What's the not my first thought way to get to the topic of gay marriage you ask? Write an article about your 3-year-old son wanting to dress up as a princess for Halloween and watch the gender-identity-must-be-maintained-at-all-costs comments roll in.
A female sports writer for the Chicago Tribune wrote the article of which I speak. I've captured some of the choice comments posted herein. The one below is by a commenter named "VOICE OF REASON" who has not only used a photo of a chimpanzee scratching his chin in contemplation to identify himself but he has also used the number one catch phrase on the list of the Top 10 political catch phrases according to Fox News: "man up." Now, immediately after stating that the author's husband should "man up" he continues that he should "be his own person, with his own ideas, instead of a mindless drone." I can't tell you how much I enjoy the use of the term "mindless drone" when used by someone doing exactly what they are accusing someone else of doing. Especially when the accused is doing the opposite of what the accuser is himself actually doing. Which is to say that "VOICE OF REASON" is being a mindless drone in his adherence to rigidly guarded gender roles.
I mean, Republican candidate for Governor of California Meg Whitman obviously has no issue with men in dresses. In fact, just last week she linked to the following video in her Twitter feed.
This next commenter "Chicagobrother" "doesn't have the time", and he also "doesn't have the patience to REALLY break this down," and yet the bulk of his comment comes after this statement, therefore some "time" must have been freed up and his "patience" must have been restored. I don't know, that whole saying a lot of words after saying that you were planning on not using a lot of words sounds sort of girlie to me. But when he's done breaking down his offense at the idea "that boys are 'naturally' drawn to pink" and that "it seems to me you wished you had a daughter instead of a boy", he does finally definitively tell us that he in fact has "got nothing left to say."
And so with that finished, "SwingingChad" decided to pick up the torch of the comment section... AND the contested 2000 Presidential election AND very likely a dick reference, all in one screen name AND then go on to make the first gay marriage comment of the section. "SwingingChad" posits that "by the time the tike is an adult, gay marriage will be legal", he even goes so far as to plan the wedding outfits with "the only question is, who is the wife and who is the bride. I think you know the answer." And so the only question is, "SwingingChad", where in this sentence does the question mark go. I'm not sure if you know the answer, tyke?
In conclusion, which is more shocking? This?