Rant: Bi-National Same-Sex Couples in the US

You know those moments where you are surprised by your own ignorance, and then, simultaneous to that surprise, you are confused about what to do in the face of your revelation?

I'm totally having one of those moments.

I've know a handful of gay men who married American women (usually their fag hags) to get citizenship, but I always assumed that if it were legal for them to marry a man, and they did so, then they would have the same automatic green card and work permit privileges as a foreign woman marrying a man.

I was definitely wrong.

Not only can gays not marry almost anywhere in this country (which we already knew), but even if they could get married (eg: in Massachusetts), it would have no bearing on the immigration status of the non-resident partner, because marriage is managed at the state level, but immigration decisions are managed at the federal level.

It's *shocking* how easy it is for straight bi-national couples to get green cards for the non-resident partner. Take the example of the lovely couple whose civil ceremony I was the witness for a couple months ago. The husband is French, got his MBA at Yale, and now works in NYC (actually in New Jersey, but they live on the Upper West Side) and was given permanent residency through sponsorship by his company. His wife is Spanish and, prior to their marriage, was only allowed in the US on a tourist visa (not having company sponsorship and not yet permitted to work). I went with them to the city clerk's office and within minutes, literally, she was his wife and within a month would be given her green card and work permit.

I'm sure there are follow-up procedures and other hoops they'll have to jump through, but that's not the point. The point is: I have less rights *as an American citizen* to be joined by my foreign husband (fictional as he may be, at this point) than my French friend did to have his wife joing him in New York.

According to this page from about.com, there are sixteen countries that recognize the residency rights of same-sex bi-national couples: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE US?

You know, I was sitting in my Con Law class day before yesterday and feeling really lucky to be an American, not because I'm so in awe of our Constitution (I'm not familiar enough with the historical moment during which it came to be for me to be that impressed with it), but because there are VERY few places in the world in which I'd have all the opportunities that I have now.

Well I am a damn fool, because while there may not be a lot of places where I could have had the opportunities that I've had, here, there are other places.

I think a lot of us should be DONE with being believing that we're not allowed to complain about the US because it's unpatriotic and ungrateful since it's worse to be in Somalia.

Yes, it probably IS worse to be in Somalia, but I'm not sure I think it's worse to be in Belgium...I just don't. I don't feel like I have to be satisfied with the set of rights that I'm given, here, and I CERTAINLY don't feel like ANY of us should be satisfied with the ways in which religious interest groups are lobbying for policies that run contrary to the basic principles of separation of church and state that underpin the formation of our country.

The US does not deserve to have my taxes or my human capital or me representing it fabulously wherever I go with my passport.

I found this article on the subject to be quite sad (note how smart it was to open with a story about a Lesbian couple, since I think they seem less threatening on this issue -- their relationships tend to be seen as more enduring and legitimate, and women tend to be seen as less opportunistic than men in terms of marrying for citizenship).

One of the best parts is where a woman from Luxembourg (a country with the highest per-capita GDP in the world -- ie: she's NOT an economic migrant!), who moved to California to go to law school and be with her girlfriend, says: "When I first came to the U.S., I had all these ideas about what this country represents — equality and human rights. It’s not at all like that. It’s in the Constitution, yet it doesn’t mean anything if you’re gay." Her partner then says: "The message from the government to gays is clear: Pursue your happiness elsewhere. It’s your country or your love. What an embarrassment..."

Indeed, what an embarrassment. And this country has been an embarrassment for a variety of reasons that are not restricted to this issue.

Another good part, if startling for its imagery (my gut reaction was "this is an unfair comparison" and then I was like "Wait. No. It's actually a really valid comparison!"), is when one of the gay men says: "“If you’re in a bi-national gay relationship, you really realize you’re not worth shit in this country,” he said. “For a straight American to get married is every bit as immoral as eating at a restaurant that doesn’t serve black people.”

I guess I feel perhaps even one step more radical. I think that, not just for gay rights issues, but for ALL the things that are really broken in this country -- and all the ways in which our government refuses to fix them -- we should move. That's right. Pick up your shit and emigrate.

I have said for years, now, that what the US needs in order to be made more progressive is to feel the shock effects of the brain-drain that would occur if people just left. Now, I know not everyone is mobile, particularly many of the groups who are most discriminated against, but when I think about the economic might that fuels so much of the rest of the country coming from places like California and New York, I think it's despicable that these liberal rich power-houses are willing to fund the ill-conceived social and foreign policies of this country. Silicon Valley does not NEED to be in California. Wall Street doesn't NEED to be on Wall Street. What if they were in Vancouver and Toronto, instead?

If right-wing conservatives want to be satisfied to destroy our Constitution and founding principles (let alone their refusal to go BEYOND those principles to truly progressive liberality) then that's fine, but they should not get to use my name or my money to do it.

I hate the images perpetuated by US mass media and exported globally of female bodies. I hate that we are a country of global economic power that is astounding (EVERY time I see a statistic about how rich the US is compared to all of Europe combined, I'm stunned), and yet we are satisfied to have millions living in urban slums or rural shacks without proper access to health care or education. I hate it that the US has so consistently felt threatened by, and stood in the way of, the development of international human rights law. I hate it that most children do not get to have summers of bucolic relaxation (since most families do not own their homes, let alone a vacation home), and I hate it that most adults couldn't take the vacation to have that summer with their kids, anyway. I hate our country's obsession with celebrities, and I particularly hate the form that it takes (the Brits hounded Diana, but do you think they would have published photos of her vagina if she ever got out of the car awkwardly and her skirt came up too high? Do you think the Brits would have bought those photos if they'd been published? Would the BBC have talked about it?). I hate it that foreign language study is only for the academic elite, and I hate it that the financial burden of joining that elite is so huge. Finally, I hate it that my lover is not welcome here, and that so few people seem to understand why that is problematic for everyone's freedom.

VC