Terrified of marriage though I am, I've always enjoyed reading The New York Times Wedding/Celebration section. I love reading about the ways people met, the way they fell in love, and the extravagence with which they sealed the deal.
So it didn't seem too out of sorts to read the San Francisco Chronicle equivalent during a late evening slow time at work (shhhh...).
I won't make that mistake again.
It was a love story. Just two good looking, super bubbly college students who, despite a bad first date over underage cocktails, fell in love and finally became Mr. and Mrs. and just wanted to read a nice story about it in their hometown newspaper.
The story was sappy and kind of lame. It was. But it didn't bug me. If you don't like love stories don't read the wedding section, right? But it apparently pissed off the majority of the Chonicle's online reader base.
What attracted me to the story in the first place was the fact that it had 97 comments made about it. 97! 97 readers had something to say about Mr. and Mrs. Happy Newleywed.
I've included below a few of my favorites (and by favorites, I mean the ones that upset me the most).
"Yes, I suppose it is sweet to be young and in love and living in this city with the hundreds of civil rights you get to enjoy by being legally married. It's too bad that that same opportunity isn't available to equally deserving same-sex couples." Not place like someone else's wedding announcent to display your political beliefs.
"I just threw up in my mouth a little."
"Get back to me when he's bangin' his secretary and she's raising their five kids and is depressed."
Straight-up character attacks: "He looks gay in that picture" followed by "awesome funbags" and "nice rack."
And my favorite:
"This comment violated SFgate's terms and conditions, and was removed." Really? A comment was so bad that the staff had to remove it. Wow.
It would be sad if it weren't so ridiculously funny. And now, the count is up to 125.
