The percentage of Californians who support same-sex marriage varies from poll to poll, but if Tuesday's news coverage is any indication, a legal union between partner A and partner B is no longer seen as either the end of the world or the start of the Age of Aquarius.
Hundreds of gay and lesbian couples received legal California marriage licenses Tuesday. But compared with the political hysteria and media frenzy that followed the brief legalization of same-sex marriages in San Francisco in February 2004, the news cycle following this nuptial blitz was a model of restraint.
For The Record
Los Angeles Times Friday, June 20, 2008 Home Edition Main News Part A Page 2 National Desk 2 inches; 82 words Type of Material: Correction
Legality of gay marriage: An article in Wednesday's Section A about television coverage of same-sex marriages said that California voters had approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage sometime in the last four years. California voters passed Proposition 22, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman, in 2000, but it was not a constitutional amendment. A proposal to amend the state Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman will be on the Nov. 4 ballot.
Wedged in between coverage of the flooding of the Midwest, Al Gore's endorsement of Sen. Barack Obama and the first of two memorials for journalist Tim Russert, stories from various California courthouses were so uniform in their well-wishing tameness that they bordered on dull. Short-and-sweet interviews with the newly married made the top of the network news at 5, but the topic was regularly trumped on talk shows like "The View" and local afternoon news hours by recent studies about the importance of sleep and the health benefits of drinking coffee.
Which, if you support same-sex marriage, is great news -- a general lack of hysteria proves a shift in public opinion much more effectively than any poll. Certainly circumstances are different from four years ago, when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom began a marital spree that left some Americans euphoric, others horrified. Less than a year later, Californians voted for a constitutional ban on gay marriage.
This time around, everyone has had plenty of warning, not to mention a whole season in which to really miss "Will and Grace." Ever since the state Supreme Court declared the same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional last month, there has been a steady drumbeat of what can only be called anticipation.
The media have had a field day predicting how an onslaught of gay and lesbian marriages will affect the state, booking up florists and caterers and perhaps reviving the state economy with a wave of marriage-minded tourists. Gay and lesbian activist groups, meanwhile, reviewed the tapes from four years ago and made it clear to their constituents that sometimes less is more, especially when it comes to cross-dressing.
So when the big day dawned, it was almost anticlimactic. Despite the fact that Californians remain almost evenly divided on the issue, the first day of what will undoubtedly be a slew of same-sex weddings occurred with far more flowers than dissent. What it lacked in tension, it more than made up for in media professionalism; everyone involved stayed very much on message.
