The Orbis

In show business, appearing on the "Tonight Show" has traditionally been a rite of passage for any comedian hoping to make it big. However, any upstart flash-in-the-pan comedian, actor or falcon trainer can appear on late-night shows like "Leno" and "Letterman." But only a select few can join the pantheon of enduring cultural icons who have been immortalized in a guest appearance on "The Simpsons." Britney Spears, who has been consistently popular since bursting onto the pop music scene six years ago, made the cut, but one-time mega-diva Celine Dion didn't. Even tennis legend Pete Sampras had to win a record 13 Grand Slam singles titles before scoring a cameo in 2001.

Though an appearance on "The Simpsons" is a hard-earned affirmation of one's staying power as a star, the idea is not limited to celebrity guest spots. Any time the Simpson family deems an issue in society – from nuclear energy to the legalization of medicinal marijuana – important enough to weigh in on, it is an indication that the issue will be relevant for a long time.

Last week, same-sex marriage proved its mettle in the episode entitled "There's Something About Marrying." In the episode, the Simpsons' hometown of Springfield legalizes gay marriage in an effort to raise tourism revenues, and Homer discovers that he can make a stack of money by performing wedding ceremonies for gay couples. Also, in a revelation unparalleled in hype since 1995 when viewers found out that Maggie shot Mr. Burns, Marge's sister Patty reveals that she is a lesbian. Despite her initial discomfort toward her sister's homosexuality, Marge eventually grows to accept Patty's lifestyle.

If America is indeed involved in a culture war, then Sunday's episode was the most recent battle. The forces of social conservatism manifested in the form of a parental warning that aired prior to the episode saying, "The following program contains discussion of same-sex marriage. Viewer discretion is advised." Oh, come on. Any avid fan of "The Simpsons" could prattle off a long list of topics discussed in The Simpsons without parental warnings that are by any measure more objectionable than gay marriage. The episode in which the old sea captain weds a yak immediately comes to mind. The parental warning at the beginning of last Sunday's show was a product of the cultural environment in which we live that seeks to demonize same-sex marriage as morally corrupt and loathsome.

Nevertheless, the more significant issue is the very fact that an animated sitcom with an audience of millions addressed the controversial issue of gay marriage. By bringing the topic of gay marriage into mainstream American culture, and spreading a message of tolerance, "The Simpsons" has performed incalculable service for the movement for same-sex marriage.

Ultimately, the culture war will have its most important moments on TV and radio, and not on Capitol Hill - despite the notion that "moral values" played a significant role in the election last November. Congress cannot legislate culture and politicians cannot change culture no matter how many times they conjure up the image of America heading straight to hell with Eminem blasting in its headphones. Instead, the cultural attitudes of Americans are derived chiefly from non-governmental influences, such as popular entertainment. In many respects, what Homer Simpson has to say about gay marriage is far more important than any assertions that either George W. Bush or John Kerry make about the subject.

Of course, the nature of the socially conservative mentality is to lay the blame for instances of subversive ideas on TV — such as tolerance for homosexuals — at the feet of the licentious liberal media monolith. But that is not the case, argues Thomas Frank in his brilliant political book, "What's the Matter With Kansas?" He argues that the content on TV that conservatives view (sometimes correctly) as sleaze is not a function of liberalism in the media, but rather of the ubiquitous business goal of profit-maximization. The corporations that control the media recognize that anything with shock value will hook viewers. Frank writes, "It is business that speaks to us over the TV set, always in the throbbing tones of cultural insurgency, forever shocking the squares, humiliating the pious, queering tradition, and crushing patriarchy."

While gay marriage cannot rightly be considered alongside Janet Jackson's breast-baring incident in the same category of content that conservatives rail against as filth, both are part of the overarching structure in which television networks seek to raise ratings by flouting convention.

One fortunate consequence is that Americans will in time grow tolerant of the idea of gay marriage as they learn through repeated exposure to it that it is nothing dreadful or abhorrent. It is a result that is as inexorable as the power of corporations best served by pushing the boundaries of conservative cultural norms.

Article Tools