Two men are about to wed in New Zealand, which in and of itself is nothing special. Same-sex marriage has been legal there for just over a year. But Travis McIntosh and Matt McCormick will be different than most gay newlyweds because, well, they aren’t gay.
The two straight BFFs are tying the knot as part of a radio contest stunt, earning themselves a free trip to the Rugby World Cup in England.
Naturally, this has gay rights groups in a bit of a tizzy. For those who’ve fought long and hard to earn the right to marry their partners, the irreverence of the contest feels a bit like a slap in the face.
“The point of this competition is that men marrying each other is still something they think is worth having a laugh at …
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
“Maybe on the day that statistics around mental health for LGBTI people are better, when high schools are safe places for LGBTI youth, we can look back on all this and laugh.
“But competitions like this don’t bring that day any closer,” said LegaliseLove Aotearoa Wellington co-chairman Joseph Habgood.
On the other hand, while the obviously fake (though legally very real) wedding may be making a mockery of the institution of marriage, it does reflect a changing tide of straight guys who aren’t fearful of appearing gay.
“We are not here to insult anyone. We are here to do our own thing and travel our own path.” Mr McIntosh said, adding, “It’s just seeing how far two good mates would go to win a trip to the Rugby World Cup.”
The two met playing rugby when they were 6 years old, and we realize it’s all a big farce but isn’t it also kind of…cute? Just look at them!
They also chose this as their wedding song for goodness sake, and they’ll marry in front of 60 friends and family members, who are reportedly “excited” is are the couple:
buffnightwing
Just goes to show that marriage is not a special thing. if it was, no one would ever get divorced. Let’s just do away with it all together.
Scribe38
@buffnightwing: It’s not important to you. I can respect that and won’t push, suggest, or argue that you should get married. It is important to me. My parents have been married over forty years. They have shared good times and bad together. I want what they have with the man I have loved for almost twenty years. I ask you to give gays the same respect I give you in your choices. Each union is unique marriage is what you make it.
DarkZephyr
@Scribe38: Amen Scribe. Marriage is a big deal to me too, especially since without the benefits that come from it I could never sponsor my fiance for a green card. But even more than that, its a special rite in my eyes, one that helps cement the reality that he and I are a family together.
buffnightwing
Marriage is some bullshit made up by some religious asshole in order to discriminate against whole segments of people and subject them to religious rule. The fact that heaters now make fun of gays getting married just proves my point. It’s bullshit.
PS: You don’t have to be married to be together for forty years either.
If you need marriage to validate your relationship then you are an romantic idiot not living in the real world.
buffnightwing
@DarkZephyr: My ex boyfriend married his mothers girlfriend in order to let her stay in the country. They aren’t together anymore. LOL
Once he gets the green card, watch out there buddy. LOL
buffnightwing
Marriage is the biggest sham ever pushed onto the world. A strong loving bond is all thats needed. Not some stupid recognition from a stupid CHURCH, which is responsible for genocide and mass murder and wars and beheadings!!
Religion is the problem, and as soon as we get away from it, we will have world peace.
Uncv1
The way I think of it is that anyone can get married at anytime- the commitment to honor and love the other person for a lifetime. That commitment is between two people, with or without religion. Whether that marriage is recognized by the legal system and has the benefits that go with marriage is a whole different story.
onthemark
Talk about “bromance” – these two guys look more like brothers than most actual brothers do.
MarionPaige
Technically, in the US at least, a “marriage” in which the parties don’t have sex could be declared void.
Whatever people think marriage is and what it is about, legally, marriage is a contract for sexual services between two parties sanctioned by the state. While in every other circumstance CONTRACTING FOR SEX (i.e. paying someone for sex) is criminalized by the State, the state makes an exception for marriage.
And, because marriage IS a contract for sex sanctioned by the State, THE STATE HAS HISTORICALLY LEGISLATED WHAT KIND OF SEX WAS PERMISSIBLE IN A MARRIAGE. Some of these sex laws may today not be enforced but, I’m pretty sure that there are still laws “on the books” in some dates criminalizing certain sex acts between married couples.
In fact, THIS could be the next round in the anti-gay marriage legal battle, criminalizing certain sex acts in ALL marriage – something pretty much every State has a legislative history of doing. ONCE YOU CONSENT TO THE STATE BEING A PARTY TO YOUR SEX LIFE / MARRIAGE, you shouldn’t then be surprised if the State then publishes a list of what kinds of sex acts are permissible in marriage
man5996853
@buffnightwing…I would never marry, ever. I find the history of the institution to be repulsive and you should be able to love someone for life without a contract telling you to do so. That said, married couples enjoy rights that non-married couples are allowed, especially gay, unmarried couples. Necessary rights like hospital visitation and the passage of one’s estate to his/her partner. I may not appreciate the institution but I sure as hell understand the need for others to marry. And a marriage is only a sham if the people who enter the union(at least one of them) are shams themselves.
MarionPaige
There is a famous “gay rights” case in which THAT STATE (in the form of a cop) arrested to men for having sex in their home. The Supreme Court found for the two gay men. However, WHAT IF THE TWO MEN WERE MARRIED? Could it be argued that the couple consented to the state regulating their sex life because the were parties to a marriage SANCTIONED BY THE STATE?
Some can argue that married couples, today, have the “right” to engage in any kind of sex they want to but: ( 1 ) as I said, there is a legal history in the US of the state regulating what kind of sex is permissible in marriage; and ( 2 ) we all know that still today, there are sex acts that are still criminalized.
MarionPaige
All this said … aren’t that some “gay couples” you wish would marry? I mean, you know that they are fucked in the head and that their “relationship” is BS. If they married, that would make their eventual split all that more messy and expensive.
Paco
Good for them. People get married all the time for reasons other than love or family. If you take marriage seriously, then be sure to take your own marriage seriously and not worry about others.
Silas Wegg
It’s always been insulting to women when closeted gay men marry them, only to waste ~30-40 years before coming out and leaving the lady far past her re-marrying prime.
AtticusBennett
it’s tacky as hell. here’s an idea – act like you’re married. publicly embrace. hold hands. report back to us all on how you were treated and maybe you’ll realize that what is a fun little “whim” for you is a life and death challenge for actual gay people.
by the way, boys, ease away from the buffet table.
DistingueTraces
There is no particular reason why anyone should get a special tax status for being in a long-term romatic relationship. None.
Any household should be able to register for joint taxation and other attendant legal benefits.
MarionPaige
just saw an interview on afterbuzz tv’s youtube channel with the cute young guy from the docu-movie Bridgroom. It’s a sad unfortunate situation that his dead lover’s parents shut him out of his lover’s final moments and funeral but, he lived.
Lvng1tor
“We are not here to insult anyone. We are here to do our own thing and travel our own path.” SERIOUSLY…..Sorry to all the jagwads above debating the validity of marriage but you’re missing the point. This is a spit in the face to all the LGBT people who have suffered and fought for the slow crawl to equality. Believe in marriage or not (BTW some of you “marriage is stupid” just come off as whiney lil butthurt babies) but this is F@CKING INSULTING.
Bauhaus
@buffnightwing:
Marriage and religion are not the same. Many marriages are civil only. Many marriages are civil, followed by a religious ceremony. Legally, all is needed is a civil marriage.
You really believe that a strong bond is all that is needed? Do you think a strong bond will get you health insurance, a Green Card, Family Leave of Absence, protect you from testifying against your partner in court, allow you to make health care decisions, financial decisions, next of kin, funeral arrangements, and myriad life event decisions? How about staying in and keeping the home you share together? Child custody? Good luck with your strong bond. Perhaps you don’t want or need these rights, privileges, and protections, but surely you can see the advantage to having them?
Couples get divorced for many reasons, but I can’t imagine it’s because marriage is not a special thing.
If your point is religion is bad for society, fine. But lumping civil marriage in with religion is erroneous, and doing away with it all together, cynical. At least know about the origins of marriage, how it has evolved, and how it benefits LGBT unions today.
As for the two straight friends entering into a fraudulent marriage for personal gain, I’m not sure what the laws and penalties are for openly doing this in New Zealand, but in the U.S., a Sham marriage carries a penalty of $250.000, and a five year federal prison term.
Bauhaus
@DistingueTraces:
You bring up a very good point about the special tax and legal status for married couples. The current system is very unfair to unmarried people.
Singles, what LGBT couples have been considered both legally and for tax purposes, don’t get the tax breaks and exemptions married couples get. For legal purposes, LGBT couples have had to create legal documents, which can be very costly, to try and cover all of the legal rights of a marriage. Of course, not everything could be covered in a legal document, and a document could be challenged by a nasty family, hospital, or judge.
Anyway, I agree that it isn’t fair to treat married and unmarried differently for tax purposes. I also agree that a “household” should have rights to a gym, a community pool, or any other membership or organization that a married household gets.
Kieran
Why not spray paint one of the guys brown and make it a gay AND interracial marriage?
pressuredrop
I’m surprised how closed-minded some people are about this.
Marriage is, and has forever been, a legal contract. Marriages of convenience involving between straight and gay people have existed for centuries.
If two best friends are willing to legally conjoin themselves in all of the ways that their country defines marriage, why does there have to be ANY romantic involvement? (The fact that they’re doing it to win rugby tickets is a bit tacky, but no more so than any number of other things people do before, during and after a wedding.)
The idea of the marriage equality movement is to open up the definitions of marriage to include a wider range of social needs. And, ultimately, that marriage is an issue of legality and not religion. The state should not be able to march two “spouses” into the bedroom and force them to have sex as proof of their marital legitimacy.
pressuredrop
“involving/between”
MarionPaige
“gay marriage” is an example of people being eager to grab headlines but not really being smart enough to do anything actually noteworthy (or revolutionary). As it stands now, gay marriage activist MISSED the big story, i.e., redefining “marriage” in a way that it covered all family units not just two people fucking. Isn’t it almost a joke in and of itself that the glorious state of Marriage is legally based on sex rather than the desire to share a life with someone? Even California’s domestic partners law defines domestic partners as two people in an intimate relationship – i.e. two people fucking.
noyaris
Why they allow people to have a fake wedding and they didn’t allow my boyfriend and and I to get the country to get married???? They should be ashamed declined our visa applications.
noyaris
Why they allow people to have a fake wedding and they didn’t allow my boyfriend and and I to get the country to get married???? They should be ashamed declined our visa applications.
michael mellor
At least they were able to marry! Gay marriage isn’t permitted in many other countries such as Australia.
spiffy
As long these two won’t be allowed to get an annulment after their rugby trip — and if they want to get a divorce, they will have to divide their assets, just like a real married couple. Let’s see how far they’re willing to play house just to win a trip.
Alan down in Florida
Forget the circumstances of the rugby trip. This marriage raises many questions, not all of them new.
How many times have you heard a married person (any orientation) say that they married their best friend? So why would anyone question the appropriateness of non-gay best friends marrying. Who better to share the day to day of life? Isn’t it easier to be in a relationship where there is no possibility of sexual jealousy?
Is the problem that they won’t have sex? Is having sex a prerequisite for getting married? We’ve already argued that procreation is not a prerequisite.
How different is this from the recent sitcom Playing House where the straight best friend moves in with her pregnant straight best friend to help her with the eventual baby?
And you never know. Sometimes the difference between straight friends and lovers is a pizza and a twelve pack.
SteveDenver
For centuries plenty of straights have treated marriage like a tissue: blow your nose and move on. Same sex marriage is on its way to becoming FULLY EQUAL with hetero marriage: a meaningless stunt with various legal and financial benefits.
Good luck guys, just remember you have to divorce before you can marry again.
jean
This marriage has no impact on anyone else’s life, gay or straight, married or unmarried. If you don’t like it, don’t do it!
SteveDenver
@Scribe38: Cool your jets! YOUR PARENT’S marriage and YOUR marriage may be meaningful to you, but think of all the divorced people you know. Like every relationship, it’s different to everyone. “buffnightwing’s” view of marriage — and these straight lads’ — doesn’t diminish yours anymore than gays and lesbians getting married diminishes the marriages of straight people.
boring
Anyone else whipped into a stone cold fury that they didn’t go with the original Smokey Robinson “Cruisin'”?
That song is THE fucking JAM.
Bauhaus
@jean: I agree with you.
It could be a bite in the ass for them if they have a falling out, if one of them dies, both of them die together, or if tragedy befalls them financially or medically. All for a trip or pushing the envelop? Marriage is deeply personal, people enter it for many reasons. At least give some thought to the contract being entered and the possible legal implications it may have down the road.
Of course their marriage doesn’t diminish, demean, or degrade anybody else’s marriage. They’ve gotten married, have made that reason public, and will now likely get some feedback about their choice.
enlightenone
@buffnightwing: Won’t speak for others, but for me it’s not religious marriage. I’m not religious or a bible thumpper; but rather marriage equality of the benefits/legal recognition/protections kind!
vocalpro69
@AtticusBennett: Well said. What they are doing is superficial, silly, and insulting. They appear as pudgy little boys in a world of men.
Mikah
Straight people have already made marriage ridiculous and meaningless enough,why should this upset me anymore than Britney Spear’s heterosexual marriage that didn’t last a week? The point is everyone should have the right to marry,no matter the reason.We fight for the FREEDOM to marry.
Black Swan
@buffnightwing: But then you would be an atheist so that null, and voids your entire argument. Thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts.
A strong bond is all that is needed? Yeah. Ok. Want to be a little more specific with that? You mean as opposed to a bond that say has honesty towards fulfilling a commitment, and a ring on your finger that you can shove down everyone’s throat? You’ve never loved anyone, and are completely incapable of love. What do you know?
You’re so stupid as to think you need to go through a church to get a marriage license in the first place.
Black Swan
@Kieran: I have no understanding of what your point is.
Black Swan
I don’t think they mean offense guys. They just have really low standards of humor. People like this would find anything funny, and this is just further proof of that. Beer and fart jokes are not my idea of high brow comedy, but I can’t fault someone for being a redneck.
There is no political agenda here. They just have really low brow standards of comedy. Atleast they aren’t in denial that gays can, or even should be able to get married. It’s an implicit celebration. That’s a win guys.
And I would be willing to believe they indirectly got married more for the right reasons than they even know. Better than what alot of other couples wed for (status, citizenship). Besides, when I go cruising I like to tell my pick-ups that I’m straight too. It makes for a fun evening. They’re just spicing it up a bit by both remaining in the closet. I mean, rugby? How straight could they possibly be? I thought rugby was hailed internationally as the gayman’s sport.
They’ll be sorry they ever got divorced when they see the hags they’re saddled with ten years from now. Be funny is they didn’t go through with the divorce. Or imagine the headlines if they (being the wiser after having attained some actual life experience) actually remarry decades later for realz tho that time.
Will L
I think this is great! Gays and lesbians have married on another for convenience for a long time. Why shouldn’t two straight men?
1EqualityUSA
They may be anti-marriage equality and this stunt is to add another reason for the general pop to see our equality as an erosion of the straights’ (precious) status.
enlightenone
@Black Swan: Was trying to make sense of your long “insight” into these insensitive idiots, but I give up!
gaym50ish
No couple, gay or straight, is required to be in a sexual relationship in order to marry.
People marry for lots of other reasons — convenience, immigration, money, companionship, etc. If a straight man and woman who just met on a reality TV show can marry, or if Britney Spears can marry in a drunken dither and divorce 55 hours later, why not two guys who just want to attend a rugby tournament? (Rugby is very important in New Zealand.)
Is it any different than gay men who marry women in order to stay deep in the closet? Isn’t that more of a mockery of marriage than two best friends getting married?