Your Dan Savage on Aussie TV

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2013 8:45 AM GMT
    Its one of the best shows on TV, Dan Savage tried to be obtuse and rude with his comments on giving head etc, maybe shocking to US viewers but here people just thought he was a twat. He did make a few good points despite being on with old Germaine Greer and some dumb US Author who seemed to have done her research on Oz via google or wikipedia, and Cranky old Pommie.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoUIa5_yFI8&feature=youtu.be&t=53m50s
  • KepaArg

    Posts: 1721

    Nov 05, 2013 12:53 PM GMT
    Here (Australia)* Perth doesn't count pommie, lol
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2013 1:18 PM GMT
    He's not ours. Feel free to keep him.
  • kew1

    Posts: 1595

    Nov 05, 2013 1:21 PM GMT
    Can you keep the cranky old pom as well, we don't want him back.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2013 2:58 PM GMT
    2jez69l.jpg

    Maybe Ricky Gervais has enough gravitas to be taken seriously as a panelist in tight t-shirts but I don't care how much hotter Dan Savage seems to be getting - if he doesn't want to come across as an American wearing a fanny pack he should throw on a jacket sometime.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2013 8:08 PM GMT
    I got 12 minutes into that. I do like Savage. I just wish he was a little smarter. I don't mean that in a bad way. Maybe it's simply something that will come to him with more age. For now, he's no match for the older conservative guy who is much more in control of his thinking (even if I think his thinking is fucked up--but I'm not sure if that isn't all an act as he seems too smart to not know he's full of shit). So I just couldn't watch what carnage might have ensued.

    I didn't think the head comment rude. What struck me as poorly thought out was his probably inadvertent juxtaposition of giving head and doing drugs. Though I understand he was trying to mirror the conservative view of us, had he been a better thinker, he'd have isolated one from the other while presenting the package. In trying to make his point as he did, he gave the other guy more ammo.

    So while he's not the very best speaker we could hope for, how many speakers are we going to find who'll publicly revel in their suck dick pride on a prime time stage. For that alone we owe him gratitude.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2013 8:59 PM GMT
    I like Dan Savage.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 05, 2013 11:26 PM GMT
    Funny how he is presented to us as an all knowing American Gay activist, hmmm. I thought he was a big deal in the US? Anyway he came across poorly and was a disappointment to many of the LGBTI's here
  • Nayro

    Posts: 1825

    Nov 06, 2013 12:00 AM GMT
    theantijock saidI got 12 minutes into that. I do like Savage. I just wish he was a little smarter. I don't mean that in a bad way. Maybe it's simply something that will come to him with more age. For now, he's no match for the older conservative guy who is much more in control of his thinking (even if I think his thinking is fucked up--but I'm not sure if that isn't all an act as he seems too smart to not know he's full of shit). So I just couldn't watch what carnage might have ensued.

    I didn't think the head comment rude. What struck me as poorly thought out was his probably inadvertent juxtaposition of giving head and doing drugs. Though I understand he was trying to mirror the conservative view of us, had he been a better thinker, he'd have isolated one from the other while presenting the package. In trying to make his point as he did, he gave the other guy more ammo.

    So while he's not the very best speaker we could hope for, how many speakers are we going to find who'll publicly revel in their suck dick pride on a prime time stage. For that alone we owe him gratitude.



    you really think so? I didn't watch the whole thing but from what I saw I think Dan was doing better. If you look at how the old conservative guy is talking it's just stupid. I was annoyed at the fact that when he was talking to Dan he didn't even look at him, he didn't let him finish when he wanted to answer questions and so on. Those are all signs of being the weakest person in a discussion. He clearly didn't have enough power to beat him with content so he didn't let him finish his sentences and tried to make him look less by not looking at him when he spoke. It's a childish way to get unintelligent people think you are winning an discussion while in reality you are making a fool out of yourself and losing the discussion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2013 2:46 AM GMT
    He's not the favorite person on radio here actually.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2013 3:10 AM GMT
    C'mon mate, dont come the raw prawn.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 06, 2013 2:21 PM GMT
    Daelin saidyou really think so? I didn't watch the whole thing but from what I saw I think Dan was doing better. If you look at how the old conservative guy is talking it's just stupid. I was annoyed at the fact that when he was talking to Dan he didn't even look at him, he didn't let him finish when he wanted to answer questions and so on. Those are all signs of being the weakest person in a discussion. He clearly didn't have enough power to beat him with content so he didn't let him finish his sentences and tried to make him look less by not looking at him when he spoke. It's a childish way to get unintelligent people think you are winning an discussion while in reality you are making a fool out of yourself and losing the discussion.


    While the elder conservative guy's speech certainly was affected, and I wouldn't be surprised if that would be a turn off for you, clearly he's the intelligence to pull it off. I much prefer that to, say, reading the affectations of some poster who hasn't the depth of mind and I tend to eventually, if not immediately, avert my eyes to that. It isn't the lack of depth that bugs me, it is the pretense.

    It didn't strike me odd that the elder gent "didn't even look at him", as I could see him concentrating on his thinking--Savage seemed to be noticing the same thing, and, I'll add, seemed intimidated by it--and all the speakers were speaking not so much to each other, but, while addressing the comments of other speakers, speaking, actually, to the audience at large. This was not a conversation just between the egos of two people but in the forum of a greater consciousness.

    In effecting that consciousness, not only does content count, but also presentation and for the 12 minutes I watched, I felt the elder conservative presented his ideas, even if I did not agree with them, better than did Savage present ideas that I might agree with. If you can not sway an audience, what good are your ideas even if they are correct?

    I'd only before this seen Savage on stage by himself, never being directly confronted by an antagonist and while he seems composed on his own, his ability to interact seemed lacking, his thinking not up to speed. Thus, his own affectations when talking dick, which should have come across more naturally. If you are sure enough of your footing, you can step in shit and no one will notice.

    Savage made some good points. I liked especially his idea of creating safe hit on spaces in a world which has been made safe from being hit on. And the conservative guy erred in his thinking when he mentioned a concept I've been championing in my own speech for years, particularly with regard to the anti pro-choice people, that our individual selves, our bodies are sovereign.

    Where the conservative fucked up is in saying that sovereignty necessarily imbues selfishness but that isn't what being sovereign is about at all. Being sovereign does not negate responsibility towards each other. It doesn't mean that I shouldn't be concerned for you. It simply means that you have no rights over me.

    But it takes more than being right to win an argument. And that's why, at least in the 12 minutes I watched, I thought Savage failed this particular encounter. Aside from that, I do support and appreciate him and his efforts.