Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Who Will Be "Gay Grinch of the Year" for 2009?

Posted by on Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 10:44 AM

grinches.jpg

Will it be MSNBC's Rachel Maddow? Gay rights pioneer Frank Kameny? Gossipmonger Perez Hilton? Author and activist Wayne Besen? OR WILL IT BE ME? DAN SAVAGE? LICKER OF DOORKNOBS, SPEWER OF SANTORUM, HAVER OF SEX? You can find a list of non-doorknob-licking nominees here. My nomination gets its very own post here! You can vote by emailing Americans For Truth About Homosexuality here.

 

Comments (62) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Matt from Denver 1
I think "haver of sex" is going to be my next blog handle.
Posted by Matt from Denver on December 29, 2009 at 10:15 AM
2
I love they have a Comcast email address.

Real classy.
Posted by Bhamjason on December 29, 2009 at 10:18 AM
3
That "site" is the "winner" of the most "egregious" use of "scare quotes" in a "blog" or "anywhere."
Posted by renbot on December 29, 2009 at 10:23 AM
4
Glen Beck is the obvious gay grinch of 2009.
Posted by rutabaga pie on December 29, 2009 at 10:30 AM
5
What's really sad is that they put somebody as vile as Perez Hilton in the same category as the other people, who are actually pretty cool.
Posted by Brie on December 29, 2009 at 10:32 AM
6
I saya I I hope he likes the SSSSCCCHHHHWAG I am gonna drop off there soon....

ho! ho ! ho!

:}
Posted by dan k. on December 29, 2009 at 10:32 AM
7
So who does watch your kid when you engage in sadomasochistic three-ways romps?

And I think Peter LaBarbera is just jealous and really wants to be a part of a three-way with you and Terry.
Posted by Helvetica Bold on December 29, 2009 at 10:39 AM
itmeantnothing 8
you really have to worry about the right and their poor reading comprehension. every question they ask ("and where was savage's innocent child while he engaged in the two instances of nonmonogamy he had in his ten year marriage?") can be easily answered by the links they provide for their readers. (he and his boyfriend were in another city, so obviously his son was being watched by a babysitter or family member).

i also love that they kept translating things for their readership, like partner = "husband" but only in obnoxious quotes.
Posted by itmeantnothing on December 29, 2009 at 10:40 AM
Matt from Denver 9
@ 5, considering the impact he had on the marriage debate, I'd say Perez belongs alongside the others, even if he neither has their class nor their eloquence. He wouldn't deserve to win since pushing for gay rights is a sideline for him, but name an individual act by the others that had the impact his questioning of Carrie Prejean had, if you can.
Posted by Matt from Denver on December 29, 2009 at 10:43 AM
Heather 10
Even though they not all gay someone should have nominated the voters of Washington State or the Washington DC City Council. Both of them made 2009 a bit less happy for the bigots.
Posted by Heather on December 29, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Carollani 11
How can anyone hate Rachel Maddow?! She's about as menacing as scary bulldyke Ellen.
Posted by Carollani http://twitter.com/carollani on December 29, 2009 at 10:45 AM
Will in Seattle 12
Considering most cable carriers are dropping Fox networks in 2010, I'm thinking Rupert Murdoch deserves Gay Grinch.

Or my brother.

Take your pick.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on December 29, 2009 at 10:45 AM
Will in Seattle 13
Rachel Maddow's sexy ... just saying, @11.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on December 29, 2009 at 10:45 AM
14
Dan, you're so cute. I hope you win.
Posted by eggy weggs on December 29, 2009 at 10:52 AM
15
I love that he links Savage Love and the Santorum definition. Right wing sites are always the best places to find links to sexy titillation.
Posted by Samuel on December 29, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Fifty-Two-Eighty 16
Will, you fucking twit. I put up with your bullshit most of the time wuthout calling you on it, because ypuve kind of become the village idiot here, but just exactly how do you justify that statement? Because one cable company (Time Warner) might drop Fox (and it's by no means a done deal yet), it certainly doesn't warrant a sweeping statement like that.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on December 29, 2009 at 10:52 AM
17
"Considering most cable carriers are dropping Fox networks in 2010"

Oh that's rich.

I would it were so, but you've got to learn how to handle the power of the crack pipe, a bit more reponsibly.

Unless you'd care to tell me different.
Posted by please let it be true on December 29, 2009 at 10:55 AM
18
@13. So sexy. I have a bit of an obsession.
Posted by Canadian nurse on December 29, 2009 at 10:58 AM
Hernandez 19
@17 "you've got to learn how to handle the power of the crack pipe a bit more responsibly" is my favorite unregistered troll comment of the year.
Posted by Hernandez http://hernandezlist.blogspot.com on December 29, 2009 at 10:58 AM
20
I'm with 15. I think this nomination is a great way to get the definition of "santorum" into a community that will use it and spread it around with a lack of irony. It's beautiful! It'll hit the dictionaries in NO time!
Posted by idaho on December 29, 2009 at 11:01 AM
21
woo! i voted!
Posted by Valkyrie on December 29, 2009 at 11:01 AM
22
Also, Dan is hardly the Grinch. He's little Max, with the horn tied around his head, leading the charge (until the charge passes him of course and he hops on the sleigh).
Posted by idaho on December 29, 2009 at 11:03 AM
23
@2 I happen to know two or three gay guys who work for Comcast (which is actually a pretty cool company on the gay rights front, offering DP benefits and the like). While I certainly wouldn't advocate for it, I wouldn't be surprised to see mysteriously bad things happening to this guy's account.

Personally, I'd nominate Karl Rove as the gay grinch of 2009. He's divorcing his wife and thus further destroying the sanctity of marriage after all.

As for being gay, you all saw the goo-goo eyes he constantly made at Bush. Can a career in drag be that far behind? (Ha! Just try and scrub that mental picture out of your brain!)
Posted by Corydon on December 29, 2009 at 11:07 AM
24
LaBerbera: 'Savage claims that allowing heterosexual spouses a “few tightly controlled” affairs would help lower the divorce rate.'

It might, Pete. Other things that might help lower the divorce rate: fewer heterosexuals cheating on each other and fewer heterosexuals being assholes to each other.

And speaking of assholes, LaBerbera again: "(And how appropriate that the winner of Savage’s little nastiness competition was a disgusting by-product of the crime against nature itself, anal sodomy..."

I would guess very few religious guys would be into anal sex as the recipient but I wonder how many of them would just love to slip into their wife's tight little hole?

Posted by Roma on December 29, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Sabotage 25
WHO WATCHES THE KID WHILE YOU AND YOUR GAY HOMOSEXUAL DOMESTIC FAGGOT HUSBAND PARTNER GO AND FUCK SOME RICH DUDE?! INTERNET REPUBLICANS MUST KNOW

I think I'd take contemporary conservatism more seriously if one, even one, of them had the writing ability of my co-workers in the Army who don't even have high school diplomas.
Posted by Sabotage on December 29, 2009 at 11:23 AM
26
@23

Karl Rove in drag - that's easily the most disgusting thing I've ever read about here.
Posted by Ivan on December 29, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Will in Seattle 27
@26 - that's cause he got divorced and came out.

Mark my words, Fox is losing market share worldwide - it's in all the International business news that you don't read, but that's not my prob. They were talking about it in the Euro and Japan zones.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on December 29, 2009 at 12:33 PM
Matt from Denver 28
@ 27: "it's in all the International business news that you don't read..."

How about a link? Just one.
Posted by Matt from Denver on December 29, 2009 at 12:44 PM
Will in Seattle 29
I watch late night TV news and feeds from various friends who don't live in North America. Go buy cable and use the frickin Net yourself, Matt. Various sources, CNBC BBC Bloomberg and then French web sites. I'm not your frickin nanny.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on December 29, 2009 at 12:51 PM
30
Dan, you're a "perversion acivist!" How cool is that?
Posted by texan on December 29, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Will in Seattle 31
He needs to get a Medal for that, texan.

maybe in the New Years Best Of issue?

With a "compromising" pose?
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on December 29, 2009 at 1:01 PM
raindrop 32
Dear sweet delusional Will, take a gander at this Chicago Tribune article posted yesterday: Fox News: Best Year Yet.
Posted by raindrop on December 29, 2009 at 1:02 PM
Matt from Denver 33
@ 29, fail. The rule is, You bring it up, You provide the proof. It is never incumbent upon me to believe you; it is always incumbent on you to prove it.

Just one link. Do your own work for yourself and find that link. Just one.
Posted by Matt from Denver on December 29, 2009 at 1:02 PM
34
Is there any possible way that we SLOG commenters could get together and send the winner a prize? I was involved in Reddit's "send flowers to Helen Thomas" event, and I think we could find something as fun to do for the Gay Grinch of the Year.
Posted by Canadian nurse on December 29, 2009 at 2:41 PM
35
@34, 2 tickets to the International Mr. Leather contest to take pictures of Peter taking pictures of everyone else's peter...or dick or charlie or butch or whatever they call theirs
Posted by step child on December 29, 2009 at 3:16 PM
Will in Seattle 36
Matt, Rupert Murdoch has revenue worldwide.

Fox is hurting. And everyone knows it.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on December 29, 2009 at 5:22 PM
37
Okay so wait...AFTAH is a real organization?

All this time I thought it was fictitious and satirical like The Onion.
Posted by MT3 on December 29, 2009 at 5:36 PM
38
36
willie the fact that no one you know watches fox means jack squat. 40% of Americans self identify as conservative and they don't watch msnbc...
Posted by estupido on December 29, 2009 at 5:47 PM
MythicFox 39
@36 Dude, if you can't even produce a "Let me Google that for you" link, you've already lost this one.
Posted by MythicFox on December 29, 2009 at 6:08 PM
Matt from Denver 40
What 39 said.
Posted by Matt from Denver on December 29, 2009 at 6:46 PM
41
Notice how the "Americans for Truth About Homosexuality"
found ONE example of a murder related to a rejected sexual advance that happens to be homosexual. I would love to see the statistics on murders related to rejected heterosexual advances. The disparity in numbers would be astronomical. The only problem is that heterosexual murders are taken as understandable, and probably aggravated...
Sheesh!
Posted by Rawkcuf on December 29, 2009 at 10:18 PM
brandon 42
I'm sure a FUCKING BABY SITTER watches his kid when he goes on his sadomasochistic sodomy-fests. It's not like he brings the kids along.

"Hey little Johnny, Thats called a riding crop, thats a ball gag and thats called Lube. You play with that while daddy goes and gets fisted by that man with big arms and too much money."

I call for a new Santorum-esque definition for Labarbera. I say it can be the trace fecal matter left on anal beads. Or an surprise dried yellow jizz stain, like "awww damn, that was such a hot fuck last night I forgot to clean up properly and now i have a big ol' labarbera on my matress".

Discuss.
Posted by brandon on December 29, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Baconcat 43
@42: "LaBarbera": where you keep the porn you secretly and frequently utilize but publicly mock.

"Oh dude, remember those horse pictures Frank was laughing and showing us?"
"Yeah, those were hilarious!"
"Yeah, I found them in his labarbera."
"What?! Gross! I didn't think he was into that, I thought he was just joking!"

"I'll just put this 'shopped photo of a nude Dan Savage in my labarbera. Er, in my me-folder."
Posted by Baconcat on December 30, 2009 at 10:52 AM
Griffin 44
I liked the caption on the photo of gays protesting outside a straight church--something about how Christians never disrupt services at gay churches. The last time I went to church without being paid to be there (got to love playing music at weddings) was when dear Fred Phelps was protesting a local mostly gay congregation. Maybe he's not a "real Christian" TM?

I would vote and all, but then they'd have my email address. And I know I could use disposable email, but still. Good luck in the races, Dan.
Posted by Griffin on December 30, 2009 at 10:52 AM
mr. herriman 45
i just voted for you dan but i sure as hell hope these people don't start emailing me around the clock.
Posted by mr. herriman on December 30, 2009 at 11:54 AM
Serenity 46
LOL @43! I love the definition and the examples. I'm in!
Posted by Serenity on December 30, 2009 at 12:07 PM
Vince 47
I think Rachel is Dan in drag anyway. They both have that sexy adam's apple thing goin' on.
Posted by Vince on December 30, 2009 at 12:15 PM
Urgutha Forka 48
So what exactly IS the "Homosexual Agenda?"
Posted by Urgutha Forka on December 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM
Queen of Sleaze 49
Don't you find it odd that you have to vote via email? Why the secrecy? It's not like it's hard to set up a fucking online poll. Shit, there's like 9 million of them on Slog. If they can make one a 5 year old can.

Me thinks this vote has been rigged... They must hate democracy!!! Socialists!!! Socialists!!!
Posted by Queen of Sleaze on December 30, 2009 at 4:00 PM
Will in Seattle 50
I find all you guys relying on tech to have the real skinny on what's going on to be amusing.

All the Net does is make SOME stuff accessible.

Some things aren't. Usually because they don't want it publicly available, you have to subscribe to a paid service to get it, or it embarasses certain people.

Mark my words, Fox is hurting. It's like when Iceland's CDO and other debt wraps were failing, nobody wanted you n00bz to know, because then you'd sell out and crash the bubble. But it still is, was, and will be a bubble.
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on December 30, 2009 at 4:14 PM
51
50 screw the 'real skinny'
I rely on Will shoving his head up his ass, taking a peek around, then coming on slog to update us on what is shaking in the universe.
Posted by ItalianDick on December 30, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Uriel-238 52
The homosexual agenda is advocacy of cultural acceptance and normalization of non-heterosexual orientations and relationships according to the Wikipedia entry.

Leaving me to scratch my head wondering why this is such a terrible thing...

...And apparently our propaganda campaign is well-planned.
Posted by Uriel-238 on December 30, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Uriel-238 53
Will, as much as I hope you're right (that would be an awesome Christmas present), I've learned in the last decade to remain skeptical until I see ol' Rupert having a yacht sale to keep afloat.

Though news of hostile buyout of Fox by Disney or Time-Warner would be tidy nice. Microsoft, even better.
Posted by Uriel-238 on December 30, 2009 at 11:18 PM
Knat 54
@11: Ha! That's the truth. I didn't even realize she was gay until I looked her up on Wikipedia just now to confirm. I just figured she cut her hair short. Y'know, like other prominent news anchors.

Jesus, would you guys just let it go with the Fox thing already? If you wanna know, it's fixed in the business section of Google News as I type this. Here's the link, you crybabies. And an excerpt:

On Wednesday, News Corp. President Chase Carey, in a memo to the company's employees, said, "At this time, it looks like we will not reach an agreement and our channels may very well go off the air."


You have to hand it to Kerry for trying to force the FCC to intervene on Fox's behalf, considering how that very station mauled him in his 2004 presidential bid. (At least, I think that's what it's saying. I'll be honest, I keep catching my eyes glaze over as I read this. I really don't care.)

MOVING ON: I hope Dan gets it, since it would be a great way for the christians to spread that much more santorum (ha ha!). And I have to say, for them doing their best to demonize Dan, that's a fantastic example of how he can really take broken logic and follow it through to its end.
Posted by Knat on December 31, 2009 at 12:34 AM
Uriel-238 55
I think we all know about the disagreement between Time-Warner and Fox, Knat. I think the question here (of which Will is allegedly more knowledgeable due to non-internet-based sources) is the severity of the issue. Either Will is predicting negotiations between Time-Warner and Fox are further from resolution than they appear and the blackout will have far more severe repercussions for Fox, or something more complex is happening on the international scale.

Either way, I had already searched and found that article. All it says is Fox networks in Time-Warner cable service areas may black-out January 1st, perhaps during mid-celebrations. They're likely to pop back up in hours (or at most, days) when differences are resolved. So far, no news source indicates Fox is endangered because of this conflict, or any other, or that this dispute is beyond resolution.

Meanwhile in Comcastsville (i.e. San Francisco) we won't notice a thing.

Since I don't figure Will as a compulsive liar, nor do I suspect the Internet is that blind to significant news, I'd figure he's most likely just attempting to tease SLOG, though I'd rather, in this case, he did have inside info from a Bilderbergian secret society and deigned to actually let us plebes in on it.

PS: I, too, have confessed a crush on Maddow, but I can't imagine her a grinch, even a gay one.
Posted by Uriel-238 on December 31, 2009 at 4:30 AM
Uriel-238 56
Oh, and Baconcat's definition of labarbera for the win.
Posted by Uriel-238 on December 31, 2009 at 4:33 AM
57
49 we are harvesting identities of faggots for the end-times to come
Posted by the apocalyptic avenging angels of the world on December 31, 2009 at 6:00 AM
Uriel-238 58
Is that to go along with your identity lists of Jews, Poles, Slavics, Soviets, Romanies, Africans, Asians, mentally ill, physically disabled and mentally retarded, Allegedly (@57)?

Does that include transgender identities, Allegedly or is that a separate list?
Posted by Uriel-238 on December 31, 2009 at 7:02 AM
Nova 59
I'm scared to email them ... they won't put me on a mailing list, will they?
Posted by Nova on December 31, 2009 at 9:05 AM
60
Perez Hilton and Chris Crocker embarrass me. It's not because of the effeminacy or their bold, outspoken personalities. Dan Savage is outspoken and RuPaul is effeminate, and I adore both of them as representatives of the gay "voice".

It's because Hilton & Crocker sensationalize EVERYTHING and because they do it only for the personal attention it brings. Gays don't have a "gay approach" to every single aspect of daily living. We all brush our teeth and take out the garbage. But Hilton & Crocker make even the most miniscule, banal act into some Holy Gay Crusade of Bravery in the Face of Oppression. They make it impossible to take seriously the very real struggles for equality that LGBT people face. Worst of all, they're just plain bitchy ALL the time.

If I thought they were sincere, I would just tell myself that they are part of the rainbow of life. However, I get the message that the sensationalism is all about milking the 15 minutes. It's annoying and quite destructive to those of us who want LGBT people not to get the shit kicked out them for being effeminate and flamboyant.

If you are a flamer, you go girl, but take a page from Quentin Crisp, not Perez Hilton.
Posted by Marriage Rights NOW on December 31, 2009 at 2:29 PM
Uriel-238 61
They probably will, Nova, but you can expect to be able to unsubscribe from them effectively.

It would be telling if they added you to a dozen other mailing lists as well.
Posted by Uriel-238 on December 31, 2009 at 4:55 PM
Uriel-238 62
Urgutha Forka, Regarding the gay agenda, Barney Frank put it rather well (from Wikipedia):

I do have things I would like to see adopted on behalf of LGBT people: they include the right to marry the individual of our choice; the right to serve in the military to defend our country; and the right to a job based solely on our own qualifications. I acknowledge that this is an agenda, but I do not think that any self-respecting radical in history would have considered advocating people's rights to get married, join the army, and earn a living as a terribly inspiring revolutionary platform.
Posted by Uriel-238 on December 31, 2009 at 5:16 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy