[asterisk-biz] (no subject)
Citizen
rick at rickrinehart.com
Wed Nov 14 21:54:09 CST 2007
Gee, this has proven to be the most entertaining list I belong to. For the last day it's been like a bad accident that I can't stop staring at.
Let me share a little story, it was 1957, the pepperoni were swimming upstream, we were parked in front of the police station downtown as my father ran inside for his pay check. Sitting on the back seat I shouted 'Look Mom it's a <the N word>'. A word I had learned at home. The gentleman on the sidewalk stopped and stared into the window of the '55 Plymouth at me pointing at him with my three year old, two inch long, lilly white forefinger. The man gave me an 'in your face look' for a moment then a little curl at the corner of his lip that could have been a faint smile or a smirk, he then walked on down the sidewalk. Needless to say, at the age of three I conceptualized that all that seems appropiate may not be. I remember the gentleman's face, expression, the hat he was wearing like a photograph today, although the moment happened fifty years ago.
So, with that said and as a homosexual, I cringe a bit when someone refers to a product or action as being <the offending G word> but i'm not immobilized by it... to understand others I have to look inside my self...
-rick
That summary, like the rest of your comments in this thread, is
precisely correct and well packaged in its brevity.
On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 19:47 -0500, Bill Michaelson wrote:
> You've repeatedly failed to grasp that the central issue has not been
> the assertion that the original poster is bigoted, but rather, that he
> cavalierly disregards social conventions in a way that perpetuates
> bigotry, and in a way that is juvenile and inappropriate for this type
> of forum. Various posters have attempted to isolate this point
> explicitly and obliquely, but it keeps getting by you.
>
> Now that he has repeated the behavior in a way that just happens to be
> uncomfortable to you, you feel the need to distance yourself. It's
> ironic because his latest post comes in a context that clearly
> identifies it as satire, albeit very poor quality. Not so for the
> original post: an off-handed gratuitous smear that was just simply in
> poor taste.
>
> Nick Seraphin wrote:
> > Well now that Alex is imploding himself on the list, whether he really is
> > a bigot or not, he sure wants us all to think he is. So I'm not defending
> > Alex anymore. However, I stand by my original position that what he said,
> > if it had been said by anyone else, should STILL not be considered a
> > bigoted statement, and that taken out of the context of Alex's other
> > statements, this by itself was not worth Matthew or anyone else blowing a
> > gasket over.
> >
> > Alex's implosion hurts my argument by association because he was the
> > original subject, but again, said by anyone else who doesn't make other
> > contextual statements to support it, the "gay" thing was not worth getting
> > upset over, nor is it, by itself, bigoted.
> >
> > -- Nick
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Brent Wagner wrote:
> >
> >
> > > For what it's worth: I won't do business with Alex, because his
> > > comment was juvenile. And, yes, there has been a pattern of
> > > mistreatment of homosexuals for a long, long time. And yes, it seems
> > > about as bad ( to me, at least ) as mistreating someone due to race.
> > > But, we're each entitled to our own opinions and actions in response.
> > > So, like I said, I won't deal with Alex. Not because I believe that
> > > he's a homophobe, or a racist, but because I don't believe that a
> > > comment like the one made by him is remotely mature or professional.
> > > By the way, I'm about as conservative as they come. Your assertion
> > > that condemning pejoratives is somehow liberal is silly.
> > >
> > > On Nov 14, 2007, at 12:47 PM, Nick Seraphin wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > People call something that isn't a sexual human "gay" to insult it,
> > > > > because lots of people have treated gay people as really bad
> > > > > things. We
> > > > > don't say a bargainer tried to "jew us down" any more, either, even
> > > > > though "Jew" isn't a bad word when referring to Jewish people (except
> > > > > when people mean it that way).
> > > > >
> > > > > When you use the term for a group of people as an insult to
> > > > > something,
> > > > > you are insulting those people. If people called some things
> > > > > "christian"
> > > > > as an insult, for example, the way people have called things "gay"
> > > > > as an
> > > > > insult for a long time, then "that thing is christian beyond words"
> > > > > would insult not just the thing, but christians, too.
> > > > >
> > > > You're going way off the deep end here, buddy. First, *I* never
> > > > used the
> > > > word. I'm simply saying that calling Alex a bigot for using it in
> > > > the way
> > > > he did is totally going overboard. I'm simply defending Alex on this
> > > > because I don't think it was the end of civilization like you seem
> > > > to be
> > > > indicating now.
> > > >
> > > > You sound absolutely ridiculous. Go back and read what you just
> > > > wrote.
> > > > You're implying that calling an inanimate object "gay" is as bad as
> > > > making
> > > > Black people sit on the back of the bus in the 1950's. You're being
> > > > totally irrational.
> > > >
> > > > Because I defended Alex's benign comment, you now called me a bigot
> > > > and a
> > > > racist (where did racism come into this? Is being gay now it's own
> > > > race?)
> > > > and "people like [me]" are the reason there's oppression in the
> > > > world and
> > > > why life is so horrible in this country. You're obviously liberal
> > > > politically from your statements below... aren't liberals supposed to
> > > > DEFEND free speech and the first amendment? Or maybe you only
> > > > defend YOUR
> > > > right to free speech? Anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot or a
> > > > racist. Classic lines from the MoveOn.org playbook for arguments.
> > > >
> > > > I suppose anytime you don't agree with someone, you just "gang up
> > > > on them" and beat them into submission until they succumb to your
> > > > point
> > > > of view? Doesn't that make YOU the oppressive one here?
> > > >
> > > > If calling something "gay" is such a bigoted slur, then why don't I
> > > > see
> > > > any outrage from the community at all the thousands of times I've
> > > > seen it
> > > > used on TV or in movies in the past 10 years alone?
> > > >
> > > > REAL slurs, like the N-word, don't get used on broadcast television
> > > > anymore and haven't for years. Yet I've often heard actors on
> > > > broadcast
> > > > television saying something is "gay" or "so gay".
> > > >
> > > > If it's such a horrible thing to say, where's the outrage over it's
> > > > common
> > > > use in everyday life? Don't tell me this mailing list is the first
> > > > time
> > > > you've ever seen someone use that word that way in recent history.
> > > >
> > > > Or what about all the times in TV or movies where there's a
> > > > situation in
> > > > which someone questions whether another man is gay or not, and they
> > > > flinch, give a horrified facial expresion, and say "God No!"...
> > > > that's not
> > > > more insulting to gay people than Alex calling an inanimate object
> > > > "gay"
> > > > on a mailing list with a tiny fraction of the viewers of any TV
> > > > network?
> > > > You think what Alex did was worse? Yet the other thing is clearly
> > > > acceptable in today's society.
> > > >
> > > > I guess Hollywood (which is full of gay people too) didn't get your
> > > > memo.
> > > >
> > > > Any other common words or phrases we have to stop using on here so
> > > > as to
> > > > not offend you or oppress you?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > This is a basic point of elementary manners. Ask yourself if you
> > > > > would
> > > > > feel safe in a gay bar full of gay bikers, asked if you like the new
> > > > > version of Windows, and you replied that you didn't, LOUDLY, saying
> > > > > "THAT IS SO GAY". Would you feel safe? Would your rationalizations
> > > > > protect you?
> > > > >
> > > > > You're one of those people who thinks you've carved out a whole
> > > > > zone of
> > > > > bad behavior because you call rules against it "politically"
> > > > > correct, as
> > > > > if the behavior is actually correct, but there's some arbitrary rule
> > > > > against it. "Politically correct" refers to all kinds of correct
> > > > > behavior that had to be forced on bigots by oppressed groups, because
> > > > > bigots, usually in the majority, could be stopped only by a
> > > > > "political"
> > > > > process, like long appeals like this one to people's sense of decency
> > > > > buried under their convenient traditional bigotry.
> > > > >
> > > > > People like you have long insisted from your conveniently protected
> > > > > roles in society that all kinds of ethnic slurs are OK. But their
> > > > > common
> > > > > use is a reminder to people they insult that the insults are
> > > > > accepted,
> > > > > will not be opposed, that the insulter has power to offend that the
> > > > > insulted does not have power to stop. The reality is referred to
> > > > > by the
> > > > > insult. To remind everyone that the target is an acceptable victim,
> > > > > which perpetuates the abuse. Including physical and political
> > > > > abuse. Gay
> > > > > people, even in America, are often second class citizens, with all
> > > > > kinds
> > > > > of rights and privileges denied them. And your calling something
> > > > > "gay"
> > > > > as an arbitrary insult to it is helping keep it that way. If you
> > > > > don't
> > > > > understand that, it's because you understand nothing about
> > > > > politics or
> > > > > how large groups of people operate. And now you're defending your
> > > > > ignorance, just because it's convenient to you.
> > > > >
> > > > Geez, Just call me Hitler so I can invoke Godwin's Law already.
> > > > You're
> > > > almost there with the above statements anyway. :-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I didn't say that making that slur was the sole action keeping
> > > > > everyone
> > > > > down. But it is part of it. And people failing to confront those
> > > > > little,
> > > > > everyday abuses is the essential part of it. Every time a White
> > > > > person
> > > > > in Alabama let a bus driver direct a Black person to the back of the
> > > > > bus, or any other of the little acceptable codes of racism was
> > > > > indulged
> > > > > rather than confronted, the racism was kept propped up by the person
> > > > > going along as much as by the person enforcing it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I also didn't say anything about "Christmas". But your bringing
> > > > > it up
> > > > > refers to you acting like there's some kind of "war on Christmas",
> > > > > the
> > > > > idiotic culture war that lets privileged people like you act like
> > > > > victims, when you're not. A sad perversion of what Christmas is
> > > > > supposed
> > > > > to stand for: the birth of someone who brought compassion for
> > > > > everyone,
> > > > > no matter their station, regardless of how socially acceptable it
> > > > > was to
> > > > > treat some people like animals or objects.
> > > > >
> > > > Well based on that statement, I now know you're a far-left liberal
> > > > nut and
> > > > there's no way I can win this argument with you, so I'm not even
> > > > going to
> > > > try. Go ahead and claim victory... tell me "you're giving up
> > > > because you
> > > > know you're wrong" or whatever canned phrase liberals are using
> > > > this week.
> > > >
> > > > You've proven you're irrational, and I don't have time to waste
> > > > arguing
> > > > with an irrational person.
> > > >
> > > > If someone else, who isn't irrational, wants to discuss this with me
> > > > privately, I'll be happy to continue off-list.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Bigotry is *real*. It ruins lives. Just because you're privileged
> > > > >
> > > > Yes... calling an inanimate object "gay" is ruining lives. The body
> > > > count must be in the thousands. Got to be George Bush's fault!
> > > > Just like
> > > > Katrina!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > BTW, ending your excuses with an insult and a smiley doesn't make it
> > > > > OK. And your saying that your bigotry is no big deal, just because
> > > > > *you*
> > > > > are so casual about it, doesn't mean it really is like that.
> > > > >
> > > > It wasn't an insult. Again, you see something where it doesn't exist.
> > > >
> > > > My God, I still cannot believe that you went this ape over Alex's
> > > > comment.
> > > > I'm literally shaking my head in disbelief as I type this.
> > > >
> > > > -- Nick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
> > > >
> > > > asterisk-biz mailing list
> > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> > > > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------
> > > "If you can't do something smart, do something right."
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
> >
> > asterisk-biz mailing list
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
--
(C) Matthew Rubenstein
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20071114/5652fc5e/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the asterisk-biz
mailing list