Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Children Need a Mom and a Dad


dude, it's fake, just like their CEO "dying" (which they had to admit to the SEC was also fake)

Posted by Will in Seattle | June 26, 2007 9:46 AM

Don't you dare apologize. Or stop. People need to feel the horror, and the hypocrisy.

Posted by Fnarf | June 26, 2007 9:46 AM

Dan, your having a child has brought out great things in you.

Posted by It's Mark Mitchell | June 26, 2007 9:46 AM

Dan, You're missing the word out in the Texas link.

This is a terrible story and proof you should need more testing to be a parent than a driver.

Posted by Leeerker | June 26, 2007 9:50 AM


I have no problem with your "mother and father" posts. That said, you might want to find an unpaid proofreading intern to review posts. I know you're busy and all, but...

Posted by Jude Fawley | June 26, 2007 9:53 AM

Damn right Dan.
Most murderers, rapists, child molesters, serial killers, frat boy drunkards, bad parents and homicidal U.S. Presidents are heterosexual. The vast majority of such creeps, in the Western World anyway, are heterosexual white males. The very notion that gay people have a lock on immortality is such utter nonsense. Keep the stories coming, and I wish you Godspeed in striking your target.

Posted by Gurldoggie | June 26, 2007 9:54 AM

Don't apologize. The clincher for me is that the other side wouldn't think twice about howling bloody murder should a gay parent do anything even remotely this bad.

Posted by Ryno | June 26, 2007 9:54 AM

Keep 'em coming. With Paris and Celebrity Gossip the cornerstone of corporate news, this blog (and others) keep my faith in journalism afloat.

The quirks and obsessions of Slog writers (e.g. your daily exposition on child abuse, Mudede's obsession with rectangular forms, ECB's bike nazi posts) is what keeps me coming back. Don't ever change.

Don't succumb to the playa hatas!

Posted by seattle98104 | June 26, 2007 9:54 AM

Great post Dan! And @4, I have never understood why you we test for everything except for having kids. Some of the shit that Dan has posted makes me favor a license before you can have kids.

Posted by Just Me | June 26, 2007 9:54 AM

Whatever else you might need to apologize for, these posts aren't among 'em.

Posted by Boomer in NYC | June 26, 2007 9:58 AM

Your points are right on, and when you want to, you articulate them well. But again, pointing out murderers and child-abusers and drawing the link to your argument, makes you look as ridiculous as those you hate so much. You could convince people to see things your way, if you took the high road. You have a large audience across the country, and could reach and influence a lot of people. But you don't, because of this stupid shit.

It's just the same 20 Seattle homos that post ass-kissing comments in your shitty little slog. Get over yourself.

Posted by The Devil | June 26, 2007 10:04 AM

Your argument for the means sums up to 'the ends really justify the means.' I agree with the ends. Kids deserve good parents, and I don't know how someone's twisted thoughts on religion manage to cloud that obvious truth. You'll keep posting these stories, but I don't think they convince anyone any more than AIDS rates among hetros would convince some religious nut that gay sex was okay. The fact that there are bad straight parents out there doing horrendous things is not going to convince anyone who thinks that gay couples can't be parents. I think it would be much more convincing to post stories about unwanted kids waiting for adoption or suffering in foster care. Equally upsetting, but a lot more to the point that kids are being denied good parents by someone foisting their religious beliefs where they're not wanted (and probably constitutionally not allowed).

As you say, it's just distressing to read these stories about kids your child's age. In the end, you're convinced that it's effective and warranted. I guess I hope that you're right, but I feel as though it just feeds into this repulsive cable news phenomenon of Nancy Grace taking the high moral ground while making a fortune regaling on the details of the murders of pregnant woman. You are not some ghoul profiting off these stories, but she would similarly find a justification for what she's doing if she were ever required to defend her slimeball 'journalism'.

Posted by vegetable lasagna | June 26, 2007 10:07 AM

The power of Christ compels you!

Posted by Carollani | June 26, 2007 10:09 AM

I dunno, kinda sucks having to be scarred with that shit just because you want to keep up what's going on around town. Like you say, we're all with you anyway. I don't think it's worth bringing us down.

Posted by chris | June 26, 2007 10:12 AM

Yesterday, I learned that guitarist Rod Poole was murdered in LA. A man stabbed him outside of some burger place, then the stabber's girlfriend kicked Poole in the head after he'd collapsed, all in front of their 4-year-old son...after finishing their Mother's Day meal.

Yet another recent story about some really shitty parents, with a long history of violence:

Posted by Jon | June 26, 2007 10:13 AM

@12 - "I think it would be much more convincing to post stories about unwanted kids waiting for adoption or suffering in foster care. Equally upsetting, but a lot more to the point that kids are being denied good parents by someone foisting their religious beliefs where they're not wanted (and probably constitutionally not allowed)."

I think this statement is right on the money. You could find stories that inform people about gay parenting and cast it in a good light, instead of trying to cast hetero parenting in a bad light. You'll never win anyone over with these gruesome and tragic posts.

Posted by Stanley's Zipper | June 26, 2007 10:18 AM

I fully sympathize with your goals with the ECDAMAF series, but it concerns me a little that hyping stories like this is indirectly helping nurture our nation's collective case of Mean World Syndrome. This nation is already entirely too prone to moral panic over this or that due to media overexposure of gruesome tabloid crime.

Posted by tsm | June 26, 2007 10:19 AM

By all means please keep posting the "Every Child Needs...." articles.
I am collecting them all to show to homophobes and other bigots when they spew their lies about queer parents.

Posted by rich | June 26, 2007 10:21 AM

No post. That judge should be removed for incompetence.

Posted by lawrence clark | June 26, 2007 10:22 AM

as the parent of a 7 month old I know the personal raw shock that these news items bring.

keep posting them till the system changes. America is a nation based on equality. If the system keeps denying this, if citizens need it shoved down their throats, so be it.


Posted by nbp | June 26, 2007 10:27 AM

I love you Dan. You're an important voice.

(one of the 20 seattle homos).

Posted by jhell | June 26, 2007 10:32 AM

Dan, keep 'em coming. You are right on - so long as we hear how bad gay parents are for children, we need to keep getting these stories out and in context. Don't give in to the whiners on here who are afraid of being "scarred" by reading about the harsh reality of the world.

Posted by Jonathon | June 26, 2007 10:36 AM

Dan, I accept your apology -- sort of. I still don't agree with your tactics, and I agree with 12 that they won't get anywhere with the people who need to hear about good gay parents. But I am glad to hear you acknowledge the painful side of this. And like I've heard so many times before, it's your blog and you'll post what you want to.

So many of these stories are about domestic violence. Can we have a simultaneous PSA about DV to go along with the one about straight sexual orientation not being a prescription for good parenting? That would be relevant, too.

For now, if you're reading this in WA and feeling unsafe or controlled in your relationship, you can call the DV hotline at 800-562-6025. You don't have to be ready to leave, just talk about how to keep yourself and your children safe and alive. Nationally, the hotline is 800-799-7233. Good luck.

Posted by bitch on heels | June 26, 2007 10:38 AM

I'm going to have to give up Slog because of these posts. It's not you, it's me -- I'm eight months pregnant and the hormones are doing a number on me, and *every single time* I run across one of your "every child" posts it sends me into a weeping fit and a tailspin that lasts most of the day. Of course there's no reason you should tailor your content to the needs of crazy pregnant ladies, but I'm sorry to lose this blog, which I have otherwise enjoyed.

I do think the relentless assault of gruesome horror that all of us face from the daily news is not at all good for our collective psyche, and I wonder if maybe you would consider dialing it back a notch, like maybe not putting the most horrifying details right up front but instead behind a cut? (I can't just skip the post because you tend to put the worst parts in boldface type, and my eye is involuntarily drawn there.) The one about the girl who was literally boiled alive still wakes me up at night, and it seems really unnecessary to force these things on your readers. I don't believe a person (even a non-crazy-pregnant-lady) can read about child torture every single freaking day and not come out a little harmed by the experience.

Posted by Shannon | June 26, 2007 10:39 AM

I think both are needed. Dan's more visceral approach and some kind of similar list saying what gay parents are doing right. Attack on two sides...

Posted by Abby | June 26, 2007 10:45 AM

Yeah, Shannon, ignorance sure is bliss.

Posted by seattle98104 | June 26, 2007 10:49 AM

I'd like to mention that I'm a straight Canadian--I've never even been to Seattle--and I'd be thrilled if the rest of my days might be spent kissing Dan's ass through comments on the Slog.

These posts are important--they matter. They mean that instead of just getting that sick feeling in our collective stomach when we read the details we think about the real implications of the hateful rhetoric being spewed out daily, and further, we think about what must be done starting now. It isn't enough to tear up. It isn't enough to hug your children tighter.

Dan, your words are so encouraging. You put ol' lady Landers to shame. Thank you for your column. Thank you for your blog. Thank you for standing up to say what the world needs to hear. You give me hope.

Posted by Jaime-Leigh | June 26, 2007 10:49 AM

Now, you see Dan. You're scaring off your readers and tormenting innocent pregnant ladies with this garbage.

But at least your cult of "20 Seattle homos" has another opportunity to stroke you off. And that's really the whole point of your Slog, isn't it Dan?

Posted by The Devil | June 26, 2007 10:53 AM

I don't always agree with your tactics, Dan, but on this one I do. No one else calls them out. You seem to be the only one countering the ECNAMAF rant. You may be preaching to the choir on here but the choir is then forwarding to their "head in the sand" Christian friends and family who only say privately "they give Christians a bad name, we're not all like that" and say nothing publicly.

So I say keep it up. And to those who don't like the posts I say... It's not like they aren't clearly titled. If you don't like it then when you see "Every Child, etc" by Dan Savage you know not to keep reading. Enjoy your sand. Hope you're able to breath down there.

Posted by monkey | June 26, 2007 10:56 AM

Uh...dude. I can't believe people are talking about a "license to have children" in response to THIS post, of all things!

Get your heads out of the sand and look at the world around you! If the right to raise children was regulated, do you know who would be guaranteed to NOT qualify? GAYS AND LESBIANS. And probably non-Christians, next. Oh, and those pesky people of color.

Jesus. Why do people express such blind faith in the system with the same breath they're using to complain about the evils it's perpetrating?

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 10:56 AM

So you'll keep preachin' to the choir as long as there are assholes. You'll keep feeding the hate-wank against straight people, and Christians, as long as there are backwards ignant stupid judges.

Sounds like an endless war of terror to me.

(There I go with that hot-button over the top rhetoric. Darn effective, innit?)

Posted by Lee Gibson | June 26, 2007 10:59 AM

@12 has it right. I've said it before and I'll say it again (to no one's surprise): These posts do not prove the point you are trying to make Dan. The stories in them are NOT related to the issue.

If you were arguing that stupid, violent, crack-addicted rednecks should not be allowed to have kids, then you'd be on track. But there is nothing in these stories that says if gay people were allowed to be parents in all states by all people and laws, microwaved babies would be a thing of the past.

Tell us please, what is the connection between fucked up rednecks who boil babies and the idea that gay people can be good parents? It seems to me that your posts are more likely to be arguing that Hets can not not be good parents.

In short, you're making a specious argument with these posts. Anyone who believes that gay people should not be allowed to be parents can poke holes in it big enough to drive a mac truck through because the content is not related to the debate. You'd serve your cause SO MUCH MORE if (as suggested above) you highlighted stories of kids who want to be adopted but aren't next to stories of loving, stable gay people who desperately want to be parents but are getting turned away.

Basically Dan, I think you're getting sidetracked by your feelings when you see these terrible stories. As you say, you imagine awful things happening to your kid (god forbid) and stop thinking clearly... Take a moment and step back from these posts and the argument you're making... really examine what you are trying to say and then look at how you're saying it. You're a smart guy, you edit a newspaper, I bet you'll see that you're not telling the story you pitched.

Posted by Charlie | June 26, 2007 11:00 AM
33 addition, allow me to add my voice to those protesting the inclusion of gruesome horrors in the Slog. Ahem:

Dan, I don't like that there are bad things in the world. Since we all know that ignoring them is the best way to deal with them and make them go away, stop making it hard for us to do that.

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 11:02 AM

Have to agree with the devil here. Your arguments are about as effective as the baseball team you've got out there, Dan. Go back to the dildos and chocolate anus posts.

Posted by ny stranger | June 26, 2007 11:03 AM

Charlie, you're a dumbass. An emotional argument like this is one of the most effective that can be made against the idea that straight parents are somehow intrinsically better for kids than gay ones. You're trying to poke holes in it because it bothered you for some reason, you're just being too much of a pussy to say why. Are you disturbed by the images, or is your "straight pride" somehow offended?

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 11:07 AM

@33 - My objection has to do not with a desire to ignore gruesome horrors, but with the fact that they receive disproportionate media attention already. We're already assaulted endlessly with stories like this in the media, such that Americans perceive the world around them as being far more hostile and gruesome than it really is. It becomes unhealthy in huge doses. Dan's using sensationalism to sell a political point - a good one, IMHO - but the effects of this kind of media treatment don't end there.

Posted by tsm | June 26, 2007 11:11 AM


Dude, you're missing the point in a big way. You don't get the connection? (Yes, that is sort of obvious.)

You're trying to see some grande parallel but you're failing to connect the dots.

This is the point:

1. Children need more than a mother and a father.

2. The capacity to raise children /= one parent has a penis and the other a vagina.

3. Worthy gay couples are denied the right to raise children by virtue of the fact that they are gay, while criminally unworthy straight couples are granted the right by virtue of the fact that they are straight.

4. This is insane logic.

5. Children need more than a mother and a father. Children need love.

The point is that this is wrong, what is happening is wrong, and the conservative/fundamentalist rhetoric would have you believe that being a good parent is somehow inherent in heterosexuals and not possible in homosexuals. That's all. How is that not clear?

Posted by Jaime-Leigh | June 26, 2007 11:13 AM

I am neither a resident of Seattle, nor a homo, but I have become addicted to reading SLOG - especially you, Dan. I wish your voice was included in mainstream news. I'd love to watch you kick CNN's ass.

These stories are horrific, but it makes me wonder: Has this brutality always happened or do we just hear about it more often now? I grew up in the secrecy of my parents' generation and not even the doctor who treated me on several occasions ever reported the obvious abuse. I don't know if reporting these stories will do anything to change the "seemingly normal, happy, married, traditional, straight" men & women who perpetrate murder and abuse but I'm grateful to you, Dan, for printing them and for all the good you do. I wish there were more people like you running this country.

Posted by winterwoman | June 26, 2007 11:13 AM

Lee - "hate wank" against straight people? Boy, are you missing the point. Dan's perfectly respectful of straight people - which is quite a big thing considering how much crap gay people have to take from certain straight people. He's just decided to point out that if they wanted to, gays COULD fight with the same dirty tactics that anti-gay hatemongers use.

The good side always needs more assholes if it's going to win. Thanks, Dan, for being good, honest, brave, and a complete sonofabitch.

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 11:16 AM


You're right, and yet you're so wrong. Gruesome news is covered disproportionately, and it is done in a disgusting, fear-mongering fashion that only seems to promote this voyeuristic 24/hr news culture. That said, that isn't what is happening here. Dan is using these stories to make a point (albeit with a heavy hand) and, more importantly, to deconstruct the idiotic argument that heterosexuals are capable parents because they are heterosexual. Crucify Nancy Grace, write a stern letter to Fox, but don't hold Dan accountable for a crime he isn't committing.

Posted by Jaime-Leigh | June 26, 2007 11:24 AM

In the 80's, homosexuality was underground, and homophobia was pretty much taken for granted. In the 90's, gays were suddently everywhere - on tv, in the military, at our workplaces, playing guitar for The Who - and mainstream attitudes softened.

Visibility is the most effective weapon you have. It's a lot easier to persecute a faceless abstraction than a an actual human being. Accordingly, Dan, I think your book and articles about parenting help the cause more than this series. So do news articles about gay dads(complete with cute pictures) like the one you linked to.

Maybe you should start a series called "Gay Family of the Week".

Posted by Sean | June 26, 2007 11:24 AM

Do NOT apologize. If people want to remain blissfully ignorant, they can scroll right past these posts. But these posts NEED to be made.

Posted by sam | June 26, 2007 11:25 AM

Of course these posts don't support the point--and who cares? I still find them highly entertaining. Of course, I really don't like children. Or parents.

Now, if we could get some posts about torturing cats, and how that proves the superiority of dogs, I'd really be over the moon with happiness.

Posted by Goober | June 26, 2007 11:25 AM

"Tormenting pregnant women"? Wow. I'm so glad to see patriarchal frail women stereotypes perpetuated on this blog.

If you, as a woman, are having so much trouble with your hormones that you can't stop crying at the drop of a hat, you have one of several choices: talk to your doctor, change your lifestyle and avoid "trigger" factors until your chemicals are back to normal, or just accept that this is how you're going to be. I experience this problem myself and I sympathize, but I know that it's not the responsibility of the world to censor itself for my sake. I'm a fucking adult and I take responsibility for myself.

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 11:26 AM

There you go, Dan - "Gay Family of the Week". Though, I suspect something like that isn't quite sesationalistic enough for you. It also doesn't do much for the little "pissed-off homo" niche you've carved for yourself.

Posted by The Devil | June 26, 2007 11:34 AM

Goober - so, you find posts about murdered children amusing because you don't like kids? Congratulations on being the biggest fucktard posting here. I hope you lose your testicles in a freak liquid nitrogen freezing accident.

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 11:34 AM

"Congratulations on being the biggest fucktard posting here."

Yes, Lauren from Seattle. Yes you are.

Oh, were talking about someone else....nevermind. Carry on.

Posted by The Devil | June 26, 2007 11:37 AM

Dan makes a point with these posts of his and anyways, top level SLOG posts are is playground... Dan, keep fighting the Good Fight with the weapons you have, not with the weapons some readers with more delicate sensibilities wish you had.

Posted by Phenics | June 26, 2007 11:39 AM

Lauren @44:
Lighten up. The nice pregnant lady explicitly says that it's her personal problem, and she doesn't expect the posts to stop on her account, and that she is avoiding Slog precisely because these posts are a trigger for her. Having some hormone issues yourself perhaps?

Posted by Sean | June 26, 2007 11:39 AM

""Pissed-off homo' niche'"? My god, you're an entitled little asshole! Last time I checked, the homos had DAMNED GOOD REASON to be pissed off!

You're just jealous because you don't get to be a member of an oppressed group. Kinda like the kid who's jealous of the attention his cancer-patient sibling is getting.

Do the world a favor: go see a shrink and sort out your mommy-didn't-pay-attention-to-me issues before you think you have some business ridiculing someone for fighting for their rights.

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 11:43 AM

1. I wasn't replying to the pregnant woman. I was replying to the brave knight who fancied himself her defender.

2. Even though I wasn't replying to her, she clearly felt Dan should feel compelled to tone it down or she wouldn't have bothered to complain, would she?

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 11:46 AM

Wait a minute -- there are only 20 Seattle homos?

Posted by Fnarf | June 26, 2007 11:50 AM

So I finally! get the reasons that Christians hate The Devil: He's an asshat moron.

And for the record, Dan is beloved in Seattle (and many other places, obviously...) by all types of people you backward ass fuck.

Posted by Original Monique | June 26, 2007 11:50 AM

I just want someone, somewhere, to find me an example of a gay family who adopted their children and then slew them all in a fit of murder/suicide. I have yet to ever hear of such a case. Yet, in nice, "normal", heterosexual families, that happens so goddam often that it barely even rates a bit in the local news.

People who go to the lengths that a gay couple - particularly men - have to go to to become parents rarely seem to treat their children like used Kleenex. On the other hand, for those for whom popping out pups is a routine yearly occurrence, might as well toss 'em in the microwave when they're not little and cute anymore.

Having been reared by lesbians back in the Very Closeted Era - and having turned out basically fine despite not having had that all-important Daddy Figure - I appreciate these posts, myself, because they point out the cognitive dissonance of those who truly believe that having an odd number of innies and outies is the only qualification parents require.

Posted by Geni | June 26, 2007 11:50 AM

Hey, you can't talk to me like that - I'm the devil damn it! And how do you know if I'm oppressed anyways?

Just because Dan's a homo doesn't mean he needs to act like a dramatic crybaby all the time. But the original point was that these posts detract from his argument and are just plain ignorant. They just are. Hammering out 20 comments in this thread won't change that, Lauren.

Posted by The Devil | June 26, 2007 11:51 AM

"Congratulations on being the biggest fucktard posting here."

Yes, Lauren from Seattle. Yes you are.

Oh, were talking about someone else....nevermind. Carry on.

Well, this is the most pathetic and hamhanded attempt at a clever turn-around insult I've seen in at least a month. Got anything else?

I don't much care what a asshole like Goober thinks of me or himself. What I do care about is the fact that we live in a world where someone can make a statement like that and not get called on it.

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 11:54 AM

I was waiting for one of you to bring up the Benoit story, one of the saddest, sickest tales in the history of a sad, sick wrestling business (and that's coming from a guy who grew up a fan!)... and it sucks to me that it's only perceived place on Slog is as exhibit A in discussing the merits of Every Child Needs a Mother and Father.

One of the wrestling business' hardest working and supposedly honorable men (in a business is dishonorable, dirty bastards) went home and killed his son and wife before hanging himself, right before a major show, literally out of nowhere. Can we discuss that a little bit, plz?

Posted by Gomez | June 26, 2007 11:56 AM

I have no problem with these posts. They get the point across that "heterosxuality doesn't guarentee good parenting". If you want to get across the point that "gay parents are just as good (if not better) than hetero parents", do something like the gay family of the week idea.

I personally think the latter would do more towards changing opinions, but it's probably a moot point anyways on this blog since you are preaching to the choir.

Posted by Julie | June 26, 2007 11:57 AM

You don't hear about gay parents slaughtering their children because nearly all parents are heterosexual. Seriously, outside of Seattle and San Fran, what do you think the overall percentage of gay parents is? Probably somewhere between zero and one percent.

On another note, have you ever wondered if all that rain in Seattle is really God pissing on all of you?

Posted by the Devil | June 26, 2007 11:58 AM

(in a business OF dishonorable...)

What the hell is with all my typos lately?

Posted by Gomez | June 26, 2007 11:58 AM

It pisses me off that I once say an "every child" post that referenced the pain of the family who birthed premature babies who were dying...and it was implied they were bad parents because of their unwillingness to abort.

1. It was a cheap shot at a tragic situation.

2. If people want to wave their pro-choice flags they have to realize it means everyone has a choice, no matter what that choice is.

3. The intent of the parents was not to do harm.

I know it wasn't a post with your byline, but it was your agenda being borrowed by another on the slog.

I think there is a great deal of hyprocrisy in the world and I think it's great that you point these things out. I think situations are sickeningly tragic and sad. I hope that more is done about them sooner rather than later.

But I walked away with a very bad taste that day and I haven't been able to shake that one.

Posted by Nay | June 26, 2007 12:02 PM

I think Goober was indulging in something called "morbid humour." Cancer jokes, anyone? If not, hey, I'm sorry. But we all crack terrible, tasteless, tasteless jokes sometimes. Or often. Or .... constantly.

Posted by Gloria | June 26, 2007 12:09 PM

Hey, you can't talk to me like that - I'm the devil damn it! And how do you know if I'm oppressed anyways?

Just because Dan's a homo doesn't mean he needs to act like a dramatic crybaby all the time. But the original point was that these posts detract from his argument and are just plain ignorant. They just are. Hammering out 20 comments in this thread won't change that, Lauren.

Well, that insult is an improvement. Good for you. For the record, I'm hammering out 20 posts because I'm unemployed, pathetic and bored. Have fun with that. If you need more fodder, I'm also passive-aggressive, have bad foot odor and a recurring facial skin condition, and I bite my nails.

Maybe you are a member of an oppressed group. I'm just guessing that if you were, we'd be seeing some form of argument as to why your oppressed group is more oppressed than the gays. Perhaps we still will.

Dan doesn't act like a dramatic crybaby. He's got a good lot in life and he knows it. That doesn't make his cause any less important.

And these posts don't detract from his argument. What they detract from is polite discourse. They should. I'm sick of people thinking that being impolite is the greatest of sins and that being nice is somehow synonymous with being affective.

He's simply telling the truth as he experiences it. Are you a parent? Can you imagine what it feels like to have that kind of devotion to a child? Can you also imagine what it feels like to be told, over and over again, that you are unfit to raise your child while being bombarded with media examples of the "fit" class of parents doing things to their kids that chill your blood to even think about?

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 12:09 PM

"I think Goober was indulging in something called "morbid humour." Cancer jokes, anyone? If not, hey, I'm sorry. But we all crack terrible, tasteless, tasteless jokes sometimes. Or often. Or .... constantly."

In that case, I was obviously doing the same when I suggested he should get his balls frozen off.

Have a sense of humor.

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 12:16 PM

@35, Lauren, you couldn't be more wrong about my argument.... I don't need to try and poke holes in Dan's argument, it is just one big whole. Yeah, reading about people killing babies bothers me. Dam right it fucking bothers me, but that's not why I am trying to stop this line of reasoning.

Since you asked so politely, I want Dan to stop posting these kinds of stories as an argument for allowing gay people to parent because it is a dumb reason that has no relation to the debate and I think Dan's platform could be used to advance actual sensible arguments for gays to be parents. That clear enough for you? Or are you going to continue insulting me now and putting words in my mouth? Anything else I need to explain or do you think you can find someone else to try and intimidate by calling them names?

@37.... yeah, you're absolutely fucking right. the system is wrong. Insanely fucking wrong. I could not agree more. the point should be made that gays should be allowed to be parents. But Dan is NOT making that point. He is making the point that there is a fucked up system in place for protecting children from abusive, insane parents.

My question is: How does 500 children killed by parents in het relationships make the point that loving gay couples should be allowed to adopt? The two are different issues.

Yes, kids need loving parents and that does not mean male and female parents. But saying that one kind of parental structure CAN be bad doesn't mean that another kind WILL be good.

@54 - Just wait. One day when gay parenting is normal and accepted, and it'll happen, these fucking things will be done by dykes and queers as well as hets. People are fucked up. Plain and simple... that's one of the reasons I think this is an idiotic argument for Dan to make.... There are less stories in the media about gay parents boiling babies than straight parents because there are fewer gay parents. Duh.

Posted by Charlie | June 26, 2007 12:19 PM

mmmmm....foot odor. Is it an aged cheese aroma, or more of a fishy stink. I've been writing in to Dan about my foot odor fetish for years now, but he never wanted to address it. Maybe he was too busy with these slog rants.

At any rate, I understand where Dan is coming from and his points are good ones. But this is the wrong way to address these issues. It is not about who is right or who is wrong. It is simply a matter of bad communication.

Posted by The Devil | June 26, 2007 12:20 PM

Geni @ 54:

I just want someone, somewhere, to find me an example of a gay family who adopted their children and then slew them all in a fit of murder/suicide. I have yet to ever hear of such a case. Yet, in nice, "normal", heterosexual families, that happens so goddam often that it barely even rates a bit in the local news.

This is the crux of why these posts are important. As someone else stated way above, all you need is one gay couple doing any of these things to their children, or even less than this (say, verbally abusing their children but not injuring them) and the Christianists would hold it up as a shining example of why gays shouldn't be parents. So I view this as a pre-emptive turnabout.

Posted by Matt from Denver | June 26, 2007 12:22 PM

Why are we even discussing this crap? Dan is pointing these stories out to debunk the myth that mother/father parented families are inherently pure compared to LGBT parented families. What is so wrong about pointing out hypocrisy and blatant falsehood?

Yes, these need to be posted, until bigots quit with their nonsense about how gay/lesbian parents are somehow unfit and that a heterosexual couple is somehow inherently fit to raise kids.

So can we stop bickering about it, and focus some more on the respected niche entertainer who cancelled an important appearance at an important show so he could go home, strangle his wife, smother his son and then hang himself without any sort of explanation or warning signs?

Posted by Gomez | June 26, 2007 12:38 PM

Keep up the posts Dan, it raises awareness. And no, I'm not one of the "20 Seattle homos kissing Dan's ass." I'm straight, live in Orange County, California and I love Dan Savage.

Posted by clarity | June 26, 2007 12:41 PM


You're right on the money in the first two paragraphs.

Your final point is way off base, though. His wife filed a restraining order and began divorce proceedings saying explicitly that she feared for her own and the minor child's safety. She later retracted the court filings. Based on this knowledge and the resulting situation, one can only assume that this is a classic case of spousal abuse. Those are your warning signs. As far as explanations go--does it really matter? Are explanations of any value now? They're all dead. It would be nice, however, if the niche market to which you refer (and in which he worked) would stop eulogizing him like he was a fucking war hero.

Posted by Jaime-Leigh | June 26, 2007 12:46 PM

Steroids make you do crazy shit, Gomez. Does that story really sound all that unbelievable to you?

But you're right, let's get back to discussing the important Lauren's foot odor. So, hey, what do you say we hook up some time Lauren? And maybe you can refrain from washing those aromatic tootsies between now and then, eh? :p

Posted by The Devil | June 26, 2007 12:50 PM

Ryno @ 7 says, "Don't apologize. The clincher for me is that the other side wouldn't think twice about howling bloody murder should a gay parent do anything even remotely this bad."

Being a dreaded hetero, I guess I must be "the other side" in this little equation Ryno has cooked up. Gee, there's no divisive behavior there, eh?

Regardless of that, I howl just as loudly as gay parents when true equality is being hindered or trounced by mainstream society, when abuse is perpetrated against innocents. Does my voice count for less, Ryno? Would you rather that heteros just not join you in your quest for equality? Because right about now I'm thinking you, whether straight or gay, should not be raising ANYbody's children if that's your perspective.

Would still love to see a few successful gay parenting stories in the Slog, Dan.

Posted by OddlyEnough | June 26, 2007 1:08 PM

@59: It rains here to keep people like you out. *Oh no! Not water! Waaaaahhh!*

And if anything, the rain is tears from Zeus, crying cause no one worships his imaginary ass anymore.

Posted by Original Monique | June 26, 2007 1:19 PM

One of the main principles of minority influence is the minority disrupts the established norm and produces doubt and uncertainty in the mind of the majority. These posts do this - they draw attention to what happens to some children with a mother and father, disrupting the white bread fantasy of a nice mom and dad raising good kids and no one ever getting hurt.

These posts may not answer the questions, and they may not explain *why* gay parents should be afforded the same rights as straight, but they do question a misconception of the majority. That is the point. This isn't the only thing Dan is doing to advance the cause, it's just one facet of it - yes, it's the loud, shocking facet that doesn't get invited to parties, but it plays a role.

Posted by Rebecca | June 26, 2007 1:20 PM

CNN headline:

"Steroids found at wrestler's house of death"

Posted by elswinger | June 26, 2007 1:23 PM


Posted by Suz | June 26, 2007 1:29 PM

I agree with @65. The point is that you are losing when your argument is that the end supports any means. That's the logic of these horrible people who go to military funerals with 'God hates fags' signs. The stunt becomes the point and the meaning is completely lost.

I guess if the argument against gays as parents is that they are going to slaughter their kids, then these are valid posts. If the argument is that the won't be good parent, then I think it would be more effective to focus on loving families and kids who are suffering waiting to be in a family like that or suffering abuse due to ignorance. For me, that's where these religious fuckwads are so obviously exposed as frauds who really have no genuine concern for the interests of kids. Who, as always, are simply using religion to collect and wield power.

I just think that any means necessary is a slippery slope to a lot of misinformation and bigotry. I realize these events happened, but when the 'news' falls into the category of idle gossip and out of the realm of usuable and actionable, then it's just sensational and gross (i.e., Nancy Grace).

Posted by vegetable lasagna | June 26, 2007 1:46 PM

Chris Benoit, like just about every other wrestler that came before him, has been doing heavy amounts of steroids since the 90's. Why didn't he do something like this before now? Why aren't there many more horrific incidents like these?

It's too easy of a copout to say, 'Oh, steroids, okay, nm.' There has to be at least one other unique factor at play.

Posted by Gomez | June 26, 2007 1:53 PM

I've changed my mind.

At first, I was upset at you, because it seemed you were gloating. But you are right--we need to show people that a loving gay couple beats a fucked up straight couple any day.

Keep them coming. I may not be able to read them, but keep them coming. But also forward them to these prejudiced judges.

Posted by prometheusnox | June 26, 2007 1:55 PM

70. Well, there you go, that would probably explain it.

And yes, the eulogies aren't very tactful given the news, but keep in mind a lot of these guys making these eulogies have idolized this guy for 15-20 years. It's kinda hard to do a 180 in a day after 15-20 years of thinking a guy is awesome.... not that it makes it acceptable, but I can see why they say what they say.

Posted by Gomez | June 26, 2007 1:56 PM

"In that case, I was obviously doing the same when I suggested he should get his balls frozen off.

Have a sense of humor."

Well, good to know we're on the same hilarious page then.

Posted by Gloria | June 26, 2007 2:13 PM

Don't stop posting these, Dan. They're also a great illustration of the plank/splinter story from the christian big book of fairy tales. (apologies to fairies everywhere)

Posted by Lauren | June 26, 2007 2:34 PM

I'm with you, Dan. Altough I'd recommend that you limit these tales to cases of abuse by heteros who are married, since if they aren't married the religowackos can say it was because they were living in sin.

Posted by east coaster | June 26, 2007 2:53 PM

Thanks Gloria.

Lauren: you're a vacuous, empty-headed, humorless cunt. And I'm quite happy in the certainty that you turn that rage inward on yourself, as well you should.

Posted by Goober | June 26, 2007 3:14 PM

Well, if it counts for anything, I was raised by a couple of batshit crazy Christians in the Midwest in the 70s and 80s and I would have killed for other parents, especially when they have the kind of love for Dan has for his kid and not getting the shit beat out of you for looking guilty.

As it is, while I believe these posts do have a negative reinforcement value, there should also be positive reinforcement with stories that add to the pro-gay parent argument. Conditioning is more effective with positive reinforcement, after all.

Posted by John Thomas Ryan | June 26, 2007 4:12 PM

Dan, I can't say I know how much this issue bothers you. Because I'm straight, and nobody's ever reflexively dismissed my validity as a parent merely because of what I do in my own bed. But I have to say that

(a) I still believe that reading details of rape and torture and murder every day does not make us more sensitive, it makes us less, and

(b) You are preaching to the choir: everybody at Slog already believes that gay parents aren't any better or worse than straight parents, and

(c) if you are going to "keep posting these horrifying stories so long as asshole judges... asshole presidential candidates... asshole religious groups... etc etc etc" then you will be posting these horrifying stories until the end of time. Ask black people if they're not still targets 40 years after the civil rights act.

Posted by Big Sven | June 26, 2007 4:37 PM

Lauren: I'm having trouble understanding your condescending attitude toward those of us who don't want to read these posts. You seem to think that there is some sort of virtue in "staying informed". Why? Do you imagine that sating your curiosity is in some way helpful to the victims? You accuse us of choosing "ignorance"--do you really imagine that we live in a la-la-unicornland where the reality of child abuse never touches us? I'd ask you to consider for a moment that those most likely to find these posts "triggering", as you say, would be the large percentage of Americans who are themselves survivors of abuse. And the truth is that whether you choose to read or not is a morally neutral decision; neither does jack to make the world a better place.

To clarify, I don't think Dan should quit making these posts just to accomodate those of us with delicate sensibilities. I *do* think putting the most gruesome details behind a cut, instead of in boldface type, is an ideal solution that would keep everybody happy. Right now those of us who for whatever reason cannot deal with these posts have only one choice: stop reading Slog. If the gory descriptions were after the jump, then we could easily skip them, while those of you who enjoy them would lose nothing. It seems to me like a very easy compromise.

Posted by Shannon | June 26, 2007 4:45 PM

I would like to second Shannon's suggestion of asking Dan and his minions to adopt a policy of putting the details behind a cut. I really, really don't want to stop reading the Slog.

Posted by Big Sven | June 26, 2007 5:26 PM

Let's try one more analogy. I'd agree with Andrew Sullivan that amazing strides were made on the issue of gay marriage, which seemed like a pipe dream 5 years ago. It's not over, but there's been progress.

I would guess that most people were won over by stories of committed relationships and what can happen when one doesn't have rights as a surviving beneficiary. I may be wrong, but I haven't heard anyone crediting the posting of stories of domestic abuse and murder in straight marriages. That's not to say that the divorce rate and people's experience with wedded bliss didn't factor in. Spousal abuse is pervasive, but did it prove to anyone that gay couples should be granted the right to get married?

They're getting the right because it's patently unfair to deny it, not because they're equally qualified to do it badly. People have problems, and all that's being proven here is that. Not that straight people have problems. Not that gay people don't. Just that some people are monsters. A daily dose of that lesson in the name of equal rights under the law.

I'm not sensitive, I just don't enjoy the exploitation of the pain of others for entertainment purposes. No matter what the end is, that's all that's going on here. Add whatever b.s. moralizing message, it is what it is.

Posted by vegetable lasagna | June 26, 2007 5:50 PM

While the logic might be faulty, the point remains the same. And who says this is an argument governed by logic, anyway?

After all, right-wingers claim all the time that children raised by same-sex couples are inherently fucked up, just because they are. The importance of love, respect and fairness rarely comes into play, and the gender of the parents looms large.

If these posts make the claim that children raised by hetero parents are endangered just because they are, then it's taking a page from the same illogical book.

Should these posts stop? Nope. It's important to bring attention to child murder and abuse, because our collective outrage can be powerful and mobilizing. Should the het = bad equation stop? Well, until those dykes and queers have the same opportunity to deep-fry their own bio or adopted offspring, who's to say Dan doesn't have a point?

The vetting process for adoption is thorough, including psych exams. The application for biopregnancy is a penis and a vagina. No application. No interview. No statement of intent. Just regular, God-lovin', hetero sex.

There are lots of great, straight parents out there, but children still sometimes are borne to terrible, fucked-up hets. There are a lot of great, queer parents out there...and the fucked-up, terrible queers are eliminated from the adoption process right quick.

Keep posting these. The argument against queer parents is nonsensical, the headlines get people reading, and the point of the whole experiment is to push people's acceptance of the status quo.


Posted by Kaitlyn | June 26, 2007 5:57 PM

"My question is: How does 500 children killed by parents in het relationships make the point that loving gay couples should be allowed to adopt?"

It doesn't make that point.

The argument that there are children mistreated by straight parents is not an argument for gays to be parents.

Pointing out the many examples of children maltreated by straight parents, destroys the justification most frequently given to prevent gays from being parents. Shattering the justification is just one of many useful approaches to the real issue.

The statement "every child needs a mom and a dad" is used as a bludgeon to prevent gays from being parents. It doesn't admit of any other requirement (loving, intelligent, capable family? nope... just straight parents, one of each gender).

The real issue isn't just that gays should be allowed to adopt, but that it's kids that are important. They need a loving, thoughtful, and capable support structure to grow up well. The specific configuration of gender and orientation in that structure is substantially irrelevant.

There is no compelling argument for restricting the upbringing children to exactly one mother and one father. That argument made alone, is dangerous and exposed as shoddy thinking by the scary examples that Dan is pointing out.

"Every child needs a mom and a dad" is a distraction, mean spirited and small. Once that distraction can be put aside, we can get to creating a rational societal and governmental support structure for families.

Posted by Ryan | June 26, 2007 6:05 PM

Just to clarify things, I'm a straight, celibate Canadian, who loves Dan Savage's news media.

The man is engaged in a non violent battle for his rights in fairly hostile environment (remember I come from a land where gay marriage was legalized by the Federal Government and was left to die as an issue by the "right wingers" of the country, whereas in your country, you have Ann (fucking dumb bitchwad) Coulter...). As such, some fire, irrational and potentially non-sensical as it may be, is required in the fight.

That said, in the long run (sometimes a rather longer run than we would like) Americans seem to get it right.

Dan doesn't just get stroked by homos in Seattle and thanks to the web, his voice, which would otherwise be smothered is heard everywhere where anyone cares to listen.

Carry on brave Crusader!

The Wet One

Posted by The Wet One | June 26, 2007 6:48 PM

Ann "Fucking Dump Bitchwad" Coulter, I like it.

Posted by Darcy | June 26, 2007 8:20 PM

Oy. "Dumb," even.

Posted by Darcy | June 26, 2007 8:26 PM

I think the tally is something like:

give-me-more-dead-baby-stories - 50

stop-the-sensationalism-and-focus-on-good-gay-parents - 20

you-wanna-fight-I'll-give-you-a-fight (what were we talking about, again -- feet?) - 19

complete non-sequiters - 5

So who's winning? Oh, right, the gay parents.

Posted by bitch on heels | June 27, 2007 2:39 AM

These stories are quite sad, but they are useful reminders that the anti-gay parent bigots out there are clueless.

I forget if you caught this story or not; it doesn't exactly fit because it's about the tragically stupid behavior of two single mothers in Pittsburgh earlier this month:

Local mothers facing manslaughter charges in the fire deaths of five children.

Completely disgusting.

Posted by Laurie D. T. Mann | June 27, 2007 7:45 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).