NYC might have mistakenly married first same-sex couple
Kimbah Nelson and Jason Stenson, both biologically male, married in late May in New York City, thanks to a food stamp card.
It is illegal for gay and lesbian couples to marry in New York, though the state recognizes same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. But Nelson used a food stamp card for an ID – it listed the gender as “F” – and wore a dress to City Hall, the New York Post reports.
Nelson is transgendered and Stenson does not identify himself as gay. But as they walked out of City Hall together after the ceremony was performed, Stenson said, “I think we just made history.”
Their marriage might be the first official same-sex marriage in New York State – though it might not stay on the books long.
The City Clerk’s office said that the marriage is not legal and they are considering next steps. The office is now requiring a birth certificate as proof of identification for marrriages.
Evan Wolfson, head of Freedom to Marry, told the Post that this is “one more illustration of why the New York Senate needs to move quickly to pass the marriage bill and end this discrimination in New York.”
Note: OK, readers – I changed the wording a bit. What do you think?
Dear Jennifer,
Somehow I stumbled onto this article of your and I read several of the comments, which are sort of interesting
I found the link to the NY Post article, and I am not found of the NY Post.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/06152009/news/regionalnews/marriage_license_of_2_nyc_men_revoked_174388.htm
With the headline:
MARRIAGE LICENSE OF 2 NYC MEN REVOKED
Now it seems to me, that on a technicality that Nelson true was born a male,and presently under going a sex reversal to become a female this really is not a same sex marriage.
I am not really sure if they fall under the term of being “homosexuals”.
I think that if two people are engaged, married, or seperated, the idea of labeling them not as a couple, but as the “t” word or the the “g” word, is degrading. we are all human. love is love.
did you get this?
@Megan
As a gay male, I have personally tried to understand trans people. I defend their use of whichever personal pronoun defines them best. A person with male anatomy who identifies as a female is, unfortunately, still a person with male anatomy. When it comes to marriage and a legal definition of “sex”, it is your sex organs that define who you are. “Gender” is a different one. A person with female anatomy can easily identify as a male. This would be a case where they are female sex and male gender.
A “same-sex marriage” is one between individuals of the same sex. This means that the reference to a “same-sex couple” is accurate.
This is also why there is a fight for same-sex marriage. There are no laws that forbid same-gender marriage. Any person with male anatomy can marry any person with female anatomy. It doesn’t matter that the male identifies as female and always dresses as a female. However, if the male gets a sex-change operation, the marriage becomes a same-sex marriage and MAY no longer be recognized by the state/province/nation.
I do agree that the original reference to a “gay” couple was incorrect.
This isn’t “tricky”, Jennifer. It’s very simple. This is a straight couple. The wording here is still incredibly offensive. This isn’t about gay marriage; this is about the legal issues surrounding trans people getting their genders changed legally. Stop claiming what isn’t ours. You’re making us (the lgb community) all look bad, and anyone with an ounce of sense regarding trans issues knows this article is a crock of poo.
Good for them!!! I think it is horrible how the laws in this country are just so prejudiced against same sex marriages. Leave these people alone and let them share their “married” lives with the spouse of their choice, please!
Why is this being repeated here just like the other news stations? They are not a gay couple. Way to propagate the stereotype that trans people are some other flavor of gay, and also decievers.
New Paltz mayor MARRIED, Gays and Lesbian couples… I agree this is dumb and whatever this couple thought they were gonna get over on state of ny is just as crazy. If the state revoked the marriages of New Paltz then they can revoke theirs too.
I am over the 15 mins. of famers out there. Also, I agree, after you have the sex change then you are no longer Gay or Lesbian, they are now man and woman, who cares what he/she was when born, its what you are at time of “marriage.”
Another instance of the gay rights movement trying to appropriate trans issues.
This highlights the problems with demanding that trans people get surgery before legally changing documented sex (or even that sex is a required part of identification). A man and a woman marry, and the technicality that the woman hasn’t had surgery and changed her birth certificate morphs this into a same-sex marriage.
Ideally, there wouldn’t be any requirement to define sex on identification, and anyone could marry whomever they wish.
Also: “Biologically male” is also offensive. Are trans people not biological?
THIS FURIOUS COMMENT: From Ms. Autumn Sandeen, a nationally recognized transgender reporter/blogger.
I’m angry regarding how this story is being covered. This is not a same-sex marriage story; this is a transgender person not being able to marry the one she loves story. This is a story about why marriage equality is more than a gay and lesbian story; part of why marriage equality is a lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community civil rights issue.
If the couple in question technically was a same-sex couple, then for sure this couple are definitely not a same-gender couple. This was a marriage between a man and a woman where the state doesn’t recognize the woman as a woman.
So, the LGBT publication The Advocate now refers to pre-operative transsexual women as men. I’m a pre-operative transsexual woman myself, who was referred to as transgender in The Advocate just last week: was it a fluke that The Advocate didn’t refer to me as “Mr. Autumn Sandeen?”
Obviously, I’m seething over this. Let me clearly state in less than judicious terms what my opinion on the LGBT publication The Advocate not following the Associated Press’s, GLAAD’s and/or the NLGJA’s guidelines of referring to transgender people by their target gender:
Don’t gay up a transgender person’s wedding. If the LGBT press wants to use this marriage to make the point that marriage equality is more than just about gays and lesbians, then fine. Want to identify a transgender woman as a man to make it a same-sex marriage story? That is just not acceptable in the slightest.”
This story is WRONG on so very many levels. You should not discuss transgender rights unless you understand transgender issues!
I appreciate the changes in the article, although I am still uneasy about the title. Same-sex couple, while possibly technically appropriate due to the biological “sex” of the individuals, still implies same-gender.
That being said, the changes to the article itself have much improved it. Thank you.
This just gets to the whole discussion of how, when and why transgenders get their natal gendeer changed on identification papers. And if when that is done it is a ‘forever’ thing.
A very complicated path especially for those who ‘change’ only hormonally and never have any surgery other than hair removal etc.
So, actually, it just is anothr example of why two consenting adults should be allowed to marry … IRREGARDLESS of gender.
i have to say that were as im happy the too of them got what theywanted how is this a “gay” couple getting married when the one is dressed as and go’s by a womans name, an lives as a woman, an the other dose not ever call him self gay, sorry your little more then a stright couple, i think its funny they say they “tricked” people into getting married, becuase that all they are, tricksters, an they are not part of my community, you you act, dress, an live as a woman, your a woman in my mind, an if you do not think of you self as gay, then your not, an most of all if you look like a stright couple walking down the street, then you have not helped me, or any other g.l.b.t person, sorry
This is AWESOME. Hopefully, they wont repeal their mistake and will continue moving forward seeing as how it so far has been a complete non issue.
Congrats to the newlyweds!!