As we eagerly await June and the Supreme Court’s decisions regarding Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act, many have already shown their support for same-sex marriage by changing their Facebook profile picture to a little red equal sign.
Well, congratulations my tolerant and accepting friends — you did it. You ended discrimination in America, all by… wait, what?
You mean to tell me our support inadvertently asserts marriage is still the preferable institution, thereby stigmatizing the single life? And you go on to say this seemingly good deed is actually marginalizing a near majority of Americans?
Well, I’ll be. That’s an interesting idea, outspoken reader.
Nevertheless, I suppose there’s support for the claim that singles and unmarried adults, both straight and gay, are still getting swindled in America.
For starters, consider this research conducted by the Department of Economics at the University of San Diego, California in 1994. Their study of two identical twins, differing only in marital status, revealed marriage might increase men’s wages by as much as 27 percent.
Other attempts to measure the gap have been skewed by unclear relationships of causality — i.e. are men with higher wages more likely to marry, or do married men earn more due to their relationship status. This study firmly establishes the latter to be true.
The Civil Reform Act of 1978 protects federal employees from this type of bias, but the Equal Employment Opportunity Act lacks such provisions. When left up to the states, only 21 protect against discrimination based on marital status, and Louisiana is not one of them.
There are similar lapses of protection when it comes to housing and healthcare as well.
In most states, landlords can legally refuse to rent to singles or unmarried couples. The only states to explicitly prohibit such discrimination are Alaska, California, Massachusetts, Michigan and New Jersey.
As for healthcare and other benefits, unmarried adults pay significantly more, lack the ability to extend coverage to a loved one and cannot elect a partner as a beneficiary for their 401(k)’s or Social Security without finding more difficult, alternative methods.
All of this is in addition to the 1,100 federal provisions already designed to assist and protect couples, including the U.S. tax code rewritten in 1948 to place married couples in the tax bracket of the spouse with the lower income.
Now that we’ve played the numbers game, I want to emphasize that marriage equality is still an important issue, and unmarried adults aren’t exactly becoming 2013’s hot new marginalized group.
Unlike gays and lesbians, single adults aren’t flagrantly discriminated against, denied basic human rights and have no hurtful slurs of their own (“Cat-lady” might work, but just try yelling “Hey, no-wife!” at a single, middle-aged man).
However, equality shouldn’t hinge on marital status any more than it should on ethnicity or sexuality.
By touting marriage as the ultimate aspiration of all men and women, we’re asserting something that’s no longer true today. Recent studies show unmarried adults are more socially active, more engaged with neighbors and relatives and are leading equally or more fulfilling lives compared to their married counterparts.
Allowing same-sex marriage won’t alleviate the larger inequality, but will only allow slightly more people into the traditionally honored institution. As a result, nearly 50 percent of all American adults — that’s all unmarried straight and gay individuals — are left out in the cold.
Of course, marriage has obvious benefits in and of itself, but it’s still a choice. And while we should allow anyone to make that choice for him or herself, the attitudes of our government and businesses should shift to reflect the changing perceptions of the single life in America.
Aaron Friedman is a 23-year-old Spanish major from Destrehan.
