Tuesday, January 22, 2008


("Good Girls", photo and copyright by Christa Renee)

As mentioned in my most recent Broad Cast post, last week a Burlington, Vermont guerrilla action theater group calling themselves Heterosexuals for Mandatory Marriage (Hmm) made their presence known at the anti-gay-marriage presentation of a Utah-based rigid marriage front. What the Burlington Free Press article did not cover was the Hmm Manifesto read aloud during the begrudgingly-granted Q&A.

Thanks to our excellent sources, I can now share with you the contents of that manifesto (below the fold). Enjoy!

Heterosexuals for Mandatory Marriage. (Hmm)

We all know something is wrong with the modern world, with our world. There is too much selfishness and greed; too much I WANT. We have a solution and it’s called GROW UP! That’s right, Americans, you need to stop acting like spoiled brats and start acting like grown ups and realize that rights and responsibilities are earned, not given.

That’s why we at Heterosexuals for Mandatory Marriage (Hmm) demand that the government stop spoiling its citizens by giving them what they want, and instead force citizens to earn their rights by growing up and getting married.

Did you know that state and federal governments already grant over 1000 rights and responsibilities to married people that are not granted to unmarried people? So why can’t all rights and privileges be reserved for the real grown ups among us, the responsible, the hard-working, the married.

We demand that only married people be allowed to vote, own homes, drive after ten p.m., adopt pets or children, and have access to unlimited credit at extremely high interest rates.

We demand that mealy-mouthed organizations like the Family Research Council stop beating around the bush and state what they are really arguing for: America as an even more stratified system of rights and privileges based on marital status. We, the Family Research Council, and all right-minded Americans know that the only thing that will save this country from going to hell is Marital Apartheid.

The Founding Members of Hmm

Mrs. John Smith
Mrs. Marian Haste
et al.


shadocat said...

That was hilarious!~ Oh, to have been there....

Mrs. Marian Kynde said...

Dear Mrs. Jochild,

Thank you so much for supporting our cause. The only thing not covered in our manifesto is our demand for preferential parking for the married. We advocate that no fewer than 25 spots per 50 are allocated to those who hang the government regulated international symbol for married - two rings entwined - from their rear view mirror, to correspond to those spaces with the logos painted on them.

Lapel pins for those showing the proper certification will be available for a small price as well, to take advantage of other special offers, such as discounts at movie theaters, first class seating on airplanes, separate lines at taxi stands and grocery stores, and the like.

Your continued support on the behalf of our cause means the world to us.

Mrs. Marion Kynde
Mrs. Marian Haiste
Mrs. John Smith
et. al

Maggie Jochild said...

Mrs. Kynde, so nice to hear from you. I wonder, is your husband's name perhaps an abbreviated form of Kirchekynderkuchen? What a lovely heritage, if so.

As regards marrieds and movie theatres, I'd like to see a separate, preferred seating for us. Not simply to remove us from the unseemly proximity of those who fail at the road to marriage, and of course to reward us for fulfulling our chromosomal destiny, but also because -- how to word this delicately -- the conubial offcast secretions of those who have not learned to sequester their passions into the lifeless corral of matrimony are known to stain even the most Scotch-guarded of fabric. I simply don't want to sit in their soak, do you?

Mrs. Jowithchild

yeshe_choden said...

Two years ago (I think) in my then-home state of Washington, a Judge struck down the newly voted-in recognition of gay unions as marriages, saying that "marriages" are characterized by the production of children.

Pronto, a gay man activist wrote up a petition for a new voter referendum, saying that all marriages in Washington State must produce a child within three years or the marriage is annulled and the rights and privileges of marriages are revoked.

He was dead serious. Got some good publicity and made his point, but did not get the referendum.

Maggie Jochild said...

Yoshe, I remember hearing about that move and thought it was absolutely an effective strategy. The truth is, heterosexual values are what have altered the face of marriage in this country, especially the loosening of the strictures against divorce.

My personal vote goes for separating church and state when it comes to committed relationships: EVERYBODY has a choice of a civil union (with legal benefits under the state) and/or a religiously-sanctioned marriage (with whatever that imbues), and the two are no longer conflated.

Then, to take things one logical step further, parents are likewise identified as those who step up and ask the state to name them as such, regardless of biology. This will insure responsibility for children, instead of the haphazard method currently in place.

Lastly, I would fucking LOVE to see the so-called queer movement move its focus away from marriage and the military, and also from carving out ever-small niches of identities, and instead deal with plain old woman-hating (in all its forms, which impacts gay men as much as it does lesbians), gender essentialism, class, race, and issues that pull us into mainstream concerns. That's where our constituency lies. In my opinion.