"How Freakin Dare You?????"


Sigh, a super common problem. Lots of gay dudes are shell shocked right now. They think this equality fight is a war. All the suicides, stupid GOP positions and beatings are giving them a fearful mediadome. Oh well, we all gots our crazies, right?
Dear Seattle Marc: Please use teh Google, and put in any of the following words - parody, sarcasm, irony, Santorum, youreanasshat

Thanks for playing.
I'd like to weigh in, but I'm more of a bird law expert. -- Charlie Kelly
I like how every single letter you get seems to include a discussion on the appropriateness of the word "fuck".

PS - You are a poopy-head, and I'm going to tell your mom about this.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah. That is all.
I have to agree with Marc. You guys are fuckheads. That is the stupidest, shittiest cover you could ever use. I am now totally lacking any respect for your art direction and editorial processes.

Face it, the obvious thing for Dan to do would be to make your name a joke, though you may have beaten him to it.

Poor Snowflake. Haters gotta hate.
I really don't think there's asshattery at play here. He seems like an older gay guy with PTSD from the bad old days, who's mistaking a joke that's not to his liking with a hate crime.
Marc's case of the vapors notwithstanding, the cover really was inappropariate this week. Boo.
Hee hee! Poor Marc. Though I do wish this week's cover had been about us (and our unadulterated joy!) rather than focusing on the opposition. But whaddya gonna do? It's 11th & Pine.
The Stranger: offending decent citizens since 1991.
This guy must be a newbie.
Gay men and a sense of humor and/or perspective are like gay men and good taste: When they don't have it, they REALLY don't have it.

I remember back when I was working with an all-volunteer AIDS charity. Someone (not me) printed up a press release or flyer or something that spelled "HIV/AIDS" as "hiv/Aids". It was a complete typo, done by a volunteer.

Well. You would have thought that the world had ended, based on a phone call I took from some distraught "advocate", who went on for fifteen minutes about how we had "set back the movement" (seriously).

This was back in the pre-Stranger days, when the only publication that would even remotely consider printing anything we did was the Seattle Gay News, which was itself a celebration of bad spelling and grammar, so between us and the SGN, I think complaining must have been a full-time job for this fellow.

Im not a hater. I get the sarcasm behind it but I do think that you probably could have put a better photo on the cover. This just really isnt appropriate (expected? necessary?)for a paper that does hold gay people in usually high regard. I guess I am a little surprised and disappointed. I understand the joke. I just dont think it is that funny.
Bonus points for Godwin's Law in full effect!
Too bad for him. I lol'd.

I hit refresh and saw this attitude explained away as being "an older gay guy with PTSD from the bad old days." I'm clearly younger than Marc (since his 40 years of activism means he started before I hit puberty). I'm a little older than Dan Savage, who started a campaign to redefine "Santorum" after the then senator compared gay relationships to "man on dog sex."

I had heard that Rick Santorum had gone to work as a columnist for a right-wing Christianist website. Is he moonlighting as the Stranger's art director?

I don't agree with Marc that lawsuits are inevitable (over what?). However, I think the staff of The Stranger should be ashamed. I look forward to Dan weighing in on this.
He really over-played his hand with that Hitler reference. The impending lawsuit(s) should be enough to ruin your weekend, and also financially destroy you forever.
To be fair, it is a pretty stupid cover.
I'd like to give Seattle Marc a hug. He's earned the right to be piqued. But, oh goodness, I don't think I'd like to be stuck in the corner with him at a cocktail party.
I think he has a point, though. You guys should do a cover story about how Hitler was right- and not left, like many conservatives suggest he was.
Missed opportunity to celebrate something a lot of us never thought we'd see in our lifetimes. This cover would be funny any other week than this. Oh well.
@8 As a older gay guy, FUCK YOU and your assinine PTSD comment, and fuck the Stranger for printing such an offensive bullshit piece of crap. FUCK YOU.

Stranger link deleted.
Birch? Is that you?
my, my. people sure do like to have "opinions" about "things".
(Also, I love the cover.)
Imagine the anger if this was a woman and a goat!!
Heeelarious cover AND response!
Oh honey! Lighten up! This pushing 50 year old faggot thinks that cover is HILARIOUS. :-)
I kind of thought the goat cover was equivalent to Garfunkel and Oates's "Sex with Ducks" song. It requires one to negate a trope by ironically appropriating it. I saw it, chuckled, and forgot about it. Meanwhile the photos of same sex couples getting their licenses linger with me in a warm and fuzzy way. If I had to make a choice between looking at pictures of loving couples basking in a civil rights victory or a visual joke like the Stranger cover, I'd go with the loving couples.
(Also, for what it's worth, I consider myself an older gay guy with PTSD from the bad old days, too.)
To be fair, you guys are fucking little snots. God bless ya.
I liked the cover. I thought it was tweaking the haters.
Hitler was right

Well, there's next week's cover.

My biggest concern is that they Hawtie McHawterson guy in the photo might not be gay. He's st8, isn't he? Dental-dammitall.
Yeah, that was a little strong reaction, but really, this is the Stranger's most common problem --- being in love with your own jokes ... you folks think this is funny and ironic and cute, and really it's just juvenile and lame. C'mon Stranger you can do better.
@3 for the win.
Also, as a 30 yo, straight, female, LGBT rights supporter I wondered about the cover myself. Obviously it doesn't offend me, but I thought to myself "this is exactly the kind of fodder we shouldn't be handing to the conservatives." They do a handy enough job of the hysteria all on their own. I'm fully with @21.
Totally realizing that the Stranger likes to make a point of pushing the envelope, and that the paper was originally intended as a snarky mockery of the S. Weekly, AND that I often can and do appreciate the staff's sarcastic humour... I was offended by the cover. Extremely inappropriate and untimely. Off-handedly dismissing the gentleman's complaint because you might be too hip and young to remember times when people couldn't come out of the closet without facing violence--much less equal rights, only serves to elucidate your neglect of learning your own nation's history, struggles--and how fragile victories can be even after achieved. Acknowledging someone's hurt is just as easy as mocking them, and so much ever more altruistic. Agreed the gentleman could've been less abrasive with his reaction and sentiments. But the cover is entirely reproachable, offensive, and WITHOUT CLASS.
"I haven't spent 40+ years of addressing discrimination to see you pipsqueaks load the ammo into the opposition's guns."

Yeah, I don't think you're a very good ally.
wasn't it just pokin fun at the chicken littles? http://www.flickr.com/photos/soggydan/82…
I laughed out loud on the street when I saw it. I thought it was HILARIOUS.

But I'm just a queer-loving straight dude. YMMV.
See, the way I read this is that this guy's offering you the statutory $10K when you immediately win the anti-SLAPP portion of his upcoming lawsuits. You people should be thanking him for his generous future donation.
My dear old British Mum used to say that it was clear America was still a "teenager" in portent and understanding. Irony and sarcasm are relatively complex concepts, so it doesn't surprise me one whit that someone from the 'bad old days' of the gay rights era does not appreciate the irony and sarcasm laden in the cover photo.

I think its hilarious, although I can see how it might "give ammo" to the haters. It would be interesting to see if you could actually track that, the ammo bit.

However, it would have been happier/more celebratory to print a photo of near-newlyweds.

But, in sum, I'd like to say: Feh.
I guess I focused on the "Welcome, Gay Marriage!" message and less on the actual picture. Perfectly good opportunity for outrage wasted.

I think the cover can read as offensive, but one has to be completely unaware of the Stranger's advocacy over the last year in favor of gay marriage to read it that way.
To quote Tim Minchin..."fucking homos....they just don't get irony"
Fuck! You've driven away daveb604! That's the last fucking straw you fucking fucks. I'm going to wear pants to Slog Happy tonight, that's how much I hate you now, you shitbutts.
Count me as another old homo-with-PTSD from the Bad Old Days who loved the cover. A gay-marrying old homo in fact!
Sometimes you have to examine whether the criticism is worse than the offense, seriously. We have to get away from this bullshit. An ironic joke won't do the damage to material rights and benefits that calling your allies nasty names will. This publication put a lot of work into this victory. I'm a Californian, but donated to approve 74 because I read the Stranger. At some point you have to decide whether you want linguistic purity OR YOU WANT A MOVEMENT!
I think this week (of all weeks) Dan Savage can do whatever the fuck he wants and doesn't have to answer to anybody about it.
So the Stranger has a history of defending Gay Rights? Check - yes they do. Thank you Stranger staff for that.

This is "obvious" satire? - Obvious to who?

The real question I have is if this exact same layout with photo's was on Fox News would ANY of us be laughing? Would it still be satire? Just because Fox News and the Onion cover the same stories doesn't make them both satire.

Based on my belief that this story can easily be taken out of context and used as a weapon in the fight for gay rights I have to wonder how much thought was put into the consequences.
48 comments in one hour? Nice work, Cienna.
@48 - Believe it or not, the source does matter. If Fox News put this cover everywhere, they'd look ridiculous for trying to make a big deal of it. That's pretty much what they already do. We can't spend all day worrying what Fox News is going to misconstrue. Let the haters hate.
I'm really not sure how this cover could be used as "ammo" by anyone opposing gay rights. I suppose they could be all like "see, see! those liberal homos don't take marriage seriously" but...I don't know. Haven't they already used/made up all the ammo available?

Who can take this cover seriously? Really... Lawsuits?? Gosh.
The worries exressed about this cover sound uncomfortably like "You shouldn't dress that way because you're just inviting rapists."
i dunno.. i thought goat fucking was a straight thing
Yeah, Marc, we get it. But the goat is kinda hot, ain't he?
middle aged housewife. broadway neighborhood activist. a lifetime of hoping for marriage equality. got the joke. like the cover.
@48, No, it wouldn't be the same if Fox News used this picture. Context is important. But the context is there, ingrained into the picture. It says "the Stranger" across the top, and "WELCOME GAY MARRIAGE" across the bottom. Just because a statement can be taken out of context doesn't mean that you shouldn't say it.
I am proud and grateful that gay rights have reached the point where we have the luxury of bickering over a dumb joke, even if it comes at the expense of completely destroying my faith in humanity. In a couple years I will probably wonder if it was all worth it, but for now I am going to savor this moment.
I don't love the cover - seems a bit pathetic actually, like trying to recaptured a younger, edgier The Stranger but doesn't quite make it for me. If you're going there, go all the way, like instead of a goat use a canned ham or a male blow-up porn doll or at least a dolphin....
@6, @9, @13, @22: Jesus Christ on a cracker! Go get laid, get gay married and smoke some legal pot.
Amen to @60 - exactly!
Seattle Marc needs to watch Jingle Goats, and chill.
I laughed when I saw it and then just kinda shook my head.

It's in poor taste but so is John Waters, and I love him.

Whaddyagonnado? I hope Marc gets over it soon. There are bigger things to kvetch about than the stranger cover.
Marc ALMOST makes a valid point but when he threw out the "Hitler Card" and then used "pipsqueaks" he lost all credibility.
My first stop for uplifting and memorable photos has always been the cover of The Stranger. But no more, I tells ya! No more!
Cover boy is hella gay I promise! Take it from me I am him.
@48 Yes, this is "obvious" satire.

Yes, Poe's Law says we have and will see this sort of thing stated seriously. And yes, those of us WITH A FUCKING BRAIN will laugh at it then, too.

Remember that Wacko Nuns From Hell video that made the rounds a couple of months ago, about how "contracepting" (not a real word) women smell wrong and turn men gay? That was hilarious!

The idea that people who believe that might vote, not so much, but those are not the same thing.

A parody of that video? Yes, please.
schmadie, isn't this an unused still from some albee play?
Isn't this rubbing it in the face of the conservative fucktards who were equating gay relationships with bestiality? How could you think this was serious?
@ 65, you're saying that Marc would have had a valid point if he just avoided saying "Hitler" and "pipsqueaks"?

No, he wouldn't. He says this:

I am just bracing for your cover to go viral on all the anti-gay sites, and the equal rights people to jump down your throats.

He's still treating the anti-gay sites as though they are something other than a laughable fringe. Which is what they are becoming, now that voters are enacting marriage equality at the ballot box.

I'm going to make a fearless prediction and say that this cover won't go viral at all, or be used by the bigots in any way. They'll understand something that Marc and others don't - that this cover is a joke at their expense. Marc actually fears that they're going to say "SEE? WE TOLD YOU THAT BESTIALITY WAS NEXT!" That's as far from valid as can be.

I think Schmader nailed it @ 8. I won't downplay the trauma Marc has undoubtedly suffered in the struggle for LGBT equality, but it doesn't make his point anywhere near valid.
@68 Thank you for your respectful disagreement. "Obviously" I have no brain. Sorry NO FUCKING BRAIN.

How long have you been on the front lines of gay rights? Where were you when Anita Bryant declared homosexuals were sex starved perverts not worthy of human dignity? Where were you while Ronald Reagan ignored AIDS and too many of my generation died in the prime of their lives?

I have seen our rights stolen from us in the heart of victory too many times to sit idly by while jokes are made that strike at our very souls. I was half way through my military career when DADT and DOMA were enacted as law. I'm grateful DADT is dead and look forward to the funeral of DOMA, but that's not a done deal.

So yes this must mean I HAVE NO FUCKING BRAIN because I didn't laugh and won't laugh at this rehashing of the same hateful ignorance spoken by a United States Senator in his official capacity as an elected official from the state of Pennsylvania. A voiced opinion that was so out of the mainstream of American thought that the man was the runner up in the most recent Republican Presidential Nomination.

So no, I don't see the humor in parroting the calumnious comparison between homosexuality and bestiality.

Prop 8 passed just 4 years ago in our most liberal state, and now, just because a small minority of people TODAY understand that our rights are worthy of protection doesn't mean it is set in stone.

There are only 9 votes that matter in the immediate future. 8 of them are probably evenly divided leaving a single lone vote of one American to decide not just Gay Marriage but the dignity of an entire class of American citizens. I'm not willing to bet that Justice Kennedy will see this cover and laugh thinking how wrong he was. I would rather HE not be encouraged to compare my love life with fucking a goat.

Once again thanks for the respectful consideration of my opinion.
@67: heyyyyyyyyy hottie
@Matt in Denver...re-read my post and you will be able to answer your own question.
I thought it was cute, but I'm missing the "Get offended by every little thing" gene.
Sometimes you show how ridiculous the other side's bullshit arguments are by embracing them—just for a moment—and pretending that they're true.

I though the cover was funny—not because it insults gay people, but because it insults people who insult gay people (and who insult the intelligence of all).

That's all I got.
There are so many things you could have done with the cover. This is probably not what I would have selected, but honestly I don't read The Stranger for the cover as I generally don't think they're interesting.
@76 - Dan. I'm so very happy that you and your partner were able to finally get a marriage license. I wish I could be at the Q Sunday night to celebrate with you both.

Marc, i think your fervent comment and the general response proves the artistic value of this weeks Stranger cover.

The question must be then if The Stranger's cover is the place for art or a place for a reflection of the of the (unfaltering lgbt supporting) content?
I have to say that I think Marc was over the top, but I agree that the cover was tasteless and I was turned off as soon as I saw it. I get the joke, but why not celebrate instead of highlighting one of the worst arguments against equality??
I'm also a 50-ish gay guy with PTSD from the bad old days. I guess I can understand how someone could be offended if you don't get the Stranger's edgy sense of irony, but I laughed my ass off. The bow tie on the goat is perfect.
The cover is beautiful. It's big "fuck you" to NOM and it makes me laugh.
@ 74, I think I answered it fine myself.
I thought it was funny - this is classic The Stranger, which is one of the most awesome parts about living in Seattle and Washington State. It's mocking the haters, not embracing them, and it takes nothing away from marriage equality. The reason they can do this cover is because the tide has turned.

Even if Anthony Kennedy saw this cover, I strongly doubt that this would sway him one way or the other. The fact that three states voted for marriage equality and one state voted down their DOMA amendment? That will have impact.

P.S. - I like John Waters too. And there should be a binding Slog poll on the cover!

And who says we're done celebrating? That cover was for last Thursday's paper, which comes out on Wednesday, and goes to the printer Tuesday night. There were no pictures of happy couples getting their marriage licenses last Tuesday night, no photos of couples marrying. This cover was created in anticipation of what began on Thursday night and will continue to crescendo through this weekend.

I don't know what the plan is for next week's cover, but I wouldn't be surprised if the folks who are saying "YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE X INSTEAD" don't wind up seeing X on the cover of next week's paper. Not because they bitched, but because that was the plan all along.
The fervent response by Marc and the amount of comments prove the artistic value of the cover of this week's The Stranger.

So then that raises the question whether or not the cover of our (historically on the front lines of gay and lgbt rights) community rag's cover should be art or if the cover should just be a reflection of the (very often directly supporting gay rights) content.

I'm for the art.

The nice thing about art is we can decide not to have a moral dilemma about it and just enjoy it. I'm enjoying it now.
@82 - This.

@83 - You did. I think that if Cato didn't have something to be grievously offended or disappointed by he would never be happy.

Very quickly: it's "forebears", not "forebearers".

And now I'M done bitching....
Obviously his criticisms were over the top (which is why you chose his among all the messages I imagine you must have received) but I totally agree that the cover was in very poor taste. Why? Why was it more important to make a joke than to celebrate? Why was it so important to make a joke that you knew perfectly well would offend some people during a really emotional, important time? It seemed trollish to me as soon as I saw the photo shoot post on Slog the other day. You're a private publication, you can do what you want, but this choice did make me lost respect for you guys as people and as journalists.
@67 are you single? ;)
Why so mad Marc?
I love the cover! It pokes fun at right-wing Santorum-style idiots; what's not to love?
I had a few thoughts when I saw the cover: They'll sure get a few angry letters from this one. Surely hit the top of the 'most commented' section.

And that it's not very funny. I love humor in bad taste, but this just seemed like a lazy attempt, nothing to get excited about. (Hence my not bothering to comment until past the 88 mark).

If you really wanted to go for it, have the goat being walked down the aisle by a guy in a Mark Discoll or Ken Hutcherson mask. The groom waits, barely disguising his huge erection w/ a Catholic priest looking on, nodding condescendingly while a few altar boys in make-up (& perhaps bondage gear) kneel at his feet. The title reads something like "Achievement Unlocked!" or "Howdy from Heaven!"

Now THAT shit would be hysterical!
I don't care about the cover- but I LOVE how CRAZY people are and how much they LOVE to get OFFENDED. Also- CAPITOLS!
You know how the religious right gets all hepped up about how gay marriage will bring the downfall of civilization, and then when it happens, the government gives you a piece of paper, it really doesn't affect anybody but you.

This cover is apparently the gay version of that.
@67, I think it's obvious from the picture that he is not single.
I LOLed at the picture but to each his own. I also seem to be missing the be offended at every little thing gene.
Humor deprived for sure. But I'd remind you all that Jen Graves, with a straight face, called the use of the word "pussy" hate speech.
@89 Sometimes people make jokes as a way of celebrating. Did I just completely blow your mind?
@ 67,

Consider me a suddenly shy admirer...


a gym-built, jackhammer-ready power top.

Whichever works best 4 U ; )
Missed the mark for the cover with this. I think it's sad.
I'm getting old, because I think that I'd have found it funny when I was 14-20. And, in my thinking, I'd probably find it funny if it would have been run the week after the election.

But, I think it's in shitty taste the first week of legalization. The time to gloat has passed, it's now a time for celebration. Maybe a photo of two ladies dressed in bridal gowns sharing a joint outside a church. Or something that's a little less about them than it would be about us.