Marie Claire‘s Terrible Advice for Women Stumped On Gay Weddings
In a bit of service journalism gone awry, Marie Claire suggests its lady readership who are unfamiliar with certain things insert editor-approved pearls of wisdom into conversation. In “How to Talk About Issues You Don’t Understand,” they’ve got tips on all things controversial, like abortion and gun control. Oh, and gay marriage.
Not sure what to say when confronted with homosexual marriage? The magazine advises you deliver this remark: “At the last gay wedding I attended, the grooms’ tuxes were brushed satin, the centerpieces were Cattleya orchids, the palate cleanser was yuzu sorbet, and the DJ was Samantha Ronson. How could something so right be wrong?”
Not only is this a line nobody would ever say ever in her life, we don’t even understand what this means.
Marie Claire: We try to think so you don’t have to!
·
That’s the kind of advice one deserves if they read Marie Claire, hello.
·
What? That’s a no-brainer. It means, “How can something we find to be in good taste be morally wrong?” It’s a light, apolitical dig at homophobia, if anything else.
·
Reciting entire quotes written by other people rarely sounds anything other than wooden. People would probably be embarrassed for me.
·
if Queerty had posted this saying, “what a funny joke”, everyone would be responding saying how ignortant Queerty was and how this was homophobic
·
It’s clever. It’s pro gay marriage, you whiners. “How could something so right…”
·
The women’s magazines lost the plot years ago. They’re beholden to the cosmetics and fashion industries for one thing. They also objectify women in a way that is much worse than what the straight men’s magazines do. If you look at the women’s magazines, it’s all about “you must be sexy”. Talk about sexist ojbectification!!!
Sorry, girls, but you’re your own worst enemy.
·
@drew brown: It still seems rather condescending to me, in a sort of “gay men are so stylish and fun to keep as pets!” kind of way. I’m sure they mean well, but would much rather see gay people treated as individual humans rather than fashion accessories and style icons.
Besides, none of the people I know (gay or straight) would have the money for that kind of wedding. It does rather assume an image of gay men that’s a little hard for the real world to live up to. Then again, women’s magazines tend to assume their readers can afford much more than the women I know ever could, so I guess it’s more of the same.
·
Samantha Ronson? Seems she would depress everybody at the wedding, although if she and Lindsay Lohan got into a screaming match at least the guests would be entertained.
·
it’s meant to be tongue in cheek, a light touch to an otherwise touchy topic for the masses…
·
There’s a fine line between making light of current news issues and trying to tell readers how they should think, what they should say, and if you believe contrary to what they say you’re wrong.
Whether you agree on the issues or not, what they’ve done is disgraceful.
Marie Claire…shame on you. This may very well have been the last time I buy that magazine.
·
Three Ways The High Court Might Rule On Your Marriage Equality
Supreme Odds: How Will Justice Elena Kagan Vote on Marriage Equality?
Follow @queerty
Its designed as a joke to break the ice on the topic and let them know that if they want to talk nothing more than stereotypes you can do so too.