@202(girloftomorrow), who wrote:

However, a lot of us in the trans community do not wish to be labelled as "freaks". If fact, a lot of us work very hard NOT to be considered freaks and we'd much rather just be known as "regular" everyday people that aren't associated with a kink or fetish. We're just born this way, we're just people like anyone else and in fact wish to conform to the binary gender system like the majority.

That is actually a fair point, and a thought-provoking one. If indeed many trans people just want to be 'regular folk' and are OK with traditional binary gender distinctions (and all the history of oppresion of sexual minorities), it would seem you're saying you'd be against "freaks" since you don't want to be seen as one of them. Doesn't that tend to support traditional structures of power and gender stereotypes in society -- the kind that make "freaks" suffer?

It seems what you're saying basically is that the "freak" fight is not your fight: trans people would then basically be all-American traditional people (or within 'traditional' limits of divergence) who don't like "freaks" and don't want to be mistaken for them. Is that so?

@204(ankylosaur)
"It seems what you're saying basically is that the "freak" fight is not your fight: trans people would then basically be all-American traditional people (or within 'traditional' limits of divergence) who don't like "freaks" and don't want to be mistaken for them. Is that so?"

I'm certainly not speaking for all trans people, but I do think that a large portion of us do wish to conform with the existing gender binaries to some degree. Of course just like sexuality, being transgender is a spectrum, so you'll get a good mix of people and how they identify, but from my experience the majority of trans people I know and have met over the years do wish to present in their preferred binary gender.

I also think trans people who do want to fit into the binary should not be made to feel guilty about doing so. Saying it "supports traditional structures of power" and "make freaks suffer" isn't really fair for people who really just want to fit in and be accepted in mainstream society. I don't think we are trying to prevent the "freaks" from having equal rights and in fact, there are other ways of being trans activists besides being totally out in public. For example, I help moderate a popular Reddit site for trans folks in my spare time.

Mr Ven, I hope you managed to sleep well. Believe me, I did not have in the least the intention of making your rest (or your day) any worse! :-|

@205(girloftomorrow), who wrote:

I also think trans people who do want to fit into the binary should not be made to feel guilty about doing so. Saying it "supports traditional structures of power" and "make freaks suffer" isn't really fair for people who really just want to fit in and be accepted in mainstream society. I don't think we are trying to prevent the "freaks" from having equal rights and in fact, there are other ways of being trans activists besides being totally out in public.

Indeed, it is not fair -- neither for people like you, nor for the "freaks" who do suffer from traditional power and gender-stereotype ways.

I don't think you're any more wrong for trying to fit in mainstream society as any traditional hetereosexual (cis-gendered) person is. When we try to fit in and be accepted, we're not trying to hurt others: we're just trying to find a place for ourselves.

But I cannot forget that the place we find for ourselves is often also shared by people who do have prejudice and who do feed stereotypes about gays, lesbians, kinksters, and the trans people on the opposite end of the spectrum to yours. As I find a place for myself in mainstream society, I don't want to forget that, and I do want to argue in favor of those sexual minorities who still suffer stereotyping. From what you wrote, I gather this is also your position (right?) -- so we're actually in agreement here. It's just that fitting in doesn't mean not fighting against stereotypes.

@207(ankylosaur)
"From what you wrote, I gather this is also your position (right?) -- so we're actually in agreement here. It's just that fitting in doesn't mean not fighting against stereotypes."

Yes it does seem like we're in agreement doesn't it? Completely agree that it still is important to "fight the good fight" even if you're fitting in, going "stealth" or what have you. Like I mentioned before, having a strong online presence is a good way to be an activist but also not out yourself to everyone. Even having noteworthy comments on this article is some small kind of activism in the right direction.

Dan is fighting the good fight. Anyone who would call him transphobic is only detracting from the good fight to draw attention to themselves.

Thanks to Ankylosaur for your thoughtful commentary. You're echoing my sentiments exactly. I'd also throw in that I *do* consider myself an allied voice for the trans community, but that as a cis- gay guy, I know what's going to fall flat on the ears of my friends, and that policing the use of words like "tranny" isn't the right way to get folks to stop using it. Social change is not overt. People do not need to "examine" their repressed transphobia (or their racism, or their misogyny, or their homophobia). That mantra must be brought to a firm and decisive end if we are ever to see progress in terms of the social acceptance and safety of queer folks. The fact is simple: attacking the person whose mind you wish to change (e.g.: by calling them a racist, or insinuating you understand something they don't about some -phobia you've diagnosed in them after barely having met them) will fail to achieve a desirable outcome. Every. Single. Time.

@210, I tend to agree with you. I do think that "repressed transphobia (or racism, or misogyny, or misandry, or homophobia) does exist -- there are people who should look into themselves. But I also think that deducing everything from word usage -- if you said 'tranny' you're transphobic, if you said 'faggot' you're homophobic, etc. -- is ultimately self-defeating: it alienates people who are also fighting the good fight.

And I agree entirely with the idea that attacking people rather than engaging them should be a last resource, only to be used with people who are really doing evil and who really can't be reached in other ways. Attacking indiscriminately, glitter-bombing your allies because of words, not contexts or intentions... that's just so sad.

Does anyone else find it a little suspicious that these glitter-bombings seem rather organized and none of them are carried out by actual trans people? I mean it's not a completely insane conspiracy to assume that someone (maybe someone not in any way associated with the trans community) may just have a bone to pick with Mr. Savage, or might benefit politically by his being publicly discredited.

Does anyone else find it a little suspicious that these glitter-bombings seem rather organized and none of them are carried out by actual trans people? I mean it's not a completely insane conspiracy to assume that someone (maybe someone not in any way associated with the trans community) may just have a bone to pick with Mr. Savage, or might benefit politically by his being publicly discredited.

Jesus.

Isn't it time, maybe, to detach T from LGB?

@215, so the fact that they were wrong and ultimately did a disservice to your cause doesn't mean much to you?

Dan, I'm a transsexual woman. I think you've been unfairly scapegoated by the trans community and I'm very sorry that has happened. We have been the victims of the most vitriolic attacks by the right lately. I know I've been feeling a little shell-shocked lately. I hope you can understand there are some people who are constantly ready to pounce, 24/7.

If we are a part of the LGB or not, we will continue to be friends with you, to live near you in the same neighborhoods as you and we will continue to shop in some of the same stores as you. We will work tirelessly along side you as we strive to bury DOMA and we will celebrate with you when it's finally, thankfully gone forever.

I love my gay friends. My two best friends are a married gay couple (Iowa!!). When I first came out, they made a safe place for me to take refuge as my life was blowing up all around me. I openly call them my two daddies, because besides my mother, they are the most important people in the world to me. My love for them doesn't depend on their "G" initial sitting close to my "T" initial. They are my friends and I love them.

This country is slowly but surely becoming more and more educated about trans issues. No one is to blame for incomplete information. Even inside the rest of our own community (the L, G and B) education regarding trans folks is mediocre at best.

If we are included or not in the community, in matters not. The migration of my initial away from the giant gay marquee won't stop my friendships, or my love and solidarity with all of you.

Love,

Zoey

Dan, I'm a transsexual woman. I think you've been unfairly scapegoated by the trans community and I'm very sorry that has happened. We have been the victims of the most vitriolic attacks by the right lately. I know I've been feeling a little shell-shocked lately. I hope you can understand there are some people who are constantly ready to pounce, 24/7.

If we are a part of the LGB or not, we will continue to be friends with you, to live near you in the same neighborhoods as you and we will continue to shop in some of the same stores as you. We will work tirelessly along side you as we strive to bury DOMA and we will celebrate with you when it's finally, thankfully gone forever.

I love my gay friends. My two best friends are a married gay couple (Iowa!!). When I first came out, they made a safe place for me to take refuge as my life was blowing up all around me. I openly call them my two daddies, because besides my mother, they are the most important people in the world to me. My love for them doesn't depend on their "G" initial sitting close to my "T" initial. They are my friends and I love them.

This country is slowly but surely becoming more and more educated about trans issues. No one is to blame for incomplete information. Even inside the rest of our own community (the L, G and B) education regarding trans folks is mediocre at best.

If we are included or not in the community, in matters not. The migration of my initial away from the giant gay marquee won't stop my friendships, or my love and solidarity with all of you.

Love,

Zoey

Sorry, noob mistake.

Z

One of things that I've noted over the years of my colleagues on the Left is that the more ideological and purist ones are infinitely more happy attacking people who agree with them on almost everything than they are attacking people who agree with them on almost nothing. It's easier to bully your friends than your enemies, no? The friends may concede a point to maintain the alliance. The enemies will tell you to f* off.

I am so sorry Dan that you need to deal with this crap. Your a great person who has done so much for the world and have TONS of support from trans people.

I use the word she-male, Guess what my trans women friends use that word. We can use that word if we want.You can empower a word by taking it back-duh! There is a bigger fight out there and your doing it.

Hate within the LGBTQ community is getting bigger and bigger and if this community was smart they would realize that there is strength in numbers. Direct your anger at the people who need it not the ones who are doing amazing things for the world.

Sending you a big hug buddy. Your awesome.
WOOF!
Buck Angel
Pioneering Filmmaker, Speaker, and Advocate

I am so sorry Dan that you need to deal with this crap. Your a great person who has done so much for the world and have TONS of support from trans people.

I use the word she-male, Guess what my trans women friends use that word. We can use that word if we want.You can empower a word by taking it back-duh! There is a bigger fight out there and your doing it.

Hate within the LGBTQ community is getting bigger and bigger and if this community was smart they would realize that there is strength in numbers. Direct your anger at the people who need it not the ones who are doing amazing things for the world.

Sending you a big hug buddy. Your awesome.
WOOF!
Buck Angel
Pioneering Filmmaker, Speaker, and Advocate

Dan,

I really respected your defense - very resonable - until I read your "Update 3". You're basically saying "I talked to a transman, so clearly I'm not transphobic." ...Just like the old "I have gay friends, I'm not homophobic!" excuse that we all cringe to hear from people who are indeed homophobic.

Be careful with this defense, as just because one transperson agrees with you or conversed with you doesn't mean the community at large will - And, you know this, of course, but your paragraph about this conversation with a transman does not reflect that. You may not be transphobic, but if your goal is to spread awareness and promote acceptance of the trans community, consider how you are modeling this as an example to others. Defensiveness isn't always the best way to go about this.

Sincerely,
Casey K, Wisconsin

Dan,

I really respected your defense - very resonable - until I read your "Update 3". You're basically saying "I talked to a transman, so clearly I'm not transphobic." ...Just like the old "I have gay friends, I'm not homophobic!" excuse that we all cringe to hear from people who are indeed homophobic.

Be careful with this defense, as just because one transperson agrees with you or conversed with you doesn't mean the community at large will - And, you know this, of course, but your paragraph about this conversation with a transman does not reflect that. You may not be transphobic, but if your goal is to spread awareness and promote acceptance of the trans community, consider how you are modeling this as an example to others. Defensiveness isn't always the best way to go about this.

Sincerely,
Casey K, Wisconsin

@225: Casey... I included that detail, at that point, because people were jumping down the throats of trans people. The point wasn't that I have trans friends—and I do, but I haven't dragged them into this—but that all trans people are not, as some were suggesting in blog comments, irrational or unreasonable.

Aah, college "activism." Where people are more concerned with appearing "more radical than thou" than they are with actually getting anything done.

If you want to be a real radical, kiddies, go to any town with a large "Occupy" crowd, break into the police station, and replace their pepper spray with silly string. Glittering an obvious trans ally for still using last week's PC terminology rather than this week's PC terminology is not activism. It's pedantic attention whoring. Learn the difference.

@195: Did you make up 'lexophobic'? Because if you did, you're a genius.

@230 (ankylosaur): hope this is not too long and dry (and it's already summarised):

Intention implies that the speaker has knowledge and control over what s/he means, and also the kind of person s/he is. But words often exceed our intention (e.g. the words "Some of my best friends are trans" exceed good intention).

Basically, it's not the words or the intention that I'm interested in, but the fantasy of a "self" that we read into someone's words - i.e. the "Dan" that we project our desires onto, something he hasn't much control over.

With some of the transpeople here who are critics of Dan, I think they are projecting onto Dan their desire for self-actualisation; they want Dan, a popular public figure, to disseminate their self-image, as dictated on their terms. And when Dan refuses to do exactly as they desire, frustration arises, as any unrequited desire. (Even gay men, rich white gay American men, after decades of work, can't guarantee that kind of public self-actulisation.)

We all do this projection trick - to Dan, to anyone else - we round people up to one, as Dan would say; out of his many words, we selectively construct a Dan that suits our own purposes. As another example, the cleverness of a comedian like Louis CK is not in his intentions, but in creating a huge zone of ambiguity, and we are left with the mental gymnastics of working out where we can sit (semi-)comfortably in relation to his words.

All this relativist "reading" is good and fine, but when some people who claim to speak for trans community (true or not) forcefully project a reading of Dan that may harm good work done in service of social justice, then that's worth fighting over. They have the right to read Dan in that way; but when they project that reading into the public in a way that shuts out allies, then they either must declare a break in the alliance (which is their right) or shut up.

The flipside is that, if both sides can buy into the notion that we each have the right to be someone not quite what the other desires, there will be more respect, autonomy and strength. This goes both ways, btw, and I have pointed out before that members of the dominant gay culture has a lot of work to do.

Another point to make about semantics, is that if we don't accept the premise that words can exceed intention, then we also shouldn't criticise Dan's detractors here, because, as many have pointed out, their heart is in the right place too.

You are a target because you have cameras and name recognition. You are also a "Soft target" because it is unlikely that you'll press charges and very likely that you'll write and speak about what happens to emphasize trans-rights.

Now the other aspect, the character assassination and smearing, is a product of another line of shit-disturberism. Frankly the people behind that should be concerned about libel an defamation but again, because you are a soft target, know you won't press charges but will still ink/type/mp3 data about the topic.

@226: "What bothers me is how this event, inappropriate or not, has been seized upon by certain people to vent their ire against transfolk overall."

The inappropriate nature of standing by ideology and hearsay over reality and deed is what has been "seized upon". Continuing to focus on the inappropriate rather than Dan's actual words is what makes this a laughable and unproductive protest.

You're all saying "but dan's REALLY transphobic if you'd only listen!" but not actually criticizing him, just passively endorsing and making excuses for the glitterati.

And by that I mean nobody's bringing up specifics to address, just vague insinuations that you conveniently refuse to back up.

@ravished, thanks for your comment! You wrote:

The flipside is that, if both sides can buy into the notion that we each have the right to be someone not quite what the other desires, there will be more respect, autonomy and strength. This goes both ways, btw, and I have pointed out before that members of the dominant gay culture has a lot of work to do.

That I certainly agree with. Understanding the complexity of other people goes in the direction of humanizing the debate, because we see a similarity in the very fact that we all have the right to be "not quite what the other desires".

But a lot of your comment seemed to be about relativism, and words going beyond intentions. Are you trying to make the point that there is no "true" Dan that one could recuperate from his words -- i.e., there are no intentions, only interpretations, "selfs" that we project, such that only mensurable effects in the outside world ('shutting out allies') are to be comparable?

I mean, it should be an objective question whether or not Dan is transphobic, and whether or not the UCI incident is evidence of transphobia. But the relativism you described would seem to belie that. Or am I misinterpreting you?

I agree with your opinion on Louie C.K., by the way -- my take on him is that he is a wizard at creating situations that force you to think all the way to the very extremes of your definitions (including whether or not evil and good can be separated -- I'm thinking of that episode in which Louie C.K. was an advocate for masturbation, a very difficult one to watch.)

Dan Savage is a liar. It was I who glittered him in Eugene, and I am a trans woman.

@235, why?

@236, Dan Savage's oppressive tendencies towards trans people and various other groups are well documented elsewhere on the internet. Google it.

If you meant, "Why is Dan Savage a liar?" It's because I'm trans, yet he claims I'm cis.

@237, I've googled it. They're mostly misinterpretations or things he's already abandoned publically. If not, please mention one I may have missed.

He didn't know that you were the person involved, and his claim was based on falty information. He's not a liar because of that; he would only be a liar if he knew you personally, and knew you were a transgender, and yet said you weren't.

@238, Actually it was a light plastic jar, but whatever. I didn't particularly mean to throw it at him; it was just the direction I threw it on instinct. But I wouldn't have minded if it did hit him, even if it were all heavy and glass and dangerous. Yes, I'm a crazy insurrecto-bitch.

@ 237 What difference does it make if you are Trans or not, what matters is that your an idiot Rose. Grow the fuck up and take a look at who our real enemies are. It ain't Dan Savage. Stop acting like a spoiled little brat we got bigger fish to fry.

@240 So, okay, you're down with physically hurting people who disagree with you. You are SO cool.

Or, you're not actually who you claim to be. Seems more likely.

@240 - Is "Bitch" okay to use or is that a no-no? It's hard to keep up what terms have been co-opted to empower and which ones make you sad. Maybe make helpful T-Shirts or something so people know? I think it might just be helpful if you grew up a little bit, but then would you still get to be all "crazy" and "anarchy"? Keep racking up the student loan debt down there in Eugene so you have something to be angry about at OWS.

@237: "Dan Savage's oppressive tendencies towards trans people and various other groups are well documented elsewhere on the internet. Google it."

Lazy, unconcerned, but attention-seeking activists are the worst.

Yes, I'm dog shit. I'm fake. I'm everything you hate. I'm everything you don't give two shits about. Wheee.

@246(rose_pedals), I don't think so. I think you're simply wrong. Wheee.

@246: Congratulations for covering a gay man in glitter.

A suggestion to people criticising Rose Pedals: Her identity is rooted in being rejected (see @246). Don't play her game, however contemptible and objectionable her action was. (And there is always the chance of misreportage - glass jar? plastic jar? Cis ally, actual trans? "Truth" is lost to the war of words.) Engage with her calmly, and strictly with facts. As Dan has done. Don't give her the satisfaction of confirming her rejectedness.

@234 (ankylosaur): I'm not a semantic atheist, but merely (perhaps cowardly) agnostic: bound by language as we are, the moment we reach towards an objective "self", something else exceeds it. "Self", like "God", is a ruse _around_ which we speak. For all we know, Dan could be a transphobic "at heart" (whatever that means); as he conversed to the trans person he could be wrestling "ick" feelings inside. Or he could be secretly wanting to fuck her. He could be feeling ick _and_ wanting to fuck her. None of this matters to us.

Spanish Inquisitions and Maoist "struggles" are aimed at finding out whether someone "is" or "is" not, really, truly, existentially, "at heart", on the right side of the ideological line. The rest of us knows that's impossible. These glitter bombers and people supporting them seem to want to hold an Inquisition on Dan.

I'm sorry, but anyone who says, "Ooh, I'm so superior to that bigot WHO I THREW A GLASS JAR AT AND COULD HAVE SERIOUSLY INJURED because he says mean things!" really just earns an eye roll from me.

If you're going to up the anti from "mean words" to "and I'm going to put you in physical danger," I really have no interest in anything you have to say. I will not reward violence.

@249, but if "Self", like "God", is a ruse around which we speak, what is it that we criticize when we criticize someone's intentions? How can we even talk about intentions (such an important concept for ideas like freedom and democracy) if there is nothing to anchor them on?

We're not always the Spanish Inquisition (cue to the famous Monty Python sketch) when we criticize someone's intentions. There is a sense in which such criticism can be accurate. Do you agree? If so, what would this sense be, in your view?

(I'm not counter-arguing, by the way, I'm just really interested in the ideas you're describing and would like to understand them better. Maybe you have a blog or something like that?)

@252: hey ankylosaurus, sorry I can't sustain the rhythm of online conversations, I'll just borrow this space once more to reply.

Reading the other thread, and your examples of the Romanian cheater and black mugger (?), it seems we have quite different understandings of power, oppression and trauma.

Both sides in this argument feel they've been wronged. Dan's side has suffered an act of human nastiness. But the trans community is talking about a different kind of wrong, a structural harm that cannot be pinned down to individual blame. This particular bunch of trans protestors, however, have reverted to the mental habit of imagining "intention" and "individual guilt", that they're reduced structural oppression to specific words uttered by specific people. I think both sides have conflated the two kinds of wrong doing, to the detriment of dialogue and alliance.

Again, I wrote a lot which I have now deleted, about apartheid and ubuntu and white liberals and the Holocaust and Schindler's List, to illustrate the difficulty of intention and the insignificance of insisting whether someone has the right or wrong intention. But in my present sleep-deprived state of mind I can't seem to make things relate to one another, so I can only feebly leave this last comment as a statement rather than a discussion. And you're welcome to reply and I'll read it gladly but I don't think I will reply. But thanks for the conversation today, hope to chat to you again on this board. :)

@ravished, the pleasure is mine! It's always good to talk to someone who is actually interested in listening and thinking about what is being said. It doesn't matter that our ideas are different. My ideas can change (they have several times already, in my life). Your perspective looks intriguing enough that I would like to know more about it.

I understand the difference you make between the trans community talking about a structural harm and this particular bunch of trans protesters blaming one individual. But since the trans community itself was in this case concerned with Dan Savage and whether or not he should be condemned, there is a link between both. What structural harm does Dan Savage mean for the trans community? Or are you perhaps talking about structural harm that goes beyond Dan and what he has or hasn't written and done about trans people?

I am sorry that you deleted so much that sounds quite interesting (and well within my current range of philosophical-humanistic interests). Any chance of finding any of your writing in any obvious sources?

You probably won't answer to that, as you said, but I wanted to say it was actually good to hear your voice here. I do hope we'll chat again, and that I'll get to hear more about your intriguing views. See ya! :-)

The infighting within the LGBT community is ridiculous. We are attacking our allies because of our own identity issues.

For some reason this reminds of the use of the "queer." The word "queer" has become an accepted term within the LGBT community and often serves as a simplified way to refer to the community as a whole. However, I know older gay men who cringe whenever I use the term in their presence. "Queer" used to be a very derogatory term that was against homosexuals. However, the LGBT community has taken the word and owned it. Perhaps it's time that the trans community takes back the term "shemale." Perhaps its time for the trans community to stop attacking their biggest supporters and allies. We love you for who you are and we want you to be happy in your bodies and in your lives and we support you 100%. Not stop hating on your own community.

Dan, remember that really, at the end of the day, you have no control over what other people may think or how they behave. People are going to think, say and do things for a myriad of reasons, due to issues in their background, their personality, hell their hormone levels. Rest assured that you are (and you are seen), as a shining light and warrior in the push for getting persons who may in some manner fall outside of the bell curve, more rights and be more accepted into society - and you do it with compassion, albeit with a sprinkle of off-beat humour from time to time. The fact that this person or persons fail to grasp this notion, shows that their views are an aberration (you sure the whole thing wasn't staged by some right wing Republicans?). Don't take it to heart and let the incident slide off into the muck where it belongs - keep trudging forward.

Perhaps the main take-a-way is that you are no longer the fresh faced not-to-be-taken-seriously 'hey faggot', but have attained some level of celebrityhood, so in the future, be sure to take sufficient measures to protect your physical security.

yikes! I'm glad you ducked the jar!

@228 Your ideas are intriguing to me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Yo Dan. I'm a gay trans woman. After reading more about this, I've had a slight change of heart.

It sucks that you even used the word shemale outside of the quote, and though I get that your definition of the word freak is really positive or whatever, it just sucks to see those words used to describe us so frequently. That's why it hurts, because the rest of society doesn't associate those words with positivity. 99% of the time freak and shemale are used in a really base and pejorative way. And it sucks. It sucks because the people that I work with get exposure to all this and think Its cool to use those words, and that it's somehow OK to regard my sexuality as freaky because it slightly differs from theirs, or JUST because I'm trans. It fucking sucks to be objectified like that. My sexuality is really, really vanilla. As in not freaky. Blaaah.

Anyway, I just want you to know that it really hurts me when you say those words, even in the context that you did, because I walk in those shoes every day nahmeen? I don't give a fuck about the radical queer activists that did this to you. The Eugene people sound like they suck anyway. I'm glad you didn't get hit, and I understand that you did this without ill intentions.

I think you do some great work Dan, just keep in mind that it isn't some esoteric PC battle your fucking with when you say shit like that. You effect my life with the shit say pretty regularly, because you're popular as fuck.

Ugh.

Glitter bombing Dan simply sends a message to the wider public that the LGBTQ community is deeply divided. If people have issues with Dan's language they should take it up with him in the form of a discussion. It seems unlikely to me that he is being deliberately offensive. These actions achieve nothing when the target is someone like Dan - infighting is the last thing we need, since we get more than enough hatred from the others.

Oh, dear me. My community certainly attracts the deeply disturbed, doesn't it? I think they call it 'co-morbidity'. Even our allies are radicals who would rather burn down Parliament than debate within its walls.

Let's give Danny the Voltaire treatment, okay? Disagree with what he says if you must, but defend unto the death, etc. In the meantime, what's wrong with minding our manners? Temper tantrums are so dreadfully boring.

Also: assault with a deadly weapon (a glass jar can be easily classified as such by any freshman ADA) is a particularly stupid way to make a point.

Thank you Summer Robin (265) and Dan and everyone. It's a mind opening event.

Rose Pedals. Thank you for your passion but not your crazy wishing a glass jar hit Dan! OMFG.

This is not about Dan. This is about you, me, everyone. Dan can and should use his culture's language in these settings where people know freaky is a loving term. We all have loose lips when we are with our fellows. This is all about us! Dan just got caught in the middle. Look at the context and setting. This was an event mostly with his fan club.

Dan is much more in self control when using language on forums and spaces that are not gay friendly. Dan is just like us!

Dan is humble. I'm guessing he knows the dialog that comes from these blogs and the work he inspires (itgetsbetter) is the real effort needed to travel the road to gay and sexuality liberation. It's about the journey. Why travel hating those who support you?

Reporters use an AP style guide to build a common language and avoid stereotypes that hurt. Perhaps Dan and other gay writers should come up with a sex positive style guide. Still, he's not bound by anyone to form to your professional standards all the time.

my 2 cents. The 267+ comments are an amazing lesson worth saving.

@rose pedals: Could you please explain what goal you intended to accomplish by throwing glitter (and then a jar) at Dan? I ask that when you explain, do not use metaphors or vague language like "he has spat on our community and he needs to learn from his mistakes" but please use
a) specific examples of exact words he has said or not said, exact actions he has taken or not taken
b) the exact ways in which these words and actions have hurt you and
c) why you chose to glitterbomb him at a conference as your preferred mode of fixing the problem.

The person who called you dog-shit is acting like a child. I'm asking you to seriously explain why you're upset and why you think your actions were justified.

Woops, I submitted the wrong comment just a second ago. Please change "as your preferred mode of fixing the problem." to "your preferred mode of ADDRESSING the problem."

That's right, it's usually the fault of the people being targeted. Women complaining about misogyny? Whiners. Brown people complaining about civil rights? Trouble makers. Trans, queer and straight people complaining about transphobia? Here is the real face of the gay community. Spoiled, privileged and with a xenophobic hair trigger, of course from being conditioned to be victims themselves. Victims will always be inclined to victimize. Don't even dare to try to bring awareness to the ugly side of beautiful gay people. They will make you sorry.