Academics certainly publish some weird stuff, and today one could work full time exposing the nonsense, and still only scratch the surface. For example, Professor Bethany Letiecq wrote in the Journal of Marriage and Family. "Marriage fundamentalism" advances "white supremacy."
"I theorize that marriage fundamentalism, like structural racism, is a key structuring element of White heteropatriarchal supremacy."
"Marriage fundamentalism can be understood as an ideological and cultural phenomenon, where adherents espouse the superiority of the two-parent married family,"
Well, we can see that here is the gender agenda at play, with the attack upon the "binary," but what the professor does not address is that across the non-White world, especially Africa, people readily marry and most define themselves by binary sexual/gender categories, of man and woman. Thus, it could be argued that what is the real "racism," is attacking the choices made by these non-White people.
Why should they listen to an American liberal-Left professor writing from the comfort of an ivory tower? They should not, and will not, because it is all just another academic exercise, to be forgotten after the next cycle of journal articles. It reminds me of something like a compost bin; garbage in, garbage buried.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/marriage-promotes-white-supremacy-george-mason-professor/
"Marriage fundamentalism" advances "white supremacy," according to a George Mason University professor.
"I theorize that marriage fundamentalism, like structural racism, is a key structuring element of White heteropatriarchal supremacy," Professor Bethany Letiecq wrote in the Journal of Marriage and Family.
"Marriage fundamentalism can be understood as an ideological and cultural phenomenon, where adherents espouse the superiority of the two-parent married family," she wrote.
She did not respond to two emailed requests for comment on her views sent in the past three weeks. The Fix asked if she would support government support for marriage, such as tax breaks, if they were better tailored to benefit all racial groups.
Letiecq employs "critical family theorizing…to delineate an overarching orientation to structural oppression and unequal power relations that advantages [white heteropatriarchal nuclear families] and marginalizes others as a function of marriage fundamentalism."
Letiecq says the government has coerced "its citizens to enter into an institution built upon White heteropatriarchal supremacy." Letiecq says marriage as an institution has allowed white heterosexual couples "to gain access to benefits, rights, and protections."
She cohabitates with her partner and their children "in a committed heterosexual union outside the institution of marriage."
Letiecq concludes that only white heterosexual couples reap the social and financial benefits of marriage subsidized by the government while minority Americans do not gain any such benefits.
Marriage scholar Brad Wilcox disagrees with the George Mason professor.
"Marriage is an institution that has advanced the common good in many civilizations, from Europe to the Americas, and from Asia to Africa," Wilcox told The Fix via email.
"Marriage benefits children of all racial and ethnic backgrounds," the University of Virginia sociologist and director of the National Marriage Project wrote. He also recently published a book about the benefits of marriage.
He pointed The Fix to several articles he wrote that show the importance of married fathers and the harms of single-parent households.
The paper is "terrifying" according to Terry Schilling, the president of a pro-family group.
The paper "suggests far-left academics are ramping up their attacks on the family, the most important institution in society," the American Principles Project leader told The Fix via an emailed statement.
"Although the social science on the immense benefits of strong, intact families is unimpeachable, this author simply waves them away," Schilling said. "She ignores the extreme harm that has come to minority Americans as a result of family breakdown in their communities."
He also criticized her for "paradoxically" blaming "the government for 'reproducing' this 'family inequality' in America, even as she also admits the welfare state's privileging of families hasn't arrested the drop in marriage rates."
He said it is "dangerous" to "attempt to degrade the family" since "it is already in serious decline."
"We need to be doing what we can right now to shore up the family, not tear it down. Otherwise, our society won't be 'reproducing' much of anything in the very near future."