Anti 'Thats So Gay' Campaign.

[Shywong]

http://kotaku.com/5336182/campaign-against-thats-so-gay

I thought you guys might find this interesting.

 

[Etoile]

Cool campaign.

 

[Powertone]

what's interesting is that those who say "that's so gay" are of the new generation, the very generation that's supposedly " embraced diversity "
having grown up with " gay straight alliance " groups and such in high school classrooms across the country...what went wrong ?

 

[Shywong]

Heh, I was in middle school around the time people started saying 'thats gay' and they definitely weren't the understanding, open-minded type. But these days, even gay people say 'thats gay,' and usually it makes people laugh with them instead of at them. I always said there's gay and there's ghey. The first meaning homosexual or queer and the other meaning lame or unnecessary.

 

[Safe_Bet]

what's interesting is that those who say "that's so gay" are of the new generation, the very generation that's supposedly " embraced diversity " having grown up with " gay straight alliance " groups and such in high school classrooms across the country...what went wrong ?

What went wrong was some asshats, like you, taught homophobia to your kids.

What went right, is that MANY more kids, now days, understand that that is hurtful and don't use the term that way and the rest, ever possibly you kids, are learning that their parents anti-gay beliefs are wrong.

Heh, I was in middle school around the time people started saying 'thats gay' and they definitely weren't the understanding, open-minded type. But these days, even gay people say 'thats gay,' and usually it makes people laugh with them instead of at them. I always said there's gay and there's ghey. The first meaning homosexual or queer and the other meaning lame or unnecessary.

WTF, dude! I don't care how you spell it (or what you "secret" meaning is), it's STILL insulting! Maybe cuz you are Bi it doesn't hurt you to use that term in a disparaging way, but it insults the shit out of the rest of us. So, using that term (regardless of spelling) is "lame or unnecessary".

 

[emap]

I poke fun of the people who say that in the games I play. Like was playing DDO and this one doofus wandered away from the party and got killed, he was saying how it's so gay that the cleric couldn't heal him and stuff.

I simply asked him a question, so you are saying that you're happy, elated, or gay that you were dumb enough to walk so far ahead of us we couldn't help you?

He sputtered on about how he's not gay for a while until we all said we get it you're not happy.

I am rather surprised that apparently most of the world has forgotten that gay has a different meaning than homosexual. It means happy, ecstatic and elated, nothing else, at least wasn't anything else until recently.

 

[Safe_Bet]

I poke fun of the people who say that in the games I play. Like was playing DDO and this one doofus wandered away from the party and got killed, he was saying how it's so gay that the cleric couldn't heal him and stuff.

I simply asked him a question, so you are saying that you're happy, elated, or gay that you were dumb enough to walk so far ahead of us we couldn't help you?

He sputtered on about how he's not gay for a while until we all said we get it you're not happy.

I am rather surprised that apparently most of the world has forgotten that gay has a different meaning than homosexual. It means happy, ecstatic and elated, nothing else, at least wasn't anything else until recently.

When some body under 80 yrs old say "That's so gay" they ain't meaning "happy or elated", they are using in a derogatory sense. Period.

 

[emap]

For the most part it's anyone under 20, gay being homosexual is a pretty recent thingy. It didn't hit widespread acceptance until the 90's.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

no, thats so not true, emap. Trust me.
The difference is that, until the 90s, most people thought they didn't know anyone who was gay.

What I do think is happening is that often people don't THINK about the fact that when they call someone 'gay' they are making a remark about homosexuality.
It is just part of the language.
For example, until last year, I had never thought about the term 'indian giver'...

 

[John Doe]

It's not going to work. For one gamers tend to be a contrary bunch and secondly this is a dumb way to do it. They don't think gamers will see through the schoolyard, "I'm rubber and you're glue" tactic? This is not only a small issue to be concerned about, it's a weak way to combat it.

 

[HarlotMinx]

It's not going to work. For one gamers tend to be a contrary bunch and secondly this is a dumb way to do it. They don't think gamers will see through the schoolyard, "I'm rubber and you're glue" tactic? This is not only a small issue to be concerned about, it's a weak way to combat it.

I actually agree with John Doe here on one point, I remember running a GSA and still help with GLSEN. I've always felt the "so gay" issue was more of a political correctness issue, a bit akin to the difference in the use of the word "nigger" between various social groups. I can't count the number of times I've heard gay men tell other gay men they're being so gay and absolutely nobodies hackles raise unless a straight person uses it.

Now yes you could make a argument that it encourages children or even adults into a environment where it's acceptable to demean people based on sexual preference but then again, I'm not sure political correctness is a good route; I really dislike the thought of taboo topics which we can't talk about for social niceties.

I hope this doesn't get too many people bridled up, I'm not saying I'm supporting harassment but more that I think there are more important topics to focus on in our schools that we have more of a chance affecting and frankly don't see this as a starting point or stepping stone.

Here's a poem of mine that I've always been in love with, I think Smokey had it right when it comes to addressing any type of discrimination. A Black American

 

[Etoile]

For the most part it's anyone under 20, gay being homosexual is a pretty recent thingy. It didn't hit widespread acceptance until the 90's.

Actually, the meaning originated in the 1920s, and gained acceptance in the 1960s and 1970s during the liberation movements.

From the OED:
1935 N. ERSINE Underworld & Prison Slang 39 Geycat,..a homosexual boy.
1951 E. LAMBERT Sleeping-House Party vii. 74 In a way it was an odd threesome. It occurred to me that Esther rather hung round our two gay boys.
1955 P. WILDEBLOOD Against Law I. 23 Most of the officers at the station had been ‘gay’..an American euphemism for homosexual. Ibid. III. 105 The place [sc. a prison] is packed with gay people who are in for something else.
1960 [see BENT ppl. a. 5c]. 1963 A. HERON Towards Quaker View of Sex iii. 24 These may form the ‘queer’ society; these will frequent ‘gay’ bars.
1966 A. FIRTH Tall, Balding, Thirty-Five xv. 194 Would he ever dare, even if he wanted to, join the shrill freemasonry of the London gay?
1968 Globe & Mail Magazine (Toronto) 13 Jan. 6/1 A coffee shop frequented by the gay.
1971 E. MCGIRR No Better Fiend 69 Until the law was changed..there was a ring of roses around the gays, everybody extorting anything they could get.
1972 Pride of Lions (Columbia Univ.) Apr. 7/3 What about a program acceptable to gays, students and workers?
1974 K. MILLETT Flying (1975) I. 15, I talked at DOB in August, candid, one gay to another.
1975 Whig-Standard (Kingston, Ontario) 13 Aug. 43/5 The female gays in Ottawa are split into four main groups.
1977 Time 25 Apr. 52/3 Florida's former Miss America, Anita Bryant, took time out from her campaign against gays to oppose the ERA.
1980 E. WHITE in Michaels & Ricks State of Lang. 236 Many gays either were in therapy or felt they should be.
1985 Sunday Tel. 30 June 18/7 What about gays, one asks, and will there be facilities for them to relate significantly to each other?

(It was accepted into the New York Times stylebook in 1989, as well.)

 

[HarlotMinx]

Actually, the meaning originated in the 1920s, and gained acceptance in the 1960s and 1970s during the liberation movements.

From the OED:
1935 N. ERSINE Underworld & Prison Slang 39 Geycat,..a homosexual boy.
1951 E. LAMBERT Sleeping-House Party vii. 74 In a way it was an odd threesome. It occurred to me that Esther rather hung round our two gay boys.
1955 P. WILDEBLOOD Against Law I. 23 Most of the officers at the station had been ‘gay’..an American euphemism for homosexual. Ibid. III. 105 The place [sc. a prison] is packed with gay people who are in for something else.
1960 [see BENT ppl. a. 5c]. 1963 A. HERON Towards Quaker View of Sex iii. 24 These may form the ‘queer’ society; these will frequent ‘gay’ bars.
1966 A. FIRTH Tall, Balding, Thirty-Five xv. 194 Would he ever dare, even if he wanted to, join the shrill freemasonry of the London gay?
1968 Globe & Mail Magazine (Toronto) 13 Jan. 6/1 A coffee shop frequented by the gay.
1971 E. MCGIRR No Better Fiend 69 Until the law was changed..there was a ring of roses around the gays, everybody extorting anything they could get.
1972 Pride of Lions (Columbia Univ.) Apr. 7/3 What about a program acceptable to gays, students and workers?
1974 K. MILLETT Flying (1975) I. 15, I talked at DOB in August, candid, one gay to another.
1975 Whig-Standard (Kingston, Ontario) 13 Aug. 43/5 The female gays in Ottawa are split into four main groups.
1977 Time 25 Apr. 52/3 Florida's former Miss America, Anita Bryant, took time out from her campaign against gays to oppose the ERA.
1980 E. WHITE in Michaels & Ricks State of Lang. 236 Many gays either were in therapy or felt they should be.
1985 Sunday Tel. 30 June 18/7 What about gays, one asks, and will there be facilities for them to relate significantly to each other?

(It was accepted into the New York Times stylebook in 1989, as well.)

Actually, this is exactly correct, the first known time gay was used to depict homosexual relationships originates in Gertrude Stein's Miss Furr & Miss Skeen in 1922. And in 1929, Noel Coward wrote

Pretty boys, witty boys,
You may sneer
At our disintegration.
Haughty boys, naughty boys,
Dear, dear, dear!
Swooning with affectation...
And as we are the reason
For the "Nineties" being gay,
We all wear a green carnation.

 

[Powertone]

What went wrong was some asshats, like you, taught homophobia to your kids.

What went right, is that MANY more kids, now days, understand that that is hurtful and don't use the term that way and the rest, ever possibly you kids, are learning that their parents anti-gay beliefs are wrong.

what's completely wrong is that asshats like you who demand tolerance make snap judgments on people like me who you don't even have a clue about
fuck off...

 

[Shywong]

Safe_Bet is the Capitol Cunt of the GLBT forums and Supreme Feminist that represents the embodiment of zealous over-sensitivity toward anything that isn't politically correct. If you possess a penis that isn't made of plastic, there's a high probability that she hates you by default. Just look at her, even though you can't see her face you know it has Pro Lesbo written all over it.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Safe_Bet is the Capitol Cunt of the GLBT forums and Supreme Feminist that represents the embodiment of zealous over-sensitivity toward anything that isn't politically correct. If you possess a penis that isn't made of plastic, there's a high probability that she hates you by default. Just look at her, even though you can't see her face you know it has Pro Lesbo written all over it.

Why, thank you Shywong. Considering the source that is a pretty high compliment!


ETA: Hey, Shywong... mind if I use that quote in my signature? Thanks, sweetie!

 

[Shywong]

Why, thank you Shywong. Considering the source that is a pretty high compliment!


ETA: Hey, Shywong... mind if I use that quote in my signature? Thanks, sweetie!

Be my guest. I knew you'd like it.

 

[John Doe]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2009/20090817.jpg

 

[JABcomix]

We're all for more tolerance and justice. Doesn't mean we're going to get it. Evolution is the best bet out of this. As soon as you attempt some sort of Revolutionary attempt to change the culture, you in turn create an equal and just as strong opposite affect. It works in just about everything. You can never just change things off the bat. Now, I'm all for accepting my gay brothers and sisters, but you're going about this all wrong. Sooner or later, people will realize how seriously retarded they are when they use that word (yes, I did use the word retard because I do believe there are real retards that pass themselves off as intelligent in this world, I mean we voted for Bush twice didn't we?) So, we simply need to allow evolution to take place and wait for the day that people will feel actual and real shame for treating others so bad ( I have no shame of course in calling someone retarded, but that's just me, I'm not evolved) Marriage came out of a social shaming of men who whored themselves out by taking way too many women. Society demanded that they become respectable. Hence, we have men who pretend to be respectable and yet cheat on their wives. So you see, we are not evolved, at least some of us aren't. How in the world can you expect an unevolved planet to treat those that they deem "fringe" with respect and dignity. It's a valid request, but it's destined to a harsh backlash that could turn ugly. Evolution not Revolution.

JAB out

 

[Safe_Bet]

We're all for more tolerance and justice. Doesn't mean we're going to get it. Evolution is the best bet out of this. As soon as you attempt some sort of Revolutionary attempt to change the culture, you in turn create an equal and just as strong opposite affect. It works in just about everything. You can never just change things off the bat. Now, I'm all for accepting my gay brothers and sisters, but you're going about this all wrong. Sooner or later, people will realize how seriously retarded they are when they use that word (yes, I did use the word retard because I do believe there are real retards that pass themselves off as intelligent in this world, I mean we voted for Bush twice didn't we?) So, we simply need to allow evolution to take place and wait for the day that people will feel actual and real shame for treating others so bad ( I have no shame of course in calling someone retarded, but that's just me, I'm not evolved) Marriage came out of a social shaming of men who whored themselves out by taking way too many women. Society demanded that they become respectable. Hence, we have men who pretend to be respectable and yet cheat on their wives. So you see, we are not evolved, at least some of us aren't. How in the world can you expect an unevolved planet to treat those that they deem "fringe" with respect and dignity. It's a valid request, but it's destined to a harsh backlash that could turn ugly. Evolution not Revolution.

JAB out

No backlash here. You are attempting to have a civil discourse and I am sure MOST of us will respond in kind. The ones that don't, well you might be correct about them

You DO have a couple of things wrong thought.

I'll start with the easy one first: Marriage.

Marriage came about as a means for men to control wealth and property. When women began to gain W & P (as widows or heirs) marriage was a means used to gain control of it. It was originally ALL about control of wealth. The chuch got involved in the middle ages when they discovered that they could get their hands on some of the money by making marriage under their control (santifing it). Check it out and you'll see that I'm right.

As for the other part, I'll quote Martin Luther King Jr.: "A right delayed is a right denyed." Our founding fathers wrote a constitution which promised these rights. Granted, they certainly didn't intent to include people of color, gays or women in thier plan, but, contrary to your supposition, we have evolved to that point. Now we need to make sure that the rights that are do us are no longer delayed.

 

[John Doe]

http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2009/20090817.jpg

The companion article to the above comic:

The True Face Of Our Enemy
by Tycho Brahe of Penny Arcade

The Think B4 You Speak campaign is basically incoherent, and operates from some deep misconceptions about how and why people communicate. These assertions have been collated and placed sequentially in today's comic offering.

Trying to regulate how people speak is a problematic endeavor. People sometimes try to assert that Information Wants To Be Free, when that isn't actually true, because information can't want things. It's a false corollary of something that is true, though - namely, that Communication Cannot Be Contained. A true corollary of this notion would be that People Will Say Things You Don't Like, And May Even Hate, a shard of schoolyard wisdom I previously thought well distributed.

The incoherency springs from the fact that the spots themselves insult the target of their message, which might work to attract attention, but the actual payload of the spots isn't savage enough to kindle any kind of genuine analysis. They're trying to regulate jerks by being jerks, but they're not really jerks, so they can't carry it off. This is the danger of assuming that your opponent is anything like yourself. They need to give their actual hatred of this practice a voice, every moment they were compressed into some subset of themselves, every brutal act, every misshapen poem they were forced to write, and concentrate this into a fragmentary lozenge of spoken power.

No-one responds to this kind of diffuse scolding, least of all young men, least of all from strangers who present themselves as archwizards of prim speech and perfect morality. Bigots and stupid kids speak this way expressly to promulgate the root concepts or to provoke a reaction. Telling them to "knock it off," as this campaign hilariously does, is like exposing your belly to these wolves.

Lexically speaking, the word Gay is a battleground of warring meanings, uses, and baggage. The fact that the slur has retained its power - for all parties involved - is evidence that the conflict is ongoing, and that its destiny is not yet established. I have tremendous support for them in their aim: the wresting of language, which is identity, from the unworthy foe. If you want to hunt this kind of game, you need bigger ordnance.

 

[Safe_Bet]

what's completely wrong is that asshats like you who demand tolerance make snap judgments on people like me who you don't even have a clue about
fuck off...

Sure I don't...

"fuck pelosi...that nazi cunt"

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=31725416&postcount=3

 

[JABcomix]

You DO have a couple of things wrong thought.

I'll start with the easy one first: Marriage.

Marriage came about as a means for men to control wealth and property. When women began to gain W & P (as widows or heirs) marriage was a means used to gain control of it. It was originally ALL about control of wealth. The chuch got involved in the middle ages when they discovered that they could get their hands on some of the money by making marriage under their control (santifing it). Check it out and you'll see that I'm right.

You may be right about this, but I wasn't referring to the devolution of marriage. I was referring to the origins. I'm sure men took advantage of this convenient form of extortion, because that's what men do. But the origins of marriage come out of this public shaming that forced men to become respectable.

As for the other part, I'll quote Martin Luther King Jr.: "A right delayed is a right denyed." Our founding fathers wrote a constitution which promised these rights. Granted, they certainly didn't intent to include people of color, gays or women in thier plan, but, contrary to your supposition, we have evolved to that point. Now we need to make sure that the rights that are do us are no longer delayed.

First off, none of us are born with any real rights. That is a myth. Rights can be taken away and rights can be given. There is no where written in the book of life that rights are afforded to humans. Do kids in Africa that are stolen and forced to work to mine your precious gemstones have rights? No, they don't. We may think they do because we afford rights to our own kids, but that in no way guarantees that other people from other parts of the world have rights. So this idea that we deserve rights is a non-winnable argument because you will always run into people who like things the way they are. You see, what many fail to understand is that when you propose a change, you strike fear in people who believe that something is being taken away from them. It doesn't matter if the fear is real or imagine. All that matters is that this person believes that you are imposing on them something that they personally didn't ask for. Fear is the main emotion of the unintelligent. Fear causes people to act irrational, even against their own best interest. You cannot confront people in such a way because you will only incite this unintelligible emotion. You're only hope is that our leaders are intelligent enough to see beyond the "mob" of morons and do the right thing. Hell, the majority of people in America were FOR slavery before it was abolished. So no, the majority is not always correct. But back to my point in "rights". We give ourselves the rights. It is us that either say we all have this or we don't. We have to agree to do this or else nobody gets the rights that we want. There is no guarantee that we will ever get the rights that we want. Yes, I do agree that we have evolved to the point where we give each other rights, but it's not perfected yet. We still discriminate and we will continue to discriminate until we have evolved to the point where we see no difference in others. There are other countries in this world that afford their citizens no rights. As long as we are part of this world, we will always have this influx of discrimination. Sure, America can try to show the way, but if we get lost ourselves, we aren't very good at leading the way. It's like the blind leading the blind. Saying that we have a right is just as fallible as saying that we have a right to freedom. Freedom, absolute freedom is the biggest fallacy. No one can be absolutely free. One must enslave others to be free. We are all connected to one another and we must find ways to cooperate with one another. Only then can we all guarantee each other a relative amount of freedom. But I laugh at those that want absolute freedom. Basically, they are saying, I want to make you my slave. The South is still pissed that we took their slaves away.


JAB out

 

[John Doe]

First off, none of us are born with any real rights. That is a myth. Rights can be taken away and rights can be given. There is no where written in the book of life that rights are afforded to humans.

The issue of whether or not humans have any "natural" rights has been debated for centuries. As with all other philosophical issues, there is no right or wrong answer.

 

[Powertone]

Sure I don't...


http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=31725416&postcount=3

wow...a liberal taking something totally out of context...imagine that.

Here's my original post on this subject which you saw fit to denigrate:

Powertone what's interesting is that those who say "that's so gay" are of the new generation, the very generation that's supposedly " embraced diversity "
having grown up with " gay straight alliance " groups and such in high school classrooms across the country...what went wrong ?

an honest question which you pounced upon calling me an " asshat " .
you and Pelosi are a lot alike. Trash and smear those who simply ask questions. Accuse them of being NAZI's and homophobes in your case.
My generation isn't the one saying " that's gay..." It's yours.
The LEFT is the most intolerant judgmental hateful political group going...no question about it...The Speaker of the House calls American citizens NAZI's ? Are you fucking kidding me ?
She favors "disruptors "except when it's an R doing it .Hypocrisy to the nth degree. Fuck Pelosi that Nazi Cunt .
Her party will be the ones herding the people in to cattle cars down the road.