In the arena of queer rights, I can think of several issues more important to me than marriage: trans-bashing, safe sex education, religious intolerance, employment discrimination, adoption rights, hospital visitation, immigration laws, military provisions, internalized racism and so on. And yet, I work for the National Marriage Boycott, an organization that seeks to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) through grassroots organizing, and a pledge not to get married until we all can. Don’t get me wrong — the arguments for marriage equality are powerful. Same-sex couples are denied 1,138 rights as a result of discriminatory policy, among them social security pension, survivor benefits and medical decision-making. I am more interested in the rights themselves than the label “marriage.” So why do I support a boycott on marriage? It seems radical, unnecessary even. Perhaps we can go on supporting the heterosexual exclusivity of the institution while working for queer rights in other contexts.

And if social justice activism operated in a vacuum, I would wholeheartedly support that notion. Yet the fundamental nature of fighting for rights, or speaking up for marginalized communities, means that what plays out on a grand national scale affects every individual in that particular community. Marriage equality is no longer a battle over tax incentives or churches, but about real human lives. I am not totally satisfied that the queer rights movement has chosen to focus on marriage, which at its core is an overly traditional and dated institution. But such is the nature of current politics — and I will work with it. My friends, fellow activists and I will work within this framework because this is our best shot at raising public consciousness and telling queer youth everywhere that the world cares. Queer youth are over eight times more likely than their straight peers to attempt suicide, and many feel unsafe in their schools and neighborhoods. I contend that boycotting marriage, in this context, is not radical but an act of  fundamental compassion. This is not to say that I do not appreciate the sacrifice that straight allies make when they sign the marriage boycott pledge or wear an equality ring in support. I understand that marriage is a social institution with deep roots and one that carries a lot of cultural value, but is this pledge too outlandish when it can express kindness and build a support network?

With Valentine’s Day fast approaching, I ask that you think about the often commercialized, but well-intentioned manifestations of love that accompany this holiday and consider how pledging to boycott marriage can be another outlet for this love. It seems a contradiction in terms, but truly, by emphasizing connectedness, we better our social and political environments. And perhaps then Valentine’s Day can take on a more ideal meaning as an occasion rooted in social justice and compassion.

– Janani Balasubramanian ’12