Is it just me, or does that sound vaguely dirty to anyone else?
No problem
So it’s okay for you to smear an entire group of people, but if they do it to you, they are assholes?
You are full of shit. Here is the quote from post #1:
(my bolding)
Do you actual read what you post? You said the scenes of heroin use make you groan inwardly. I asked you why you “groan” during scenes with heroin use.
But you assume people who groan at male homosexuality hate/discriminate against homosexuals (hence, they are homophobes). I was trying to show how ridiculous the argument you’re making is.
You didn’t groan audible because of it would have been rude, not because you didn’t have a reaction to what you were seeing in the screen. If this were just a thread about rudeness in movie theaters, you might have a point. But, since you assume that these people who grained are homophobe, you need to be called on your bullshit logic.
I notice it. I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, I’m just saying I don’t see causation there.
They shouldn’t, it was rude. But, let’s not pretend this is only about rudeness.
Your point is that things that are arguable more morally abhorrent should elicit a greater reaction based on that fact. That the people should have reacted to the killing, rape, etc. if they react to the guys kissing. To me, that’s like saying that since cancer kills more people than MS, our efforts should be proportional to the severity of the problem. I think the analogy works fine, in that they both illustrate the same flawed reasoning.
No shit buddy, but if you are going to advocate tolerance, you should avoid **wishing **harm to people.
When you actually get to know any of these people you attribute malicious intent to, your opinion might be valid. You have no idea why they reacted the way they did. Plus, if they really wanted to stick to homos, there are plenty of other, more effective ways, to do it.
You may have a point, but I personally don’t see this as hypocrisy.
As are all people, regardless of geography.
Has anyone suggested that you don’t have a right to write what you’d like? The reason why I don’t just ignore is because it’s most of arguments made in them are faulty. Additionally, it doesn’t help people become more accepting when you call everyone who holds a contrary opinion, a homophobe.
Please elaborate?
They aren’t “imposing” views on you. That’s your own problem, if you get so offended by a noise.
Why does this case make you think they are hateful?
I also noticed you didn’t respond to the “Chatty Chatty Gang Bang girl” or “Booty Mamita” question. What the hell did you mean by that?
No, it’s similar in some way, but it’s not the same. Comparing the two is wrong.
I disagree.
Which might be why she said they’re kind of the same, jackass. Is there some universe in which “kinda the same” doesn’t mean “similar in some way”?
Why is it wrong to compare discrimination based on race to discrimination based on sexual orientation?
Please, take it easy on us! We can’t follow this sort of dizzyingly brilliant rhetorical flourish!
Oh yeah? Sez you!
If I say to myself, “Brickbacon has trouble with idioms,” did I say anything? Of course not: saying something to myself is an idiom, meaning that I kept my fool trap shut.
Similarly, if someone groans inwardly, the adverb negates the literalness of the word “groans.” It’s perfectly clear that he didn’t groan (i.e., make a noise like, “Unnnnnggggghhhhh!”): he just thought that noise.
And I think–I hope–we’re all clear that the Golden Rule doesn’t say, “Think about others what you would like them to think about you.” It has to do with deeds, not thoughts.
Sampiro, I see now why you think that sitting a seat apart is a sign of fear of gay-cooties. Especially if you ended up liking Menudo–their music is tripe!
Daniel
My mother-in-law went to see “American Beauty” because of her vague notion that it was a sequel to “Black Beauty.” Some people just don’t sweat the details.
Yes, if only we all thought the same way.
If you tell me she saw Blue Velvet because she thought it was the third in the National Velvet trilogy, I will be your best friend forever.
Yes, it would be a much better world if being gay were seen as less objectionable than being a junkie, so glad you agree.
Or posted the same way. Repeatedly. Are you going to cut and paste this one for page 4 as well?
Hey asshole, I’m perfectly aware he did not make an audible noise. My point was that he was irked, or bothered by the scenes showing heroin use. If he was bothered by those scenes, why can’t he understand that others people might be bothered by seeing two men kissing, and that their reaction may not have been borne out of a hatred for gays. His “reaction” clearly doesn’t mean he hates drug users, so to assume it’s that way for people who don’t like seeing men kiss is stupid.
Again and again and again and again my problem is not with whether they like or dislike or approve or disapprove of me but the fact they were rude and obnoxious.
No, there’s blood and bone and muscle and stuff in there as well. The shit’s probably not even 1% of my total body weight. (See, if I used this line you’d take it literally.)
Here it is again, with my emphasis:
You see, there’s a difference between groaning inwardly (which isn’t literal, btw- the closest I’ve ever actually come to groaning inwardly was probably a stifled belch) and groaning out loud.
Uh… I definitely assume that people who groan OUT LOUD at male homosexuality have something against homosexuality. I would also assume people who groan at an interracial kiss are racist. Whether they hate or discriminate against them I make no speculation towards, particularly the latter as it would depend much on their station in life.
And you failed nicely.
My prejudice against heroin addicts is neither irrational nor unexamined. It is a viewpoint formed because heroin addiction is demonstrably harmful to the individual using it, to their inner circle of friends/acquaintances, to society in general. Heroin can be demonstrably proven to be an objectively bad thing without having to resort to religion or cultural relativism or anecdotal evidence. There simply is no comparison to groaning out loud at a completely non graphic male-male kiss. (Hell, Jesus received kisses from men, and not just from Judas- he berated his dinner host once for complaining about the actions of a woman bathing his [Jesus’s] feet by saying “she kissed me, you didn’t”.)
And while I don’t believe you made a comment about disliking PDAs in general, let me call bullshit on that one to whoever did say it. When was the last time you watched a romantic movie with two straight characters kissing (not a gratuitous sex scene, no tongue, just a peck on the lips) and thought “that’s gross and unnecessary”? And if I am on a subway or in a movie theater and I choose to kiss a male companion on the lips, how in any way does it harm you?
Fine.
No, it’s about attitudes and intolerance and gross public disrespect for the rights of other people to peacefully co-exist as well.
Heroin addiction, police brutality and violent muggings are arguably more abhorrent than homosexuality? Kiss my ass French-style Lucy Mae, and might I add go straight to hell. Were you born this fucking stupid or did you take private lessons with the retarded kid who lived down the street?
(I hope that didn’t come off sounding insulting.)
I’m sure that if I sat down and strained like Elvis after a CheeseFest I could make an analogy between the Wal-Mart after Christmas sale and the Anabaptist takeover of Muenster, but that wouldn’t make it a good one. There is NO good analogy to be made between disliking two men kissing v. violence v. drug addiction and medical research funding. The two things are apples and Yugos.
Now you just said I was full of shit and now you’re saying I have no shit. You can’t make a simple argument. (This is what brickbacon calls “Logic”.)
Wishing harm to people hyperbolically during a RANT is just a tad different from actually wanting harm to come to them. Earlier, when I said “kiss my ass”, I really am not inviting you travel to my apartment, come upstairs, brush my dog off of you, get down on your knees and apply your lips to my gluteal muscles- in fact I’m never more than a few feet away from a pistol so it’d be really ill advised. Neither do I really want to unleash Rottweilers in a movie theater- oh it’s fun to fantasize about it, but I don’t really intend to do it and if given the option I really wouldn’t do it. Do you by chance have Aspergers?
Such as voting against civil rights for them. Gee, I wonder how these people vote in elections when that’s on the agenda?
I’ve a feeling you wouldn’t see a point in the Pentagon. This is like arguing with Les Nessman.
I have never called everyone who holds a contrary opinion a homophobe. I call people who groan audibly at two men innocently kissing homophobic. I don’t think this is unreasonable.
Chatty Chatty Gang Bang- a term for a very talkative sluttily dressed college age girl.
Booty Mamita- a term for a large girl with ineloquent speaking ability dressed (at least in this case) in tight party wear and possessed, in relativity to others, a big butt. Were she older I’d have called her a Booty Mama, but as she is younger (adolescent perhaps, Mamita, a diminutive.)
You’re right. If we all were more tolerant of alternative lifestyles then we wouldn’t have any of those wonderful public beheadings of queers that make the country you live in such a beacon.
Admission of ignorance = making excuses for bigotry. Duly noted.
Bullshit. Most of your posts have been about homophobia, not rudeness in movie theaters. Despite your attempts to move the goalposts, this thread is about you stating that groaning, while seeing two men kiss, makes you a homophobe.
Yes, and if we were talking solely about movie theater rudeness, you would have a point. The real argument is about their “disgust” with what they saw, not that their reaction was audible.
Racism and homophobia are not the same. Either way, a interracial couple is not analogous to two men kissing.
No, heroin can be shown to be damaging to your health, it cannot be “proven” to be bad in any moral sense.
The comparison is that many people think homosexuality is a sin, and is something they are morally opposed to.
Okay, prove to me police brutality is more abhorrent than homosexuality. How exactly would you go about doing something like that? I meant the hierarchy was debatable, but I can see how that wasn’t clear the way I wrote it. However, even when you interpret it the way you do, I don’t see why you’re so upset.
You are saying things that you consider objectively worse should elicit more of a reaction from people. That the reaction should be based on the objective appraisal of each act (homosexual acts, muggings, rape, etc.). Using this logic, a person should be more concerned with heart disease than from anything else because it is objectively more deadly and is more likely to kill him/her. This concern should result in more funding to “cure” things that are objectively worse. But it doesn’t because people are concerned with whatever they’re concerned with, often without regard to some “objective” measurement. Trying to dictate what people should be moved, outraged, or disgusted by based on your arbitrary standard is stupid.
Yet, it still has no place in the OP. I never accused you of actually wanting to hurt people.
Unless you have some evidence that they overwhelmingly vote against gay rights, or that people, who aren’t rude enough to audibly groan, vote for them, then you should shut up. You are just pulling shit out of your ass. I know is much easier to assume they are all hateful bigots, but I see no actual evidence aside from your delusions which stem from a persecution complex.
I do, because it is based on no evidence.
You don’t see yourself as compromising the moral high ground when you make comments like these.
And you have yet to offer a shred of evidence that it does not, in fact, indicate homophobia. Why else would they be groaning?
How are they different?
Why not?
It can be proven to be harmful. Homosexuality cannot be proven to harmful. Therefore, it is rational to put a moral value on heroin use. It is irrational to put a moral value on homosexuality, positive or negative. Puting a negative value on it is a form of bigotry. People who groan at the sight of two men kissing have clearly put a negative value on the act. Therefore, the people who were groaning were homophobes.
Right. Those people are called homophobes.
Police brutality causes measurable harm to its victim. Homosexuality causes no harm to anyone, and has no victims. Therefore, police brutality is more abhorrent than homosexuality.
This makes no sense at all.
Is there anything, short of actual violence, that you would consider evidence of bigotry?
What are your standards of evidence?
How so? The first term refers to directly observed behavior, and the second isn’t noticably perjorative. How does that cede any moral ground to the homophobes who groan audibly when they see men kiss?
I wasn’t necessarily overlooking them. I was just assuming they were covered when I talked about people having a gut-level reaction to things differently than others, across a wide spectrum of issues.
My basic argument is, “you like what you like” and you “dislike what you dislike” and I think that’s just the way you are. I think a lot of that isn’t a choice.
For example I have many white friends. Only one of them has ever dated a black man. Are all my other white friends racists? Is the fact that 95% of all couples I see uniracial indicative of the fact that most people are vile racists?
I don’t think so. I think people have personal preferences. And one of those personal preferences may be, for example, preferring not to see homosexual love-acts. All I’m talking about here is what people like to see versus dislike to see.
I’ve never excuse the people who went “eww” or whatever when they saw two guys kissing. Because you don’t need to act that way in a movie theater. Nor am I excusing people that you know, think they have the right to beat someone up because he’s kissing another man in front of them.
I’ve tried to use the terms sex act/romantic act together because I don’t really know how I classify kissing, either.
As for the rest of it, if you guys would read my posts I already said several times people shouldn’t react audibly to kissing in the theaters, well, at least to the point where other moviegoers will take notice of it.
My point is while I think these moviegoers were badly behaved I don’t think we can say they were homophobes just because they were visibly grossed out by two guys kissing.
brickbacon- You see no analogy between disgust over a gay kiss v. disgust over an interracial kiss, but an analogy between irritation with homophobic groans is directly analogous to stopping funding for MS research in your logic. You cannot understand how police brutality can be said to be more harmful than a gay kiss…
You are just simply too lobotomized-Chihuahua stupid or too batshit crazy to attempt to debate. Take this as a victory if you wish; I’ll wager you’ve had few enough.
I am quite aware that “the jury is out” on this question. Would you be happier if I said that there is no convincing evidence? The fact remains that none of the psychologists, anthropologists or sociologists who like to use biology to explain behavior can identify a pathway from DNA to “being grossed out by gay men kissing,” or, “doing well on the SATs,” nor do I see any reason to believe that such a direct path exists. Psychology is a valuable science, but the continuing popularity of biologically reductionist theories in the field is puzzling to me. Perhaps I just had a really crappy textbook when I took a course in it, but I found the polarity of all the different theories of behavior and consciousness to be troubling. Apparently, there is no room for restricting your theories to testable notions, or to observations supported by the data in psychology. Cute.
But that’s neither here nor there. You’re right, it is irresponsible to hold people accountable for deep prejudices. No, wait, that’s bullshit. No it isn’t irresponsible! Or foolish! Or, I should say, it’s not irresponsible to hold people accountable for the inappropriate expression of deeply held prejudices. Strange, though - isn’t that what you’re saying? “It’s what people do with these prejudices.” Well, DUH. And what I’m saying, in agreeing with the OP, is that loudly proclaiming your disgust at a gay kissing scene in Rent while sitting in the middle of a crowded theater is inappropriate! If someone is squicked out, fine. They can even squirm quietly in their seat, if that will help. But when you cross the line into saying “eewww!”, you’ve turned yourself from an uncomfortable but respectful person into an uncomfortable dick. There’s no call to be a dick.