UW Seattle Students Protest Paper’s Link of Gays to Bestiality


Approximately 100 people attended a rally at the University of Washington late last week protesting the school paper’s use of an image of a man and sheep to illustrate a column taking a stand against same-sex marriage.

The paper’s editor in chief says there will be no apology for the column: “‘That’s not the most productive way of dealing with it,’ said Jeglum. She says the student-run paper is committed to diversity, though the picture wasn’t interpreted the way staff intended. ‘There was a slippery slope argument made in the article about gay marriage leading to other forms of union and that was what illustration was meant to illustrate,’ said Jeglum. She says she’s thankful the column created a discussion about homophobia, but next time, she says she would approve a different picture. The author of the anti-gay opinion piece could not be reached for comment. His article appeared next to another opinion column supporting gay marriage.”

More at SLOG on the paper’s Ann Coulter wannabe editor (thanks commenter)…


  1. Mike says

    There has been some great coverage of this over at Slog:


    Apparently this is just the most recent example of the paper going increasingly conservative, on a liberal campus, in a liberal city.

    The article I’ve linked to is just the latest to address this in Slog, and not the best.

  2. noah says

    I wish the SLOG writer had not attacked the editor based her looks. Comparing her automatically to Ann Coulter in terms of looks is sexist. They’re both blonde and women. But holding women up to be judged on their looks? Please.

    Why fall into the same old sexist routine when dealing with a woman who one finds irritating, etc.? Attack her ideas, ethics, skills, etc. but not her looks. Yes, she’s a jerk, a bigot, an obdurate, closed-minded conservative too ignorant to understand her responsibilities as a journalist.

  3. says

    If I were on that campus instead of my own I think I would have taken the picture as an ironic commentary on the idiotic opinion piece. Anybody involved in the marriage movement knows that these slippery slope arguments come up all the time. The wingnuts are out there, in papers across the country, on message boards, still spouting their ignorant “expertise” on homosexuality.

    Frankly I think it’s a good thing for students, who tend to be naive and complacent, to see that homophobia is alive and well. Maybe they’ll get angry. Maybe they’ll do something (like protest or hold a rally).

    I do, however, have an issue with the popular perception among students (which they get from the media) that there are two sides to every issue and that they should both be respected. Sometimes giving equal time to bigots is a bad idea. Global warming? Maybe yes, maybe no. Holocaust? Maybe yes, maybe no. Science and history sometimes provide real evidence. Same here. Educated people know that the opinion piece was full of misinformation. That misinformation should be challenged somehow (and presumably will be in future letters and articles).

  4. Chris says

    I made a serious mistake and read some of the comments at Seattle Times.

    It’s a statement against freedom of expression: People stating that homosexuality would be clearly against natural law because it doesn’t produce overpopulation, that atheists would be dumb because only a God could say that there is no God and that his God tells people that we are not allowed to exist etc.

    It’s so stupid it hurts. They should go to jail for posting this crap.

  5. says

    There seems to be something about student papers that seems to be appealing to right-wingers. I used to be involved with a student paper and ended up walking out because of the racist shit they tried to pass over as ‘journalism’.

    Most journalists rank little higher than cockroaches, and it seems thier training starts early.

Leave A Reply