Nuh,uh, honey, don’t even try to work that attitude; Homey don’t play that. I have steadfastly been on your side, even opening my own Pit thread deploring the irritatingly repetitive safer sex nagging from clueless people preaching to the fucking choir. you had no business going into that thread to point out that only one safe sex message was mentioned. The point has already been made, and now you are just pissing people off and being an attention whore. Knock it off. At this point, you are crying “wolf” and you are alienating people. Save the indignation when it is needed, or you run the risk of having people turn a deaf ear (blind eye, whatever) to genuine instances of homophobia. I’m not mad atcha; I just want to to step back and see what effect you are actually having, vs what you intend.
As I recall, the last thread of yours in the Pit that got hijacked by a safe-sex warning had a grand total of one “warning” (i.e., “I hope you practice safe sex.”). Once you (and others, on both sides) went ballistic, it degenerated into a thread on what can and can’t be said.
So I don’t find your “observation” valid, in this case. There was one “warning” in the thread under discussion now, and it occurred much earlier than in your thread I’m referencing.
It seems to me you’re attempting to wear the label of victim here, and it’s not sticking.
And, as usual, gobear has made my point in a more appropriate fashion, a full minute before me. He’s Dan Aykroyd to my loser Pez dispenser collector. (Obsure digital-cable internet access commercial reference.)
I read it. You didn’t offer a safe sex warning, but you did put in a small highjack about how it was “interesting” that a straight person only received one warning about safe sex. Jesus, how many warnings did you want her to receive?
For no particular reason at all, you dug up your deceased equine in order to have a high horse to sit upon. How much longer do you have to beat this thing before you sell it to the glue factory?
Very nice! SPOOFE will be along shortly with his bag of points, I’m sure.
Just say “No” to l33t.
And, gobear you are my hero. Can I buy you a Sierra Nevada Pale Ale while we listen to some George Clinton?
OK fine. It was inappropriate, and I knew it all along. I just thought it would be interesting to see what would happen if a thread about straight sex were to be hijacked as threads about gay sex are. Now I know.
Let’s just bury the whole thing now and return to happy-happy fun-time.
Homebrew, I may have to ravish you if we ever meet.
Scott Evil no, you can’t ply the “more in sorrow than in anger” card, either.
That’s called being a prick, which starts with P, which rhymes with T and that stands for Trouble, oh, we’ve got trouble right here in River City!
[/quote]
I just thought it would be interesting to see what would happen if a thread about straight sex were to be hijacked as threads about gay sex are. Now I know.
[/quote]
but the controls of your little experiment are not equal. Your hijack wasn;t a hijack out of the blue; it comes on top of several vituperative Pit threads, and is perceived as you being deliberately provcative. If you had waited a few months, and then did the hijack, it might have gone over better.
Is that all there is? If that’s all there is, my friend, let’s keep on dancing, let’s break out the booze, and have a ball…if that’s all there is.
Yep. What happens is pretty much the same sort of shitstorm that resulted when it happened to you. But I happily accept your apology, and hereby retract my unpleasant words lobbed in your direction. As I said in the OP, I enjoy you as a poster, and hope that you will continue to post here in the future.
In other words, Scott, you were trolling. Hmmm…
FWIW, gobear, I’m satisfied with scott’s response.
S.E., stirring things up to see what interesting things happen – do you have a different definition of trolling?
No.
I’ve never done it before, and will never do it again.
Scott’s comment in the linked thread seemed like a bit of hijack, which he admitted, but not irrelevent or untrue. So I’m not entirely sure what this thread was supposed to be about anyway.
I had no idea ‘breeder’ was such a common pejorative term. Have any of you really been called that before? Still, I would hold back from using it now that I know people are offened by it.
Hamadryad - I think Pride is appropriate for all groups of people, but I admit to being pissed off when I see a man and woman kissing at a gay club. I tell myself one of the couple may be bisexual and that’s why they’re there, or perhaps they’re a straight couple visiting with a gay friend on his or her birthday, but still, it irks me. It feels like ‘our’ space is being taken over. And it’s not like there aren’t enough places the hetero couples can go (using ‘hetero’ to mean the opposite of same-sex in this context). In some people’s opinion, Pride is well on the way to becoming too mainstream and being taken over by the straight majority (and the people giving you dirty looks wouldn’t know you were bi rather than straight).
Exsqueeze me, but I made the breeder remark purely in jest, as I made clear earlier.
What I have taken issue with is the vitriol of mintygreen and others which wants to cast it as me using a perjorative term.
It was a damn joke, and then to act as if I have committed some sort of offensive attack when I simply asked if that was a term that would be preffered over str8, is beyond ludicrous.
“It feels like ‘our’ space is being taken over.”
Funny, I thought this kind of exclusionary behavior is what we’re supposed to be fighting against. I certainly wouldn’t think that a gay couple kissing at, say, Wal*Mart was “taking over my space.”
“But not everyone thinks like you, Hama.”
No, but everyone SHOULD. (On this topic, IMNPFHO, anyhow.) And I intensely dislike having to prove to anyone that I’m “gay enough” to be at any venue. How rude and counter-productive. How very discriminatory…and thus, rather ironic.
That’s called “biphobia,” and is totally inappropriate. It is also totally irrelevant to what I had to say. You were discriminated against at a pride parade; I presume that gay people were in the majority in that situation. I was referring to majorities claiming to be offended by minorities, not the other way around.
Not quite - it’s disingenuous for a powerful majority to claim to be oppressed by a disempowered minority. But you get points for trying.
I wasn’t aware that WalMart was bisexual or heterosexual space. For what it’s worth, I am not offended, threatened, or otherwise discomfited by straight smoochage in a gay bar. But I presume that QueenAl is referring to the concept of safe space, which has been discussed at length without arriving at any particular conclusion.
Matt:
So, precisely which “powerful majority” member claimed oppression? I called Hastur on acting like a jerk by employing an offensive slur, not for oppressing me or anybody else.
Hastur: Nigger jokes aren’t funny either.
I see no oppression occuring. I do see insults occurring, and to my knowledge, there’s no majority/minority rule on who gets to insult who.