Yeah, well this is something I’ve always found odd. Cigarettes are generally called fags, but the packaged, non hand-rolled variety are sometimes called straights. Well, they are by my friends anyway.
I just find it funny that my friends regularly call cigarettes both straights and fags. Never mind, no-one else is gonna find it odd.
Cheers, Harry
You are incorrect. By implying in the other thread’s title that the person/people with whom you were upset has/have somehow implicated an entire subset of the population, you dragged that subset into the discussion with no cause or provocation whatsoever. Consider: How much less effective would your thread have been had you titled it “You’re making yourself look like an ignorant fuck”? I submit that it would have been just as, if not more, effective.
My apologies. I had a suspicion that I was overreacting to that point, and I appreciate you confirming that for me. Mea culpa.
I’m not flaming – or at least, I’m not intending to do so. My question is, if your intention was to make the point you just did so eloquently, why is it necessary to say that the actions of a few idiots make an entire subset of the population look bad?
I can’t answer this to your satisfaction, obviously – I can’t prove my motives to you. For what it’s worth, I will tell you that my intent, when I opened the thread, was to protest the perceived prejudice in the thread title. I didn’t notice the name of the author until I began reading, and others began mentioning your screen name.
I do not understand how people have read this into the thread title; however:
[ul][li]It was not my intent.[/li][li]I have aplogized.[/li][li]I won’t do it again.[/ul][/li]
What more do I need to do?
Esprix
Bullshit. From the link you posted, you were obviously reffering to Baldwin’s lame joke and the very first sentence in your OP says “you’re an ignorant choad whose swaggering machismo makes you out to be exactly the fuckhead you truly are.” Now, you can try to weasel out of this one by saying that you didn’t specifically mean Baldwin, but I ain’t buying it.
You are a screechy, hissy, drama queen. You are so wrapped up in your own sexuality that it colors everything in your world. Recently, in a thread about the “PC police” you even went so far as implying that I willfully insult gay people. Seeing as the only referrence to homosexuality I made in that entire thread was asking you a hypothetical question regarding what seemed to be a contradiction in your posts, I thought it a bit over the top and indicative of your ‘I’m-so-oppressed’ worldview.
Though you had no way of knowing, I have written several letters to government officials and elected representatives regarding gay marriage and inheritance rights after observing the problems my uncle and his partner of twenty some odd years have experienced. (Neither is a screechy, hissy drama queen by the way). In that thread I claimed that I was not easily offended, but I have to admit your throw away insult stung a bit. Call it a petty grievance if you like, but the “I bet you hate homosexuals” driveby is your modus operandi around here. You are far to quick to accuse someone of homophobia, racism, misogynism, etc.
Not every one cares about your sexual orientation, Esprix, yet you always assume the worst. Get over yourself.
Thank you for reading the first sentence. Did you read the last?
I bolded the important part. Thanks.
Maybe because it hit a little too close to home?
The comments about which I started the thread that started this whole fucking mess in the first place were homophobic and misogynistic. I was not out of line by calling them such.
Esprix
Your “disclaimer” was as weasly as your “apology”. You are a screechy, hissy, drama queen and one trick pony that would rather insinuate something you believe than actually come out and say it.
Needless to say, I don’t like you much. I can’t stand anti-semites*
And you are still using the “well, you must hate gay people” bullshit when it’s not relevant.
*disclaimer: I am not refferring to Esprix specifically as an anti-semite. Gosh, you can say anything as long as you tag it with a disclaimer, can’t you?
The Things I’ve Learned Today, by Esprix
[ul][li]It’s ok to fight ignorance - but not too much.[/li][li]It’s ok to stand up for youself and your community - but not too much.[/li][li]If you have an issue that is important to you, you cannot be defined by anything else in your life - you are a one trick pony.[/li][li]It’s not important when people say ignorant things, it’s only important whether or not you like the person who tells them that what they said was ignorant.[/li][li]If someone says something offensive, telling them so makes you a screechy, hissy, drama queen.[/li][li]Because you are a screechy, hissy, drama queen, it is ok to continue to insult them and their community.[/ul][/li]
My point - as it has always been - is that making derogatory comments to lesbians, and using the word “gay” as a slur, is ignorant and offensive.
My thanks go to those who agreed with that point and supported it throughout this debacle. No thanks go to those that derailed that point with attacks on my character.
Esprix
Sauron asked “why is it necessary to say that the actions of a few idiots make an entire subset of the population look bad?”
It’s probably fair to note that, for better or for worse, that is how at least some parts of the world works. There are idiots out there, that hold various positions, and sometimes that means that other people are going to feel that they have to be on-guard until other people prove themselves not-idiots.
You religious? Ever have the moment of tension when you find out a new acquaintance is an atheist, waiting to see if they’re going to express contempt because you have gods? You an atheist? How about that moment of tension when your new religious acquaintance finds out, where you’re bracing for the “But you should read my Book, and then you’ll understand and be okay” spiel. Childfree? Tired of “When your clock starts ticking you’ll change your mind” yet? Want or got kids? Encountered one too many bursts of vitriol about the “spawn” produced by “breeders”?
Or perhaps, are you not quite wary of people with those identifications, but just really short-tempered with them if they show up? Does running into a bisexual who starts up on the “people who are only attracted to one sex are repressed” line provoke irritation beyond the ignorance of the offense? If you run into someone who spouts the whole “Paleolithic Mother Goddess that everyone worshipped and there was no fighting and lots of sex” line, would you test and verify if they told you what time it was afterwards?
Or are there people who share your adjectives that make you cringe? Me, I go ballistic at the polyamorous folks who starts pulling “more highly evolved” or “more enlightened” lines on other people, for one simple reason: they make me look bad. They take the actions of a few idiots, and leave me with more work to demonstrate my good faith. I don’t like that this happens, but it really is likely that entire subsets of the population will be tarred by the stupid actions of a primonent few.
It sucks slugs through a straw. It makes the lives of people who don’t deserve the backlash harder. It makes it harder to trust. It puts nasty crevices all through the idea of shared community.
That’s why I appreciate Esprix and others pointing things out. It’s why I put in some effort to point things out, too, in areas where I’m informed (and in areas where my ox is being gored). So long as the idiots can carry on being idiots freely, they’ll be putting rifts between the people of good faith, the people who are interested in building community together. This is all . . . (something I’ve realised that I can’t put in English easily) . . . hard work that I believe needs to be done. Not just the fighting ignorance. That’s a good start, but it’s not enough to restore good faith, build a community in which differing people can be productive members without fear that their differences will break the community.
I like alloys. They have strength.
Is it like this in real life, too, or just on a message board?
Lilairen, I agree completely with most all of what you said. My only complaint arises when the fight against ignorance in itself contains some ignorance in the form of prejudice (against any group). Then I feel I should speak up.
Since Esprix has apologized for any perceived slight, intentional or not, I’m copacetic with everything. (Not that he owed me an apology, of course.)
I have nothing to add except an admiration for, and intent to use at the earliest opportunity, the following phrase:
I’m sorry, but that’s bullshit. There’s simply no implication in that thread title that Exprix’s comments were directed at heterosexuality at a whole. I’m at a loss as how it can be read otherwise. The clear implication is that the people he’s addressing are substandard: that they are making heterosexuals look worse than they really are.
Further, the comment is entirely on point, as this is the sort of issue where you rarely see the other side of it. There’s a certain minority of straights that make this sort of joke, and there are a majority (I hope) who do not. But making the joke is much more visibile than not making the joke. A lesbian talking to a straight guy about her relationship might hear, “Can I watch?” but she’s not going to hear, “I’m not interested in watching because I have too much respect for the dynamics of your non-traditional relationship.” Who do you think makes the bigger impression? The jackass who makes the offensive joke, or the decent person who doesn’t make any sort of joke at all? These people do, indeed, reflect badly on heterosexuality as a whole, and they should be called on it.
I’m curious: Why would you automatically assume all heterosexuals share the opinions of the idiots against whom the tirade was directed? Why do those idiots automatically get to drag down everyone else?
It’s my assertion that this wouldn’t happen for those whose worldview isn’t already narrowed by ignorance or prejudice. If one hears the “trapped lesbian” comment, one should be able to think “that person is an idiot,” not “heterosexuals are idiots because of this person’s statement.”
As was mentioned earlier, the attitude displayed in your post would also lead to the assumption “Black people can’t be journalists, because they plagiarize” as opposed to “Jayson Blair can’t be a journalist because he plagiarizes.” Does Jayson Blair make black people look like plagiarizers? No. He makes Jayson Blair look like a plagiarizer. Bringing his race into the equation serves no purpose whatsoever, other than to support a preconceived prejudice or stereotype fostered by the person making such an argument.
You may want to reflect on that.
You put it down to petty past grievances. Others have suggested it might actually have something to do with your own readiness in the past to take issue with perceived offense where none was meant. The thread only really took off once you started making comments that offended and refused to accept that this was the case.
Your own words:
Sometimes an outsider can read things into our words that we did not mean. There is apparently a perception about you (that I was not previously particularly aware of, actually) that you also read into comments things that were not the intent and then similarly flame them for it. In fact and after reading Baldwin’s reply, the OP that started all this may be a case in point of you doing just that. From my so-far uninvolved point of view, the pile-on was little more than a reaction to the irony of the situation.
pan
So are you an outright liar or simply being disingenuous? You’ve been involved in at least two Pit threads where the offensiveness of the term “faggot” has been discussed. You absolutely knew the kind of reaction that term gets from people on this board and you chose it deliberately to get that response. To claim innocence due to ignorance is bullshit.
Why? Is it true, then, that my message wasn’t important, it was only important that I delivered it?
And, as I mentioned in the other thread, I specifically went out of my way not to make this about any specific poster or any specific post on the SDMB, but rather a general rant because I’m sick of hearing these ignorant comments (and I’m obviously not the only one who thinks they’re ignorant, as I haven’t heard a single lesbian yet say they were a-ok by her). Are such comments ignorant or not? Shouldn’t you call people on their ignorance, whether it was intended or not? I obviously insulted a lot of straight men here - unintentionally - and got called on it - rightly - and have apologized. Why do these comments get a free ride and I don’t?
Esprix
I think us Philly Dopers can only ever truly forgive you if youse comes ta FluffyaDopeFest.
GoBear
I disagree. The most hateful thing to call a gay man is LogCabinist.
Because when one’s message starts to become obscured by one’s persona the import of the message is lost.
Entirely possibly. That’s why I suggested that you reflect on it.
Wow. There’s a lot of mixed-up messages in there. Let’s try to sort them out: [list=1][li] I don’t blame you for wanting to take a stand against something you (and I, actually) find offensive.[/li]
[li] There are ways and means of doing this. Choosing the wrong one leads to all kinds of messy consequences. Making personal comments about an individual poster that you have previously never heard of (and regardless of what you think you did, this was what happened) appears to many people to be a wrong one.[/li]
[li] Unfortunately you also chose an ambiguous title that came across to many as just as offensive as what you were complaining about. This is where your track record took hold - not stages (1) or (2). It would seem that there was widespread outrage at the irony of someone doing this who themselves have been given in the past to shooting first and asking questions later on matters of perceived offence [/li]
[li] Your responses when questioned on this were defensive rather than conciliatory. This added fuel to the fire because, again, you have a reputation of demanding apologies rather than explanations from others that offend you.[/list=1]Do you see? It wasn’t what you took offence at, nor was it what you chose to do about that offence that caused the problem. It was rather the fact that you were hoisted ‘pon your own petard. Contrary to your statement above, the original comments had not got a free ride – indeed that was the whole point of your thread, to prevent them getting a free ride. But in creating that thread, you yourself had created the precedent that offence-causing statements should be leapt upon without remorse. You made the rod for your own back. [/li]
The way to fix this is to think about Stage 2. Good interpersonal skills involve the development of conflict resolution. Conflict resolution does not involve screaming and shouting at the one you disagree with, no matter how tempting it may be to do this.
It’s all a matter of what you hope to get out of your “call[ing] people on their ignorance”. Do you hope to educate and change them? Or is it all just posturing to prove to third parties how enlightened you personally are? If it is the former then the delivery has to be tailored accordingly. If it’s the latter then rant on, but don’t be surprised when trainwrecks like these are the result.
You’re a bloody smart guy, Esprix and like a lot of bloody smart guys you get worn down by what you see and lash out in frustration. It’s understandable but the consequences are not unforeseeable. The cycle of attack and defend is best avoided by not attacking in the first place. Working with others is better than seeking to place them outside the circle and throw stones at them.
Now you may disagree with all that I’ve written here. You may reread this thread and decide that my analysis is just plain flawed. But please don’t dismiss me as just another fool who is out to get you. I’m not and I want nothing but to ease some of the pain I see. The above simply reflects a pattern as I observe it. Consider it a data point. I’ll not refer to it again and if you don’t change your pattern then I’ll just assume that you’ve concluded that I’m wrong. So be it, the wheel turns, maybe you’d be right. Either way, good luck for the future.
pan
Well thanks for continuing to flog me for my transgression after I’ve apologized for it. You have some valid points, but I don’t agree with most of them, and as I’m tired of being today’s whipping boy, I’m about finished here. Life moves on.
Esprix
I’m so fucking tired of people equating homophobia with some minor social slight, and accusing people like *Esprix (and me from time to time) of overreacting.
None of you, whatever your secret dark thoughts, would ever tell a black person he was overreacting if someone said something casually racist. THAT’S the valid standard, not the minor social slight.
Anyone who sees Esprix as a hissy queen is a bigot, whether they’ll admit it here or not.