Sharing is Caring

On April 14, 2011, I held my newborn nephew, Wee Man, tight against my chest as he dozed in a state we all refer to as “drunk baby.” With his right eye closed and his left eye rolled back in pure post-feed ecstasy, he cooed rhythmically as I stroked his back and drank in his pure baby smell. In that moment I was so overwhelmed with gratitude at the time I had gotten to spend with him and the rest of my family over the previous two weeks. Sitting in that rocking chair and looking around at my Mom, Grandma, sister-in-law and C all together, my eyes started to fill with tears. I got up and went into my Grandma’s room with Wee Man and wept uncontrollably. I wasn’t ready to say goodbye again.

Although in reality I am only ever a day’s travel away from my family, the distance never feels as vast as when I turn that first corner away from my Mom’s house and watch their waving arms disappear from view. I think this is because I’m never sure what I will be facing when I return. When I kiss my family goodbye, there is a part of me that knows there is a chance I will never see them again. That may seem ridiculous, but it was underlined by my Mom’s accident in 2009. Also, my Grandmother is 92 and even though she is still in remarkable health, I have to accept the fact that even she cannot live forever.

This goodbye drove home a new realisation to me. Wee Man had already changed so much in the 14 days since I had met him and I was distinctly aware of everything I was going to miss between that day and my next arrival. I reflected back on how much I hadn’t experienced in my grandmother’s mother’s and brother’s day-to-day lives and, equally, how much I have not been able to share with them over the previous 8 years and I immediately began to mourn all the time I would not be able to spend with this newest addition to our family.

As if sensing my distress, Wee Man stirred and started to fuss as C came in to comfort me. She has seen me fall to bits like this on two previous visits and knows that there is no stopping it. She lovingly and patiently watched me express my overwhelming frustration and sadness for a third time, even though I know it broke her heart to watch me cry from all the way from my Grandmother’s bedroom to O’hare airport.

I know the same limitations on the amount of quality time I spend with my family would apply to any situation where I didn’t live within easy access and I accept that I made the decision to move away from them in the first place. At the same time, life circumstances change and we should all be able to make choices in response to those changes. The existing legislative framework set out by the US federal government does not give me a choice; it gives me an ultimatum. There is no situation that allows me to live with C and be near my family.

Ironically, as I said yet another goodbye to my family in Illinois, the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) was being re-introduced to Congress by Representative Jerry Nadler (D-NY) and Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). It would amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to introduce ‘permanent partner’ as a new sponsorship category, defining ‘permanent partner’ as an individual 18 years or older who:

a)      Is in a committed, intimate relationship with another individual 18 years or older in which both parties intend a lifelong commitment;

b)      Is financially interdependent with that other individual;

c)       Is not married to or in a permanent partnership with anyone else;

d)      Is unable to contract with that other individual a marriage cognizable under the Immigration and Nationality Act; and

e)      Is not a first, second or third degree blood relative of that individual.

As far as I can tell, point d above means that UAFA would only benefit US citizens and permanent residents looking to sponsor their same-sex partner for immigration. This recognises that heterosexual couples have the choice to enter into marriage if they need to for immigration purposes. In effect, UAFA seeks to add the words “or permanent partner” after every reference to “spouse” throughout the entire Immigration and Nationality Act to ensure immigration equality for all, regardless of sexuality.

As it currently stands, there are no Republicans supporting UAFA in either the House or the Senate, and Democrats seem to be divided on the issue as well. So what exactly is the contention? Rep Nadler pointed out opponents’ two main arguments on MSNBC recently, namely:

1.       Passing UAFA would lead to rampant cases of fraud. Fraud is already a serious concern under the existing system. It is relatively easy for one man and one woman to get a marriage certificate as no one checks to make sure they are a genuine couple when they legally register their union. That places the responsibility on the immigration assessment process to ensure the truthfulness of applicants seeking to settle in the USA as the spouse of a citizen or permanent resident. UAFA opponents feel that introducing ‘permanent partner’ as a new sponsorship category will make it even easier for people to cheat the system. In my opinion, the problem of fraud is an issue to be addressed as part of the wider immigration reforms and it should not be used block immigration equality.

2.       UAFA is a backdoor route to federal support for gay marriage. By specifying an age of consent, exclusivity in the relationship and genetic distance the qualifying criteria by which UAFA defines ‘permanent partner’ closely reflect that required for a man and a woman to enter into marriage (I discussed this in Go Forth and Multiply). However, apart from immigration sponsorship, UAFA does not extend any of the benefits, rights and responsibility associated with marriage to permanent partners. In fact, of the 19 countries that do recognise immigration rights for same-sex couples, only 5 have equalised marriage benefits. I have a feeling this is one of those ‘slippery slope’ arguments that those opposed to the so-called gay agenda makes against any proposal that would grant equal rights to homosexuals.

UAFA has been introduced in some form to every consecutive Congress since 2000 but it has always died in committee. The closest it ever came to being seriously considered was in 2009, when Senator Leahy, who is chairman of the Judiciary committee, bypassed the normal subcommittee and held a hearing to discuss it. You can watch the entire 2009 UAFA hearing here if you have a couple of hours to burn. Watching it this afternoon I was surprised and disappointed that I was watching a conversation from 3 years ago. The testimony statements from those affected by the discrimination are incredibly moving and still relevant, and the arguments given in opposition are exactly the same as those being put forward today.

The 2011 version of UAFA is almost word-for-word identical to the previous versions that have been introduced and it has clearly hit a political stalemate. Re-introducing the same proposal over and over again in this way means progress depends on a significant change to the hearts and minds of many politicians. Despite some significant steps forward in the LGBT movement, like the repeal of DADT, even Rep Nadler and Senator Leahy, who are sponsoring UAFA, aren’t hopeful that it will pass this year.

The only way to affect a political change is to throw a lot of money at politicians or to amass a significant amount of public support for a cause. Unfortunately, there is relatively little awareness of the immigration equality cause simply because there is no reason for anyone to consider it unless they are affected. Due to the very nature of this issue, visibility is not a strong point. Consider the following situations:

1.       If the couple are living together in the US, the non-citizen/resident may not want to draw any attention to their relationship or their immigration status because:

·         They could face problems in obtaining, maintaining or renewing a temporary visa for other reasons (e.g. work or study) if their relationship was made public; or

·         They are in the country illegally.

2.       If the non-citizen/resident is frequently travelling to and from the US, they may not want to draw any attention to their relationship because:

·         They could be refused a tourist visa and entry to the US as a result of having ‘immigration intent’.

3.       Those of us living together in other countries are significantly limited in our ability to represent ourselves to American society in any capacity.

That is why it is so important for people, like me, who are affected by it to share our stories, and for those who are sympathetic to our situation, like you, to talk about it with others. I will talk more about this in future posts, but C and I are at a crossroads in our own lives and are considering where in this world we want to live over the coming years. I would love to have the choice to move close to my family, but the reality is we will end up settling in a country where neither of us has any family or historical ties. There are a number of countries that recognise their economy and society would benefit from the skills and experience we have worked hard to attain and would gladly welcome us as a couple.

Even if this isn’t the year for immigration equality, we can collectively make a difference over time, and I would love to think that I may have a choice to permanently return to the country of my birth sometime before I die.

(If you’d like to do something worthwhile, the people at Immigration Equality have made it easy for you to email your representatives, share your story or let your friends know about these issues through their Action Fund.)

Wedding Belles

Ours wasn’t the only wedding in 2009. I had to come to terms with the fact that my little brother isn’t little anymore. Admittedly, he hasn’t been ‘little’ since he shot up to well over 6 feet tall in 1999, but I think even he will admit it took him a lot longer to grow up - about ten years, in fact. You see, in May 2009 my little brother stood up tall and married the woman who had given him the inspiration and strength to be the best man that he could be.

His wife doesn’t have a malicious bone in her entire body. She is incredibly kind, caring and immediately adopted me as another sister. In my short visits home over the previous two years I had watched in amazement as she patiently and completely transformed him. My Mom and Grandma applaud her for succeeding in what they had desperately tried to do for the previous ten years. The boy who wouldn’t get out of bed before 2pm was now driving his beloved to work at 6am without complaint (though at that time of the morning I don’t expect he really says much of anything); where he had previously taken anything he could get his hands on, he was now giving little tokens of affection; while he had never before acknowledged what other people were feeling, he was now offering help and showing gratitude for receiving it. The boy is clearly in Love – it has given him a sense of purpose and self-worth and has empowered him to finally grow into his mighty frame.

Before I touched down in Chicago, a week before the main event, I knew it was going to be a full-on visit with all the last-minute preparations, rehearsals, visitors and celebrations. To top it off, in the car ride down to Bloomington I found out there wasn’t just one wedding on the cards – my aunt was also getting married!

My aunt has been a huge support to me throughout my life, in a way providing the ying to my mother’s yang. Where I’ve seen my Mom as controlled and restrained, my aunt is more impulsive and carefree. She has always let me sound off to her about everything and anything. I’m sure she can chuckle at the evolution of my various personal conflicts from trying to fit in at school to developing an adult relationship with my mother to navigating through random political and moral worldviews. She and her partner have been together as long as I can remember, so he’s also had a big influence in my life. I distinctly remember the gruelling hours of practice he put me through to improve my skills and confidence enough to make the softball team in 8th grade. Summer afternoons have never been as baking hot before or since!

I don’t know all the details of their life together, but I know they have been through a lot and that they have always made decisions together, confidently. In spite of hardships, they have been together for over 20 years, but had never married so I must admit I was more than a bit surprised that they were choosing to tie the knot.

One of their deciding factors to wed had to do with health care; namely that they needed to be married for my aunt to include her partner in her health care benefits package. “In sickness and in health” is a fundamental aspect of any marriage, after all. Having just been through a decision-making process of my own, I knew the importance of taking whatever steps are necessary to ensure the security of my relationship. They got married with no pomp and circumstance in their front room, witnessed by small crowd of close family and friends and administered by a justice of the peace.

My brother’s wedding the following week could not have been more different. It was, in every sense, a traditional wedding with a young couple committing themselves to each other in front of God and everyone. There was a blur of chaos and stress leading up to it, but the big day was beautiful and the ceremony perfectly represented the two of them. The church was full with extended family and friends from both sides. I cried when they said their vows and laughed as my brother drove his bride around the church car park with his head peering out the sun roof.

The stark contrast between these two events is quite revealing. Both are considered to be weddings and both resulted in two individuals marrying, yet their reasons for marrying and the ceremonies undertaken are products of these couples’ circumstances and aspirations. At no time did anyone from the government step in to question or regulate the validity of either. There was no government official present to assess their love for each other, question how they intended to live their lives together or to obligate them to have children.

While my aunt and her partner may not have ever felt marriage was for them in terms of the holy matrimony aspects, the civil aspects of marriage were absolutely fundamental to their overall wellbeing and happiness. Ironically, while some would see this approach to marriage as little more than a paper exercise, their decision to marry has affirmed their commitment to each other and has ultimately strengthened their relationship like nothing else could. I know for certain they are grateful for the opportunity that their marriage has afforded them.

I admire this post by Louis J Marinelli, which illustrates my point here perfectly. After years of narrowly understanding marriage as ‘holy matrimony’ he now appreciates, and perfectly articulates that the government should only be concerned with regulating the civil aspects of marriage. Once this is understood, it is clear that the civil rights afforded through marriage should be applied equally under the law to all citizens, regardless of gender. It takes a lot of guts to admit you have been wrong in the past and I hope he will continue to be a champion for marriage equality. I know that me, C and our friends and family will.

We Did

C and I were looking forward to 2009. We recognised all the risks, forward-planning and hard work that it had taken for us to get to where we were and we were ready to finally be settled in our new place. At the same time, we knew that my Fresh Talent Scheme visa was due to expire in December. It was becoming more and more apparent that my status as a non-permanent resident meant it was nearly impossible for us to make any long-term plans together because our future together (geographically speaking) wasn’t clear.

I could have applied to remain in the country on my own merits, sponsored by my employer but there were challenges associated with that route. First, the company would have to advertise my job and I would have to re-apply to keep it; this was relatively routine and everyone was confident it was a low-risk. More importantly, though my status in the UK would be bound to my employment at this company: so, if I were to lose my job for any reason, I would have to find another employer to sponsor me or leave the country. Normally I wouldn’t have considered losing my job as a real possibility, but the evidence of the recession was more apparent than ever and unemployment levels for my sector were growing exponentially. Redundancies were (and still are) a possibility, and the options for finding alternative jobs quickly were (and still are) incredibly limited. This wouldn’t have provided us with any sense (or reality) of security.

It made more sense for me to apply to stay in the country based on the legitimate reason for me wanting to be here – so that I could live my life with my partner. In the UK, that was a real option for us.

I have to pause for an aside here. I had originally written “Fortunately, in the UK, that was a real option for us.” Yet it’s not by luck or chance or circumstance that the UK affords gays and same-sex couples equality under the law. Enormous effort and resources have gone into campaigning for and achieving equal rights often in spite of efforts by the ‘moral majority’ to exclude gays. It’s certainly not perfect I can’t help but admire a political system that not only recognises the importance of treating everyone fairly in rhetoric, but also in policy, procedure and practice.

The first Civil Partnership in the UK happened in December 2005. C often talks about how she never thought marriage equality would happen. As a teenager she had to seek out a hidden scene in basement bars with blacked out windows tucked away from public life. Because it was new and topical, we had talked a lot about getting married early on in our relationship and knew that it was what we wanted to do when the time was right for us. I think we’d always assumed that in order to get married we’d have to have a wedding, and all the pomp and circumstance that went with it. I didn’t want to do that without including my friends and family in some way and there was still a lot of relationship-building that needed to happen for that to be a possibility.

The more we talked about it, though, the more apparent it became that neither of us were ‘wedding’ people. The thought of having to plan and execute a day where we were the centre of attention was our collective idea of hell. We were all for celebrating our love and commitment to each other; just not as a public spectacle. It became apparent very quickly that, actually, there really wasn’t a better reason for us to make a formal commitment to each other. It would enable us to have a secure future together and finally start planning our life beyond the next visa.

So, in February, we were engaged. There was no ostentatious proposal and we didn’t actually tell anyone, but it was incredibly romantic.

Despite not having a wedding as such, we still had a lot of planning to do. We wanted to register our civil partnership on 20 August 2009, our fourth anniversary, and needed to time our various applications and submissions to the Home Office accordingly. We needed a Certificate of Approval from the Home Office (processing time 4 weeks; valid for 3 months) in order to give notice to register our Civil Partnership to the registrar in Edinburgh. We then had to seal the deal within 3 months. After that we could apply for me to get Indefinite Leave to Remain as the spouse of a UK citizen any time before December, when my other visa expired. The process was pretty straightforward and we had plenty of time to get it all in place. Once we knew what we had to do and when, we were able to relax and really enjoy the build-up to starting a future together.

We even had enough wiggle room to programme in a holiday to Rhodes in July. C’mon...it wouldn’t have been ‘us’ without some time in the sun! It was an incredible week and we spent a day leisurely wandering around Rhodes Old Town shopping for rings. We’d seen a few possibilities, but eventually found two simple matte white gold bands with a polished continuous wave. We had them sized and went off to bask in the sun while they were engraved with our wedding date. A few short hours later, our most prized possessions were stowed away in a small blue velvet ring box.

We kept our plans on a need-to-know basis, only revealing to people when we were ready for them to know. That may seem selfish, but we weren’t doing this for anyone else and really didn’t want the fuss that comes with big announcements. In June, we had each asked a friend in Edinburgh to be our witnesses out of necessity, but we waited until August to tell our families.

It was a somewhat difficult telling C’s family because we weren’t including them in the ceremony. Both of her brothers had church weddings and she had been very involved in those. At the same time, we didn’t want the day to pass without them even knowing about it. I know they all had wished they could have been there, but we are incredibly grateful for the respect they showed us in simply accepting that we were doing things our own way. I have been touched by how they each acknowledged and celebrated our union with us since then.

I told my Mom over the phone. At the time she seemed a bit distant in her response, but the next day she emailed me:

 5 August 2009

Thanks for sharing with me about you and C. I just want you to be happy and I like C and know that her family has been very kind to include you in so many activities and holidays (which helps me to feel better knowing that you have somewhere to be at those times).  I also know that C and I have not had much of an opportunity to get to know each other...

Be happy (that is what I wish and want for you).  If being with C makes both of you happy and you realize the problems and hardships that you might face that is all that matters.  
Much Happiness Always!!
Hugs and Kisses
Mom

On the 20 August, C and I spent the morning at home. We exchanged cards, rings and lifelong intentions in private before setting off together. We met our witnesses outside the flower shop on Broughton Street where we picked up thistle corsages. It was raining, so we got a taxi up to the Registry Office, just off the Royal Mile. I took a few minutes to freshen up before our registrar met us and took us upstairs to a beautiful room. He said a few respectful words before going through the legal aspects of the ceremony. I remember us looking at each other as we signed our certificate. My hand was shaking and I felt overwhelmed by emotion. I was excited and nervous at the same time – this was unchartered territory for both of us but felt comforting. It was the right time.

As we walked out of the registry office, Edinburgh’s city centre had been transformed. The sun was beaming down and the streets were overflowing with festival-goers. We wandered up the Royal Mile and met a street performer acting as a statue. She was in gold from head to toe and for £1 she handed us a golden rose. We walked up towards the castle and wandered down Ramsay Lane, stopping at Mound Place with the whole of Edinburgh’s New Town in front of us. It was so fitting to be surrounded by the same buzz of Edinburgh in August that had brought us together four years previously. There is a picture of us laughing together there that is one of my favourite photos of us ever.

As we returned home together that evening we simultaneously exhaled a sigh of relief - the next chapter in our life had just begun and we were starting it in style, with a 3-week honeymoon in Australia. Little did we know that C would have an opportunity to get to know my Mom very well before we applied for my next visa, though the circumstances were highly unexpected...

Death and taxes

In Go Forth and Multiply I looked at the reasons why marriage laws exist. I discovered that the personal qualities assessed by authorities to determine whether a couple is qualified to be married do little to ensure the integrity of the nuclear family unit, despite proponents of traditional marriage claiming that this is the purpose of these laws. The real point seems to be to ensure that the individuals entering into the marriage are actually capable of making the decision to marry and that no one is being coerced or taken advantage of through the union.

There is another important qualification that I failed to mention – that neither of the individuals is married to anyone else. This is actually a mandate from the federal government, rather than the state. From what I gather, this is the only marriage law regulated at the federal level and it originates in the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act in 1862. This made it a criminal offense to have more than one spouse at the same time. However, the logic behind this decision wasn’t based on a moral standing or designed to protect children; it was in response to the growing property portfolio and power of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as a result of pluralist marriages (the law also placed a financial limit on church and non-profit ownership).

So...is the government’s interest in marriage actually more about regulating power and money than it is about imposing traditional moral objectives?

Let’s take a look at exactly what same-sex couples are actually being excluded from by examining the aspects of civil marriage.

Civil marriage is a single legal contract that instantaneously confers a number of benefits, rights and privileges between spouses. After DOMA passed, The United States Government Accountability Office identified 1,049 federal benefits, rights and privileges that are contingent on marital status. By 2004 this number had increased to 1,138. This is further compounded at the state level where, for example, Illinois has a further 648 benefits, rights and privileges that are contingent on marital status.

Feel free to read through them all in detail, especially if you are having trouble sleeping. Alternatively, you can trust me in saying that they pretty much all whittle down to death and taxes by:

·         defining how the couple is treated with regards to employment benefits and taxation (including 179 provisions at the federal level alone) while they are married;

·         establishing rights and responsibilities for dissolving the marriage, including obligations for child and spousal support; and

·         defaulting the surviving spouse as next of kin upon being widowed, which means they are entitled to receive financial benefits (e.g. pensions), transfer of property, etc.

Some of the federal laws defer to the state definition of marriage, so if the state government legally recognises same-sex marriage then the couple will receive equal legal rights and protection. However, it is important to recognise that only 5 states and the District of Columbia are currently marriage-equal. Other states that recognise ‘domestic partnerships’ or ‘civil unions’ present a complex legal landscape that still significantly limits rights and protections for same-sex couples.

Some of the provisions can be accessed through other routes. For example, most provisions relating to criminal issues (e.g. domestic violence and sexual assault) include the terminology ‘spouse or intimate partner’, recognising the reality that alternative forms of family exist. Provisions relating to employment can be supplement where employers implement their own policies to extend benefits to same-sex couples. Many private companies choose to do this even though they are not legally obligated because they recognise and value staff diversity.

In spite of all that, there are still some incredibly disparaging issues. I take particular offence to these:

·         Federal health and welfare programmes – these are primarily designed to assist disadvantaged individuals and families. Marital status is normally significant in determining whether a family qualifies for support and what level of support they receive. This excludes disadvantaged same-sex couples from receiving adequate levels of support and all same-sex couples from receiving benefits in the event of their partners’ death.

·         Child and spousal support – these laws exist to ensure children receive adequate support in the event of divorce by obliging absent parents to provide appropriate funds to the spouse with whom the child lives. A partner left to raise children after a same-sex relationship has broken up has no legal recourse to seek child support. Equally, a parent can be left without legal recourse to gain access to a child.

Obama extended federal benefits to same-sex couples last year and, with the repeal of DADT, this will likely be extend to include military personnel and veterans. However, immigration remains exclusive as a direct result of the definition of marriage in DOMA.

The reason I can’t come home with my partner comes down to how marriage is defined...by DOMA.

If you asked 100 married couples to define marriage, I guarantee you will get 200 different answers. Ask them again in 10 years and you’ll get another 200 answers, all different from the first. What makes a marriage is unique to the individuals in it; how they conduct their relationship depends on their needs and circumstances which are constantly changing.

Marriage laws and the legal provisions extended to married couples have nothing to do with how marriage is defined to individuals and everything to do with legally defining the couple as a financially interdependent unit. The evidence required to prove the validity of a marriage for immigration purposes underlines this, by requiring couples to submit documentation showing joint ownership or property and/or documentation showing the co-mingling of financial resources.

Watch this.

I absolutely love the point Cynthia Nixon makes here, so I’m going to say it again:

Marriage equality will not re-define marriage any more than allowing women the right to vote in 1920 re-defined ‘voting’ or integrating diners in the 1960s re-defined ‘eating out.’ It will simply mean everyone has a right to sit at the same table.

The more I watch the debates on same-sex marriage and speak with people about this issue, the more I realise how little most Americans know about how and why the government regulates marriage. This realisation is what compelled me to write this blog in the first place and the comments I have received here and through private communications have confirmed this message needs to get out...

It'll be fine

In July 2007, I completed my coursework in Planning and got a job as a consultant on a temporary contract while I finished my final dissertation. After receiving my MSc, I applied for a Fresh Talent: Working in Scotland Scheme visa to stay in the UK for two years as a new graduate. My job was transferred to a permanent contract and I started life as a professional woman. This meant I had to buy a lot of shirts that constantly need ironing.

The transition wasn’t easy. C and I spent almost every night together but it was getting harder to find the space to spend quality time together with my new 9 to 5, Monday to Friday schedule. C had her flat in East Lothian and I was living in a shared flat in Edinburgh, 25 miles apart. We would mostly stay at mine through the week as bus links from her small village to Edinburgh in the morning were pretty unreliable and I didn’t have a car (or a UK driver’s license). Living in a shared flat was fine when I was a student, but it was near impossible to get the privacy we wanted or sleep we needed in a flat full of students. There were many weeknights when we would give up in desperation and drive back to East Lothian at midnight just to get some respite.

I had every weekend off, but C worked at least two weekends a month. When we had time off together we would mostly spend it at hers. She had a gorgeous top floor flat in an 18^th century mansion house in a small, idyllic village. It overlooked a square with a fountain and was only minutes from a beautiful riverside walk, complete with a waterfall. I couldn’t have invented a more beautiful place to stay. The time we spent there was always peaceful and allowed us glimpses of what our life would be like if we lived together. Unfortunately we decided it wasn’t feasible for us to move into hers – mostly because of my work demands in Edinburgh. Instead, we focussed our efforts on preparing C’s flat for sale with a view to renting somewhere in the city together.

In February 2008, C’s mother was unexpectedly diagnosed with cancer. These things are never expected, but she hadn’t been unwell in any way leading up to the diagnosis. C was devastated and devoted all of her spare time and energy ensuring her mum was getting the care she needed, attending hospital appointments, etc. I had never been in a situation like that with anyone before. I was scared and I didn’t know how to support C. I would love to be the kind of person who can find the right words or make the right gesture to offer comfort. Instead, I become hesitant, vacant and completely lacking in any emotional intelligence or thought. The Scots actually have the perfect word to describe this: glaikit.

I had booked at trip back to visit my family over Easter weekend. It was already going to be a short trip but it would mean I could celebrate my birthday while I was there. Unfortunately my flight over from London was delayed by 27 hours so the trip was cut even shorter. I still had my birthday in Illinois, the first in many years, but the journey was exhausting and the whole ordeal left me quite uncharacteristically emotional.

It was such a stressful summer. I was at my wits end with shared living and had moved into a tiny and drafty 1-bedroom flat that I could just afford. C put her flat on the market just as the recession hit. Her mum started chemo. It was hard to see any silver linings amongst all the gray clouds. We kept repeating the mantra “It’ll be fine.” Life had guided us toward each other for a reason and it would guide us through all of this the same way. We just needed to keep strong and, in time, it would all be fine...somehow.

I remember sitting with C in front of two glasses of cool white wine at the shore in Leith after work one afternoon. We were tense, fed up and I don’t think we were even looking at each other. Somehow, through the course of the conversation we both finally expelled all of the fears we had been holding back. Ironically, sharing our fears with each other was the only way we could be strong together. In that moment I learned what it means to be a partner. I had never shared my fears about anything with anyone before, but never once did I feel vulnerable or alone. C was there for me and I was there for her at this impossibly difficult time. Our support for each other is unwavering.

And then the pieces gradually started to fall into place. Despite the housing market crash, C sold her flat (and made a tidy profit) in early July. Her reward was to watch all her belongings driven off to storage and move into my tiny flat with me. She arrived with nothing more than two suitcases and a couple of potted plants. It was certainly very cosy, but we were finally together in our own space. C’s mum successfully made it through her treatment and began the long road to recovery. As a means of exhaling, we did what we do best – we went on holiday!

The two weeks we spent in Florida and Georgia were nothing short of perfection. We cruised around in a sexy Ford Mustang called Sally, taking in downtowns, uptowns and backwaters with complete abandon. It was what all holidays should be – exactly the opposite of our real life. We were in gluttonous America; we did whatever we wanted and faced no obstacles.

At the end of the trip, C flew home to Scotland and I flew home to my Mom’s for a week. It was hard to leave her and I would have loved to bring her back to continue our adventure, especially as it was Homecoming week at IWU. Unfortunately it was still not the right time for her to join me but I had an incredible visit. I was able to spend a lot of time with many of my friends from college and I got to be a part of the ongoing planning programme for my little brother’s upcoming wedding. Amazing.

At the same time, C arrived back to a typical October in Scotland and spent the first night shivering under 5 blankets. She understandably took the decision that we deserved somewhere bigger and warmer...immediately. Cold is a great motivator and in a few short days she had found just the place, which she showed to me two days after I got back. We moved into what is now our home in late October 2008. It suits us perfectly: a modern and airy 2-bed flat, quietly tucked away but still in walking distance to the city centre.

A few months later we decided we could share it with 2 perfectly behaved goldfish named ‘Indiana Jones’ and ‘Spike’. I feel compelled to say the names were chosen by our nephews.

We regularly reflect on the hurdles we had to overcome to secure our home together and we will never take for granted the opportunities that this place affords us, in particular: space to spend quality time together, without forward-planning; respite from the normal stresses of work and city-living; and a venue for hosting friends and family (we’re slowly getting better at this).

On the 31^st December 2008 we rang in the New Year by listening to Edinburgh’s famous fireworks from the warmth of our living room. It had been one hell of an exhausting year and we were eager to see it end. Yet, from where we were sitting it was clear that, somehow, everything was going to be fine. We had gotten through it together and had grown stronger in the process. It was also clear that living together was merely the first step in us pledging our commitment to one another. 2009 was going to be a busy year, with two weddings in the diary...

Go Forth and Multiply

It is a rather compelling experience to learn about something only to conclude that the new information confuses things further. This is how I feel after every ‘session’ I spend reading about same-sex marriage debates in the USA. The only comparison I can make is to a rubix cube: every time I manage to get one face in order, I end up having to destroy it to complete the next face. I realised from the outset that this topic is a rather big beast, but I am surprised to still be discovering new ‘faces’ with every session. While I know this is a topic I will re-visit here often, I am really struggling to find the right place to begin my interrogation.

It seems to me that the point of most contention is the particularly messy business of trying to discern between the traditional and civil aspects of marriage. In short:

Traditional marriage covers the religious/moral aspects of the union.

Civil marriage is essentially the legal contract by which the federal and state governments extend certain rights and responsibilities to consenting adults.

These two concepts are not mutually exclusive; any form of governance is inevitably influenced by values-based agendas that change (sometimes drastically) over time. Everyone would agree that there is a limit to what the government should spend its time (and money) regulating when it comes to marriage. Unfortunately, people disagree on exactly where that threshold should be.

Not Republicans, though. Apparently this issue unites 80% of Republicans. Candidates for the Chair of the Republican National Conference (RNC) recently cited the importance of Traditional Marriage in preserving the integrity of the nuclear family unit, providing healthy environments for children and defining who we are as Americans (link below). In their opinion, it is the government’s primary objective to ensure that marriage remains a union of one man and one woman (under God), primarily for the purpose of procreating.

Is this really what the current marriage laws do?

With very few exceptions, the requirements for people to enter into a marriage are established by state governments. The criteria have changed over time according to what is socially acceptable. The Civil Rights movement sparked the most recent major overhaul of these laws, and it was as recent as 2000 that Alabama became the last state to repeal its constitutional amendment banning interracial marriage.

At the moment, most states will consider three things:

 A couples’ genetic proximity – this is to prevent close blood relatives from marrying. Around half of states require you to go beyond your first cousin. These laws came about after sociological studies published in the mid-1840s indicated cousin marriages resulted in unfit offspring. Interestingly, further study has concluded there is no significant correlation and the USA remains one of the only countries with legal prohibition of cousin marriages.

Both individual’s ability to consent to the marriage, usually by requiring they are of a minimum age and mental capacity. I can see an argument that these traits will ensure the couple can sufficiently care for any offspring, but suspect they also go some way towards protecting the individuals entering the marriage, as vulnerable members of society, from being abused.

Both individual’s gender – the topic we are currently grappling with. Obviously two individuals of the same sex cannot procreate without some form of third-party intervention.

I suppose these requirements do go some way toward ensuring a viable breeding pair, but surely this is not a comprehensive framework for preserving the integrity of the nuclear family unit. For starters: there is no assessment of a heterosexual couples’ fertility; children are not a required outcome of marriage; nor is there a government mandate to require couples who have had children out of wedlock to get married. There is also no assessment of a couple’s long-term compatibility to consider whether, if they do have kids, they have the tenacity to stay together. Can you imagine the public response if these reforms were suggested?

Under this logic, same-sex couples have the same procreation potential as infertile heterosexual couples – yet infertile heterosexual couples are not prohibited from marrying. Nor is a marriage license required for same-sex couples or infertile heterosexual couples to have children – either through surrogacy, artificial insemination or adoption. At this point, proponents of Traditional Marriage will usually question whether or not same-sex couples can adequately parent a child and scientists all over the world are rushing to provide evidence to support one side or the other.

Has the true motivation behind preserving Traditional Marriage revealed itself yet?

How confusing is this: A 2009 poll in Iowa found that 92% of those surveyed said gay marriage in the state had led to ‘no real change’ in their lives. Yet, a 2010 poll found that only 44% of Iowans supported same-sex marriage. I know statistics aren’t to be trusted, but this does demonstrate something important: the Traditional Marriage movement is not about preserving the sanctity of marriage – it exists, quite simply, to exclude same-sex couples from equally accessing the benefits, rights and privileges associated with marriage. The arguments used are offensive and the entire debate does more to contribute to the destruction of young peoples’ mental and physical wellbeing than it does to protect children because it perpetuates the culture of hate and discrimination.

Consider how this makes me feel:

The government considers it unsuitable for me to marry my close relatives, anyone under the age of 18, anyone who is mentally incapable of making decisions or any woman. This tells me that, in the eyes of the government, homosexuality is on par with incest, paedophilia and abusing people with learning disabilities – all of which are criminal offenses.

As a young person I felt ashamed of who I was and the feelings I had; as a result, I hid myself away from friends and family until I could escape to a context where I felt safe enough to be ‘out’. I don’t ever remember anyone saying that being gay was wrong, but I concluded from the (American) world around me that it was not acceptable.

In a way I was fortunate. Not everyone can leave their situation or create a space where they can fit in, particularly when they are young. I never suffered bullying in school as a result of my sexuality but the evidence of bullying across the USA is overwhelming. It is driving bright young people to kill themselves. Where is their protection?

More importantly, where do you think these bullies draw their justification from?

Children aren’t raised solely by their parents. They mimic the behaviour of the adults around them and draw so much of their worldly understanding and self-worth from their interactions with teachers, church elders, peers and, perhaps most influential, the media. Adults are fuelling the fire of homophobia in our country. Rather than working to protect children, state and federal legislators who oppose marriage equality are complicit in perpetuating this hatred to the detriment of everyone. Rather than helping to keep families together, they are tearing families apart.

It was essentially the subtle hatred of gays in the USA that drove me to leave, so that I could be who I was without fear of discrimination. Now, with DOMA in place and the Traditional Marriage movement seemingly gaining momentum, it is the institutionalised discrimination that directly excludes me, like so many others, from returning with my foreign partner. 

Reference:

RNC Candidates debate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmuJ-wtnPEI&feature=player_embedded

Public Opinion of Gay Marriage in Iowa: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Iowa 

All Hearts Come Home

Before coming out, I had always felt like I was one person in the USA and a different person abroad. I already had a hard enough time trying to shape my life abroad into a telephone conversation – coming back to the USA to visit my family was a completely different mindgame. Regardless of how I had evolved in the months since my last visit, once I crossed the threshold of the family home I felt like I had to regress back to being the same little kid I had always been under my Mom’s roof.

Any visit would bring me, my Mom, my Grandma and my brother together. Usually my Aunt and a shortlist of other family friends would make appearances throughout the week. There would be brief exchanges of stories about what everyone had done recently. I would be asked weird and wonderful questions about my life overseas, which often provided more insight about the asker’s own life. Admittedly, most of these would come from Grandma: did I have a microwave (yes), did I live far from the queen (not really, if you count Holyrood palace), how many TV channels did I get (at first 5, now over 100), did I really pay nothing to see the doctor (yes), but was that doctor as good as an American doctor (yes).

However, the majority of time during any visit is spent doing what people who have known each other their whole lives do best – dredge up the past. In the first few years I lived outside the USA, dredging up the past was hard because I was doing everything I could to distance myself from that past. Simple comments about what my hair used to look like or what I used to wear or how I used to play the flute, etc., used to send me into an internal rage. I felt that their constant references to the past overlooked the person I had become.

So, simply making my Mom aware of C’s existence and significance in my life was a huge step towards reconciling my two separate lives. Mom now had a glimpse of my real life – that is, the one I lived the majority of the time. She had finally seen and acknowledged my present.

Shortly after my Mom returned to the USA, I met C’s family for the first time. They are so integrated into my life now that it’s hard for me to chronologically place that first meeting. I remember it was a warm, sunny afternoon BBQ in C’s older brother's backyard. I was incredibly nervous and struggled to come to grips with the rather fast-paced west coast accent. But I also remember feeling so welcomed.

C came out to her family in her teens and had already gone through the tumultuous re-building of relationships that follow these revelations. It was heart-warming to see a family all interacting as adults. They accepted me immediately as her partner because there was no need to first overcome the issue of sexuality. It felt so...normal.

One of the highlights for me was meeting C’s two nephews for the first time. At the time they were 2 and 7 and we played football in the back garden. Kids don’t care who you are or where you come from as long as you know how to have fun. They both accepted me immediately, particularly the youngest. He followed me around for most of the day and we shared a special bonding moment on the porch steps, eating chips, bobbing our heads and tapping our feet along to the music. For the next year they called me Panda and after that I became Auntie. I also now have a niece and another nephew on the way. It is certainly a title and a role I cherish.

I had learned a lot from what my Mom and I had fought about when she was here. As much as I wanted to hit the fast-forward button and move our lives along to when everything could be ‘normal’, I knew we had to get through the awkward phase first, however long that was going to be.

I found out later on that one of the main issues my Mom struggled with was that she now felt like she was lying to her mother. My Grandmother is an amazing woman with a sharp wit and an incredibly generous spirit, but she has gotten increasingly stubborn in recent years. Mom worried that she wouldn’t accept this part of me and it would permanently affect our relationship. In coming out, I had effectively transferred my worry and stress to her. Whenever I phoned home, I would always speak to both of them at the same time and any mention of C was always met with a very swift change of subject. At times I felt like coming out had been pointless - I still couldn’t talk about my life!

In September 2006 I returned to the USA for a 2-week visit and to get my UK student visa. C booked tickets to come over for the second week and I softly sounded out with my Mom if she would be able to come to Normal and see where I grew up. I mentioned to my Mom in an email that C would be in Chicago anyway and I would need to be up there for a few days to get my visa – looking to see if she would extend the invitation for both of us to spend a few days in Normal before flying back to the UK. She didn’t. I wasn’t disappointed, but I was frustrated. I couldn’t see how anything was going to change without an opportunity for everyone to be in the same place at the same time. C offered me a lot of perspective, reminding me that it was still very early days.

I did feel more at ease with myself and my Mom in the week I spent with my family. Mom and I had a couple of brief but re-affirming conversations. She again stressed that she knew I was happy, that she was proud of me and that she was trying. She explained how hard it was for her to keep quiet about things in front of Grandma and I think it gave her an insight into how I had felt all those years, though I had the advantage of distance.

C and I had an amazing time in Chicago. It was the first time she had visited the city and our first trip in the USA together. Over the course of the week I introduced her to: lunchtime margaritas at the Cheesecake Factory promptly followed by a tipsy afternoon shopping spree; Illinois tornado warnings, including what to do when the sky turns green and it starts to hail uncontrollably; and, most importantly, many of my friends from college. In a way she got to experience some of the ‘me’ that exists outside the UK and I was grateful for that. We returned to the UK together, and I was, once again, a student.

The rest of that year was spent juggling time between classes, shifts in a cafe, and nights at C’s little country retreat. She always made sure I was well-fed and well-clothed and sanctioned the occasional afternoon truancy as long as it fell on her day off and we could spend it together.

I continued to do better in keeping in touch with my family, and respected my Mom’s need for time. I would mention C in passing, but wouldn’t over-emphasise her in any way that would make Mom feel uncomfortable with her new secret. I knew it would take time.

In the run-up to Christmas, my Mom and Grandma mailed me 3 boxes of Christmas joy. One was full of cookies (this is an annual tradition very much enjoyed by all my friends) – it arrived first, was opened immediately and consumed within a week. The other two were full of presents for me – all wrapped – and I was under strict instructions NOT to open them until Christmas Day. They went under the tiny fake tree I had in my room. On Christmas Eve (close enough!), I opened the boxes to find a selection of bizarre, hand-picked treasures. I am at loss for words to describe the presents my family send me and any unknowing person would struggle to justify the cost of shipping once they’ve seen what’s inside. Each odd little trinket in itself is just clutter, but cumulatively (and especially with the hand-written notes describing each) they represent a little taste of home and a lot of love.

The most surprising treasure, and the one that meant the most to me, was a small green stocking. It had C’s name on it.

Merry Christmas!

Lie to me

When I got home from work on Wednesday I was flooded with news of Obama signing DADT into law and immediately got on YouTube to watch the full video for myself. It was validating to hear my President recognising that sexual orientation is not a character flaw so significant that it undermines a person’s potential to demonstrate courage and valour and to see him sign those sentiments into law.

It’s staggering to think that 14,000 people were discharged from service for being gay. I welled up when Obama spoke of Captain Jonathan Hopkins being discharged only to receive emails from his soldiers saying they had always known he was gay and thought he was the best commander they ever had. He was removed from service because of his sexuality and not his leadership qualities. In spite of everything he worked for and the achievements he made, his country told him that he was not worthy of service because of who he was.

This echoed with a video I watched recently about Jane Castor, the Tampa Police Chief. She says she fundamentally wants to be remembered as a good police chief, but at the same time recognises the significance of her position as the first female chief (and as a lesbian). These aspects of her self make her significantly more vulnerable to criticism. She says “If a male in this position fails, then he fails as an individual. If I fail, I fail for all women.” She can’t change her gender or her sexuality (although she could have chosen to keep it hidden). Regardless of how she defines herself, she will be judged by how others may ultimately define her.

Discrimination is unfair treatment based on prejudice. The particular trait identified for prejudice can include almost anything, as demonstrated by Jane Elliott’s “blue-eyed/brown-eyed” experiment. If you haven’t seen this before, I recommend you watch it. It clearly demonstrates just how easy it is to discriminate; we all do it and some believe it is an innate human trait. It is for this very reason that protecting everyone against institutionalised discrimination is of particular relevance to humanity.

Take some time to consider this:

How do you identify yourself? How do you prioritise your unique genetic traits, personality characteristics, educational and/or professional achievements or your relationships to other people to define who you are?

How to you portray this identity to others? In what ways do you express yourself through your appearance or the way you speak, etc.?

Do any of your identifying traits limit what you can do in certain situations? If so, have you ever changed the way you portray yourself or hidden certain aspects of yourself in order to reduce conflict or achieve an objective?

Is that lying?

Growing up, I ignored so many aspects of my self because I somehow knew they were wrong. I don’t ever remember anyone sitting me down and directly saying GAY IS BAD, but I inherently felt ashamed of the feelings I had and my attraction toward women. I knew that what I felt was ‘different’ and so I buried it away, out of reach from everyone, including myself. I wasn’t lying; I was simply adapting to my situation in the way I felt was most appropriate to ensure my own ‘survival’. By changing that situation (i.e. studying abroad in Australia) I was able to express those hidden aspects and it fundamentally changed how I looked, spoke and interacted with people. I liked who I was in that situation and I did what I needed to do to ensure I could be that person most of the time.

We all adapt to our context in some way. When I go to work I wear office attire, I am confident, making eye contact with everyone, speaking clearly and directly and ensuring my body language is welcoming and professional. At parties I like to drink myself merry and usually end up dancing badly and/or singing loudly. At home I lounge around in sweatpants and eat my dinner off my lap in front of back-to-back episodes of Man v Food. All of these are me, and yet not one of them completely defines who I am.

So adapting to a situation is normal and healthy; BUT, there is a threshold of acceptability with regard to asking people to sacrifice their integrity. It is not healthy or right to force someone to portray something other than who they are for a long period of time. Senator Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) made a poignant observation in the 2 December DADT hearings: DADT undermines the fundamental principles of the military, namely honesty, integrity and trust, and forced gay and lesbian soldiers into a situation of “I don’t want to lie, but you won’t let me tell the truth”.  

This is almost word-for-word how C describes how she feels going through border control in the USA. Immigration officers at every airport assess the potential risk of each entrant based on the information given to them. If they feel any individual is trying to undermine the system in any way, including trying to enter the USA deceitfully, they can refuse that person entry.

In particular, officers try to assess if a person’s situation is such that they are at risk of overstaying their visa. C’s ESTA visa is valid for 2 years and she is entitled to multiple entries, provided she stays for no longer than 90 days at a time. If an immigration officer interpreted the fact that C is the same-sex partner of an American citizen as a potential risk factor, she could be turned away at any time. This isn’t as big a risk as being discharged from the military, but the principle is exactly the same.

C only travels to the USA with me once or twice a year and we only ever stay for short periods of time, so I think we’re safely under the radar. We have evidence of our lives in the UK and can demonstrate that we are not intending to live in the USA, so it is unlikely that an immigration officer could find suitable grounds to refuse her entry. Yet we still adapt ourselves to reduce any risk every time we enter the country.

In October 2009, the immigration officer at O’Hare asked C the purpose of her trip. If she had been completely forthcoming she would have said “I’m here because my mother-in-law has sustained a critical head injury. She’s in intensive care and my partner is beside herself with grief. I’m here because I want to help look after the people I love”. Instead, she responded: “I’m here for a shopping trip.”

I don’t want to lie to you...

My brother asked me recently why I hate America. I answered him honestly – I don’t. I just find it impossible to respect a country that doesn’t respect me. From the moment our plane touches down in the USA, we are forced to lie about who we are. This is the exact same principle as DADT; it is unfair and wrong. We may not be soldiers sacrificing our lives in the name of the USA, but we are both human beings (and I am an American citizen).

When we return to the UK, bleary-eyed at Heathrow, I stand in the Non-EU passport line while C breezes through the EU/British passport line. When I get up to the counter, I hand over my foreign-national identity card that clearly states I have definite leave to remain as the spouse of a UK citizen. The immigration officer scans my card, asks me how my trip was and I cross the border to my adopted home country, integrity intact.

I will never suffer anxiety about trying to get across the UK border because my rights here are validated. My love here is validated. My status as a human being here is validated. These are the basic principles of life – not special privileges. We are expected to assume the same responsibilities as everyone else, so are we therefore not deserving of the same respect entitled everyone else?

References:

White House video of Obama signing DADT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS26CciE0VQ

Jane Castor video: http://vodpod.com/watch/5088563-jane-castor-tampa-chief-of-police-out-lesbian

Rachel Maddow’s summary of the DADT hearings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Be72P9Y0eM&feature=related

Jane Elliott A Class Divided http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCjDxAwfXV0

A Mother's Love

2006 was a milestone year for me. Through a series of independent experiences, I finally began to really understand the impact my decisions and actions have on the people who love me. This is an important realisation for everyone, but is particularly useful for anyone wanting to be a good partner, daughter and friend.

C and I decided to go on our first holiday together. Rather than choosing a secluded weekend away in the familiar Scottish Highlands, we got a cheap last-minute deal to spend a week Goa, India. It was a freezing January in Scotland, so why not?

Our flight from Gatwick was delayed, so we filled those couple of hours by filling (and re-filling) our wine glasses. By the time we boarded the plane we were very merry indeed and I promptly fell into a drunken slumber with my head on my tray table. I awoke about an hour later and got up to go to the toilet. At this point it all goes a bit fuzzy, but I do remember seeing some shocked passengers’ faces as the world closed in around me and I plummeted, unconscious, into the aisle halfway between my seat and the galley. From what I gather, the flight crew scooped me up, took me to the back of the plane and brought me around. I was pretty embarrassed, but accepted a big bottle of water and sat up for a few minutes before very quickly passing out again, pouring the entire contents of the water onto myself and the floor around me.

Around this time a very camp steward was waking C up to let her know her ‘friend’ had just passed out and was at the back of the plane. She was understandably concerned as she approached me laying in a puddle of liquid with my feet in the air and an oxygen mask on my face.

I tried to make light of the situation at the time, making jokes through the oxygen mask, but I was struck by the look of desperation and helplessness on C’s face as she approached and the relief that washed over her as she watched me recover. I’d been in a horrific jet ski accident when I was 16 and remember very clearly the same look on my Mom’s face as she rushed me through the rural roads of Illinois to the hospital. Medical emergencies, no matter how small, always inspire us to look at things from a new perspective. Although she jokes about it at parties, C isn’t far from the truth when she says she truly demonstrated her love by kneeling down in what she thought was my urine to take my pulse and comfort me.

It wasn’t all heavy, though - we had a lot of fun, after that! We took a walk along Calangute Beach that Sunday. It was packed with locals and a group of boys were playing football (soccer). Their ball got away from them and I tried to show off by kicking it back – barefoot Beckham style. Rather than going anywhere near where I intended it to go, the ball careened toward a family walking toward us. Fortunately the husband ducked in time to avoid it, but left his unsuspecting wife, walking behind him, completely open. Needless to say the ball intersected with this woman’s face. C nearly collapsed in a puddle of her own urine, laughing uncontrollably as I desperately apologised. She knew in that moment that she wanted to spend the rest of her life with me – she had never laughed more in life with anyone else.

I could write for days about how magical that first holiday was, but the point is that we both realised in that week that we love living our lives together. Every crazy experience was heightened by the fact that we shared it. We truly became partners on that holiday and every trip we’ve taken since then has reinforced our bond.

Things continued to develop back in our day-to-day lives as well. My voluntary placement was going very well and I began to see the links between my MSc dissertation topic and a potential career in urban planning. I was urged by a colleague at the national charity to apply for a job with a planning consultancy based on the skills I was demonstrating and this inspired me to think about getting a qualification that might actually lead to something. I found an MSc course at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh that was a perfect fit.

My Mom turned 60 that March, but I wasn’t there for the celebration. Her present to herself was a passport (she is now one of only 22% of Americans to have one) and a ticket to come see me. As the date of her arrival approached, I grew increasingly nervous about how I was going to introduce her to my life in Edinburgh. I knew by the time she had left here, I would have finally come out to her.

She arrived in the middle of May for a 3 week stay. The day after her arrival, two of my good friends registered their civil partnership. I was honoured to be asked to be a witness for their ceremony and had accepted before my Mom told me she was coming. So I told her I had an appointment in the afternoon and I left her shopping on the Royal Mile with a mobile phone and instructions to answer it when I called.

I met C at the registry office and we both celebrated as our friends made a lifelong commitment to each other in a beautiful and very moving ceremony. We all went along to a local al fresco pub to celebrate and I phoned my Mom to find out where she was.

She didn’t answer the phone.

11 times.

By the time she did answer she was panicked – she was jet lagged and thirsty and not totally sure where she was. I managed to figure out she was just around the corner from us and went to meet her. She suggested we go back to where I had been so she could get a Diet Coke and sit down. I literally had 40metres to explain to her she was about to join a lesbian wedding reception. I said something to the effect of, this is a rather eccentric group of people to which she simply responded “I understand.”

My Mom impressed me a lot in the following hour. She joked and laughed with everyone there and showed off all the things she’d discovered in shops up and down the Royal Mile. Afterward, C drove us up Arthur’s Seat so Mom could take in perhaps the best view of the city and we went to the Shore for dinner. Mom seemed so relaxed, but I felt sick as C dropped us off at my flat because I knew I was about to have the conversation with my Mom that I had been avoiding for years.

By this time I had moved out of my friend’s front room and into a beautiful tenement in Edinburgh’s New Town. Unfortunately the charm of the flat was outweighed by the general neglect normally given to older shared-tenant properties in the city. It was a cold, damp place for most of the year. As we sat in the lounge room I muttered something to the effect of “C’s not just my friend, she’s my partner” and “I’ve always wondered if you’ve known I’m not straight”. But I was completely blown away when, after a few moments of silence, my Mom said “You are my daughter and I love you. I will try to figure out how to be okay with this.”

The following week we went to Galway in Ireland. We didn’t talk much about my revelation and whenever I brought up C Mom would get noticeably uncomfortable. That weekend, back in Edinburgh, we had a big fight. I had asked if it would be okay if I spent some time that evening with C, and Mom got upset. She had, after all, come all this way to see me. I said a lot of things I regret in that exchange, but fortunately I listened to what she told me:

Almost every day my Mom had no idea what I was doing, if I was happy or if I was even alive. I had shut her out completely and she had no point of reference in my life anymore. She knew I had been holding back and now that she knew why, it was going to take some time for her to come to terms with it all. She felt lied to and used. I had always gotten what I wanted from her and I had given her nothing in return for the last 3 years.

She was trying to meet me more than halfway by travelling across the world to be a part of my life abroad, if even for a short time. She wanted to be able to go back and picture me doing normal things in her head. I was asking her to instantly accept all the things I had hidden from her for all this time; she was at least owed the time to transition into this.

I respected her feelings more appropriately after that and we spent the week travelling up the west coast of Scotland to Skye. It was a magical trip and we were both more relaxed around each other and laughed a lot. I got to know my mother again in that week and do you know what I realised? In spite of me trying to hide from her, she had always known me better than I knew myself. When we got back to Edinburgh, she asked me to invite C to the movies with us to see the Da Vinci Code (we’d already visited Roslyn Chapel). That was the first indication of her acceptance and it meant the world to me.

Before she left, my Mom told me she would pay for me to get yet another university degree, even though it meant another year away from the USA, and away from her. She told me she knew I was happy here – otherwise why would I stay? She made me promise that I would try harder to keep in touch with everyone. I had a responsibility in this relationship, too, after all.

When I came back from seeing her off, I found this note on my pillow.

Thanks for showing me a great time. Now I will be able to picture lots of things easier. I know you will do great at university and that you are happy to be in. It is a big accomplishment and we are proud of you! Remember you are very cherished and loved by Grandma and me.

Stay in touch better. We miss you tons.

All my love!!

Hugs and Kisses!! (from Grandma too)

Mom

The void left by her absence lingered for weeks...