Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Download Folder

0 items

Houston Voice, No. 1183, June 27, 2003
File 014
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Houston Voice, No. 1183, June 27, 2003 - File 014. 2003-06-27. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. December 15, 2017. http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/721/show/685.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

(2003-06-27). Houston Voice, No. 1183, June 27, 2003 - File 014. Montrose Voice. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/721/show/685

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Houston Voice, No. 1183, June 27, 2003 - File 014, 2003-06-27, Montrose Voice, University of Houston Libraries, accessed December 15, 2017, http://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/721/show/685.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Houston Voice, No. 1183, June 27, 2003
Contributor
  • Weaver, Penny
  • Crain, Chris
Publisher Window Media
Date June 27, 2003
Language English
Subject
  • LGBTQ community
  • LGBTQ people
  • Gay liberation movement
Place
  • Houston, Texas
Genre
  • newspapers
Type
  • Text
Identifier OCLC: 31485329
Rights In Copyright: This item is protected by copyright. Copyright to this resource is held by the creator or current rights holder, and the resource is provided here for educational purposes. It may not be reproduced or distributed in any format without permission of the copyright owner. Users assume full responsibility for any infringement of copyright or related rights.
Note This item was digitized from materials loaned by the Gulf Coast Archive and Museum (GCAM).
Item Description
Title File 014
Transcript HOUSTON VOICE www.houston voice.com JUNE 27, 2003 13 Dint MICHAEL ALVEAR Canadian gays will so improve upon marriage, think air! light! color! that hapless heteros are likely to be victims of our gentrification. Blame Canada for wed woes THEY SAY THAT CANADIANS ARE simply unarmed Americans with health care. But the truth is they're much more progressive than we are. Too much so. In fact, Ontario's decision to allow gay marriage is the kind of ill-informed thinking only a nine-month winter could produce. Using an urban gentrification model to renovating marriage makes one thing clear: Allowing all gay people to marry is a grave injustice to heterosexuals. Urban gentrification tends to displace retirees, households with fixed incomes and families who simply can't afford the rising rents and property taxes. The same thing will happen with marriage gentrification. There will be heterosexual victims: Couples who have fixed intellectual incomes (they won't be able to afford the rising level of thinking), families who don't respect diversity and couples who buckle at the difficulty of propping up loveless marriages in the face of loving ones. Ontario officials don't seem to be concerned with displaced straight couples. I haven't heard one government official ask, "Where will these people go once gays womp up the institution of marriage?" A cheaper part of town, no doubt. THAT'S WHY I'M PROPOSING THAT Ontario officials back down from their noble but misguided effort to attain full equality under the law. Besides, Canada has never done anything big or important. Why start now? They're probably just trying to get even with us for that old "Saturday Night Live" joke ("Is he gay or just Canadian?"). Here's what Canadians need to do: Create a government incentive program that slowly introduces gay marriage while softening the blow to straight couples that'll be uprooted by the beau- tification process. Urban renewal starts block by block. You wouldn't bulldoze an entire city, right? Where would everyone go? Ontario should identify 20 marriage-distressed communities and make only those gay residents eligible for marriage. These newly married gay couples would also receive federal grants and tax- exempt bonds to finance sweeping revital- ization and marriage-creation programs. This would have a dramatic effect in marriage-poor areas, which tend to have an astronomical number of divorcees, unwed mothers and dateless gay men. Part of the program would also involve a set-aside for the covenant-challenged: the couples who can't or won't stay in an institution where love and commitment are the oidy criteria for residence. If Canada did it this way, then for once America would be copycatting its neighbor instead of the other way around. Across America, low-marriage neighborhoods could be reclaimed by identifying them as Marriage Gentrification Zones. Armed with engineering studies, architectural plans and full-length make-up mirrors, we could actually end up rehabilitating what the thrice-married, abortion-paying, DOMA-voting congressmen think we'll destroy. URBAN AND MARRIAGE GENTRIFICA- tion share the same goals: safe, well-lit streets (though I must say the current lighting may be too harsh for the gay sensibility), more constructive behavior (marrying out of love, not out of expectation), preservation of beauty (fighting for urban character rather than suburban sprawl) and a culture of service to others (children to some, three-ways to others). With my plan, Ontario can ease gays into the institution of marriage while providing sanctuary for straight couples who'll be displaced by the gentrification. I guess the real question is whether gays are talented and creative enough to reverse the blight and moral decay that straight people have brought to marriage. Well, we're not exactly strangers to the blight and moral decay thing. Besides, who better to do it than us? You don't want a tract-housing specialist. You want somebody who's going to do with air, light and color what Madonna did with tits, clothes and dyes. There's no question that gay couples will revitalize marriage. With the current divorce rate at 51 percent, anything would be an improvement. If the government of Ontario will take things slow, they won't just provide equal rights for gays, they'll also end up fixing a dilapidated institution, increase the property value and make it a place everyone wants to live in. Michael Alvear is the author of "Men Are Pigs But We fove Bacon" and can be reached at mictiael@meiirpicjs.cc. Vykts^WatchOatfor tyAbsenBechdd ihe canolio/ure www .Vy 1« sTo Va tchOu ttor.com
File Name uhlib_31485329_n1183_013.jpg