Dan Savage Posts on Asexuality

[michaeld]

Comment #94 was priceless. Excellent reasoning!! I approve of your comments, sir. They are some of the most reasonable on the board.

Thanks!

EDIT: I've added my own reponse, #149. Hopefully that'll help cool things down a bit. <_<

Hopefully. :) Though if the Ian and Davy trolls stick around, don't count on it!

Thanks for your asexy contribution to the comments thread. :D

[je_suis_napoleon]

The idea of being open about asexuality with someone you date more than once is, of course, perfectly reasonable and valid. It's just the snide, hateful way Dan presents it that's so offensive.

I've always loved reading Savage Love, to sort of get an idea about "how the other half lives" and what goes on in the minds of sexuals. I actually get choked up when he prints letters from people who tell him how much he's done for them and their lives by letting them know they're not horrible freaks because their sexual desires aren't mainstream.

Why can't he bring himself to do the same thing for aces? Why can't he think of us as just another group of people who fall on a different point on the curve? I've never seen him insist on people spelling out their needs for anal by the third date, or wearing a "Foot Fetishist" sign around their necks.

I wonder if he's ever been in the situation of finding out someone he cared about and respected was really a raging homophobe? That's kind of what I feel like now.

[Sally]

Savage used to be a fairly sincere journalist. Now he's a propagandist and celebrity. His weekly The Stranger used to have some serious journalism in it; the last real journalist has left for another on-line publication and The Stranger is a paper primarily for the LGBT community living in one specific community in Seattle. He will take the most sensationalist viewpoint in order to get notice.

This is my viewpoint, of course, but I've been reading The Stranger--or read the Stranger--for more than a decade, before Savage was editor. He used it simply as a ladder to national reknown as the out-est gay person in America. He has no reason to be particularly nice to asexuals; he has every reason to make fun of us.

[je_suis_napoleon]

You know, I wonder if he thinks people with a HIGHER-than-average need for sex need to "come out" with it before the third date, too.

[Sally]

You know, I wonder if he thinks people with a HIGHER-than-average need for sex need to "come out" with it before the third date, too.

I'd guess he thinks anyone with higher-than-average need for sex is normal. Anyone with normal need for sex is represessed.

[mindlife]

You know, I wonder if he thinks people with a HIGHER-than-average need for sex need to "come out" with it before the third date, too.

Good question.

[rose]

here is a direct link to a pod cast were he responds to message a caller left. Visit My Website

skip toward the end it's the last call.

episode 140 at 27.40

and here the one to the podcast archives

here just scroll down a little. Once the stream takes a minute to fully load you can skip toward the end.

[jmerry]

The next installment in the series: Column for Sept. 10 and Letter of the Day.

Savage's comments are pretty much repeats of what we've already seen- kind of obnoxious, but not too bad on substance. It's the letter writers who are saying things like "maladjusted little shit".

[sinisterporpoise]

He has a real point about the monogamy thing.

[jmerry]

Letters of the Day for Sept. 11. This time with asexual letter-writers.

[Guest Heligan]

Honestly, I feel you should disclose your sexuality to people you're interested in before you start dating... It's unfair and hurtful to both parties involved otherwise. By or before the third date is hardly unreasonable.

This is what I do. Better safe than sorry. I wouldn't want to start really liking someone only to find out they have no desire to be with an asexual.

Granted, I also haven't been able to get a date since I started doing this.

LOL (actually laughed so much Im crying a bit), yes, disclosure worked that way for me too- next time Im just going to try to muddle through I think... its not like Im not willing to do the compromise thing (and maybe getting to the age where lube isnt out of the question even with desire). Seems to me its either fake it or be alone forever! I just have to find someone I like enough for it not to feel too vile...

[Jillianimal]

The idea of being open about asexuality with someone you date more than once is, of course, perfectly reasonable and valid. It's just the snide, hateful way Dan presents it that's so offensive.

I've always loved reading Savage Love, to sort of get an idea about "how the other half lives" and what goes on in the minds of sexuals. I actually get choked up when he prints letters from people who tell him how much he's done for them and their lives by letting them know they're not horrible freaks because their sexual desires aren't mainstream.

Why can't he bring himself to do the same thing for aces? Why can't he think of us as just another group of people who fall on a different point on the curve? I've never seen him insist on people spelling out their needs for anal by the third date, or wearing a "Foot Fetishist" sign around their necks.

I wonder if he's ever been in the situation of finding out someone he cared about and respected was really a raging homophobe? That's kind of what I feel like now.

Tell that to him!

[Ninny]

Holy crapping fuck this makes me so damn angry!

*head explodes*

[brocaine]

You know, I wonder if he thinks people with a HIGHER-than-average need for sex need to "come out" with it before the third date, too.

I've been reading his column for something like 12 years, and I'd guess he'd suggest any need that you have in a relationship that isn't implied by our social expectations should be disclosed early and loudly. Especially if the person considers throttling back their needs to be a "deal breaker". FWIW, he appears to be no more hostile to asexuality than any other kind of sexuality that he doesn't share (heterosexual, extreme fetishes, etc...) I don't think he'd claim on his better days to be a completely fair sex columnist. He's stated that his goal is first to entertain his readers, then solve people's problems (he recommends therapists for those who want different priorities).

[gray_imagination]

ugh.

also grr.

I couldn't read many of the comments, I only got far enough to say out loud to the empty room:

"But...I don't LIKE roller coasters."

[Sammie]

Are asexuals against orgasms in general or just sex? Are they cool on masturbating? If not, wtf? It's like denying yourself free roller coaster rides.

You know, a lot of people don't like rollercoasters.

Interesting. So, they are inborn eunuchs?

Go back to school.

Asexuals can go not fuck themselves

Sure, we're quite happy with that.

if there were actually a biological state of 'homosexuality' among humans it would be a non-reproducing entity.

of course there ain't no such creature- just people who choose to engage in homosexual behavior.

A yes. Not reproducing isn't natural. Unless the bible tells you to become a nun and die as a virgin. Then it's heroic.

Isn't an nonsexual relationship, just a normal friendship? Isn't the whole point of dating someone as opposed to just being their friend sex?

Yes, love = sex and that's why you can buy appreciation and happiness at your local prostitute.

anyone want to help me open the Seattle Lesbian, Gay, Bi/Poly, Trans, Straight, Plushie, Horsefuckers, Asexual Center?

Sure, but you can't join. You obviously have a fetish you sarcasm. perv.

People who are "asexual" are not the norm. Being not the norm most likely means there is something either mentally or physically wrong.

I can't believe the rest of this post didn't have a hint of sarcasm. You can't possibly be serious?

Oh God, how many men have I dated who assumed that just because I'm a middle-aged woman I would be happy with brief smooches and hugs?

Who are these men and could you post their phonenumbers and pictures?

championing that is like promoting aspie pride or "indigo children".

I'll just let the stupidity of this post hang in the air for a moment.

cool your jets, i know 30 yrs ago the same thing would be said of homos, but like i said, the biological urge was THERE, there are gay animals ( penguins and shit) there are not, however, asexual animals

.

[Jillianimal]

cool your jets, i know 30 yrs ago the same thing would be said of homos, but like i said, the biological urge was THERE, there are gay animals ( penguins and shit) there are not, however, asexual animals

Pandas are actually ready to screw anything 2-3 days out of the year.

[Sally]

Oh God, how many men have I dated who assumed that just because I'm a middle-aged woman I would be happy with brief smooches and hugs?

Who are these men and could you post their phonenumbers and pictures?

Oh yeah. There would be a rush like the opening of Filene's on sale day.

[PiF]

Clearly savage is a bit of a fuckwit

[AVENCakes]

u"But...I don't LIKE roller coasters."

Neither do I. I hate roller coasters, I went on one by accident at sea world, never making that mistake again.

I went to a theme park with my forensics class (it was an awesome class), and drew while they spent the 2-4 hours waiting for every ride. I got a lot done and people watched the entire time, which was a lot of fun. They got a total of 2 minutes of adrenaline. Everyone was happy. They gave me weird looks, but at least no one had to worry about their bags getting stolen.

At least they aren't smart enough to use analogies we can't refute easily. :/

[ghosts]

So the word isn't used, but I figured people might be into this:

How important do you think sexual chemistry/compatibility is in a long-term relationship?

Sexual chemistry/compatibility is only as important as sexual exclusivity/satisfaction is. And for the record: Companionate marriage—the union of two individuals who love each other but don't fuck (or don't fuck each other)—can be wonderful.

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=5466300

[spoonsfromdenmark]

Savage wrote about asexuality again in his latest column on the 3rd. It was not exactly positive. In the asexual tumblr community there was a bit of a backlash against it. I decided to write Savage an e-mail in response to the column and sent it this afternoon. My letter and a link to the column in question can be found here:

http://aftermorrissey.tumblr.com/post/3184271938/response-to-savage-love

Now let's see if he'll respond.

[Lord Happy Toast]

I sent him an email:

Hi,

I'm a member of the asexual community, and a recent post of yours has considerably offended many asexuals, and also demonstrates an utter lack of concern for people not very interested in sex. Your post makes it sound like it's extremely easy to go and find potential partners who aren't interested in sex. If you could write a column telling us how to go about doing this--as it is evidently extremely easy--this would be enormously appreciated by the asexual community and could do a lot of decrease the degree to which they dislike you for regarding our needs as negligible because we are not in the majority.

Thanks,

Andrew

[sinisterporpoise]

The Tumblr community may have suffered a backlash, but at least Dan didn't take the time to respond to any one of them.

[spoonsfromdenmark]

Well, he often responds to this sort of thing in his column itself. He'll be recording his weekly podcast today or tomorrow (it goes out tomorrow) and the newspaper column goes out the day after tomorrow. I actually do have high hopes for this issue. He has in the past responded well to criticism and brought in experts to respond to questions that fall outside of the realm of his expertise and experience. Really, he would be contradicting much of what he stands and fights for if he ignores this issue.

Also, I think people have a much higher change of eliciting a real response from him if they e-mail him directly rather than leaving comments or posting about it indirectly on other sites.

[sinisterporpoise]

Well, he often responds to this sort of thing in his column itself. He'll be recording his weekly podcast today or tomorrow (it goes out tomorrow) and the newspaper column goes out the day after tomorrow. I actually do have high hopes for this issue. He has in the past responded well to criticism and brought in experts to respond to questions that fall outside of the realm of his expertise and experience. Really, he would be contradicting much of what he stands and fights for if he ignores this issue.

Also, I think people have a much higher change of eliciting a real response from him if they e-mail him directly rather than leaving comments or posting about it indirectly on other sites.

I think you missed the point. He DID respond to me attacking his position. I don't write on Tumblr, but I don't get a lot of traffic either.

[spoonsfromdenmark]

Ah, I did miss the point of your post then. I just saw your article - what was Savage's response?

[Coleslaw]

Savage wrote about asexuality again in his latest column on the 3rd. It was not exactly positive. In the asexual tumblr community there was a bit of a backlash against it. I decided to write Savage an e-mail in response to the column and sent it this afternoon. My letter and a link to the column in question can be found here:

http://aftermorrissey.tumblr.com/post/3184271938/response-to-savage-love

Now let's see if he'll respond.

This is a beautiful letter. Bravo. If he challenges that there can be a happy sexual/asexual couple, come back and let us know. I, for one, would be willing to testify to that effect.

[michaeld]

This is a beautiful letter. Bravo. If he challenges that there can be a happy sexual/asexual couple, come back and let us know. I, for one, would be willing to testify to that effect.

Oh that's already been tried. His enlightened response, to an asexual letter writer who was in a happy relationship with her sexual boyfriend, was that "your boyfriend is either a fool or a fag."

http://www.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2009/06/22/savage-love-letter-of-the-day&view=comments

[Lord Happy Toast]

While not as beautifly written as spoonsfromdenmark's letter, after getting a chance to think more about Savage's post, I wrote a second, less antagonistic email to him last night. Well, it was less antagonistic towards him, although, adopting his rather course style, I took liberties of bluntness on other issues.

a somewhat nicer way of posing my earlier email

Regarding asexuality, being minimally sexual and all that, your perspective is, I think, very skewed. The reason for this you more-or-less admit:

We don't usually hear directly from these "minimally sexual" types. Instead, we hear from their maximally unhappy partners

In all likelihood, then, the result is that you very much feel for their needs, but having not heard many stories from the other side of the equation, you demonstrate an utter lack of concern for their needs. This can be seen in language like this:

why would you even contemplate inflicting yourself on a normally sexual person?

Because of someone's sexuality (or even sexual orientation) trying to get their emotional needs met is "inflicting" themself on someone. For someone who is interested in sex, wouldn't trying to get into a relationship with someone much less sexually interested than themself also be inflicting themself on someone? Unless, of course, you operate under the assumption that if someone belongs to a socially valued majority, then their needs matter, whereas if someone is in a marginalized minority, then theirs don't.

There are people who suffer quite a bit because of desire discrepancies in sexual relationships (or relationships that they would like to be sexual.) However, it would be a massively fallacious move to conclude that therefore all--or even most--experience this as suffering. Of course, the ones who find it a manageable problem in a generally positive relationship probably aren't going to spend a lot of time complaining about it. Thus, you don't hear their voices as much. Which isn't to say that they don't exist. (I guess that instead of the therapy-fallacy where all of the [people in category X] that you encounter are having serious problems, you have the advice-columnist fallacy, which basically works the same way.)

Anyway...for people at the lower end of the sexual desire specturm, there is precious little information out there for them. You can find medicalizing bullshit based on "clinical observation" treated as scientific fact. (What's that, in real science causation is difficult to establish? Unless you're dealing with a voiceless population who isn't organized well enough to point out the prejudices of those making such pronouncements. A number of years ago, as I was trying to make sense of my own sexuality, I read large sections of Our Sexuality. What I learned is that the expert consensus is that I didn't exist. What I concluded is that the experts are dumbasses.) More recently, I took a university level class on human sexuality. There I learned that if a guy is at a party and there's a girl interested in him but he isn't interested in sex, then, our final exam asked, what sexual dysfunction does he have?

My impression is that people lots of people in the asexual community would like to have romantic relationships and their preference is definitely for other people who aren't interested in sex. The primary reason that many--possibly most--who have romantic relationships, have them with sexual people with sexual people is that it is extremely difficult to find other people not interested in sex. There may be plenty out there, but there is no easy/reliable way to find them.