Dan Savage is obsessed with me. I posted one comment on our blog and he's since written three responses: this is the latest and weirdest, because it involved postponing answering a man's question in order to engage in an extended diatribe against (conversation with?) me.
Several readers have wondered why I didn't really respond to his original "attack-response." Well, it's because he never really responded to the issues I raised. He went into what marriage counselors call the "kitchen sink" mode--throwing everything he could against me. Since I don't feel similarly uber-negative about him, I just had little interest in responding with a massive counter attack.
To the charge of--how can you say the Dan Savage may not know about women but the Pope does?--I would say, well if Dan is the Vicar of Christ, maybe you should believe him.
But really the point I was making in the original critique was not really a moral critique but a practical one. A man with a wonderful, sexually responsive girlfriend found himself craving sexual variety. One response is: risk this relationship to get everything you want. But men who actually want to attract women--even for what I would call immoral relationships--might have a different response. "You crazy guy don't you appreciate what you got?!?"
I speculated that Dan didn't have that response because he's not intuitively aware of the realities of opposite-sex relationships. But maybe that's not the reason, maybe he's just personally dense!
Anyway, here's Dan's latest weird diatribe against me. (warning: some readers may find the content offensive)
BTW, wives who refuse to have sex with their husband are endangering their marriages. On that Dan, me and the Catholic church all agree.