Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Seeing red: why John Pilger is wrong on marriage equality

By Rodney Croome - posted Wednesday, 23 May 2012

The American civil rights movement was a colourful but hollow distraction from the far more important issue of America's war in Vietnam, and that is why presidents Kennedy and Johnson supported it.

If you find this statement trite, offensive and wrong then you may react the same way when you read John Pilger's analysis of Barack Obama's support for same-sex marriage.

Pilger believes the Obama administration is attempting to divert attention from wars abroad and wealth disparity at home, and raise more money from Hollywood, by endorsing marriage equality.


He has no evidence for these links. His analysis also doesn't explain why Obama took so long to "evolve" on the issue and seems to have been moved to act by an unscripted endorsement of the issue by Joe Biden. 

Nor does Pilger allow for the fact that a cause can be right even if the motives of some of its supporters are less than pure, or just not the same as his. 

Pilger would probably respond by saying my comparison between black civil rights and same-sex marriage is unfair because in his words the latter is about "lifestyle liberalism". 

Such a casual dismissal of marriage equality is not just because Pilger doesn't believe marriage matters much. 

He believes marriage is part of the problem: "the rights historically associated with marriage are those of property: capitalism itself", he writes. "Bourgeois acceptability is not yet a human right."

Pilger's same-sex marriage blind spot is not uncommon among left-wingers his age. 


Many older lefties retain an outdated view of marriage as an instrument of male domination over women, the middle class's domination over workers and God's domination over us all.

They refuse to see that the institution has been reformed, at least in the west, so that women, workers and non-believers now have much more autonomy to decide how, when and if they wed, how they conduct their marriage (including whether or not they have kids), and if and when their marriage will end.

They refuse to acknowledge that it is precisely this change which has made same-sex marriage an issue: now marriage is a choice for the majority it makes sense to ask why isn't it a choice for the minority.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

13 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Rodney Croome is a spokesperson for Equality Tasmania and national advocacy group, just.equal. He who was made a Member of the Order of Australia in 2003 for his LGBTI advocacy.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Rodney Croome

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 13 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy