Join 3,551 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Here Come the Brides and Brides and Grooms and Grooms
March 28, 2012 6:47 PM   Subscribe

On Wednesday 29 March 2012, the first mass same-sex TV wedding in Australia was broadcast.

After an audience member proposed to her girlfriend live on air, Adam Hills, one of Australia's most popular comedians, decided to hold a mass TV wedding of same-sex couples, AKA the Big Gay Wedding, on his show Adam Hills In Gordon Street Tonight.

His assistant, Hannah Gadsby, interviewed the almost-newlyweds. And a Bucks and Hens night was held. And then, finally, the big day arrived (same link as on the front page).

A sixpence was sent in by an 88 year old (straight) bride for luck. (Something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue, and a silver sixpence in her shoe.)

Adam Ant was the wedding singer. And of course what wedding would be complete without a Facebook wedding album?

Note: this wedding is not legally binding. Some Australian states recognise same-sex civil unions, but "same-sex marriages are currently not permitted under Australian federal law".
posted by malibustacey9999 (22 comments total) 10 users marked this as a favorite

 
Genuinely sweet and funny. I can't imagine American broadcast TV doing the same thing.

(And they even worked in a little Kylie at the end. Bless.)
posted by beaucoupkevin at 7:21 PM on March 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


You know, I was entirely prepared to be bored to tears by this. Or maybe just tired because same sex marriage shouldn't still be political issue in 2012. Regardless, I can't stand watching mass weddings with straight people, why the hell would I expect anything different from a same-sex mass "TV wedding"? But then, of course, there was Adam Hills. And then there was the sixpence in the shoe. Instead of being bored to tears, I almost ended up crying.

That was really sweet. I'm clearly getting sentimental in my old age.
posted by mixing at 7:21 PM on March 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


That was really sweet. I'm clearly getting sentimental in my old age.

Fully agree with exactly what you said, mixing. That was really well done. I'm middle-aged and straight, and not exactly thrilled with of the whole institution of marriage, generally. But seeing the older couples (especially) doing this does bring a tear to my eye. We need to keep applying pressure on the forces of bigotry and hatefulness until something like is this is no longer considered newsworthy.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 7:28 PM on March 28, 2012 [4 favorites]


And they even worked in a little Kylie at the end

Not a euphemism.
posted by eriko at 8:08 PM on March 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


I long for the day this is not FPP worthy.
posted by falameufilho at 8:10 PM on March 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


My marriage celebrant (highly recommended) got married in Canada to his partner, which directly spurred Howard's amendments to the Marriage Act as well as a court case (which was lost/withdrawn by the Parliament action). Funny sidelight to this is that he was the only person at our wedding that I can definitively say held religious beliefs. And he met his future husband at a christian youth camp.
posted by wilful at 8:17 PM on March 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


Does iView work outside Australia?

http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/view/917590
posted by wilful at 8:19 PM on March 28, 2012


I get a "copyright warning, not viewable in your country" message, on that, wilful.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 8:25 PM on March 28, 2012


Pity. Suspected as much. Oh well, youtube it is.
posted by wilful at 8:26 PM on March 28, 2012


Should have pointed out that I'm in Canada, wilful, which is a strange jurisdiction world-wide for copyright issues, or so it's been explained to me. This might not be true in Europe or the States. But thanks for thinking about it.

That said I am happy to say that the right-wing thugs in Government here haven't yet attacked same-sex marriage laws in Canada. Oddly, they have even gone so far to plug a loophole in the law which might have jeopardized the validity of same-sex marriages performed in Canada in certain jurisdictions. When even jack-booted Reform Party , wing-tipped Conservatives support progress of this type, I'd say that the days of this antiquated bigotry are truly numbered in rational society.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 8:45 PM on March 28, 2012


I was talking to one of my many1 gay friends the other day and I was telling him how gay people are conceding an obvious rhetorical point. When I hear about people supporting "gay marriage" I often wonder what that is. Do they have to get a "gay marriage" license? Damn it gay people, start calling it "marriage." Then when the conservatives say they are against marriage, you can laugh and point, and when they call it "gay marriage," you can also laugh and point.

Seriously, I think the same about gay marriage as what I thought in the early 90s about "e-commerce" and "e-checks" and "e-anything." My comment then was, and I hope this holds true for gay marriage in 10 years (or less), "You know what they will call e-commerce in 20 years? Fucking commerce."

I love telling people I am against gay marriage, then when they start to get upset I add in that it's the marriage part that burns my ass. I'll take a bullet for equal protection under the law, so I don't see why the government should involve itself in a religious affair. If you want to argue that marriage isn't religious that's fine too, but I don't see why married people get rights single/gay people are denied.

Who you are fucking matters .09% to me (unless I am paying to watch it online). Want to argue the rights of individual vs. couples? I am totally there with you. I really feel for gay people when I read things about how they are denied the ability to make medical decisions for their partners without power of attorney, but so are unmarried couples.2

Plenty of people, gay and straight, have decided marriage isn't for them. I burns my ass all the time when I hear either side arguing about how they are denied what straight people get when they are married. I agree! Let's pull down the rights of the married to be on the level of the unmarried. Let's move marriage entirely over into the realm of the religious (or non-religious), but let's take it away from the judges and justices of the peace entirely. Get government out of your bedrooms!

Marriage should be defined by the two (or more) consenting individuals engaged in the activity. Everyone else should mind their own fucking business since it doesn't affect them. Write up the legal contract and sign it. Then take off your clothes, or put them on, or do whatever you married freaks do when married!

I could go on forever. tl;dr: I'm right, everyone else is wrong.

1. Ok, I admit it. I have no gay friends, but I do have a gay coworker who, on occasion, agrees to speak for all of gaykind.

2. When I got sick I had a gay surgeon. It matters 0% to me that he was gay. I didn't even know he was gay until way after the fact. At the time he never once alienated my girlfriend or excluded her from discussions of my care. I appreciated that fiercely. It was literally less than an hour before my surgery when he asked me who I wanted to make medical decisions for me in the event I was incapacitated. I wrote "my father" (who is a pastor), but not because he shared my religious beliefs (I have none, he loves God), but because he shares my medical beliefs. It was at least a year on before I thought what my surgeon did might be odd. He shared medical details with her she had no real right to know. We weren't married. Even under the statutes we lacked a common law marriage.


In short, you get less than 100 years on this suckhole of a planet. Spend them with those you love doing what you love. I'll support you.
posted by cjorgensen at 9:24 PM on March 28, 2012 [3 favorites]


I love telling people I am against gay marriage, then when they start to get upset I add in that it's the marriage part that burns my ass.

I'm sure people really appreciate being put on the defensive by your clever turn of phrase.

I agree with you -- I really do -- but there is no significant movement for making the reforms you mention. Legislatures are debating and adopting measures that specifically prevent same-sex couples from marrying. The rhetoric being bandied about by the proponents of such laws (or overturnings thereof) is often dehumanizing and hateful, and even those who are less overtly horrid about the matter can neatly summarize their position as "I don't support gay marriage."

I wonder if making a point, however valid, by leading with a phrase that people are sick to death of hearing people say, and that often precedes truly horrid speech, is worth it. Seriously.
posted by lumensimus at 10:30 PM on March 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


"(or overturnings thereof)" ought to read "(or overturnings that would have the same effect)" or something like that. Editing window pony, et cetera.
posted by lumensimus at 10:34 PM on March 28, 2012


Quite remarkably though, and I think this is about as significant as it gets, Gregory told me that tonight, on his way home, a dear friend of his told him that he had decided that it wasn’t so bad after all if two blokes wanted to get married. He threw his religious belief coins up in the air and they both landed queen-side up. And the world didn’t stop, and the sky didn’t fall in.
posted by malibustacey9999 at 10:40 PM on March 28, 2012


Sorry, stuffed that up, let me try it again: Quite remarkably though, and I think this is about as significant as it gets, Gregory told me that tonight, on his way home, a dear friend of his told him that he had decided that it wasn’t so bad after all if two blokes wanted to get married. He threw his religious belief coins up in the air and they both landed queen-side up. And the world didn’t stop, and the sky didn’t fall in.
posted by malibustacey9999 at 10:42 PM on March 28, 2012


Little things like this make me proud of the bit of the blue marble I live on.

8 cents well spent.
posted by But tomorrow is another day... at 10:54 PM on March 28, 2012 [3 favorites]


I kinda hoped this was gonna be gay Moonies…
posted by klangklangston at 11:06 PM on March 28, 2012 [1 favorite]


Yay! Two of my friends - Cath and Helen - were among the couples who got hitched. They are two of the most generous, talented people you can imagine and they are raising two of the most fabulous, unaffected kids I've ever met. If my two grow up half as well adjusted as their kids seem to be, I will be pleased as punch.
posted by tim_in_oz at 11:53 PM on March 28, 2012 [2 favorites]


I agree that it will be great when stuff like this is no longer newsworthy. Meanwhile, here in North Carolina, another idiotic ballot amendment to change the state constitution is coming up during a primary that otherwise holds little interest for many Democrats heading in to a presidential election with an incumbent.
posted by Red Loop at 3:09 AM on March 29, 2012


I wonder if making a point, however valid, by leading with a phrase that people are sick to death of hearing people say, and that often precedes truly horrid speech, is worth it. Seriously.

Fair enough. No need to pounce on one line though. It's not like I get a lot of chances to decry the institution of marriage. I can never wrap my head around why marriage is bound up in law and government in the first place. If there weren't so many rights and benefits tied to it I don't think most people would care.
posted by cjorgensen at 7:55 AM on March 29, 2012


ABC Gippsland was interviewing the Catholic Bishop of Sale this morning on gay marriage. Pretty happy with the discussion on Facebook, in a country (therefore conservative) part of the world, full support for gay marriage. As I said over there: "Funny that a celibate unmarried priest can pontificate (excuse the pun) on how wonderful marriage is."
posted by wilful at 7:12 PM on March 29, 2012 [1 favorite]


Cute and touching enough ...until 8:05 when Adam Hills utter the words, "I take you...to be my unlawful TV partner."

I was actually getting moved until that part, that sentence. That clarification.

Then I got angry. Here is a room full of pairs of human beings, who, like so many other human beings on the planet, have found one another and have decided to unite in matrimony.

Except legally they cannot. I didn't really realize that until that moment. While I thought I knew the laws about such things in Australia, I figured I had missed something. I was wrong. I didn't. Marriage of same-sex couples in Australia is still forbidden.

Forbidden. Because that's what illegal means. Marriage between two people who love one another but are the same gender is forbidden in Australia.

Hills did a great job making the occasion significant and meaningful but I imagine most people present already had that part sorted out. What these marrying people want is legal recognition of the validity of their commitment. That's what is missing.

This is 99% flying in the face of convention, 1% mocking clownery. But it's that 1% that sticks in my craw. Soon enough however we too shall overcome.

And just wait until you see the weddings we stage then!
posted by Mike Mongo at 8:47 PM on March 29, 2012 [1 favorite]


« Older Bathroom door never closes? Talking to self in bri...  |  But shouldn't consumers have s... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments