And why don’t we just ban “metrosexual” too? I mean, isn’t that just sexualizing straight males who mind their looks?
It’s not a problem as far as I’m concerned. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with ammosexual.
nearwildheaven intentionally used the derogatory word “ammosexual” in what was otherwise a breaking news thread. ExTank’s response was not appropriate for MPSIMS, but was certainly not unexpected given nearwildheaven’s derogatory comment.
It was my opinion that despite only having two posts, the thread was already off the rails. Rather than try to save the thread, I felt that it was better to let someone start a new thread without the sexualized anti and pro gun rhetoric.
I discussed this with @puzzlegal and told her that I believed it was best to leave the thread closed.
If anti and pro folks want to sling sexualized comments back and forth at each other, you know where the Pit is. Keep those types of comments out of MPSIMS breaking news threads.
Before posting breaking news threads and before commenting on them, please be sure to familiarize yourself with the guidelines for breaking news threads, found here:
Breaking news events will sometimes involve guns. Keep in mind that breaking news events are not the proper place to argue either side of the gun debate. You can certainly comment on the news event itself, but keep political jabs (including jabs directed at your opponents in the gun debate) out of the breaking news thread. As the guidelines state, feel free to use the breaking news thread as a springboard for whatever views you may have, but post those in a new thread in the appropriate forum (most likely GD, P&E, or the Pit).
Self-described ironically.
Meh, I consider posts accusing gun owners of being fetishists mostly to be too childish to be worth responding to. The equivalent of “doody-head”.
Moderator Note
Let’s keep the ATMB discussion about the rules and procedures of the SDMB. If you want to discuss gun related topics, that’s not an ATMB issue.
Okay, I’ll buy that putting “ammosexual” in the OP was a bit of a political jab (I’d have called that “borderline”) that maybe didn’t belong in a breaking news thread, as @ParallelLines opined in Post #30.
I don’t get that it’s overly or overtly sexualized, beyond mocking gun nuts for their perceived use of guns to cover their sexual insecurities. It’s nothing like the same order of “sexualized” like what Andrew Giuliani said about his 4-month (or 4-year) old daughter, discussed in another recent thread, that was over-the-top creepy.
But what I really don’t get is why this Board has become so hypersensitively squeamish about anything even remotely seen as “sexualized”. Take a hint from Crafter_Man:
Yeah, Andrew Giuliani was deeply creepy and offensive. But have we all become such a community of fragile snowflakes that we are “deeply offended” at “mild” insults like this? And must we be so careful that we never ruffle a single pinfeather on this Board? (Actually, I don’t see this as such a “mild” insult.) Especially toward gun nuts, of whom most of us on this Board are deeply critical?
But ok, I get that it didn’t belong in a breaking news thread.
(I see that several additional posts have come in while I was typing this, that I haven’t read yet.)
I can get behind your points for breaking news stories, but I still disagree that there’s anything sexual about the term. Yeah, I know, it’s right there in the name, but still, nobody takes it seriously. It is nowhere near the terms that are actually sexualized and actually offensive.
But we musn’t se*ualize! I propose we ban any words containing the letter “x”, or, if they must be used, censor the “x” as I did here.
How about just not being an asshole. You know it irritates some people so you simply must say it. You’re being a jerk and an asshole.
Well, to be sure, this Board does lean mostly liberal/progressive/Democrat, and we like to write things that are irritating to/toward conservatives/right-wingers/Republicans, especially the more extreme ones. The few remaining conservatives on this Board write things that irritate the rest of us too. It’s all good – that’s exactly what prevents this Board from becoming a ghost-town echo chamber, as for example Trump Social quickly became. If we, like Crafter_Man, can just be big boys and big girls, we can take it.
So, let me make sure I understand the board’s rules. It is okay to be a jerk as long as it is against the conservatives/right wingers/Republicans on the board and the pro gun people are the extreme ones. Right?
I wasn’t familiar with that story.
I wish I still wasn’t familiar with that story.
What a creep.
Yeah, that pesky First Amendment. 
What does the first amendment have to do with rules of a message board?
Well, you could call him a gun nit without fear of argument.
Because it doesn’t. It says that beyond just being a gun nut, he gets actual sexual kicks or has a gun sexual fetish.
Look There are car enthusiasts - muscle cars, sports cars, what not. Calling anyone with a car collection or a super car a “car fetishist” would be beyond the pale.
There are craft beer, wine, and whiskey enthusiasts- calling them alkies or booze hounds would also be out of bounds.
Yes, also Repthuglians, Demonrats, etc.
Sure- he doesn’t mind the insult. Many women casually call each other “bitches”. But generally we don’t use that term here as we do not know who will be deeply insulted and who would just laugh it off. There is no reason to resort to playground name calling.
Exactly.
Thing is, I don’t think we really have a beef with collectors, or hunters with hunting rifles, or hobbyist “plinkers”, etc. (Dopers - Am I wrong?) It’s the really whacked out, violent (or at least violent-talking) people like those right-wing militias that have assault rifles, people with whole arsenals in their homes or pick-up trucks, people calling for civil war – those kinds of people that we should perhaps really be worried about. THOSE are the kind of people that I think of as “gun nuts”, not all those others. And I don’t see why we should have any compunction about insulting those, or mocking them with words like “ammosexuals”. Especially in an OP like the one under discussion here, which apparently really was aimed at an unnamed Facebook page full of whacked-out gun nuts, not on this Board, who were not named specifically. And if we’re going to mock them, I don’t know why we need to be squeamish about doing so with a word like “ammosexuals”. The whole point is to be insulting toward actual gun nuts, not toward reasonable gun owners/users.
I like how you’re deliberately continuing Fear_Itself’s mockery of people who get confused between the first amendment’s constraints on the government and the first amendment’s constraints on private organizations. Well played–your satire is very subtle.
While I’m sure it’s fun to imagine some Dopers clutching their pearls and pressing the backs of their hands to their foreheads in helpless squeamishness, that’s not what this is about. It’s about a deliberate push to dismantle language that uses sexuality as a means of dismissive mockery.
I can recognize that something is degrading even if I’m not personally offended by it. And I can make an effort to do better. To be better.
Moderator Note
This type of thing belongs in the Pit, not ATMB. Treat others with respect in this forum.
You can say that you disagree with certain types of behaviors, but do not insult anyone outside of the Pit.
No argument here. I’m not allowed to be a jerk and he is. He even admits to it.