The Glenn Show on the Future of Marriage

01.26.2013, 11:05 PM

Guest host Glenn Loury II and David Blankenhorn at Bloggingheads.tv:

On The Glenn Show, guest host Glenn II and David tackle the issue of marriage equality. David sees a crisis in the institution of marriage in America. Glenn and David discuss the generational divide over the public and private meanings of marriage, and explore the chicken-and-egg reasons for the declining marriage rate.

And more. Check out the video.


11 Responses to “The Glenn Show on the Future of Marriage”

  1. SexualMinoritySupporter says:

    I watched the video. NOT a criticism but an observation, David always seem very uncomfortable in his body language and his speech when he talks about his support of Civil Marriage for Sexual Minorities. He never seems, “happy” in his support.

    Second, he uses the less polarizing term, “gay different-ness” He used that term several times, as in; once sexual minorities are granted Civil Marriage perhaps there will be a reduction in the perception of gay different-ness (paraphrasing). What David is describing is that sexual minorities will experience less stigmatization. There is a significant difference between stigmatization and being perceived as, shoulder shrug, merely “different”.

    I know he is being careful to be inclusive, trying to have everyone (gay and straight) sit around the table to come up with solutions to reinforcing Civil Marriage. However by using the term “different-ness” minimizes the actual stigmatization that sexual minorities have experienced, and still experience.

    If you want sexual minorities at the table, if you want that honest conversation and cooperation I would suggest that you acknowledge their experience, not diminishing it by suggesting that they have merely been seen as “different” when REALLY they have been treated just awful, they have been, and currently are, stigmitized. The conservatives you want at that table also will much prefer David’s description of “different-ness”.

    David’s support of Civil Marriage for Sexual Minorities comes across as very lukewarm. He is careful in his choice of words to not offend conservatives but by doing that he offends sexual minorities by diminishing their lived lives. No it is not “different-ness” it IS stigmatization.

  2. David Blankenhorn says:

    SMS: Well, I’m sorry that my body language and tone don’t meet with your approval.

    My comments about “differentness” had nothing to do with stigma; it had to do with the possibility that gays and straights and their relationships are going to be more alike, less different, as time goes on (e.g. when Glenn L marries), in part because of the common participation in the institution of marriage. It’s a hypothesis about how institutions can affect behavior, not social stigma.

  3. SexualMinoritySupporter says:

    David, I did not write that as a “zinger”. I think you are probably unaware of how your tone and body langue come off.

    But isn’t Social Stigma behavior? It is the behavior of the people who are stigmatizing others, is it not?

  4. SexualMinoritySupporter says:

    “From this day forward it is not Love that will keep your Marriage alive, it is your Marriage that will keep your Love Alive” I strongly agree with this quotation David quoted.

    As any long time married person will tell you there it is in a nutshell. Civil Marriage keeps couples together over the rough times all marriages have, eventually we resolve our conflicts and remember why we are together.

  5. Mont D. Law says:

    (with the possibility that gays and straights and their relationships are going to be more alike, less different, as time goes on (e.g. when Glenn L marries), in part because of the common participation in the institution of marriage. )

    This has been my position from the very beginning. As widespread acceptance of gay and lesbian people spreads, as traditional marriage and family options become more available, people will behave as people do and reproduce the structure of the family that raised them. Glenn Lowery III, gay or straight, will crush in middle school, hookup/date for a while in high school and college, then marry and raise kids. Does this fix everything for everybody. No because not everybody’s family is as bougie as the Lowery’s and a lot of what gets passed on will be dysfunctional. As is the case for straight people. The closet always breeds pathology.

  6. David Blankenhorn says:

    Mont: I did not see it that way, formerly. Now I do — or I suppose I should say, now it’s my hope.

  7. Billy says:

    I hope that marriage will also prove to help gay and lesbian couples stay together. However, insofar as the implication is that without marriage gay and lesbians couples do not stay together, that premise is wrong.

    I personally know gay and lesbian couples who have been together more than 60 years. That they have not been allowed to marry is a profound injustice. I hope that the Supreme Court will remedy that injustice soon.

    Marriage is not necessary for couples to stay together. It does, however, provide benefits that help and it signals community support for relationships–which gay people have been conspicuously denied in the past.

  8. Mont D. Law says:

    (I hope that marriage will also prove to help gay and lesbian couples stay together.)

    I never said that, neither in my reading, did Mr. Blankenhorn, so I’m not sure why it’s relevant to the discussion.

  9. Diane M says:

    @Billy – “Marriage is not necessary for couples to stay together. It does, however, provide benefits that help and it signals community support for relationships–which gay people have been conspicuously denied in the past.”

    I agree, but I would add that marriage can help couples stay together. Partly because of the benefits making life easier. Partly because of community support. Also, for some of us at least, because of the commitment that you make when you marry. Because you have made the commitment, you try a little harder. And because you know that your partner has made the commitment, you can rely on them and live your lives more inter-dependently.

  10. Diane M says:

    @Mont D Law – “Does this fix everything for everybody. No because not everybody’s family is as bougie as the Lowery’s and a lot of what gets passed on will be dysfunctional. As is the case for straight people.”

    Married families are not always good things. I think, though, that the alternative for most people is living together and breaking up many times. That ends up working even less well, most of the time, particularly for children.

  11. Billy says:

    Diane wrote: “Also, for some of us at least, because of the commitment that you make when you marry. Because you have made the commitment, you try a little harder. And because you know that your partner has made the commitment, you can rely on them and live your lives more inter-dependently.”

    I don’t doubt what you say is true. However, I know for me and many other people involved in gay relationships, we have already made commitments to our partners and they to us.

    I am the most ardent supporter of marriage one can imagine. However, I don’t need the government’s stamp of approval to validate my relationship. My partner and I have been a couple for almost 30 years and we have never doubted our commitment to each other.

    We do want the government to recognize our relationship because of some tangible benefits–including, some that are taken for granted by married heterosexual couples but which we have had to spend thousands to dollars to obtain, ranging from rights of inheritance to assurances that we can make medical decisions for each other if necessary–and also because the government’s refusal to recognize our relationship sends a very clear message that in the eyes of the law we are not equal to other citizens and our relationship is lesser.