This essay asks a seemingly simple question: Can it ever be ethical to take a benefit that is invidiously denied others? Posed in such stark terms, the question seems to admit only one answer: “no.” But many, many heterosexuals voluntarily accept the benefits of marriage that are invidiously denied to their gay friends and family. This essay is an attempt to reconcile this conflict. The reconciliation we propose avoids total renunciation. Instead, we suggest a theory of limited disgorgement, a pragmatic formula to determine how much privileged people should give up if they decide to accept benefits invidiously denied to others.