You should watch this

It's been receiving attention for months now, yet there are still those who haven't seen it. And need to. This can happen to couples of any genders and sexual orientations without legal protections. Marriage is one way, in the eyes of the law, to protect the rights of those who love one another.

Missed Connections

Advice given anonymously in Cragslist personals? Advice you can trust.

Honeymoon Map

View Honeymoon in a larger map

I've begun mapping places suggested by the anonymous parcels I have been receiving.

Possibility of legal polygamy thanks to same-sex marriage opponents

My clever and creative roommate, Freddy, in the course of discussing my project has determined that, due to same-sex marriages not being recognized in every state, in certain circumstances polygamy can technically be legal. That requires a bit of a qualifier, however, in that there are conditions under which bigamy is technically legal and illegal simultaneously. This is really an exercise in logic, or more precisely, the illogicality of not universally recognizing marriage between same-sex partners across every state of our fine union. His argument goes like this:

A same-sex couple marries one another in a state in which their union is legally recognized. They then travel to another state, possibly their home state, in which same-sex marriage, even that performed elsewhere, is not recognized. Their union, from a legal perspective, is null—it never even took place in the eyes of the state. Now that their union is void, one or both are free to marry, in this state that doesn't recognize same-sex marriage, an opposite-sex partner.

While illegal in the states that recognize same-sex marriage, this second, opposite-sex union would be the only legal marriage in a state that doesn't recognize same-sex unions. The relationship, then, is both legal (in some states) while simultaneously illegal (in others).

In order for this paradox to occur, the marriages have to take place in this order. Because opposite-sex marriages are recognized throughout the U.S., if already in one first, you can’t marry someone else of either sex. The same-sex marriage must be first.

Of course, this argument hinges on a state’s legal wording for conditions under which opposite-sex marriage can occur. It also hinges on the interaction of federal law with these state laws. However, if it is the federal government’s policy to allow states to determine the legal definitions of marriage for that state, then it should not interfere in state matters of opposite-sex marriage, either.

Anyway, I am no legal expert, so if anyone reads this and has a reason why it would not work, please respond. I would like to know the viability of this argument.

If this dude's for real, good luck to him

While trolling Craigslist for ideas for my next Husbrand ad, I came across this loving message from a very loving 28-year-old who wants to raise loving children. Of course, given my own proclivity toward marriage, I love it.

More husband hijinx

I haven't had much success in crowd-sourcing a new ad for my husbrand. My friend, Ryan, has helped with some wording, but I was hoping for buy-in from a lot more people. I need people to believe.

So, until I can raise enough interest to complete a second ad, I have created an Amazon wishlist to make it easy to gift me with exactly what I want. Mail order spouses are a thing of the past, now that the Internet makes shopping such a cinch!

A preview of my Amazon wishlist.

I'm a late adopter in this case, but...

I used Instragram for the first time today for the Public Privates project. It is the second in a series of photographs showing the progress of cleaning my bedroom, my own private space.

1977 Filter.

The New Gay Marriage Map

Post-election social cartography:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/11/updated-map-new-state-marriage-equality-america

Washington is no longer a state in which "ceci est un mariage parce que vous l'avez fait ailleurs."

Sexual Taxonomy

I'm so glad you asked these questions. They're not just questions about sexuality, but questions about semantics and taxonomy-- all of which are some of my favorite subjects! Let's parse them.

First, let me say that the "G" in my ad, describing myself as "GWM," stands for "generous" and doesn't speak to my sexuality at all. It is a natural assumption that the "G" would mean gay, for a number of reasons:

1. The ad, although posted in the Gigs category of Craigslist, is clothed in the form of a personals ad and so, based on this taxonomy, we apply a set of assumptions particular to personals ads in determining meaning.
2. The presence of the word "straight" in the headline of the ad influences how we read the rest of the ad. Would one really feel the need to use that word unless one needed to set it apart from "the other." The same might also be said for the "W."
3. The letters "GWM" appear in the same sentence as the letters "SWM," another convention of personals ads, and seem to be set in opposition to them.
4. The project draws attention to the issues surrounding same-sex marriage, which is another cue that would lead one to read "G" as gay.
5. Subsequent information might be used to assign meaning retrospectively to this statement. I recently denied that the project was about gay marriage but said that it was, instead, about opposite-sexual-orientation marriage.

We make assumptions based on categories of convenience, applying the characteristics of the category to those individuals who appear, to us, to fit the category. It's a form of shorthand for knowledge, and, while labeling is a natural inclination for humans, not always accurate or fair.

So the question about my sexual orientation still stands.  My question, in response, is: "Who gets to determine it and how?" Is the label based on what someone else says (or speculates without saying) I am?  If so, I might be gay in the sense of "homosexual" or in the sense of "weird, bad, stupid" in the eyes of those who wield the word in that way. 

If the intended sense is "homosexual," is the label based on some particular social/medical/psychological definition? Am I gay if I have sexual contact exclusively with members of the same sex? 

If not exclusively, then does the label gay still stand? Or would I then be deposited into the category, bisexual?

If the social/medical/psychological definition is the one given the most weight, would it still apply to me even though I have been celibate for almost three years? Can someone be both nonsexual and gay? If not, then is someone gay only when engaged in a sexual act, and then not gay when not having sex?

Or, is the definition based on attraction, rather than sexual activity? Then, again, the question of exclusivity comes into play. Does the attraction have to be sexual, lead to a sexual feeling? Or can the attraction just be an appreciation of beauty?

Is the label based on self-identification. If I were to exclusively have sexual contact with members of the same sex, but call myself straight, does that make me straight or is that just lying? What if it isn't so much a lie as just something I say without meaning it? What if it's just bullshit, as so much that is said turns out to be?

Could marriage be a similarly clouded concept? Clouded by some people claiming the authority to define something that is not theirs to label. Is there a legal definition of sexual orientation? Is there a legal definition of attraction? Is there a legal definition of love? 

Even so, are these definitions the same as religious definitions? And, if so, which religion's definition is the one that stands? Is it the religion of the majority? The religion of the state? Isn't it strange that America was colonized by the Puritans, a people seeking to free themselves from a religion that attempted to define the limits of marriage? Doesn't freedom of religion also include freedom from the religious definitions of others?

There is no question as to my sexual orientation because my sexual orientation is not yours to question. You do not have the authority to do so. At most, you can speculate, accuse, condemn.

Now please don't get me started on how you have quantified sexual orientation, dividing it into degrees of gayness and straightness.

This just in

Whoa, wait a minute. Who said anything about gay marriage? What I am proposing is opposite-sexual-orientation marriage.  And I propose it because it already exists and has for centuries. Either to hide their sexual orientation, to produce children, to take advantage of the socio-politico-economic advantages of marriage, or just because it was what was expected of them, gay men and women have been marrying straight people since recorded history.

Same-sex marriage does not open the door for these "abuses" of marriage. The door, if there ever was one, was wrenched off its hinges and splintered into a billion pieces by opposite-sex marriage long ago. If these are "abuses" of marriage, then they are abuses that are irrespective of the gender and sexuality of those involved.  They seem, to me, more like "reasons" and they are reasons that already exist. Security. Companionship. Working together to make the world a better place for yourself and others.

Number 2

If I was trying to take advantage of the government, I would have placed an ad asking for someone to form a corporation with me.

And only one response to the ad so far

Not unless divorce is already on the horizon, and even then I don't want to be in the middle of it. Again. My father and his family were Mormons, but they didn't practice polygamy and it isn't in my genes. Good luck to you and your family. I hope you get whatever you need to take care of them.

Only two responses so far on Reddit

The marriage industrial complex

Ryan Conrad of Against Equality discusses the complexities of same-sex marriage and the discourse in which it is enmeshed.  In particular, very compelling is the argument that marriage is a raced, classed issue. For example, take note of what he says about healthcare.  Concerns of class, privilege, and access are central to my project because I am in a position where I have something I cannot use (domestic partner benefits through my employment, a reliable automobile, a weekly paycheck) that I can share with someone who needs them. This is central to my selection criteria of future husband-- need.

I was born into a lower-class, farming family that moved gradually into the lower-middle-class after my parents physically moved from our rural town to the suburbs of a larger city. Through education (courtesy of mammoth student loan debt) and near-constant employment (at times in three jobs simultaneously) I have moved into the central middle class, where I enjoy privileges I could have never imagined in my childhood. I have a job in academia that, most days, doesn't even seem like work. And, most days, I feel I don't deserve it.

What I had not considered are issues of race that complicate the same-sex marriage movement. Even embedded in my Craigslist ad are signs of internalized racism: the fact that I said I am seeking a "Straight White Male," for example. I chose these words only cursorily, influenced by my own minute experience with personal ads and, perhaps even with a specific candidate in mind. This was not intentional, but, of course, the best of intentions...

Thank you to Ashlie Sandoval for sharing this video on Facebook.  Keep fighting the good fights, Ashlie!

Ceci n'est pas un mariage

The second project that begins today is one that I have been developing for a couple of years now, but have only recently been able to conceptualize how social media might be its vehicle. There are four stages to the project.

1. Using Craigslist I will post an ad seeking a male marital partner. I will direct all my various social media connections to the ad to draw attention, but hope that replies come in from those I don't virtually know, as well.  The responses, if any, will be redirected through this blog, and perhaps Facebook, which holds the largest possible audience. There had better be responses. I mean, I'm a goddamned catch.

Today, I posted the ad:  http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/crg/3367083326.html thus setting this project in motion.

2. Sometime in the Spring semester, I will pare the responses down to a couple of serious candidates (remember, I'm a catch) with whom I will conduct videotaped (videoSDcarded?) interviews. The interviews will be posted to YouTube. From this group, I will choose my future husband, the father of my future children.

3. During the summer of 2013, he and I will fly into Seattle, rent a car, and drive to Vancouver, BC for the wedding (ceci est un mariage) and then on to enjoy a honeymoon in Alaska (ceci n'est pas un mariage). Honeymoon photos will be posted to Tumblr. We will drive back through BC to Washington (ceci est un mariage parce que vous l'avez fait ailleurs) afterwards, and, rather than flying home, take the rental car back to Cincinnati via a circuitous route: all 48 contiguous states. Photos will be taken all along the route, each captioned with one of the above parenthetical phrases, depending on if, at that particular spot, same-sex marriage is legally recognized.

4. Upon arriving back in Cincinnati, I, my now unhusband (determined spatially), craigslist responses, video interviews, and the photographs will be available for viewing in a gallery for about a month, until it's time to return to work for the fall semester. Ideally, there would be live video feed streaming from the gallery space. The exhibition will be titled Ceci n'est pas un mariage.

What happens from there is up to my unhusband and I. Perhaps we will someday travel again to a place where we can say, "Ceci est un mariage."

I'm hoping to crowd-fund this project through Kickstarter, embedding it even further in the social media sphere from which the project will be distributed. If anyone is interested in helping through some other means, I'm happy to have you on-board as wedding planning crew.