RECENT  POSTS:  » Jodie Foster in 2013: 'I am'; Jodie Foster in 2014: 'I do' » AFA promotes its new app in only way it knows how » Robert Oscar Lopez says I perform 'psychological operations routine' on him when I quote his own words from his own web site » Matt Barber's ever-classy site suggests gay people are literally crushing fellow humans » Bryan Fischer is on to our comic book villain–in-chief » Southern Baptist Theological Seminary's Al Mohler 'can't give' us acceptance; good thing we're not asking » NOM fails to trip up Oregon marriage case » Audio: Tony Perkins equates opposing equality with opposing Nazis » 'WaPo' conservative columnist: 'Strident' marriage equality opponents have lost » If you feel like you hear about another marriage case every day, here's why  

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

02/21/2013

Brian Brown explains deep meaning of world's simplest logo

by Jeremy Hooper

Screen Shot 2013-02-21 At 8.19.12 PmBrian Brown cannot believe that the newly formed Respect For Marriage coalition is also using two enjoined rings to represent its marriage equality cause. Brian writes:

[The Respect For Marriage coalition is] still using another image you'll recognize: NOM's logo! — well, sort of — they have created a logo to look like NOM's well-Screen Shot 2013-02-21 At 8.19.23 Pmrecognized conjoined blue and red rings.

Because I designed NOM's logo personally, I find this to be an insulting mockery, as well as very ironic: you see, I created this image to reflect the difference between men and women symbolically. The red ring represents men and the blue represents, women. The intertwining of the rings is meant to show that marriage is the unique union of both a woman and a man coming together in committed love.

As for what it means for HRC, though, I can't imagine.

Ooh, snarky last line there, B.B. But to answer your question: It's tacos. That's what two rings means to HRC: tacos. Whenever we gay folk want to signify our craving for stuffed tortilla products, we are instructed to make some sort of enjoined ring sign with whatever tools are available to us. It's all spelled out on page 345 (or is it 336?) of The Homosexual Agenda (Revised Edition; Queen Degeneres Version).

I kid. But seriously—does Brian really expect us to buy this deep "explanation" of the NOM logo. I mean, come on: IT'S. TWO. RINGS. Representing marriage. I mean, maybe he really did gender-color them in the rigid fashion that he describes. But two rings? A more obvious option does not exist!

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