Time for Rights? Loving, Gay Marriage, and the Limits of Legal Justice
Time for Rights? Loving, Gay Marriage, and the Limits of Legal Justice
Chandan Reddy, 76 Fordham L. Rev. 2849 (2008)
(An excerpt is below. To view the full text, please use Westlaw, Lexis, a law library or alternative source.)
It is important to note here that the desire to remember Loving at this historical moment in the interest of furthering the gay marriage movement is ultimately circumscribed by that interest. This interest first analogizes the discursive productions of sexuality and race in the law and, in the broader social formation for which this law is devised, reduces and effaces the specificity of each production as well as their linked and relational coproductions, as Halley and Somerville each argue. Somerville, like Darrel Hutchinson and Mary Eaton, reveals how this desire for the miscegenation analogy effaces and occludes gay, lesbian, and queer people of color as a compound class with distinct experiences of domination and subordination. These experiences, she explains, cannot be captured, comprehended, or articulated by prevailing legal and cultural epistemologies founded on so-called single issue oppression or suspect class subordination.
2 Comments
To whomever posted the snippet from the abstract: In plain language, what is the gist of their paper?
Based on the excerpt, the author argues that the methods and assumptions used to compare sexual orientation discrimination to racial discrimination are deficient and shortchange those who experience both kinds of discrimination.