The seeming contradiction between support for the tangible benefits of marriage and opposition to calling a same-sex relationship a marriage is best explained by the symbolic meanings of marriage. While some of the opposition is simply a reaction to the demand that the longstanding definition of a word be reconsidered, much more is at stake to the opponents of same-sex marriage. The concept of marriage is deeply entwined with people's identities as men and women and as heterosexuals. The status of being married is associated with being honorable and respected, two cherished social values. In the view of opponents, expanding access to the status of being married to same-sex couples may threaten to diminish the value of that status, just as it may threaten to subvert traditional sex and gender roles. As late as 2002, 55 percent of Americans thought that homosexuality was always wrong. While that represents a substantial drop from the 73 percent who said so in 1973, it remains a majority.

The lesson to be drawn from these findings by the gay and lesbian rights movement is a difficult one. To win real recognition of same-sex partnerships, it may be necessary to advocate only for civil unions and the practical benefits—insurance, hospital visitation, taxation, and the like—associated with them. For at least another generation, it is unlikely that gay marriage will pass muster in the court of public opinion. This is a hard pill to swallow for LGBTs and their supporters, as so many lesbians and gays are still exhilarated by the images of gay marriage broadcast last year from San Francisco and Boston—and exhausted from the state-by-state battles they have fought against the constitutional amendments.

How do we reconcile the immense popularity of Queer Eye and Will and Grace—or even the daytime talk-show hit Ellen—with the continuing controversies surrounding the rights of gay people? Perhaps the answer is to be found in what is shown and what is not shown on these programs. The character Will Truman virtually never encounters discrimination as a gay man, and he rarely, if ever, uses his skills as a lawyer to protect the rights of gay people. Everyone knows that if he were ever to marry someone, his true love is Grace. The "Fabulous Five" in Queer Eye are presented as men devoid of any private lives. They may be arbiters of taste and manners, but for all we know, they live alone and have no sex lives or romances whatsoever. And despite the nearly endless revelations about her personal life that appear in the tabloid press, Ellen DeGeneres says little about her lesbian identity to the audiences of adoring, middle-aged, mostly straight women who watch her show. The gay people who are so exceedingly popular in mass culture are smart and likable—but they raise none of the issues that are at the center of the struggle for gay rights.

So when will lesbians and gays be accepted by the American public as not just entertainers, but equals? All the trends in American public opinion toward the rights of LGBT people are trends of increasing knowledge and affection. In the long run, these trends are likely to result in greater support for substantive equality. The trends are in the direction of justice—but the struggle for justice never is an easy one.

Patrick J. Egan is a doctoral candidate in political science at the University of California, Berkeley. Kenneth Sherrill is a professor of political science at Hunter College, City University of New York.