Mates' marriage horrifies gay rights groups

Heterosexual Dunedin men Travis McIntosh (left) and Matt McCormick, who are preparing for their wedding. Photo from MediaWorks
Heterosexual Dunedin men Travis McIntosh (left) and Matt McCormick, who are preparing for their wedding. Photo from MediaWorks
Travis McIntosh and Matt McCormick wrote their wedding vows yesterday, brimming with ''nervous excitement'' about their big day.

The Dunedin men will marry tomorrow, but their move has horrified gay groups.

The pair are heterosexual best mates.

Engineering student Mr McIntosh (23) and teacher Mr McCormick (24) will tie the knot to win a The Edge radio station competition and a trip to the 2015 Rugby World Cup in England.

Mr McCormick said from Auckland yesterday opposition to the wedding was understandable but the pair never intended to offend anyone.

''We are not here to insult anyone. We are here to do our own thing and travel our own path.''

Mr McIntosh said the wedding was not mocking the institution of marriage.

''It's just seeing how far two good mates would go to win a trip to the Rugby World Cup.''

''We picked up our wedding certificate and the nerves are starting to really hit home.''

They will marry in front of 60 family and friends at Eden Park, Auckland.

Mr McIntosh said most guests would travel from Dunedin and Central Otago, paying their own way.

A celebrant would make the union legally binding and Crowd Goes Wild television presenter James McOnie would be MC.

The pair said their wedding vows would touch on their friendship and recall their time playing rugby together at King's High School in Dunedin.

They were undecided if they would take hyphenated surnames and who would walk down the aisle.

The couple's wedding song is Cruisin', by Huey Lewis and Gwyneth Paltrow.

Mr McIntosh said he thought the marriage would last at least two years.

Mr McCormick, a teacher at Musselburgh School, said the friendship began after the two met at Pirates Rugby Club in Dunedin when he was aged 6.

His family, like Mr McIntosh's, was excited about the wedding.

''They're backing us 100%,'' Mr McCormick said.

However, gay rights groups have condemned the union.

Otago University Students' Association Queer Support co-ordinator Neill Ballantyne, of Dunedin, said the wedding was an ''insult'' because marriage equality was a ''hard fought'' battle for gay people.

''Something like this trivialises what we fought for.''

The competition promoted the marriage of two men as something negative, ''as something outrageous that you'd never consider'', Mr Ballantyne said.

LegaliseLove Aotearoa Wellington co-chairman Joseph Habgood said the competition attacked the legitimacy of same-sex marriages.

''The point of this competition is that men marrying each other is still something they think is worth having a laugh at ...

''Maybe on the day that statistics around mental health for LGBTI (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender and Intersex) 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.''

shawn.mcavinue@odt.co.nz

Could not agree more

I could not agree more. Well said.

Honest about intentions

Is it any more a sham marriage than one of Mick Jagger's efforts? Or one involving one of the many Hollywood idiots, who have every conceivable clause in their pre-nup, that gives them the right to walk away from the whole thing if things get too hard?

At least these fellows are being honest about their intentions.

They can't win in some eyes

Surely the objection of the homosexual community to this sham marriage demonstrates that they too think that marriage is a serious commitment between two people which is intended to last for life? Wow, there really are some ant-gay people here. To them I say grow up and mind your own business. I hope these guys will be splitting up all their worldly goods when they do divorce.

Precisely

Precisely. The dictionary for hundreds of years has stated that marriage was the union of a man and woman. Two same sex people wanting to be "united" is something new, so therefore it should have a new name to go with it. Marriage is for the heteros, get your own word for your version of it.

This is the trickle down effect of that horrible word called tolerance, which is rammed down our throats, every day, disguised as "what the public wants", when as you rightfuly say, it is nothing close to the actual public opinion at all. Has anyone actually stopped, and asked themselves, "who gets to decide what we are tolerant of?". I was never consulted on the topic of gay marriage, and do not support it one bit, but if I say this out loud, in public, then "tolerance" labels me a hater. I'm stuffed either way.

These two guys are being 100% honest and upfront about what they doing, and why they are doing it, and they have something the LGBT community appears to be lacking..... a sense of humour.

Too right

Too right. I refer to her as my wife because that's what she is - just as I'm her husband and proud to be so. 

Fortunately in our house the PC Nazis are recognised for what they are - mirthless partypoopers whose contribution to societal good is a long way south of zero.

I say to those people, get a life!  But please, not in my town. 

Two fine cattle beasts and more

My wife and I says Treeleaper. And there's the problem, the possessive. No thanks to heterosexual marriage. Keep your status women safe at home, may they keep your house clean, prepare all your meals, and bear and raise your children? The guys in this story have a better outlook, short sharp and matey.

My wife and I

My wife and I are we.

Hype.O.Thermia can swear what he likes till hell freezes over but if I were him I wouldn't swear on oath that the majority of non-homosexuals were for the homosexual marriage bill, he might find himself in contravention of the Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act. What is worrying is that some people in the modern age seem to think that they have wisdom that far exceeds that of the thousands of generations that preceded them.  They seem to me to believe that if they think something is true, then ipso facto, it must be true.

I'm not sure that straight people have turned marriage into an ugly word -  in fact I'm sure they haven't.  

What I do know is that marriage is not held in the esteem that it was and nor does it have the importance that it once had.  It has become disposable in the modern world and in my opinion (I'm not swearing it though, its just my opinion), it's for the worse. My guess is the under 40's probably supported the homosexual bill and you could say that "OK, fine" it's their world, they have to live in it.

And...?

So two men are getting married for the benefits, not for the love. OK, and many, many hetero-marriages happen for this reason today and have happened through the ages - marriages for benefits, visas, dowries, politics or many other reasons not including love. Contrary to what some same-sex marriage proponents are crowing this week, doesn't this marriage further legitimise and equalise same-sex marriages?

I thought I knew my own opinion...

...but Treeleaper believes he knows better, and has held forth on my behalf about  "how we straight people felt about our marriages being trivialised with the homosexual 'marriage' bill."  I could have sworn the majority of "we straight people" either supported gay people having the right to marry, or didn't mind one way or the other.  I'd have pointed to any number of news stories of male-female marriages that trivialised sincere loving marriage entered into with the intention that it be "till death do us part" (even though the language of the ceremony may be more modern) and involve mutual kindness and support through easy and hard times.  And then, added to those marriages that end in divorce when the wedding guests have hardly got around to hanging up their posh clothes in their own wardrobes, are the ones where there is worse than trivialisation.  Beating and cheating, sexual and financial exploitation, continual disparagement till one partner feels so useless and worthless they get to believe that they don't even deserve to be treated decently.  And yet, we (we?) thought homosexual marriage would trivialise heterosexual marriage?  Treeleaper, don't you think heterosexuals have already done that on our behalf?  Or is it kind of OK when straight people turn "marriage" into an ugly word?

Mates' marriage

I think most people, gay men included, can see that this is just some stupid gimmick by a radio station.

I'd like to know how many people the writer of this article Shawn  McAvinue rang before he found someone who was 'horrified'.

I agree

I agree Hypo. Too often we have minorities that finally get their own way then complain when others jump on board.

Be careful what you wish for.

Marriage

Reality is they are consenting adults and can do as they please. Isn't that what these organisations fought for, the right to choose?[Abridged]

 

Build a bridge people

I support gay rights even though I am het. I try to support others and can see no reason why people discriminate and judge and yet wave their own flag for equality. These two men love each other, end of story. If they want to wed then who are any of us to judge? Boston Legal showed something like this in the last episodes. As I say to people who are against gay marriage - Is it hurting you? How? No-one can every give a good reason. Just because you don't like it is not a good reason. So I repeat - if they get married is it hurting you? How? Any action that shows you can love another man if you are male is good, doesn't matter if it is romantic love or not.

Good luck guys.

Perhaps Mr Ballantyne now realises...

Perhaps Mr Ballantyne now realises how we straight people felt about our marriages being trivialised with the homosexual "marriage" bill.

Mates' marriage

Absolutely nothing wrong in this marriage  -  it cannot trivialise what gay groups have fought for, as it's not a gay thing.  Merry, perhaps, but not gay, and there's nothing wrong in that, is there ?

Gay marriage

See what happens to so called 'gay marriage'?   It becomes a right joke, and that is what it sure is.   Don't know why LGBTI are upset about it. They claim they have the right to 'marry' so why can't anyone else?  They can't say it is discrimination.   Anyone can marry regardless of their status. 

Cracked wedding bells

Gay rights groups are "horrified" because 2 non-gay guys are marrying to win a prize?  They should be celebrating!  Same-sex marriage has moved so far into the mainstream that it applies with all the seriousness and all the frivolity of heterosexual marriage.  Radio stunt marriages, "celebrity" marriages that last less than a fortnight, marriage for money, for status, for immigration, all these used to be the preserve of heterosexuals.  Now it's equal opportunity vulgarity, along with equal opportunity to celebrate deep sincere committed love.  Welcome to full partiipation, you wanted it, you should never have been shut out from it.  When people want equality and eventually get equality do me a favour, don't whine.

Sham marriage

How can this be legal? it is a sham marriage.  It is no better than people who marry to get residency in a country.  It needs looking at.

Kiwi humour

What a laugh - good on them, it's just straight Kiwi humor. As for those complaining, why don't they run a competition of their own for, say, a "normal " wedding? [Abridged]

You only live once

I wonder how many of those complaining actually listen to the Edge?  Hell, for a free trip to next years rugby world cup I d consider doing the same.

Good on them

Wherever you go and whatever you do, there is someone somewhere waiting to be offended by something.

Is there a clause in the gay marriage bill that says they have to be in a sexual relationship? No? Well, Mr McCormick can calm down then. All is well.

ODT/directory - Local Businesses

CompanyLocationBusiness Type
The Cedars B&BWanakaBed & Breakfasts
Bygone Era Bed & BreakfastDunedinBed & Breakfasts
Forman Building Systems LtdDunedinBuilders
Enterprise BeadsOamaruGifts