No group has done more in the way of forcing us to rethink the
definition and role of family as homosexuals have. Within the
civilization of illiteracy, homosexuals assert their identity in
the public eye. Gay and lesbian groups fight for the
ratification of the homosexual family, which could not even be
conceived of within the pragmatics associated with literacy.
Their fight corresponds to a practical experience that is not
motivated by the self-perpetuation drive of the species, but by
other forces. These are economic, social, and political-the
right to enjoy the same benefits as members of heterosexual
families. Interestingly enough, social principles adopted in the
age when pragmatics required that society support childbirth,
family nurturing, and education are extended today, under
totally different circumstances, in ignorance of the necessities
that were reflected in these principles. A tax deduction was an
expression of social co- participation, since society needed more
people, better educated youth, a stable framework of family
life. The economy and the military could not succeed without the
fresh flesh of new generations.
Gays and lesbians challenge the traditional notion of family in a
context that no longer requires hierarchy and that redefines
roles that have become stereotypes and undemocratic. They
propose a model on a continuum in which each partner can be
provider and assume household duties to any degree. There are no
clear-cut roles, no clear-cut hierarchy, and no long-term
commitments. Children are not the consequence of sexual
relations but of desire and choice. This choice has two aspects
of special significance for the pragmatics of our age. One
concerns the human desire to form an alliance in the form of
family, which seems almost instinctual. It may be difficult to
recognize a natural inclination in a context (homosexuality) that
negates propagation of the species. It is this threat to
survival that caused so many taboos to be placed on
homosexuality in the first place. These taboos took on other
dimensions when encoded in a literacy that ignored the
pragmatics.
The second aspect has to do with the extent to which homosexuals'
desire for a family constitutes its own validity in the
pragmatic framework of our time. To what extent does the desire
to have a family reveal characteristics of human
self-constitution in the current context? In a world in which
there is a high rate of births out of wedlock, a world in which
the traditional family is no guarantee of relationships free of
abuse and exploitation, a world with great numbers of children
in orphanages or in foster care, any desire to place children in
a loving family context is worthy of attention.
What constitutes a family in an age whose pragmatics is not
defined by the values perpetuated in and through literacy? The
new definition might go along these lines: main provider (the
father role); second provider (the mother role), who is also
manager of the household. The two roles are not polarized; each
provider participates in household work and in salaried work
outside the home, as circumstances require. A child is a
dependent under the age of 18 years (or 22 years if in college),
for whom the providers are legally responsible. A grandparent is
qualified through age and willingness to assume the role.
Aunt/uncle is someone with fraternal ties to the providers. The
definitions can go on. In considering these literate definitions,
we can see that they apply to the situation of the current
traditional family as well, in which father and mother both
work, in which a child may live with and be cared for by a
parent's second or third spouse, in which distance from or lack
of blood relations calls for ad hoc relatives. The most vital
implications concern our culture as it has been passed down over
the centuries through literate expression, laden with values
that literacy perpetuates and endows with an aura, in defiance
of the new pragmatics and the new scale in which humans operate.
The homosexual family and its occasional focus on adopting
children reflects the fact that we live in a world of many
options, and consequently of very relative values. Their desire
for a family, under circumstances that are far from being
conducive to family life, is as valid as that of an unmarried
woman who wants to give birth and rear a child (the one-parent
household). It is as valid as the desire of infertile couples who
use every means the market offers to have a child, through
costly medical intervention or by hiring surrogates. In the
civilization of illiteracy, each person forms his or her own
definition of family, just as people form their own definitions
of everything else. The only test of validity is, ultimately,
effectiveness. In the long run, the biological future of the
species will also be affected, one way or another, as part of the
effectiveness equation.