liberated sexual and romantic standard leads to people discovering themselves for themselves, this awakening gets branded as "Hook-up Culture". Ad hominem advertising works or it wouldn't continue. Where people really look inside of themselves and ask what they want, whether or not they're receiving it, how much they're giving, how much they're worth, and really assessing love and life as a journey to achieve love, a journey to write on their own is opening a door that can't be closed. So the conservative institution knee jerk reaction of a smear campaign is achieved in a single phrase "Hook-up Culture". The crime of finding one's own sexuality, one's own desires is timid adherence to a dying archaic model. This model was never designed to provide love, but to ensure land inheritance among male heirs and secure wealth. Massive level pussy control when the original lying thieves and dictators, I mean high priests and traders, cornered the market on literacy, commerce and laid down the foundations of what would become our oldest and dumbest institutions. Institutions are self-serving. The self is served by the self. The self deserves love. The journey towards companionship and lasting fidelity is the masterpiece we write of our life. Fidelity is not the swearing off but the continued pursuit of, hence it isn't limited by number or gender. The journey in every piece is how we master ourselves. This can never be given away. To assume otherwise is to play a charade, to hide from making real decisions, from being real with yourself.

     If we lived in a mirror universe where homosexuals were a dominant portion of the population the world would function efficiently and harmoniously. If there were very few heterosexuals population growth would be low. Given my disposition and feelings, if I lived in this universe I still wouldn't want to have kids of my own. Being surrounded by non-breeders wouldn't change my mind on that. War wouldn't be as much of an issue, nor bullshit macho posturing. Gay or straight guys would still go through adolescence and get their testosterone boost and have their episodes, but the gladiator culture would not be the prevailing model. In the present world the proto-warrior way is thrust upon us as a method of preserving the hierarchy frame. The need for this hierarchy is left over from tribal days when we were much more savage and required wildpack mentality to survive. When prosper and evolve become key, the model has to be re-envisioned. I posit that in a gay-dominant universe, there would still be the Beowulfs among us, but we would find our way to co-exist without damaging humanity just as I have. The world would be a much cleaner, neater place. Communication between men and women would be easier, as well as between men and men. Every straight man on the planet would have 5 gay wingmen. Every straight woman would have 5 favorite gay bars. Any homo-phobe on the planet would be...      lonely. Men would still behave like men, but without as much fierce competition. Competition now breeds excellence and results, but that competition should be in the excellence of performance, in the results, the finished product, not in the vanity. What is given to the world is the focus, what is done. The artist or athlete, the performer, the crafter, the human is a conduit. If marriage even existed as a concept in the gay dominant universe it wouldn't be excluded from heteros.

     In our for real universe gays have never posed a threat to heterosexual unions. Gays have never threatened the sanctity of marriage. In zero cases have gays ever united and then officiated their nuptials by sending pterodactyls to heterosexual wedding parties. Gays have yet to counter-strike and bomb churches, form armed militias or threaten civil liberties in any way. In this universe secrecy and shame are real social poisons that drive people to divorce, depression and suicide. In this universe everyone knows someone or has known someone who was gay and never gave them any flak for being hetero, but continued to live their lives. An alarming amount of couples don't have sex enough, and the national conversation doesn't address this in a solvable way enough. Hook up culture threatens marriage, conservatives and emotions? And gays threaten the sanctity of marriage? And rock and roll was sent by the devil. In the last case, the real threat of rock and roll was that it encouraged the mixing of blacks and whites on dance floors.  Every generation has their distraction play. In 100 years the world will look back and remember this issue as a steaming pile of barbaric shit. In this world we have always been working towards individual advancement and in the process the advancement of humanity. Regardless of a person's own motivation towards the collective the individual adapts, the population evolves. The journey for love and completeness, companionship was never supposed to be a war, a journey through Hell. The struggle is internal but when that frustration is turned outward, institutions are formed. Barriers to cling to. Armor against pain. Like retreating into your shell after a bad break-up or a string of disappointments. Fear is a beast of survival, a feeling blanket meant to alert and activate us. But when we wear it like a security blanket and shrink back, or produce rules and restrictions and tell other people how to love and expect such demands to produce emotional results, or turn that frustration into rage towards others for finding their love then that fear turns self-destructive. The very idea of addressing the issue of gay marriage is giving credence to the question. If I opened this essay with "Imagine a world in which we enslaved all the mentally retarded people. And nobody on the planet had any emotional or moral problem with that, for say 5 generations. And then..." then immediately would be laughter, dismissal or shut-down from a reader. Because relegating people to the role of slave seems like nonsense. But if I opened with "We should ban the mentally retarded from marrying or adopting children." the question would be given time to soak in. So the real issue is, why is it public policy how we love? At what point does it not become prohibitive of our very humanity to interfere with people's lives? What makes it okay to rule over other grown adult's love?