Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
Assumptions and Homophobia
chaironic:
The discussion pertaining to 1866 misses a very important point: the joke wasn't to enforce the stereotype of the homophobic man, but to subvert it. In panel 3, we're tricked into thinking Steve was offended at being thought to be gay, but it turns out he's just shocked that anyone could think he wasn't out of Marten's league.
Is it cold in here?:
--- Quote from: muffin_of_chaos on 24 Feb 2011, 18:12 ---In theory, no one should be offended by anything.
--- End quote ---
If the other party has resorted to verbal aggression, it's too late for friendly mediation, and they're only doing it to signal that physical aggression is not far behind. I'm offended by being put in danger. Anger is a survival emotion for a reason.
Akima:
--- Quote from: muffin_of_chaos on 24 Feb 2011, 18:12 ---In theory, no one should be offended by anything To be offended is to combine a signal of distaste or disagreement with anger towards the originator, and anger pretty much never works as a better motivator for friendly diplomacy than not-anger as a general rule..
--- End quote ---
This sounds like something between a massively condescending cop-out and a bullies' charter. It essentially says to the victim of abuse: "Your feelings are invalid. Your feelings are something that you are not entitled to have. Your feelings are the problem, not the way you've been treated." Just imagine telling victims of gay-bashing that they shouldn't be offended by it. Or women who've been raped. Or even just subjected to racial abuse. Just imagine telling them that their feelings are unhelpful and that "friendly diplomacy" will "work things out" if only they "relate" to the "offender"....
:psyduck:
And yeah, I'm comfortable with saying that gay-bashing and rape, and racial abuse are wrong, however horribly absolutist and unsophisticated that view apparently is. Sure it's a messy world, with lots of shades of grey, but retreating behind the idea that nothing is ever right or wrong is a cop-out.
El_Flesh:
I think alot of people love to slap on labels.
I worked with a couple of gay guys and got along fine with them!
One was a Liberache type and I was constantly joking with him (since he insisted on being in the closet I would ask him for pointers on cruising the babes - they all loved him! It was great fun for all of us ESPECIALLY him - he genuinely laughed at the things I would say.)
The other one I asked alot about the gay lifestyle because I was as interested as I would be in another culture.
Like one question: does it ever bore you or get annoying to have sex so often?
Turns out it's quite satisfying apparently.
Well, great for him! As for me, I'm not interested in being any part gay, and so I'm sorry - when people try the stunt of "well you haven't TRIED it" I'll tell them they're frikkin idiots and to fuck off. What makes me a homophobe simply because I don't want to be any closer to a gay guy than arm's length? Why should I have to have no problem with a gay in my personal space to NOT be a homophobe? Why aren't some of them HETEROphobes for insisting that there's something wrong with straight men?
I think alot of people today are very fast to slap a label on something without even thinking about it, simply because they're raised to do so.
Carl-E:
A person can be closer than arm's length and not be making a pass.
Or even be interested.
Now, different cultures have different definitions of personal space, and even within a culture, you'll get wide differences - most New York City dwellers have a much smaller sense of personal space than people from the rural areas, and that will, occasionally, lead to severe misunderstandings and even confrontations.
If you're talking about people (gay or otherwise) getting in your space to the point where you're uncomfortable, that's pretty reasonable. I think the problem most people had with your statement was the quantification, and the fact that "at arm's length" is an expression commonly used for things we find disgusting.
Of course, your reactions cited at the end of the post are pretty homophobic. You wouldn't tell someone to fuck off if they said you didn't like broccolli because you never tried it, would you? It's yhe vehemence that makes it so!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version