Join Email List | About Us | AMERICAblog News
More about: DADT | DOMA | ENDA | Immigration | Marriage | 2012 Elections

Dan Savage glitter-bombed again

| Reddit | Tumblr | Digg | FARK

UPDATE: It seems the trans activist glitter bombed Dan just as he was about to educate MTV viewers about anti-trans defamation.  That was one hell of a rare opportunity lost.

One sentence in this Bilerico post stood out:

It was hard not to notice all the cis (non-trans) people rushing to defend Savage's transphobic actions and argue that he should be free to continue them.
It's also hard not to notice the gratuitous use of a slur against non-trans people in a piece about the evil of using slurs.  Is this any better than referring to straight people as "breeders," or transgender people as "trannys"?

A commenter noted another point:
I noticed the person, who wrote that article about Savage's use of slurs criticizes his defenders for having "only a minimal understanding of the complaints against him." That's kind of odd, because if this person, knew anything about Dan Savage, they would know that his philosophy (whether they agree with it or not) is that using slurs in a non-derogatory way takes away their power.
And this involves two issues, really. First, is it ever okay for anyone to use a slur - e.g., can a gay person say "f*ggot," can a black person say "n*gger," in any context? (I'm using the asterisk only because the automatic ad filter gets annoyed sometimes.)  Second, if it is okay for a member of a group to sometimes use a derogatory term that defines their own group, then why would it be okay for Dan to say "f*ggot" but not also "tranny."  We're all one community, right? Or are even our most strident activists claiming, tacitly, that we're not?

blog comments powered by Disqus