Coming Out of Left Field

Thursday, September 15, 2005

A retort to Travis

Just e-mailed to Representative Phil Travis, as a response to his quote in an AP story about yesterday's vote:


Dear Representative Travis,

I was rather intrigued by your recent statement that "The union of two women and two men can never consummate a marriage. It's physically impossible."

First, I am not quite sure what exactly you mean by "consummate". Merriam-Webster defines consummate as to "to make (marital union) complete by sexual intercourse". Without going into details, I can assure you that gays and lesbians, contrary to your statement, are in fact able to satisfy the requirements of this definition.

Second, although I am not intimately familiar with all the nooks and crannies of Massachusetts law nor with the legal history of the Commonwealth, I have not heard of any recent cases in which a marriage, either opposite-sex or same-sex, was annulled on the grounds of non-consummation. When I was married myself last year, neither my wife nor I were questioned about our ability to consummate, nor has anyone else we know who has gotten married in this state (either opposite-sex or same-sex). So I fail to understand what consummation would have to do with the legal aspects of marriage in Massachusetts.

Third, I fail to understand why this would concern you on a personal level. I am not in the habit of wondering what goes on in other people's bedrooms, and find such behavior unseemly when someone expresses such curiosity in normal conversation. To hear such a remark from someone in public office as part of a public debate about people's civil rights is extremely off-putting and offensive, and does nothing to help your cause.

In future, it would probably be better if you would confine your remarks to the merits or demerits of the case, rather than engaging in speculation that is, on many levels, absolutely unnecessary.




I doubt I'll get a response, but if I do I'll be sure to post it.

Technorati: , LGBT, marriage equality, Massachusetts

Very well articulated. Although a New York resident, I'm a Massachusetts native (not to mention a big homo and huge sox fan), so have been following developments with keen interest.

Don't underestimate the power of your email - Sen. Lees reversed his position on the gay marraige ban, citing the fact that he heard from over 7,000 of his constituents...though if you're looking to file something under the category of stating the obvious:

"Gay marriage has begun, and life has not changed for the citizens of the commonwealth, with the exception of those who can now marry," said state senator Brian Lees, a Republican who had been a cosponsor of the amendment.

Enjoy your site. Best, Sarah

Thanks. I doubt that Travis would change his position, seeing as he is one of the people supporting the ballot initiative that would outlaw everything, but it felt good to tell him what I thought.

One of my school friends and I turned our outrage at the latest Travis outrage into a little laugh fest at his expense.

RSLS: Sounds like we're back to W's description of marriage. *in baby voice* "You need a pee-pee and a hoo-hoo, or it's not a marriage.
Friend: And you have to use them. Together.
RSLS: Perhaps they should put a clause in the marriage license that you have to provide evidence of this within 1 month of marriage.
Friend: But how? Used condom?
RSLS: No, that wouldn't really prove it. Unless it had vaginal secretions on the outside, and the materials both inside and outside could be DNA matched to Party A and Party B.
Friend: Well, my girlfriend and I have a whole drawer full of pee-pees, and between us we've got two hoo-hoos, so I guess we're all set.
RSLS: *Cracks up in disbelief and awe that Friend would disclose this in normal conversational tones as the class is taking seats for Massachusetts Practice and Procedure.*


Post a Comment