Monday, January 11, 2010

Prelude to controversy - SOMEONE is not happy over Martha Stewart's focus on gay weddings

I call this post a prelude because I am merely introducing the controversy. The parties involved, one being a online friend of mine heavily involved in it, will no doubt make their feelings known on his site.

 Last year, Martha Stewart Magazine featured its first gay wedding - the June wedding of blogger Jeremy Hooper of and his husband, Andrew Shulman.

It was a nice piece free from any criticism of which I was aware of . . . that is until now.

A blogger by the name of The Barefoot Bride not only criticized the showing of this wedding but also encouraged people to write in and complain to the magazine:

I understand that one reader’s views, opinions, and purchases can not change the course of an entire magazine. However, I believe that I speak for a majority. A very large majority. As marriage amendments protecting marriage as between one man and one woman have been passed across the country, the facts speak for themselves – America as a nation does not support same-sex marriages. If you are also disappointed in this article as much as I am, I would encourage you to write to MSW and let them know. A magazine without input from its readers is not serving its readers.

***Note: I just wanted to clarify that I don’t hate homosexuals. I actually know a couple gay and lesbian people and they’re great folks. This, however, does not mean that I agree with their lifestyle choices. I don’t un-follow Twitter feeds or unsubscribe from great blogs just because the writer believes that same-sex marriages are fine – differences are differences. However, as a paying customer of Martha Stewart Weddings, I would like to be able to read the magazine without having to see photos of homosexual couples being intimate.

Now throughout her screed, she emphasized (over and over again) that she has a right to her opinion. And that she is in the majority regarding her opinion about marriage equality.

No one is disputing the fact that she has a right to her opinion and the idea that she is in the majority is irrelevant. What galls me is this statement:

I may not always agree with the lifestyles and life choices made by all the people featured in every publication I read, but I do not appreciate picking up my favorite magazine to see photographs of homosexual couples being affectionate. For someone who believes that same-sex marriage is wrong, such articles and/or photos are offensive – and something I certainly would never knowingly pay money for.

So to her, it's not enough to feel that marriage equality is wrong. She has a problem with lgbts being publicly affectionate.

Would she rather we shake or hands or better yet get all clandestined with our affections as if we have something to be ashamed about? Why should we conduct our lives in accordance to her ignorance?

The Barefoot Bride invited people to write in their comments and this worries me.

There are some in our community who have a tendency to shoot from the hip, speak without thinking, and throw out nasty comments.

For the most part, people have behaved themselves with the exception of an ignorant few.

However, I can just picture Maggie Gallagher salivating over this mess in eagerness to create another martyr of the pushy gay community, another person supposedly "victimized" for speaking out against marriage equality.

So if anyone weighs in, please be polite. Or better yet, be dignified like Jeremy when he asked the following:

As one half of the couple featured in the mag, I'd like to know why, exactly, you think you are more entitled to freedom than my husband or myself. And please don;t start with the religion: We are talking about CIVIL marriage. Church ceremony is an ancillary (if oft utilized) component. Gay and lesbian people are fighting for the civil component, gladly leaving the church discussion up to the individual denominations/sects/etc.

I'd love to hear your thoughts, and share them with my readers. Let's have an open discussion about why my rights as a tax-paying citizen should be denied by personal religious whims. You can reach me at

Jeremy Hooper
Good As You

Oh, and PS: People of many different faiths (including a nun in full habit) were at our wedding. Where is respect for *their* faith views?

I'm sure Jeremy is going to weigh in on the controversy via his site in the same dignified candor. I can't wait to read it.

But as for the rest of us, instead of writing to The Barefoot Bride, write to Martha Stewart Weddings and tell them how much you support the magazine's decision to run a gay wedding.

Because this situation is not about The Barefoot Bride. It's about us.

Bookmark and Share


Bill S said...

"Being intimate" implies something far more graphic than what was actually pictured in the magazine. And whenever someone says, "I don't have a problem with gay people", you can bet they'll proceed to prove that they do.
The mere SIGHT of a gay couple is too upsetting for her. It's so upsetting she felt the need to protest the images in a magazine. To write a long screed denouncing it.
No, she has nothing against us. We're "great folks" long as we know our place.

bonnie-halfelvn said...

I had a feeling we'd be seeing flak like this, so I wrote last week and simply thanked MSW for featuring a gay couple and for treating them the same as any other couple.

welchva said...

Well said!
My words regarding the bigot are not so kind.

Joe Mustich said...

I thought the MSW article was wonderful.

Onward to equality,
Joe Mustich, Justice of the Peace,
Washington, Connecticut, USA.

The marriage foes have just got to find something else to focus on in the 21st century. Shame on them.

Daniel said...

The blog appears to have been shut down by its hosting provider for having excessive server traffic.

BlackTsunami said...

Oops to Barefoot Bride. Now you know you can't get us folks riled up. LOL