Jeremy Irons Tries Explaining His Bizarre Gay Marriage Comments, But Still Makes No Sense
In case you missed it, Jeremy Irons went on a bizarre tangent about gay marriage that ended with him concluding that fathers may end up marrying their sons … but that it wouldn’t be incest because they’re both male, and that it would be done just for tax purposes.
Now, the actor is backpedaling, but still leaving us flummoxed.
“I am deeply concerned that from my online discussion with The Huffington Post, it has been understood that I hold a position that is antigay,” he wrote on his blog. “This is as far from the truth of me as to say that I believe the earth is flat.”
He goes on to explain that he was being “mischievous” and demonstrates that he’s never heard of the Internet. We’d say more, but we’re too busy trying to cool off our melted brains. Here’s the rest of his explanation.
“I was taking part in a short discussion around the practical meaning of marriage, and how that institution might be altered by it becoming available to same-sex partners. Perhaps rather too flippantly I flew the kite of an example of the legal quagmire that might occur if same sex marriage entered the statute books, by raising the possibility of future marriage between same sex family members for tax reasons, (incest being illegal primarily in order to prevent inbreeding, and therefore an irrelevance in non reproductive relationships). Clearly this was a mischievous argument, but nonetheless valid.
“I am clearly aware that many gay relationships are more long term, responsible and even healthier in their role of raising children, than their hetero equivalents, and that love often creates the desire to mark itself in a formal way, as marriage would do. Clearly society should find a way of doing this.
“I had hoped that even on such a subject as this, where passions run high, the internet was a forum where ideas could be freely discussed without descending into name-calling.
“I believe that is what it could be, but it depends on all of us behaving, even behind our aliases, in a humane, intelligent and open way.”
One guy not hiding behind an alias in his criticism of Irons? The always amazing Alan Cumming, who legally married his partner in New York in 2012 after a 2007 civil union in London.
I hate when people say they don’t have strong feelings about something then proceed to spew offensive and ignorant ones #jeremyirons
— Alan Cumming (@Alancumming) April 4, 2013
Is Jeremy Irons a vampire? Because he just got slayed.