Calling out the Implicit Racism in Dan Savage’s Politics the ‘It gets better project.

[BiDaveDtown]

thefeministwire.com/2012/02/from-one-white-gay-male-to-another-calling-out-the-implicit-racism-in-dan-savages-liberal-politics-the-it-gets-better-campaign/#comment-8119

The lack of analysis of the limited racial parameters of this campaign reflects a problem critical in Dan Savage’s work and is evidenced throughout his career. Two events stand out most, however.
First, the presidential election in 2008: While the majority of the world was celebrating the election of Barack Obama, Dan Savage was busy crafting his response (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3At0vMsRO7XlsJ%3Aslog.thestranger.c om%2F2008%2F11%2Fblack_homophobia+%22black+homopho bia%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a) to the “hoards” of Black voters that came out to vote in the historic election, who, as the media purported, were also voting in support of California’s Proposition 8, according to Savage:
I’m thrilled that we’ve just elected our first African-American president…But I can’t help but feeling hurt that the love and support aren’t mutual. I do know this, though: I’m done pretending that the handful of racist gay white men out there—and they’re out there, and I think they’re scum—are a bigger problem for African Americans, gay and straight, than the huge numbers of homophobic African Americans are for gay Americans, whatever their color.

While Savage later deleted this post, and then came out on the Stephen Colbert show and said (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/210299/november-11-2008/proposition-8-protests---dan-savage) the exact opposite, his initial reaction was very telling, without ever recognizing the implications of his racially-charged statements. If he was indeed interested in critical, organic change one would think he would’ve participated in a discussion with Black queer groups to work through why blaming black people for Prop 8 was not an accident or an act of innocent misplaced anger, but consistent with century old anti-Black rhetoric.
In fact, it is this very rhetoric, which emerged during reconstruction known as “White backlash” that resonates very much within his statements. “Backlash” then was the popular response to the enfranchisement of Black people immediately after the Civil War which was viewed as a direct threat to their (White) citizenship. It continued to manifest through Jim Crow and the Civil Rights era, and still does today.
In Savage’s case, Black citizenship (demonstrated via the purported turnout for Prop 8 during the election for Barack Obama) was seen as discreditable because of homophobia in the Black community. Savage finds homophobia to be more of a threat to his personhood (and that of any other white gay man) than White supremacy is a threat to any Black person. Many of the comments on his blog largely reflect this view.
In this discourse, sexuality and gender become equitable with race. They translate into even exchanges that one can simply check off on a list of rights and afforded legitimacy. Savage is prioritizing White gayness as more worthy of attention than Blackness. The problem here relates to the concerns around the motivations behind “It Gets Better,” where again, it appears that Black bodies don’t matter, or, they only matter if and only if they are designated as queer. Moreover, those non-queer Black bodies are imagined as existing outside of the frame of citizenship because they ostensibly violate the rights of enfranchised (White) gay men.
Savage should not start a campaign to take on race-based violence; honestly, he would not be good at it. But we, who look to pundits, media personalities and nationally recognized advocates, must think critically about this type of insular work and thought. We cannot narrowly challenge a topic like violence only within the context of gay youth. Is violence not a problem for everyone? Is it only young gay men and women who are bullied to death?
Second, Savages proclaimed (http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=12237) support of the Iraq War places this argument within a global context:
War may be bad for children and other living things, but there are times when peace is worse for children and other living things, and this is one of those times… To stop Islamo-fascism, we’re going to have to roll back all of the tyrannous and dictatorial regimes in the Middle East while simultaneously waging war against a militant, deadly religious ideology… invading and rebuilding Iraq will not only free the Iraqi people, it will also make the Saudis aware of the consequences they face…

Again, violence against whom? Whose lives matter? Let’s ignore the fact that Iraq was a relatively secular and liberal state in the Middle East and let’s forget that they had no weapons of mass destruction or substantial links to Al-Queda. At worst, Savage is calling for violence against innocent people, at best, he affirms that his freedom as a White gay American is more important than that of a free Iraqi or Saudi, Afghani for that matter.

[darkeyes]

From what I know of Savage, it seems to me that he attempts to survive and thrive by appealing to the wider heterosexual world and shwoing that he isnt such a bad chap after all and shares almost all of their most dearly held values, and by making accomodation with them on other issues he can control the beast, much as some Jews, bankers, financiers and other right wing politicians did within Nazi Germany in the 1930s.. I dont give him much thought to be honest and dont think u should either.. but then I am not an American and we dont have anyone quite like him here tf... simply treat him for what he is Dave.. a wanker...one who accomodates and makes common ground with those who would do the likes of us in by showing he can be as unpleasant as they about things which matter to them more than screwing down and locking away the likes of us.. in the end history, not just as happened in Nazi Germany, shows that such people do not thrive, but eventually pay the price for their stupidity, but knowing him to be what he is and by others avoiding his foolishness it will be them... gay lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people who will save his bacon and allow him (maybe) to thrive...

[void()]

Sorry this guy bugs you. I can understand why to a degree. On the other hand, I have barely heard of him. I steer clear of lots of media any more, or approach it extremely aloof. This seems to help reduce negativity.

This is not exactly shoving one's head in the sand. It is though a means to cope better with all the negativity. Fran has a good idea, dub him a tosser, move on. Tossers are not worth much of anything. Us crazy mates though can offer these amazing things, they can radically shift reality.

*hugs*

The prize is a world in which people treat one another with love, respect and dignity. Anything not the prize should not cloud your vision of it. If you don't notice things which aren't the prize, they lose power and go away. Let the bad ass thugs handle them, because they will. What goes around comes around.

[æonpax]

`
I can honestly say, I do not nor ever did, follow the exploits of Dan Savage, other than incidentally. I put him into the category of lesser media personalities such as Alex Jones, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Andrew Breitbart (RIP) and Orly Taitz whose collective claims to fame is seeking out their own specialized (often off-beat) audience and saying outlandish, inane and offensive things. Their cultish fans are attracted to style over substance.
`
`

[RavenEye]

Have you heard his theory on bisexuality? He thinks for "many people it's a phase." This guy is just stupid!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2sIf_sVYuc

[IanBorthwick]

Later on this guy recanted and then made BLATANT threats about whether we should leave him alone about this or not, because he thinks himself so politcally strong he can take anything out in a blink of an eye. The one thing I am glad of is the fact that most BLGT youths have not heard of this shit-dripping, and not listened to him. The problem with that is when they run into his rhetoric from others int he community they think it is the opinion of others rather than this tool-bag reaching into our world and giving us Bisexuals(males mostly from his own admission) a giant Birdy.

[void()]

Have you heard his theory on bisexuality? He thinks for "many people it's a phase." This guy is just stupid!


I'm reminded of the Wendy's commercial of yesteryear. "Where's the beef?" I don't see any content to him or anything he would sling.
Void imagines a meeting.

"Oh hi, look I'm a gay activist that has political views."

Void stares blankly through such personages and wouldn't miss this opportunity.

"Hello. Anyone home?"

More blank staring.

"Are you retarded or not on the grid? I'm on the inter webs, television."

Staring, a deep sigh ... "Die Fooken Antwoord is all up on the inter webs too, Rush as well, Shinedown, Judas Priest, I've even seen Bill Gates with twenty tits. wat jy sien, gat eter?"

"Wha ..?"

"Presies, neem 'n vlieënde sprong dom fokker."

Die Antwoord translates to The Answer in Afrikkans.

[keladry]

I like Dan Savage. He is honest about what he thinks... but the reason that's good is because it allows his feelings to evolve... listen to what he says about Bisexuality now... it's not the same thing he said back then... Honestly. If you are honest about your feelings, it's easier to change your mind about them..he might be slow to change his mind, but his mind *does* change. That being said. I'm only commenting on the Bi thing, because that's something I've followed. Again, he's not perfect and often wrong, but he's up for changing his attitudes and changing his mind and even apologizing sometimes... All we can ask if for people to improve, and my experience of listening to his podcast indicated that he does, he gets better, he learns, he grows. And so even though sometimes he's a dick and says the wrong thing and even thinks something awful, I like him, and he brings me hope that people can change, because he does change... that's what I have to say to all you haters, heh.

[void()]

I like Dan Savage. He is honest about what he thinks... but the reason that's good is because it allows his feelings to evolve... listen to what he says about Bisexuality now... it's not the same thing he said back then... Honestly. If you are honest about your feelings, it's easier to change your mind about them..he might be slow to change his mind, but his mind *does* change. That being said. I'm only commenting on the Bi thing, because that's something I've followed. Again, he's not perfect and often wrong, but he's up for changing his attitudes and changing his mind and even apologizing sometimes... All we can ask if for people to improve, and my experience of listening to his podcast indicated that he does, he gets better, he learns, he grows. And so even though sometimes he's a dick and says the wrong thing and even thinks something awful, I like him, and he brings me hope that people can change, because he does change... that's what I have to say to all you haters, heh.

Sorry if I gave the wrong impression. I genuinely do not hate him. Look, this ---> -_- is my face of apathetic indifference. I just did not see that was more than a shallow person rattling on. So, excuse me, going back to figuring out how to gingerly combine Grecian fire, play putty and use it as kindling.

[RavenEye]

I like Dan Savage. He is honest about what he thinks... but the reason that's good is because it allows his feelings to evolve... listen to what he says about Bisexuality now... it's not the same thing he said back then... Honestly. If you are honest about your feelings, it's easier to change your mind about them..he might be slow to change his mind, but his mind *does* change. That being said. I'm only commenting on the Bi thing, because that's something I've followed. Again, he's not perfect and often wrong, but he's up for changing his attitudes and changing his mind and even apologizing sometimes... All we can ask if for people to improve, and my experience of listening to his podcast indicated that he does, he gets better, he learns, he grows. And so even though sometimes he's a dick and says the wrong thing and even thinks something awful, I like him, and he brings me hope that people can change, because he does change... that's what I have to say to all you haters, heh.

I don't hate him, or anyone for that matter. (Although I extremely dislike George W. Bush and M. Night Shamala) I just think some of his opinions are idiotic. *sips tea*

[jamieknyc]

It is kind of ironic seeing America's most prominent militant gay activist being called a quisling because the extremists think he isn't radical enough.

On the comment about Proposition 8 and black voters, he only said publicly what many other gays were saying at the time. If it was racist, that was because Savage represents the white-as-rice LGBT movement and not because he was necessarily expressing only his personal beliefs.

[IanBorthwick]

I like Dan Savage. He is honest about what he thinks... but the reason that's good is because it allows his feelings to evolve... listen to what he says about Bisexuality now... it's not the same thing he said back then... Honestly. If you are honest about your feelings, it's easier to change your mind about them..he might be slow to change his mind, but his mind *does* change. blah blah blah as the bard said...

Now, for the real facts instead of the WARM and FUZZIES....

IN his interview with someone asking, after the latest study on Bisexuality put him in his place, he used his prior attacks to vindicate himself, asking WHY was it hate when he said it and WHY was it valid when a researcher did it. And if we supposed he was the worst enemy of Bisexuals, then we had already lost the fight...a threat.

Oh MY! That's so "Evolved" I nearly missed it because I was waiting for,"I'm gonna make youse an offer dat youse can't refuse..."

Basing an opinion on what you want to believe rather than the facts is amazingly myopic and will, in every case, get you a nasty wake up call down the line. When this study came out, Savage POUNCED like a reckless, angry, once bitten, bigot he is. And used the Straw-Man study to jam his rhetoric up our collective asses for years to come in many talks he gave. I can link them, but it wouldn't shake you out of that stupor you placed yourself in because, well sweetheart, he wasn't after YOU. He was after me, and others like me. Male Bisexuals. He painted women only mildly in the same manner because he realized he was going to have to make the most of his interviews.

Reality, he was called to the carpet by so many people, reporters, angry bloggers, pissed off gay men in love with bisexuals, and so on and so forth. Because of him an entire culture hidden beneath the weight of the reality they needed to behave acted out at Pride in Long Beach and were admonished, not allowed to be part of the parade, and the Klein Institute, which helped start San Diego Pride felt threatened for setting up a booth there.

I'll believe he evolved when I see the Grand Wizard of the KKK crying at MLK Jr's grave. SOmething so ingrained as what Savage has in him will take epic effort on HIS part to remove, but he's always acted like Sharon Osbourne after being made to apologize for LOVING the idea of a mutilated man on day time TV...the exact OPPOSITE of contrite.

[Annika L]

Have you heard his theory on bisexuality? He thinks for "many people it's a phase." This guy is just stupid!

Thank you for posting this...I'd never actually heard him speak before, and it's good to get a direct listen to what he's *actually* saying, as opposed to everyone's spin or bias.

But...hello? For many people, bisexuality *is* a phase. He doesn't say it's *just* a phase, and he certainly doesn't say it's a phase for everyone. In fact, he says pretty explicity that he is sure that bisexuals do exist...he's just also sure (as am I) that plenty of people use a bisexual identity as a sort of transitioning device to get from a gay identity to a straight one, or vice versa. That jives with what I've heard from a lot of bisexuals, past and present, both on this site and on others. "True" bisexuals may not like the fact that these people exist, or that they use a bisexual identity this way, but they do...don't shoot the messenger.

I actually didn't hear anything on this video clip that I found offensive, or even particularly disagreed with. He's kinda funny, really. Maybe if I heard more, I'd find something offensive...but this clip does nothing to convince me that he's an idiot (aside from the fact that the pose he's in at the start of your clip certainly makes him *look* stupid :tong:).

[tenni]

Annika
If a person uses the label bisexual for awhile and then decides that they are not bisexual, they never have been bisexual.

"A fundamental truth about bisexual identity is..." (said Dan Savage)

Such use of words is not a fundamental truth about bisexuals as much as it is a fundamental truth about gays and lesbians. It is the gay people who finally decide that they are gay and not bisexual. A fundamental truth may be that some gay people use the bisexual identity incorrectly. It has nothing to do with people who identify as bisexual and continue to do so. Savage admits this but couches it in phrases and terms to downplay validity about bisexuality.

Its semantics.

[drugstore cowboy]

But...hello? For many people, bisexuality *is* a phase. I'm in my 50s I wonder when this "phase" will end? All joking aside if you're actually bisexual then it's not a "phase" at all and the only people who it applies to are chickenshit gays and lesbians who are too afraid to actually be honest about who they are and their sexuality and come out, and they've never been bisexual at all in the first place. A lot of bisexual men and women identify as gay or lesbian before they come out as bisexual or understand bisexuality. I guess we should now say that being gay or lesbian can be a "phase". Dan Savage has been bigoted towards bisexuals for decades and practiced bisexual erasure and he still does that. In a recent writing of his on bisexuality he said how he does not believe that bisexual teenagers or youth exist and that he personally would only maybe believe that a person is really bisexual once they're past their mid 30s. Savage has also been highly bigoted towards trans people and is racist.

[darkeyes]

Annika
If a person uses the label bisexual for awhile and then decides that they are not bisexual, they never have been bisexual.



Lets get it right, tenni.. for a long time I had relationships with both genders.. for u to sit there and tell me I was never bisexual is a pompous and arrogant as any gay telling u that u are not bisexual...I adored sex with guys but time and some unexplained change in me meant sexual attraction for the opposite gender disappeared... I never really noticed it die although did that my preference was moving inexorably toward my own gender...and denied it for some years.. but I was as truly as bisexual as any on this site and whatever changed me, I cant explain any more than u.. I just am what I am... it is just the way I seem to have been made... and any lesbian or gay that tells me that I was never bisexual, he or she too will catch the sharp end of the Fran tongue and addressed as the pompous arrogant sod that they would be...

No I do not accept it to have been a phase for all bisexuals and that they will inevitably become gay or lesbian.. but it is for some.. me for a start.. and a few others I know... and there will be a few on this site who will experience the same metamorphisis of their sexuality... maybe u, tenni babes... maybe not.. who can tell... sexuality is a far more complex issue than any of us understands or is ever likely too...

[jamieknyc]

Fran is right about this. If a person changes their orientation, it doesn't alter past history.

[djones]

Dan Savage is a self interested self promoter - like many in the media. Sadly, many people take his opinions (and bias / hate) as fact and logic. Such people are blinded by the rainbow it seems. Any scratch beneath the surface and Savage's dislike for Bi men - and deeper anti-Bi sentiments - are able to be seen. The lgbt folks gravitate toward Savage as he has mainstream appeal and audience - blind to the fact there is a B in lgbt that savage blatantly lambasts. A very sad example of this was the 2011 NYC Pride Parade wherein Savage was made grand marshall. A slap in the face to the Bs of the lgbt. Again, blinded by the rainbow. Just one of the reasons I don't consider myself an "lgbt person" .

[jamieknyc]

Savage is a syndicated columnist, and like all columnists, he has a constituency he has to keep happy.

[tenni]

darkeyes
I understand the position of making a conscious decision to decide to have sex with only one sex and still be a bisexual. I don't think that you change your orientation though...at least I don't. I am bisexual and I know that I'm sexually attracted to both genders even though presently I am declining the ladies. I am still sexually attracted to both. I've been in love with both genders. I couldn't be more bisexual.

If you genuinely believe that you have become lesbian and have no sexual /emotional interest in men, then you stand in a different place. Its all feked up babes. If you once had emotional /sexual attraction to men, you may again in time.

I do suspect that there is more than one sexuality under the bisexual umbrella. I believe that sexuality may be fluid over our lifetime. I've read a few gay people state that they have developed an interest in opposite gender and are bi curious after more than 20 years of "being" gay. I think that they lived a gay life. Call yourself what makes you happy. Sorry, but that is how I see it.

[Sonja]

As a life long bisexual. This means I knew I was bisexual at 5 and I'm almost 34 now and I'm still bisexual. What Savage says is a flat out attack and I don't like his hate for the Bisexual community. As IF he is the authority on and or in the LGBT Community. He's not. The only thing he has going for him is the fact that he has the biggest mouth. I will stick with worthwhile people sharing and stating worthwhile information. If I want an idiot that panders to the hetero community, while saying he's gay but hates part of the lbgt community. Then I'll listen to his worthless diatribe. Since I don't have any interest in his trash, I'm all set.

[drugstore cowboy]

It is kind of ironic seeing America's most prominent militant gay activist being called a quisling because the extremists think he isn't radical enough. On the comment about Proposition 8 and black voters, he only said publicly what many other gays were saying at the time. If it was racist, that was because Savage represents the white-as-rice LGBT movement and not because he was necessarily expressing only his personal beliefs. I wouldn't say that Savage is somehow the most "militant" gay white male activist. There's Andrew Sullivan and while not being a U.S. citizen he is an American gay male activist and even further to the right than Dan Savage is, Sullivan is HIV+ and doesn't care if he infects others with HIV or gets infected with other strains of the virus or STDs, and just like Savage he's a major media whore and hypocrite. I've read what Dan Savage has to say about black men before and he uses the tired old racist stereotype of "big black dick" or thinks that if a white person sleeps with a black person that it's somehow a novelty or whatever other racist BS he claims when in reality it's no different than having sex with someone of your own race. Yes a lot of gay white men can be racist but blaming a failed prop 8 election on an entire race is beyond low and trashy, it's racist. Keep in mind that Dan Savage does not speak for all gay white men or even the entire LGBT community he only speaks for himself.

[Annika L]

Annika
If a person uses the label bisexual for awhile and then decides that they are not bisexual, they never have been bisexual.

"A fundamental truth about bisexual identity is..." (said Dan Savage)



I'm in my 50s I wonder when this "phase" will end? All joking aside if you're actually bisexual then it's not a "phase" at all and the only people who it applies to are chickenshit gays and lesbians who are too afraid to actually be honest about who they are and their sexuality and come out, and they've never been bisexual at all in the first place.

LOL, I knew my post would rile some people. And yes, it's clear that many don't pay attention to the likes of Dan Savage...because even when quoting him, you aren't paying attention to what he is saying.

First, cowboy, to your "joke": nobody, least of all me, said *you* were one of the people for whom bisexuality is a phase. All Savage said (in this clip), and all I put in my post, is that there are many people for whom this is the case (not all people...not even most people...just many people). This is simply true. You aren't one of them...neither am I. That's ok...it's not all about you.

Now on to tenni. You've quoted my point. Savage specifically says "a fundamental truth about bisexual identity"...not "a fundamental truth about bisexuality". These people adopted a bisexual identity (i.e., identified as bisexuals) for a phase of their lives, to help them transition from straight to gay or vice versa...or for whatever reason. It's not up to us to determine whether they were "truly" bisexuals...maybe they were, and changed; maybe they were mistaken and were never really bisexual; maybe as cowboy suggests they were in denial about either their gayness or straightness; maybe you're right and it's their monosexuality that is the mistaken phase and "they'll be back" in the bisexual fold before long...whatever...the point is that they went through a phase of bisexual identification. During that phase, they were pretty indistinguishable from "real" bisexuals, in that they'd been having sex with one sex, and then changed to having sex with the other.

The thing that impresses me is how defensive people get about this topic. There are pretty clearly many bisexuals who are bisexual for life, from the point where their sexuality forms at all; there are pretty clearly many people who identify as bisexual for a time, and then change for whatever reason. Why is this a problem for anyone?

Now if you want to explore fundamental truths about *bisexuality*, you'll have to start by defining what bisexuality is, as distinct from bisexual identity. I understand what bisexual identity is. I understand less what it means to be a "true" bisexual...it seems like that means "to have a bisexual identity throughout one's life". In which case, the only way to tell the difference is to wait until the person dies and see if their sexual identity ever changes. Pretty inefficient, really. Maybe there are fundamental truths about bisexuals...there probably are, in fact. The problem is, nobody can truly *know* whether they are one of those people to whom those fundamental truths apply: those of us who think of ourselves as "true bisexuals" could well be mistaken...I don't see it happening, but if my sexuality changes in the next few years, then according to tenni, at least, I was never bisexual. What a fleeting concept.

This thread has been most thought-provoking for me.

[Sonja]

The problem is, nobody can truly *know* whether they are one of those people to whom those fundamental truths apply:

"those of us who think of ourselves as "true bisexuals" could well be mistaken...."

I will have to disagree with you on that. I have been bisexual my entire life and it has never changed and it never will change. I know myself, and I know that I am not mistaken. Maybe the reason so many of us are angry or upset is because its verbal abuse and an insult toward those who are bisexual and always will be bisexual.

While I do agree that there are those that identify as bisexual because they are conflicted and confused. So they explore both, to find out where they stand. That I can get and respect, as long as they are honest. Just like lesbians or gays that identify as bisexual because they are unsure, then they transition and that also goes for straights. They were once bisexual, because they were unsure. That won't ever change.

But then you also have those that USE bisexuality, for a number of reasons. I don't see them as ever having been truly bisexual, they used a term to get somewhere, or get someone or a few someone's. That does not make them bisexual, it makes them users.

But to lifelong bisexuals what is said by dan, is hate speech.

[tenni]

Annika
It is still semantics. Whether you add or leave the word "identity" out, if a person's identity included the belief that they are bisexual and later see themself as lesbian identity, they were not bisexual or they are not lesbian. I agree with some of your thoughts that it may take some time to identify as bisexual and accept your sexuality. Many, like Sonja, can look back or knew from the age of 5 what their sexuality is. It may take longer to identify your sexuality and it seems that some make an error.

[jamieknyc]

I didn't say Savage was the most militant. I said he was the most prominent. And as for his racial comments, he only said in public what many others said at the time.

[Annika L]

I have been bisexual my entire life and it has never changed and it never will change. I know myself, and I know that I am not mistaken.

I find the strength with which you assert this to be most revealing.

Not one of us can predict the future, my dear. You can be no more certain that your sexuality won't change than I can be that mine won't. I'm pretty confident that it won't, but I am neither so naive to believe, nor do I have such strong needs to believe that it will not change that I would ever assert so categorically that it is not possible.

Please note that I do not (at all) claim that your sexuality will change: I can predict your sexuality even less well than you can. All I claim is that *neither* of us can know it for certain fact. So all I hear in your claim is a strong need to *believe* that it will remain stable. I hope for your sake that it does remain stable.

[Sonja]

Annika
It is still semantics. Whether you add or leave the word "identity" out, if a person's identity included the belief that they are bisexual and later see themself as lesbian identity, they were not bisexual or they are not lesbian. I agree with some of your thoughts that it may take some time to identify as bisexual and accept your sexuality. Many, like Sonja, can look back or knew from the age of 5 what their sexuality is. It may take longer to identify your sexuality and it seems that some make an error.

Yep. I knew, and I knew because my parents didn't coddle me or treated me like an idiot. They explained to me that there is more than one sexuality out there. But yes many can be unsure or make errors, but that doesn't make them right or wrong. They are exploring, trying to find themselves. I

ts what savage says in how most of use bisexuality, or that its a phase or a choice. To me that's flat out hate-speech. And to once identify as bisexual but now lesbian, gay, straight. Savage uses that to claim its not real. That being gay or lesbian you are born that way, but bisexuality is a choice. Its not.

I no more chose to be bisexual than a person chose to be gay, lesbian, transgender or straight.

Some, like myself know right away. Some others it takes longer. Savage uses the taking longer to find yourself to verbally abuse those of us that have always been bisexual. Whether we knew very early or later in life. Its wrong, abusive and its hate-speech.

And I flat out refuse to support his hate-filled diatribe against the Bisexual and Transgender community. As well as his racist remarks toward the Black Community.

[Annika L]

Annika
It is still semantics. Whether you add or leave the word "identity" out, if a person's identity included the belief that they are bisexual and later see themself as lesbian identity, they were not bisexual or they are not lesbian. I agree with some of your thoughts that it may take some time to identify as bisexual and accept your sexuality. Many, like Sonja, can look back or knew from the age of 5 what their sexuality is. It may take longer to identify your sexuality and it seems that some make an error.

tenni, everything is semantics. I think the problem I have with what you're saying is that you seem to believe there can be an absolute truth about somebody's sexuality, and they are either in touch with it, or mistaken about it. I'm not so certain this is the case. I think sexuality is slightly more dynamic in nature than this. Static for some, static for periods of time for many...but dynamic in the longterm, and in some people's short-term. Many whom you'd think of as "truly" bisexual describe periods where they have zero attraction to one sex or the other, and then the focus shifts. You might say these people are *really* bisexuals...unless/until a day comes when the interest in one or the other sex drops off completely...at which in your judgment, you conclude that the person was *never* bisexual, just mistaken? What good is a concept like that? All you can ever say about a person...even yourself, as I imply to Sonja above (whether or not anyone wants to hear it)...is to whom they are attracted *right now*, with some weight, perhaps, added by how long this attraction has lasted. But if you're going to revise their whole history if their taste changes...and invalidate the label they once applied to themselves...then of what use is that label?

[Annika L]

In the clip above, I did not hear Savage saying bisexuality was a choice...maybe I missed it, but it seemed to me that he spent significant time at the end of the clip saying the exact opposite: that you couldn't simply make a choice and decide to be attracted to one sex or the other.

[Sonja]

I find the strength with which you assert this to be most revealing.

Not one of us can predict the future, my dear. You can be no more certain that your sexuality won't change than I can be that mine won't. I'm pretty confident that it won't, but I am neither so naive to believe, nor do I have such strong needs to believe that it will not change that I would ever assert so categorically that it is not possible.

Please note that I do not (at all) claim that your sexuality will change: I can predict your sexuality even less well than you can. All I claim is that *neither* of us can know it for certain fact. So all I hear in your claim is a strong need to *believe* that it will remain stable. I hope for your sake that it does remain stable.


I know what you are saying and I do agree just about anyone can change. However, I have known myself for nearly 34 yrs. I know where my soul lies, I know my feelings, my life, I know myself in so many ways that most people could never begin to. I know what or will not change about me. Why? Because Only I can make such changes. I don't believe, I know for a fact without a doubt that I will never change in my sexuality.

And my sexuality will never change for the simple fact that I love and enjoy the company/companionship, sexuality/intimacy of both genders. Always have.

I know the constants about myself, the what will never change no matter what.

One: is my Pagan/Occult Ties, Studies, and Practices.
Two: is my Bisexuality.
Three: is Things I hold of worth and/or value.
And the list goes on and on. I could be here till next Jan naming them all.

But you get the understanding. :o)

I just do not like savage's way of clumping us all together as if we are all made up frauds, when its not true. For some of us it took longer to find ourselves. That doesn't make us frauds. Those of us that have always known ourselves, doesn't make us fruads. Those that are frauds and use terms and identity to grease their wheels or so they could get what they wanted should not be lumped with the rest of us.

And yes, he did say that bisexuality was a choice. He was saying how all bisexuals turn it off and on when it suits them. That's a big reason why so many are ticked off.

[Annika L]

However, I have known myself for nearly 34 yrs. I know where my soul lies, I know my feelings, my life, I know myself in so many ways that most people could never begin to. I know what or will not change about me. Why? Because Only I can make such changes. I don't believe, I know for a fact without a doubt that I will never change in my sexuality.

...

I just do not like savage's way of clumping us all together as if we are all made up frauds, when its not true. For some of us it took longer to find ourselves. That doesn't make us frauds. Those of us that have always known ourselves, doesn't make us fruads. Those that are frauds and use terms and identity to grease their wheels or so they could get what they wanted should not be lumped with the rest of us.

And yes, he did say that bisexuality was a choice. He was saying how all bisexuals turn it off and on when it suits them. That's a big reason why so many are ticked off.

I get what you're saying as well, and I think we're fine as long as we can remember that "having no doubt" and "knowing for a fact" are two different things...and that many, many people who now recognize their sexuality as shifted, once had just as many and just as strong reasons for believing it never would.

I agree with you about "frauds"...but they are like frauds of every other kind...only a small number of people are intentionally defrauding others...most believe what they are saying, at least while they are saying it. It'd be nice if everyone was truthful with themselves, and with others. But that seems not to be the nature of this species.

Now I said above, and I'll say it again to remind, that I don't follow Savage...Raven's clip above is the only bit of his actual words I've heard. But in that clip I detected no note of him implying that we are all frauds (that there *are* frauds, perhaps...but he's right about that)...maybe he says it elsewhere...care to post another clip? Also, I just listened to this one again, and he does not (in that clip) say bisexuality is a choice...rather, he specifically builds a scenario to suggest that it is not realistic for a person to simply choose their sexuality.

[Gearbox]

He may have avoided lots of agro if he said "I know the truth about PEOPLE....", instead of "Bisexuality".

[drugstore cowboy]

I didn't say Savage was the most militant. I said he was the most prominent. And as for his racial comments, he only said in public what many others said at the time. He's not that prominent, he's a media whore, an ex drag queen who studied drama and bitched and moaned until he got an advice column in a free city paper in Seattle. He's not any sort of expert on human sexuality, kink/BDSM, or gender/trans issues even if he wants to bill himself as being one and pretend he is. Savage started the whole "It gets better" project not to actually help LGBT kids and help LGBT people get equality but to self promote, to get money, and to get a reality TV show on MTV. If you do your research about him he's actually not that liberal either politically or socially at all and never has been. Dan is not a good face for the LGBT movement. However the media has decided he is. While we argue over the entire matter he cashes another check, extracted from the combined misery of every LGBT person who has been abused by society or family. The man makes his money off of our collective misery. If society didn’t heap hell after hell on us there would be no pay check in the LGBT movement for Dan. If overnight we suddenly gained our rights and every bigot said sorry, the man wouldn’t have a job. He is slime. The whole thing where he blamed the entire passing of Prop 8 on black people was not only racist, it was completely wrong.

[IanBorthwick]

He may have avoided lots of agro if he said "I know the truth about PEOPLE....", instead of "Bisexuality".

But don't you see, he doesn't even know THAT! He knows the truth about a few people, and creates a blanket statement, sort of like Annika is doing to allow her to seem right and pick apart anything anyone says to show her myopic view to be what it is. Myopic, duh. Anything you say is turned back on itself, not by fact, but belief. As you can see in all the posts, no facts posited, just belief, denial, reservations, shaming, questioning their facts, and all with the BELIEF that a stand point based in ignorance and disinformation has the same strength as fact and self-understanding, as well as knowing from which direction the MIS-direction is coming from.

For the sake of all of us, stop treating the ignorance of others as if it carries ANY WEIGHT. It doesn't. It cannot. Feelings carry no facts, no truth, they can only hopefully point you to PERSONAL truth if you don't ignore what your head says also. This idea that I can change tomorrow is a fine idea, and I am sure I will change tomorrow as compared to the prior day, but saying that tomorrow I will abandon my sexuality when I have not even felt a need to do so, let alone an ability in the pressure of society to conform....this smacks of the retardation behind the Ex-Gay movement.

If that insanity has been found to be not valid, and was paraded around before the Prop 8 case about gays, and the passage from the psych manual that was cited says that NO ONE CAN CHOOSE their sexuality, so it cannot be adjusted...how is it you figure we can suddenly be NOT bisexual? What data do you have? WHat person can you have on the stand? And if you are going use yourself as an example, please don't. That is, at best, a compromised witness no one is going to give credence. Especially in light of those who are experts in sexuality who already wrote that sexuality simply doesn't change like that. If your say so is greater than theirs by anything you try to put forth, you're going to need a mountain of evidence...why? Because from this point forth you're as suspect as the bigots who pushed Prop 8 without being willing to face that known fact, but in this case the demarcating line is you believe that Bisexuality CAN be a choice or it can alter to simply fade away.

I'd choose my words ever so carefully knowing this, Annika, were I you.

[Annika L]

Um, Ian? The only blanket statement I think I've made in this thread is that none of us know the future. Think I'm safe with that one, but thanks for your concern.

[Gearbox]

@IanBorhwick- Just thought he'd have avoided some agro, not that I'd agree with him.lol

I'd like to know if he'd roll his eyes at 16yo's who claim they are gay also though. Would he assume they'd claim different in 10 years time too? That's not unheard of, yet it's not mentioned at all by him.
Many gays will deny ANY attraction to the opposite gender, which is fair enough, that's why they call themselves 'gay'. But many will tell you that they do, but it's so much 'weaker' than same gender attraction that they opt to call themselves 'gay'. That's (IMO) a social choice, not a sexuality choice, and same goes for 'straights' with a weak attraction to same gender.
Dan Savage himself mentioned that he met a woman that he'd love to fuck (can't find that vid), yet he sticks with 'gay'. His choice! But it's misleading as to what homosexuality and sexuality in general actually is IMO. Not that I KNOW!
But as for bisexuality being a 'weigh-station' between Hetero & Homo for some, both hetero & homo can also be too with the same reasoning. It should also be noted that sexuality can 'evolve' into bisexuality, NOT always from it, so ALL sexual identities can be considered as a phase if one can.

IMO bisexuality isn't being the ball on a sexuality roulette wheel while it bobs about the red&black until it lands on either one. It just doesn't land.http://www.bisexual.com/images/smilies/wink.png
Same maybe true for sexuality in general. Who knows?

[jamieknyc]

Savage's biggest gig is probably his column in the Village Voice, but that isn't the point. Savage is no slouch at political militancy (he vreated the secondary meaning of 'santorum'), but some people criticize him fior his mainstream approach to sexual mores because they are extremists who have psychological needs to be a group made up overwhelmingly of affluent whites play-acting at being victims of oppression.

[Annika L]

Many gays will deny ANY attraction to the opposite gender, which is fair enough, that's why they call themselves 'gay'. But many will tell you that they do, but it's so much 'weaker' than same gender attraction that they opt to call themselves 'gay'. That's (IMO) a social choice, not a sexuality choice, and same goes for 'straights' with a weak attraction to same gender.

Geary, Bless you again! You've put your finger on exactly the distinction I was making...and that I hear Savage making in the video clip on the previous page.

I agree with you that the choice you are describing above is not a sexuality choice...it is a sexual *identity* choice. Those people are choosing to identify as gay, rather than as bisexual or straight. Their sexuality is what it is, and they cannot choose it. But they can choose how they are going to describe it, and how they will view it internally...how they identify. And if you were male with no attraction to women whatsoever, then of course, you might feel that you had no choice in how you identify: gay would be the only option.

Similarly, Savage (in that clip) makes no comment on bisexuality...he comments on bisexual identity, and the fact that for many (not all or most), that identity is a phase. I stand by that, not because of how I feel (as Ian seems to claim), but because I have spoken with many past and present bisexuals, on this site and others, who have had this experience. I am not one of them...but I can and will not deny their existence or their experience.

I do not and cannot apologize for Savage generally. As I've stated multiple times now, I haven't read or heard much from him...really, just the quote in the clip. He may be racist and evil and all kinds of mean and nasty stuff (to quote Guthrie), but I heard no such thing in the clip that was presented as him being stupid...I felt he was being moderate and sensible.

[IanBorthwick]

Um, Ian? The only blanket statement I think I've made in this thread is that none of us know the future. Think I'm safe with that one, but thanks for your concern.

Oh, yeah...you only made one blanket statement...sure. And you also didn't push your opinion forward as if it carried the same weight as fact....

Two Words, learn them, recite in the mirror.

Epic Fail.


Geary, Bless you again! You've put your finger on exactly the distinction I was making...and that I hear Savage making in the video clip on the previous page.

Chalk another issue up...Selective hearing.

You and Savage have a common problem, and if you two got together we'd be dealing with the proverbial pair of blind people leading each other. Only problem is the rest of us are the ones who get fallen on, not the metaphorical ditch. This is called "Rebranding" so you can backpedal and take a different stance more palatable to the audience while pretending to be misunderstood. You graduate from the Savage school of Histrionics and Legerdemain. Brava. Problem is I'm still not fooled.

[12voltman59]

I just have one comment on what Savage says about the worthiness of the war in Iraq---if we really wanted to go after a nation and a government that had real and substantitve ties to the 9/11 terrorists----we would have bombed the shit out of and invaded Saudi Arabia and executed most of the members of the Saudi royal family, instead of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden, because most of the 9/11 attackers were Saudis, most had some relationship to the Wahhabi movement in Saudi, a radical Muslim offshoot that is funded in large part by the Saudi ruling elite.

As far as other things that Savage says, I don't really pay too much attention to him---but from postings others have done on here about things he says and the few times I have seen him come on shows like Bill Maher's "Real Time" and perhaps on an MSNBC show---he seems to be pretty well "impressed with himself," to put it one way, but that is not a crime--actually the same thing can be said for lots of people.

He surely doesn't seem to be very accepting of bisexuality, that is for sure.

I had to come back and add this point regarding Savage's belief that bisexuals can decide to be bi or not----I say to that--so what if that is true--or that any one can chose to be gay, bisexual, straight, transgender or whatever. I say that a person has every damn right to chose their sexuality type---because I really do believe that the spectrum of human sexuality is very wide and broad---for reasons that go far beyond mere biology and that a person's desire for expressing their sexuality has more to do with this aspect of the "true nature" of what human beings are (something that most people don't know since science and religion both have lead us astray from this knowledge).

Savage's shortcomings are that he only deals with, and is a protector and defender, of what one aspect of society accepts as "gospel truth" about what constitutes "gayness" and like all such "defenders of the faith," God help those who dare challenge the accepted wisdom on the matter--which in his case is that homosexuality is innate in those who are such--(which is only true to a degree but not the whole story) and that "being gay is not a choice but the way a person was born." Part of that status quo consensus is that bisexuality is merely either a starting point for people to discover their true sexual natures is to actually be gay or that bisexuality is a refuge of cowards or scoundrels for those who "want the best of both gay and straight."

[Annika L]

Oh, yeah...you only made one blanket statement...sure. And you also didn't push your opinion forward as if it carried the same weight as fact....

Two Words, learn them, recite in the mirror.

Epic Fail.



Chalk another issue up...Selective hearing.

You and Savage have a common problem, and if you two got together we'd be dealing with the proverbial pair of blind people leading each other. Only problem is the rest of us are the ones who get fallen on, not the metaphorical ditch. This is called "Rebranding" so you can backpedal and take a different stance more palatable to the audience while pretending to be misunderstood. You graduate from the Savage school of Histrionics and Legerdemain. Brava. Problem is I'm still not fooled.

Hmmm...care to get specific about what's up your ass? Or are you only capable of ad hominem attack?

Which opinions do you suppose I have that I am pushing forward? And what other distasteful blanket statements have I made? What is the nature of my "fail" that is so epic?

On the "selective hearing" thing, no, you misinterpret...possibly willfully, although I'm willing to hear you out. I realize that Gearbox was not arguing in support of Savage...but he did bring up an example that was exactly the sort of thing I was trying to think of and articulate...something that would nicely illustrate the difference between bisexuality and a bisexual identity (a difference people seemed to be missing)...so I used the example, and gave credit to the source. I don't believe that qualifies as selective hearing. If you meant that I was selectively hearing Savage talk about bisexual identity, rather than bisexuality, I don't think so. Listen to the clip. No really...listen to it. He says identity. tenni even quoted it.

Supporting Savage is not my agenda either, btw. I know almost nothing about him or his views, and have said this repeatedly. The only reason I entered this discussion at all was because I was lightly browsing through the comments, trying to get a sense of why there was so much distaste directed toward this person I barely knew of, and saw a video clip in a post that the poster seemed to think illustrated his stupidity and sexuality bias. I said to myself, "well, it'll probably be aggravating to hear, but it'll be quicker than reading through all this mishmash bitching." So, with trepidation, I watched it. And I was surprised not to hear anything particularly stupid or particularly anti-bisexual...in fact it was rather entertaining (the raison d'etre of an entertainer, of course, but it still caught me off-guard, given how the clip was described). So I wrote about my impression, and what I heard him saying...the actual words, mind you. And I got jumped on by people who (talk about selective hearing) didn't seem to have listened to the clip, and didn't seem to have read what I wrote.

So I wrote to clarify...and on...and here I am doing the same with you, though I'm no longer sure why...after all, you're the one who said to stop treating the ignorance of others as if it had any weight. If you can't reply with substance, I believe I'll take you up on that advice.

[tenni]

Annika
I may be wrong but you seem to be basing your comments on this particular video. That is fair as you always seem to be. I do have to wonder if this video is a revised position on bisexuality being a phase..not just for some but most bisexuals. I don't have the evidence but did Savage not use stronger language indicating that bisexuality was not just a phase for some but most bisexuals? Was that not his original statement and after protests he has modified his statement? Why? I can only guess and I won't because that is not your thing..lol(guessing as you like evidence ;)

I will post that I'm not sure about what I read on this site about wanting no barriers or points of definitions in describing bisexuality and sexuality in general. I think that you may water down sexuality until there is nothing there. This may leave the door open not for a broader understanding but a denial of bisexuality.

btw Did we clear up that Savage's statement do not connect to "Implicit Racism"? maybe bigotry but not racism?

[Annika L]

Annika
I may be wrong but you seem to be basing your comments on this particular video. That is fair as you always seem to be. I do have to wonder if this video is a revised position on bisexuality being a phase..not just for some but most bisexuals. I don't have the evidence but did Savage not use stronger language indicating that bisexuality was not just a phase for some but most bisexuals? Was that not his original statement and after protests he has modified his statement? Why? I can only guess and I won't because that is not your thing..lol(guessing as you like evidence ;)

I will post that I'm not sure about what I read on this site about wanting no barriers or points of definitions in describing bisexuality and sexuality in general. I think that you may water down sexuality until there is nothing there. This may leave the door open not for a broader understanding but a denial of bisexuality.

btw Did we clear up that Savage's statement do not connect to "Implicit Racism"? maybe bigotry but not racism?

Hi tenni, and thanks for the summing up. Yes, the video clip may well be presenting a revised position, but you are correct (and I have repeatedly said this) that my only actual knowledge of what he's said comes from this clip...he could well be a terrible person, but that clip was (in my eyes) not good evidence of this. I continue to await a better clip.

Btw, you are welcome to guess about him (I have my guesses)...I really don't have a stake in him, or care much about what he's said. I put extremely little stock in media figures and icons of any kind.

And to be clear, it's not that I do not want definitions of sexuality...I thrive on definitions. But they need to be clear, they need to be stable, and they need to be checkable...i.e., for a definition to be useful, you need to be able to tell whether someone or something meets the definition. If a person meets the definition today (so the term applies to them), but tomorrow meets the definition for the term *never* having applied to them, that is problematic in my view...unstable, and uncheckable in any meaningful way.

I'll let others debate racism. I'm not sufficiently familiar with the man, and do not wish to be.

[youlemeia]

I dont give him much thought to be honest and dont think u should either.but then I am not an American and we dont have anyone quite like him here tf.simply treat him for what he is Dave.a wanker.one who accomodates and makes common ground with those who would do the likes of us in by showing he can be as unpleasant as they about things which matter to them more than screwing down and locking away the likes of us. in the end history, not just as happened in Nazi Germany, shows that such people do not thrive, but eventually pay the price for their stupidity.














-------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Bridesmaid Dresses (http://www.dressale.com/bridesmaid-dresses-classic-bridesmaid-dresses-c-2_4_40.html)|Black Junior Bridesmaid Dresses (http://www.dressale.com/junior-bridesmaid-dresses-black-junior-bridesmaid-dresses-c-2_9_44.html)|Sheath Wedding Dresses (http://www.dressale.com/wedding-dresses-sheathcolumn-wedding-dresses-c-2_3_23.html)|Maternity Wedding Dresses (http://www.dressale.com/wedding-dresses-maternity-wedding-dresses-c-2_3_30.html)