Dan Savage vs. Tony Perkins
Now this is what a gay leader looks like.
Many years ago, when I first started to pay attention to the gay rights movement, I saw an interview between Bill O’Reilly of Fox News and David Smith of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC). O’Reilly made Smith look like a whipped child, and I still remember how angry I was that the best our side could put up against O’Reilly was a human sacrifice. Where are our charismatic leaders? Where are the men and women who can forcefully go toe to toe with bullies without being shrill or thuggish? I’ve asked those questions often, but earlier this week, I received an answer when viewing this video of Dan Savage, a nationally syndicated sex columnist and novelist, go after Tony Perkins, one of the many heads of the right-wing hydra of homophobia. Savage has been on numerous news programs lately, taking the message of equality to the masses. While he is no Martin Luther King, I haven’t seen anyone else step up as boldly and effectively as he has. Good on ya, Dan.
15 comments:
I disagree. I thought he came across as a bully and made Tony Perkins seem reasonable, which is no mean feat.
I find it very unsettling that our movement is rallying behind Savage and Sullivan et al. without, I think, really taking into account the conservative ideological basis for their marriage argument.
Dan Savage speaks truth to power. Thanks for sharing this.
gotta agree with the disagreer. Savage is just fine until he actually engages Perkins, if you could call it that. he's jumpy and obnoxious. he cuts in so much he comes off as incoherent, and it was hard to do anything but cringe.
I recommend Dan's 2003 book Skipping Towards Gomorrah: The Seven Deadly Sins and the Pursuit of Happiness in America.
Where is our Martin Luther Queen?
Steven - Why is it unsettling that there are both conservative and liberal bases for advocating for marriage equality? I wonder if "conservative" is even the right way to think about it. It seems like an issue of basic fairness and not one that is fundamentally at odds with conservatism or liberalism. So, why should I care if conservatives agree with me? Shouldn't that be celebrated? And, is there room for including conservative gays in "our" movement? Is it not their movement too?
John-
While I am, obviously, not Steven, based on his comments on a previous post, I would bet he would agree with me...
It's unsettling because it seems like people have stopped asking why we're fighting for, specifically, marriage. Marriage is not the end-all, be-all of equal rights, but I have seen them used interchangeably with increasing frequency.
The institution of marriage doesn't privilege straight people over gay people, it privileges married people over not-married people; families based on a (presumably) sexually intimate couple over families which are not.
It has nothing to do with distancing ourselves from "conservatives", and everything to do with being more inclusive to all families.
You do not fight privilege by redrawing the lines to include yourself in the privileged.
(Also, Steven, we should totally form a non-traditional family unit together. <3)
Anderov- OK, well let me ask a few more questions in order to try to understand what this alternative movement would look like.
It seems that what you want to see is a coalition of some "non-traditional family unit" constituencies. This seems like it is fundamentally distinct from a gay rights movement, but that might be OK. Who is included in this movement that would make it inclusive enough for you? And I don't mean this as a purely theoretical question. I mean, what organized group of citizens do we need to include in our agitation for rights? Is there such an organization or network of organizations that exist that seek protection under the law that fit the profile of non-traditional families that we are currently excluding? What, practically speaking, from the perspective of someone who is potentially sympathetic to your point of view, should we do in order to avoid excluding others from obtaining the sorts of rights that most of us want? And would these other, non-gay or non-coupled people want to align their political movement with ours?
I also would agree with you that marriage is not the end-all, be-all of equality. But it's certainly a big one and I haven't been convinced yet that it's insignificant enough that it shouldn't be part of our goals (whether I personally get married some day or not). Employment non-discrimination, Don't Ask Don't Tell, hate crimes, and transgender rights are obviously important too. It may seem that some of us are fixated on marriage to the exclusion of these other issues, but I don't think people have actually forgotten that marriage is not the only thing worth fighting for. It's just that it happens to be a hot issue right now because many gays want marriage rights and many of our enemies are organizing to amend constitutions and statutes to prevent that from happening.
What Anderov said!
If you're unsure exactly what we might be working toward instead of marriage, check out this web site:
http://beyondmarriage.org/
Steven - thanks for the link! This is exactly what I wanted to see, and probably the comments section on a blog is not the ideal place to convey such information. =) I see nothing here that I can disagree with. I really liked this statement:
"Rather than focus on same-sex marriage rights as the only strategy, we believe the LGBT movement should reinforce the idea that marriage should be one of many avenues through which households, families, partners, and kinship relationships can gain access to the support of a caring civil society."
It seems to me that broadening the discussion beyond the marriage issue actually gives us a potentially larger pool of allies, and even better, would penalize the "pro-family" types that have overreached with policies in places like Arkansas and Virginia that affect non-gay families.
Good stuff. Thanks for enlightening me.
I think Dan Savage is one of the sexiest men I have ever seen. I am truly crushed that he has a husband already (but good for Terry!). He is probably an incredibly good father too.
Why can't more gay men be as hot, intelligent and courageous as Dan Savage?
Savage was a horrible debater; just plain rude. Not a good way to win converts.
re: anonymous
What an assimilationist pussy you are.
Ooooh. Let's not upset anyone.
Post a Comment