In a characteristically rambling head-scratcher of an op-ed, the English-language edition of state-run newspaper the Global Times has weighed in on the US Supreme Court’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage, declaring that “conservatism is justified.”
The Chinese party mouthpiece recognizes the historic ruling as a "development in human rights" but immediately goes on to state that China and other Asian countries “won't follow quickly and neither should we therefore blame ourselves.”
Of course, China should never feel bad about granting human rights slowly, but let’s hear state media explain why:
"Society needs to show increasing tolerance for gay marriage, but it's unnecessary to hype it up to induce potential homosexuals."
Induce them to do what exactly? Enter into a committed relationship with the person they love? Sorry homosexuals (and “potential homosexuals”), but China just doesn't think it's strictly necessary for you to be legally listed as the next of kin when your beloved passes away.
The argument continues:
"Undoubtedly, heterosexual marriage conforms more to the laws of nature and the purpose of marriage, and has contributed immensely to civilizations. It may prove to be an insightful choice to protect the role of heterosexual marriage in the basic unit of humanity."
Ah, the old "laws of nature and purpose of marriage" argument. We've heard this one before and we all know what it’s about: procreation. We can't argue with this one – every sperm is indeed sacred. Frankly, we had no idea the Chinese Communist Party was basing policy decisions on Monty Python sketches, but we can’t say we aren’t pleased to hear it. No announcement yet on when the one-child policy will be repealed, but this editorial strongly suggests that it’s coming soon.
As for why heterosexual marriage needs to be “protected” from the grave danger posed by allowing same-sex couples to tie the knot, the anonymous writer lays out this unassailable defense:
“[I]t will touch upon many people's understanding of a normal marriage if marriages between homosexuals are legally equal to those of opposite sexes.”
Ruh roh. We’re not entirely sure what it means if people’s understanding of a “normal marriage” gets “touched upon” but it sounds bad. Really bad. Like gay marriage is going to put a limp-wristed hand on normal marriage’s thigh and do something inappropriate.
Just to cover their asses, the Global Times asserts that no one really knows what the consequences of marriage equality would be for opposite-sex marriages (hint: absolutely nothing):
“The significance of legalizing same-sex marriage is to protect minority rights. But it remains uncertain whether same-sex marriage will weaken the solemnity of heterosexual ones. The latter will remain the mainstream form of marriage, but it now faces multiple challenges. It's unknown whether same-sex marriage will become the latest challenge.”
So just to be clear, okaying same-sex marriage might “weaken the solemnity of heterosexual marriages” because ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. So best to play it safe and screw minority rights, amirite?
And then in a big ol’ paragraph of complete nothingness that borrows heavily from the rhetorical craft of George W. Bush (and is therefore best read in Dubya’s voice), the op-ed opines:
"Humans are enjoying more and more freedom, which is promoted by technological advancement and social development. Same-sex marriage sheds more light on freedom."
After that brief detour to the White House lawn circa 2002, the editorial continues:
"Despite instances of homosexuality in its history, China imports the modern view from the West and it's hard to know whether it will eventually catch up with the West in this regard. What's important is that the morals and laws about homosexuals in today's China reflect the reality of this group, and it shouldn't be compared with the West in a simplistic manner."
Of course, it ain’t a Global Times op-ed if it a) doesn’t point out that China is special and shouldn’t be held to the same standards of morality as the West, and b) just plain doesn’t make sense.
Just in case you thought state media were a bunch of intolerant assholes, they sign off their sterling defense of denying same-sex couples the right to marry with this sweet message of peace and love:
"We should send our best wishes to the homosexuals but meanwhile hope that some traditions of human beings will continue. We hope for the harmony of diversities."
All the best, gays! But remember, we humans were here long before you showed up so please don’t expect us to jeopardize our ancient traditions just so that you can enjoy the dignity and legal rights conferred by marriage.
Besties,
SEE ALSO: China responds to gay marriage ruling with support and fears of human extinction
0 User Comments