Dan Savage’s hypocrisy

(This is the first,  in what may be 2 or 3 posts on this issue. This is a general response, next I will respond to the rest of his speech, and perhaps another post to deal with some of the responses that liberals have had to the completely justified outrage that conservatives are feeling about this.)

I spent most of the day, yesterday, trying to figure out how to start this post.

I’m usually quite witty (if I do say so myself), but I’m honestly just very angry about this. Wit has deserted me in favor of mental equivalent of “HULK SMASH!”

Now let me preface this with something that I don’t talk about often.

I am not a Christian. Let’s get that out of the way so that I won’t be categorized as a “religious bigot”, “butthurt Christian”, “conservative fundie”, or any of the other terribly tolerant language that the liberal blogs have been categorizing anyone who takes issue with Savage’s language as.

Yes, that’s right, I’m personally pro-life and extremely conservative in most other ways…but I don’t believe that Jesus Christ rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, ate the last supper with the 12 apostles, or died on a cross and rose again 3 days later.

I do believe that the Bible has some good stories and some good lessons to teach, just as I believe about many religions. I believe that it shows a unique look at a society (or a religious history, for the Jewish people, if you are looking at the Old Testament) and it must be read in the context of its time, as a form of history. (Something even my mother who, unlike my father, can be a bit of a Biblical literalist, freely admitted in a conversation with me last night).

The Bible, similar to most other philosophies and religions, has some bad parts as well. The large portion of the Old Testament is history and some truly awful shit has gone down in every society/religion at some point.

Now, having said that.

What Dan Savage said in his rant (yes, that’s what I categorize it as. Lot’s of anger, no real substance) just made him a bully and destroyed his credibility as a promoter of “anti-bullying” views.

Yes, calling a holy book, or part of it’s contents, “bullshit” is sometimes accurate (I often say similar words about things that about the Q’ran) however, saying the things he said in a pre-planned speech, to a group of high school students, was bullying. This wasn’t said in the heat of the moment, when he was angry at someone coming after him personally, this was pre-meditated and there is no way he did not know that many students and teachers in that crowd would be Christians. That would be a statistical improbability.

Then, of course, he took it a step further and called those who did the mature and walked out (rather than I would have done, even as a non-Christian, which would have been stand up and take him to task…or possibly pop him in the mouth…depending on my mood) “pansy assed”. Which, unless I’m wrong, is a pejorative used to refer to effeminate gay men.

Oh the irony inherent in a man who hates the bullying of gay people, using a gay slur to insult others.

Maybe he should have just called them faggots and gotten it over with.

I have an intense problem with hypocrisy. It is the one thing that will automatically make me lose all respect for you.

I may not like the views of certain groups (PETA, liberals in general, the Taliban, etc) but if you can remain consistent in your views and actions, I can at least respect that you know your own mind…even if I can’t stand the way your mind works.

It is the hypocrisy of Dan Savage’s views that kills me.

You cannot truly know yourself or your beliefs if you believe that bullying of one group is wrong, but bullying of some other group is fine…because you don’t like them.

You can’t be believed or respected if you say “It Gets Better” from one side of your mouth, while the other side says that you wish an entire political group was “just fucking dead”.*

You can’t demand respect for gay people, while using gay slurs to categorize those that you don”t like.

You can’t demand change and respect from people, when your actions against those who disagree with you is to make up vile uses for their name.

Not only has he shown his hypocrisy, but Savage has once again shown his sheer lack of intelligence (Yes, I think you are unintelligent if you can’t hold consistent beliefs, it isn’t hard to do) and his immaturity.

Is this really the person the gay community wants to represent the great future that is in store for young GLBT people?

How can life “get better” if the role model for a better life is so filled with anger, so bitter and hurtful to others?

You can’t fight fire with fire Mr. Savage. Perhaps it was your intent to live up to your name, but you are doing a great disservice to those you claim to be trying to help.

As Perez Hilton said** “Can’t we just be good and kind to each other? Isn’t faith in love and honesty and kindness all any of us really need?”

That is what will get our world where it needs to be, not divisive language and anger towards anyone who doesn’t fall in line with your ideal.

 

*As a gay conservative/Republican I would like to know what that means for me. Should I just die to make Savage happy? Or does life get better for me too, since I’m gay?

**Yes, I was shocked that he was one of the people to speak out about this.

Wait…this logic falls apart somewhere.

Yeah…I’ve never liked PETA much, but this…this is a new low. This is an ad that PETA is trying, emphasis on trying since no one will actually place the billboard anywhere, to run in Florida.

A planned advertisement from the animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that implies a shark-attack victim deserved his injuries has had the effect of chum in the water for the group’s critics.

The proposed billboard features a great white shark biting into a severed human leg, with the jarring slogan, “PAYBACK IS HELL. GO VEGAN.”

The advertisement was in response to a fisherman who lost a leg in a shark attack while spear fishing off Anna Maria island.

Charles Wickersham, 21, survived the attack, but remains hospitalized with a severe wound on his left thigh.

“With sharks in the news, we thought it would be a good time to bring up the fact that sharks are not actually the most dangerous predators on the planet – we are,” PETA spokeswoman Ashley Byrne told the News.

“Americans alone kill 12 billion fish for food every year.”

“We are glad that Mr. Wickersham will be okay,” says Byrne. “We hope that after this painful and horrible experience he and other fishermen will consider the pain that fish feel and we hope they will consider taking up another pastime.”

- NY Daily News

What? Just…what?

A man was fishing, for food…which y’know, humans have been doing for thousands of years…and somehow it’s his fault that a shark attacked him and we should feel bad for the shark!? I’m not saying we should blame the shark, the shark was doing what sharks do, but Wickersham was doing what humans do as well. He didn’t deserve to be attacked by a shark, nor should it be seen as some sort of warning towards fishermen or hunters.

Now I’m going to start making some generalizations, let me know if you think I’m wrong about these generalizations in any way whatsoever, but I don’t foresee any issue with them.

Members of PETA believe that animal life is, at the very least, as important as human life and that is why, therefore, animals should not be killed for food or any other reason.

But, I would venture to guess, that most (if not all) members of PETA are also pro-choice.

Now I’m not arguing about whether or not abortion is or is not moral or whether it should or should not be legal. That is not what this blog is about.

What this is about is the fact that PETA logic is severely flawed, because they believe that animals should not be killed, but potential human life is not as important as the life of an animal.

This is further borne out through yet another generalization.

How many members of the protest of the execution of Troy Davis were also members of PETA? I can’t give you an exact number, but I venture to guess that quite a few members of PETA protested his execution.It seems like the sort of thing they would be involved in, tangentially.

So the life of a convicted felon is worth more than the life a potential child, but still less than an animal? Or the same as an animal? or more? Sorry, I’m not a member of PETA and the last time I met one I alienated her by telling her “no thanks, I already eat tasty animals. I don’t need to join an organization about doing so.” so I’m a little iffy about the order of importance that living creatures fall into in this organization.

So for the sake of ease, I’m going to go with this.

Fish > Convicted Felon > Fisherman > Fetus

Can you see an issue with this? I don’t know, maybe it’s just me seeing a slightly illogical bent to this view of the world.

 

I could understand the PETA’s stance (understand, not agree) if they were consistent, if PETA believed that ALL life on the planet was equally important, but they don’t. I can understand a person’s position, if not agree with it, when they have their priorities straight even when their beliefs aren’t necessarily consistent, but PETA also fails in that respect.

My only question is what part of PETA’s beliefs don’t fall apart under light scrutiny?