Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ben X

Homophobic?

Recommended Posts

Twig all I ever seem to read from you is whining about how people haven't read your posts properly. The problem here isn't everyone else. The problem is you; you're shit at communicating. Try harder, or stop trying to contribute to discussions that require you to communicate clearly.

Seriously, for someone who generally believes people should just man up and not give a shit about anything, you're doing an awful lot of whining and victimizing of yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Emotional hurdles are something you overcome through sheer force of will. You have to dig deep and find the strength to do so, sure. But everyone CAN do it. Not everyone can literally jump a hurdle. At least, not without at least being in good enough shape to do so.

As I said, in an ideal world I agree with you, but we don't have that. We have history, culture and the monumental inertia both carry.

Edit: That said, the idea that bullying is instantly deflated by non-co-operation from the bullied isn't true. Maybe with an isolated incident or one source, or maybe sometimes you can take a name intended abusively and defuse it by adopting it, but it's just not possible in every case. Try walking into the wrong bar as a gay or interracial couple and you'd soon realise why. People are not wired to be insensitive, especially when pressure mounts up from more than one source.

A game developer I know, who has dark skin, was told in the post office the other day "You seem like a very nice person, but there are too many immigrants". She was born here, FFS, went to a very good school and has a cut glass English accent. When people tell you that kind of thing, apropos of nothing, for more or less your whole life, it's almost impossible to not let that affect your concept of the world and other people.

--

Twig, I think a part of the reason you attract so much flak is that you often don't acknowledge points made by other people; you just find ways to restate your argument around them. It makes it look like you're arguing against feminism, or that you're pro-privilege, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edit: that was some unnecessary shit i had here! that just ain't like me GET RID OF IT I SAY

Salka I had already apologized for the miscommunication. That was mean, and I'm already leaving the thread. Bye. ):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Linking to old racist posters is entirely relevant. There's a history there. That's why certain words have more weight.

If I made up a phrase, say "Mega-Belgium", to describe people of a certain ethnic background, and then used it to their faces, do you think they'd be offended? It's the history of a given word that gives it power. It's typical of white people to think that racism doesn't exist anymore, so what's the Big Deal? When really racism is still very much alive. It's perhaps less institutionalized than it used to be, and it's learned to be hide itself in certain company, but every one of my friends of colour (for lack of a better phrase) over the years has related a story of modern day racism to me. From walking down the street and have someone point and say, "Look honey, a nigger!", to actual physical violence. Every single one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If someone punches you in the face, you can't just ignore it. If someone calls you a WHATEVER, it is in your power to mentally fuck them right off. It's a huge hurdle to jump. I know from experience - despite being the "safe" race and sexuality, I was still a target for a very long time. Nonetheless, it is a jumpable hurdle.

It's a jumpable hurdle to YOU, because there isn't much of an institution built around bullying skinny white nerds (or whatever you were bullied for in school, unless it was some kind of disability in which case disregard this post) beyond high school UNLESS it is combined with homophobia.

So good for you, Twig! Good on you for figuring out a way to not be bothered by things! However, telling other people that they, also, have the power to not be bothered by words is kind of a myopic and arrogant thing to say, because you're completely disregarding the fact that the discrimination those words represent shows itself in LOTS OF WAYS in their everyday life. Not just people saying things to them. The words part are just the warning, or the icing on the cake, or the punctuation for emphasis. And you cannot safely just ignore them always, because if, say, you're at a bar, and you're black, and people start calling you things, they are eventually going to break a bottle on your head or something unless you leave and leave fast. In this situation, you would not be able to just calmly drink your beer and revel in your word-depowering wizardry. And often, you really don't know when a situation is going to escalate. Or maybe it just happens so much that after a while it really becomes unignorable.

Maybe you're seeing everyone else's experience through the prism of your own experience, and applying the same standards to them. You seem to have a different concept of what "being offended" means that sounds a lot more voluntary than I think it is, and I would like to hear you explain it further, because it might just be a semantic argument, but I guess you've left the thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently I upset Orvidos with my last post.

Orv, it wasn't directly aimed at you, just a response to the idea that history wasn't relevant. And the capitalization thing was just a way of stressing words... which I then mocked myself for. Didn't mean to patronize, sorry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S'cool. I guess I didn't stress my point well enough since you seem to agree with my point that racism isn't that kind of thing anymore. Yes, words have a history and it's that history that gives them a great deal of their weight, but racism isn't a goverment institution anymore(*), or anything like that.

I'm just going to bow out here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Plz-bhcHryc&feature=player_embedded

(*There are a trillion disclaimers that needed to be added to that statement and I'm sure you all can adequately cover them.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, sorry, Orv. I guess I didn't read your entire message properly. I was more replying to the idea that such things aren't directly relevant, rather than your exact post. I think things like that are relevant, but they're also not relevant (as you say). It all depends on how you're using them, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, all these WORDS are very interesting, but I found a loophole by referring to an earlier tweet of mine...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only just realized this went from a sort of mocking thread to Morality Squad FOB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad it did, but I wish people with dissenting opinions wouldn't bow out when confronted by a larger number of opposing opinions. Regardless of who's right the discourse is useful as an educational experience, and it's something I think needs to happen much more in general. With contentious topics it's good to drag your arguments through some hot debating to see whether they hold up, and if you even still agree with them in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only just realized this went from a sort of mocking thread to Morality Squad FOB.

It's so much more than that Orv. Someone is wrong on the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish people with dissenting opinions wouldn't bow out when confronted by a larger number of opposing opinions.

Seemed to me like Twig bowed out because he was offended by some words...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hah! While Salka is apparently angry at me, it only bothers me in the sense that I don't like to upset people. It's why I am constantly apologizing for things. I am definitely an asshole, but I try to be a nice asshole! It's why I edited out a fifty paragraph essay in the last post I made. U:

The real reason I bowed out is because the argument was already approaching a near retread of an argument I'd already had in the feminism thread. Sententia: If you're interested, last time, the argument only strengthened my own beliefs, rather than bringing me to question them further. You could go read it, if you like! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad it did, but I wish people with dissenting opinions wouldn't bow out when confronted by a larger number of opposing opinions. Regardless of who's right the discourse is useful as an educational experience, and it's something I think needs to happen much more in general. With contentious topics it's good to drag your arguments through some hot debating to see whether they hold up, and if you even still agree with them in the end.

I bowed out of both the feminism thread and this because I feel both threads have reached the point where there is no useful discourse going on (I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that feminism is a good thing and racism is a bad thing in a page or two of both threads) and they just became a whirlpool of "Hey, facts, you're wrong". I'm tired of these threads.

And yes, I don't have to post in them, a-bloo bloo bloo, They don't have to continue for thirty pages more than they need to. I think what I said about this becoming the new morality squad fob is good evidence of this. A somewhat joking, somewhat serious post about a Twitter comment turned into three pages of this. And they definitely don't need to turn into what happened in the Twig situation. Yes, his experiences and feelings towards bullying/bigotry are different, and definitely do not reflect what most people go through in such situations, or how they come out of it. When you start insulting him for it? Get off your fucking high horse and stop posting about it.

It's like Tumblr in here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a-bloo bloo bloo
Peculiar!

I think the discussions here are good, for the most part, and I want them to continue. I mean, I don't follow them constantly, and some stuff is not my ballpark, some lines of argument kind of don't interest me, but still, good stuff, educational, important. For what it's worth (nothing!), you have my (!) approval!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thread didn't go very far off-topic; the original post was tangentially about language and who it offends/why, and language use as a discussion point is heating up all over the internet, at least all the places I go. When insults get thrown around it's unfortunate, but it's also indicative of a strong belief behind an opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When insults get thrown around it's unfortunate, but it's also indicative of a strong belief behind an opinion.

Does having strong feelings about something make it alright?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait the only insult I saw was "shit at communicating".

I don't think it's true that once we have said "feminism good, racism bad" there is nothing else to do but nod thoughtfully and fiddle your thumbs. If this were the case, neither sexism nor racism would be so problematic today. There's plenty to be discussed, like what exactly constitutes racism/sexism/whatever, roots of the problems, how widespread and/or harmful these things are, how they manifest in different people's lives, what can be done about it on a personal or institutional level, etc etc etc. Why do you hate facts. And freedom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, because what I definitely hate is freedom. I sincerely hope that's hyperbole/sarcasm that I'm misreading. What I actually hate is crusades, and while a certain level of intelligent discussion on these matters is fine, it continues to regularly get out of hand, which isn't fine. Even the discussions that start out perfectly modulated with everyone being civil tend to turn into "Well you're wrong by the way, and here's why". It does that every other page or every three pages. Again, civil discussion and dissemination of information is fine, social crusades all too often turn into shouting matches where no-one gets anything done.

(Note: Crusades and causes are not the same thing, but can become intertwined.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you hate facts. And freedom.

GOLD COMING FROM SOMEONE WHAT HATES FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!!

;D

Wait the only insult I saw was "shit at communicating".

I can't recall the exact quote, but it was insinuated at one point in the feminism thread that, through my "ignorance" (an insult in and of itself), I actively support bigotry by supporting offensive humor. This is complete and total bullshit. I fucking detest bigotry of any form. (Although I do feel it's important to say that I make an exception for genuinely stupid people who let themselves believe genuinely stupid things.) I am fully conscious of when I am actually guilty of it myself, and it tears me up inside when it actually happens. I relish our differences as human beings of different groups and cultures and whatever because it makes life more interesting. But I also love to mock our differences. I find humor in all things, good and bad. I don't believe this makes me a bad person. I DO tend to avoid making jokes about sensitive topics, because I don't think I'm a skilled enough humorist to make GOOD jokes on these topics. But I fully support the people who can.

Moving on!

I choose not to make a big deal of these insults, more often than not, because I like to assume that people don't actually MEAN to be insulting. Ironically, in writing this post, I now AM making a big deal out of them... I did point it out at the time in the hopes of, well, keeping the insults from happening in the future! But I have no desire to make it a Thing. It sort of worked, until Salka went nutso on me. Make no mistake: I'm not offended. I completely understand and empathize with your* frustration. I just happen to strongly disagree on what is a very touchy subject for some people. That disagreement tends to breed more and more hostility the longer the argument goes on. Which is unfortunate, but I'm not sure what I can do about it. I try to be as civil as possible while being the odd man out. I like to think I succeed, but apparently I failed after all, or we wouldn't be having this conversation!

*A general "you". I'm not referring to you, Sal, specifically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, because what I definitely hate is freedom. I sincerely hope that's hyperbole/sarcasm that I'm misreading.

Um, yes. "Why do you hate freedom" is, I thought, a pretty common jokey thing

What I actually hate is crusades, and while a certain level of intelligent discussion on these matters is fine, it continues to regularly get out of hand, which isn't fine. Even the discussions that start out perfectly modulated with everyone being civil tend to turn into "Well you're wrong by the way, and here's why". It does that every other page or every three pages. Again, civil discussion and dissemination of information is fine, social crusades all too often turn into shouting matches where no-one gets anything done.

Pointing out that someone is wrong is not inherently uncivil, though? Especially when "and here's why" comes right after. Nobody's going "well, you're wrong, and stupid, good luck being a stupid wronghead." I don't see how "well this thing you just said is wrong, and here's some stuff supporting my argument" is not a perfectly reasonable avenue of discussion.

it was insinuated at one point that, through my "ignorance" (an insult in and of itself), I actively support bigotry by supporting offensive humor.

Ignorance is not malicious. Not knowing a thing doesn't make you stupid, it just makes you uninformed. I don't remember if anyone used the actual word ignorance but I'm pretty sure those of us arguing with your view just read some of the things you said as so callous that we were trying to understand whether it was because you didn't know it hurt people, or because you thought it really didn't matter in the grand scheme of things, or because you sincerely thought that people should just learn to not feel hurt, or what. See also my post to you earlier in this thread, where I'm still wondering if maybe your definition of offense is different from mine. And see, now that you've said this:

I find humor in all things, good and bad. I don't believe this makes me a bad person. I DO tend to avoid making jokes about sensitive topics, because I don't think I'm a skilled enough humorist to make GOOD jokes on these topics. But I fully support the people who can.

it makes sense. This whole time, you were talking about jokes that are actually funny, whereas I think some of us were thinking more along the lines of "hurr women amirite?? get back in the kitchen." This is why I (and maybe others) was asking you for specific examples, because what you were saying didn't make sense with what I knew about sexist/racist/etc jokes. Which is that they're not funny.

Here's a relevant quote from an article I just read concerning the whole messy Daniel Tosh incident (let's not talk about that, btw):

People have wounds, and those wounds are painful. That doesn't have shit to do with the weak concept of "taking offense." If someone talks about Texas being a shitty state, I might "take offense" at that. Fine, whatever. All of us who like comedy are generally in agreement with the idea that "taking offense" is lame, and a comedian should be willing to "offend" whenever he or she wants to.

But causing pain is quite a different fucking matter. Your job as a comedian is to take us through pain, transcend pain, transform pain. And if you don't get that, you are a fucking bully, and I've got zero time for bullies.

So yeah basically it's like how Dave Chapelle is a good comedian (funny, insightful, subversive jokes ABOUT racism) and Carlos Mencia is a bad comedian (racist jokes playing off of but not necessarily criticizing existing racial stereotypes). Right? Or am I still completely off the mark here?

PS: In the interest of full disclosure-- I hate Carlos Mencia for various reasons but don't really feel THAT strongly about calling him a racist. Just a bad comedian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pointing out that someone is wrong is not inherently uncivil, though? Especially when "and here's why" comes right after. Nobody's going "well, you're wrong, and stupid, good luck being a stupid wronghead." I don't see how "well this thing you just said is wrong, and here's some stuff supporting my argument" is not a perfectly reasonable avenue of discussion.

I'm not saying it isn't in and of itself, but it frequently leads to "shouting" matches here on the forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, now wait a second. I specifically said multiple times that the "hurr women" jokes were fucking stupid. But I hate them on the grounds that they are stupid, not that they're offensive. If someone wants to make a joke about a woman getting back in the kitchen, he or she is fully entitled to do so, and no one should have the power to make them stop. If it proves to be unfunny (which it will, because such jokes are stupid), then they will hopefully learn from their mistake and try to tell a better joke next time around. Maybe they won't learn. Then fuck them, they aren't good comedians in the first place, and I don't have to ever listen to their dumb jokes, anyway.

I'm not familiar enough with Carlos Mencia to judge him, but that doesn't sound too different from what my opinion would be, because I prefer intelligent comedy (for the most part). But to reiterate: I don't think Carlos Mencia should be stopped from telling his bad jokes. I just don't have to listen.

I do consider being accused of ignorance an insult when every time it is followed by "here let me tell you why" and the why is something of which I'm already aware and I point this out and am later accused of ignorance of the same thing that I've already said I'm aware of. But the accusation of ignorance comes from the ignorance of the accuser, so it's not a big deal. That's kind of what I was getting at when I said I'm not offended. It is just "like, whatever, maaan".

I guess a simple answer to your inquiry as to my definition of "offensive": something that has the potential to hurt someone. The problem, in my opinion, is that everything has the potential to hurt someone, somewhere, somehow. No matter how innocent you might think it is. It's ridiculous, I know. But there are people who will literally be offended by a poop joke. Certainly there are different degrees of offensiveness, and intelligent human beings understand that some things, like rape, are on a whole different level from poop, but that doesn't stop that one crazy person from being offended by a seemingly inconsequential thing. And I don't mean to downplay the significance of a comment about rape by comparing it to poop, so don't take it that way, PLEASE. My point is that, in comedy, there can't be some arbitrary line. No two people will ever agree on where that line is. There will always be slight variations depending on the topic and the individual. Every audience member has the power and the right to be offended, but they don't have the power or right to shut things down.

Now let me ask you this: how do you define "actually funny"? Who is the final judge on what is and isn't funny?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I certainly don't think a government entity should be on hand to stop people from telling awful jokes. I've been saying that people shouldn't tell those jokes, because it is a bad thing to do, and yes, hopefully if they do they will learn to stop doing it when they make people sad or get slapped in the face. I also don't think people should go around pulling tigers' tails because it's a pretty awful thing to do in and of itself and hurts the tiger and also the tiger will kill you, but certainly people have the right to do that I guess.

When you say 'I don't think he should be stopped' do you mean that there shouldn't be like a government-sponsored censure of his jokes, or that nobody should complain or tell him his jokes are bad? Because I totally agree with the first one, but I am also very much on board with people telling him to stop telling jokes that he steals and then tells badly. :I

There's a difference between a good-natured joke and bullying, and intent has less to do with it than effect does. If you hug someone too hard because you love them so much, and you accidentally break their rib, you ease off. And maybe you hug people more gently in the future, so as to prevent more injuries. You shouldn't be stopped from hugging people, but you really should stop hugging people so hard. If you don't because you really just don't feel like it and people should just learn to put their arms up for defense, well that's pretty horrible.

Now let me ask you this: how do you define "actually funny"? Who is the final judge on what is and isn't funny?

The last sentence of the article I quoted summarizes it pretty well: "Your job as a comedian is to take us through pain, transcend pain, transform pain." Not just point out pain, or say that your pain is funny to me.

The list at the end of this article is good: http://jezebel.com/5925186/how-to-make-a-rape-joke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×