I’m sorta confused. Are we pro or anti homophobia?
I gotta know which t-shirt to wear in the rally. Come to think of it, I need to know which rally to go to.
We are pro-antihomophobia.
Wear both shirts. And, the rally? “He’s over there…”
Stop the presses! Two and a Half Inches of Fun is outraged over something insignificant!
:rolleyes:
If this warning was added to a link that went to a website that had a black or interracial couple doing the same thing or discussed racial issues, nobody would be defending the warning regardless of the opinions of racist employers. Would you approve of a warning to Richard Dawkins’s website because of anti-atheist employers?
What if a warning was attached to this link:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
Bigoted views of employers on sexual orientation deserve no more validation than bigoted views on race or religion. Adding that warning validates the racist views of employers as something to be placated.
You’re doing a disservices to mouthbreathers.
Strong response.
Get your finger off the trigger, man! Your just itching to start some shit. Guys like you worry the livin’ shit out of me.
.
Yanno, Two and a Half, I honestly cannot tell if you really are upset about this, despite knowing that the poster in question is gay and the other explanations you’ve been given . . . or if you’re an idiot.
Mind you, that you are both remains a possibility.
Opinions?
.
As a card carrying, fudge packing, hip swishing, butt pirating, cocksucking fag I have no issue with that being noted as possibly NSFW. My boss wouldn’t be pleased with me having a site up that had ads of half naked guys on it.
And yes, 2 1/2 inches (which I think is an exaggeration) is an idiot.
If the mod had thought that the site was definitively NSFW on account of the gay content, they’d have broken the link, not just clarified a warning offered by the poster of the link and moved it up to somewhere where it might actually be visible before clicking on the link in question.
Hi, I’m Giraffe, moderator for the Straight Dope Message Board. As a moderator, I need a bigotry that won’t let me down under pressure. That’s why I use Homophobia. It’s easy! The stereotypes can be memorized in just minutes a day, and can be applied almost anywhere. On the go, at the office, relaxing around the house: Homophobia can be used where you need it!
Try some today.
They give you guys cards?
Of course. That’s so we can identify ourselves to you straights, me thinks you wouldn’t like the secret handshake very well. 
Which i think is an understatement.
Took me a while to work out what was going on here. I went to the page in question, and saw absolutely nothing that could even be considered vaguely NSFW.
I actually began to think that the OP might have a point.
Then i disabled Adblock and saw the images of shirtless guys in provocative poses. While, in an ideal world, those pictures should not even raise an eyebrow, the fact is that some places have pretty strict internet use policies, and have a very low tolerance for anything that vaguely smacks of sexual imagery. I really can’t see this as evidence of latent homophobia on the SDMB.
If the black or interracial couple were scantily dressed, i would have no problem with the NSFW warning.
No, for a couple of reasons.
First, a link to Dawkins’ website would presumably be identified as such, and would also probably occur in the context of a thread about atheism and religion. No-one clicking on that link would be likely to be surprised by the presence of atheist opinions. If they were worried about an anti-atheist employer, they cold avoid clicking on the link. By contrast, a story about Tim Hardway’s homophobia need not contain images of semi-naked men, and someone clicking on that link might not expect to see such images. Warning them that those images are present is not unreasonable.
Second, because Dawkins’ site is about ideas and not about possibly-sexual imagery. Like it or not, large amounts of bare skin are frowned upon in many workplaces, whether or not the images themselves are overtly sexual. Employers don’t like the idea that their staff are looking at nudie pics at work, and they also have to be aware of sexual harrassment laws.
You really are a tool, aren’t you. If you don’t know the difference here, you’re beyond help.
As i said earlier, before i turned off Adblock i thought you might have a point. Next time i have that thought, i’ll know better.
What, you guys don’t get cards? AND you have to have sex with women?
I thought we endorsed Moronophobia? So why is this guy still here?
Well hell man, somebodys got to do it. Better me than some fuckin’ new guy.
And now that I’m over calling 2 1/2 an idiot, I can laugh at the concept of the SDMB being homophobic. That is the funniest thing I’ve heard today.
Then would somebody please explain the new CecilHatesFags forum?