That's very interesting. This point makes a lot of sense to me and relates to the conversation of how gender egalitarianism has impacted "marriage" and heterosexual relationships overall. As a cis woman who recently got engaged to a cis man, I have been thinking a lot about legal marriage--if it matters, why and when it matters, who has access, and why and when they have access. It often seems like questions around marriage relate directly to raising children, which leaves out a growing group of people who choose not to have kids (to say nothing of those who want children but cannot have them). I think marriage has in many ways become synonymous with "family" and that has so many implications and carries a heavy weight with it as well. I'm not sure we'll every be able to fully parse marriage--a set of legal rights of partnership--with marriage--a socially constructed idea of what partnership "should" be.
In reply to <p>Judith, that's a great by hanneblank
That's very interesting. This point makes a lot of sense to me and relates to the conversation of how gender egalitarianism has impacted "marriage" and heterosexual relationships overall. As a cis woman who recently got engaged to a cis man, I have been thinking a lot about legal marriage--if it matters, why and when it matters, who has access, and why and when they have access. It often seems like questions around marriage relate directly to raising children, which leaves out a growing group of people who choose not to have kids (to say nothing of those who want children but cannot have them). I think marriage has in many ways become synonymous with "family" and that has so many implications and carries a heavy weight with it as well. I'm not sure we'll every be able to fully parse marriage--a set of legal rights of partnership--with marriage--a socially constructed idea of what partnership "should" be.