In the aftermath of an election which saw the voters of two states (Maryland and Maine) redefine marriage for the first time, CollegeHumor.com offered a snarky message from homosexual men to those of us troglodytes still arguing in favor of old-fashioned matrimony.

The video has gone bonkers on YouTube, social media, and news sites. (And John Stonestreet talks about it in today's BreakPoint commentary.) You can watch it here. Be aware that the vocabulary is colorful.

Here's the gist:

“Americans are becoming more comfortable with gay marriage, seeing it as both a moral and a civil rights issue. But there are many out there who are still fighting against the cause. And as gay men ourselves, we’d just like to say to those people, ‘Fine. Keep marriage between a man and a woman. And in response, we will marry your girlfriends.’”

They then embark on a journey through 20 years' worth of fawning media-generated stereotypes of the "gay man," in order to justify an unbelievably creepy thesis that--if they wanted to--homosexuals could steal our womenfolk. Among the evidence marshaled, we're informed that everyone knows gay men are smarter, more muscular, better dressed, more fun, and (I am not making this up) better at sexually pleasing ladies than hetero men. After all, women already enjoy the friendship of gays more than straight guys anyway. Didn't you know?

They conclude that fellas who oppose gay "marriage" had better back off, because we don't stand a chance against the masculine charms of--wait for it--homosexuals.

When a gay friend of mine posted the video on Facebook, I immediately started coming up with uncharitable comebacks. But in a moment of better judgment, I linked instead to a piece from earlier this year by Marc Barnes over at Bad Catholic (a Patheos.com blog). In it, he bemoans "Our Godawful Objectification of Men with Same-Sex Attraction," and notes how many of the stereotypes CollegeHumor invokes represent insulting reductions of human beings to little better than lapdogs. It's worth quoting in full:

"The Gay Best Friend Abstraction isn’t just a false category in which to place a person — it is an amputation of the person. When girls want a 'gay best friend' they certainly aren’t asking for a unique human being, with all aching, terrifying desires human beings contain, who will work for their ultimate good to the point of death. They want an accessory. The 'Gay Best Friend' must — above all things — be safe. He must have all the emotional benefits of being a male, without the emotional threats. He must be supportive, without reminding her of the father-figures in her life. He must provide the emotional affirmation of male, physical touch, without touch ever meaning anything. He must be a girl, provide fashion advice, and — in general — have all the characteristics of a puppy on happy pills."

Such is the picture of gay men impressed upon our culture by popular media. Evidently, we're now expected to nod obediently and even laugh when these stereotypes are invoked. I know religious conservatives are supposed to be losing this battle. But it seems to me same-sex-attracted men are the ones paying the highest cost.