4 ms·

I find it very hard to find the link between this and homophobia. Could you try to explain it in more detail perhaps?

by mtrimpe 14y ago

rmc 14y ago
There is none. They are trying to cast themselves as the liberal and progressive ones. "What about lesbians?" is not an uncommon response, here's some details on why this isn't such a great justificiation: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/What_about_lesbians%3F http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/What_about_lesbians%3F
claudius 14y ago
I also find it very hard to find the link between this and sexism. Nevertheless, the reasoning goes as follows: If a sexual joke is classified as sexism, it necessarily requires a link between sexuality and gender[1], since otherwise, a joke about sexuality could not have any effect on gender, hence could not be sexist[0]. But by linking sexuality and gender, you imply that there is no sexuality within one gender, since otherwise you could not make the leap from ‘sexual’ to ‘gender’. By assuming that all sexuality is inter-gender, you ignore intra-gender sexuality, i.e. homosexuality. Yes, this is an exaggeration and I usally don’t care at all what you think/say of/about my sexuality and would furthermore prefer a society where everybody can say whatever the hell they want and if people find that offensive, it would be their own fault rather than the fault of those on whom they eavesdropped. But this whole sexism debate really annoys me, so apologies for that. [0] Where I use ‘sexist’ in the meaning of ‘generally treating different genders differently and/or specifically dismissive of one gender’. [1] I hate the word ‘gender’, but saying that you imply a link between sex (the activity) and sex (the property) might be slightly confusing.
- mtrimpe 14y ago
  I initially thought you were trolling but it's clear that your response, although one I strongly disagree with, does have solid reasoning behind it. If you're looking for actual counterpoints; I'm an LGBT man and I support Adria for her right to be offended about these statements, which I feel is all that's truly at stake here.
  - claudius 14y ago
    The difference between sarcasm and trolling might sometimes be rather subjective, sorry. I agree with you that people are allowed to be offended, but I also think that people should be allowed to offend – if we tried to never offend anybody, we wouldn’t get anywhere[0]. I take it it depends on your personal values whether you think that free speech is more important than feeling well, but I hope we can nevertheless agree that it is neither possible to never offend anyone nor is it wise to always offend everybody. Things are unfortunately rarely as black and white as we would like them to be. [0] http://abstrusegoose.com/47 http://abstrusegoose.com/47

I find it very hard to find the link between this and homophobia. Could you try to explain it in more detail perhaps?

by mtrimpe 14y ago

I find it very hard to find the link between this and homophobia. Could you try to explain it in more detail perhaps?

rmc 14y ago

There is none. They are trying to cast themselves as the liberal and progressive ones. "What about lesbians?" is not an uncommon response, here's some details on why this isn't such a great justificiation: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/What_about_lesbians%3F http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/What_about_lesbians%3F

claudius 14y ago

I also find it very hard to find the link between this and sexism. Nevertheless, the reasoning goes as follows: If a sexual joke is classified as sexism, it necessarily requires a link between sexuality and gender[1], since otherwise, a joke about sexuality could not have any effect on gender, hence could not be sexist[0]. But by linking sexuality and gender, you imply that there is no sexuality within one gender, since otherwise you could not make the leap from ‘sexual’ to ‘gender’. By assuming that all sexuality is inter-gender, you ignore intra-gender sexuality, i.e. homosexuality. Yes, this is an exaggeration and I usally don’t care at all what you think/say of/about my sexuality and would furthermore prefer a society where everybody can say whatever the hell they want and if people find that offensive, it would be their own fault rather than the fault of those on whom they eavesdropped. But this whole sexism debate really annoys me, so apologies for that. [0] Where I use ‘sexist’ in the meaning of ‘generally treating different genders differently and/or specifically dismissive of one gender’. [1] I hate the word ‘gender’, but saying that you imply a link between sex (the activity) and sex (the property) might be slightly confusing.

mtrimpe 14y ago
I initially thought you were trolling but it's clear that your response, although one I strongly disagree with, does have solid reasoning behind it. If you're looking for actual counterpoints; I'm an LGBT man and I support Adria for her right to be offended about these statements, which I feel is all that's truly at stake here.
- claudius 14y ago
  The difference between sarcasm and trolling might sometimes be rather subjective, sorry. I agree with you that people are allowed to be offended, but I also think that people should be allowed to offend – if we tried to never offend anybody, we wouldn’t get anywhere[0]. I take it it depends on your personal values whether you think that free speech is more important than feeling well, but I hope we can nevertheless agree that it is neither possible to never offend anyone nor is it wise to always offend everybody. Things are unfortunately rarely as black and white as we would like them to be. [0] http://abstrusegoose.com/47 http://abstrusegoose.com/47