Bringing this discussion back... does fighting bigotry with bigotry work?

[Le Jacquelope]

This ain't a vendetta thread.

I'm talking about people who are hell bent upon pushing their group as superior to others.

There seems to be a very small but vocal group of people who behave like this in every demographic group: women who claim women are better parents than men, blacks who claim they're superior athletes, and in the case of one particular person on Lit, a homosexual person who persists in claiming that gays are more intelligent and have better jobs than straights.

This is not about pulling race cards or anything else... it is about one and only one thing: the irrational desire to stereotype someone of a different race, gender, religion, sexual preference, etc., as somehow inferior to you, and how this reflects badly on the person who does this, and perhaps the movement that they represent.

Now most people are going to want me to name names instead of doing what kobalt.9 calls "passive aggressive posting", and when I do name names, Etoile calls it a grudge thread and then moves it to the GB.

Well, I already named names, so let's get back down to the point instead of engaging in petty diversionary tactics. 'k?

 

[Netzach]

have you ever looked at a breakdown of urban demographics?

A lot of them claim that gay male households on average do better financially and have a higher level or education than other households.

Let's go shoot all the social scientists now.

Or maybe just Q.

No. Let's move this thread AGAIN!

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Why do they make this claim?

These people remind me of the people who post leading social indicators and place black people at the bottom of every list: lowest income, lowest education level, highest crime rate, etc etc They also ding hispanics pretty hard, too. (Hi, 69forever!)

It has "political motivations" written all over it, and you know it.

 

[emap]

Loving think back to high school, remember how the different people got treated? Remember how the cheerleaders got treated? Remember how many people actually accepted people as people instead of something different and unclean? High school never goes away, it just changes a tad.

There will always be people who lash out against different, no matter why they are different, a black man can expect to rise higher than a white women, not because he is better at doing his job, but because he is a man, now if there is a white guy he will go higher than a black man, assuming there is already the one token black man in the higher ups. Things are getting better for a black man, but a woman is screwed still.

I think now you can actually find women at the top, not the very top so far I think, but they are all not paid as much. The only group who has it worse than a woman, hispanics, for some reason they are viewed en masse as stupid people unfit for anything but farm hands or fast food. At one time, it was Chinese, they laid the tracks for the railroads then got shot, or not paid and forced off railroad property, for the longest time they could do nothing but clean clothes, they were good at it, because their society raised them to work. Eventually they got lumped in with the Japanese and thought of as intelligent, diligent, non stop workers, neither group is very happy with that.

Before the Chinese it was the Irish, because they came to America after the english settlers and were different, practically same island, but different customs and languages. No didn't forget, in between the Irish and Chinese where Africans, but that one mostly was in the south, because that was where they had a use, according to the south. Still do according to some of the south, but we won't go there, I'm from there and it doesn't sit well with me.

But before all of them, there was women. We were supposed to have babies and cook dinner, clean the house and please our husband, well depending on where your from and when, it was just the husband, or husband and the whole village/tribe, or the visitors along with husband. Women had no power, at least not visibly, I'm very sure there were many kings that were just figureheads for their wife. In the US, a woman could not own property, vote, hold a job and be paid unless she was single, otherwise husband got the money, or much of anything but clean the house cook dinner and have babies, or be a prostitute the last of those things went away finally in the 70's. A woman could not be anything but a nurse until 1890 I think it was, may have been a bit earlier. A woman couldn't vote until shortly before that, maybe after.

Gay's are the current hate group, hispanics are the current think less of group, but women are still looked down on as less then them, yet we hold all the power.

 

[Netzach]

Why do they make this claim?

These people remind me of the people who post leading social indicators and place black people at the bottom of every list: lowest income, lowest education level, highest crime rate, etc etc They also ding hispanics pretty hard, too. (Hi, 69forever!)

It has "political motivations" written all over it, and you know it.

I think that it depends on the spin. It CAN have political spin, it also might just be a fact.

Are they implying that the people on the bottom rung are lazy and are there because they are inferior, or are they calling attention to the fact that they are there because of fucked up unequal access to opportunity because of racism/whatever ism?

I think you need to look at the context before flipping out about it. I doubt that Q was saying "look gay men make more money, we're the master race."

 

[Etoile]

This ain't a vendetta thread.

I'm talking about people who are hell bent upon pushing their group as superior to others.
(snip)
Now most people are going to want me to name names instead of doing what kobalt.9 calls "passive aggressive posting", and when I do name names, Etoile calls it a grudge thread and then moves it to the GB.

Well, I already named names, so let's get back down to the point instead of engaging in petty diversionary tactics. 'k?

It was a vendetta thread, LT. Read the rules thread. That kind of thing doesn't fly here. I have no problem with the discussion by itself, but specifically attacking one poster is not kosher. And as I said, if you have a specific problem with my judgment as a moderator, feel free to take it up in private message. Since you didn't, I'm assuming that you're not questioning my decision.

And in case you're wondering, I'll defend just about anybody who's being attacked, even if I don't like them or agree with them. Specific personal bashing is not permitted, and I enforce that unequivocally.

But as I said, the discussion itself is fine. Carry on.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Re: Re: Bringing this discussion back... does fighting bigotry with bigotry work?

It was a vendetta thread, LT. Read the rules thread. That kind of thing doesn't fly here. I have no problem with the discussion by itself, but specifically attacking one poster is not kosher. And as I said, if you have a specific problem with my judgment as a moderator, feel free to take it up in private message. Since you didn't, I'm assuming that you're not questioning my decision.

I would have been asked to name names anyway, and failing that request would have been accused of homophobia anyway, because someone would think I was attacking gay rights activism by portraying them ALL as fanatics, blah blah.

I've seen that trap a thousand times.

So I named actual names and it got judged as a "personal attack" thread right off.

I didn't PM you about it because frankly I don't ever see PMing any moderator anywhere as a fruitful endeavor unless you have 9/10ths of the board on your side.

And in case you're wondering, I'll defend just about anybody who's being attacked, even if I don't like them or agree with them. Specific personal bashing is not permitted, and I enforce that unequivocally.

But as I said, the discussion itself is fine. Carry on.

That sounds fine with me. I named names to avoid being taken as broadbrushing the entire gay rights movement by the actions of one... which itself would cause a nasty flamewar.

 

[ExistentialLuv]

I am not going to repost what I had in the last thread. The subject was great and my answer obciously belongs where the thread went even though it pertained to the subject. Sucks she moved the thread. She does allow that kind of behaivor her from a few. Etoile, You know You do. Why send you a PM about it when you see this person does nothing wrong. This is not a personal attack just what I have witnessed for myself. This is one of the reason I do not post very much on this board anymore.

Just wanted to share with you what happened the other day LT, concering not so much gays but race.The war we are in right now has caused hate and bigotry against middle easterners that makes me sick.

I was in the 7 Eleven the other day when a group of young men walked in. The first thing out of ones mouth is

"OMG there is a terrorist working here." The guy at the counter just looked at him and kept working. Took it better than I did. I came unglued on the dude. Let him know just because the skin is the same color does not make him Al-Quida. He is from India and next time to think twice before opening his fucking mouth. Before I could say anything else he apologized to the gentleman and me.

I felt so good for standing up for the guy. He thanked me and I went on.

 

[karuna]

my unrequested $0.02:

Hostility and delusions of superiourity, motivated by bigotry, really suck.

But you know what? Hostility and delusions of superiority suck in general. They don't become virtues just because they're not motivated by bigotry.

I'd like to invite you to be less angry and hostile. It might feel good to be a Riteous Crusader and all, but the world is not suffering for a lack of riteous crusaders.

Everybody want an excuse to feel superiour and vent their angry id. I like your excuse a little better than the bigots', but the difference is smaller than you think.

If you want to be all about compassion and tolerance and peace, then live it. Anger is not peace; there's no way to be angry for peace.

 

[shy slave]

my unrequested $0.02:

Hostility and delusions of superiourity, motivated by bigotry, really suck.


If you want to be all about compassion and tolerance and peace, then live it. Anger is not peace; there's no way to be angry for peace.

 

[Etoile]

Sucks she moved the thread. She does allow that kind of behaivor her from a few. Etoile, You know You do. Why send you a PM about it when you see this person does nothing wrong. This is not a personal attack just what I have witnessed for myself. This is one of the reason I do not post very much on this board anymore.

I'm sorry to hear you say that. If at any time you feel that I'm allowing someone to get away with something, please report the inappropriate post. To my knowledge I don't have any personal biases...I certainly can't think of any offhand. I do rely on people (and there are several) who use the "report this post" function to call my attention to issues, but I make the decisions on my own. The only person I don't moderate outright is Queersetti because he is also a moderator, and as he can tell you, I have PM'd him when I feel he is being inappropriate. I would like to remind you, also, that I am human and not infallible myself.

Again, I'm very sorry to hear you say you don't want to participate much anymore. It is Literotica's loss.

 

[ExistentialLuv]

I'm sorry to hear you say that. If at any time you feel that I'm allowing someone to get away with something, please report the inappropriate post. To my knowledge I don't have any personal biases...I certainly can't think of any offhand. I do rely on people (and there are several) who use the "report this post" function to call my attention to issues, but I make the decisions on my own. The only person I don't moderate outright is Queersetti because he is also a moderator, and as he can tell you, I have PM'd him when I feel he is being inappropriate. I would like to remind you, also, that I am human and not infallible myself.

Again, I'm very sorry to hear you say you don't want to participate much anymore. It is Literotica's loss.

The topics have gotten so far of the issues of GLBT. It honestly looks like a PG fluff board for bi males. It is hard to find something concering our community anymore (that is interesting) and the one time I do, it is moved. Your decision though and you have that right. As far as reporting, used it and got told to stop acting like a child (that hurt). I will still be lurking about, maybe one day your Baby will grow up and get back to the issues concering our community at the present moment.

I know your job around here is not easy. With real life and other interest you can not be around babysitting all the time. Fallacy is known by all of us and he who denies it can not be trusted.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

my unrequested $0.02:

Hostility and delusions of superiourity, motivated by bigotry, really suck.

But you know what? Hostility and delusions of superiority suck in general. They don't become virtues just because they're not motivated by bigotry.

I'd like to invite you to be less angry and hostile. It might feel good to be a Riteous Crusader and all, but the world is not suffering for a lack of riteous crusaders.

Everybody want an excuse to feel superiour and vent their angry id. I like your excuse a little better than the bigots', but the difference is smaller than you think.

If you want to be all about compassion and tolerance and peace, then live it. Anger is not peace; there's no way to be angry for peace.

LOL well if your $.02 wasn't requested then I'd never have posted this thread.

Your post makes a pile of dollars and cents, IMHO.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

I'm sorry to hear you say that. If at any time you feel that I'm allowing someone to get away with something, please report the inappropriate post. To my knowledge I don't have any personal biases...I certainly can't think of any offhand. I do rely on people (and there are several) who use the "report this post" function to call my attention to issues, but I make the decisions on my own. The only person I don't moderate outright is Queersetti because he is also a moderator, and as he can tell you, I have PM'd him when I feel he is being inappropriate. I would like to remind you, also, that I am human and not infallible myself.

Again, I'm very sorry to hear you say you don't want to participate much anymore. It is Literotica's loss.

I will say one thing... you score an A+ for diplomacy.

 

[Etoile]

I will say one thing... you score an A+ for diplomacy.

Thank you very much, that means a lot to me.

 

[Etoile]

The topics have gotten so far of the issues of GLBT. It honestly looks like a PG fluff board for bi males. It is hard to find something concering our community anymore (that is interesting) and the one time I do, it is moved. Your decision though and you have that right. As far as reporting, used it and got told to stop acting like a child (that hurt). I will still be lurking about, maybe one day your Baby will grow up and get back to the issues concering our community at the present moment.

My only point to make here is that this board is what the community makes it. You joined Lit a couple of months after GLBT Chatter was created, so you wouldn't remember the first few weeks. I tried to organize what the board was about - I cracked down on "fluff" threads and got a lot of grief for it. I backed off, and pretty much everybody has been rolling merrily along ever since. It sounds like you want the board to be the same way I did originally, but unfortunately that's not what the greater community wants. I don't visit the PG so I can't compare this section to it.

As for the time you reported a post (and I'm discussing this only because you brought it up), as you may recall that was the reason the rule was established about "no personal attacks." I'm sorry my refusal to support you in the flame war made you feel hurt, but it's the past now.

Again, this board is what you make of it. If you want to see more topical threads, feel free to start them! I'd be delighted to participate and discuss issues with you. In fact, I'm about to go start a thread myself; maybe you'll check it out.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

This is not a personal attack, but this is a solid example of a gay person falsely accusing another person of gay bashing simply because the accused had a problem with their bigotry.

"But you expect gays to just take any shit that's thrown and us and keep quiet." - Queersetti


The quote by me which he says is an example of me "wanting gays to take any shit that's thrown at them and keep quiet" is this:


"That's the whole point. People who make "Politically correct" stereotypes and generalizations never like having stereotypes and generalizations used on them.

This kind of blatant, naked, in your face hypocrisy is the foundation of political correctness.

There are two schools of thought here, and there really is no reconciliation. One has got to dominate and one has got to go the way of the dodo.

One mindset believes that "Hey, I'm the politically correct demographic, I have a right to insult, degrade, stereotype and generalize anyone I want, and if anyone has a problem with it, they need to shut up and take my abuse and call it humor."

The other mindset says "Fuck you you hypocritical twit."

I'm in the latter camp because I couldn't keep anything in my stomach down while hanging around people in the former. They nauseate me."

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=188570&perpage=25


Take it as an attack if you want, I call it documenting a case example.

 

[karuna]

Hi Lovingtongue,

I was just hoping to offer a more or less objective observation: you are very very angry. This posting is so garbled by rage and fury as to be all but incomprehensible.

Since your goal seems to be to prove that you are not on a "vendetta," I would say that your recent messages are only getting you in deeper.

If you want to have a political discussion, go for it. Do it. If you want to convince the readership that you aren't angry and vindictive, than say something... anything... that isn't an angry demand for vindication.

I've been peeking in on this thread for a while now and I have absolutely no idea what your talking about, so I have no idea if we would agree or disagree about politics. The only thing I *am* sure of is that you are on some kind of furious vendetta.

Just take a few deep breaths. Either post something about issues, politics, opinions, experiences... or go whallop some pillows with a wiffle-ball bat.

Look, if you want to go on posting your anger, go for it. I have neither the desire nor the authority to tell you what to do. I am merely letting you know, as one reader, that you are not changing any minds here. You're not making any progress. In fact, you're not really even making any sense.

I am sorry that you have been so upset by your previous discussions here. I am not doubting the sincerity of your feelings, or the legitimacy of your complaints. I am merely hoping you will calm down.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Hi Lovingtongue,

I was just hoping to offer a more or less objective observation: you are very very angry. This posting is so garbled by rage and fury as to be all but incomprehensible.

I see that I'm simply not going to get an answer to a simple question:

Is telling a gay person that it's wrong to propagandize heterosexual people as "less educated" the same thing as telling gays to shut up about homophobia? Yes or no?

If you think that bringing that up is rage and fury then frankly speaking I have nothing more to say to you. I have no hope of getting a straightforward answer to a simple and straightforward question and as such I question your own ability to reason and I'm sure that'll cause some trouble.

 

[karuna]

I see that I'm simply not going to get an answer to a simple question:

Is telling a gay person that it's wrong to propagandize heterosexual people as "less educated" the same thing as telling gays to shut up about homophobia? Yes or no?

Please don't be angry at me. I'm just the messanger.

And the messanger is here to tell you that this is not a "simple question." I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, and assuming that you don't normally write such tortured, impenetrable sentences. I'm assuming it's becuase you're angry.

In any case, I've reread this sentence ten times and I still don't get a yes or no question out of it.

As far as I can tell, somewhere there was a discussion of demographics, and in this discussion it came up that homosexuals appeared to be more highly educated and wealthier than heterosexuals. Someone, possibly you, was upset by this, and objected stating that it was bigotry. Someone else, possibly you, objected to the objection, possibly calling it political correctness... although the accusations of political correctness might have come from either side.

You can assume it's all an anti-you conspiricy, but the fact is that you're not making a lot of sense.I don't disagree politically wiht you, because I have no idea what you're saying. I don't know if you need to calm down, or if you just need an editor. But if you want to have a discussion, you need to write a lot more clearly and calmly.

-k

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Please don't be angry at me. I'm just the messanger.

And the messanger is here to tell you that this is not a "simple question." I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, and assuming that you don't normally write such tortured, impenetrable sentences. I'm assuming it's becuase you're angry.

Actually, the sentence is fairly easy to understand.

You just don't want to answer it.

No editor would ever come along and change what I said because it was very well written. I invite you to find one who would have a problem with that sentence.

I was prepared for your antics before I came here, and knew you'd come up with this delusion that you can't comprehend what I wrote because it's "mean spirited". That's why I wrote it in the plainest of English so when you did pull this little distraction, you'd be exposed as the partisan that you are.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

It's sad that someone speaking in plain English can't be well understood. Perhaps I should ask some heterosexuals these questions instead?

 

[Etoile]

It's sad that someone speaking in plain English can't be well understood. Perhaps I should ask some heterosexuals these questions instead?

Or perhaps the thread stopped getting responses because nobody wants to talk about it anymore.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Or perhaps the thread stopped getting responses because nobody wants to talk about it anymore.

It's fairly obvious why.

As soon as the tough questions came out and the documentation was posted that backed up my premise, and the pathetic attempt at a personal attack was deflected....

everyone suddenly clammed up.

I wonder what you people are hiding from that you can't answer a simple question without getting angry like karuna did? And yes, that was pure anger. Karuna's "tortured, impenetrable sentence" excuse doesn't fly because I only write in the clearest of English.

I found a moral inconsistency and no one is willing to deal with it.

 

[Etoile]

Because nobody gives a flying fuck, LT. You're the only one who cares. The rest of us just plain aren't interested. Let the thread fucking drop already.