No, This Is Not About Britt and Me. It’s About Marriage Equality.
The best thing Obergefell v. Hodges did was make same-sex marriage unremarkable. The second-best thing is that it made same-sex divorce unremarkable.
With observations like these, it’s no wonder Hallmark keeps sending rejection letters. But if marriage were nothing more than greeting card sentiments, it would be worth fighting for.
The laws and regulations around spousal benefits, taxation, and inheritance don’t just help couples protect their relationships—they also make it possible to end them.
Before Obergefell was decided 10 years ago, many married same-sex couples discovered they were unable to divorce. They were stuck in legal limbo, dealing with unprecedented scenarios with real-world consequences.1
We’ll discuss that right after I offer …
A Quick Defense of Unremarkable Marriage
Every marriage is remarkable in its own way. The Complimentary Spouse’s and mine certainly is.2 But when same-sex marriages are unremarkable in the eyes of the law, that’s progress. It means marriage equality is real: same rules, same rights, same responsibilities, same endless discussions about where to eat dinner.
Catch-22
When Britt and I got married, it was virtually impossible for us to get divorced. We were married in California, but in the United States, you have to file for divorce in the state where you live. For us, that was Florida, where our marriage wasn’t recognized.3
This wasn’t a situation we ever needed to deal with, as we’re in this for life, but other same-sex couples in states without marriage equality did. For them, the lock in wedlock was literal.
Judges in these states were rarely sympathetic. Their legal arguments usually went like this: If we grant you a divorce, we’re admitting that same-sex marriage is real, and we ain’t doing that, so fuck you.
OK, I’m paraphrasing a bit but, if you look past the legal jargon in many of the rulings before Obergefell, you’ll see I’m not too far off the mark.4
Same-sex marriage advocate Bex Schwartz5 pointed out the irony.
“If you’re against same-sex marriage, you certainly should be for divorce,” she told The Atlantic in 2012, three years before Obergefell.
Divorce Isn’t Just About How. It’s About Why.
Randi Milgrim, a leading divorce attorney on Long Island,6 says the right to divorce isn’t just about laws and paperwork—it’s about recognizing that some marriages become unsafe, unsustainable, or just plain wrong.
“It’s the way out of marriage when trust has been lost, with security for yourself and your children,” she said.
That makes divorce more than just a legal mechanism, she explained. It’s a way for people to reclaim autonomy and affirm their self-worth. It also lets them show the world what they believe a healthy, loving relationship should—and shouldn’t—look like. That sets a powerful example for children and adults alike.
After Obergefell
In the Obergefell decision, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote:
It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. … They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.
Justice Anthony Kennedy
Divorce might not be a pleasant topic, but it’s just as important to approach it with the same dignity as we do marriage. Before Obergefell made marriage equality the law of the land, state inconsistencies and judicial prejudice denied many same-sex couples that dignity.
Freedom to marry entails freedom to divorce.
Hallmark won’t put that in a greeting card, but Obergefell put it into law—where it counts.
From Our “Credit Where Credit’s Due” Department
The artwork at the top of this post is a mural by D*Face. I took this photo in Brooklyn in 2019.
Here’s Another Thing You Don’t Find in Greeting Cards: Footnotes
- I believe the legal term for this is clusterfuckery. ↩︎
- After all, he’s my media naranja. ↩︎
- I wrote virtually in the first sentence because technically it would have been possible. It would require moving to California and living there for at least six months to establish residency. ↩︎
- The rationale provided in this decision is one of the worst things I’ve ever read, not just because of its reasoning, but because the authors put three spaces after the periods. Using two spaces is criminal. Three spaces should get you life in prison. ↩︎
- She organized the Pop-Up Chapel in Central Park when marriage equality came to New York. ↩︎
- Who happens to be my cousin, which is why Britt isn’t worried that I have a top divorce attorney’s contact info in my phone. ↩︎