This gay marriage thing. Bertie Ahern says that he’d be wary of a divisive referendum on the issue, but I’m not convinced that the constitution needs to be changed at all to permit it. He’s just taking the path of least resistance. Fair enough, that’s the mark of the man. He does what his voters expect of him.

Extending marriage to include same-sex couples would not undermine or attack it as a hallowed constitutionally-protected institution, it would strengthen it, at a time, arguably, when it could do with strengthening. For those who endeavour to form life-long partnerships, being married supports them in many ways. When people go through a bad time in relationships, if they are married, there are more reasons – legal, financial, social, spiritual, institutional – why they might be persuaded to batten down the hatches and work to resolve their conflicts, as opposed to jumping ship at the first lurch. Those who do succeed in navigating choppy seas or enduring the doldrums together over a long time, often come out richer and wiser and more secure in themselves. Having a sturdy boat helps, and I would see marriage as being the strongest of relationship vessels.
This matters especially when there are children around. Marriage of course is not a panacea for relationship wounds, and certainly there is nothing worse than being trapped in a miserable marriage with an incompatible person, especially when the kids are young. But, seeing the love and kindness that is emanating from my parents’ 44-year-old marriage at the moment, and knowing the storms that they have been through along the way, the only conclusion to be drawn is that it’s been worth it, for them. And I know it’s true for many more. On all sorts of levels, marriage can bring out the best in people. Although, you are more likely to be murdered by your spouse than a stranger. But let’s not spoil the mood, just yet.
As I’ve written before, I’d like that choice to marry. Even though it seems unlikely for me at the moment, I do believe it is unfair that, should I choose to embark on a serious, life-long relationship with someone, I would not have the protection of a marriage to bolster its chances of long-term success, just like anyone else. Surely it’s in society’s best interests to want this for me and all of its citizens? If marriage has such a special place in the constitution, it should be open to all.
Married couples do not automatically have a right to adopt, they have a right to apply to adopt, which is different. The interests of the child are always paramount, and if a couple is not deemed suitable to bring up children, then they do not get approval. It’s as simple as that, in a field that is highly complex. The sex of the couple does not matter. The orientation of the adoptive parents doesn’t matter even now, as single people can, and do, adopt children. I am not eligible to be an adoptive parent, not because I am gay, but because I am too old. I missed the boat on that one. Time and time again, studies have shown that children reared by same-sex couples are just as well-adjusted as those raised by heterosexual couples. Indeed, as accidental pregnancies are near-impossibilities in same-sex relationships, the psychological trauma of being unwanted is unlikely to be visited on those children.
I believe that marriage in Ireland will be extended to include gay people, because I think that the High Court challenge by Katherine Zappone and Ann Louise Gilligan, who are asking that their Canadian marriage be recognised in Ireland, will succeed next year. I don’t think there will be outrage on the streets when it happens. There won’t have to be a “divisive” constitutional amendment. The elegance and simplicity of the argument for gay marriage will win out, against the doubters and the begrudgers. It will be important, and I will celebrate it. If Spain, which gave us the name de Valera, can do it, so can Ireland.
But the greatest threat to gay people at the moment in Ireland is not legal or constitutional. Nor am I convinced that introducing full equality under the law would lessen this threat, at least not in the short term. I’m talking of the violence that takes place frequently against (mostly) gay men at night. A 20-year-old Donegal man lost sight in one eye last month in a severe homophobic attack in Derry. Two men have been left unconscious on the ground, so badly beaten up they were hospitalized, in central Dublin over Christmas, with the prime suspect being known to the Guards. There were attacks last April and November in the same park, St Audeon’s. It appears things have got worse since I was attacked by a gang in September 2002 in Aungier St, after leaving the George; but I know someone else was attacked in that same spot, under similar circumstances, before me. This is homophobia at its most dangerous and life-threatening: sustained, pre-meditated, planned assaults. But this doesn’t appear to be of concern to the general Irish media, as far as I can see – I can’t find a mention of these attacks in the Irish broadsheets, nor of the recent public appeal by the Guards for witnesses and other victims to come forward. (If you can help, it’s never too late, my own experience of the Guards when I was beaten up was excellent, and I’d encourage anyone to talk to them.)
There are different models of social change. I think the law matters enormously, as I know what being criminalized, subject to life imprisonment for having sex, was like. It was profoundly affecting, and both depressed and radicalised me. Following that logic right through, I won’t be content until the law of the land accepts and protects my equality. I left Ireland in 1993 still a criminal in the eyes of Irish law, and when I move back later this year I hope and trust it wont be long before the last, logical step to full equality will be taken.
But we are nowhere near tackling the real problems that Ireland faces. Ireland is a savage place, and as “we” get richer the gap between rich and poor is becoming a chasm. In particular, we are clueless about Irish male psychology, about what drives these men to such hatred and violence. It’s about time we paid attention. It’s easier to argue for a change in the law (this is not to diminish the efforts of those tireless advocates for reform for one second) but it’s far more difficult to get involved at grassroots level on the estates and in the cities where gangs roam at night, and to go into the schools where contempt and ignorance festers, to talk to the social workers and the community workers and the guards and the parents and the lads themselves, to try to identify where the problems lie and what can be done about them. Jailing them after they’ve beaten another queer senseless is too little, too late.
Yes, it will make a difference when kids in national school are taught that when they grow up they can marry a man or a woman, depending on who they love more. That’s the sort of equality I believe in. But when you’ve got kids who learn the language of violence from an early age, and when gang culture is tolerated due to fucked up parents or no community policing, or ineffective teachers not noticing or powerless to defuse the hate and envy that’s brewing, fancy bourgeois notions of equality are completely irrelevant. That sort of feral youth picks on any obvious lone target, queer, paki or chink, it really doesn’t matter as long as he gets the buzz of feeling powerful to obliterate his own insecurities and fears.