Michael Lucas - CEO of the porn company Lucas Entertainment has posted footage from a recent debate at the Oxford Union on his website and it's been picked up by various porn blogs. Lucas - a law graduate and former porn actor was speaking in proposition of the motion 'This House Believes That the Gay Rights Movement Has Undermined Family Values'. The full speech is below. Annoyingly, I can't find out what the vote was so I'd welcome any info from people on that (I think the proposition was passed). Lucas makes some interesting and compelling points but he seems to send the audience to sleep - which given his speaking style is perhaps understandable. Although a porn CEO, Lucas with his celebrity friends (including the family friendly Graham Norton) is no doubt at the more 'acceptable' end of the spectrum. How would a porn CEO such as Paul Morris have gone down? Would such a figure even be invited?It might be surprising that I am arguing on the same side as Stephan Greene, whose views I despise. But in this case I am proud to be part of a movement that has undermined family values and continues to undermine them.
To me “family values” is a code word.
Here is what I think when I hear the term family values…. I think of family as “one size fits all”, the Model T of relationships, organized around the holy five: spouse, career, home, church and children, possibly including the occasional dog. I think of my native Russia where it is basically a requirement for a women to get married by the age of 23, which makes them forever neurotic, and insecure. I think of Clinton’s impeachment hearings — because he had an affair with an intern and not for passing “don’t ask, don’t tell”. And I think about many great politicians who lost their careers because of American hysteria over family values.
I also think about St Paul who said, “The husband is head of the wife”.
And we can never escape from hearing daily about family values of sons of Allah, about the treatment of Muslim women by their husbands. The Koran clearly said: “Admonish them to their couches and beat them.” As Borat concluded, ”in my country first is God, then man, horse, dog, then women, then rat”.
So what do the defenders of Family Values really defend, when they repeat endlessly “that the traditional family is the essential building block of traditional society?” They defend the traditional order of society.
This is where they clash with the gay rights movement. Gay rights are profoundly subversive of traditional society. They posit a new identity, which is not accounted for in most traditional societies. If gay identity becomes a possibility, then the straight identity becomes a matter of CHOICE and established Family Values become options rather than the “natural order.” That’s why they hate us so much: because we really do undermine their certainties.
We gay people offer CHOICE in the construction of our relationships, freedom and liberation, which is very attractive to straight people. Our lives challenge their certainties every day.
We gay people are broadening and redefining the values, which govern our relationships. That’s not to say that we don’t value family. But we love our partners because we have chosen them out of pure love — and not to meet the expectations of society.
We also prove that remaining single, with a family made of friends, is a viable option to experience love, caring, trust and commitment in a family of choice. One does not have to be in a relationship and can be happy without a partner; one does not have to have children in order to live a wonderful fulfilling life.
Worst of all, perhaps, for the sex-obsessed family values defenders, we undermine the sanctity of monogamy. Some gay couples chose to be monogamous, and others do not. And we have certainly proven that love for a partner is about far more than sexual exclusivity. We have proven that, monogamy is neither necessary nor sufficient when it comes to love and family. What’s required is something emotionally deeper and more profound.
Studies in the US conclude that three in four long-term, stable, committed gay couples have negotiated some form of open relationship. I think both choices are significant. A quarter has chosen to remain monogamous. And three quarters have chosen to base their relationship on trust and intimacy rather than sexual exclusivity. It’s the word “choice” that’s so subversive – Now, where is the choice, where is the room for negotiation according to traditional Family Values?
This is not to say that the gay movement stands for sex without limits, just like the reality of traditional family is not about monogamy. About half of all married women and 60% of all married men have cheated on their partners. (NOTE: Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy) — and so “family values” support norms that include lying about one’s sexual life. We challenge this by coming out of the closet not just about being gay but by aspiring to honesty about our sexual lives.
In fact family values are so artificial that they do not work for their own proponents:
Jim Bakker -head of PTL (Praise The Lord)-cheated on his wife Tammy Faye with his secretary.
Ted Haggard –evangelical preacher –had sex with a male escort while married.
Mark Foley: US representative sent sexually explicit e-mails and text messages to male pages.
Mark Sanford: South Carolina Governor married with children, who disappeared to continue affair with his mistress in Argentina.
Newt Gingrich: former Speaker of US House of Representatives; married three times; had an affair with women who would become his second wife while married to his first. Then had affair with a woman who would become his third wife while married to the second.
Iris Robinson: Northern Irish member of Parliament who cheated on her husband with 19 year old boy.
This list could go on forever.
And our relationships are more equal— there are no blueprints and no traditions, which determine the powers and economic arrangements between each other. Each couple has to develop and negotiate from scratch, what works for them. And again, there is the element of CHOICE, which strikes at the core of what traditional Family Values are all about.
Speaking of choice, the PACS in France and civil unions has been overwhelmingly embraced by straight couples who are seeking a legal framework for their relationships without resorting to marriage and the traditional baggage it carries. Something similar is happening in the U.S.: many cites and towns in the U.S. are allowing couples to register as “domestic partners.” Politicians are offering this to gays, as an alternative to “marriage.” One result has been that straight people are choosing to declare themselves ”domestic partners,” rather then getting married. As straight couples realize that there may be alternative arrangements available to them, family values rooted in marriage are being undermined.
So to my gay counterparts – don’t be so humble! Our fight produced a very attractive role model that scares our opponents to the point of hysteria; that’s why they are attacking us so vigorously. Sometimes those attacks become ugly and desperate. From Pat Robinson and Jerry Falwell who said that ”gay people helped the terror attacks on 9/11” to Stephen Greene who supports the death penalty bill for homosexual acts in Uganda. People like Greene would be happy to wipe gays off the face of the Earth to defend their lifestyle.
So our opponents are right when they argue that the state must deter public approval of the gay identity in order to defend traditional family values. We are indeed Family Values’ worst enemy. But the point is this: We are winning and they are losing.
Post a Comment