Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drunks

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Gays in Maine Buying Up All the Wedding Rings, Catching All the Bouquets, Sexing In All the Honeymoon Suites

Posted by on Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 9:00 AM


What do you suppose happened to the 22%? How were their lives negatively impacted?

 

Comments (42) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Well obviously they were forced to watch homos hold hands. Also office talk of "did you see that fabulous wedding?!"
Posted by tigntink on January 24, 2013 at 9:07 AM · Report this
Matt from Denver 2
It's a negative impact when your lifelong bigotry, which has always been seen as just dandy by society at large, suddenly becomes not okay, and makes you a target of scorn. The bitter taste of losing isn't very positive, either.
Posted by Matt from Denver on January 24, 2013 at 9:07 AM · Report this
3
It gave them the sadz.
Posted by wxPDX on January 24, 2013 at 9:08 AM · Report this
Foghorn Leghorn 4
Their gay marriage proposals were cruelly rejected, obviously. :(
Posted by Foghorn Leghorn on January 24, 2013 at 9:19 AM · Report this
Jaymz 5
Because, now that they can get married, they are crushed that their partners don't want to!
Posted by Jaymz on January 24, 2013 at 9:19 AM · Report this
Jaymz 6
Foghorn beat me to the concept by seconds....
Posted by Jaymz on January 24, 2013 at 9:20 AM · Report this
Pope Peabrain 7
Their freedom of religion has been crushed, stomped and pooped on.
Posted by Pope Peabrain on January 24, 2013 at 9:21 AM · Report this
DAVIDinKENAI 8
They weren't invited to the wedding.
Posted by DAVIDinKENAI on January 24, 2013 at 9:22 AM · Report this
Paul Constant 9
To paraphrase Louis CK, they're mad because they had to "talk to [their] ugly child for fucking five minutes" about gay people.
Posted by Paul Constant http://https://twitter.com/paulconstant on January 24, 2013 at 9:27 AM · Report this
Helenka (also a Canuck) 10
Because they can't get anyone to marry them, straight or in-the-closet gay. And it's Just. So. Not. Fair.

::listens to the stomping of angry feet::
Posted by Helenka (also a Canuck) on January 24, 2013 at 9:37 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 11
I imagine waking up to find yourself on the obviously losing side of history would be a pretty negative feeling.

Posted by Theodore Gorath on January 24, 2013 at 9:39 AM · Report this
12
Perhaps that 22% did not say anything.
Posted by DRF on January 24, 2013 at 9:50 AM · Report this
emma's bee 13
I believe the clinical term for the injury is gluteal myalgia.
Posted by emma's bee on January 24, 2013 at 9:59 AM · Report this
Jaymz 14
@13 - officially has entered my lexicon, thank you.
Posted by Jaymz on January 24, 2013 at 10:03 AM · Report this
Looking For a Better Read 15
There's a certain erosion of quality of life when you sit in the dark corner of your own small world, stewing in your hatred and bigotry, pondering all the horrible, awful things that are surely occurring (the flamboyance! the fabulosity! the fucking!) that really have nothing to do with you, but that you just know are wrong, because Jesus.
Posted by Looking For a Better Read on January 24, 2013 at 10:07 AM · Report this
rob! 16
@13: Proctalgia fugax. This too shall pass.
Posted by rob! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZBdUceCL5U on January 24, 2013 at 10:11 AM · Report this
17
They keep crawling out from under their beds! And they're in the kitchen, eating my wife's jam!!! Why doesn't Mr. Maulding do something before it's too late!!?
Posted by seeker6079 on January 24, 2013 at 10:14 AM · Report this
18
@9, exactly. Now they have to explain to their kids why they should still be little bigots even though society is increasingly accepting of marriage equality.
Posted by JenV on January 24, 2013 at 10:18 AM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 19
Public Policy Polling's tweets link here but the full results PDF doesn't have a question about marriage. I'd kind of like to see what they were asked and if there were follow ups.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on January 24, 2013 at 10:30 AM · Report this
Sargon Bighorn 20
No doubt the other 22% are sitting in jail cells. The Gay Mafia targeted them, set up the sting, planted "evidence", kidnapped a few people, did some hair, smeared a reputation or two, glitter bombed a cocktail lounge, and WHAM-BAM those 22% now find themselves in jail under trumped up charges of just wanting to protect marriage.
Posted by Sargon Bighorn on January 24, 2013 at 10:34 AM · Report this
21
The exact same way Polygamy negatively impacts Danny's life.
Posted by aw, Danny; see? Bigotry Makes You Stupid. on January 24, 2013 at 10:34 AM · Report this
emma's bee 22
@16: Perfect! Especially apropos, since it can be associated with spontaneous erection in men.
Posted by emma's bee on January 24, 2013 at 10:37 AM · Report this
Will in Seattle 23
There have been some severe impacts in Maine.

Everyone in the lobster and fishing industry has been given invites as their fellow crew members got gay married, and you can only go to clambake weddings so often before all the days just start running together.

Also, there is a severe shortage of mimosas.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on January 24, 2013 at 10:37 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 24
21, Dan Savage on polygamy :

I have the same reaction to legalizing marriage for gays as I do for polygamists. What’s the big deal? Legalize it. It’s kind of like arguing against giving women the vote because then women will want to enter the work force. (Horrors!)

Bottom line: Grown ups should be allowed to marry whoever (whomever?) they want. http://slog.thestranger.com/2006/03/05-1…
Posted by Rob in Baltimore http://www.wishbookweb.com/ on January 24, 2013 at 10:50 AM · Report this
Womyn2me 25
God gave them boils. And locusts. and odd feelings of attraction towards the same sex.
Posted by Womyn2me http://http:\\www.shelleyandlaura.com on January 24, 2013 at 11:03 AM · Report this
RTam 26
@24 Thanks for that. @21 brought out my "super-confused" face since I was pretty sure, but had no immediate proof, that Dan had no problem with consensual polygamy.
Posted by RTam on January 24, 2013 at 11:19 AM · Report this
MacBastard 27
They can't stop thinking about gay sex! And no one will let them get any!
Posted by MacBastard on January 24, 2013 at 11:21 AM · Report this
28
@21 @24, Dan has de-evolved (devolved?) on this.

In his 2012 dinner debate with NOM's Brian Brown, Savage was strongly *against* polygamy citing reasons such as destabilization of society and sexism (males get multiple females leaving some males frustrated, females in unequal roles).

But this Big Love picture is archaic. Today it equally could go the other way with poly relationships and all even out in the long run.

Dan should re-evolve on this, his 2006 piece was rational.

I can understand how he has to be careful not to undermine same-sex marriage movement and being pro polygamy might do more harm than good, but at least he could say "no opinion" on it.
Posted by delta35 on January 24, 2013 at 11:23 AM · Report this
29
Just realized @24 you gave a wrong link, NOT by Dan but by Josh Feit.

So I guess dan never devolved. Still, he could evolve, right?
Posted by delta35 on January 24, 2013 at 11:26 AM · Report this
kim in portland 30
Sour grapes. They're just feeling victimized. I spent Chrstmas with a few.
Posted by kim in portland http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/11/fast-paced_video_provides_a_fu.html on January 24, 2013 at 11:34 AM · Report this
scary tyler moore 31
@17 for the monty python win.
Posted by scary tyler moore http://pushymcshove.blogspot.com/ on January 24, 2013 at 11:34 AM · Report this
Rob in Baltimore 32
28, I believe Dan was speaking to the way fundamentalist Mormons treat polygamy were the women get no choice in the matter.
Posted by Rob in Baltimore http://www.wishbookweb.com/ on January 24, 2013 at 11:38 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 33
The problem with polygamy is that whenever it is practiced on a large scale, it eventually ends with twelve year olds girls being handed out to old men to rape at their leisure, while the other "wives" do the housework.

Not that this will, or always happens, but the reluctance of society to approve of polygamy is basically because the above mentioned scenario happened, and continues to happen, a lot.

But I can see no intrinsic problem regarding people marrying how ever many people they want, as long as they can avoid the above scenarios, and everything is above board: no welfare cheating like the polygamist sect Mormons.
Posted by Theodore Gorath on January 24, 2013 at 11:47 AM · Report this
very bad homo 34
They're upset that the rest of society has left them behind.
Posted by very bad homo on January 24, 2013 at 12:26 PM · Report this
35
@28 in that debate, Dan said polygamy would have to be evaluated on its own merits in response to Brown's slippery slope argument. Dan listed a couple of things that might weigh against polygamy, as you listed, but I didn't get the sense that he was set against it. Just that it had negatives that gay marriage did not, and thus the slippery slope was a logical fallacy.
Posted by wxPDX on January 24, 2013 at 12:37 PM · Report this
36
All that noisy gay sex keepin em up at night. Duh.
Posted by LML on January 24, 2013 at 1:32 PM · Report this
37

Hooray for the majority of my fellow Mainers!

Posted by Velvetbabe on January 24, 2013 at 3:05 PM · Report this
38
All the best brunch places suddenly closed for private events every weekend.
Posted by lulubelle on January 24, 2013 at 4:07 PM · Report this
39
Just as how, to Sir John Middleton, the increase by two to the number of inhabitants of London was something, so to the 22% any reduction in the number of people who can be oppressed for no just cause is equally something.
Posted by vennominon on January 24, 2013 at 4:27 PM · Report this
40 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
41
@32: More like the traditional way that polygamy has worked throughout the world, across all of history.

Which has typically been that the rich and powerful got lots of wives as a show of how rich and powerful they are, with few other considerations for the people that those wives are.

And while I'd *like* to believe that wealthy actresses would collect many husbands just the same as their male counterparts, I seriously doubt that would play out that way for various reasons.
Posted by gromm on January 25, 2013 at 12:38 AM · Report this
lolorhone 42
22% of those polled in Maine either had to realize that they were on the losing side of history or had to realize that they (and their antiquated notions of propriety) would be dead soon.
Posted by lolorhone on January 26, 2013 at 12:49 AM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy