Non-AFL chat thread

[gangsta deluxe]

I should further add, that given the results of cognitive bias studies, homophobia isn't an uncommon problem. We are primed to subconsciously act negatively towards people on their race, sex and sexual orientation without realising it. People are less likely to receive jobs, promotions, equal pay and equal treatment in a range of contexts because of these things (don't believe me? Look it up). And it isn't the hardcore nuts to which you refer who are responsible. You are likely a homophobe and you don't even know - not that it is an 'evil' or terrible thing about you. We implicitly act positively towards white straight blokes and poorly towards others. We discriminate all the time.

What is sad is that it is normal. We are all primed to act like this, me included, because of our environments.

What perpetuates these things is what we see on tv and in society. Old priveged white blokes making these comments and nobody stands up to them. In most jobs, not on tv, that would have gone unremarked.

Well I won't shut up or trivialise it when I see it. I'll call it out each and every time. That is a key part of making change in these issues.

Further to that - it isn't up to you as a privileged bloke to decide what can or cannot be considered homophobia. You haven't been discriminated against. And you shouldn't be the voice in this discussion.

 

[Sharkey66]

most pathetic F1 qualifying ever, these new rules suck.

 

[immortalmike]

Yes let's us white straight males be the deciding voice on these issues and give a pass to words like '****ter' as stupid little mistakes. But let's get real offended and be really careful about the use of words like 'homophobe', people throwing those around are the real problem....


What a joke. Sexism homophobia and racism are huge issues in our society and instances of it like this one by Taylor should be called out and condemned. You can see he wasn't sorry and didn't understand the problem with his actions in the Hun article about it.

Stigmatising words calling out discrimination like they are a somehow describing an uncommon and abnormal evil is just wrong. Micro aggressions like these that happen every day hurt people - just because your mates aren't effected by it doesn't mean others are (I have contradictory anecdotes to what you say so don't pull that line).

Instances of behaviour like this are simply unacceptable.

It is a sad indictment on society when an opinion calling for understanding and nuance can be met with such a vehement response. My position was that micro-aggressions (whether they exist and are meaningful or not) should not be met with the same response as actual explicit aggressions. You seem to want to use a sledgehammer either way. The irony being the first line of your post was a micro-aggression in that it assumed everyone participating in this discussion was a straight white male.

You're response is embarrassing, you played identity politics in your first line, indicating that my opinion was worthless based on my sexual preference and the colour of my skin (despite my being a member of three marginalized and underpriveleged groups and spending the better part of my life volunteering to help others who are marginalized).

That cognitive bias studies indicate that we unconsciously respond positively towards our ingroup is nothing new, I did my honours thesis on that back in 2006. We actually consciously try to change that response every day and someone shouting sexist, racist or homophobe is counterproductive to that process as all it does is make someone dig in and either lash out or reinforce that opinion. MLK had it right with the nonviolent and peaceful approach, I feel we should do the same with our language.

This will be my last post on the subject in this thread as we've gone way off topic. Please pm me or quote me in the nonAFL chat thread if anyone wants to discuss this further.

 

[NBates]

Who cares what sexual preference anyone has - it's whether they're a bombers supporter or not which tells you what sort of person they are . Chill everyone.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[LittleG]

most pathetic F1 qualifying ever, these new rules suck.

Was good until the final section. Needs another two minutes on the clock & an extra set of Tyres to be available just for the final session.

 

[Sharkey66]

Was good until the final section. Needs another two minutes on the clock & an extra set of Tyres to be available just for the final session.

Sorry really disagree, the 90 sec clock just brings too much of an element of luck into it, i want to see the best guys racing, not get knocked out because they get held up by traffic or have a minor slip at the wrong time. Can live with the new rules for Q1 and 2 but just let em run in Q3.

 

[LittleG]

Sorry really disagree, the 90 sec clock just brings too much of an element of luck into it, i want to see the best guys racing, not get knocked out because they get held up by traffic or have a minor slip at the wrong time. Can live with the new rules for Q1 and 2 but just let em run in Q3.

Teams needed to get the drivers out there 30seconds earlier. Just think once the get better organized it will be a good format.

 

[JEDi 44]

Teams needed to get the drivers out there 30seconds earlier. Just think once the get better organized it will be a good format.

I don't mind the top 10 shootout that they have at bathurst every year. I'd be up for that

 

[LittleG]

RIP Tray Walker. CB Ravens.
Not sure why you were riding a dirt bike at night, with no lights and wearing dark clothes.... I hope you keep your happiness and giving nature wherever you are now.

 

[Ozil]

Sorry really disagree, the 90 sec clock just brings too much of an element of luck into it, i want to see the best guys racing, not get knocked out because they get held up by traffic or have a minor slip at the wrong time. Can live with the new rules for Q1 and 2 but just let em run in Q3.

I enjoyed it, but I agree. Too much riding on one slip up.

I'd like to think it could be given a chance as LittleG said, but there's already talk it'll be ditched. Meeting called for tomorrow morning.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

90 seconds is too short. Two drivers going every 3 minutes would be preferable, and everybody should be able to finish their current flying laps when the time elapses, provided they've crossed the line before it ends.

... But it just doesn't work for Q3; you want to see the best laps in the final session and we didn't get that. Top ten shootout or just the old system for Q3.

 

[BEaston]

give a pass to words like '****ter' as stupid little mistakes. But let's get real offended and be really careful about the use of words like 'homophobe', people throwing those around are the real problem....

Yeah. This is really weird. I don't understand get this at all. Why would we mollycoddle those being offensive to large groups of people??? The damage those words do is real. We know this. I don't understand why would anyone defend the use of those words when it's known that they hurt people.

Yes partially. Free expression is the most important part of a free society, it's directly linked to our liberty as a people.
Hurt feelings are an unfortunate consequence, one that is hard to balance. When you ask "how many gay people think it doesn't matter...?" I can only go by my personal experience, my gay friends and family don't care about the words only the intent, nobody in my family cares whenthe word wog is used frivolously in popular media and neither do I.
Bad ideas can still be conveyed without using the words i.e., a southern preacher saying "Homosexuals are against nature" is a homophobic idea, while someone saying "****ters should have every right to get married" is quite the opposite despite the language used.
Getting hung up on words and not the ideas behind them marginalizes those that may be allies in favour of punishing poor expression.

But I'm not really even in favour of people using the words, I'm more worried about the response to a slip up. Someone jokingly calling someone a ****ter is a very different prospect to the Westborough Baptist church. To call them both homophobic and painting them both with the same brush is excessive. Some understanding both ways would be a better option, a simple "hey BT that's a shitty thing to say" will get a better response than "**** you Brian! You homophobe".

You're arguing for free expression but have an issue with people calling homophobic comments out as homophobic. You can't have it both ways.

You also seem to be saying that BTs comment wasn't homophobic. I don't think you can say that on behalf of anyone but yourself. It clearly is homophobic and hurtful to a lot of people.

Yes, different instances of homophobia vary in how damaging they are but that doesn't make the lesser instance not homophobic. And it doesn't mean the lesser instance should be ignored. The total effect of these types of comments are greater than the sum of it's parts. In isolation, sure an off handed comment is seemingly harmless but when it's seen as ok to say those things, people say them more often. It's those everyday "off the cuff" comments that add up to marginalise minority groups, the exact definition of "ism" that you used originally.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

Big win for the Spurs today.

 

[fargy]

How the fudge did Alonso walk away from that!

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Freaking incredible. I don't even know how he got out of the car. For reference:

Driver walked away.

 

[fargy]

Freaking incredible. I don't even know how he got out of the car. For reference:

Driver walked away.

 

[fronkalicious]

Big win for the Spurs today.

Looked very much like a playoff game didn't it. Amazing that the dubs only have a 3 game lead in the west.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

Looked very much like a playoff game didn't it. Amazing that the dubs only have a 3 game lead in the west.

Spurs have been almost as good. Shapes as a great series should they meet in the playoffs. Would be amazing if the dubs didn't even win the west.

 

[immortalmike]

Yeah. This is really weird. I don't understand get this at all. Why would we mollycoddle those being offensive to large groups of people??? The damage those words do is real. We know this. I don't understand why would anyone defend the use of those words when it's known that they hurt people.




You're arguing for free expression but have an issue with people calling homophobic comments out as homophobic. You can't have it both ways.

You also seem to be saying that BTs comment wasn't homophobic. I don't think you can say that on behalf of anyone but yourself. It clearly is homophobic and hurtful to a lot of people.

Yes, different instances of homophobia vary in how damaging they are but that doesn't make the lesser instance not homophobic. And it doesn't mean the lesser instance should be ignored. The total effect of these types of comments are greater than the sum of it's parts. In isolation, sure an off handed comment is seemingly harmless but when it's seen as ok to say those things, people say them more often. It's those everyday "off the cuff" comments that add up to marginalise minority groups, the exact definition of "ism" that you used originally.

You once again misconstrue my opinion.

I did not argue against people calling out homophobic comments I argued for a nuanced response. I posited an idea not a hard and fast rule. You hurt the side of social change when you brand someone a homophobe for an insensitive poorly thought out joke that may or may not be construed as homophobic (which is what I initially took umbrage with). As I'm on the side of social change I would like to point out that as much as whenever and wherever I can. Whether you agree or not is your perogative.
It is to say though that this "call out" culture has several effects. Firstly it alienates potential allies in that you set up a 100 percent with us or that means you're against us. You set up a world straight out of 1984 where thought crime is punished the same as actual crime. Secondly, you set up a society so toxic to free speech that Jerry Seinfeld is too politically correct to speak at college campuses. And thirdly to the general public you weaken the term homophobe to the point where a large number of people won't care when someone is called one because "the pc police call everything that" this effect was positively (in my opinion) exemplified in Fox News continuing to call Obama a liberal socialist (when he's about as socialist as W was smart) so much that a huge part of their population now feels empowered to vote for an actual socialist in Sanders. Now imagine that in reverse and see where we got Trump.

I'm not saying this just to defend free speech (which oftens coincides with defending speech I find abhorrent) or to silence you, but more as a liberal progressive (in the American sense) trying to bring some nuance back to the group where free thought and nuance used to be strong ideals. Jonathan Haidt has recently said that pointing out racism has become the new racism and I don't think he's far off track. We're in danger of coming off as pig-headed and resistant to different ideas as those we mock.

As far as my opinion on BT's comment. No I didn't feel it was homophobic as it was not meant in offence and it was an individual speaking about another individual and I will readily admit that this is a personal opinion just as yours is also a personal opinion. Neither of us is objectively right on this. And neither of us represents anyone other than ourselves. But even if it was, one arguable homophobic joke does not make a person a homophobe. Nor should it incur the wrath that an explicitly homophobic person should. Nowhere did I say it should be ignored (those are words you unfairly and dishonestly) put in my mouth. I merely think that there are levels of apropriate response.

As for your assault on free speech because of hurt feelings, well I fear that's where you and I will always differ. It is a shame that feelings can be hurt but it is far more shame when censorship reigns supreme and we lose the very liberty we live for. We live in a society with differing people who have different sensibilities, what one person finds hilarious might be what another finds offensive. There's a point where you literally can't keep up. Recently "obese" was termed an offensive word towards overweight people and "person of size" is now preferred, but in the 90s "obese" was considered the proper politically correct term. Do you not see how ridiculous this is?

 

[Unorth]

Kind of incredible that if you combined the total losses of San Antonio and Golden State (17), that would still be good enough for the least amount of losses on the season (next best is Cleveland at 20).

 

[fronkalicious]

Kind of incredible that if you combined the total losses of San Antonio and Golden State (17), that would still be good enough for the least amount of losses on the season (next best is Cleveland at 20).

Today's game was the first time in the history of the nba that two teams 48 games over .500 have played each other. Next highest is 42 games over .500.

 

[NoName]

Anyone here on the Western Bulldogs Forum page on Facebook?. Who do you think Red WB is?

 

[Fossie 32]

Wasn't there a poster by the same name on here?

 

[BEaston]

You once again misconstrue my opinion.

I did not argue against people calling out homophobic comments I argued for a nuanced response. I posited an idea not a hard and fast rule. You hurt the side of social change when you brand someone a homophobe for an insensitive poorly thought out joke that may or may not be construed as homophobic (which is what I initially took umbrage with). As I'm on the side of social change I would like to point out that as much as whenever and wherever I can. Whether you agree or not is your perogative.
It is to say though that this "call out" culture has several effects. Firstly it alienates potential allies in that you set up a 100 percent with us or that means you're against us. You set up a world straight out of 1984 where thought crime is punished the same as actual crime. Secondly, you set up a society so toxic to free speech that Jerry Seinfeld is too politically correct to speak at college campuses. And thirdly to the general public you weaken the term homophobe to the point where a large number of people won't care when someone is called one because "the pc police call everything that" this effect was positively (in my opinion) exemplified in Fox News continuing to call Obama a liberal socialist (when he's about as socialist as W was smart) so much that a huge part of their population now feels empowered to vote for an actual socialist in Sanders. Now imagine that in reverse and see where we got Trump.

I'm not saying this just to defend free speech (which oftens coincides with defending speech I find abhorrent) or to silence you, but more as a liberal progressive (in the American sense) trying to bring some nuance back to the group where free thought and nuance used to be strong ideals. Jonathan Haidt has recently said that pointing out racism has become the new racism and I don't think he's far off track. We're in danger of coming off as pig-headed and resistant to different ideas as those we mock.

As far as my opinion on BT's comment. No I didn't feel it was homophobic as it was not meant in offence and it was an individual speaking about another individual and I will readily admit that this is a personal opinion just as yours is also a personal opinion. Neither of us is objectively right on this. And neither of us represents anyone other than ourselves. But even if it was, one arguable homophobic joke does not make a person a homophobe. Nor should it incur the wrath that an explicitly homophobic person should. Nowhere did I say it should be ignored (those are words you unfairly and dishonestly) put in my mouth. I merely think that there are levels of appropriate response.

As for your assault on free speech because of hurt feelings, well I fear that's where you and I will always differ. It is a shame that feelings can be hurt but it is far more shame when censorship reigns supreme and we lose the very liberty we live for. We live in a society with differing people who have different sensibilities, what one person finds hilarious might be what another finds offensive. There's a point where you literally can't keep up. Recently "obese" was termed an offensive word towards overweight people and "person of size" is now preferred, but in the 90s "obese" was considered the proper politically correct term. Do you not see how ridiculous this is?

So from what I understand what you're saying, essentially it's ok to call out homophobia when you consider it to be (the example you gave was Westboro Baptist Church) but when you don't (BT) it's not ok to call it out. That is essentially what this discussion comes down to, our different opinion on what constitutes a homophobic comment. The thing is, we know that these words are hurtful to a lot of people (you are being disingenuous if you are going to claim otherwise) even if it isn't offensive to you personally. So to me, to defend them shows a total lack of empathy or at least sympathy to what oppressed/marginalised groups have been through historically and unfortunately what they are still subject to in today's society.

How have I assaulted free speech btw? I have never said people can't say those words. Sure you are free to say whatever offensive things you want, I mean no one is going to arrest you. But I just question why anyone would a) want to say things they know will hurt people/groups or b) defend people that do that. I have only said that when those comments are made, people can (and should) call them out if they find them offensive. You seem have an issue with people doing this. Do you see the contradiction in that you are championing free speech but have an issue with people speaking freely in calling something homophobic if they consider it so? You are contradicting your own argument.

 

[LittleG]

Kind of incredible that if you combined the total losses of San Antonio and Golden State (17), that would still be good enough for the least amount of losses on the season (next best is Cleveland at 20).

Spurs are having one of the great seasons of all time... Except golden state is doing it even better.
Crazy season, can't see Cleveland winning against either of these truly awesome teams!