comparing homophobia or the status of GLBT people in America to anything related to the North American slave trade and it's lingering effects in the USA is what's offensive. speaking of PC.
i'm not doing any such thing, i'm comparing lame defenses of offensive terminology
bullshit.
you are making a moral equivalence argument. and it's very weak.
Actually, the moral equivalence argument is strong. Your defense is that the marginalization of people for being GLBT has not taken the exact forms of the marginalization of people for being of African descent.
That a specific set of circumstances/state of affairs has not played out in the same exact ways historically as another set of circumstances/state of affairs-- as they rarely if ever do-- doesn't exonerate your blunder.
Actually, the moral equivalence argument is strong. Your defense is that the marginalization of people for being GLBT has not taken the exact forms of the marginalization of people for being of African descent.
You do not understand words. And you are making shit up. African descent what? Marginalization? Huh? I said the lingering effects of slavery in the USA. I don't know about you, but that is about being disenfranchised. That is what's funneled into the N-word when I hear it. Not marginalization. Sure the word faggot is rude and crass, but to give it equivalence with N doesn't help any view of this argument.
That's the only point where I disagree with Mr. Deej. And, look back through this thread, it's funny how he tried to back out if it.
That a specific set of circumstances/state of affairs has not played out in the same exact ways historically as another set of circumstances/state of affairs-- as they rarely if ever do-- doesn't exonerate your blunder.
ok here is what i dont understand about the folks, like pc popo deej, arguin whether faggoty is cool or not. when i see comments about particular religious fanatics (read christians), i dont see anyone sayin anything about that being judgmental or demeaning. i see a lot of folks joining in on the hate. so why would you be "tolerant" for one thing and intolerant for another? the whole point to being tolerant is to be open to everything. am i not correct? thats why i think your lil pc campaigns are bullshit.
if i am a homophobe why are you not tolerant with that? why do i have to be tolerant to your views, but not the other way around?
and by the way, the baby rita name is an inside joke.
If it was anybody else but fatback I would have given this thread title the NAGL stamp. But what can I say? I think Frank is funny. He knew what he was doing when he put 'faggity' in the title, and this thread pretty much turned out the way he knew it would.
So the office is having a little "dunk tank" thing to raise some money for the x-mas party. Everybody gets this email from one of the girls that was going to participate:
All,
I must decline my acceptance as a nominee for the dunk tank. I was informed yesterday that I will be leaving on a deployment for the Air Force on Sunday.
I wish I could make it but I'm sure you guys will have a wonderful time dunking L*e and M*r*n instead. :-)
So M*r*n (who is a bit of a smartass) responds with some smack talking:
Just one less Non-throwing female to laugh at I guess........
Then, this email shows up:
That comment sounded a little insulting to this female regardless of who it was directed at. Please watch your "cute" replies when so many recipients are involved.
K*lly
The strange part? K*lly wasn't a female when she started working here. She was a he. A big HE. Used to be an Army Ranger. The email where the head office announces that K*lly will no be using the women's restroom was called "the email heard 'round the world". Now go read that last part again. K*lly is a feminist now. There is something really awesome about that.
So the office is having a little "dunk tank" thing to raise some money for the x-mas party. Everybody gets this email from one of the girls that was going to participate:
All,
I must decline my acceptance as a nominee for the dunk tank. I was informed yesterday that I will be leaving on a deployment for the Air Force on Sunday.
I wish I could make it but I'm sure you guys will have a wonderful time dunking L*e and M*r*n instead. :-)
So M*r*n (who is a bit of a smartass) responds with some smack talking:
Just one less Non-throwing female to laugh at I guess........
Then, this email shows up:
That comment sounded a little insulting to this female regardless of who it was directed at. Please watch your "cute" replies when so many recipients are involved.
K*lly
The strange part? K*lly wasn't a female when she started working here. She was a he. A big HE. Used to be an Army Ranger. The email where the head office announces that K*lly will no be using the women's restroom was called "the email heard 'round the world". Now go read that last part again. K*lly is a feminist now. There is something really awesome about that.
Actually, the moral equivalence argument is strong. Your defense is that the marginalization of people for being GLBT has not taken the exact forms of the marginalization of people for being of African descent.
You do not understand words. And you are making shit up. African descent what? Marginalization? Huh? I said the lingering effects of slavery in the USA. I don't know about you, but that is about being disenfranchised. That is what's funneled into the N-word when I hear it. Not marginalization. Sure the word faggot is rude and crass, but to give it equivalence with N doesn't help any view of this argument.
That's the only point where I disagree with Mr. Deej. And, look back through this thread, it's funny how he tried to back out if it.
That a specific set of circumstances/state of affairs has not played out in the same exact ways historically as another set of circumstances/state of affairs-- as they rarely if ever do-- doesn't exonerate your blunder.
I want to exonerate my blunder. That's funny.
I don't understand words? Clever.
I'll make this brief. You stated that the moral equivalence argument was bullshit. So the line of reasoning goes, GLBT folks have not been oppressed in the way that people of African dsecent have been. In short, Gay people, Trans people, others who fall outside of heternormativity are not marginalized by the word "faggot" in the same way that Black people (you unnecessarily ad "in this country" or something to that effect) are marginalized by the word "nigger." Ergo, it is the people who called you out on using "faggot" who have the real problem-- How dare they compare it to the "N-word?"
As a Black dude who does call white people out on saying "nigger" this strikes me as one of the most asinine, spineless, and intellectualy dishonest arguments put forth. First, it rests on the problematic idea that a bad thing has to take the same exact form as a previous bad thing to be condemned as such. Following that line of reasoning, it's wrong to call Rwanda '93 genocide because it's not the Nazi Holocaust. A serial murder is not a serial murder unless it's as gruesome as something Dahmer did, etc., etc.
Secondly-- There are MANY significant parallels between the experiences of GLBT folks and Black people in this country and you have to be oblivious or willfully ignorant to not recognize them. Not limited to
* The redlining of GLBT persons into specific areas. * Negative stereoptypes * Scapegoating * Inabilty to form legally recognized social unions (Learn something about slavery before invoking it) * Relogation to identities socially constructed for the express purpose of marginalizing people (Learn about the social construction of the identity "homosexual" and compare/contrast this with the construction of discreet racial groups) * Difficulty obtaining employment because of group identity * Legally codified AND socially enforced denial of complete social agency because of group identity
I could go on, but I think it suffices to say that not only is your argument weak on logical grounds, it's weak on practical grounds even if one buys into your line of reasoning.
Actually, the moral equivalence argument is strong. Your defense is that the marginalization of people for being GLBT has not taken the exact forms of the marginalization of people for being of African descent.
You do not understand words. And you are making shit up. African descent what? Marginalization? Huh? I said the lingering effects of slavery in the USA. I don't know about you, but that is about being disenfranchised. That is what's funneled into the N-word when I hear it. Not marginalization. Sure the word faggot is rude and crass, but to give it equivalence with N doesn't help any view of this argument.
That's the only point where I disagree with Mr. Deej. And, look back through this thread, it's funny how he tried to back out if it.
That a specific set of circumstances/state of affairs has not played out in the same exact ways historically as another set of circumstances/state of affairs-- as they rarely if ever do-- doesn't exonerate your blunder.
I want to exonerate my blunder. That's funny.
I don't understand words? Clever.
I'll make this brief. You stated that the moral equivalence argument was bullshit. So the line of reasoning goes, GLBT folks have not been oppressed in the way that people of African dsecent have been. In short, Gay people, Trans people, others who fall outside of heternormativity are not marginalized by the word "faggot" in the same way that Black people (you unnecessarily ad "in this country" or something to that effect) are marginalized by the word "nigger." Ergo, it is the people who called you out on using "faggot" who have the real problem-- How dare they compare it to the "N-word?"
As a Black dude who does call white people out on saying "nigger" this strikes me as one of the most asinine, spineless, and intellectually dishonest arguments put forth. First, it rests on the problematic idea that a bad thing has to take the same exact form as a previous bad thing to be condemned as such. Following that line of reasoning, it's wrong to call Rwanda '93 genocide because it's not the Nazi Holocaust. A serial murder is not a serial murder unless it's as gruesome as something Dahmer did, etc., etc.
Secondly-- There are MANY significant parallels between the experiences of GLBT folks and Black people in this country and you have to be oblivious or willfully ignorant to not recognize them. Not limited to
* The redlining of GLBT persons into specific areas. * Negative stereoptypes * Scapegoating * Inabilty to form legally recognized social unions (Learn something about slavery before invoking it) * Relogation to identities socially constructed for the express purpose of marginalizing people (Learn about the social construction of the identity "homosexual" and compare/contrast this with the construction of discreet racial groups) * Difficulty obtaining employment because of group identity * Legally codified AND socially enforced denial of complete social agency because of group identity
I could go on, but I think it suffices to say that not only is your argument weak on logical grounds, it's weak on practical grounds even if one buys into your line of reasoning.
You're a fucking tool. You are so uptight and misguided that you are hallucinating and making up words. You read like a flunked out philosophy major. Have you ever tried to apply any of your poor man's Michael Eric Dyson rhetoric? You need to call me. We need intelligent problem solvers like you. Puke.
You clearly have not read this thread and you are simply hung up on this delusional premise that you made up. I'm glad you like yourself, because you are so boring. Don't accuse me being dismissive of GLBT struggles because I suggest those struggles are different from slaves and their descendants in the USA.
Actually, the moral equivalence argument is strong. Your defense is that the marginalization of people for being GLBT has not taken the exact forms of the marginalization of people for being of African descent.
You do not understand words. And you are making shit up. African descent what? Marginalization? Huh? I said the lingering effects of slavery in the USA. I don't know about you, but that is about being disenfranchised. That is what's funneled into the N-word when I hear it. Not marginalization. Sure the word faggot is rude and crass, but to give it equivalence with N doesn't help any view of this argument.
That's the only point where I disagree with Mr. Deej. And, look back through this thread, it's funny how he tried to back out if it.
That a specific set of circumstances/state of affairs has not played out in the same exact ways historically as another set of circumstances/state of affairs-- as they rarely if ever do-- doesn't exonerate your blunder.
I want to exonerate my blunder. That's funny.
I don't understand words? Clever.
I'll make this brief. You stated that the moral equivalence argument was bullshit. So the line of reasoning goes, GLBT folks have not been oppressed in the way that people of African dsecent have been. In short, Gay people, Trans people, others who fall outside of heternormativity are not marginalized by the word "faggot" in the same way that Black people (you unnecessarily ad "in this country" or something to that effect) are marginalized by the word "nigger." Ergo, it is the people who called you out on using "faggot" who have the real problem-- How dare they compare it to the "N-word?"
As a Black dude who does call white people out on saying "nigger" this strikes me as one of the most asinine, spineless, and intellectually dishonest arguments put forth. First, it rests on the problematic idea that a bad thing has to take the same exact form as a previous bad thing to be condemned as such. Following that line of reasoning, it's wrong to call Rwanda '93 genocide because it's not the Nazi Holocaust. A serial murder is not a serial murder unless it's as gruesome as something Dahmer did, etc., etc.
Secondly-- There are MANY significant parallels between the experiences of GLBT folks and Black people in this country and you have to be oblivious or willfully ignorant to not recognize them. Not limited to
* The redlining of GLBT persons into specific areas. * Negative stereoptypes * Scapegoating * Inabilty to form legally recognized social unions (Learn something about slavery before invoking it) * Relogation to identities socially constructed for the express purpose of marginalizing people (Learn about the social construction of the identity "homosexual" and compare/contrast this with the construction of discreet racial groups) * Difficulty obtaining employment because of group identity * Legally codified AND socially enforced denial of complete social agency because of group identity
I could go on, but I think it suffices to say that not only is your argument weak on logical grounds, it's weak on practical grounds even if one buys into your line of reasoning.
You're a fucking tool. You are so uptight and misguided that you are hallucinating and making up words. You read like a flunked out philosophy major. Have you ever tried to apply any of your poor man's Michael Eric Dyson rhetoric? You need to call me. We need intelligent problem solvers like you. Puke.
You clearly have not read this thread and you are simply hung up on this delusional premise that you made up. I'm glad you like yourself, because you are so boring. Don't accuse me being dismissive of GLBT struggles because I suggest those struggles are different from slaves and their descendants in the USA.
You didn't just say the struggles were different. That statement alone isn't all that controversial-- For instance, exploitation has historically not been as big a factor in GLBT struggles. You said that the moral equivalance argument was bullshit. Perhaps you should go back and read what you wrote. In short, the crux of your argument is "A straight person saying 'faggot' is not as bad as a non-Black person saying 'nigger'." But hey, maybe that's just a "delusional premise." A backpeddling graemlin would be nice.
I'm not super emotionally invested at this point because you've already made yourself look very stupid, but I love how verbose arguments are acceptable when debating cartoonish conservative strutters, but not when someone points out that you stepped in shit. Next time: "Yeah, I'm sorry. That was wrong of me." Peace.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
"A straight person saying 'faggot' is not as bad as a non-Black person saying 'nigger'."
"A straight person saying 'faggot' is not as bad as a non-Black person saying 'nigger'."
That is the truth though.
As someone who has a tooth missing because some rednecks presumably didn't like the way I was dressed and decided to beat me until "you admit that your a poofter", i find rating things on the hate-o-meter pretty offensive.
Hate is hate. Trying to pass it off as a colloquialism is bullshit. It makes me mad every time I read it on here, and it makes me even madder when people get on some "my hurt is worse than your hurt" BS.
Someone is hating you for something you can't change in both instances.
For the record- I'm not outing myself on the strut - I have a girlfriend, and beyond that it's none of anyones business.
In short, the crux of your argument is "A straight person saying 'faggot' is not as bad as a non-Black person saying 'nigger'."
I said they are different. It's not that your verbose arguments are unacceptable. Not at all. You just write like an excited teenager preparing for his Sociology of Discrimination exam. You flunked. Sorry. You managed to bring everything but breeder Aliens into your argument. Stupid? Who?
Anyways, I'd like for you to stay around. I could teach you some stuff. I'm tired of beating the fuckin shit out of these chump ass conservatives.
"A straight person saying 'faggot' is not as bad as a non-Black person saying 'nigger'."
That is the truth though.
As someone who has a tooth missing because some rednecks presumably didn't like the way I was dressed and decided to beat me until "you admit that your a poofter", i find rating things on the hate-o-meter pretty offensive.
Hate is hate. Trying to pass it off as a colloquialism is bullshit. It makes me mad every time I read it on here, and it makes me even madder when people get on some "my hurt is worse than your hurt" BS.
Someone is hating you for something you can't change in both instances.
For the record- I'm not outing myself on the strut - I have a girlfriend, and beyond that it's none of anyones business.
Why did you have to throw in that "I'm not gay" comment?
Because too too many times i've had not being homophobic equated with actually being gay. Plus i've seen innocuous comments become a witch hunt on here, just didn't want to give anyone fuel.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
"A straight person saying 'faggot' is not as bad as a non-Black person saying 'nigger'."
That is the truth though.
As someone who has a tooth missing because some rednecks presumably didn't like the way I was dressed and decided to beat me until "you admit that your a poofter", i find rating things on the hate-o-meter pretty offensive.
Hate is hate. Trying to pass it off as a colloquialism is bullshit. It makes me mad every time I read it on here, and it makes me even madder when people get on some "my hurt is worse than your hurt" BS.
Someone is hating you for something you can't change in both instances.
For the record- I'm not outing myself on the strut - I have a girlfriend, and beyond that it's none of anyones business.
I'm very sorry that that happened to you.
But until you've been ripped from from your family and heritage, stuffed in a disease-ridden ship like a sardine, risked death as you are taken across an ocean, forced to do manual labor under the coersion of routine whippings and very real threats of lynchings and castrations, had your wife and children stolen away from you, denied an education, been legally defined as only 3/5th of a man, faced unapologetic and systematically overt discrimination over the course of 400+ years, and on top of all of that you lack the chance to ever hide from being a product of such a sordid history...plaese to fall back.
"A straight person saying 'faggot' is not as bad as a non-Black person saying 'nigger'."
That is the truth though.
As someone who has a tooth missing because some rednecks presumably didn't like the way I was dressed and decided to beat me until "you admit that your a poofter", i find rating things on the hate-o-meter pretty offensive.
Hate is hate. Trying to pass it off as a colloquialism is bullshit. It makes me mad every time I read it on here, and it makes me even madder when people get on some "my hurt is worse than your hurt" BS.
Someone is hating you for something you can't change in both instances.
For the record- I'm not outing myself on the strut - I have a girlfriend, and beyond that it's none of anyones business.
I'm very sorry that that happened to you.
But until you've been ripped from from your family and heritage, stuffed in a disease-ridden ship like a sardine, risked death as you are taken across an ocean, forced to do manual labor under the coersion of routine whippings and very real threats of lynchings and castrations, had your wife and children stolen away from you, denied an education, been legally defined as only 3/5th of a man, faced unapologetic and systematically overt discrimination over the course of 400+ years, and on top of all of that you lack the chance to ever hide from being a product of such a sordid history...plaese to fall back.
using the oppression of one group to defend the oppression of another. Nice.
Comments
Actually, the moral equivalence argument is strong. Your defense is that the marginalization of people for being GLBT has not taken the exact forms of the marginalization of people for being of African descent.
That a specific set of circumstances/state of affairs has not played out in the same exact ways historically as another set of circumstances/state of affairs-- as they rarely if ever do-- doesn't exonerate your blunder.
SoulStrut OGs stand up! Who besides Shied has been here since 1992!?
^^^DOESN'T THINK ANYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE EXISTED PRE-SOULSTRUT^^^
haha. That was kinda funny.
tequila gimlet aint half bad either
You do not understand words. And you are making shit up. African descent what? Marginalization? Huh? I said the lingering effects of slavery in the USA. I don't know about you, but that is about being disenfranchised. That is what's funneled into the N-word when I hear it. Not marginalization. Sure the word faggot is rude and crass, but to give it equivalence with N doesn't help any view of this argument.
That's the only point where I disagree with Mr. Deej. And, look back through this thread, it's funny how he tried to back out if it.
I want to exonerate my blunder. That's funny.
ok here is what i dont understand about the folks, like pc popo deej, arguin whether faggoty is cool or not.
when i see comments about particular religious fanatics (read christians), i dont see anyone sayin anything about that being judgmental or demeaning. i see a lot of folks joining in on the hate. so why would you be "tolerant" for one thing and intolerant for another?
the whole point to being tolerant is to be open to everything. am i not correct?
thats why i think your lil pc campaigns are bullshit.
if i am a homophobe why are you not tolerant with that? why do i have to be tolerant to your views, but not the other way around?
and by the way, the baby rita name is an inside joke.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
MAD FAGGITY
NAGL
TOO LITTLE CHALANCE.
All,
I must decline my acceptance as a nominee for the dunk tank. I was informed yesterday that I will be leaving on a deployment for the Air Force on Sunday.
I wish I could make it but I'm sure you guys will have a wonderful time dunking L*e and M*r*n instead. :-)
So M*r*n (who is a bit of a smartass) responds with some smack talking:
Just one less Non-throwing female to laugh at I guess........
Then, this email shows up:
That comment sounded a little insulting to this female regardless of who it was directed at. Please watch your "cute" replies when so many recipients are involved.
K*lly
The strange part? K*lly wasn't a female when she started working here. She was a he. A big HE. Used to be an Army Ranger. The email where the head office announces that K*lly will no be using the women's restroom was called "the email heard 'round the world". Now go read that last part again. K*lly is a feminist now. There is something really awesome about that.
And thats my worthless story for the day.
I have a hard time not describing things as retarded now at 28.
Great story, but... What is Kelly's liquor drink?
4cl Southern Comfort
2 cl Canadian or Bourbon
2 cl fresh lemon juice
4 cl fresh orange juice
shake with icecubes and strain it in a long drink glas filled with 1/3 crushed ice
one of my favourite summer drinks and one of the few really good drinks with Southern Comfort
I don't understand words? Clever.
I'll make this brief. You stated that the moral equivalence argument was bullshit. So the line of reasoning goes, GLBT folks have not been oppressed in the way that people of African dsecent have been. In short, Gay people, Trans people, others who fall outside of heternormativity are not marginalized by the word "faggot" in the same way that Black people (you unnecessarily ad "in this country" or something to that effect) are marginalized by the word "nigger." Ergo, it is the people who called you out on using "faggot" who have the real problem-- How dare they compare it to the "N-word?"
As a Black dude who does call white people out on saying "nigger" this strikes me as one of the most asinine, spineless, and intellectualy dishonest arguments put forth. First, it rests on the problematic idea that a bad thing has to take the same exact form as a previous bad thing to be condemned as such. Following that line of reasoning, it's wrong to call Rwanda '93 genocide because it's not the Nazi Holocaust. A serial murder is not a serial murder unless it's as gruesome as something Dahmer did, etc., etc.
Secondly-- There are MANY significant parallels between the experiences of GLBT folks and Black people in this country and you have to be oblivious or willfully ignorant to not recognize them. Not limited to
* The redlining of GLBT persons into specific areas.
* Negative stereoptypes
* Scapegoating
* Inabilty to form legally recognized social unions (Learn something about slavery before invoking it)
* Relogation to identities socially constructed for the express purpose of marginalizing people (Learn about the social construction of the identity "homosexual" and compare/contrast this with the construction of discreet racial groups)
* Difficulty obtaining employment because of group identity
* Legally codified AND socially enforced denial of complete social agency because of group identity
I could go on, but I think it suffices to say that not only is your argument weak on logical grounds, it's weak on practical grounds even if one buys into your line of reasoning.
You're a fucking tool. You are so uptight and misguided that you are hallucinating and making up words. You read like a flunked out philosophy major. Have you ever tried to apply any of your poor man's Michael Eric Dyson rhetoric? You need to call me. We need intelligent problem solvers like you. Puke.
You clearly have not read this thread and you are simply hung up on this delusional premise that you made up. I'm glad you like yourself, because you are so boring. Don't accuse me being dismissive of GLBT struggles because I suggest those struggles are different from slaves and their descendants in the USA.
You didn't just say the struggles were different. That statement alone isn't all that controversial-- For instance, exploitation has historically not been as big a factor in GLBT struggles. You said that the moral equivalance argument was bullshit. Perhaps you should go back and read what you wrote. In short, the crux of your argument is "A straight person saying 'faggot' is not as bad as a non-Black person saying 'nigger'." But hey, maybe that's just a "delusional premise." A backpeddling graemlin would be nice.
I'm not super emotionally invested at this point because you've already made yourself look very stupid, but I love how verbose arguments are acceptable when debating cartoonish conservative strutters, but not when someone points out that you stepped in shit. Next time: "Yeah, I'm sorry. That was wrong of me." Peace.
That is the truth though.
As someone who has a tooth missing because some rednecks presumably didn't like the way I was dressed and decided to beat me until "you admit that your a poofter", i find rating things on the hate-o-meter pretty offensive.
Hate is hate. Trying to pass it off as a colloquialism is bullshit. It makes me mad every time I read it on here, and it makes me even madder when people get on some "my hurt is worse than your hurt" BS.
Someone is hating you for something you can't change in both instances.
For the record- I'm not outing myself on the strut - I have a girlfriend, and beyond that it's none of anyones business.
I said they are different. It's not that your verbose arguments are unacceptable. Not at all. You just write like an excited teenager preparing for his Sociology of Discrimination exam. You flunked. Sorry. You managed to bring everything but breeder Aliens into your argument. Stupid? Who?
Anyways, I'd like for you to stay around. I could teach you some stuff. I'm tired of beating the fuckin shit out of these chump ass conservatives.
Start another topic. Let's go.
Why did you have to throw in that "I'm not gay" comment?
I'm very sorry that that happened to you.
But until you've been ripped from from your family and heritage, stuffed in a disease-ridden ship like a sardine, risked death as you are taken across an ocean, forced to do manual labor under the coersion of routine whippings and very real threats of lynchings and castrations, had your wife and children stolen away from you, denied an education, been legally defined as only 3/5th of a man, faced unapologetic and systematically overt discrimination over the course of 400+ years, and on top of all of that you lack the chance to ever hide from being a product of such a sordid history...plaese to fall back.
What's that? I can't hear you.