Gay Patriot Header Image

Another juvenile Savage slur

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 2:26 am - May 6, 2013.
Filed under: Liberal Hypocrisy,Mean-spirited leftists

It’s been nearly eleven months since Dan Savage slurred certain gay people (with whom he disagreed on matters political) as “faggots,” an epithet whose use by one teenage girl caused the Human Rights Campaign to demand an apology from that girl’s Republican mother.  Well now Mr. Savage has wished illness upon that charismatic Republican woman.

And yet I could find nothing on HRC’s web-site related to the slur.* (HRC has still refused to call on Mr. Savage to apologize for using a hateful word to describe his fellow gays.)

Mr. Savage wished cancer on Sarah Palin.  I guess it’s okay to wish death on those horrible, no good very bad Republicans.  Don’t expect any gay group to ask that gay leftist — or any gay activist — to speak in more civil terms.

*Here’s a screen capture of my search done at 11:22PM PST (05/05/13):

Screen shot 2013-05-05 at 11.22.02 PM

Share

43 Comments

  1. This guy oozes ugliness. Hopefully more will see that. Glad you called him out.

    Comment by Diane Tavarez — May 6, 2013 @ 2:41 am - May 6, 2013

  2. As we all now Democrats can get away with saying almost anything. Bruce should bring everyone up-to-date at is going on in South Carolina with Dick Harpootlian, the head of the South Democratic Part, and his remark that our current South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, who is of Indian heritage, should go back from where she came. My favorite remark by Harpootilian was that Lindsay Graham was too light in the loofers for South Carolina voters. Yeah, Democrats are gay friendly, as long as we stay on the their liberal plantation.

    Comment by SC.Swampfox — May 6, 2013 @ 6:00 am - May 6, 2013

  3. Yeah, I really can’t respect anyone who spent the better part of four months trying to come up with a name for “that frothy mixture of sh*t and semen.”

    Expecting anything other than that from this seething glory-holer is absolutely futile.

    Comment by My Sharia Moor — May 6, 2013 @ 6:31 am - May 6, 2013

  4. The Dems are inherently racist and prejudiced. The limbs will always get a pass when it comes to hurtful language. Apparently ignorance really is bliss.

    Comment by Victoria — May 6, 2013 @ 7:12 am - May 6, 2013

  5. I don’t know about other people, but my own progress towards a more accepting view of GLBT issues was very much slowed by things Dan Savage said, along with other vitriolic things said against religious/social conservatives by others (e.g., Perez Hilton’s comments to Carrie Prejean). I can’t imagine that there aren’t lots of other people whose own change in how they see these issues has been slowed by such ugly comments. A lot of people who aren’t necessarily anti-gay will close their minds when they hear these words. One can always choose to lift up one group of people without tearing other people down. Unfortunately, Dan Savage doesn’t choose to do that.

    Comment by Chad — May 6, 2013 @ 7:24 am - May 6, 2013

  6. Why, oh why couldn’t Savage have been lucky enough to experience the Castro district back in the halcyon days of the late 70′s?

    Oh, just imagine how much fun he would have running bareback through the bathhouses back then….

    Comment by My Sharia Moor — May 6, 2013 @ 9:21 am - May 6, 2013

  7. Dan always makes me think that had it not been for his sexuality, he would have been one of those backward hat wearing bullies that he claims to revile. I have to believe that young people will start to see this hypocrisy and leave this man in the rear view.

    Comment by Elise — May 6, 2013 @ 9:40 am - May 6, 2013

  8. All right, time for a copy/paste pointing out something some conservative somebody said… as if that somehow justifies “Macho Man” Danny Savage’s latest remark…

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 11:40 am - May 6, 2013

  9. Why, oh why couldn’t Savage have been lucky enough to experience the Castro district back in the halcyon days of the late 70′s?

    I’ll go one better than that one, Sharia. In fact, I’ll take a page out of Savage’s book myself:

    I hope he is struck with a sexually transmitted disease that begins with A and ends with S.

    And yes, I went there. Deal with it.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 6, 2013 @ 11:41 am - May 6, 2013

  10. And thank you for your comment, Elise. I say it all the time: if 75% of the male gay activists were heterosexual, they’d actually be worse off. Men wouldn’t have to worry about being accused of raising a hand to a female. P.S. Sharia, I showed your site to my boss, and we were both cracking up. Love it!

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 11:47 am - May 6, 2013

  11. Dan Savage will soon learn that what you send out returns to you. Since he sent out cancer to Sarah Palin, cancer will return to him. On his next visit to the doctor for a checkup he should have his prostate checked.

    Comment by Roberto — May 6, 2013 @ 12:54 pm - May 6, 2013

  12. That is preciselywhere I was going, Peter. How very astute of you.

    Some of us are old enough to remember how many gay men died in SF, and how odd it was that they were screaming at Reagan, while just as vociferously opposing any legislation that would have aimed to quell the destructive behaviors going on in the bathhouses.

    Comment by My Sharia Moor — May 6, 2013 @ 1:39 pm - May 6, 2013

  13. I’ve met liberals who knew Savage when he was a kid in Chicago. All of them made excuses for his vile behavior. None of them were bothered by anything he said or did.

    Comment by pst314 — May 6, 2013 @ 1:54 pm - May 6, 2013

  14. Less vile but still ridiculous is when DS recently compared Andrew Marin (leader of a Christian group in Chicago that seeks to bridge the gap between the GLBT community and religious conservatives) with Westboro Baptist Church. When someone is trying to meet you halfway and you compare them to the most identifiably anti-gay people in America…really have to question Dan Savage’s judgement. You don’t build bridges with people by taunting people on the other side.

    Comment by Chad — May 6, 2013 @ 2:17 pm - May 6, 2013

  15. Oh god, where to start with Savage? He’s right about a lot of things, but he’s wrong frequently, too, and he’s boorish far too often. And he all too often puts down traditionally marginalized groups. The Trans* community has little love for the guy, and a lot of bisexuals, including myself, think he’s anti-bisexual. He has also been criticized for verbally attacking fat people. It’s been said about him he only really cares about affluent gay men and lesbians. And someone in a Gay Patriot comments section once said that he seems not to have much respect for lesbians, but I haven’t yet heard or read anything like this on any other occasion.

    Just after the Prop 8 win in 2008, Savage made a statement that certainly looked racist to me. And I was far from the only person to read it that way.

    Savage is far from universally loved by LGBT and left of center people.

    What I see consistently in gay and lesbian blogs and gay and lesbian-run orgianzations is an unwillingness to publicly criticize Savage. I don’t see praise of the guy occurring in all of those blogs or organization, though it does occur with some.

    Notice that I said gay and lesbian blogs and gay and lesbian-run organizations, meaning that not everything that calls itself LGBT actually represents bi or trans* people or has them in leadership roles or even on staff.

    In case you’ve wondered why Dan Savage is “our” national spokesperson, he provided a sadly believable answer: “By default,” due to how bad our existing national spokespeople are, and he specifically used HRC people as the example.

    Since he seems to say something particularly offensive every so often (bimonthly? monthly?), one wonders if he does it intentionally to keep himself in the media’s eye. Whatever the reason, I’ve come to think that he’s kind of a jerk.

    Comment by Donny D. — May 6, 2013 @ 2:24 pm - May 6, 2013

  16. And speaking of Dan Savage marginalizing people who are already being marginalized, one can certainly make an argument that people of the right are now marginalized in the American LGBT community.

    Comment by Donny D. — May 6, 2013 @ 2:35 pm - May 6, 2013

  17. And speaking of Dan Savage marginalizing people who are already being marginalized, one can certainly make an argument that people of the right are now marginalized in the American LGBT community.

    Comment by Donny D. — May 6, 2013 @ 2:35 pm – May 6, 2013

    Yes indeed, and in particular by people who go around stating that gay conservatives and Republicans are what they “term LGB(T?) Fox News conservatives” and are “completely pro-employer, pro-big business, pro-wealthy political line of major conservative broadcast media” time, and ‘downplay anything that would cause straight conservatives, including homophobes, with those politics to not like us.’”

    Meanwhile, given that gay and lesbian organizations, including GLAAD, HRC, and others, plus the Obama Party, worship and lionize Dan Savage and put him in a position of speaking for them at the White House, clearly he represents and is endorsed by the vast majority of gays and lesbians, the vast majority of gay and lesbian organizations, the Obama Party, and “progressives”.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 6, 2013 @ 3:48 pm - May 6, 2013

  18. Meanwhile…clearly he represents and is endorsed by the vast majority of gays and lesbians, the vast majority of gay and lesbian organizations…

    I don’t think one can accurately state that he represents and is endorsed by the “vast majority of gays and lesbians”. The organizations, definitely. But since the “vast majority” of gays and lesbians in this country don’t live in urban centers and don’t donate or support most of the national orgs, that seems to be sweeping them up into a grouping unnecessarily (Maybe not the right word?).

    Certainly the “vast majority” of a certain category of gays and lesbians applies, namely the left-of-center urbanites who donate to the national orgs. Eh, maybe I’m splitting hairs.

    Comment by Neptune — May 6, 2013 @ 4:30 pm - May 6, 2013

  19. And you’ll notice who ISN’T commenting on this thread… Well, they probably will now that I’ve mentioned it…

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 7:30 pm - May 6, 2013

  20. And you’ll notice who ISN’T commenting on this thread… Well, they probably will now that I’ve mentioned it…

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 7:30 pm

    Oh, Douglas.
    What a shrewd way to bait your friend from Arizona, Lori the Riveter.
    Aren’t you the clever one!
    By gosh, by golly, yessirree you certainly are!

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 6, 2013 @ 8:01 pm - May 6, 2013

  21. Not that I owe you this conversation, jman, but that wasn’t who I was referring to. And BTW, what I said in comment 10 applies to you just as much as Dan Savage. But I’m glad you understand who you can and can’t refer to like you did to her.

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 8:35 pm - May 6, 2013

  22. But I’m glad you understand who you can and can’t refer to like you did to her.

    Gather ALL the pertinent facts, Douglas.

    Your friend slings it pretty good, and at many people, when she gets her dander up.
    I was testing the sincerity of her oft-touted support of free speech and “people working things out amongst themselves”.
    She failed the test.
    And I see from her blog that she’s still pi$$ing and moaning about it today (and playing the ‘victim card’, to boot; how ‘leftist’ of her).

    If you’re going to dispense admonishments (are you the latest GP ‘behavior monitor’?), then save some of your finger-wagging for her.

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 6, 2013 @ 8:43 pm - May 6, 2013

  23. But I’m glad you understand who you can and can’t refer to like you did to her.

    Who exactly would that be?

    And again: get all the facts, Douglas.
    Pay closer attention to how SHE refers to others (V the K, for one example).

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 6, 2013 @ 8:50 pm - May 6, 2013

  24. Well, I’m not going to pretend that you both didn’t go at it, jman. I can see that just fine. Just make sure you call the ones that’ll let you call them that. Just remember, I’m not Lori. That’s all I’m saying.

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 9:09 pm - May 6, 2013

  25. Just make sure you call the ones that’ll let you call them that.

    My guess was correct, then.

    Is that a challenge, Douglas?

    Know this:
    I never ‘lead’ with it, and I kept it under wraps for more than a few comments AFTER your friend’s “eighty-year-old drunks in some trailer park someplace” crack.
    But if someone wants to open that can of worms, I’m going throw it right back in their face.

    And that includes you, if you ever play those cards with me.
    And that’s all I’m saying.

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 6, 2013 @ 9:19 pm - May 6, 2013

  26. So, Jboy’s charm school has migrated to another thread.

    I suppose the best thing to do is simply wind him up and let him go. As Douglas has demonstrated, people with sense recognize what’s happening.

    I don’t really read Savage much. Every once in a while I read somebody who calls himself Joe My God, and he sounds basically like Savage. I suppose it’s an entire genre.

    Comment by Lori Heine — May 6, 2013 @ 9:22 pm - May 6, 2013

  27. Fair enough. Unless you know who I’m referring to in a comment, stay out of it. You know how the word “assume” works, right? Don’t bring me into your feud with Lori.

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 9:23 pm - May 6, 2013

  28. Unless you know who I’m referring to in a comment, stay out of it.

    Fair enough.

    Don’t bring me into your feud with Lori.

    You brought yourself into it in the very thread in question (comment #83).
    So if you don’t want to be a part of it, then you stay out of it.

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 6, 2013 @ 9:33 pm - May 6, 2013

  29. As Douglas has demonstrated, people with sense recognize what’s happening.

    Yes, it looks like he does….now:

    Well, I’m not going to pretend that you both didn’t go at it, jman. I can see that just fine.

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 6, 2013 @ 9:35 pm - May 6, 2013

  30. There’s a stack of crying towels by the exit, Lori.
    Feel free to take as many as you need.

    Comment by Jman1961 — May 6, 2013 @ 9:38 pm - May 6, 2013

  31. Re: #28 Agreed, jman. I know you’re itching for the last word, so have at it.

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 9:57 pm - May 6, 2013

  32. … How did I know that would work? lol

    Comment by Douglas — May 6, 2013 @ 10:24 pm - May 6, 2013

  33. Unless you know who I’m referring to in a comment, stay out of it.

    The rules laid down by the snide and prickly are about as useful as the trail of snot left by a giant banana slug.

    But it is, after all, a perfect segue to focused narcissism on a divergent Dan Savage slur thread.

    Comment by heliotrope — May 7, 2013 @ 11:50 am - May 7, 2013

  34. [...] on Gay Patriot, a resident guardian of All Things Moral and Decent got snide and snarky with one of our regular [...]

    Pingback by Gay Conservatives and their Games | Born on 9-11 — May 7, 2013 @ 2:23 pm - May 7, 2013

  35. The rules laid down by the snide and prickly are about as useful as the trail of snot left by a giant banana slug.

    Geez, Helio, you sure know how to gross someone out! EW!! :-(

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 7, 2013 @ 3:24 pm - May 7, 2013

  36. Dan Savage will not be happy until America gathers around and cheers as he engages in ass play on his front yard, in the park, in a McDonald’s, etc, etc, etc…

    To deny him this, therefore, is quite obviously homophobic and evil.

    Comment by My Sharia Moor — May 8, 2013 @ 8:02 am - May 8, 2013

  37. Its Sad that the loathsome Dan Savage is passed off as some sort of role model for homosexuals.

    Comment by Niall — May 8, 2013 @ 10:40 am - May 8, 2013

  38. I occasionally read this site, but have never commented. I felt the need to comment here though.

    People like Dan Savage are exactly why gays and lesbians run into the roadblocks they do. My experience with being gay is that no one really cares unless YOU make an issue out of it. I served in the military, come from a very small town and was raised in a strict conservative religious home and never had any problems (except in HS, but who doesn’t?)

    As much as I hear other gays railing against religious people for their “hatred” that has not been my experience. My family and those around them never made slurs against any group of people. Sure, they would make comments on people based upon their character, but never just because they were a difference race, religion or sexual orientation. It was a live and let live attitude and I believe that the majority of people feel that way. I’ve never sat in any church that “hated” anyone. I feel sorry for those of us who reject the Divine because of misrepresentations and lies of others who are only thinking of their own selfish desires.

    That being said, I’m glad this site is here and I am glad to know that there are other conservative gays like me. I knew there had to be, but I’ve never met any in person. Cheers, everyone!

    Comment by bicentennialguy — May 8, 2013 @ 2:18 pm - May 8, 2013

  39. My experience with being gay is that no one really cares unless YOU make an issue out of it.

    Exactly! This is the reason why I’m a conservative gay man. I don’t let my orientation define me or the essence of being myself.

    Unfortunately, there are GayLeftLib types out there that need social justification for their miserable existence. Some of them even troll on this blog. But I digress.

    Here in Texas, we go along to get along. Nobody gives a rat’s hiney what you do in the privacy of your own home. Just don’t rub our noses in it.

    That’s why our mayor in Houston, Annise Parker, can get elected repeatedly as an “out” lesbian. She doesn’t make it a big issue.

    However, some LGBTXYZPDQ types assail her for not being “gay enough.” Sort of like how Bill Richardson (D-NM) dissed Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) for not being “Hispanic enough.” Who are these people to tell us what the litmus test is for our personal information?

    Libtards, that’s who.

    Anyway, welcome to the community!

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 8, 2013 @ 3:44 pm - May 8, 2013

  40. Thank you, Peter H.

    Comment by bicentennialguy — May 8, 2013 @ 3:52 pm - May 8, 2013

  41. Personally, I think Dan Savage should be put in a room full of Westboro nutbags and see if he can emerge unscathed.

    Poetic justice.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — May 9, 2013 @ 11:02 am - May 9, 2013

  42. And speaking of Dan Savage marginalizing people who are already being marginalized, one can certainly make an argument that people of the right are now marginalized in the American LGBT community.

    Comment by Donny D. — May 6, 2013 @ 2:35 pm – May 6, 2013

    Yes indeed, and in particular by people who go around stating that gay conservatives and Republicans are what they “term LGB(T?) Fox News conservatives”

    Would GOProud-style LGBT conservatives be more accurate?

    and are “completely pro-employer, pro-big business, pro-wealthy political line of major conservative broadcast media” time, and ‘downplay anything that would cause straight conservatives, including homophobes, with those politics to not like us.’”

    I’m sorry, but that’s what I see when I look at GOProud-style LGBT conservatives’ politics. Where am I wrong in what I wrote there? I mean specifically.

    Meanwhile, given that gay and lesbian organizations, including GLAAD, HRC, and others, plus the Obama Party, worship and lionize Dan Savage and put him in a position of speaking for them at the White House, clearly he represents and is endorsed by the vast majority of gays and lesbians, the vast majority of gay and lesbian organizations, the Obama Party, and “progressives”.

    GLAAD is a mess. They had the scandal over Net Neutrality that caused GLAAD to temporarily implode as more than half its board and I think it’s head had to resign. Also, they love to recommend as pro-LGBT movies and TV series that have significant anti-LGBT content in them, making me think they mostly just want to have “access” to big Hollywood people.

    HRC is happy to throw any part of the LGBT community under the bus when it fits HRC’s interests. They sell out too much, especially to the Democratic party, in great part because they want “access” to powerful Washington, DC types.

    The Democratic party is corrupt and untrustworthy and is just the less reactionary big business party. In partisan election, I almost always only vote for the Dems to keep Repubs out — and where gun issues are too confounding, I have been known to not vote at all in those races.

    So no, I don’t worship GLAAD, HRC or the “Obama Party”. I think most LGBT people, including most moderate and left of center LGBT people, are cynical about HRC, and for all I know may be of GLAAD as well. And those who aren’t total followers by nature distrust the Dems to varying degrees, and many think the Dems take our votes and money for granting, using the logic “Where can they go?” if we get really pissed off at them.

    Though I’ll acknowledge that something like 31-32% of LGBT people already vote Republican. Though I don’t know what that means exactly. Ticket voters, sure. But also people who vote GOP more often than they vote Democratic? I don’t believe that 31-32% are all diehard Republicans. (I’m not saying the remaining 68-69% are all diehard Democrats, or are all Democrats of any kind, either.)

    Comment by Donny D. — May 9, 2013 @ 6:05 pm - May 9, 2013

  43. I’m sorry, but that’s what I see when I look at GOProud-style LGBT conservatives’ politics. Where am I wrong in what I wrote there? I mean specifically.

    Well, of course you see that, Donny D; you’re an anti-Republican bigot.

    As you yourself admitted:

    In partisan election, I almost always only vote for the Dems to keep Repubs out

    So you aren’t really making any type of intelligent judgment or evaluation, nor are you looking at or even reviewing evidence; you’re simply a knee-jerk anti-Republican bigot who always votes against Republicans.

    Which makes this statement funny:

    And those who aren’t total followers by nature distrust the Dems to varying degrees, and many think the Dems take our votes and money for granting, using the logic “Where can they go?” if we get really pissed off at them.

    Which is absolutely true. And they know you can’t go anywhere because you are an anti-Republican bigot who blindly and always votes against Republicans no matter what the Obama Party does.

    So you just demonstrated why you’re a waste of effort, Donny D; by your own admission, there is nothing, literally NOTHING, that would change your mind about Republicans. You are always going to create excuses to hate Republicans.

    So you are a bigot. You’re a blind, hatemongering, irrational bigot. And I see no reason why we should waste our time trying to appeal to someone who is so obviously irrational, so unwilling to look at evidence, and who has directly acknowledged that there is nothing, no piece of evidence, no action, that is ever going to change his mind.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 10, 2013 @ 2:57 am - May 10, 2013

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.