|
DarkCrawler posted:How about you answer my counterfactual instead of declaring me defeated? If you want to keep digging, I'll hand you a shovel. DarkCrawler posted:What about a picture of a white woman and a black man kissing as a hypothetical dictator pairing on either side of time? Is It inherently sexist and/or racist due to the weight of historical gender and racial power dynamics? Does one always gave to keep in mind the act as representing something once literally outlawed (either because the woman not being married to the man or because of their races) instead of it being an embrace? The thing that makes it homophobic is that it is showing a pairing of two men who would be insulted to be called homosexual. In essence, it's middle school "haha you guys are totally gay for each other" in image form. If your hypothetical white woman and black man dictators were fierce opponents of miscegenation but otherwise allies than the depiction you're hypothesizing about *would* be racist because it would be saying, in essence "you're so close to each other you're in a sexual relationship" and in this hypothetical the reason that the target would think it is bad is because of their racist belief. If they weren't racist themselves or at least didn't oppose miscegenation, then it wouldn't be. The targets thinking "two men kissing is bad" is a key part of its reason for existing. Ask yourself if there would be so many depictions of this if one of them were a woman, or if both of them were outspoken advocates for gay rights. So the answer to your counterfactual is "it really depends", and it doesn't help your argument.
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 09:19 |
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:So a reference to two dictators literally kissing in actual reality (there are photographs and eye-witnesses) to lampoon two present dictators becomes inherently homophobic because it depicts two men kissing and the men depicted themselved are homophobes? Did Trump and Putin actually kiss in reality? I've Googled for it and can't find any reference at all to it being a thing that actually happened. I certainly didn't find any photographs or eyewitnesses. The majority of results appear to be dedicated to a Lithuanian mural that went viral in mid-2016, while the rest of the results seem to be about an 60/40 split between "liberal comedy acts claiming that Putin gets Trump horny" and "metaphors from half-baked pundits talking about how pro-Russia Trump is", plus a handful of articles complaining about the homophobic vibe of the whole line of attack. The artists of said Lithuanian mural say it was inspired by a well-known piece of Berlin Wall graffiti, which in turn was based on an actual photograph of two Eastern Bloc leaders sharing a particularly deep socialist fraternal kiss. And I don't see any reason to doubt that. The post-Soviet cultural context is pretty different from the American cultural context. So when the artist says "But I think there’s nothing gay about them. They are kissing, right, like a Soviet Union thing", that's certainly credible enough. But that's how the work was understood by the artists and by the people who lived in the area where the mural was painted. When the picture is going viral in the US, which has a substantially different cultural context, the interpretations and intentions of the people resharing it there are not necessarily the same. It's a classic "death of the author" situation. In the US, depictions of men kissing are almost universally associated with homosexuality. To the extent of which Americans have historical customs involving same-gender kissing, they're largely forgotten today. In the US, the socialist fraternal kiss is a little-remembered piece of trivia about the practices of countries on the other side of the planet fifty years ago. When that photo pops up on an American's Twitter feed, how will they interpret it, and what will they be thinking when they eagerly mash the retweet button? I doubt they're thinking about a photograph between two Soviet Bloc leaders from the 70s. I don't think they're thinking about "a Soviet Union thing". In fact, now that we've covered the mural, let's broaden the conversation a little, because there were plenty of Americans producing their very own genre of "Trump-Putin romance" media, most of which was very definitely not inspired by socialist fraternal kisses. For example, the New York Times put out a satirical video of Trump and Putin tongue-kissing and tweaking each other's nipples as they rode a unicorn together in their underwear, while hearts and rainbows floated past in the background. I rest my loving case. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KC7lctZYsA Main Paineframe fucked around with this message at 20:18 on May 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 20:16
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Is Lindsay Graham gay? I thought that was just a joke. He’s the most closeted man in the world. There were probably a lot of guys like him in the 70s, but he’s about the last one left I can think of. Self-loathing has evolved massively in the last 50 years, but maybe the south makes a person like that.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 20:33
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:If you want to keep digging, I'll hand you a shovel. Again, you should really see where this goes before declaring pre-emptive ownage. quote:The thing that makes it homophobic is that it is showing a pairing of two men who would be insulted to be called homosexual. In essence, it's middle school "haha you guys are totally gay for each other" in image form. If your hypothetical white woman and black man dictators were fierce opponents of miscegenation but otherwise allies than the depiction you're hypothesizing about *would* be racist because it would be saying, in essence "you're so close to each other you're in a sexual relationship" and in this hypothetical the reason that the target would think it is bad is because of their racist belief. If they weren't racist themselves or at least didn't oppose miscegenation, then it wouldn't be. Okay, so the context is determined by the personal beliefs of those included? So if two dictators who couldn't give two fucks about homosexuality or at least have not been open about their beliefs are depicted, there is zero homophobia involved? quote:The targets thinking "two men kissing is bad" is a key part of its reason for existing. Ask yourself if there would be so many depictions of this if one of them were a woman, or if both of them were outspoken advocates for gay rights. Are you seriously claiming that if someone depicted two advocates of gay rights kissing they would not instantly be accused of homophobia? Like you've twisted yourself into trying to rationalize homophobia into in this one specific example of historical reference that you missed "You support gay rights, what are you, gay?" Could not someone make the sexism argument (which you did not address) with a female leader and a male leader kissing? Have you missed "Wow she is just using sex to get her way" that has been heaped upon powerful women throughout history? Why is the reasoning only applicable to people who are against a thing, when it is people who are FOR a thing who are most often targeted by say, homophobia? Is It not possible to be a homophobe against people who are not homophobes? Would you accept your own reasoning from someone opposing those leaders, who claims they depicted them kissing because they wanted to show their closeness instead of implying they were gay? quote:So the answer to your counterfactual is "it really depends", and it doesn't help your argument. It absolutely does, when your philosophy on the issue seems bit open to homophobes in particular right now.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Again, you should really see where this goes before declaring pre-emptive ownage. If two dictators didn't give a gently caress about homosexuality there I expect there would be less homoerotic art of them. DarkCrawler posted:Are you seriously claiming that if someone depicted two advocates of gay rights kissing they would not instantly be accused of homophobia? Like you've twisted yourself into trying to rationalize homophobia into in this one specific example of historical reference that you missed "You support gay rights, what are you, gay?" You are rationalizing homophobia by acting as if the depictions of Trump and Putin acting romantically towards each other is actually a reference to fraternal socialist kissing, instead of being homophobic. I wish you wouldn't, because rationalizing homophobia is pretty gross. DarkCrawler posted:Would you accept your own reasoning from someone opposing those leaders, who claims they depicted them kissing because they wanted to show their closeness instead of implying they were gay? No. I think Main Painframe's post does a good job of explaining why.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Why? Is it bad to be orange? Is him being orange the reason you hate him?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 20:51
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:attacking people with their appearance makes you look like an rear end in a top hat Decorum will end up giving us another 4 years (or more) of Trump. Not to mention a twisted version of Gilead.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 20:57
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:You could consider jokes about bad fitting suits/spray tan/ridiculous hair to be jokes about his vanity and insecurity. Yeah, even on Trump's appearance you can pick things that don't poo poo on other people. Trump isn't short, but he still lies about his height because he's an insecure braggart: that says something about him without actually mocking short guys. He wears a blatant awful spray tan, which is simply a choice on his part. Despite having lots of money and professional tailors, he chooses shapeless unflattering suits rather than ones actually cut to his body type.Neither of those are situations other people are forced into.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 20:57
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Why? Is it bad to be orange? Is him being orange the reason you hate him? "people hate him for being orange" is one thing and "i have no reason not to mock that part where the guy dyes his face orange for the dumbest reasons" is another
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 21:02
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Did Trump and Putin actually kiss in reality? I've Googled for it and can't find any reference at all to it being a thing that actually happened. I certainly didn't find any photographs or eyewitnesses. The majority of results appear to be dedicated to a Lithuanian mural that went viral in mid-2016, while the rest of the results seem to be about an 60/40 split between "liberal comedy acts claiming that Putin gets Trump horny" and "metaphors from half-baked pundits talking about how pro-Russia Trump is", plus a handful of articles complaining about the homophobic vibe of the whole line of attack. Uh, I'm not sure if you know the post-Soviet cultural context in countries such as Lithuania, much less the wider Eastern European Sphere in regards to homosexuality but it is much worse than United States. It is sort of strange that you would think it has to cross the Atlantic Ocean before it meet a homophobe. I would also not really definitely paint all of American culture as anti men-kissing, especially considering the amount of immigrant culture where it has been sustained. Italian-American is probably the most famous one thanks to big fat kisses in mafia movies but there is also America south of the United States of America, Middle Eastern diasporas, etc. Plus all the liberal subcultures of the urban areas that are not dependent on regional customs but actually just nor giving a poo poo about two men kissing eachother ANYWHERE as long as they reserve most places for the privacy of their own home. Are we defining "American culture" by the repressed WASPs alone? The artist also knew it would be seen in other countries, including United States. Does it not simply make him a culturally insensetive homophobe instead, even if he had done it in the most gay friendly environment on Earth instead of Lithuania? DeadlyMuffin posted:If two dictators didn't give a gently caress about homosexuality there I expect there would be less homoerotic art of them. That's not an answer. It's a dismissal, in this counterfactual there is "homoerotic art" (Jeez). Answer the question as presented. quote:You are rationalizing homophobia by acting as if the depictions of Trump and Putin acting romantically towards each other is actually a reference to fraternal socialist kissing, instead of being homophobic. You are rationalizing homophobia by claiming that it can't be directed against non-homophobes. And by claiming that two men kissing is automatically erotic! And no, I am talking about a very specific literal reference to fraternal socialist kissing. You can quote me on where I talked about the other examples being a reference to it or stop making things up. . quote:I wish you wouldn't, because rationalizing homophobia is pretty gross. You seem to be doing it yourself - as well as rationalizing other bigotries by ascribing incredibly specific (the political beliefs of the person in question) as the only determining factor in question. quote:No. I think Main Painframe's post does a good job of explaining why. I don't and I feel like I did a pretty good job explaining to why it is based on a limited understanding of cultural context on both sides of the ocean. Killer robot posted:Yeah, even on Trump's appearance you can pick things that don't poo poo on other people. Trump isn't short, but he still lies about his height because he's an insecure braggart: that says something about him without actually mocking short guys. He wears a blatant awful spray tan, which is simply a choice on his part. Despite having lots of money and professional tailors, he chooses shapeless unflattering suits rather than ones actually cut to his body type.Neither of those are situations other people are forced into. Some obsessive spray tanning is pretty clearly related to psychological issues, such as body dysmorphia. I would say Trump is a pretty good candidate for a whallop of various psychological conditions relating to his appearance (didn't he assault one of his wife over hair plugs?). DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 21:11 on May 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 21:03
|
|
|
Adenoid Dan posted:You should be ashamed for doing this thing. What, no I don't find this thing shameful, why would you think that? I don't think it's something to be ashamed of. But he does.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 21:19
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:And no, I am talking about a very specific literal reference to fraternal socialist kissing. You can quote me on where I talked about the other examples being a reference to it or stop making things up. No, that is not what this conversation has been about. You are now trying to turn the conversation to this because it is something you think you can win. You're accusing me of making stuff up, I am asking you to have a tiny amount of good faith in this discussion rather than try and pretend that the topic has always been about something else. Here's the comment that kicked it all off. Screenshot because I want to show the post you were responding to.  Did you somehow read "all those pictures" to mean "one particular picture"? The posts you have been responding to are clearly not focused entirely on that one example either. There have been multiple examples posted, which you have handwaved away as not actually famous. DarkCrawler posted:Yeah, well I don't actually, as per your question, remember any of those pictures as opposed to the actually famous ones? The middle one isn't even about kissing! The last one just has Trump's face copy-paste on an actual woman, I feel like if your intention is to communicate homophobia you would actually at least bother to find a picture where two men kiss, not exactly a hard thing to do in the 21st century This post of yours argues that *these* pictures are not homophobic: cat botherer posted:I'm glad all of these are referencing the socialist fraternal kiss, and there's no homo implied So maybe you should explicitly re-state your position, because from where I am sitting you seem to be trying to reframe your previous defense of homophobic satire as totally not homophobic as now being about one particular piece of art. DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 21:30 on May 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 21:27
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Some obsessive spray tanning is pretty clearly related to psychological issues, such as body dysmorphia. I would say Trump is a pretty good candidate for a whallop of various psychological conditions relating to his appearance (didn't he assault one of his wife over hair plugs?). As we age, colors appear desaturated. It's just a normal part of the aging process. While he appears bright orange to us, he appears normal to someone with degrading vision. It's the same reason why everyone on fox news is so color saturated. To the older crowd, it appears normal.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 21:28
|
|
|
I think Main Paineframe and Deadlymuffin are making a much more compelling argument than DarkCrawler. Even if many of the art and jokes about Trump and Putin being gay aren't made with the explicit intent of being homophobic, I would say the vast majority of it clearly is. Not to mention the examples of popular media figures like Stephen Colbert making jokes about the only thing Trump's mouth being good for is as Putin's cockholster. I feel like if a fascist or trumpist or whatever was making these artworks and jokes about gay people, it would further the narrative that two people being gay is something to be laughed at, it would definitely be considered homophobic. The fact that it was targeted at Trump and Putin doesn't change the fact that it is still making fun of the gay community, and it will likely cause some amount of harm to gay people who feel like they are being laughed at. Trying to make fun of Trump and Putin with something that they will likely never see, when tons of people who actually are marginalized and are often the targets of these same memes or jokes and laughed at by fascists now feel like people who say they are allies feel the same way. So you're doing zero harm to the targets of the joke, and the collateral damage is harming already marginalized people. Why do it?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 21:36
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:No, that is not what this conversation has been about. You are now trying to turn the conversation to this because it is something you think you can win. Since you quote the original post, you can see the question. "Remember all those pictures of Trump and Putin kissing that liberals love putting up?" In response to the literally most famous picture of Trump and Putin kissing that I am pretty sure liberals in America shared online as well, I got a screenshot of a video, Trump and Putin not kissing and Trump photoshopped on top of a woman. You mistake my criticism for not really demonstrating the initial claim for something else. At nowhere do I claim THEY are a reference to socialist kisses. Already stated that some images do have homophobic intentions as well. In one specific case I argued that Trump being photoshopped over a woman is not likely to be homophobic by intention, seeing as the internet does not lack material for two men kissing. You quoted it so I am not sure why you claim that I made that comment about other pictures. You claim ALL pictures of Trump and Putin kissing are automatically homophobic because their targets are homophobic, without regards to the intention, cultural specifics etc. I find it a really bizarre way of defining bigoted intent, and a standard that starts to quickly unravel when applied not only homophobia, but to all the other bigotries of the world. enahs posted:I think Main Paineframe and Deadlymuffin are making a much more compelling argument than DarkCrawler. Even if many of the art and jokes about Trump and Putin being gay aren't made with the explicit intent of being homophobic, I would say the vast majority of it clearly is. Not to mention the examples of popular media figures like Stephen Colbert making jokes about the only thing Trump's mouth being good for is as Putin's cockholster. I feel like if a fascist or trumpist or whatever was making these artworks and jokes about gay people, it would further the narrative that two people being gay is something to be laughed at, it would definitely be considered homophobic. The fact that it was targeted at Trump and Putin doesn't change the fact that it is still making fun of the gay community, and it will likely cause some amount of harm to gay people who feel like they are being laughed at. Trying to make fun of Trump and Putin with something that they will likely never see, when tons of people who actually are marginalized and are often the targets of these same memes or jokes and laughed at by fascists now feel like people who say they are allies feel the same way. So you're doing zero harm to the targets of the joke, and the collateral damage is harming already marginalized people. Why do it? I don't disagree that the vast majority of it is homophobic.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 22:08
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:I don't disagree that the vast majority of it is homophobic. Wonderful. We agree.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
Donald's the most toxic president in history, you basically can't get a date online if you admit to being a Trumper now, sometimes even with other Trumpers. He has normalized a bunch of repugnant beliefs and behaviors among a section of young men, such as militant white supremacy and misogyny. He looks very unhealthy and bizarre in a way that's difficult to describe and defies our typical standards for aging, gracefully or ungracefully. He goes on nonsensical free association rants, filled with unprecedented lies and howlers per minute, that make him sound demented. Armchair theories on his psychology abound. This is largely what makes lickspittles like Hawley appear ridiculous when they try to claim any cultural high ground or conservative tradition, particularly through a vague manliness. If you can't form or maintain social relationships because you are too radicalized out of any coherent ideologies except hatred and fear, are you an adult man? If your family severs contact with you because your personality is now a product of your TV, are you an adult man? I doubt the memes one way or another had anything to do with people figuring out that they can't stand to be around Donald Trump supporters, and this rigorous debate around the value of memes won't stop the steady stream of homophobic cartoons people share on Facebook. National leaders clearly deferring to other leaders also inspires revulsion in anyone with nationalist sentiments, or who remembers the day before when the other leaders were supposedly dangerous geopolitical rivals who don't share our basic values. I guess you can explain the homophobia as a commentary against their cultivated straight images and strained attempts at "traditional" manliness. Insofar as it matters.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 22:13
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Decorum will end up giving us another 4 years (or more) of Trump. Not to mention a twisted version of Gilead. I need to reiterate, insulting people doesn't bring people to your cause it only maybe makes people question voting for other people. There is a difference between calling all trump supporters assholes and ugly vs. telling people how they are being hurt by trump and his policies/getting people to get involved to make the world better.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 22:56
|
|
|
Name Change posted:Donald's the most toxic president in history, you basically can't get a date online if you admit to being a Trumper now, sometimes even with other Trumpers. He has normalized a bunch of repugnant beliefs and behaviors among a section of young men, such as militant white supremacy and misogyny. He looks very unhealthy and bizarre in a way that's difficult to describe and defies our typical standards for aging, gracefully or ungracefully. He goes on nonsensical free association rants, filled with unprecedented lies and howlers per minute, that make him sound demented. Armchair theories on his psychology abound. Yes, a lot of them are adult men. These are real people you're talking about, even if you don't ever have to see them in real life. People who are largely a product of their circumstances, which does not excuse their awful behavior but it means they are still worthy of compassion, even when they are not worthy of respect. Dehumanizing the other is what the fascists are trying to do. I think we should try to find ways to reach and rehabilitate these people so they can actually give a poo poo about others, rather than just writing them off and belittling them. To be clear, I do not condone the behavior of Trump or Trumpists and they are often insufferable to be around, and many of them believe and say and do awful things. I condemn those actions, but they are still people and you can try to be compassionate and understanding of why society and their circumstances have led them to be the way that they are now. You're right that this discussion won't do anything to stop the steady stream of homophobic memes/jokes/etc. What it can do is help give visibility to the issues we are discussing to the limited audience that we do have. Every change starts small and grows in impact if enough people care to help to make it happen. If we're able to change one person's mind who would have otherwise reposted homophobic memes, or helped one gay or LBTQ+ person help to not feel like they are being laughed at by everybody, then I think it's a discussion worth having. (Not saying you were saying that we shouldn't be having this conversation, just trying to make it clear why I felt it is important to respond).
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 23:05
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:I need to reiterate, insulting people doesn't bring people to your cause it only maybe makes people question voting for other people. There is a difference between calling all trump supporters assholes and ugly vs. telling people how they are being hurt by trump and his policies/getting people to get involved to make the world better. They're not being hurt by Trump, they are being hurt by Trump supporters. If it wasn't Trump it would have been someone else and will be someone else. Blaming Trump or Bush or the next right-wing vessel for these people is just fighting the symptom while hoping the disease will go away. enahs posted:Yes, a lot of them are adult men. These are real people you're talking about, even if you don't ever have to see them in real life. People who are largely a product of their circumstances, which does not excuse their awful behavior but it means they are still worthy of compassion, even when they are not worthy of respect. Dehumanizing the other is what the fascists are trying to do. I think we should try to find ways to reach and rehabilitate these people so they can actually give a poo poo about others, rather than just writing them off and belittling them. To be clear, I do not condone the behavior of Trump or Trumpists and they are often insufferable to be around, and many of them believe and say and do awful things. I condemn those actions, but they are still people and you can try to be compassionate and understanding of why society and their circumstances have led them to be the way that they are now. All fascists are people. Being a person does not make someone worthy of compassion, otherwise the "worthy" in that sentence does not have any meaning whatsoever. A lot of humans are pretty awful, Trump supporters among them. Pointing this out does not "dehumanize" them.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 23:28
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:They're not being hurt by Trump, they are being hurt by Trump supporters. If it wasn't Trump it would have been someone else and will be someone else. Blaming Trump or Bush or the next right-wing vessel for these people is just fighting the symptom while hoping the disease will go away. I have compassion for fascists just like I have compassion for you. I can't possibly know how you feel so I won't put words into your mouth. I'll speak to my experience thinking that there are bad people in life. It also seemed obvious to me that people who choose to do bad things are just bad people, and it's good when bad things happen to them. I have worked a lot on changing my thinking about that because it's not consistent with how I feel about life and people in general. Every single person alive was a child at some point, and their circumstances helped to shape them into the person that they are today. A concerningly large amount of them turned out to be fascists for a whole host of reasons, a large part of it is because of who their parents are. I've been terminally online for almost 20 years now and back in the early 2000s I had some pretty awful opinions. I would casually say terrible things in chat rooms and video games. I look back on myself and I have compassion for the person I was then because I was raised in an evangelical Christian family with a father who frequently regurgitates white supremacist rhetoric and casually drops racial slurs. That's what I was raised to believe was normal and acceptable. I was very fortunate that I met so many diverse people online. A whole bunch were just like me, white male teenagers being edgy and playing first person shooters and diablo 2. I also made friends with people nothing like me, and it helped to gain empathy and recognize my own privilege. I am also privileged to have had access to mental health care for more than 20 years and have spent a lot of time recognizing and processing the trauma I experienced as a child. Many of the people who had similar circumstances and experiences as me still turned out to be fascists, but I do not believe it is because of an inherent trait that person was born with. There is no such thing as original sin. I do not believe that people who choose to do terrible things are worthy of respect or admiration or power because they've shown that the choices they make are awful and the things they do hurt people. I do believe they are worthy of being treated with kindness, but I do not expect others to agree me. I believe they are worthy of compassion because that child did not choose to be raised in whatever circumstances they were. Good or bad, it was forced upon them.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
enahs posted:I have compassion for fascists just like I have compassion for you. I can't possibly know how you feel so I won't put words into your mouth. I'll speak to my experience thinking that there are bad people in life. It also seemed obvious to me that people who choose to do bad things are just bad people, and it's good when bad things happen to them. I have worked a lot on changing my thinking about that because it's not consistent with how I feel about life and people in general. At some point people have to know that their views are disgusting enough that other people are going to ostracize them. This isn't going to be accomplished by Facebook memes, these are just noise that occur over everything. Compassion goes both ways, you have to care enough about somebody to tell them that they're being loving horrible and need to stop.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
Name Change posted:At some point people have to know that their views are disgusting enough that other people are going to ostracize them. This isn't going to be accomplished by Facebook memes, these are just noise that occur over everything. Compassion goes both ways, you have to care enough about somebody to tell them that they're being loving horrible and need to stop.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 02:46
|
|
|
Whether those kinds of jokes are homophobic or not, they're also painfully unfunny.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 03:10
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Whether those kinds of jokes are homophobic or not, they're also painfully unfunny. Yeah, they've honestly got the energy of this classic Onion article: https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/1029486837801398278?s=20
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 05:06
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:Yeah, we really need to care enough about libs to tell them to stop posting pictures of Putin making out with Trump. Where are you even seeing this kind of stuff? Do you have some sort of lib twitter group you follow?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 05:20
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Whether those kinds of jokes are homophobic or not, they're also painfully unfunny. That's the rub, really, they're all incredibly cringe playground level poo poo that somehow makes Trump look like he delivers slick zingers in comparison.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 06:06
|
|
|
holy poo poo you gamers put circular firing squads to shame in how ruthlessly and longwindedly you stab eachother on these forums how about instead of stabbing eachother to death over whether a lovely five second photoshop of trump and putin making out is of questionable quality or not, you gamers post and discuss some actual news? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 07:46
|
|
|
Iamgoofball posted:holy poo poo you gamers put circular firing squads to shame in how ruthlessly and longwindedly you stab eachother on these forums no
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 09:27
|
|
|
Iamgoofball posted:you gamers Whoa there, this kinda language is uncalled for.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 09:47
|
|
|
enahs posted:I have compassion for fascists just like I have compassion for you. I can't possibly know how you feel so I won't put words into your mouth. I'll speak to my experience thinking that there are bad people in life. It also seemed obvious to me that people who choose to do bad things are just bad people, and it's good when bad things happen to them. I have worked a lot on changing my thinking about that because it's not consistent with how I feel about life and people in general. That is putting words in my mouth though. I don't believe that bad people coalesce out of the ether fully formed and are "just bad people" because of some inherent trait at birth. That I don't believe they are worthy of compassion does not mean that I don't realize the effect of environment, upbringing, genetics, etc. as to how someone becomes an evil piece of poo poo like a Trump supporter.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 11:15
|
|
|
Professor Beetus posted:This is always such a tedious argument when it comes up, but I think I have the solution. Most of these people are absolute garbage humans who commit numerous crimes against humanity and spend most of their time enriching themselves and making the lives of the average American significantly worse as a result. So just slap that text on an unflattering picture and boom, no one needs to utter a word about what they personally think of someone's physical characteristics. The word you're looking for is "capitalist" and I'm all for making it a bad word over all the body shaming here.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 13:20
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:That is putting words in my mouth though. I don't believe that bad people coalesce out of the ether fully formed and are "just bad people" because of some inherent trait at birth. That I don't believe they are worthy of compassion does not mean that I don't realize the effect of environment, upbringing, genetics, etc. as to how someone becomes an evil piece of poo poo like a Trump supporter. I never said that you did. You said that you believe that they are not worthy of compassion. I disagree with that, so I shared my experience and explained why I believe that they are. I was on the path to become one of the people you call an evil piece of poo poo. I was extremely privileged and fortunate to have had access to the resources that helped me to make the changes that I did. Everybody has the capacity for change for the better and I want to help as many people do that as I can. I have no illusions that everybody will change. Fascists have demonstrated repeatedly that they don't want to, and the power structures in our society reward that. What we can do is work to change our society to remove that incentive. You are not the only person I'm talking to here. Like I said in a previous post, I feel like it is important to oppose your narrative in this public space for the broader audience of this thread. I don't presume to be able to change your mind and I'm not trying to shame you for believing the way that you do. I hope that I can help to convince others that there are better ways to fight back against fascism than by stooping to their level and using their same dehumanizing rhetoric against them. Iamgoofball posted:holy poo poo you gamers put circular firing squads to shame in how ruthlessly and longwindedly you stab eachother on these forums Feel free to start.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 14:12
|
|
|
The thing is, the actual political history of the United States shows that your "better ways" are ineffectual and easily defeated not only by fascists but the establishment democrats. That is because "stooping to their level") by describing them accurately?) is an actually effective political tactic with long record of success. If you are trying to convince your ways being better outside any other context than morality of their users, you are not armed with a lot of actual evidence for that. In the context of achieving one's political goals "better" means "more effective" . In the context of "fighting back fascism" specifically your ways are not better than mine, but demonstratably worse.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 14:34
|
|
|
Vice Media found an emergency buyer and has declared bankruptcy. This avoids the prospect of them shutting down completely in the short-term, but they have to start making money within a year or so because they sold all of their assets as part of this deal to bail them out. The media company used to be worth approximately $5.7 billion, but has lost over 96% of its value since 2017 after digital advertising collapsed and a potential sale to Disney fell through. https://twitter.com/AP/status/1658076038398615552 quote:NEW YORK (AP) — Vice Media is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, the latest digital media company to falter after a meteoric rise.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 15:17
|
|
|
It’s looking increasingly likely that Biden is going to cave on the debt ceiling https://twitter.com/andrewgiambrone/status/1658113816872341506?s=46&t=BHs6Pl38GJXGN2Y4xeriNA
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
whatever happened to "we don't negotiate with terrorists" 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:13
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:It’s looking increasingly likely that Biden is going to cave on the debt ceiling If they do it's entirely because Democrats like having this fight every decade. This was the chance to safely disarm the stupid debt ceiling thing once and for all, the GOP is in an incredibly weak negotiating position and required George Santos' vote just to get a package together. SCOTUS (and all their rich benefactors) are not going to insist the country destroy its own economy if Biden tried the 14th amendment or even the coin, and then that would be that no more debt ceiling fight ever again. Like so many American political problems, this would be solved by the capacity for curiosity to look at any other country on earth and wondering why they don't do things that way.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:17
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Decorum will end up giving us another 4 years (or more) of Trump. Not to mention a twisted version of Gilead.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 09:19 |
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:It’s looking increasingly likely that Biden is going to cave on the debt ceiling Neither of the cited Reuters or Politico articles actually say what the article and tweet are claiming they do. The closest they get is Reuters posted:White House officials acknowledge that they must accept some spending cuts or strict caps on future spending if they are to strike a deal, two sources said, while insisting they must preserve Biden's signature climate legislation that passed along party lines last year.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:19
|
|
