stats for wordpress

Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!

Time Magazine’s Dual ‘Gay Marriage Already Won’ Covers — Awesome, Beautiful, But

by David Badash on March 28, 2013

in Marriage,News,Politics

Post image for Time Magazine’s Dual ‘Gay Marriage Already Won’ Covers — Awesome, Beautiful, But

Time today published its weekly cover story, “Gay Marriage Already Won,” with dual covers of two same-sex couples kissing. Very cool, and yes, exciting. And beautiful. The covers, in black and white, feature a male couple and a female couple — who are both apparently white.

All the images, by Peter Hapak For Time, are beautiful. You can see ten of the originals — also beautiful — here.

Love the story — would have loved to see some diversity on the cover.

The actual cover story, titled, “How Gay Marriage Won,” by David von Drehle, includes a female couple, both of whom are Black — and not quite kissing.


Also, LGBT couples are often, like opposite-gender couples, multi-racial.

In the end, no doubt it was an art director’s choice, and not based on race.

That said, the first paragraph in the long and in-depth article, which is wonderful:

Eager to be eyewitnesses to history, people camped for days in the dismal cold, shivering in the slanting shadow of the Capitol dome, to claim tickets for the Supreme Court’s historic oral arguments on same-sex marriage. Some hoped that the Justices would extend marriage rights; others prayed that they would not. When at last the doors of the white marble temple swung open on March 26 for the first of two sessions devoted to the subject, the lucky ones found seats in time to hear Justice Anthony Kennedy — author of two important earlier decisions in favor of gay rights and likely a key vote this time as well — turn the tables on the attorney defending the traditionalist view. Charles Cooper was extolling heterosexual marriage as the best arrangement in which to raise children when Kennedy interjected: What about the roughly 40,000 children of gay and lesbian couples living in California? “They want their parents to have full recognition and full status,” Kennedy said. “The voice of those children is important in this case, don’t you think?” Nearly as ominous for the folks against change was the fact that Chief Justice John Roberts plunged into a discussion of simply dismissing the California case. That would let stand a lower-court ruling, and same-sex couples could add America’s most populous state to the growing list of jurisdictions where they can be lawfully hitched.

Am I being too picky? What do you think? (My fiancé says I am.)

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!


bgryphon March 28, 2013 at 10:00 am

Perhaps there was no ill intent- the Art Director might have decided that they really wanted a couple in "full kiss" for the cover while insisting the image of the ethnic couple be included inside. Perhaps it was a (conscious or otherwise) reflection that many people see the push for marriage equality to be of greater import to middle-class Caucasian gays.

IndyBareBear March 28, 2013 at 10:05 am

Yes you are being too picky. There is NO way that they could represent the uber-kaleidoscope that is the GLBT community! They would have to have upwards of 1,000 different covers. What about the guys that like Drag Queens, they Leather Community, the Bear/Twink community? Do you see where I am going with this? We are a patchwork – that makes up a giant quilt of the GLBT community. We should just be happy that they gave us these two covers!!!

yuriconalc March 28, 2013 at 10:09 am

You're not being too picky at all. And ill intent doesn't really have a place in this conversation. The gay marriage debate is a lingering relic of gays being invisible. LGBTQ folk of color are still knee-deep in this issue. Ill intent isn't the question – why wasn't there 'good' intent to have diversity represented with *diversity.*

I see fewer interracial couples than ever before in media. We haven't won tile we've won and if we're pretend everyone is white and affluent still, we haven't won anything at all.

angloam March 28, 2013 at 10:13 am

I think the BIGGER ISSUE is that gay marriage hasn't already won when it's illegal in so many states.

blt123 March 28, 2013 at 10:37 am

I think this is a big issue that happens allll the time with gay media. They like to use white folks as the cover story. White folks that have an upper middle class appeal to them. This give the idea that POC aren't gay or are some how more homophobic or ashamed to be themselves. So, I don't think you're being to picky at all. I think you've hit it right on the mark! This is just another example of the politics of respectability.

ChicagoJJ March 28, 2013 at 11:17 am

Yes you are being too picky. They got two beautiful pictures of couples in full kiss. EVERY couple cannot be represented. Let's focus on the issue of marriage equality (not 'gay marriage'. I don't say 'gay banking' or 'gay vacationing').

schroedinger March 28, 2013 at 12:43 pm

No, not too picky, because I think just having the conversation is important; representing the diversity of our alphabet soup community on two magazine covers is impossible, but *recognizing* that diversity– and the challenges it poses, whether it be on glossy magazine covers or in our communities– is imperative if we are to maintain the integrity of the movement as a whole.

docandraider March 29, 2013 at 9:09 am

As a Canadian, my own reaction was slightly different…

bgryphon March 29, 2013 at 9:23 am

I always love the DnR take on 'Muricans.

But to be fair, the Canadian government decriminalized gay sex in 1969, while SCOTUS didn't do so down here until 2003. It appears that the US may be a bit faster in going from that to full Marriage Equality.

See… for more dates/details.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: