LGBT (sub)section?
Thread Closed 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
16-06-2017, 09:13 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 08:55 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 08:46 AM)Vera Wrote:  Also, for all those who seem incapable of grasping it, there is a HUGE difference between attacking someone, personally, for the shitty things they say and the shitty human being they are, and attacking someone for the colour of their skin, the shape of their nose, what they have between their legs and who they they have between their sheets. I thought that was obvious, but apparently, not...

Facepalm

We all recognize the difference, Vera. It's a matter of just being above all of it. You can argue with muffs without resorting to insults, he clearly seems incapable or unwilling. I see this as an Atticus Finch, calmly looking at the man who just spit in his face, situation. You need not to respond with vitriol, but rather with the poise and rationality that you are so famous for. Even if Muffs won't listen to anything but insults, other people can learn for the encounter.

You missed the point of my comment.

Also, muffs from my experience is a troll, an awesome, funny troll at that, but a troll nonetheless. He is a just a person certain people won't like, and the way I see it, it's not like he is lynching transsexuals or black people or anyone, but rather being rather uncouth in his speech. I have friends who are civil and also very uncouth, but when push comes to shove, they will defend the rights of any "Tranny" or African- American or gay person.

As far as I understood Muffs original, topical criticism, is that a LGBTQ+ subforum would only distinguish them from others, which is fine if that's what you want, but some people believe that it's not that significant of a difference between heteronormative, cis, or any other buzzword and should be intergrated so that it's not looked at as anything different, but rather normal and natural. It's a matter of perspective.

I don't think he's a troll, I think he likes to be provocative. While I don't agree with (or like) some of his terminology, he does come up with some thought-provoking points in his posts (and I'm not talking about anything to do with insults, I'm talking about when he makes actual points in his posts).

To me, he's like a comedian who gives social commentary on a variety of topics and dances on the edge and pushes the envelope (sometimes off the table Tongue ). That's why I don't think you can take him seriously when he says the T word.

Obviously, things have now gone off the rails and name calling is actual name calling on both sides, but in his early posts, I just think it's part of his social commentary and not meant to be derogatory-instead it's meant to be provocative. That said, when you are provocative, you are going to get blow back. It just goes with the territory.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like jennybee's post
16-06-2017, 09:28 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 09:13 AM)jennybee Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 08:55 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  We all recognize the difference, Vera. It's a matter of just being above all of it. You can argue with muffs without resorting to insults, he clearly seems incapable or unwilling. I see this as an Atticus Finch, calmly looking at the man who just spit in his face, situation. You need not to respond with vitriol, but rather with the poise and rationality that you are so famous for. Even if Muffs won't listen to anything but insults, other people can learn for the encounter.

You missed the point of my comment.

Also, muffs from my experience is a troll, an awesome, funny troll at that, but a troll nonetheless. He is a just a person certain people won't like, and the way I see it, it's not like he is lynching transsexuals or black people or anyone, but rather being rather uncouth in his speech. I have friends who are civil and also very uncouth, but when push comes to shove, they will defend the rights of any "Tranny" or African- American or gay person.

As far as I understood Muffs original, topical criticism, is that a LGBTQ+ subforum would only distinguish them from others, which is fine if that's what you want, but some people believe that it's not that significant of a difference between heteronormative, cis, or any other buzzword and should be intergrated so that it's not looked at as anything different, but rather normal and natural. It's a matter of perspective.

I don't think he's a troll, I think he likes to be provocative. While I don't agree with (or like) some of his terminology, he does come up with some thought-provoking points in his posts (and I'm not talking about anything to do with insults, I'm talking about when he makes actual points in his posts).

To me, he's like a comedian who gives social commentary on a variety of topics and dances on the edge and pushes the envelope (sometimes off the table Tongue ). That's why I don't think you can take him seriously when he says the T word.

Obviously, things have now gone off the rails and name calling is actual name calling on both sides, but in his early posts, I just think it's part of his social commentary and not meant to be derogatory-instead it's meant to be provocative. That said, when you are provocative, you are going to get blow back. It just goes with the territory.

My usage of the word troll, fits your assessment of Muffs. I think that trolls can be thought provoking, but when you say shit that's clearly toeing the line of being offensive to some for the sake of it, that's trolling to me.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
16-06-2017, 09:38 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 09:12 AM)Emma Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 08:55 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  We all recognize the difference, Vera. It's a matter of just being above all of it. You can argue with muffs without resorting to insults, he clearly seems incapable or unwilling. I see this as an Atticus Finch, calmly looking at the man who just spit in his face, situation. You need not to respond with vitriol, but rather with the poise and rationality that you are so famous for. Even if Muffs won't listen to anything but insults, other people can learn for the encounter.

You missed the point of my comment.

Also, muffs from my experience is a troll, an awesome, funny troll at that, but a troll nonetheless. He is a just a person certain people won't like, and the way I see it, it's not like he is lynching transsexuals or black people or anyone, but rather being rather uncouth in his speech. I have friends who are civil and also very uncouth, but when push comes to shove, they will defend the rights of any "Tranny" (no offense intended) or African- American or gay person. Muffs is as, far as I can remember, a self-titled faggot. This is the way he views the world and he views words differently than you do and I have to say, I lean more towards his line of thinking than the opposite side of the fence. Words are a tool, and they have meanings that are contextual in nature. I think a good, uncouth racist joke is funny, but I do not support subjugation, genicide or otherwise acts towards races. I can see the difference and in tent.

Also, I would like to talk about Emma's, assertion that some people might not be strong enough to cope with words. That might be the case, but i have to ask: Is that because they JUST CAN'T, or because they were never properly taught that they have to or even taught how to? And is banning words or practices that might prevent those behaviors condusive to producing people that can have thick skin ( a really good trait in my opinion, some may disagree.) I see it very much like a immune system defense, where you body has to be exposed to pathogens (weakened or not) or order to start to have the tools to deal and endure them. a person who hasn't encountered a disease isn't strong against it, but rather the most vulnerable. Maybe that's just another difference of opinion.

As far as I understood Muffs original, topical criticism, is that a LGBTQ+ subforum would only distinguish them from others, which is fine if that's what you want, but some people believe that it's not that significant of a difference between heteronormative, cis, or any other buzzword and should be intergrated so that it's not looked at as anything different, but rather normal and natural. It's a matter of perspective.

See, I'm sorry, but I'm not going to sit back and ignore muffs' behavior. I've already explained why. You can, though.

I've engaged with muffs and other people on this forum who used transphobic/homophobic language quite calmly (and sometimes quite un-calmly). I honestly do not care if others look down on me for engaging it. Because I think his bullshit should be challenged and not accepted. And to simply call it uncouth is to excuse it as "rough around the edges". To brush him off as a troll is to excuse him, too. No, he behaves in a bitter and vile manner. And I've seen it time and again. He's capable of expressing himself without being a troll, but we don't call him to discussion on a higher level, do we? Nah, because it's 'muffs.

Muffs can discuss on a higher level, but I suspect he doesn't because it's a commentary on exactly this issue. I don't think muffs is acrually transpjobic or homophobic, even if he uses that vernacular. I think he uses words in a very contextual way. Shit, I say "racist" shit all the time about my own race, but you don't see me bringing out the whip in harm and even self harm because I say these things with the intent to amuse people, and I think that's the point. I don't think Muffs used the word tranny to be transphobic but rather because it's an insult that you would be affected by. Dude is a dick, but he ain't the nearly the transphobic homophobic racist that people make him out to be.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Atothetheist's post
16-06-2017, 09:46 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
Ato and Jenny, it still astounds me that you're just "okay" with it. Whether to make a point or not, it's I who should overcome my faults in... idk, taking him too seriously? Finding his verbiage to be harmful? All because he's never going to change and he's funny sometimes.

Again, I say nope. He doesn't have to change his behavior, but I'm not going to ignore it either. Words matter. Agree with it or not, they do affect people deeply and I'm not going to silently abide with it. If I think he's saying something harmful- regardless of his intentions- I'll decide if I'll say something.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Emma's post
16-06-2017, 09:47 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 09:38 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 09:12 AM)Emma Wrote:  See, I'm sorry, but I'm not going to sit back and ignore muffs' behavior. I've already explained why. You can, though.

I've engaged with muffs and other people on this forum who used transphobic/homophobic language quite calmly (and sometimes quite un-calmly). I honestly do not care if others look down on me for engaging it. Because I think his bullshit should be challenged and not accepted. And to simply call it uncouth is to excuse it as "rough around the edges". To brush him off as a troll is to excuse him, too. No, he behaves in a bitter and vile manner. And I've seen it time and again. He's capable of expressing himself without being a troll, but we don't call him to discussion on a higher level, do we? Nah, because it's 'muffs.

Muffs can discuss on a higher level, but I suspect he doesn't because it's a commentary on exactly this issue. I don't think muffs is acrually transpjobic or homophobic, even if he uses that vernacular. I think he uses words in a very contextual way. Shit, I say "racist" shit all the time about my own race, but you don't see me bringing out the whip in harm and even self harm because I say these things with the intent to amuse people, and I think that's the point. I don't think Muffs used the word tranny to be transphobic but rather because it's an insult that you would be affected by. Dude is a dick, but he ain't the nearly the transphobic homophobic racist that people make him out to be.

I remember there was a thread awhile back and I got pissed at some of the shit going on in it. And I said "Can't we just all get along people??!!" Undecided And Nishi said, "You do know where you are, don't you? This is the Internet." Tongue

I think Nishi was right, but I think what makes it hard here is that this place has become a little safe place for so many of us, so it's hard to watch people you like tearing each other down. I really don't like people feeling bad on either end. Undecided
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes jennybee's post
16-06-2017, 09:48 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 09:38 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  Dude is a dick, but he ain't the nearly the transphobic homophobic racist that people make him out to be.

We probably disagree here. I've seen nothing from him suggesting that he's not and only evidence to suggest he is. Just because he's gay doesn't mean he doesn't have some level of internalized homophobia.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Emma's post
16-06-2017, 09:56 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 09:46 AM)Emma Wrote:  Ato and Jenny, it still astounds me that you're just "okay" with it. Whether to make a point or not, it's I who should overcome my faults in... idk, taking him too seriously? Finding his verbiage to be harmful? All because he's never going to change and he's funny sometimes.

Again, I say nope. He doesn't have to change his behavior, but I'm not going to ignore it either. Words matter. Agree with it or not, they do affect people deeply and I'm not going to silently abide with it. If I think he's saying something harmful- regardless of his intentions- I'll decide if I'll say something.

On a personal level, I'm not okay with it by any means. But I do support a person's right to free speech. Do I wish they chose better ways to wield it--absolutely.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like jennybee's post
16-06-2017, 09:57 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 09:48 AM)Emma Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 09:38 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  Dude is a dick, but he ain't the nearly the transphobic homophobic racist that people make him out to be.

We probably disagree here. I've seen nothing from him suggesting that he's not and only evidence to suggest he is. Just because he's gay doesn't mean he doesn't have some level of internalized homophobia.

Well, I have anecdotal evidence. I have spoken to him many times and I never got the impression that he actually was homophobic, or transphobic or racist, but rather that he is a personality. Have you listened to his interview in the Forum Lounge? If memory serves he wasn't too bad in that. I think he is a offensive comedian in a way. If you feel the need to say something against his opinions, I'll listen because I might honestly be wrong. I never said to sit down and be quiet when you think offenses are being genuinely committed against you, but I think that we differ on what is and should be considered offensive.

We are having a civil disciussion, I like that. I'm glad we are able to disagree in a way that doesn't resort to insults. I feel your passion and I'm glad you have it, I just have a different perspective on things (a perspective that's ALWAYS open to change and improvement). Even if I disagree with this discussion, I want you to know that I not disagree with you as a person. I think I'm going to bow out of the discussion and let you all take a breather from the argument.

-Steven.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
[+] 2 users Like Atothetheist's post
16-06-2017, 10:01 AM
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 09:57 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 09:48 AM)Emma Wrote:  We probably disagree here. I've seen nothing from him suggesting that he's not and only evidence to suggest he is. Just because he's gay doesn't mean he doesn't have some level of internalized homophobia.

Well, I have anecdotal evidence. I have spoken to him many times and I never got the impression that he actually was homophobic, or transphobic or racist, but rather that he is a personality. Have you listened to his interview in the Forum Lounge? If memory serves he wasn't too bad in that. I think he is a offensive comedian in a way. If you feel the need to say something against his opinions, I'll listen because I might honestly be wrong. I never said to sit down and be quiet when you think offenses are being genuinely committed against you, but I think that we differ on what is and should be considered offensive.

We are having a civil disciussion, I like that. I'm glad we are able to disagree in a way that doesn't resort to insults. I feel your passion and I'm glad you have it, I just have a different perspective on things (a perspective that's ALWAYS open to change and improvement). Even if I disagree with this discussion, I want you to know that I not disagree with you as a person. I think I'm going to bow out of the discussion and let you all take a breather from the argument.

-Steven.

I think you're a good person, Ato- and I hope you know that. I like you and pretty much everyone on these boards I interact with regularly. And I don't hold any animosity toward you for your opinions. I strongly disagree with some of them, but thanks for the discussion. Hug
Find all posts by this user
[+] 1 user Likes Emma's post
16-06-2017, 10:02 AM (This post was last modified: 16-06-2017 10:08 AM by Atothetheist.)
RE: LGBT (sub)section?
(16-06-2017 09:57 AM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(16-06-2017 09:48 AM)Emma Wrote:  We probably disagree here. I've seen nothing from him suggesting that he's not and only evidence to suggest he is. Just because he's gay doesn't mean he doesn't have some level of internalized homophobia.

Well, I have anecdotal evidence. I have spoken to him many times and I never got the impression that he actually was homophobic, or transphobic or racist, but rather that he is a personality. Have you listened to his interview in the Forum Lounge? If memory serves he wasn't too bad in that. I think he is a offensive comedian in a way. If you feel the need to say something against his opinions, I'll listen because I might honestly be wrong. I never said to sit down and be quiet when you think offenses are being genuinely committed against you, but I think that we differ on what is and should be considered offensive.

We are having a civil disciussion, I like that. I'm glad we are able to disagree in a way that doesn't resort to insults. I feel your passion and I'm glad you have it, I just have a different perspective on things (a perspective that's ALWAYS open to change and improvement). Even if I disagree with this discussion, I want you to know that I not disagree with you as a person. I think I'm going to bow out of the discussion and let you all take a breather from the argument.

Also, to your point that I'm "okay" with it. I think that you fail to understand what I mean. If one genuinely uses the word nigger in a derogatory way as a means of insulting a black man and wishing to hurt him or her, that's wrong. That's NOT okay at all. I will be right there with people to admonish this man. However if one uses the word in an offensive joke then that's different, I see a distinction. I don't think it makes me a bad person, just one that thinks words can have different connotations and different meanings based on the intention and the scenario it's being used in. I certainly don't think an actor playing a role saying the word is a racist because I understand the situation behind it.

-Steven.

Well, fuck me silly. I meant to edit, not duplicate and reply, see the last paragraph. I also meant to say that I don't think Muffs is a saint either. There are times where he goes a little far, even for me.

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 
Forum Jump: