Terrible Editorials, Opinion Pieces and Letters to the Editor

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Terrible Editorials, Opinion Pieces and Letters to the Editor

«‹›106 »

OwlFancier: Aug 22, 2013

Did the scene involve a horse wearing a gimp suit or something because it sounds pretty scandalous.

# ? Jan 20, 2015 13:25

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 20, 2024 01:48

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Its 10 seconds of a guy motorboating a girl's butt, filmed so that there's no nudity except for maybe a few seconds of the guy's dick at the end. I think it's supposed to be funny and I can't believe an adult human could possibly be scandalized by it or even find it remarkable in any way.

# ? Jan 20, 2015 14:26

Nick_326: Nov 3, 2011; History's Latest Monster

This was an editorial written in 1966:

Read the whole thing (that pic is roughly half the whole piece) here:

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1966/08/09/page/14/article/why-must-we-put-up-with-daily-brawls

It is absolutely loving unreal to see how much of this rhetoric is still being used today.

# ? Jan 20, 2015 16:22

GhostofJohnMuir: Aug 14, 2014; anime is not good

Nick_326 posted:

This was an editorial written in 1966:

It is absolutely loving unreal to see how much of this rhetoric is still being used today.

It should be noted that Chicago stands with Boston as an incredibly racist Northern city. As you read that editorial, remember that blacks were being red lined with intense fervor, that the black neighborhoods received severely substandard city services compared to what whites received despite paying the same taxes and that people were and in some place still are very upfront about hating black people.

# ? Jan 20, 2015 17:48

Doctor Butts: May 21, 2002

Get a load of this piece of poo poo:

quote:

The leader of the free world visits the Saudis, and takes President Obama along: Kevin O'Brien

The current presidential administration hasn't, by any stretch of the imagination, lived up to Barack Obama promises of the most transparency ever. Not unless we've taken to defining stone walls as transparent. But something important was uncovered this week during Obama's visit to Wahabbist, Sharia-ridden, repressive Saudi Arabia: the first lady's noggin.

The line of sight to her locks was way too transparent to suit a lot of Saudis who, according to The Telegraph of London, registered their disdain on a Twitter feed that translates roughly to "#Michelle_Obama_Immodest."

The Saudis must not get out much.

That Michelle Obama is immodest is a fact well known to anyone who has purchased a school lunch in the United States over the last couple of years � or heard the complaints of those subjected to a first lady-influenced menu. She's not afraid to tell us what's good for us. Nor is she shy about portion control.

But the immodesty that scandalized the Saudi critics had to do not with the first lady's relentless campaign against greasy tater tots, but with her flagrant lack of head covering while accompanying the president on a quick side trip to pay their respects to King Abdullah, who died Jan. 23.

The Telegraph and other sources also reported that she didn't seem terribly enthralled by her treatment at the hands � or, more to the point, the hands withheld � of the Saudi dignitaries who greeted her husband in receiving lines at King Khalid International Airport and at the Erga Palace. Mrs. Obama stood a pace behind the president � probably galling in itself � as all and sundry shook his hand. Some initiated a handshake with her, too, but a good many of the sheiks wouldn't shake.

In more than one photo in the British press, which has an insatiable appetite for dramatic facial expressions, she wears a baleful Barack's-going-to-catch-it-when-we-get-home look that's chillingly similar to the one she wore during another awkward breach-of-protocol moment � that time at Nelson Mandela's funeral when Barack was cozying up to Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning Schmidt for selfies.

Note to the Secret Service: It's not the drone that crashed on the White House lawn that you need to worry most about. It's the queen bee crashing around the family quarters.

Imagine the conversation as the commander in chief carefully keeps himself out of striking distance from his wife, strategically employing a loveseat from which William Howard Taft once had to be pried by a team of impeccably matched Clydesdales:

"Barack, why did you even drag me to that awful thing? None of the other guys brought their wives. And this stay-a-pace-behind nonsense ..."

"OK! OK! We know for next time. When their new king keels over, you don't have to go. You probably want to stay out of Dearborn, too."

But give credit where it's due: For a woman who wasn't proud of her country until it issued her the keys to the White House, she did the rest of us proud by keeping her head up and uncovered.

And there's growth here: She covered up when she accompanied the president to Indonesia in 2010, although she didn't look happy about it. (Then again, when does she look happy?)

Maybe this time around, she figured that since Barack doesn't have any more campaigns to run, she could play the Saudi Arabia trip her way.
If so, good for her.

She was an American visiting abroad and she acted like one. She did nothing undignified. She displayed a level of respect and solemnity befitting the occasion. She didn't stop being an American just because certain Americanisms � like being a woman out in public without a veil � might make some of the locals queasy.
She represented at least a slice of who we Americans are, and she did so very ably.

In today's world of religious and cultural warfare, we need more of that. Americans can be pleasant and respectful of other cultures without surrendering to them. The goal is to live peaceably, side by side. Failing that, the goal has to be the preservation of our own culture � by force, if necessary � especially when it conflicts with cultures based on repression.

The State Department routinely warns American women with plans to visit Saudi Arabia that failure to keep their heads covered risks "confrontation by Mutawwa and possible detention/arrest."

Mutawwa are the religious police.

"While most incidents have resulted only in inconvenience or embarrassment, the potential exists for an individual to be arrested, physically harmed, or deported," State's advisory explains.

Well, the Mutawwa weren't going to lean on Michelle Obama. Just as they looked the other way when Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton showed up unveiled.

Those women did what leaders do. They looked the repressors in the eye and said, in effect, "No. I don't have to do that."

Cities, school districts and college campuses where Islam's advance forces constantly demand special accommodations should take that same position. They need to respectfully but firmly tell the Muslims that they are welcome to live here and are cordially invited to assimilate. They should not, however, expect us to conform our culture to their preferences.

To a great extent, we can each do things our own way without any lasting ill effects. Hats off to Michelle Obama for demonstrating that.

Jesus loving Christ. Literally suffering from Obama Derangement Syndrome, can't stand to agree with anything an Obama does without paragraph after paragraph of insults.

# ? Jan 30, 2015 21:48

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

quote:

That Michelle Obama is immodest is a fact well known to anyone who has purchased a school lunch in the United States over the last couple of years � or heard the complaints of those subjected to a first lady-influenced menu.

i wish i had grown up in this magical america where school lunches pre-2008 weren't lowest bidder garbage

# ? Jan 30, 2015 21:49

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

GhostofJohnMuir posted:

It should be noted that Chicago stands with Boston as an incredibly racist Northern city. As you read that editorial, remember that blacks were being red lined with intense fervor, that the black neighborhoods received severely substandard city services compared to what whites received despite paying the same taxes and that people were and in some place still are very upfront about hating black people.

And (at least pre-White Flight) there were many incidences of Blacks & Hispanics being beaten by Italians for wandering into the wrong neighborhood.

# ? Jan 31, 2015 19:16

Jerry Manderbilt: May 31, 2012; No matter how much paperwork I process, it never goes away. It only increases.

Man, a baby boomer acquaintance from my high school years was from Chicago (dad was from Texas, mom was a Cuban Jew, they divorced when he was 10 and his dad took his younger brother south) was like this to a T; he'd tell me when he worked for the municipal government that "these really nice black folks from the country would turn real uppity" under the city's first black mayor. He also talked about how aggressive Puerto Ricans were and bragged about getting punched by a Filipino after calling him a goo goo.

# ? Jan 31, 2015 19:21

ProperGanderPusher: Jan 13, 2012

computer parts posted:

And (at least pre-White Flight) there were many incidences of Blacks & Hispanics being beaten by Italians for wandering into the wrong neighborhood.

Here in San Francisco, Chinese people used to risk getting the poo poo beat out of them if they went past Broadway into North Beach. Then Italians were promoted to white status and most of them immediately fled to the 'burbs. Many remaining locals still bitch about those goddamn Cantonese peasants barking at each other in their moon language in THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, of course.

# ? Feb 1, 2015 05:08

MaxxBot: Oct 6, 2003; you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!

Ever wonder what sort of things a gay man employed by Breitbart would write? I didn't think so, but I'm going to show you anyways.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/02/04/gay-culture-is-dead/

quote:

One of the best things about being gay is that you can totally objectify and degrade your sexual partners without being accused of sexism. That, and the promiscuity and the drugs. But I find myself increasingly in the minority these days when it comes to enjoying the more subversive side of gay life.

Most gay couples I meet are uptight, humourless, smug and depressingly domesticated. They don�t go out any more and they look on illicit substances with disdain. They�re more likely to argue over who�s going to feed the cat than who gets the ball-gag tonight. And the stuff they listen to and read is getting boring, too, as the naughtiness that was such an essential and thrilling part of gay culture starts to disappear from their lives.

Just how bad the situation has become was brought home to me on Friday, when I was railroaded by a friend into seeing a �gay play.� Two hours of affirmation therapy and tired 80s camp with no interval: what was I thinking? But it was worth sitting through in one regard. It confirms my suspicion that gay culture is dead.

Widespread acceptance of gay lifestyles has killed gay culture because the deviance that gave birth to great characters and literature is gone. The present generation of gay British men is a smug class of particularly sanctimonious middle-class bores.

The truth, of course, is that gays can privately be the most bigoted, vicious, waspish people around� and that�s just the lesbians. But they�ve learned to act right-on in public�even, occasionally, sexually prurient�and become uniformly dull as a result. Just as heterosexuals are fleeing from marriage, homosexuals are eagerly colonising suburbia, desperate to get a slice of that idyllic normalcy they feel they�ve never had access to. I can�t be the only person who finds that a bit sad.

Iconoclastic gay icons such as Quentin Crisp would have cringed mightily at My Night With Reg, currently playing at the Apollo on Shaftesbury Avenue. The fact that this naff eighties comedy is getting a run in one of London�s most prestigious theatres�and that the place is full�is depressing The play is full of crap, self-deprecating jokes and �impressionistic� pauses whenever Aids is mentioned. It�s a pallid retread of Crisp�s brilliant routines.

But then, I suppose it�s a sign of the times: today�s most famous homosexual, Stephen Fry, is himself a self-conscious imitation of a much greater wit from history. That�s not a bad summary of most of what we see in the pages of gay magazines these days.

The play was written thirty years ago, but I mention it because that nothing has changed since. Consider Cucumber, the execrable Channel 4 show about homosexuals currently airing. It is one of the most irredeemably terrible things ever broadcast�and I say this as someone who has seen Mega Shark Versus Crocosaurus. I defy you to endure more than ten minutes of it.

Predictable gags, self-absorption and limp bathos. So why was it commissioned? Because it�s gay, and because the writer, Russell T Davies, has the right politics. He once called David Cameron and Nick Clegg �savage and evil people.� If you ask me, �savage and evil� is a far better moniker for the creator of televisual torture Queer as Folk than it is poor hapless Clegg.

(I make the point about politics because gay right-wingers are something of an endangered species. I�ve never been sure what my sexual proclivities have to do with my opinions on taxation or the nuclear deterrent but apparently you can only be a conservative and enjoy the company of men if you�re �self-loathing� or �confused.�)

My Night With Reg wraps unthreatening humour, sentimentality, victimhood and self-indulgence�all the chief virtues of the political left�into one cloying two-hour festival of self-love. The current run started at a smaller theatre in a publicly-funded production, because, well, obviously. It�s the melancholic stage equivalent of Gay Pride, and just as soulless and boring.

The worst of it all is that this stuff gets rapturous applause from audiences who don�t know any better. Gay audiences can sometimes seem stubbornly unsophisticated, full of middle-aged men who, like Bill Maher�s studio crowd, will laugh at anything. Perhaps that�s because, despite the integration of gays into mainstream society, audiences remain obsessed with gay-this and gay-that, as if it�s the only thing they�ve got going for them and the only mechanism with which they can relate to one other.

They�re also getting older, which I take as more evidence that queer culture is stuck in a rut: it�s not engaging young people at all. The audience on Friday was so ossified and spindly I�m surprised there wasn�t AZT on tap alongside the Peroni. (That�s the sort of joke, by the way, that if you have the right politics you get applauded for but if you�re a Tory can end your career on trumped-up charges of homophobia. For the gay Establishment, it�s all fun and games until someone votes Conservative.)

The only boys in the theatre under 30 were obviously being paid for�some things never change�and with the exception of a few dutiful female collaborators, the place was packed floor to ceiling with the walking dead. Young gay men today are giving up even on middle-brow culture, it seems, retreading into admittedly gruesomely entertaining but utterly vapid TV shows like RuPaul�s Drag Race.

Has there been a single truly great gay record, movie or book published in the last ten years? I�m not talking about soppy sentimentality like Brokeback Mountain or Milk. I mean challenging, uncomfortable, riotous, colourful experimentalism like Hedwig and the Angry Inch or Isherwood�s Berlin novels or Queen�s A Night At The Opera.

I�m not saying I want a return to queer-bashing by the police and chemical castrations, obviously. But there�s truth in that old joke: �In Italy, for 30 years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love, they had 500 years of democracy and peace�and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.�

Someone please prove me wrong. Because I�m about ready to check out.

Maybe you'd meet better guys somewhere other than your weekly ex-gay therapy sessions? Just a thought.

# ? Feb 4, 2015 21:34

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN: Jun 26, 2009

I just read a breitbart article about the poor state of gay theatre these days what the gently caress.

# ? Feb 4, 2015 22:42

OwlFancier: Aug 22, 2013

Is he arguing that everyone needs to be a terrible gay villain stereotype from a 1990's cop show or something?

# ? Feb 5, 2015 00:15

Gynocentric Regime: Jun 9, 2010; by Cyrano4747

This is actually a pretty common sentiment I've heard more than once from gay men as to why they're against marriage equality. I think a lot of them defined being gay as inherently transgressive and opposed to mainstream life. So to them settling into a monogamous relationship and having children isn't something real gays do.

# ? Feb 5, 2015 01:24

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

It's just a repackaged anti-suffragette schtick from 1900. "As a woman, and I know for I am a woman, these girls who have been misled by progressives into wearing pants and having jobs and not meekly accepting beatings from their husband are angry lonely, unhappy creatures. Oh please good people, don't drag more women into the dreary masculine areas of making decisions and voting, we're much too delicate to ever be happy that way."

A standard conservative rationalization for making GBS threads on people all the time is that liberal "help" only really hurts people, and what looks to be loving them over is actually compassionate conservative "tough love". See Mildred, the gays don't even want marriage, it's being pushed on them by an overbearing leftist elite, when all they really want is to be rejected from society so they can live underground lives of hedonism and art and creativity before burning out and dying at 28 because we withheld medical care.

What actually got to me more was a conservative of all people (the motherfucking kings of sappy maudlin :911:

my country, my brave troops, doesn't the Queen bring a tear to your eye) complaining that tributes to AIDS victims was syrupy and forced. "Obviously the tragedies of gay people aren't real, don't give them another thought. The real tragedy is the mean things they say about my bosom-brother Nick Clegg!"

# ? Feb 5, 2015 01:24

Edible Hat: Jul 23, 2007; by FactsAreUseless

"Why do people call me self-hating just because I'm a gay conservative? Now, let me tell you about how I preferred when gay people were ghettoized and had self-destructive sexual and drug habits."

Do I need to tell you that Milo Yiannopoulos is thirty years old and never directly had the authentic, transgressive gay experience that he so wants to return to?

Edible Hat fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Feb 9, 2015

# ? Feb 9, 2015 00:11

Starving Autist: Oct 20, 2007; by Ralp

Edible Hat posted:

Do I need to tell you that Milo Yiannopoulos is thirty years old and never directly had the authentic, transgressive gay experience that he so wants to return to?

He obviously feels like he missed out, and it's gay culture's fault that the play he saw last week wasn't very good, too.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 00:46

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Edible Hat posted:

Do I need to tell you that Milo Yiannopoulos is thirty years old and never directly had the authentic, transgressive gay experience that he so wants to return to?

This also explains why he can't seem to understand why HIV is such a big deal or why anyone still gives a poo poo about the death toll and the astonishing lack of concern and even glee among some folks (and heads-of-government I could name *ahem*) that people they didn't like were dying, because it happened when he was a baby and conservatism is defined by a complete absence of empathy.

He's like the Ted Rall of gay people. "Why is HIV such a traumatic memory? I didn't die, it was only people who weren't me so what's the big deal? Get over it already."

# ? Feb 9, 2015 01:25

Selachian: Oct 9, 2012

Edible Hat posted:

"Why do people call me self-hating just because I'm a gay conservative? Now, let me tell you about how I preferred when gay people were ghettoized and had self-destructive sexual and drug habits."

Do I need to tell you that Milo Yiannopoulos is thirty years old and never directly had the authentic, transgressive gay experience that he so wants to return to?

Milo Yiannopoulous? The shitbag who tried to claim Gamergate for conservatism also has weird opinions about gayness? I am shocked.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 02:36

FilthyImp: Sep 30, 2002; Anime Deviant

What kind of loving idiot comes of age in the 90s and doesn't remember how AiDSchat was woven into everything involving sex? I mean Christ almighty MTV's sex in the 90s had a fuckzillion episodes alone.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 02:39

Goatman Sacks: Apr 4, 2011; by FactsAreUseless

Selachian posted:

The shitbag who tried to claim Gamergate for conservatism

Gamergate was always about conservatism. Namely, white men being upset that their play toys might at some point not be 100% oriented towards them.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 03:25

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Entitled white failures have pretty much made up the backbone of the Republican Party since the 80s. The rage machine that powers the leadership comes from white guys who didn't get everything they assumed they would. For boomers that was money and segregated neighborhoods, but for tragically under- or overweight or prematurely balding millennials it's pussy and ironic racism.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 03:42

Pope Guilty: Nov 6, 2006; The human animal is a beautiful and terrible creature, capable of limitless compassion and unfathomable cruelty.

Goatman Sacks posted:

Gamergate was always about conservatism. Namely, white men being upset that their play toys might at some point not be 100% oriented towards them.

And that women's bodies being to women.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 03:43

Starving Autist: Oct 20, 2007; by Ralp

Goatman Sacks posted:

Gamergate was always about conservatism. Namely, white men being upset that their play toys might at some point not be 100% oriented towards them.

Gamergate was always inherently conservative, but never really belonged to an established conservative movement. That's where Milo et. al. come in...

# ? Feb 9, 2015 03:52

Mineaiki: Nov 20, 2013

FilthyImp posted:

What kind of loving idiot comes of age in the 90s and doesn't remember how AiDSchat was woven into everything involving sex? I mean Christ almighty MTV's sex in the 90s had a fuckzillion episodes alone.

It's more that he doesn't realize that a lot of people in this country in the '80s were really hoping that all the Homosexuals, Haitians, and Heroin users (the three Hs associated with AIDS) would just die off. If they weren't hoping, they were at best unwilling to lift a finger or be made uncomfortable by things like health campaigns that mentioned gayness in order to stop it. Associating AIDS with sex in general like you said was a big victory, because before it was "well maybe if you weren't a human being God wouldn't have decided to give you a horrible death." He doesn't even see the transition happening, AIDS is just some vague scary thing to him, and not the name of a really dark chapter in American social history.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 04:12

Harold Fjord: Jan 3, 2004

Mineaiki posted:

It's more that he doesn't realize that a lot of people in this country in the '80s were really hoping that all the Homosexuals, Haitians, and Heroin users (the three Hs associated with AIDS) would just die off. If they weren't hoping, they were at best unwilling to lift a finger or be made uncomfortable by things like health campaigns that mentioned gayness in order to stop it. Associating AIDS with sex in general like you said was a big victory, because before it was "well maybe if you weren't a human being God wouldn't have decided to give you a horrible death." He doesn't even see the transition happening, AIDS is just some vague scary thing to him, and not the name of a really dark chapter in American social history.

I find these kinds of generational differences in understanding to be super interesting. It's a lot like how some people view Cuba or nuclear energy.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 14:10

Mr. Funny Pants: Apr 9, 2001

Mineaiki posted:

It's more that he doesn't realize that a lot of people in this country in the '80s were really hoping that all the Homosexuals, Haitians, and Heroin users (the three Hs associated with AIDS) would just die off. If they weren't hoping, they were at best unwilling to lift a finger or be made uncomfortable by things like health campaigns that mentioned gayness in order to stop it. Associating AIDS with sex in general like you said was a big victory, because before it was "well maybe if you weren't a human being God wouldn't have decided to give you a horrible death." He doesn't even see the transition happening, AIDS is just some vague scary thing to him, and not the name of a really dark chapter in American social history.

I hit puberty just before AIDS became a thing. I poo poo you not, aside from an unwanted pregnancy, the most terrifying worst case scenario for sex was...

HERPES.

I swear to god, you would have thought that herpes was AIDS, ebola, and small pox combined. The speed at which herpes went from destroyer of lives to quaint memory was amazing.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 18:49

Precambrian: Apr 30, 2008

VitalSigns posted:

He's like the Ted Rall of gay people. "Why is HIV such a traumatic memory? I didn't die, it was only people who weren't me so what's the big deal? Get over it already."

Ted Rall has literally made the same point as Milo here. Gay culture used to be thrilling and dangerous, now it's whitebread and mainstream. Slam on the brakes, everything should go back to being the way Ted and Milo want gay culture to be.

# ? Feb 9, 2015 20:13

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

Precambrian posted:

Ted Rall has literally made the same point as Milo here. Gay culture used to be thrilling and dangerous, now it's whitebread and mainstream. Slam on the brakes, everything should go back to being the way Ted and Milo want gay culture to be.

what's the german word for confusing you and your peer group aging into a more mature stage of life with the rest of the world becoming less good

young gays are still just as hedonistic and transgressive but when you're thirty and you start blaming everyone else for being a stick in the mud, lol

# ? Feb 9, 2015 20:14

MaxxBot: Oct 6, 2003; you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!

If all gay people had suddenly stopped liking sex and drugs I would be pretty mad too, luckily the entire article is pure bullshit. I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't based off of this author's personal experiences at all, it looks like something specifically written to appeal to his homophobic audience.

MaxxBot fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Feb 9, 2015

# ? Feb 9, 2015 21:53

Sinestro: Oct 31, 2010; The perfect day needs the perfect set of wheels.

Goatman Sacks posted:

Gamergate was always about conservatism. Namely, white men being upset that their play toys might at some point not be 100% oriented towards them.

I would disagree with the second part. A cursory glance at GamerGate shows a very broad and diverse demographic.

About Milo Yiannapolous (sp?), it never occurred to me that lesbians and gays might be transphobic. I guess growing up people tend to just say LGBT so I assumed they were one unified ccoalition. Can anyone shed light on why a gay man would say the things he does? I assumed as someone who heard similar bigoted rhetoric his whole life he would be more sympathetic.

# ? Feb 10, 2015 02:37

Nintendo Kid: Aug 4, 2011; by Smythe

JaggyJagJag posted:

I would disagree with the second part. A cursory glance at GamerGate shows a very broad and diverse demographic.

About Milo Yiannapolous (sp?), it never occurred to me that lesbians and gays might be transphobic. I guess growing up people tend to just say LGBT so I assumed they were one unified ccoalition. Can anyone shed light on why a gay man would say the things he does? I assumed as someone who heard similar bigoted rhetoric his whole life he would be more sympathetic.

Eh lots of people are dicks to everyone that isn't them, let alone everyone who isn't similar to them.

poo poo there's a couple gay men out there who hate lesbians for no sane reason.

# ? Feb 10, 2015 02:51

OwlFancier: Aug 22, 2013

JaggyJagJag posted:

About Milo Yiannapolous (sp?), it never occurred to me that lesbians and gays might be transphobic. I guess growing up people tend to just say LGBT so I assumed they were one unified ccoalition. Can anyone shed light on why a gay man would say the things he does? I assumed as someone who heard similar bigoted rhetoric his whole life he would be more sympathetic.

Dropped on his head as a child?

Also while LGBT organisations generally form a coalition for mutual gain, individual L G B and T people don't necessarily get along very well.

# ? Feb 10, 2015 02:59

boner confessor: Apr 25, 2013; by R. Guyovich

JaggyJagJag posted:

About Milo Yiannapolous (sp?), it never occurred to me that lesbians and gays might be transphobic. I guess growing up people tend to just say LGBT so I assumed they were one unified ccoalition. Can anyone shed light on why a gay man would say the things he does? I assumed as someone who heard similar bigoted rhetoric his whole life he would be more sympathetic.

no matter how much of a social, sexual, racial, or otherwise undefined minority someone may be, they are still just as capable of being a shithead as anyone else. this is why it's entirely possible for black people to be incredibly racist to other black people, for example. there's no mechanic that as your minority status rises, your minority tolerance also rises in equal measure

# ? Feb 10, 2015 03:24

VideoTapir: Oct 18, 2005; He'll tire eventually.

Nintendo Kid posted:

Eh lots of people are dicks to everyone that isn't them, let alone everyone who isn't similar to them.

poo poo there's a couple gay men out there who hate lesbians for no sane reason.

They're secretly straight?

# ? Feb 10, 2015 04:02

7c Nickel: Apr 27, 2008

JaggyJagJag posted:

I would disagree with the second part. A cursory glance at GamerGate shows a very broad and diverse demographic.

Uhh huh... yeah totally.

# ? Feb 10, 2015 04:25

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Nintendo Kid posted:

Eh lots of people are dicks to everyone that isn't them, let alone everyone who isn't similar to them.

poo poo there's a couple gay men out there who hate lesbians for no sane reason.

There are gay men out there who hate women for no good reason.

# ? Feb 10, 2015 04:35

Defenestration: Aug 10, 2006; "It wasn't my fault that my first unconscious thought turned out to be-"
"Jesus, kid, what?"
"That something smelled delicious!"; Grimey Drawer

Jack Gladney posted:

There are gay men out there who hate women for no good reason.

Same is true for straight men. No reason patriarchy shouldn't apply to gay men too

# ? Feb 10, 2015 04:42

ErIog: Jul 11, 2001

Defenestration posted:

Same is true for straight men. No reason patriarchy shouldn't apply to gay men too

Same is true for Laura Ingraham. Patriarchy and Classism are like the speedball of societal problems, a hell of a drug.

# ? Feb 10, 2015 04:45

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 20, 2024 01:48

Tacky-Ass Rococco: Sep 7, 2010; by R. Guyovich

7c Nickel posted:

Uhh huh... yeah totally.

That it was overrun with reactionary idiots isn't really in question. But games media is poo poo, and there were reasonable amounts of non-white non-male gamers who decided to be publicly outraged for reasons which approximate plausibility. (Not that the outrage was justified, but that it wasn't artificial.)

# ? Feb 10, 2015 04:57

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Terrible Editorials, Opinion Pieces and Letters to the Editor

«‹›106 »