Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsThursday, September 9, 2010
Homo Conservative Women Turn On Barren Fag Hag
Posted by Dan Savage on Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 8:00 AM
When male conservative pundits do not understand what female conservative mothers understand about what threatens America, the conservative movement has a real problem. Underscoring our point, Sarah Palin, mother of five and mama grizzly extraordinaire, strongly opposes same-sex marriage and supports a federal ban on same-sex marriage. (Interestingly, Ann Coulter, who is not a mother, had no problem being a headline speaker at Homocon, the gathering of homosexual conservatives, who, among other things, support same-sex marriage.)
Only childless single women support marriage equality. Please make a note of it, lesbian moms.
Many think that marriage is in the first place about procreation. Red State Feminists beg to differ. As we have argued on our website before, the purpose of marriage is to make true, equal, loving partnerships between the two halves of humanity necessary for humanity to continue: men and women. And in establishing those partnerships and in ensuring equality between men and women in those partnerships, marriage ensures that all new human beings will learn from their earliest days how to live in peace, equality, and love with the other half of humanity and will look forward to forming such loving, equal heterosexual partnerships in the future themselves.
Domestic violence, child abuse, incest, divorce—these social ills do not touch the lives of married heterosexuals. All children born to married heterosexuals live in homes where peace, love, and equality reign. That's why every child deserves a mother and a father.
Now it is true that many cultures have perverted marriage, so that in some areas of the world, such as Afghanistan, marriage is more like domestic slavery. But that is the antithesis of what marriage is supposed to produce in a society, and we can condemn those oppressive marriages as being a real perversion of what marriage was meant to be and to do.
RSF's revisionist history is so brazen and transparent that I can't keep the sarcasm up. It's too early.
For the record, RSF: Marriage was "like domestic slavery" for most of its history—and that includes its history in our area of the world. Women were domestic slaves right here in the west, right here in the United States. It wasn't until relatively recently that American women could vote, own property, gain legal custody of their own children, bring rape charges against their husbands, etc., etc., etc. The people of Afghanistan are practicing and preserving "traditional marriage."
If anything it's egalitarian marriage—marriage as the union of two legal equals, the institution of marriage as heterosexuals redefined it, marriage as currently practiced in the United States—that represents a "perversion" of what "marriage was meant to be and to do." It's a happy perversion, a beneficial and just perversion, a perversion in the "serious deviation from what is considered to be orthodox" sense of the term. But it's a perversion nonetheless.
Which means you're perverts too, bitches.
1
Great rebuttal Dan.
I've always said, the BASIS of marriage can easily be found, written in the vows. You know: "To have and to hold," " To cherish from this day forward," "In sickness and in health," "For better or for worst" and "Til death do us part." These things don't require a penis opposite a vagina.
And, I've not known of one, single person that has ever stated their reasoning to marry was to start having babies. Maybe there are some, but I've never known of any.
I've always said, the BASIS of marriage can easily be found, written in the vows. You know: "To have and to hold," " To cherish from this day forward," "In sickness and in health," "For better or for worst" and "Til death do us part." These things don't require a penis opposite a vagina.
And, I've not known of one, single person that has ever stated their reasoning to marry was to start having babies. Maybe there are some, but I've never known of any.
2
More:
"Consider “Doogie” Howser and his same-sex partner, who have bought eggs and rented a womb in order to have twins. They are saying that they are under no obligation to allow their children to have a mother, that it is all right to purposefully and premeditatedly exclude from their children’s lives the love of a mother. Mr. Beck, this is the height of inhumanity. This is erasure of motherhood by men who see no value in women."
Wow, these guys are good. They have reframed gay men adopting as "men seeing no value in women." I think one of the problems liberals/democrats have with fighting this sort of thing is that we make the assumption that to blatantly lie and misinform is, first of all, wrong, and second, would never pass muster, when that's obviously not the case. All the sheep who listen to this will hear is: "Gay men hate women so much they don't want children to have a mother!" These conservatives are like a cancer.
"Consider “Doogie” Howser and his same-sex partner, who have bought eggs and rented a womb in order to have twins. They are saying that they are under no obligation to allow their children to have a mother, that it is all right to purposefully and premeditatedly exclude from their children’s lives the love of a mother. Mr. Beck, this is the height of inhumanity. This is erasure of motherhood by men who see no value in women."
Wow, these guys are good. They have reframed gay men adopting as "men seeing no value in women." I think one of the problems liberals/democrats have with fighting this sort of thing is that we make the assumption that to blatantly lie and misinform is, first of all, wrong, and second, would never pass muster, when that's obviously not the case. All the sheep who listen to this will hear is: "Gay men hate women so much they don't want children to have a mother!" These conservatives are like a cancer.
3
I actually do know someone who got married for the sole purpose of having babies. She said it was time to have children and the guy would be a good provider. Their marriage was a sham from the beginning and 30-some odd years later it's still a sham. These two live in different states (literally & figuratively) and never divorced because her job has better benefits than his. And she has the gall to be against same-sex unions because of she claims to believe in the 'sanctity of marriage'.
4
@3--it is amazing how people can not see the hypocrisy in their own lives. How many straight men and women are on their second or third marriage and still see gay marriage as an attack on the sanctity of marriage?
My cousin got married, put his wife through school, then she divorced him (which seems to be like a very expensive escort type relationship) and yet he still sees marriage as a holy thing between a man and a woman.
My cousin got married, put his wife through school, then she divorced him (which seems to be like a very expensive escort type relationship) and yet he still sees marriage as a holy thing between a man and a woman.
5
@3 - Well, you know at least one more person than I do that would marry for such a reason. I'm sure it does happen though.
But, lets face it, for someone to marry under such a sham (as you stated) AND then be against same-sex marriage because they believe in the 'sanctity of marriage,' is one fucked up individual.
Just my $0.02 worth...
But, lets face it, for someone to marry under such a sham (as you stated) AND then be against same-sex marriage because they believe in the 'sanctity of marriage,' is one fucked up individual.
Just my $0.02 worth...
6
Meh. Anti gay marriage types really have no defensible arguments so they just spew whatever comes to mind. They've already lost. They know they've already lost, but they just don't want to admit it. Their arguments always fall back to the same things: religion and their personal feelings of squeemishness, and they're more than willing to allow religious beliefs and personal dislikes become laws; laws which, by their very nature, cannot stand up to Constitutional review. It's sad. They're sad. But they won't last forever.
7
I'm active in the feminist movement and one of my pet hates is the 'You're not a real feminist unless you agree with us on (insert issue here)' line. But really, I'll make an exception for these cause-hijacking whiners. Women's rights are intimately bound up with LGBT rights. To demand one without the other is hypocrisy. These people claim they don't agree that marriage is primarily about procreation then go on to trot out that NOM sentiment about the 'beautiful two halves of humanity necessary for its continuation' coming together in union. 'Necessary for humanity's continuation' basically = primarily about procreation. And marriages primarily for procreation have historically turned women into brood mares. And claiming that humanity is basically split into two separate halves along distinct gender lines? Ain't nothing feminist about that.
Any woman who claims that gay men hate women because they don't want to raise children with a woman has a problem, probably derived from valuing herself entirely by the presence of her uterus.
Any woman who claims that gay men hate women because they don't want to raise children with a woman has a problem, probably derived from valuing herself entirely by the presence of her uterus.
10
It's the cognitive dissonance that makes it hard to take them seriously. They seem to be saying that marriage is such an important function of society that the state has an interest in limiting personal freedom. Then they fail to advocate for an end to divorce where couples have children for the same reason.
They put the concept of marriage on a pedestal as some sort of bastion preventing the fall of civilization--but in the real world, many marriages fail. And they fail to insist on making divorce illegal to protect children because they know that advocating for an end to divorce for straight people, in order to logically defend against same sex marriage, puts them squarely in the camp of extreme nut jobs.
They put the concept of marriage on a pedestal as some sort of bastion preventing the fall of civilization--but in the real world, many marriages fail. And they fail to insist on making divorce illegal to protect children because they know that advocating for an end to divorce for straight people, in order to logically defend against same sex marriage, puts them squarely in the camp of extreme nut jobs.
12
gosh Dan you are one bitter sad little puppy.
your parents must have had the shittiest marriage in the universe......
your parents must have had the shittiest marriage in the universe......
13
2
When 2 men pay a woman to have a baby and take that baby away from her to raise they are not "adopting".
They are taking the baby away from it's mother.
See how that works?
Let us help you:
Do they want the baby to have a mother?
Demonstrably not.....
(you wouldn't be reframing 2 gay men snatching a baby as "gay men adopting", would you?)
When 2 men pay a woman to have a baby and take that baby away from her to raise they are not "adopting".
They are taking the baby away from it's mother.
See how that works?
Let us help you:
Do they want the baby to have a mother?
Demonstrably not.....
(you wouldn't be reframing 2 gay men snatching a baby as "gay men adopting", would you?)
14
@13 So whenever a straight couple adopt a kid and don't have any contact with the mother they were snatching a child?
Also how is it "snatching a child" if the mother gives them the child of her own free will? They aren't going into the hospital maternity ward and just grabbing a baby in case you were wondering.
Also how is it "snatching a child" if the mother gives them the child of her own free will? They aren't going into the hospital maternity ward and just grabbing a baby in case you were wondering.
15
"Domestic violence, child abuse, incest, divorce—these social ills do not touch the lives of married heterosexuals. All children born to married heterosexuals live in homes where peace, love, and equality reign. That's why every child deserves a mother and a father."
Dan how do you feel the fact that homosexuals domestically abuse each other twice as much as heterosexuals,as shown in UCLA studies, impacts children placed in those homes.
Violence against partners is known to also affect children in the home.
Dan how do you feel the fact that homosexuals domestically abuse each other twice as much as heterosexuals,as shown in UCLA studies, impacts children placed in those homes.
Violence against partners is known to also affect children in the home.
16
Homosexuals More Prone to Partner Violence Heterosexuals
Monday, August 30, 2010
A series of high-profile cases of homosexual-perpetrated domestic violence has sent shock-waves through Massachusetts communities in recent months:
1. On February 16, a Suffolk Superior Court jury convicted Nicole Chuminski on two counts of second-degree murder, following a fire that killed the two daughters of her lover Anna Reisopoulos. During a heated argument between the two, Chuminski reportedly fell into a fit of rage. A few hours later Chuminski returned to her partner’s apartment and hurled an acetone-laden firebomb into the front door.
Sophia and Acia, ages 2 and 14, were burned beyond recognition, so dental records were needed for positive identification.
2. On March 29 Annamarie Rintala of Granby, Mass. was found dead by strangulation in the basement of the house she shared with her domestic partner Cara. Cara had been previously charged with domestic violence after she struck Annamarie in the back of the head with a closed fist.
3. Eunice Field of Brockton, Mass. found herself on the losing end of a bitter ménage ŕ trois. So on August 9 she marched to the apartment of Lorraine Wachsman. There she grabbed a serrated knife and stabbed Wachsman in the back and neck. Dispelling any doubt about her intentions, she then penned a note admitting she had killed Waschsman “for taking away the love of my life.”
Ms. Field is now being held without bail pending a September 3 court appearance.
Monday, August 30, 2010
A series of high-profile cases of homosexual-perpetrated domestic violence has sent shock-waves through Massachusetts communities in recent months:
1. On February 16, a Suffolk Superior Court jury convicted Nicole Chuminski on two counts of second-degree murder, following a fire that killed the two daughters of her lover Anna Reisopoulos. During a heated argument between the two, Chuminski reportedly fell into a fit of rage. A few hours later Chuminski returned to her partner’s apartment and hurled an acetone-laden firebomb into the front door.
Sophia and Acia, ages 2 and 14, were burned beyond recognition, so dental records were needed for positive identification.
2. On March 29 Annamarie Rintala of Granby, Mass. was found dead by strangulation in the basement of the house she shared with her domestic partner Cara. Cara had been previously charged with domestic violence after she struck Annamarie in the back of the head with a closed fist.
3. Eunice Field of Brockton, Mass. found herself on the losing end of a bitter ménage ŕ trois. So on August 9 she marched to the apartment of Lorraine Wachsman. There she grabbed a serrated knife and stabbed Wachsman in the back and neck. Dispelling any doubt about her intentions, she then penned a note admitting she had killed Waschsman “for taking away the love of my life.”
Ms. Field is now being held without bail pending a September 3 court appearance.
17
Perhaps Dan could explain to Eunice that cheating makes her relationship with Lorraine more special. She doesn't seem to understand that.....
"Eunice Field of Brockton, Mass. found herself on the losing end of a bitter ménage ŕ trois. So on August 9 she marched to the apartment of Lorraine Wachsman. There she grabbed a serrated knife and stabbed Wachsman in the back and neck. Dispelling any doubt about her intentions, she then penned a note admitting she had killed Waschsman “for taking away the love of my life.”
"Ms. Field is now being held without bail pending a September 3 court appearance."
"Eunice Field of Brockton, Mass. found herself on the losing end of a bitter ménage ŕ trois. So on August 9 she marched to the apartment of Lorraine Wachsman. There she grabbed a serrated knife and stabbed Wachsman in the back and neck. Dispelling any doubt about her intentions, she then penned a note admitting she had killed Waschsman “for taking away the love of my life.”
"Ms. Field is now being held without bail pending a September 3 court appearance."
18
@16 Wow, three isolated cases totally mean all same sex partnerships are abusive! Holy leaps in logic, Trollman!
19
18
And yet Dan posts three "youth pastors" (one of whom is always gay...) and Slog cries for religion to be abolished.....
And yet Dan posts three "youth pastors" (one of whom is always gay...) and Slog cries for religion to be abolished.....
23
Dan's Bitter Bile Vomit:
"Domestic violence, child abuse, incest, divorce—these social ills do not touch the lives of married heterosexuals."
Actually, according to the UCLA study, they affect 12% of married heterosexual families with children.
And 40% of single parent families. Maybe every child DOES deserve a mother and a father. Dan's sarcasm notwithstanding.
Domestic violence afflicts 30% of homosexual homes.
TWO and a HALF TIMES the rate of heterosexuals.
too bad Dan is all out of Sarcasm.
love to see what he could do with that cherry.....
"Domestic violence, child abuse, incest, divorce—these social ills do not touch the lives of married heterosexuals."
Actually, according to the UCLA study, they affect 12% of married heterosexual families with children.
And 40% of single parent families. Maybe every child DOES deserve a mother and a father. Dan's sarcasm notwithstanding.
Domestic violence afflicts 30% of homosexual homes.
TWO and a HALF TIMES the rate of heterosexuals.
too bad Dan is all out of Sarcasm.
love to see what he could do with that cherry.....
24
The word "Heterosexual" is a relatively new and modern term. It was coined at the turn of the 20th Century to describe men and women who have sex for pleasure and not to procreate or because they were married. Heterosexuality was considered a mental illness...And yes, a perversion too.
26
Are gay people more prone to domestic violence? I'd like to know. Anyone read anything, or have any personal experiences they would like to share?
27
Such an obtusely ahistorical view of the world is of a piece with the mentality that "true" Christianity is the version that was invented by southern evangelicals about 70 years ago.
28
They are entitled to their beliefs but unless they can come up with a justification that goes beyond religious preference or appeals to tradition, there is no reason their views should have the force of law.
29
I sometimes wonder if the unregistered troll who thinks up such clever screen names isn't actually Loveschild born again.
30
@26: In a very quick search of academic literature, I found 2 scholarly studies that found rates of domestic violence for same gender and opposite gender couples were about the same. A third article reported a much higher rate of domestic violence for same gender couples, but this was the narrowest of the studies and only looked at a sample with high rates of substance abuse. But don't trust me, or anonymous trolls -- any good librarian can show you how to do your own research!
31
From a scholarly peer-reviewed journal: "Findings from existing research reveal many similarities between same-gender and opposite-gender IPV [intimate partner violence]. The prevalence rate of approximately 25% to 35% of all partners experiencing IPV is comparable (Gunther &Jennings, 1999), thus of the 19 million same-gender couples (Island & Letellier, 1991), about 5.7 million report being either a victim or perpetrator of IPV. Also similar are the types of violence reported including sexual, physical, financial, and emotional abuse (Merrill & Wolfe, 2000; Renzetti, 1992). Common is the spiral of violence—the violence increasing in frequency and severity over time (Tully, 1999)." Journal of Interpersonal Violence, February 2005, vol. 20:no. 2 (149-154)
33
@32 Read 30 and 31, although we all know how you hate to have your "facts" challenged by the facts.
34
Reading these comments made me think of a funny story.
I once was clicking with this guy (i'm a straight woman) and while we were in the sharing each others' fantasies and past romps stage, he started telling how much cuckold fantasies wound his crank. That turned into a story about how his previous girlfriend indulged him and that he was sorry to break up with her because he had wanted to marry her...
...which then lead to the caveat: upon marrying they could no longer indulge his fantasy because, as he put it, "marriage is sacred." The same woman, with whom he'd already watched having sex with another dude!
As a kinky girl myself who is highly educated, warm and kindhearted, I have spent years battling virgin/whore bullshit with men. But this was the first time I'd encountered someone so internally inconsistent that the whore turned into the virgin upon marriage. Holy cognitive dissonance.
Never underestimate the degree to which people can rationalize their own behavior to conform to their religious indoctrination.
I once was clicking with this guy (i'm a straight woman) and while we were in the sharing each others' fantasies and past romps stage, he started telling how much cuckold fantasies wound his crank. That turned into a story about how his previous girlfriend indulged him and that he was sorry to break up with her because he had wanted to marry her...
...which then lead to the caveat: upon marrying they could no longer indulge his fantasy because, as he put it, "marriage is sacred." The same woman, with whom he'd already watched having sex with another dude!
As a kinky girl myself who is highly educated, warm and kindhearted, I have spent years battling virgin/whore bullshit with men. But this was the first time I'd encountered someone so internally inconsistent that the whore turned into the virgin upon marriage. Holy cognitive dissonance.
Never underestimate the degree to which people can rationalize their own behavior to conform to their religious indoctrination.
35
@32: Page 6 of this report suggests that homosexuals are more likely to have been the VICTIMS of domestic abuse. Due to the wonderful mechanism of closeting, this does not imply that they were abused by other homosexuals.
@2: Gay men see no value in women's private parts, is what.
@2: Gay men see no value in women's private parts, is what.
37
35
right.
all those poor downlow cheating closeted faggots beaten by their outraged wives....
pitiful.
just pitiful.
right.
all those poor downlow cheating closeted faggots beaten by their outraged wives....
pitiful.
just pitiful.
38
This pissing match is stupid, pointless and cruel.
Abusive individuals can be found in every walk of life. Individuals who abuse seek to use violence to manipulate and control others; abuse is not limited to an ethnic, socio-economic, religious, lack of religion, gender, or sexual orientation. That is one thing working with individuals in Domestic Violence situations taught me. And, it makes using statistics, like Domestic Violence which effects all groups, to justify discrimination and unequal treatment under the law both sick and sad.
The Constitution does not give a right to marriage to any. Not even heterosexuals are given a right to marriage in the US Constitution. Yet, marriage has been allowed to become intertwined with the government and in doing so it has created a "wrong" to deny it to some. The intertwining of marriage and government permits discrimination. There is no undoing what's already been done, heterosexual couples aren't going to surrender those federal benefits, and the only thing that makes any sense at all at this point is to make it available to everyone.
To continue to argue that discrimination is justifiable is mean spiritedness, pure and simple.
Abusive individuals can be found in every walk of life. Individuals who abuse seek to use violence to manipulate and control others; abuse is not limited to an ethnic, socio-economic, religious, lack of religion, gender, or sexual orientation. That is one thing working with individuals in Domestic Violence situations taught me. And, it makes using statistics, like Domestic Violence which effects all groups, to justify discrimination and unequal treatment under the law both sick and sad.
The Constitution does not give a right to marriage to any. Not even heterosexuals are given a right to marriage in the US Constitution. Yet, marriage has been allowed to become intertwined with the government and in doing so it has created a "wrong" to deny it to some. The intertwining of marriage and government permits discrimination. There is no undoing what's already been done, heterosexual couples aren't going to surrender those federal benefits, and the only thing that makes any sense at all at this point is to make it available to everyone.
To continue to argue that discrimination is justifiable is mean spiritedness, pure and simple.
39
They say that their viewpoint "isn't about procreation." Then, two fucking sentences later, they go on about how marriage is supposed to be this wonderful institution for "the two halves of humanity necessary for humanity to continue."
So you see, folks, it's not about procreation; it's about procreation. DUH!
I swear, they're getting lazier with their logical loopholes these days.
So you see, folks, it's not about procreation; it's about procreation. DUH!
I swear, they're getting lazier with their logical loopholes these days.
42
Woo Hoo!! As a straight married vanilla male (who reads Dan every day) I finally have a loophole to say I am a pervert too. I was starting to feel left out.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Required Listening: Howard Stern on Ellen, JC Penney, Bullied Gay Kids, Rosie, Santorum, Bachmann, et al by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
State Legislator Testifies That His Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Came to Him from a Commercial for Jack in the Box by Christopher Frizzelle
-
"Let me be the first one to say: My business will refuse to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony," by Republican Representative Matt Shea of the Spokane Valley by Eli Sanders
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
"I don't know if I want to be here [if gay marriage passes]," by Republican State Senator Jay Rodne of North Bend by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (43) RSS