What is all the sniggering about Santorum...

[right on maude...]

I mean the frothy mix part of things. Okay, I will admit that I have chuckled at Dan Savage's savage attempt at payback for Ricky's seemingly anti-gay crusade, but consider this:

If gay man-sex should not be looked upon with disgust, why does Dan create such a nasty image of the by-product of said action?

[jberryhill]

1. There is nothing "gay" in the definition of Santorum

[right on maude...]

2. Maybe technically but here's the first hit on the Google:

http://spreadingsantorum.com/

I do believe that Dan Savage was not referring to hetero anal sex...

[justiceischeap]

7. Dan Savage asked his readers to coin the definition

Not all of his readers are homosexual, so the definition for Santorum, the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex, was the chosen winner. The whole reason Savage did this was because of this:

Santorum made his comments in an April 2003 interview with the Associated Press. Discussing a recent United States Supreme Court decision striking down an anti-sodomy law, Santorum said:

If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything… It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution... You say, well, it's my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that's antithetical to strong healthy families... In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality. It's not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism

So, in a way it could be argued that associating Santorum with something that most would associate with gay sex is the intent because Santorum is so staunchly against homosexuality, is irony and not humor.

[right on maude...]

11. I understand the context but I still maintain that the result

is a reduction of anal sex as a dirty, revolting act.

And of course not all gay men engage in anal. I was surprised to read stats that showed a substantial number who don't wish to participate in that sex act. So it's not a given that all gay men want to do it or have it done to them.

[justiceischeap]

24. Looking at your OP I gotta say, you're the one bringing gay sex into this

And I know people enjoy anal sex but the imagery in itself makes it appear as a dirty, revolting act. That doesn't mean that people who enjoy it can't (and more power to them) but it's kinda gross. Which, again, is the irony of the definition.

I mean, if you really, really didn't like gay people, don't you think having your name in some way associated with anal sex (which many people wrongly associate with homosexuals--and why are so many people thinking about anal sex anyway?) would be the worst thing to happen to you? As a homosexual, I find the irony delicious and am not at all offended by the definition but I'm not a gay man, I'm a lesbian so I don't know if most gay men find this offensive.

[FarLeftFist]

30. Gays are the only ones who do anal sex? What about straight women?

[pnwmom]

3. I was wondering that myself.

[right on maude...]

5. To be fair, Dan is equally crude in his description of sexual behavior

straight or gay. I must admit that it demonstrates (at least to me) a disdain for sex. Treating sexual activity as a dirty joke doesn't sound very respectful but that's just my opinion, of course.

[Dreamer Tatum]

6. which is ironic, no? nt

[right on maude...]

8. I don't know if it's ironic but it seems pretty contradictory.

I read his column every week because he's a bright, funny individual (plus the freaky stuff people are into). But I always go away with this feeling that describing sex acts in such crude terms and advocating for anything (as long as both people are into it) really treats sex in an animalistic fashion. If we are evolved beings, shouldn't we act in a more enlightened way?

[jberryhill]

10. No, it's not

There is nothing wrong about sex.

The fact that it can involve messy fluids is not some indictment of sex.

I like riding bicycles. I don't like to get chain grease all over the place.

[right on maude...]

14. We don't snicker about chain lube

Americans as a whole treat sex in a Puritanical fashion, which means disdainfully. At the same time we inflate its importance. Very messed up 'tude, IMO.

[jberryhill]

15. We do, however, snicker at tombstoned trolls

Fare thee well.

[pinboy3niner]

18. *snicker*

[Dreamer Tatum]

22. Oh SNAP. nt

[Dreamer Tatum]

4. +1 if anal sexual congress, especially between men, is supposed be as dignified

as any other sexual practice, that attitude is totally at odds with the shame many are trying to attach to Santorum.

But as I have said, pee pee and poo poo and gay jokes seem to be perfectly appropriate for people who consider themselves
more evolved than those they ridicule.

[jberryhill]

13. You might want to look at the posting history of our new friend

Incidentally, the point of the OP, posted by this now-tombstoned troll, was to get "sniggering" in a headline.

[booley]

9. wait a minute... don't straight people have anal sex too?

Anyway I think we can still be ok with gay people having sex and make jokes about one of the less pleasant parts of the aftermath.

Do jokes about sleeping on the wet spot mean straight sex is bad?

[jberryhill]

12. Bingo

Childbirth is considered by many to be a blessed event.

Dealing with the various fluids involved is not what people usually have in mind there.

[pnwmom]

16. Yes, but it's less common. I think the point of the joke is to "smear" Santorum,

but it could backfire into smearing anyone who has anal sex -- and that is more often associated with gay people than with straight people.

[jberryhill]

19. Really?

When someone mentions anal sex, most folks think of lesbians?

[pnwmom]

26. Excuse me. I should have said, "gay men." n/t

[Dreamer Tatum]

23. No pun intended. nt

[pnwmom]

27. I think Dan Savage very much intended the pun.

I was just acknowledging it.

[booley]

29. those people don't like gay men anyway

and by "those people" i include Richard Santorum.

Let him be hoisted by the very prejudice he wishes to spread.

It's Karmic and the damage to the rest of us will be minimal. As I said, the ones who aren't in on the joke already hate gay people.

[napoleon_in_rags]

17. Its funny. My only regret is that its probably helping Santorum.

As I recall the Savage thing, Savage was being over-the-top gross because of over-the-top gross characterizations of gays. But the scary thing is, I can understand the political inclination to vote for it. We just came out of the "Dick and Bush" presidency, the time of Dick Army and the rest - and Republicans followed up with speaker Boehner. (read how it looks, not how its actually pronounced.) Now they have the perfect "come from behind" candidate, Santorum, the "number 2" man, all thanks to Savage.

The inclination to vote for these things comes from a real since of disenfranchisement with the process, the sense that its so doomed at least you can get a dirty joke out of sending Santorum to Washington, that's my guess.

[great white snark]

20. Thanks for the pizza delivery cbayer.

[EFerrari]

21. What do you mean, "seemingly anti-gay crusade?

[jberryhill]

25. It is code for "How did I get to 29 posts before MIRT got to me?"

[JoePhilly]

28. Very simple ... Which by product of "man-sex" (your term) upset "Frothy Santorum" and ...

his supporters most?

To Santorum, and many in the GOP, to be called "gay" ... or "sissy" ... or "girly man" ... as an attack intended to diminish the opponent.

And so, the response here is to call Frothy Santorum" that which he would use to diminish others.

Those who don't "get that" ... might hust have issues similar to "Frothy's".

[Erose999]

31. Logical fallacy: you're assuming hetero couples don't do it ITB.