A Speech on Love

 

I spent this past weekend in rural Vermont, attending the wedding of one of my best friends from college. While I don't fully approve of the location (almost two hours from the nearest major airport and with no cell reception), I absolutely approve of the coupledom.

One of the "events" at the wedding was, interestingly enough, a speech competition (the groom is a speech and debate coach at the high school he teaches at). The assigned topic was on "love". Here is the speech I gave which -- brag alert -- won the competition. You can feel free to steal it in your own wedding toast:

* * *

When [the groom] told me that we would have a speech competition on the topic of "love", I was confused. Why love? It's the most boring part of a tennis match! It literally means "nothing"!

But then I realized that obviously, a speech and debate coach wouldn't create a competition around an easy topic. He wanted us to work in rougher grass and harder clay. The true challenge would be to take something as mundane and meaningless as "love" -- the part of a tennis match when nothing has happened yet -- and see if we could nonetheless create a speech that was moving and meaningful and impactful.

So this is my attempt to craft a meaningful, moving speech about love, the part of a tennis match where nobody has scored and nothing has happened yet.  

Love is expectation. 

Love is anticipation.

It is the tingle on the edge of your seat as you await what is to come.

Love can be disappointing, when only one player still has it and the other has moved far beyond. And love can be sad, when the match is over and there is no more love to be had.

But love can also be thrilling. Some of history's greatest rallies have occurred over love -- service and return, athletic lunges and beautiful shots -- the moments that make us feel alive and remind us why we play the game.

And ultimately, love is a constant. No matter what happens, after every game, set, match, we return back to love. Love is the beginning. It is the part where nothing has happened, yet. And so it means that you have everything still in front of you.

Marriage is a great beginning, and so it is only fitting that it starts at love-love. So here's to love-love, and the great match that's been made, and the great match that will continue to be played forward, grounded and returning to that basic and elemental feature -- of a tennis match -- of love.

I'm assuming the Post will be apologizing for Richard Cohen shortly?

Today’s GOP is not racist, as Harry Belafonte alleged about the tea party, but it is deeply troubled — about the expansion of government, about immigration, about secularism, about the mainstreaming of what used to be the avant-garde. People with conventional views must repress a gag reflex when considering the mayor-elect of New York — a white man married to a black woman and with two biracial children. (Should I mention that Bill de Blasio’s wife, Chirlane McCray, used to be a lesbian?) This family represents the cultural changes that have enveloped parts — but not all — of America. To cultural conservatives, this doesn’t look like their country at all.

A different sort of gag might be appropriate for Richard Cohen when he thinks he wants to talk about race.

Also, his assessment of current "convention"

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

A Sanctified Institution

Immigrant to America? Want citizenship? Forget things like the pesky DREAM Act! Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) has a better recommendation: just marry an American! After all, if marriage is kind of like buying a cow (which I'm given to understand that it is), why not buy American?

In reality, Jezebel pretty much says what I want to say:

if Kyl actually encouraging marriages for citizenship someone should let him know that's a Federal felony. So much for the sanctity of marriage, hypocrites. And even if marriage is a good option for someone, it isn't a totally safe bet, anyway — there are plenty of couples where one of the partners is found guilty of something like an expired visa and are given penalties that range from years to a lifetime. There are just so many issues here, and I have a feeling I'm not even scratching the surface.

I would add that -- criminal liability aside -- there is something rather bloodless about telling someone they should marry, not for love, not because of true connection, but in order to access a legislative privilege. If this is the GOP's big plan to win back Latinos, well, best of luck.

Gingrich's Infidility Saves His Bacon

Newt Gingrich refrained from signing a conservative Iowa group's "Marriage Vow" pledge, probably because he recognized that -- as a prominent serial adulterer -- he'd be a national laughingstock if he did (well, more so). Gingrich instead gingerly offered to help "sharpen" the language so he could sign.

But fortunately for Gingrich, the delay probably evaded a serious gaffe. Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum -- who already signed the pledge, are now scrambling after folks pointed out the pledge implied that family dynamics for Black children were better under slavery than they are today (Robert George: "Black unemployment? Also low then, too!"). The specific claim -- that "a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household" than a Black child today -- is, in addition to being offensive on face (as the "two-parent household" here typically involved a slave woman and the master who raped her), also wrong on the facts.

Bachmann's damage control included a claim she didn't endorse the slavery portion of the four-page document (which was part of the preamble), wrongly explaining that in the antebellum south marriage was common and recognized amongst slaves, as well as a campaign release telling us that Rep. Bachmann "believes that slavery was horrible and economic enslavement is also horrible". That's definitely going to extinguish the fire alright.

So yeah: Lucky Gingrich.

Marital Troubles

United States Representative Kurt Schrader, of Oregon's 5th congressional district, is getting a divorce. Why is this interesting? Because Schrader is the fifth straight representative of the OR-5 to divorce while in office. How many representatives has the Oregon 5th possessed since its creation? Five. So the next time you see a politician bowing out of a race in that district for "family reasons", give it a little more credence than normal.

New Rule Roundup

Not eating lunch today was a mistake.

* * *

In the wake of the NHL barring Detroit Red Wings fans from throwing Octopuses onto the ice after goals, Down Goes Brown offers up some other new hockey rules.

Obviously this legal interpretation isn't going anywhere, but still amusing: Florida accidentally outlaws sex. Kind of like how Texas accidentally barred marriage.

TNC on how all Black people are scary Black people.

Interesting documentary on an Israeli doctor working to save the life of a Palestinian child in the midst of Cast Lead. Apparently it is getting rave reviews.

Hamas is willing to accept a Palestinian state on 1967 borders, but will never recognize Israel, because that would imply giving up the right to a Palestinian state ... beyond 1967 borders.

I do approve of Tolkien permanently transforming elves from midgets to lithe giants.

Idaho Eyes a Ban on Transgender Marriage?

A panel of Idaho Republicans want the state to rewrite its marriage laws to hold that it is "a bond between a 'naturally born' man and woman". (Via). Part of me hopes that this does pass, just because I think that it may actually be more vulnerable to challenge than typical laws "merely" prohibiting gay marriage. Because the law at least potentially prevents transgender individuals from marrying anybody -- man or woman -- it doesn't even have the (facially ridiculous) defense that it doesn't exclude anyone from marriage (just their preferred partner). If that's the case, it is tough to see it standing against constitutional challenge. And that, in turn, would be one hell of a precedent.

Then again, maybe I'm being too indulgent in formalist fantasies. Transgender rights are still pretty controversial, and I suspect a reviewing court, particularly in Idaho, will search long and hard for a "neutral" reason for upholding this law too. Best to not push my luck.

The Divorced Virgin

This story about a women who divorced after five years of marriage, still a virgin throughout it all (she had waited until marriage, and then found that she and her husband could not have intercourse) is quite compelling reading. But it also bolsters my sense that abstinence until marriage fundamentally is not a good policy, and in fact is really short-sighted.

To be clear: Anybody who chooses to be abstinent has the right to that choice, for as long as they choose to make it, without any shame or judgment from me (or anyone else). But the case for an over-arching normative commitment to abstinence seems to rest on extremely shaky ground. Start with the fact that it seems to nearly always diverge into slut-shaming -- indeed, it's difficult to see how an argument that abstaining is morally preferable to partaking could avoid such an insinuation. But beyond that, abstinence seems to rest on this mythos that sex is easy and comes naturally, and that there is no such thing as sexual compatibility (or lack there of). Neither of these things are true.

Good sex takes practice, and while there's certainly no shame in learning the ropes (so to speak) with a single partner, I think many people are deluded into thinking that first time is going to be absolutely perfect, and if it isn't, something is wrong with them. Not really -- the odds are much higher that y'all simply don't know what you're doing; with practice and experience, things usually (hopefully) improve.

That being said, some folks simply aren't sexually compatible with each other. There can be physiological issues, but there also can be pairings where one partner really likes or wants something that the other is uncomfortable with. This is the sort of thing that I imagine is worth knowing prior to tying the knot. I think it is qualitatively better when newlyweds already know that they share enough sexual proclivities in common that they can have a good sex life, and I think it is qualitatively better when each partner in a relationship knows themselves well enough and has enough experience to know what their own proclivities are. Simply assuming that because all the other pieces fit, this one will too, is a recipe for unhappiness. At the very least, it's a pretty substantial roll of the dice.

What we should be teaching young people, I think (and alas, it will never happen), is simply this: It is not shameful to feel pleasure. What you do with your own body is your own business. What you do with a partner's body is yours and their business, and we should teach people to treat their partners with respect and view the act of being with a partner as predicated on that respect and mutual reciprocity. If you decide you don't want sex, that's fine, and if you decide you do want it (and have a willing partner), that's fine too, and if you change your mind at any point in the process, that's fine as well. The decisions you make in this arena should be based on your own desires and the safety of others, not an aversion to social shaming or stigma.

Story of the Weekend

My throat is scratchy from lots of yelling.

My body is sore from lots of dancing.

My face is burning from lots of sun.

And I'm exhausted because I got virtually no sleep.

It was a fabulous wedding celebration. Congratulations (again) Tim and Wendy!

Weiner Gets Married

New York Democratic Representative Anthony Weiner is reportedly engaged, to none other than top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

One gets the distinct feeling that the far-right Israel National News won't be sending flowers to the wedding, given its opinions of interfaith marriage (Abedin is Muslim, Weiner is Jewish). They spend most of their time wondering how Weiner's fiance will affect his staunchly pro-Israel stance. I am curious what makes them say that Ms. Abedin is "conservative" (one would think she wouldn't be working for Clinton, then, right?).

But who cares what the Israeli far-right has to say about American nupitals. I can give my congratulations. May they have a long and happy marriage!

Secondary Objective

There is something quite unseemly about targeting a political opponent's spouse as a retaliatory measure when they vote for a bill you dislike. I'm not sure, however, if it is more or less distasteful when said spouse is a fellow elected official who took the "right" position on the bill you're complaining about.

Unlucky Eight

A Saudi judge has reaffirmed his previous ruling allowing the marriage of an eight-year old girl. The case had returned to him after an appellate court remanded the case. His reasoning was that the girl's mother, who brought the case on her daughter's behalf, had no standing to sue since she was not the girl's legal guardian (that would be the father, who arranged the marriage to settle a debt and is separated from his wife). The judge said that the girl herself could petition for divorce once she reached puberty, and in the mean time the man was forbidden to have sex with his "wife".

A Picture of a Marriage

This picture, of Hillary Clinton being sworn in as Secretary of State, comes from this CNN article detailing her first overseas trip to Asia. But that's not what I want to focus on.

Look at Bill. Look at how he looks at his wife. There is tremendous pride there. And tremendous love.

The Clinton's have had a turbulent marriage, to be sure. But I'm reminded of something Mike Huckabee said about them:

Bill Clinton and Hillary went through some horrible experiences in their marriage because of some of the reckless behavior that he has admitted he had. I am not defending him on that, it’s indefensible. Just let’s not let it get lost on us that they kept their marriage together. They raised a magnificent daughter. Chelsea is truly a delightful human being…She’s polite, thoughtful, intelligent and everything you would hope a daughter to be. But they kept their marriage together. And a lot of the Republicans who have condemned them and talk about their platform of family values, interestingly, didn’t keep their own families together. Give Bill and Hillary Clinton credit for doing something we say they should have done and that is hold their marriage together in spite of enormous trials.

I don't believe, as I imagine Huckabee does, that divorce is always a bad thing. Sometimes, marriages don't work out. Sometimes, it's better for both persons if a couple splits. Sometimes, it doesn't matter if it's better for "both" persons or not -- a marriage can poisonous to one party, and they deserve the right to leave if that's the case.

However. The Clinton marriage has always been presented as two people who could barely stand each other, going through the motions to nurse their respective egomaniacal ambitions. I'm sorry, but I just don't see it. I don't. I don't see them as a couple that should have split up, and is only staying together for appearances sake.

Everything I've observed about Bill and Hillary Clinton together has demonstrated a couple that is fiercely loyal to one another, that has genuine affection for one another, and that will back the other one up no matter what. Bill Clinton's behavior was often inexcusable, but they worked beyond it, because I really think they love each other. Sometimes Bill was a little aggressive on the campaign trail -- more than I'd like -- but that's because he wanted to do everything he could to help his wife in her effort to become President, and sometimes passion makes one a little hotter than one perhaps should be. As an Obama supporter, I can forgive that.

The Clinton marriage, as I see it, is a relationship of two extremely smart, extremely committed public servants who have gone through a lot together, seen some successes, made some mistakes, and through it all, still support each other and care about each other in a deep and fundamental way.

I like that in a marriage.

SEE ALSO: Hillary Clinton's swearing-in ceremony.

One More Football Followup

After this post and this post, a friend of mine sent me this article from ESPN, reporting that being in an interracial marriage is a barrier to Black coaches seeking top jobs in college football:

- Florida Gators defensive coordinator Charlie Strong believes race is a reason he hasn't been offered a head-coaching job during his 25 years in college football, a newspaper reported Tuesday.

Strong, a 48-year-old black man, shook his head affirmatively when an Orlando Sentinel reporter asked him if his interracial marriage was a factor in getting passed over for jobs, including one at a Southern school a few years ago. Strong, whose wife is white, said he heard that too many times for it to be rumor.

"Everybody always said I didn't get that job because my wife is white," Strong said at media day Monday, as the Gators prepare to face Oklahoma in the FedEx BCS National Championship Game. "If you think about it, a coach is standing up there representing the university. If you're not strong enough to look through that [interracial marriage], then you have an issue."

The same article reports that Turner Gill, the Buffalo coach who was the primary subject of my last few posts, also is married to a White woman.

Essentially Married

French Court: Virginity not an "essential quality" for a bridge. Good to know.

UPDATE: Bride! BRIDE! God I'm an idiot. And here I am, trying to parse the double entendre behind PG's comment, when the real solution is (as usual) "David's a moron".

Civil Rights Roundup: 07/16/08

Your daily dose of civil rights and related news

Is our natural inclination when seeing others in distress indifference?

Montgomery County, Maryland just became America's first jurisdiction to pass a law protecting the workplace rights of nannies.

Immigrant students in college (here legally, I might add), face severe harassment and discrimination on campus. The focus, unfortunately (since I rather like the state), is on Somali students at the University of Minnesota.

The US might finally lift its ban on HIV-positive immigrants.

The Wall Street Journal has another one of those really dumb editorials trying to claim the GOP is the better party on race because it historically was anti-slavery. Everyone knows the facts on this: In the 19th and early 20th century, Republicans were primarily the civil rights party, and Democrats were primarily against it. Starting with FDR, the Democrats began moving left-ward on race issues, causing a division with the southern, Jim Crow wing of the party. Eventually, those people left for the GOP, who welcomed them with open arms. And that's where we're at today. This is not that complicated.

McCain waffles clarifies his stance on gay adoptions.

Massachusetts will allow out of state gay couples to marry after repealing a 1913 law originally designed to limit interracial marriages.

Black and Hispanic state troopers are suing the state police force, alleging discrimination and cronyism.

Facebook ads for women basically just tell them they're fat and ugly. My girlfriend noticed this, which is why I'm currently "in a relationship" with a person of indeterminate gender.

Women, take note: You wouldn't want your employer think about your vast amounts of experience if that means keeping your hair gray.

BBC: Muslim woman denied citizenship in France, on the grounds that she is insufficiently assimilated (actually, that does strike me as very French).

The Justice Department has filed a discrimination suit against a condo association accused of refusing to sell to a Black couple with children.

I blogged on this topic once before, but now the NYT takes it on: child brides resisting their forced marriages in Yemen (and winning too!).

Finally, who told this "joke"?

Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, ‘Where is that marvelous ape?’

Why, Republican Presidential candidate John McCain, that's who!

It Could Be!

Eugene Volokh makes two points off of this picture. First, if you look at the interior of the venue, it looks like the couple got married in Hell. True. Second, he says that he likes the "non-traditional" wedding dress of the bride, but notes that they're generally worn by folks on their second or subsequent marriage.

Inexplicably, he doesn't connect these two points. Who arrives at your wedding when you engage in sinful behavior like divorce? Could it be....Satan? Apparently!

Wedding Celebration

Everybody congratulate Lauren, founder of Feministe, now blogging at Faux Real, because she's getting married today!

I also congratulate her on being a damn fine blogger, but that I can do any day.

Playing Both Sides

This article on how more Black women are dating White men is quite interesting. I have no problem with interracial dating whatsoever, but in the Black community there has been noticeable tension from Black women that successful Black men are marrying White women. Black women, by contrast, have faced a variety of internal and external pressures to stay within the race. This asymmetry was deeply unfair, and I approve of social barriers being lifted so that our dating standards are equitably distributed among the sexes.

It Takes a Child to Raise a Village

These Bangladeshi children are serious ballers:

Classmates of a 13-year-old Bangladeshi school girl due to enter a forced marriage have united to stop the ceremony going ahead, police say.

Around 50 pupils in the town of Satkhira took to the streets to demand that Habiba Sultana's wedding be called off, they say.

Pupils even submitted a petition to police urging them to take action.
[...]
Police say that she was too frightened to protest.

When she told her friends about the impending wedding, they rallied round and urged her not to go ahead.

Parents of her friends contacted Habiba's father and tried to stop him from going ahead with the wedding.

Initially he ignored their protests, but changed his mind after the police were alerted and small protests were held outside the school.

Correspondents say that the stand of the schoolgirls has created a stir in the town.

You go, girls.

(Thanks to my pal J-Rod for the tip)