Silverman Slams Marriage on 'The View'

  • The service having id "propeller" is missing, reactivate its module or save again the list of services.
  • The service having id "buzz" is missing, reactivate its module or save again the list of services.
Silverman Slams Marriage on 'The View'

When the ladies of The View asked Sarah SIlverman a marriage equality advocate if she is going to get married, she said she wouldn't because "It's like joining a country club that doesn't allow blacks or jews." Brilliant analogy, especially because, like a country club, the institution of marriage is something a lot of queers wouldn't want to join anyhow.

An awkward silence and weak applause follow her remark. Maybe it isn't that the audience disagrees with her, but that it doesn't even occur to them to think of the larger political implications of straights choosing to get married.

FYI, Charlize Theron is another celebrity who is vocal about her anti-marriage stance. Here she is talking about it on The View last November.

Is it hypocritical of allies to take advantage of the same privilege they claim to be against keeping gays out of? What do you think?



Comments [41]

SMBrown's picture

Did anyone else notice that

Did anyone else notice that later in her interview Sarah mentioned that Logo was largely responsible for saving her show?  Comedy Central slashed her budget 30% and Sarah said she would have had to go off the air rather than produce an inferior show.  So...I wouldn't be surprised if her overt support of gay marriage might have something to do with the financial support she received from Logo.  And I'm not being cynical, or saying that's a bad thing.  In fact, I think it's a very good thing when our community flexes its economic muscle...

karrr's picture

very true

economic muscles are SO important for any group trying to push an agenda

SMBrown's picture

Which is precisely why, I

Which is precisely why, I would add, VP charging for Premium service is an important step for the lesbian community.  Money talks.

Grace Moon's picture

i've been thinking about this ... a lot

leveraging our collective power.

Its one thing to leverage our voices and another to leverage our economic power. right now lesbians don't seem to have economic power.

I do want to point out LOGO is owned by Mtv which is owned by Viacom, so while the management of LOGO is queer their ultimate ownership is not. they too have to answer to the suits at the top. I might add  extension ae is owned by LOGO, owned by Mtv, Owned by Viacom. so ultimately any money they make goes back into the corporation and not necessarily into the community at large.

 

tweet tweet @gracemoon

SMBrown's picture

Interesting

Ah....thanks for the info.  I should have known in this age of the mega-conglomerates that Logo wouldn't be standing alone as its own entity....

Vitality's picture

Economic power

I truly believe that the gay community could have significant economic power and leverage - I may be making vast generalisiations and bias - that I think in general they are intelligent, political,  self aware individuals that have the capacity to make a lot of their lives despite societal obstacles. Many are "choosing' to not have children until later in life, if at all and thus avoid the subsequent economic drain and effect on career advancement prospects. Working mothers often face as much if not more prejudice in the workplace and are overlooked for promotion because their loyalties are perceived as split. Whilst this often far from a choice - it does mean that DINKY's ( double income no kids yet) have an enviable economic position and thus leverage.

I think what we often fail to do is invest  in the community. It may be an even vaster generalisation but a lot of Gay people I know - really know how to spend that disposable income rather than invest it in the community by supporting ventures or publications etc.

I won't necessarily use the premium members features of Mate  - but I think it is important to support Velvet Park - it would be such a poorer world if it became no longer viable. It is easy to take for granted things that hold up the community without realising wihtout support they may not be sustainable.

Pat Lewis's picture

It would be nice if all of us

It would be nice if all of us intelligent, political, self-aware queers could also benefit from the same tax breaks and benefits that straights get when filing taxes! That way we could invest more money into our community!

Pat

Vitality's picture

I am sorry

As a Brit I have no idea about this we have a much more egalitarian tax system - all the married couples allowances went out a long time ago - but we do have quite powerful queers in government.  It is disgusting that such inequality is institutionalised - but there are a lot of gay couples with large amounts of disposable income that could have a lot of economic leverage if they were to apply it.

Steph's picture

Very nice to see another Brit

Very nice to see a fellow Brit in the hood!! Smile

Vitality's picture

Hello

I sent you a note  a while back on Mate to the same effect. I love this site because sexuality is just part of who we are it is great to have a place that combines that with politics and culture. I am missing a great Pride event in Norwich this weekend because of a stupid cold !

Steph's picture

I never received that note so

I never received that note so apols for my lack of response!
Yes, agreed - I learn so much on this site.
I am slumped in frontof the telly reading the paper with one eye on the rugby! Hope you feel better soon.

Vitality's picture

You sound like

a Beatrix Potter character - peering out from behind the paper with one eye - was it Mr Todd the fox who had designs on Jemimas eggs?

Steph's picture

Ha ha!! I've never been

Ha ha!! I've never been compared to a Beatrix P character before!!

karrr's picture

cha ching!

cha ching!

karrr's picture

curious about this payment thing

"I won't necessarily use the premium members features of Mate  - but I think it is important to support Velvet Park"

 

I think it's important to support vp too, but there needs to be a better reason than just charity--if i was going to do that, maybe i'd throw $5/month at lamda legal. maybe a better feature package for premium members. i guess it's difficult making up rules for this kind of stuff, because paying for online networking is kind of against the grain with all the free sites out there. but the bills have to be paid somehow, and if you're not selling ad space, then the burden would have to rely on the users i suppose.

Vitality's picture

User support

I have so much respect for Grace and her team - they are ask for so little but provide so much  - I have no idea how VP runs financially - it is probably a lot of vocation on their parts. I think we should pay for what is worthwhile or it will end up like consumer telly where only populist sites can run well and have an influence. You seem an extraordinarily intelligent person  so I know you will have thought about this -what do you think about gay economic leverage?

karrr's picture

above i said that i really

above i said that i really think that economic power is really important for any group who wants to push an agenda. that being already said, my point of view comes from that of a small business owner's and i am very scrupulous with my money. i think that unique marketing and services are very important, and no doubt grace and the others haven't worked their butts off on this site, i just don't like charity appeals when it comes down to running a business. i feel like there's a lot of businesses who run things with either green energy or good social values and even though i commend them for making those choices, i'm not n e c e s s a r i l y going to economically support what they are doing. i believe you need an exceptional product to get that extra dime from me. 

new belgium is a good example of this. i think that for the price category they have an exceptional beer, and i pay a little extra for their beers in return. but unknown to many people, new belgium has green and sustainable business practices, yet they don't push this fact. they don't say that i should buy their beer because it's supporting the green business movement--they simply have a small category on their website about it--they tell me that i should buy their beer because it's supremely tasty beer with quality ingredients.

karrr's picture

i guess this is in reply to

i guess this is in reply to specifically vp. i won't use the extra features, so i don't see why i should pay for something i'm not going to use.

Julia Watson's picture

Hi Karrr, That is a valid

Hi Karrr,

That is a valid point, so thanks for bringing it up! That said, consider this: The money Vp will make from the subscriptions to Mate is what will allow us to keep churning out the free content (blogs, videos, forums, etc) that you and our other readers enjoy. We're not owned by a big corporation like many other queer media sites are; we're just a handful of queer ladies who are passionate about lesbian culture, lesbian media, and the community we've built here on this site. That means that for the past year we've been running on blood, sweat, tears, caffeine and (in Moonie's case) loans to keep this place up and running, and that just can't go on forever. For better or worse, we've reached that tipping point.

What Moon and many other folks have explained in the threads dealing specifically with the new payment system bears repeating here. It comes down to the problem all new media is facing: if people aren't willing to pay for the content they enjoy accessing online, that content eventually becomes unsustainable. It costs $$ to employ the writers, editors, copyeditors, designers and developers required to keep a site like this going and growing.

So in order to keep access to the blogs, video content and forums free and make Vp sustainable, we've created Vp Mate and will be charging for access to some of the more advanced dating features. Some folks who will buy subscriptions will do so because they want to use those dating features, and others will do it just because they want to support this site and the work that goes into keeping it going. That's up to each person individually.

I hope this addresses your concerns. If you have any questions, please don't be shy about asking!

karrr's picture

thanks for

thanks for your succinct response, julia

karrr's picture

oh, and don't worry, i'll

oh, and don't worry, i'll never be shy about asking Wink

Julia Watson's picture

Ha! Good. Just know that

Ha! Good.

Just know that we're not asking for charity here. We're selling a product. We're just trying to be creative with how we go about selling it so that it remains accessible to everybody who wants to be here.

karrr's picture

het allies marrying

according to theory that "you can't be against something you are participating in," it does indeed deem those married allies hypocritical. but a logical extension of this debate is: is it hypocritical for gays to get married (in the permitting places, naturally) because not every gay couple in the world can get married? 

if i wanted to marry my current lover and used the logic that i would not marry until everybody had the legal right to marry, not to sound, erm, anti-hopeful, but honestly, some places in the world would be making steps for GLBT rights if they just decriminalized same sex relationships.

so again, what i'm trying to say is this argument that is so often  used against the hetero allies a double standard if we are proud of our gay friends for getting married in the legal areas in the usa?

Amy Nicole Miller's picture

That's a great topic, one

That's a great topic, one that I didn't delve into here but that I love talking about. I feel conflicted about how gay marriage factors into this whole marriage boycott debate. I agree with what Julia says- that homos marrying is in itself a political and progressive act. Personally, I wouldn't consider getting married to my partner unless it was legal for us (i.e. not a "civil union") as well as for everyone else in the United States. Maybe I just feel that way because I'm not all that into marriage in the first place. Perhaps if I lived in a state where it was legal, I would do it- at the very least, just for the benefits and rights awarded to married couples.

 

karrr's picture

i think the grey area of

i think the grey area of switching comes down to theory versus personal needs. when do personal needs (pleasing parents/being traditional, health insurance/spousal benefits, tax cuts, legalities of sharing children, etc, etc--general ease at moving through society both litigiously and socially) become slightly more important then the philosophy/theory of the solidarity in the marriage movement?

Julia Watson's picture

That's a good point, but at

That's a good point, but at the same time, I feel like gay couples getting married (with or without the legal sanction of their government) is inherently (sometimes, quite accidentally) an act of political and cultural defiance of homophobia and queer oppression. I think more gay families publically celebrating their love and committment = more ignorant heteros being forced to grapple with old prejudices and myths about what it means to be gay. And that's always a good thing.

Tex's picture

Excellent point....

Excellent point....

Twitter Time @kdhales

Grace Moon's picture

OMG

love her, what a good clip.        

tweet tweet @gracemoon

Joanne Robertson's picture

.

.

Amy Nicole Miller's picture

isn't it?

I got very frustrated with Jessica Valenti (of feministing.com) last year because she always blogs/speaks about equal marriage for gays yet blogged incessantly about her own wedding, even posting pics on feministing of it. When called out in comments, she got very defensive, understandably so- because it's a very personal issue, one that she debated about frequently.
My point is that she made a personal choice to get married and justified it to herself and her readers. But I think that posting the wedding pics crossed the line. I felt like that was really rubbing it in the readers' faces. On one hand she says it's personal and not something she feels the need to defend publicly, but she was putting out there herself, via her blog. There is definitely some hypocrisy there.

rovermom's picture

But at the same time, can you

But at the same time, can you not blame her? I mean, we all know, well quite a few of us know, that at some point in a relationship, marriage is the very next step in it.

 

And the longing to go to the next step and be in the celebration - the unity that comes by going through the door of marriage. It's not right that gays are excluded from legal marriage. At all.

But, it does not mean gays CAN NOT go through the marraige door and celebrate in unity. We just don't get the all inclusive package at the marriage club, like heteros do.

 

I know if anyone here could legally marry their wife today, they would. I don't blame Jessica, or any other marriage equality activist, for succombing to the power of love.

But anyone who stands with us, by marriage abstinance, THANK YOU...you are much stronger then most.

Tex's picture

Not arguing with you....

cause you know how I feel about this marriage thing....after defending it and losing didn't change my feelings either. But, I don't necessarily think getting married is the logical next step in any relationship. I think feeling that it's the next step is the pressure from the outside world....pressure for making it the next step when people are not ready for that step. I truly think that's the main reason 50% of marriages end in divorce. Couples think they have to commit to marriage. More and more marriage is reverting back to the business contract status it was created for in the first place. Ever wonder what would happen to the institution of marriage if our government initiated a federal flat tax?

Twitter Time @kdhales

rovermom's picture

I'm talking about those who

I'm talking about those who have been together for years and who are very much in love...who come that step as couple.

Marriage isn't for everyone or for all couples. Too many people take it up like a challenge, a game, a certain rite of passage to be accepted. And yet, those are good reasons if works. Marriage seems to be a step in becoming an adult, and legitimacy.

Marriage is everything possible between people.

If I could add all my relationships up, they wouldn't add to 2 years...I've had enough time on my hands to watch other relationships grow and fold.

Who am I to say who should or shouldn't marry? Who am I to say anyone should or shouldn't celebrate their union?

Julia Watson's picture

Last quarter one of my

Last quarter one of my classmates wrote a first person narrative piece about being a straight ally who campaigned for LGBT rights as an undergrad at her college. In a discussion about her piece, somehow we got on the topic of her being married and she admitted that, both in retrospect and even now, it had never even occured to her to question that she could get married and her gay friends couldn't, much less to choose to wait to get married until everybody had that legal right.

I found that both sad and frustrating.

 

Amy Nicole Miller's picture

i'm a moron

My reply to you is above Smile

Tex's picture

Bottom to top morons....

my bottom always ends up on the top too.....how do you stop that?

Twitter Time @kdhales

Not2Taem's picture

Rotate!

Don't worry, Texy; its good to rotate positions now and then.  Tongue

Grace Moon's picture

its a bug

and I'm not sure what its from?

because it doesn't happen all the time. Its kind of random.

If anyone can figure out what triggers the reply to the bottom comment going to the top gets to figure out why Toyota cars accelerate when they aren't supposed to. apparently it ain't the floor mats.

tweet tweet @gracemoon

Amy Nicole Miller's picture

It only happens to me when I

It only happens to me when I accidentally type my comment in at the bottom of the page and submit it (which makes it go to the top), instead of clicking 'reply' directly under the person's comment.

Not2Taem's picture

Been there

and done that. I'm also thinking it is human error.  Oups

Julia Watson's picture

Yeah, I think that's the only

Yeah, I think that's the only time it ever happens to me, too.