RECENT  POSTS:  » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall' » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something.  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

03/31/2010

Bunnies and chicks are our Peeps?

by Jeremy Hooper

This weekend's New York Times Magazine cover story will be on the topic of gay animals, with a cover that looks like this:

Nytmag-1
These Easter Bunnies Are Gay [Towle]

Which is great. Just great. I mean the last thing we need to be doing is putting in the minds of the American public the idea of a furry queer thing that sneaks into Christian children's rooms at night and lures them with rainbow-hued candy! [::le sigh::]

Though actually, come to think of it, we probably shouldn't worry so much about a "Homosexual Easter Bunny Out To Recruit Your Kids!" meme. After all, the number of social conservatives who'd admit there could be any science behind this whole gay thing is surely much smaller than those who believe a particularly prolific hopper could hop the globe in one night so as to stuff Cadbury-branded products into a Target-bought basket. So yea: Carry on, NYT!

***

**UPDATE: The story is already up online: Can Animals be Gay? [NYT]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails