Sale pastor Heidi McIvor in the Coalition for Marriage's new television advertisement. Credit:YouTube / Coalition for Marriage With that in mind, I conclude that what is actually being said here is, "in countries with gay marriage, parents have lost their right to rigidly enforce the concept of heteronormativity while ensuring their legacy of homophobia remains intact in their children." The advertisement in question here actually focuses very little on two members of the same sex getting married. It's the trouble that comes afterwards that we should really be worried about. People marrying bridges, boys being forced to wear pink, feminists outlawing stay-at-home-mothers. Where will the madness end?! Which is of course the whole point of the underhanded exercise. As put forward in this excellent analysis by Mark DiStefano, the tactics employed by the Coalition for Codified Homophobia aren't designed to simply reinforce negative ideas around marriage equality. Polling in Australia has consistently shown that the majority of citizens are in favour of extending marriage rights to same-sex couples, and it would be nigh on impossible to persuade a majority of these people to change by focusing on the so-called "sanctity of marriage" alone. Instead, the "no" lobby is working to stoke underlying prejudices using phrases such as "an attack on our way of life", "a battle against political correctness" and, in a nod to an old classic, "the thin end of the wedge".

By the way, boys are already allowed to wear dresses. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen But let's pretend for a moment that the statements of fear offered here aren't completely bonkers, and let's consider why people would find them terrifying. "The school told my son he could wear a dress next year if he felt like it" Homophobia and misogyny have always been bedfellows. The homophobic parent isn't just afraid of having a gay son; they're also afraid of having a heterosexual son who doesn't know how to rigidly perform straight masculinity. While it's considered almost a non-issue to dress girls in clothes designed with boys in mind (because masculinity isn't considered shameful in the way femininity is), the reverse remains steeped in weird paranoia. Boys in dresses aren't just kids wearing clothes they like and feel comfortable in – they're snags* in the time/space continuum that threaten to tear open the fabric of the universe and unleash Hell on Earth.

While it makes zero sense that anyone with a rational mind would see something wrong with children being empowered to wear the clothes they like and feel comfortable in, it makes total sense that homophobic people see it as the beginning of the end. Personally, I look forward to a future in which my son will be supported to wear what he likes without fear of being bullied, degraded or made to feel sub-human. And hey – if more boys start wearing dresses, perhaps more dressmakers will start designing them with pockets. *Also funny because SNAGS used to mean 'sensitive new age guy'. A bit of 1990s-related humour there. "When same sex marriage passes as law overseas, this kind of program becomes widespread and compulsory" What kind of program? The one where schools make it possible for children to adhere to a uniform dress-code that accords with their comfort and not someone else's restrictive ideas around what boys and girls are legally allowed to wear?

Again, I'm totally on board with this. Lots of little boys enjoy wearing dresses and glitter and sparkles and fairy wings, up until the point when someone else tells them that these things shouldn't be a source of joy for them but a source of shame. Teaching kids to feel ashamed of themselves is what leads to a discordant, violent society – not boys feeling the breeze on their knees. "Kids in year 7 are being asked to role-play being in a same-sex relationship" I sincerely doubt there is a single school in Australia that's asking year 7s to role-play being in any kind of relationship at all, let alone a same-sex one. What they may be doing is asking kids to imagine what it's like to be marginalised and afraid because of unfair prejudices that remain around something as basic and innocent as same-sex attraction or gender diversity. The way I see it, asking kids to practise empathy for each other will lead to safer school environments overall with happier, more well-adjusted kids who feel welcome in their communities rather than ostracised from them. As an aside, I spoke to a girl in year 7 the other day. She told me kids in her year level are starting to do things at parties that she's not quite ready for, but that peer pressure to participate makes it really difficult to say no.

She wanted to know what she could do to protect herself from growing up too fast without putting herself in danger of being isolated or bullied. I told her there are no easy answers because high school can be a really rough time. Loading I mean, for goodness sake. This is real. Worry about something real. Which is a pretty good conclusion for the whole sorry mess of a "no" campaign.