Eugene Moore: Opposing Civil Union Bill a recipe for heartbreak

Amid the furore over the Civil Union Bill is a simple fact that seems to be lost on those who think it will harm the institution of heterosexual marriage.

As long as people who have a predominantly homosexual orientation are made to feel that they and their relationships are somehow less than those of heterosexuals, most homosexually oriented people will continue to do what we've done for centuries - to place ourselves in heterosexual relationships.

Using religious imagery (since the overwhelming number of vocal opponents of the bill base their opposition squarely on their religious beliefs), if I were Satan floating on my lake of fire trying to dream up the most effective way to undermine heterosexual marriage, the answer would be simple: I would demean homosexuality, convince gay people that the only proper relationships are between people of the opposite sex, relegate same-sex relationships to second or third-class status and thereby maximise the number of homosexual people who will try to fit into a heterosexist society, family or religion by living a heterosexual life.

And the penny that hasn't dropped is quite simple and logical: for every homosexual person who is pressured into living a heterosexual life, there is a heterosexual partner who is paired up with a homosexual, and the heterosexual partner has no idea.

What a recipe for potential unhappiness and relationship dysfunction. And what of the broken dreams, suicides and disastrous outcomes for these families when the closet opens up and the truth is revealed (if it ever is)?

Opponents of measures such as the Civil Union Bill, which would contribute to a normalising and respecting of relationships between homosexuals, must be challenged to answer the question: "Who is advantaged by such mismatched relationships to which heterosexism contributes?"

Certainly not the homosexual partner, who might experience soul-destroying depression, guilt, frustration, self-hatred, difficulty responding sexually to their opposite-sex partner and so on.

Certainly not the heterosexual partner, who has no idea why their partner is not terribly interested in sex, why their partner is depressed and, in some cases, why their partner may take out their depression, guilt and frustration on the family, or through substance abuse or desertion.

How much family dysfunction and unhappiness in society can be attributed to these mismatched relationships? How would the average heterosexual person cope with living for 40 years in an intimate sexual relationship with someone of the wrong sex?

My own wife was subjected to 14 years of being married to a gay man because of the societal, familial and religious homophobia that made it virtually impossible for me to face my own homosexuality, come to terms with it and have an appropriate relationship with someone of the appropriate sex.

Someday it will finally dawn on straight people - particularly those who profess to want to do what is best for heterosexual marriage - that it is in their best interest to help to create a world in which gay people are not ashamed of being gay. Where we don't view ourselves and our relationships as inferior to those of heterosexual people and their relationships.

If I had lived in a society in which committed relationships between homosexual people were given the same value and respect as those between people who are attracted to the opposite sex, my wife would probably have ended up with a heterosexual man and I would have ended up with a homosexual man.

In such a case, my homosexual relationship, far from undermining heterosexual marriage, would have strengthened it, not only for my wife but for the institution as a whole.

And the argument often touted by opponents of the bill - that by normalising same-sex relationships, otherwise heterosexual people will choose to enter same-sex relationships - is patently absurd.

This bill is about homosexual people pairing up with other homosexual people. The opponents of the bill have consistently failed to show why this does damage to the pairing up of heterosexual people.

Any measures that make it easier for homosexually oriented people to accept their orientation rather than hate it and attempt to live a heterosexual life, will advantage everyone, especially heterosexual people and their relationships.

The Civil Union Bill is one such measure. Those trying to defend heterosexual marriage by opposing this bill are simply shooting themselves in the foot.

Most parents surely want to live in a world in which they know the young person courting their child is doing so because he or she is truly attracted to their child, and not because he or she is trying to fulfil the heterosexist expectations of society.

* Eugene Moore is the director of a training and consultancy firm that specialises in sexual-orientation issues. It works with military and law-enforcement agencies in New Zealand and Australia.