RECENT  POSTS:  » Your anti-LGBT movement at work: Viciously denigrating stock photos of gay families » Maggie Gallagher's latest shows what a disservice she did to the *civil* marriage debate » Brian Brown apparently buying a new dinette set, misapplies purchase to marriage debate » Focus on the Family: Marriage equality activists are 'tyrants'; opponents are 'slaves' » Read: Zack Ford smacks back Ryan Anderson's love of tax-subsidized discrimination » God Hates Fads: Radical Bay State group pretends homosexuality is like skinny jeans » But does the Archbishop even believe in gay? » Video: Move over aliens, plagues, Sharknados—it's committed gays who'll soon kill Western Civilization » Nine former water-carriers for 'ex-gayness' join all credible scientists in denouncing 'ex-gay' propaganda » The operative word is 'yet'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

12/02/2011

Agreed!

by Jeremy Hooper

Brian Moylan makes a case:

First, it's degrading to women by calling them "hags" and, if you've spent any time with the women who hang around gays in New York you'll know that they are often more attractive and well put together than the average lady.

Also, it refers to their gay friends as "fags" something we wouldn't even tolerate if Liza Minnelli called us that (maybe Judy, but not Liza!).

FULL: We Need a New Word for ‘Fag Hag’ [Gawker]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails