Buckeye trees have a major case of the Anna Paquins.
Though most people might meet news of the tree's bisexuality with a shrug, one Christian Ohioan is outraged—OUTRAGED he tells you!—that his fellow citizens are referred to as "buckeyes," coinciding with his state's filthy abomination of a choice to mark the tree its official symbol.
In a opinion lettter titled "What about carnations?" sent to Findlay, Ohio's The Courier, Jim Fletchley writes:
SO WHAT ABOUT CARNATIONS?
Something in the "Just Ask" column (Page A3, May 29) disturbed me. According to the column, "the Ohio buckeye, Aesculus glabra, bears flowers with both male and female organs on the same tree. It is a monoecious species."
I couldn't believe this, so I did some research and, sure enough, a science website (forestry.about.com) states that "the Ohio buckeye is polygamo-monoecious, bearing both bisexual and male flowers."
The buckeye is our state tree and most of us gladly wear the nickname, "buckeyes." But it is shameful and unacceptable that a bisexual tree should represent us! We are flaunting the Holy Bible!
I urge everyone to contact their state representative and demand legislation removing the buckeye as our state tree and condemning the use of the term "buckeye" as a nickname for residents of Ohio.
Does anyone know if carnations are bisexual?
Jim Flechtner, Findlay
Hmmm. Last we chekced, Jim, carnations (as well as all other flowering trees and plants) came out of the closet centuries ago. Might we suggest the blatantly heterosexual Croc shoes as a totally straight alternative?