I am feeling a strange and somewhat unwarranted affinity to Dan Savage right now. Apparently he’s going to be on some new television show (that’s the unwarranted part: there’s no comparing our relative popularity or cultural influence), and certain people are rising up in protest because he’s too rude.
Dan Savage’s vulgarity and violent rhetoric is well-documented. Savage is unapologetic in his promotion of filth masquerading as humor. His new show, ironically titled “The Real O’Neals,” is a platform he does not deserve. Even so, Disney ABC continues to remain silent as pro-family and pro-faith organizations call for it to reconsider its decision to promote this bigoted, hate-filled man.
"Disney ABC continues to circle the wagon and ignore the anti-religious bigot in their midst,” said MRC President Brent Bozell. “We will not relent in exposing Dan Savage for the vile hate he spews at conservatives, Catholics, and evangelicals. Disney ABC’s silence is shameful.”
He has riled up the usual suspects. Here’s a sampling of their statements:
“The most incredibly vicious anti-Catholic in America is Dan Savage. What he has said about Catholicism is so vile that Disney would never air it. To offer this malicious bigot a show is the height of irresponsibility.”
– Bill Donohue, President, Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights“Unfortunately, Dan Savage’s public persona is completely opposite to wholesome role model for kids. His crass and even vitriolic disparaging of certain faiths and family values, and his aggressive agenda of promoting dangerous, deviant sexual experimentation couldn’t have escaped Disney’s or ABC’s attention. To see the network that brought us Cinderella endorse a man like this should outrage every American who cares about our children and our culture.”
– Lila Rose, President, Live Action“Dan Savage recently made a lewd smear against Pope John Paul II on Twitter in which he accused him of being a child molester. This is sadly typical of Dan Savage, who has a history of making X-rated personal attacks. Why would Disney hire this man for one of their TV shows? And why would advertisers want to be associated with such vile attacks on Catholics?”
– Brian Burch, President, CatholicVote.org
I am also a little bit jealous. There are a lot more complaints in that article, and I noticed that his critics are far more writerly than mine — in the entire thing, they only use the word “smear” twice, and they are rather more concise.
You know, if I still had young children at home, and I had the choice of letting them watch a half hour of Dan Savage or a half hour of Bill Donohue, and I were interested in encouraging them to grow up to be tolerant of others, I know which one I’d choose. It wouldn’t be the sour old guy who never cusses.
The quotes are much improved If you insert the correct translations for pro-family (anti-people, anti-equality) and pro-faith (anti-science). But then being condemned by major religions is great advertisement, at least in this day and age. And certain regions of the planet.
Good grief, I just reminded myself how backwards we humans really are.
How can you circle one wagon?
Not really familiar with Dan Savage, but with those endorsements, I like him already.
Dan Savage was great 10 years ago, might well still be great. I haven’t really kept track since he coined the term “santorum”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Santorum#Gay_rights
I don’t know PZ. I can sort of see you with your own teevee show too. Perhaps an action/adventure type of thing. Maybe call it Ice Station Zebrafish.
oh IRONY:
I suppose this is the ABC response to Seth McFarland’s Family Guy, which is blatant attack on “family values”, #religion#, and decency (and jabs at civil rights, etc).
Not a big fan of Dan Savage. He’s said on numerous occasions that whenever someone tells him they are bisexual, he automatically thinks, “I was, too, at your age.” He also doesn’t think asexuals should be a part of the LGBT movement.
Bill Donohue refers to someone else as a “malicious bigot.” I presume he did it unselfconsciously.
I agree that Dan Savage is far from perfect, but so am I!
I would watch Ice Station Zebrafish :-) Or Zebrafish Point, Zebrafish dans le Métro … and PZ could be the Wizard of OZebrafish, I guess.
The bigots’ reactions certainly make me think this could be worth watching (not that we’ll get it over here, but still). It’s kind of irresistible, all those pearls being clutched.
I just a brief (too brief) google of Dan. His sitcom will concern a family whose teenage son “comes out” as gay. I guess these CONsoives objectors never saw Modern Family. OR, no no no, they just hate him for his naughty advice column “Savage S@x”. ‘Family values’ does never include anything about that s@xstuff, donchano. The consoives only know s@x from porn (they keep hidden in the closet in the backroom) so ANYTHING about s@x must be porn.
to be brief, and optimistic: all the controv about Savage is a _good_thing_, TV sitcoms are so bland these days, maybe he can liven them up a bit with controvy stories.
Call for another totally ineffective Disney boycott in 3.. 2.. 1..
People! They are obviously criticizing his use of gendered insults and transphobic slurs!!
.
.
.
.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Almost had you there for a second, didn’I?
@Trav Mamone – Yeah, he said that like 10 years ago, but has since then admitted he was wrong and apologized multiple times. He’s written several pretty touching articles about his coming out process and how it has colored his perception of others.
My wife worked with Dan for years, and he was our wedding officiant (18 years ago). I think he’s great. Not perfect, no, but awesome.
Wow, I never thought I’d be agreeing with Bill Donahue. Dan Savage is a total shithead (hella transphobic, hella biphobic, hella gross in general). There’s a nice blog called Fuck No Dan Savage that documents his shit. I recommend a quick read of it if you haven’t seen his awfulness.
Jenna Stewart@16:
He seems to have a certain attitude that one sees amongst more prominent social justice advocates that he is so social-justicey that there is simply no way what he says can be considered offensive. Like My Best Friend Is Black™ on steroids:
“BUT GUYS!!! IT’S ME, DAN SAVAGE, KING OF THE LGBT KINGDOM!! WHEN I SAY T—NY OR COMPARE FEMALE GENITALS TO AN EXPLODED CANNED HAM, IT’S JUST MY EDGY SOCIAL JUSTICE HUMOR. I’M NOT LIKE *THOSE* GUYS!!!”
Still, I guess I consider the guy a net positive in the world. I just wish he’d own the fuck up to it when he gets called on his BS and consider that no, the mere fact of being Dan Savage doesn’t give your carte blanche to use transphobic slurs.
From the letter to Disney:
Disney will be associated with the hate language of this uncivil figure since Disney will be endorsing it.
Ooh! So now the people who sent this letter will “be associated with the hate language” of all the people who have called for the execution, often by stoning, of LGBT people (not to mention the ISIS’s executions of gays)? If Disney is endorsing the totality of what Savage has said by having a show about one person’s childhood, then they must be endorsing all of what religion has said and done to LGBT people over the ages, right?
Savage may not be perfect, but considering the nature of his enemies I’m willing to give him a chance. I’m avoiding any new shows (I’m cutting the cable as soon as my current contract with Concast is up) so I won’t watch him on ABC but I won’t object to it either.
What he has said about Catholicism is so vile that Disney would never air it.
And, apparently, so vile that poor Bill Donohue can’t even specify why it was vile or unwarranted.
To offer this malicious bigot a show is the height of irresponsibility.
And I guess it would also be irresponsible for Donohue to elaborate and make a solid case, amirite?
How can you circle one wagon?
Hey, this is Disney we’re talking about here. They’ve done far stranger things in their animation.
The enemy of my enemy is not my friend. I can acknowledge the good that Dan Savage has done–and he certainly has done some good–without remotely giving him a pass on the shittiness he perpetuates. I hope the show will be successful and not hurt and belittle vulnerable people who aren’t white gay cis men and boys.
Savage is “anti-family” in precisely the same sense that Jackie Robinson’s Dodgers were “anti-baseball.”
I’m sure these religious people who are criticizing Dan Savage for not being politically correct are the same people who are claiming that political correctness is a great danger to freedom and liberty.
But you know how politically correct religious conservatives can be … when it suits them.
Never mind Disney, Mel Brooks addressed that question decades ago in Blazing Saddles.
Savage does have some problems, and he has that thing where, once you reach a certain level of fame, it becomes psychologically difficult to issue a genuine apology. (Say it with me now: “If anyone was offended…”.)
But of course, these asshats will never actually complain about his periodic forays into actual bullshit, because that’s not the stuff they care about (and of course, they’re usually worse on those issues).
We can also add raging fat hatred and misogyny to Savage’s list of faults. He may have done some useful things here and there but he’s a hot mess on a lot of issues.
The Donahue Catholic hatred of Savage is a complete pack of BS, mostly centered on the fact that he has “dared” in their eyes, push back against homophobia and direct attacks against himself with humor and sass. It’s so very much a bully tactic on Donahue’s part owing to the fact that he hates that anyone talks about sex in a frank way, much less a gay man and that they dare not be silenced by him. So yeah, I can understand identifying with that particular aspect of Dan Savage…
That being said, Dan Savage… has done direct harm to a number of communities I belong to or am strongly allied with.
His statements minimizing or erasing bisexuality directly impacted my ex-partner and made it harder for her to feel safe coming out for a number of years. His statements on polyamory have been equally ignorant and dismissive. He is deeply fatphobic and pushes unhealthy body image expectations on his audience and his treatment of kink in his podcast has often been complete garbage. Additionally, his defenses of his repeated use of the t-slur which he has continued to defend as recently as last year: From a sympathetic to him post.
CONTENT WARNING FROM HERE ON OUT FOR SLURS, TRANSPHOBIA, ACEPHOBIA, and SEXUAL ASSAULT
He’s definitely gone some incredibly fucked up places regarding trans people, echoing a lot of the ignorance and hate that is used by families and people to dismiss the life experiences of trans people, like with this column from 2003
Additionally, he’s a firm component of being an always game partner, which is not bad on its own, but owing to his baggage, he is often really blind to the realities of sexual assault and often gives straight up dangerous advice either telling people to force themselves through something for “love” or in the name of “not being repressed” or that coercion is not that big of a deal. And his treatment of survivors of sexual assault is often yikes level shit, From a column in 2010:
Note, the context of this is that she has a trigger surrounding her husband after a bad rape, but in Savage world, blue ballsing someone is an act of abuse.
And this leads to the part that I feel is most important. Dan Savage believes that not having sex with a horny partner is either an act of emotional abuse or a sign of deep fucked up repression, so you can guess just how well he’s handled the existence of asexual people…
Yeah… From a 2011 column:
Because being an asexual in a relationship with a sexual is an act of abuse you guys and is the real aggressive move, so clearly the asexual partner is to be in a position of needing to “make up” for such inherent cruelty.
The context of that is that rape by coercion is obscenely high for asexuals and many of us are correctively raped, even by partners owing to a cultural belief that a relationship is about sex and anyone who is not inherently sexual is just repressed and needs to be nudged into a good time. This advice directly fuels a continuance of that and a deeper ignorance for sexual partners of asexuals and allow them to feel aggrieved if they perceive their sexual needs not being met and puts a large amount of expectation and pressure for asexuals which makes it more difficult for the asexuals to determine if there are non-sexual aspects to sex they’d be interested in exploring for their own reasons or not.
And it’s a viewpoint he has not backed down on despite many asexuals explaining why this is dangerous and harmful advice and in fact has just continued to loudly beat the drum for acephobia.
In an interview with asexual hosts for an asexuality documentary, he decided to use the opportunity to go off repeatedly with bigoted ideas of what we are like:
And when interviewing an asexual as an attempt to shield himself from criticism and “clear his name”, he uses the opportunity to continue to push his bigoted view that we’re making it up to run away from the fact that “sex is too scary for us”:
DJ in this transcript is David Jay, who founded AVEN and is the biggest spokesperson for our community. The context of this exchange is that when Dan Savage is asked something he doesn’t feel he has the background to answer he usually finds and expert in that field and lets them take the lead in answering the question for him. Instead, Dan Savage brought on David Jay, grilled him about how “weird” asexuality was and then decided to try out this analogy where he compared asexuals to child-molesting religious figures because that’s analogous, right?
And that is the refrain Dan Savage brings up whenever asexuality is mentioned, that it is a symptom of repression, that it is unreal or unimportant and that we are doing violence to our partners if we do not enter into relationships hat in hand apologizing for our broken subhuman nature.
And that’s a major problem because it is already hard enough for an asexual to come out and admit things, to find support, community support, or be fully accepted into the queer community. Additionally, a lot of people trust him on sexual matters because he’s one of the only games in town on that, so people are learning the wrong way to approach asexuality in relationships and it leads to a continuation of a status quo where the onus is often on asexuals to “perform” if they love their partner (basically the whole wifely duties thing).
Additionally, his advice helps shape the sex-positive community as a whole and that has had a negative impact on how that community treats asexuality, which has left a large number of young aces feeling alienated from that community or outright threatened by members who take the Dan Savage stance that sex positivity means that everyone should be game for sex and sexual exploration with whoever is horny.
And this is bad because sex positivity is often so crucial for asexualities, both to end the established patterns of sexual expectation in heteronormative relationships and to encourage greater dialogue and understanding of the nature of attraction and its variance.
So yeah, for those reasons, I cannot count on him as a kindred spirit. He has done too much to increase bigotry or harm for those like me.
And I want to state here that I really like some of the things he’s done (The “It Gets Better” Project in particular), but that the repeated instances of harmful advice and cartoonish bigotry is difficult to overlook.
Oh, also, want to know a cool party trick to make any group of asexuals grown in unison? Just say the words “well to quote Dan Savage”.
Shoot that should be groan not grown.
And there we have it; all we needed to know about their actual motivation.
don’t believe hes actually going to be in the show, I think he is just an executive producer.
@Cerberus
Wow, those are some shitty things. I knew he had a track record for gendered insults and use of the word “tranny”, but fucking wow.
On a different point:
This really does get down to he nitty gritty of a lot of abuse and hate campaigns against a person. So often internet abusers really do circle down to this idea that someone they don’t like is given a platform they feel they don’t deserve owing to various bigoted ideas of that.
We’ve seen it constantly in Gamergate with the hate mobs against Anita Sarkeesian and Zoe Quinn entirely starting because they were seen as succeeding in a way against what the haters felt they deserved and every new success or accomplishment on their behalfs is seen as a new call to double down, because grrr, how dare this person I harassed and said was worthless dare continue to show worth and be heralded even though I personally don’t like them.
There’s such a conceited ball of entitlement behind it where they harass more and more basically over the fact that reality doesn’t actually consider them the sole arbiter of the universe and that sometimes things you don’t like succeed. It’s like they don’t actually understand they are not actually Emperor God-King of the Cosmos.
Holy shit Cerberus. I really wasn’t familiar with Savage, but damn. That is some awful bilge he spewed on aces and trans* folk. Jesus. That is the most erased I’ve *ever* felt my sexuality to be. I mean, shit, I didn’t even know I was ace until *after* I was married to a sexual. Which is hard enough getting sex to work without extra “you must have sex to be a healthy couple” baggage added (because there is already plenty of it).
So according to Savage, I’m what? Supposed to divorce my husband who I’m otherwise perfectly matched for and love because I don’t have the same sex drive as him? Fuck that noise. It’s not an easy aspect of our relationship, but relationships aren’t easy. They require compromise and talking, and trying to understand the other. Even when, no especially when, things like sex drive don’t line up perfectly.
If Savage is just better than the alternative of Donahue, I want a third choice.
Incorrect. He has talked at excruciating length about how his “GGG” standard does not imply that people are required to do things that upset them or they don’t want to do. The “Game” part of the equation means that people who are interested in their partner’s pleasure should be open to trying things that turns their partner on, and open to the idea of giving pleasure without needing reciprocal pleasure every time. The full quote is “Game for anything – within reason.” What’s reasonable for one person is problematic for another, and that determination is up to the individual.
I’ve been listening to his podcast since it started, and Dan has been clearly, and loudly, pro-bi-visibility for at least as long as the podcast has been around. He has said (truthfully) that a lot of gay people come out as bi first, because it’s a somewhat less-fraught stepping stone to publicly identifying as further along the gay-straight spectrum. That seems like a non-controversial statement that in no way erases bisexuality.
That whole episode was ridiculous. Someone needs to brush up on the Use-Mention Distinction. He was talking about the historical use of the word “tranny” as it has been applied to both transsexual and transvestite people. If a teacher is talking about The Adventures Of Huckleberry Finn and says the word “nigger” while discussing the historical and societal context of the book, does that make the teacher a raging white supremacist?
Probably a Freudian slip. This seems to be exactly when the Catholic Anti-Defamation League does.
Anyhoo. I accept that Dan Savage falls into the “Your fave is problematic” category, but he’s done me hella good since LanguageLog linked me to him.
I’ll also note the following from Cerberi comment: “this column from 2003”, “From a column in 2010” and “From a 2011 column”. I can’t tell the dates of the Tumblr posts, since the authors seem to think that layout is more important than bibliographic data.
@Cerberus is working overtime at the outrage factory #28:
Wow. I guess I was only peripherally acquainted with Mr. Savage; I’ve seen him a few times on MSNBC. So thanks for the sampling of his yuckyness.
Ugh. As a fat person, that on its own is a deal-breaker for me. I was equally disappointed with Alton Brown with his fat-hate after his heart attack. Sigh. But this:
This is really awful. The actual advice is okay (barely, I think joint counseling would be a better starting point and breaking up might be necessary) but the victim blaming screed was *so* unnecessary. No, strike that. It was awful, full stop.
His stance on ace issues is really lacking in empathy, too, though. I started becoming ace during perimenopause and I’m not willing to have hormone therapy just for the sex drive thing since the rest of menopause was a cakewalk for me. Husband and I have worked things out for ourselves by becoming poly. So, strike two, Dan Savage.
Not waiting for strike three; there’s enough shitty stuff there to tell me I don’t need to actively follow him for sure!
@Rawnaeris, Knight of the Order of the Glittery Hoo Ha @35:
Reading this makes me think that, as an advice-giver, Savage was simply in over his head and resorted to his “gut feelings.” If that’s the case, and you want to be taken seriously as a writer of an advice column, a bit of research would be in order. That and a LOT more empathy. Sheesh.
I also wasn’t aware that he was so trans phobic, which is also unforgivable. Anyone who wants to give advice needs to ALWAYS remember that they are talking to and about PEOPLE and not unknowable, exotic, wierd “others.”
Possibly relevant.
@Sili
Yeah, the reason the example of Transphobic comments is so old is because Dan Savage has since repeatedly apologized and reversed his position. Same with his comments on bisexuality. In live shows, he still gets questions using slurs, which he does read, and then proceeds to explain the problem with those words and why he’s stopped using them. He has written several columns and devoted chapters in his books to mistakes he makes, changes to his vocabulary and outlook, and how he’s trying to grow as a human. But it is the internet, so nothing is ever forgotten and it’s possible (and easier) to find the older, controversial articles that made people angry and everybody talked about, instead of the newer apologies that nobody is looking for.
As for his remarks on asexuality, yeah, he’s made some strong statements that will be (rightfully) held against him for some time. But those are individual statements taken out of the general context of his whole message. Dan Savage does not always think as much as he should before opening his mouth. However, he generally pushes the opinion that sexual incompatibility is as a legitimate reason for ending a relationship as any other. He’s not saying you need to end your relationship if there’s a mismatch. No relationship is perfect and each party in a relationship has to give up a bit of what they want to make the other person happy. If that price is too much or is causing you grief or anxiety, then the relationship doesn’t really work and probably should end. Or perhaps a different approach to the relationship is needed (for instance, if one person has a much lower sex drive, perhaps the relationship will work if the other person is allowed to have sex with other people).
I think he’s definitely done a lot more good than harm and his views are growing all the time. What’s the point of calling people out on these sorts of things if we then completely ignore any growth they show?
So…anybody know exactly what’s ironic about the name “Real O’Neals”?
bojac6@40:
This occurred in 2014…
And the quoted text comes from a site that AGREED with Savage. Replace the t-slur with the n-word up there, and imagine anybody defending the line “used to make jokes about n—–rs” by being a condescending asshole to a black student who objected until the kid just gave up and left. If I had a shitty history of transphobia and I was trying to remake my image, I’d probably avoid repeated use of a transphobic slur and then throwing a fucking hissy fit when called out on it and THEN demanding that I be apologized to.
So he may have “gotten better” about trans people but apparently not by much…
And forgive me if I am reading that wrong, but frankly, who the hell is Dan Savage, “reformed” transphobe, to say if or if not that word HAS been reclaimed, and whether it is empowering or not? He’s the last person on the goddamned planet to make that call.
nich:
Damn fucking straight. And those words don’t get “reclaimed” fucking overnight. Even if they were, I would let the people who are the TARGET of the word be the sole ones to use it. If they are attempting to reclaim it, let THEM reclaim it, by NOT using it clumsily yourself and again making it a word used to label an out-group. I swear to god it is not that complicated, but people consistently and possibly deliberately fail to miss this point. Because they despise the idea that there are a certain words they shouldn’t use. Sorry, entitled shits everywhere, but bigotry exists. Either actually oppose it and slightly limit yourself in order to try to not feed into that bigotry, or be a fucking shithead who can’t ever respect any boundaries and requests and continue to spout off in a way that contributes to further bigotry against the already oppressed. Make your fucking choice, and don’t whine and cry when you held accountable for it.
Also #echochamber
Sili @36
Both of the transcribed interviews were 2011. As for the comment on them being old.
CONTENT WARNING FOR SLURS, TRANSPHOBIA, ACEPHOBIA, AND CASUAL TREATMENT OF SEXUAL ASSAULT FROM HERE ON OUT:
Interview in October 2014, a little over 6 months ago:
Where he reinforced his notion that there is such a thing as romantic fraud, which he regards as a form of abuse, when someone doesn’t disclose or doesn’t know about their asexuality up front, which echoes the “date fraud” shit transphobes throw at trans* people to justify their murders.
And he reiterates this idea that there are sneaky asexuals going around willy-nilly tricking poor allosexual people into relationships with them just so they can deny them sex like the blue-ballin’ biatches they are and that this is a big enough problem that it needs to be brought up quite literally every time he talks about the subject.
And this “I’ve grown and fixed all my problems because I’ve avoided the most obviously fucked up things I can” pose is one he uses a lot to sidestep actual work to genuinely grow and stop hurting people.
Like the bizarre defense of the t-slur I noted above from a sympathetic to him source, but it’s actually a lot worse. The incident in question, he used the t-slur repeatedly while explaining how he totally doesn’t use that slur anymore you guys because trans people are sooooo sensitive and really, what’s the problem anyways with a cis gay man reclaiming a word on behalf of trans people and then wrote a public letter demanding that the 17-year-old trans kid who called him out apologize to him personally and the entire trans community because the kid uses the pronoun “it”, which is a pronoun some trans people use in a genuine act of reclamation.
His reasoning:
So 2 cis gay men were trading the t-slur back and forth while talking about how they totally didn’t use the t-slur anymore because it hurts people, but hey we’re all reclaming so whatev, a trans kid says “hey can we not” to this, and gets a complete non-sequitur about words that were reclaimed by the communities targeted with them, leaves in tears, and we get this woe is me evil trans people don’t get it piece that uses the word a couple dozen times in explaining how wrong done he is by people thinking he uses the slur. This was June 2014.
Shittiness about trigger warnings and the feelings of rape survivors in May 2014: Yup
But as always it gets so much “better” when he feels he is wrong-done by those evil PC hordes out to get earnest people like him:
I get that people can grow and change and I support that, but with Dan Savage, the most he usually changes is no longer spouting the most obvious forms of bigotry once called on it enough, but he still holds the same belief systems and they pour out anytime he feels criticized (in his mind) “unfairly” because he’s taken the effort to put on the outward appearance of the lowest form of tolerance and “support” and that can get exhausting and means that dangerous advice still happens over and over again:
His last post:
In response to someone who wrote this:
or this from March 2015:
in response to this question:
Cause having squicks is being childish and trying to push someone into doing something into something they have already stated they aren’t interested in is A-OK. But only if you’re pushing from the more adventurous side, otherwise, you are committing relationship fraud.
….
Ugh.
I appreciate some things he has done, but it is very very hard to ignore this kind of repeated shit and look past and forgive it when this advice is still doing harm to people in my communities and reinforcing a situation that puts so many asexuals in a very dangerous situation.
komarov @1:
This is similar to what the Human Rights Campaign recently did to Governor Bobby Jindal’s op-ed about
religious libertydiscrimination in a New York Times article.http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/human-rights-campaign-markup-religious-freedom
Holy fuck.
I knew next to nothing about Dan Savage, and after reading the shit he’s said*-in recent years-he can go fuck himself.
Btw, what qualifies him to offer advice of any sort?
*thanks Cerberus
Do actual people write to Dan Savage or is it more of a Letters to Penthouse thing?
greenspine @ 36-
Yeah, that’s not my problem. It’s not a terrible philosophy except for how he actually applies it as advice. So often, he shits on anyone that is like “this activity is a no go zone for me” as being inherently repressed unless they’ve tried it repeatedly and it hasn’t worked for them and is really shitty to them and very supportive of more sexually coercive partners writing in.
And that leads to a lot of letters coming from readers who are almost always women talking about their guilt issues of meeting this standard he’s set and really pushing themselves into activities that are emotionally and physically upsetting for them and this is usually the only time that he remembers that whole “within reason” part and speaks to it… unless he feels the writer isn’t “twuly” trying in which case they get the whole prude/relationship fraud spiel.
And I’ve seen a lot of people negatively affected by nominally liberal “sex positive” dudes (especially those in the ace community tend to be heavy hit by them because the dudebros often echo Dan Savage’s early sentiment that asexuals are just repressed people) who seem to follow this train of thought that good girls need to be GGG and thus need to be open to fucking acehole randos with increasing sexual demands or else they are prudes and “sex-negative).
So there’s that as well.
Thank you to others who’ve taken the time to post about Savage. I read his column regularly but skeptically—I’m aware that he’s “grown” but also aware that he continues to have deep blind spots. I’ve learn things from his column that have been helpful for me personally. On the other hand, I always read with my guard up and have to perpetually weigh the learning potential against the risk of possibly contracting ideas that I don’t recognize as being harmful to people I care about. I go back and forth about whether it’s worth it and have stopped and started reading his column several times.
Does anyone have recommendations for a sex columnist who’s less problematic?
Yeah, I have a lot of issues with Savage, but they’ve been pretty well-documented above. I have a particular problem with him telling people to dump women if they have issues with sex. We’re often conditioned by society to have issues with sex. If I’m comfortable with someone, we can get through it. If they’re just going to pressure me to have sex when I’m not comfortable with it, they won’t have to dump me because I’ll dump them first.
What I knew so far about Savage has been only good and plenty of it.
Still, learning the shit he has done is a good lesson on the halo effect.
Good and great people do shit and make mistakes, and must be called out on it.
I have never been a fan of Savage Love, Savage’s sex column. It was these two stories that made me pay attention to him, while making no excuses for his other comments.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/379/return-to-the-scene-of-the-crime?act=3
(Atheism and Catholicism)
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/293/a-little-bit-of-knowledge?act=2
(Father-son stuff and gay marriage)
I was going to come here to post and be angry, but Cerberus beat me to the punch and did so with far greater eloquence than I would have mustered. I guess I meet the party trick as well. Mention Dan Savage and I’ll pop out of the woodwork for a bit.
On a more personal note, when I was younger and struggling with my own sexuality, or lack thereof, I was heavily involved in the LGBT organization on campus. Many of the members were big fans of Savage, and often recommended I read his work. I did, which happened to be in 2011, right at the time of the posted interviews. Considering I had only recently come to terms with my friends’ insistence that I was asexual, his comments filled me with quite a bit of despair for a time. As such, I’m not exactly a fan of his.
Rise Kujikawa #56
yeah
Cerberus regularly out-eloquences everyone here.
Well I never…
Rise and chigau @ 56-57
Awww, you’re making me blush!
@greenspine:
Is that teacher one of those assholes who was part of the history of use of that slur? Is that teacher supposedly rehabilitating their shitty racist attitude? Did a student ask that teacher with a history of using that word as a slur to use another word, and not say stupid shit like, “Gosh, kids, I use to make n—-r jokes all the time! BUT NOW THAT WORD IS EMPOWERING!!!!” If yes, then hell fucking yes the fucking teacher should hold back on the use of that word, not browbeat the kid: “WELL GODDAMN, SON, WOULDJA MIND IF I SAID S–C OR W-BACK??!!” until the student fled the classroom and then use their almighty platform to demand an apology from all those uppity black folk who dared criticize the King of Social Justice. It might not make him a “raging white supremacist” (eyefuckingroll) but it does make him an asshole.
For fuck sake this isn’t that hard…
because Dan Savage has since repeatedly apologized and reversed his position
Crap in a hat. Just stop. Please. It’s so, so tiresome to see people scramble to make excuses for the bad behavior of public figures in their community: yes, but he didn’t mean it, he said he was sorry, he totally doesn’t believe that any more, why can’t you see the good he’s done!!!!!
Translation: well, he’s not shitting on me, can’t we just pretend it never happened?
Yes, Dan Savage has done a lot of good and brought a lot of visibility to important issues. No, this doesn’t mean he gets a free pass on being a shitsack who pretends that he can’t possibly be a bigot because he’s gay and that magically erases all of his well-off white dude privilege. He still says stupid shit and still makes sexist comments about how boring and humorless lesbians are and how women just don’t want sex the way men do (never mind that the social pressures on how men and women are allowed to behave are, uh, just a little bit different.)
Should he have his show pulled because rabid Christian trolls dislike him? Nope. Is he a SJW Superstar who we should all love? No. Fuck this guy.
PZ, you’re not embracing Queer activism’s you here. More like its Dawkins, maybe its Nugent. He’s not “rude”in the plain spoken sense. He’s “rude” in the constantly bashing on his perceived lessers, breathlessly entitled, wrong-side-of-the-Deep-Rifts sense.
Disney ABC couldn’t buy publicity like this. Also, I want PZ to do for evolution what those other two space guys did for astronomy.