1. image: Download

    amydentata:

epochryphal:

dopegirlfresh:

oh shit, son.

[image: New! From Dan Savage’s “It Gets Better” Campaign: a tub of “I Can’t Believe It Got Better!”  Made with White Privilege!  White-r + Male-r.  0% Class Awareness.  Adopt Babies + Go to Europe!]

ACCURATE

    amydentata:

    epochryphal:

    dopegirlfresh:

    oh shit, son.

    [image: New! From Dan Savage’s “It Gets Better” Campaign: a tub of “I Can’t Believe It Got Better!”  Made with White Privilege!  White-r + Male-r.  0% Class Awareness.  Adopt Babies + Go to Europe!]

    ACCURATE

    (Source: kfffunk)

     
  2. I’ve got a piece of advice for Dan Savage: stop spewing biological essentialisms about the “nature” of men or women. For as much as I agree with his conclusions about needing a plurality of socially-supported options for committed partnerships within our culture, his anti-feminist rhetoric about what women need— which offers a pretty overwrought rendering of sexual freedom as a male need, and “Mr. Darcy”(seriously?) as a female need— is straight-up stupid and completely at odds with any progressive sexual political agenda.
    — 

    Married, With Infidelities - Readers’ Comments - NYTimes.com

    And this comment totally gets to the heart of my problems with Savage, as much as I love his advice. He doesn’t really understand women sometimes.

    (via gold-notebook)

    The above commentary is also something I don’t get. Women are just people. Their minds are not different from anyone else’s. I don’t think his problem is that he doesn’t understand women; I think his problem is that anyone not like him (and even a bunch who are) is turned into a very simple organism with maybe one or two character traits, of which he thinks not much. Women and men and everyone else want the same basic stuff, and anyone who generalises otherwise needs to forget about genitals for a while. (Cassian)

     
  3. I had a little Dan Savage rage going on, and a convenient rainbow-themed photo, soooo…

     
  4. Asexual musings

    So I was just pondering the very sex-normalising nature of Dan Savage’s advice column lately. I used to love reading it because of his quirky and slightly aggressive tone, and was pretty much not noticing the morals of his advice, because I basically wasn’t looking for advice. Then I started to take in what he was saying, prompted by my friend, who’d said DS had been very transphobic in a few posts.

    I carried on reading for a while, but it became apparent that there’s a “tone” to his writing that is some good things and some not so good. He’s definitely not able to relate to or give advice to asexual people, trans people or straight people. When he tries, he kind of ends up talking like aces, trans*people and straight people are odd at best, and freaks who don’t deserve love at worst.

    So that’s context. The point I’m getting to is, in a lot of his columns, there’s a lot of people writing in to say that they’re not so interested in sex, or downright asexual, and they are worried that their partners will leave them even though everything else about their relationship is okay. They feel that their dislike of sex is going to ruin the love because it causes this imbalance, and I can understand that. Sometimes it’s about whether or not to tell their partner. All of that isn’t what makes me sad.

    DS’s column is probably one of the few places online that also shows people who have a much higher sex drive wanting to not hurt or badger their lover(s) for sex. We never ever see people worried they’re having or wanting sex too much, and I think that’s because we’re in a phase where sex-positivity is making a comeback, and that’s awesome. But that means we’re told that sex and wanting sex, is normal and right, but not wanting sex is freakish and abnormal.

    I’m not sure where this was going, but. Being worried that your sex drive is too high for your asexual partner is just as valid, and should be seen just as much, as worrying that your lack of sexual desire is too little for your sexual partner.