Do We Sometimes Take Political Correctness Too Far?

[ruggerson]

And does that cause unneeded and unwarranted hostility from people who feel their right to free expression is being squelched by schoolmarmish codes of behaviour when it comes to joking around about straights and gays?

Do we not have a right to laugh at Reverend Haggard at the same time we see the tragedy in his situation and the situation of all people in the closet?

Or do we have to be relentlessly sanctimonious and humorless about ourselves and our stature in America in 2006?

You see, imho, people like Lisa Lampanelli (sp?) serve a real purpose in our society. She plays on stereotypes that most people just mutter under their breaths, and in so doing exposes them to the light of day and reduces their stigma. She makes us all one in the human experience.

Shouldn't gays and lesbians be able to laugh at themselves at the exact same time we are deadly seriously fighting for our rights and our lives?

[MADem]

1. Do you mean joke around, like this??

I got that from John A's AMERICABLOG...and he said he whipped it up himself!!!

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/11/disgraced-evangelical-leader-accused.html

(In the odd event that someone doesn't realize it, the site owner is gay)

[TallahasseeGrannie]

4. I'm fat. Really fat. And sometimes it's funny

and I don't mind laughing about it and I don't mind my family teasing me now and then.

But there is also a serious side to it. But what's life without laughter? OVER, THAT'S WHAT.

[LeftCoast]

8. I'm tired of being the butt of someone's joke

It seems like we're either hated, feared or made fun of.

[sui generis]

181. hi TG!

I'm right there with you. There isn't one single rule that applies all the time, but if we can't laugh at ourselves now and then . . . what's the point of having a head?

Sigh. I remember an episode of the new Bob Newhart show where one of the characters says "if I can't drive down the road with the top down, and the wind, blowing through my hair, then what's the point of having a head?"

I guess that's kind of how most of us drive through DU some days, either with the top down, or without a head, and some days both.

[orpupilofnature57]

2. Isn't it funny we always call on others for courage and a sense of humor. Are you Gay?

[ruggerson]

26. Ummm. Yes. n/t

[LeftCoast]

3. Some people find black-face amusing too

Are the people that find that offensive taking political correctness too far?

[orpupilofnature57]

5. Great point!

[foreigncorrespondent]

14. Yep!!!

Sapph always cringes when we watch a certain Judy/Mickey movie and they do black face in that.

But remember, we are ok to the butt of peoples jokes, and we aren't allowed to stand up and say, hey that hurt. Gotta have someone lower on the shit heap to pick on right?

[sui generis]

182. let me answer that. When Michael McDonald mocks someone

doing black face on MadTV do you think he's just being an insensitive ass? What about Carlos Mencia? Should he be "banned"???

There is no single rule that applies. Anyone who thinks there is will be very unhappy when confronted with the complexity of reality.

[LostinVA]

6. The term "political correctness" is a RW meme/talking point

to "shame" people into allowing them to use stereotypes against people.

I fully have the ability to laugh at myself, and to joke about things about me and my life.... however, I never, ever laugh at homophobia. Or homophobia hiding behind "jokes," or "you're too sensitive" comments.

I'm old and worldly enough to tell the difference.

[ruggerson]

9. Nothing is ever black or white

most things are fairly gray. And I think not being able to find humor in our lives and our situation in American society works to our detriment.

For example, Jewish comics were full of virtually NOTHING but self referential stereotypical humor (and many still are). It served them very, very well over the years, and kept them laughing through a lot of trying times here in America.

[LostinVA]

16. I find humor in my life and in many situations

You either didn't read my post, or are being disingenuous.

There is ONLY BLACK AND WHITE when homophobia is presented. Or sexism. Or racism. YOu want to be ridiculed? I have no problem with that on your personal level -- but you undo EVERY thing we;ve ever fought for, every right we've clawed out of the earth.

SElf-effacing humor is NOT the same as someone else throwing that "humor" at you -- that is the whole damned point of self-effacing humor. You know this, no matter what your agenda is... because I think you do have one.

"Discussion" ended. I'll no longer be the slate for you to write your "homophobe apologists" garbage on.

edited for misspelling.

[ruggerson]

22. Who the fuck said anything about being ridiculed?

I was talking about the way WE present ourselves to the world. And no, there is not just black and white when homophobia or racism is involved. I'm white. I think I live my life as colorblind as I know how. I think the majority of the time, I'm pretty successful. But I can't tell you I've never had a stereotypical thought about blacks. Or Jews. Or Protestants. Because I have. And anyone who says they haven't is lying through their teeth. So, no, homophobia is shades of gray too and the more we invite straight people INTO our world, and using humor is one way to do that, the better.

You kind of proved my point with your last line.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

24. You're right she did prove your point.

You are trying to put your "homophobic apologist slate" on people. I find it sad that you don't even realize that. Hopefully, you'll come around.

[ruggerson]

27. I'm doing nothing of the kind

and you can repeat the bullshit ten more times and it won't make it any truer.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

30. You're right. *You* can repeat your bullshit ten more times and it won't make it any truer.

You do a disservice to the community by allowing yourself to be a cheap joke.

[ruggerson]

33. My community is the world

Not restricted to people of my own sexual orientation. And again, my point is proven, when you might agree with twenty posts I'd write on various issues pertaining to gays and lesbians, but you become vicious and hostile the moment I post something you take exception to.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

46. And you do the *world* community a disservice, by being an apologist for bigotry.

And I am hardly being vicious and hostile, by the way.

[ruggerson]

49. Of course you are

you are being everything you claim you detest.

All because you disagree with me about self referential humor.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

51. I'm fine with self-referential humor. Those on DU who know me personally can attest to that.

I am not fine with being the brunt of jokes from those who will quite willingly throw me and my rights under the bus.

[ruggerson]

60. Well then that makes two of us

but the difference between us is I'm not calling you names nor attacking you nor doing all the things you claim to hate in others.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

66. No, the difference between us is I know the time and place for making jokes.

And I don't claim to "hate" anything.

[ruggerson]

71. Calling someone

a "homophobe apologist" is hateful.

And my joking that prompted this thread was about Haggard. If you don't think some humor is appropriate as part of the reaction that situation, I give up.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

78. If you're apologizing for the homophobes, then it's the truth, not hateful.

[ruggerson]

80. But it's not the truth

It's just moronic, mindless, vicious namecalling. Adds nothing to the discussion except I guess it gives you a thrill to type it.

[foreigncorrespondent]

29. Wanna know how I present myself ot the world?

I make jokes of myself all the time. Yet people who get to know me look into my eyes and see the real me. A woman who is in love with someone, but who is dying in side because she cannot be with that person she is in love with. And you know what? It is the fucking idiots who just love to make jokes at our expense and without our permission that are the same people who make the laws, or support the laws to keep me apart from my love. That is what you need to realize ruggerson.

On this stage, there is no room for allowance of homophobia. If we give them an inch, they will take a mile and more.

[ruggerson]

36. Well then we're pretty similar

I live with my partner of ten years as if homophobia does not exist. People have to accept us together as a married couple or I really don't have time for them in my life. It's just a given - a reality that we live. I've always felt that if you LIVE your life knowing that you are equal to everyone else, you are doing your part to change the world, one small part at a time. I've been out since I was seventeen and realized that it was the world that was fucked up, not me.

I also can tell jokes about myself and my experiences as being a gay man who grew up in a homophobic America. I can share humor with gay friends and straight friends both, and I think it plays a vital role in helping people understand who we are.

[foreigncorrespondent]

39. Gee thanks for the rub...

...I really do appreciate it.

How can I as a gay woman forced to live 8,000 miles from my partner go through life like I am equal to everyone else? Go on explain it to me, because I must be so fucking stupid for not knowing the formula.

You continue your little blind existence being a apologist for the haters while the rest of us do the hard work for you.

[ruggerson]

42. How do you know what work I do and don't do?

How do you know if I haven't given time and money (I have) to the partner/immigration issue? Your post presumes you know anything about my life because of a position I am taking about self referential humor. LIGHTEN THE FUCK UP.

[foreigncorrespondent]

48. NO you lighten the fuck up.

I never you said you didn't give to causes did I? But you told me to go through believing I am equal, so give me the fucking magical formula you possess.

And how dare you believe you know much about me beyond the fact I am Australian and in a binational relationship. I have worked damn hard for YOUR rights as an American citizen. NOT MINE. I lost my rights as a fucking citizen in Australia two years ago when the government declared us Aussie queers second class.

So you misread me completely and I deserve a fucking apology for that. How dare you!

[ruggerson]

50. I think you're angry at a ghost

certainly not me, as you know jackshit about who I am.

[foreigncorrespondent]

55. Nope...

...I am angry at the person who makes a thread telling me I need to sit on the back of bus and become an apologist for people who hate me. That person is YOU.

And you would be surprised what I know about you, mate.

[ruggerson]

The OP says no such thing

but if that's what you want to believe, knock yourself out. It's your loss, not mine.

[foreigncorrespondent]

61. Oh please...

...could have fooled me. You are the first to jump in on what most of us see as anti gay threads and tell us to lighten up.

And trust me, no loss here. I don't need people in my boat who want to bend over that easily.

[ruggerson]

70. Really?

Show me one. I have called people on their homophobia diligently here (Remember the recent hostile remark someone made about Mass giving rights to people who wanted things up their ass? Who was that who called that person out to the point where he had to write a lame apology thread to gay DU'ers? And I seem to remember PM's from you backing me on that). I have written extensively here about homophobia and how we all deal with it. I have written extensively here about the hatred spewed at us from the religious right. I don't have to defend my bona fides to you, especially when you lie (that's right, LIE) as you do in your first sentence.

Your anger is getting the better of you, mate.

[foreigncorrespondent]

72. Then shall...

...we talk about opening up some of the Bush* is gay threads? I seem to recall you and I coming to blows in many of those threads.

My anger isn't getting the better of me mate. But I am obviously striking a nerve with you.

[ruggerson]

77. I think you have me confused with someone

I don't even remember ever writing on a Bush is gay thread. If I had, my reaction would have been that it is inherently homophobic, as if all evil people are somehow gay.

Truly, you are mistaken here. Pull up a post where I ever wrote something contravening you on a Bush is gay thread.

[foreigncorrespondent]

81. Oh I don't have you confused.

...I also don't have anything you have ever said bookmarked, because nothing has ever impacted me in a way that warrants that. So feel free to go through the archives, I'm not about to blow my one day off digging shit out for you.

[ruggerson]

79. I'm waiting to see the "many" threads

you and I came to blows over.

Because, unless my aging brain is getting the better of me, there has never been even ONE.

[foreigncorrespondent]

83. Wait all you like...

...just like you have kept me waiting for a response to my post #17 for a while.

And yes, your brain is lapsing. If Sapph wasn't in the hospital right now I am sure she would be here telling you the many conversation she and I have had about the blows you and I have had.

[ruggerson]

85. My point is proven

you can't even come up with one.

Sorry I wasted my time on someone who is hallucinating.

[foreigncorrespondent]

87. Oh boy...

...into personal attacks now are we?

You are really showing your true colours today, and trust me there isn't a rainbow colour amongst them.

Your point hasn't been proved at all. I have nothing to prove to a tired old man with a mind full of holes.

[ruggerson]

88. When you run out of steam

let me know.

* a reply to post 87

[foreigncorrespondent]

90. Try again...

...I'm not about to run out of steam. I just got better things to do with my time than go digging through hyears of posts to find shit for you, because you don't remember things.

[ruggerson]

92. So the PM's

from both you and your partner are all imaginary, eh?

[foreigncorrespondent]

94. Did I say that?

Noooooooooooo! I said almost isn't 100%.

Don't put words in my mouth, mate.

[ruggerson]

95. have another Fosters on me n/t

[foreigncorrespondent]

98. No thanks.

Don't touch Fosters. There are much better Australian beers than that.

[ruggerson]

100. Well then have a VB

n/t

[foreigncorrespondent]

101. Wrong again!

I only drink VB if I can't afford the partucular beer I like.

[ruggerson]

104. Ok, a Crown Lager

n/t

[foreigncorrespondent]

105. Wrong again.

Why don't you give it a rest. Trying to impress me with your knowledge (or lack) of Aussie beers isn't actually going to do anything.

[ruggerson]

107. That's it

I'm trying to impress you with my knowledge of australian beer.

You nailed it.

Mate.

[ruggerson]

86. Umm

without revealing private PM's, She has written me that she almost always AGREES with everything I write.

I repeat. You are confusing me with someone.

[foreigncorrespondent]

89. Oh look at this...

...you can reveal all you like. I don't care. But almost isn't 100% now is it?

Try again.

[ruggerson]

93. now you're starting to sound truly whacked

mate.

[foreigncorrespondent]

96. LOL

Gee if you want to insult try harder.

[Jamastiene]

91. Where is the color code chart? Does Rummy have it?

"homophobia is shades of gray too"

What shade of gray is it when something happens like what happened to Matthew Shepherd or when a certain lesbian, I fall in this category, gets raped simply because people around her found out she was gay? I'm curious. What shade of gray are the jokes that aren't ridiculing gay people and the jokes that are ridiculing gay people. Where's the color chart for that? I must have missed a memo. I'd guess you were the only one who got that color chart, so it's not helping any of the rest of us if you won't list it. Give us a link to the shade color chart please so we CAN discuss this...in the know.

[LostinVA]

120. I think our AA DUers would also be curious if they';re are "shades"

of racism, too. Guess there is of sexism... guess it's okay if your boss just pats your ass -- just laugh about it -- I mean, you didn't get fired, right???

So, if someone makes a not-so-kidding dyke joke, I guess we should just laugh and go along... I mean, we didn't wind up strung-up to die like Matthew, so what's the harm???

Unbelievable. And his hole keeps on going deeper....

[Vorta]

56. Special exceptions

There is ONLY BLACK AND WHITE when homophobia is presented. Or sexism. Or racism. YOu want to be ridiculed? I have no problem with that on your personal level -- but you undo EVERY thing we;ve ever fought for, every right we've clawed out of the earth.


The problem with that is that "we" grant exceptions, and so do other groups. There are straight people (celebrities, personal friends, family members) that we feel comfortable with, who can poke fun at us without us getting upset. Obviously when I say "us", I don't mean every single gay person on the planet. I refer to the mainstream.

[foreigncorrespondent]

20. ruggerson...

...you really do not see the difference do you?

[LostinVA]

21. No, he doesn't

Or else it's "politically expedient" for him not to.

[ruggerson]

28. between jews and gays?

[foreigncorrespondent]

32. NO!!!

Between us making fun of us and inviting them to join in rather than them making fun of us and crying foul when we stand up against it.

It has nothing to do with PC and more to do with being respecting of your fellow humans. And that is something I do not see when we are the butt of THEIR jokes. Jokes which hurt. And jokes which cause damage. Damage that tears OUR community apart because we have people with in it wanting us to just go along all merry like and not rock the boat.

[ruggerson]

40. I wrote this post because something that *I* wrote

got shitlisted for being insensitive. Not something that a straight homophobe wrote. YOu're not getting the OP at all.

[foreigncorrespondent]

44. Oh please...

...you insult my intelligence now do you?

You bet your damn ass I get the OP, and you bet your damn ass I won't agree with it at all, because I refuse to become a bigots apologist.

[ruggerson]

53. And I refuse to be angry and misguided

over an OP I didn't get.

I guess that makes us even.

[foreigncorrespondent]

73. ROFLMAO (n/t)

[readmoreoften]

109. Yeah, and we laugh at ourselves all the time.

But when blue-eyed blonde Germans make Jewish jokes, it's a different thing. Look I don't need to read 1000 threads on how funny it is that some men buttfuck. If the guy was caught buttfucking a woman, such threads would be decried as sexist because it was a woman's butt that was fucked. Let's be serious. 70% of DUers are cool and I don't mind having a laugh or two with them even at my own expense. But the other 30% are just looking for an excuse to vent their own bullshit. They are absofuckinglutely OBSESSED with Haggard and male buttsex.

And didn't you get upset when a prominent DUer made a comment about taking it up the ass? Come on. On the heels of the bullshit over the NJ decision and people's bullshit over that, do I really trust these people and their gay jokes? These same people who say that Ann Coulter jokes are also not about being trans but about "her hypocrisy". What fucking hypocrisy? She's a genetic female fascist not a tranny hypocrite.

Humorless? Me? I think not. But do I have to listen to straight people's BAD JOKES? I see no humor in that.

[Vorta]

37. Right wingers aren't always wrong

And to believe that they are (or for them to believe that we are) is a barrier to progress.

I had this discussion with Rick Rosensomethingorother (a DC gay activist) years ago. I was defending PC as merely a cultural expectation of civility, not unlike any cultural expectation of civility in the past. He assured me that it was much more than a movement for good manners, and he was correct.

Everyone stereotypes. Stereotypes exist for a reason, usually because there is sufficient commonality of behavior in a group to generate the stereotype. Even the expression has been altered to be more powerful and less accurate. There is nothing wrong with a stereotype, we use them all the time in decision making. It's the false stereotype which is bad, and it's nothing more than a lie like any other. A fair amount of what we call affinity is based in a stereotype.

[foreigncorrespondent]

41. ROFLMAO

Why do your posts make me laugh so damn much?

Right wingers aren't always wrong

Indeed!

[Vorta]

74. Have your fun

I'm not a saint, but I am honest and upfront. Could you ask for more than that from a complete stranger?

[foreigncorrespondent]

103. ROFLMAO

How do I know you are being honest? Upfront for sure, honest, who knows?

[Vorta]

172. Do you think Chris Rock is funny? eom

[niallmac]

7. Keep that thought!

I never voted for PC. Noone ever invited me to the discussion group. I missed the meeting
where we all voted to enforce PC as if it were written in stone.
I am no fan of thought control and I can call out the biggits on my own thank you.

[LostinVA]

59. To quote your profile (and a very excellent quote it is):

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

Edmund Burke

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

69. What's a "biggit?"

:rofl:

[LostinVA]

It's a hobbit's cousin, methinks

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

82. Oh that's why I didn't know. Try as I might, I could never get into that Tolkein stuff.

[LostinVA]

121. That's because you're from NJ and a dyke

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

129. Oh yeah, duh. Nevermind.

[Jamastiene]

10. There is no such thing as politically correct.

It's a right wing catch phrase, pure and simple. They say that anytime someone on the left has compassion for someone, because they cannot stand compassion. So if we have compassion for gay people, they bring this phrase up. Sadly, some people buy right into it and go along with them. Next thing you know, someone comes to the GLBT forum and feels the need to rehash the same right wing talking points to us again and again.

What with all the latest gay bashing jokes that seem to be running rampant over in GD, I decided to come here. What do I find here? More bullshit. Maybe I had better go back to the store and buy some of those boots that go all the way up to the hips. Looks like I'm going to need them even here in GLBT soon. :eyes:

[ruggerson]

11. Sorry, doesn't fly

You are no more compassionate than I, nor do you have gayer, more liberal credentials because of your mindless assertion that I am "buying" into rightwing talking points when I express the opinion that we should not object to self referential humor.

Oh. and..

:eyes:

right back atcha.

[LostinVA]

19. Jama is correct

"Politically correct" is nothing but a RW meme... and her assertion is far from mindless -- it's right on the nose.

SElf-effacing humor is not the fucking same as someone else using that humor directed at us -- that's the definition of the term... disingenuous, but also transparent.

You just want us all to be forelock-tugging, submissive queers -- fuck that agenda. Matthew Shepard didn't die for me to allow that crap in this forum, of all places.

[ruggerson]

25. Claiming Matthew Shephard

for yourself is truly pathetic. He doesn't belong to you, he belongs to all of us, gay and straight.

I could respond in kind to your personal attacks, but it's pointless as I see I've hit a real nerve with my observation.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

31. Well, he certainly doesn't belong to "homophobe apologists."

[foreigncorrespondent]

34. What is truly pathetic...

..is you thinking she claimed Matthew to herself. No, what she did was state that he didn't die so our community would fold and allow the bigots to continue making fun of us.

And I stand with her. I will not allow them to continue on with this bullshit. Not at my expense. Not at my partners, expense, and certainly at the LGBTIQQ (at large) expense.

[LostinVA]

38. Thank you for explaining the point about Matthew

I wouldn't think that someone posting in THIS forum would need to have it explained...

I honestly think that anyone of us who gives an INCH of our rights or dignity away literally has the blood of that young man's (and many others') blood on their hands.

[ruggerson]

47. Oh for christsakes

what a hateful, vindictive thing to write. I hate to tell you, but I think I might have a little more insight into what Matthew Shephard went through in his young life than you. That is unless you were a gay man in a previous existence.

[foreigncorrespondent]

52. Oh boy...

...gonnna play the males have it worse card now are we?

[ruggerson]

54. No, I'm going to play

the "you don't know what the hell you're talking about" card if someone claims Matthew Shephard to the exclusion of others.

[foreigncorrespondent]

57. God...

...you really are losing it. You still don't get what she meant, even though it has been pointed out to you.

And guess what, you can't know what it was like for Matt unless you ended up in the same field as he did. That is where you claimed him for yourself.

[ruggerson]

62. I know exactly what she meant

and she's mistaken.

[foreigncorrespondent]

64. If you think that...

...then you have absolutely no idea.

Try again.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

68. Trust me, you don't understand what she meant at all.

[LostinVA]

67. *yawn* Wrong on so many counts

Firstly, my "young life"? Don't I wish. Nice presuming.

Secondly,: gosh, I didn't know you had to be a man to understand and appreciate what Matthew sacrificed. What totally bogus shit -- talk about hateful.

Thirdly, I wrote nothing hateful or vindicative. I think you need to look in a dictionary for a word between the two: truthful.

Fourthly, I haven't been killed for being gay, but I've lost a job, suffered financially, and emotionally because of it.

Fifthly, you are totally and completely full of shit. Seriously. You post this crap, then refuse to own it. Then insult people who call you on your shit.

Pshaw.

Dude, you and your agenda are so on my Ignore list.

[ruggerson]

75. Christ, you can't even read

I referenced HIS young life. Not yours. This has been your pattern in this entire thread. Reread the post you just responded to.

You have my sympathies for the discriminaton you've suffered. But what you don't seem to get is that we've ALL been there.

You're the one who claimed Shephard, I was just throwing it right back at you. It was a ridiculous thing for you to write.

Okay, "Dude?"

[Vorta]

133. the events of that night

I didn't know you had to be a man to understand and appreciate what Matthew sacrificed

Perhaps not, but I don't know any women who have done the stupid stuff that I have done. When MS was killed it was a "there but for the grace of God go I" moment for me. I have done some incredibly dangerous and stupid things in the pursuit of excitement, and placed myself in situations where I could have easily ended up a victim. Would I have deserved it? Of course not. I would have set myself up for it, though.

[ruggerson]

43. They're her words, not mine.

She wrote he didn't die for "me", not us.

[davidinalameda]

146. until I see a straight person strung up on a fence

and beaten and left for dead because of his sexuality by two thugs, Matthew Shepherd does not belong to the straight community

[mondo joe]

155. Matthew Shepherd doesn't BELONG to anyone.

For goodness' sake.

[davidinalameda]

158. he does

he belongs to all us who have been victims of gay bashing

he unfortunately put a face on it for America

[mondo joe]

160. You don't get to own other people.

You can use him. You can invoke him. But he's not YOURS.

Get a freaking boundary, please.

[foreigncorrespondent]

23. But...

...there c ould be a HUGE gap between where two people stand on a political scale.

It isn't a question of being more compassionate, or being more gay or hold more liberal credentials now is it? It is all about what pour true beliefs are and whether or not we house some sort of internalized homophobnia in ourselves even though we are out.

[Jamastiene]

45. It flies much better than any of your slams.

That's for sure. You seem to be talking just like the right wing here. My assertion stands. You ARE buying into right wing talking points because you use right wing catch phrases. You might as well be saying they are right.

Btw, there is a big difference when gay people make the jokes and when homophobes make the jokes, just for the record.

[ruggerson]

63. Um, i wrote the OP in regards to humor *I* wrote

not anyone else. Me. Got it? ME.

[Jamastiene]

76. Oh, I forgot, I'm sorry.

It is all about you, you, and you only, isn't it? What you say goes for the entire GLBT community. I forgot. You dictate now what the rest of us have to think and feel about all issues. It's all on you. And when they jolly humor your ass right into the barbed-wire fenced-in camps with the rest of us to be slaughtered like cattle, I'll remember it was all on you, because it's all about you only. It always has been, hasn't it? The rest of us are just inconvenient truths that keep coming up over and over again amidst your right wing ass kissing session.

[ruggerson]

84. No, exactly the opposite

I am expressing this as MY opinion. And you're the one puking up anger back at my obversations instead of rational dialogue. Alienating people who are your allies is neither good politics nor sensible human behavior. And each time you throw the rightwinger epithet at an ally who doesn't conform to everything you want him/her to conform to, you lose even more.

[Jamastiene]

97. Losing you would be no great loss to me.

You are but one among many who seems to be missing the point. Ridiculing gay people IS homophobia. When a gay person does it, it is still homophobia, just internalized. I used to go down that road years ago until I learned that it just invites worse and worse ridicule and then violence. Yes, hate speech does lead to violence against us. You seem to be ignoring that fact.

"And you're the one puking up anger..."
You must be making me nauseated.

[ruggerson]

99. Ah, but that's where you are mistaken

because you eventually become isolated and alone and alienated from those that would seek to lift you up.

And, for the umpteenth time, the post is about self referential humor. Not hate speech. But I can see humor is not your closest companion.

[Jamastiene]

102. Listen. I live in a red state, so don't preach to me about alienated.

Most of my life has been all about alienated. I didn't have the luxury of somene giving a shit when I was raped. I could be attacked again at any time and there would be NO community there for me, least of all someone like you. I wouldn't want you there anyhow, because the last thing a woman wants to hear is that sort of humor after she's been raped. And that's exactly what your type likes to do. With friends like you, who needs enemies? You are so red state in your mentality. That's why we are not progressing. You are the one who is mistaken. Just jolly it up as a right wing house homo until you see the truth. I'm tired of dealing with you in the meantime.

[ruggerson]

108. Like I said

humor has not been your ally, apparently.

And since I've never lived in a red state, and never plan to, the rest of your venom is misdirected garbage.

When rational people hate their surroundings... they move.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

130. About your last sentence...classist crap.

Not everyone has the financial means to move. Are poor people irrational?

[ruggerson]

148. LOL

poor people move all the time. It doesn't take huge sums of money to move to a less hostile environment and start over.

But that was yet another nice try.

[Vorta]

162. I moved to San Francisco with a plane ticket, $200, and a place to stay for a week.

[Jamastiene]

188. But, aren't you the one who said you wished you had

first gotten a certificate in electrical, plumbing, or someting else first? I mean really, it takes a considerable amount of planning, saving, and money to move and survive once you get there. At least be consistent in what you say on that subject.

Reference:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=221&topic_id=42855#43024

[Vorta]

197. Yes I did

first gotten a certificate in electrical, plumbing, or someting else first? I mean really, it takes a considerable amount of planning, saving, and money to move and survive once you get there. At least be consistent in what you say on that subject.


I said I wished I had done that, but I also said that I moved to SF on a lark not because I found DC or home intolerable. I was merely pointing out that if one does find where he is intolerable, then it might be his best choice to go sooner rather than later.

[Jamastiene]

198. I'd much rather prepare first and have a successful move than

go on a lark. I learned the hard way when I tried to move before. I don't want to have to come back for lack of preparation on my part.

[LostinVA]

123. If you're not an advocate, you're a hindrance, eh, Jama?

Good post!

[Jamastiene]

190. Thanks.

I'm getting slightly better at expressing myself. It took years, but I need to learn how to do this if I am ever going to say what I really want to say. :hug:

[LostinVA]

122. Good post, Rockingham!

You're on fire in this thread!

[readmoreoften]

110. How is this self-referential humor?

This isn't our community poking fun at itself. This is an outside community poking fun at homos.

[foreigncorrespondent]

12. There is a HUGE...

...difference between laughing WITH us and laughing AT us.

[ruggerson]

13. Well of course

but if we can't laugh AT ourselves and invite straight folks in on the joke with us, aren't we losing a real chance at reducing hostility and giving them a window into our world?

[foreigncorrespondent]

17. I am the first person...

...who will take the mickey of myself. I do it all the time. And I invite my straight friends to do it too. But the shit I have been witness to since the NJ court ruling (and I could go back even further if I truly want) hasn't been US taking the mickey out of us and inviting THEM to join in. It has been THEM taking the mickey out of US and crying foul when we stand up and say hey that hurt.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

15. Exactly.

I will definitely joke around with straight friends in a non-"PC" manner, but it's a matter of laughing together. Not being laughed at and being too dumb to realize it.

[LostinVA]

124. Bingo -- I have friends and family I do that with, and even some coworkers

But, there are other coworkers and family who would NEVER be allowed to say certain things to me, even as a "joke," because it's not a joke. They know it and I know it. But, per the OP, we should just allow all kinds of "jokes" to be made at our expense, because we can't be too "PC" and offend the RW, who aren't always wrong...

I think I summed that up about right, eh?

Notice how all the queers in this thread by the OP and one other DON'T think this is a good idea?

Kinda like T.D. Jakes and the African-American rights movement.... there's always someone willing to stab a fellow victim in the back to better their own life.

[iamjoy]

18. It Depends

Some jokes are meant as exactly that, jokes.

In fact, some jokes show inclusion. You know, don't you rip on your friends sometimes? You're one of us, I feel comfortable enough with you to make a joke about you.

Some jokes are a way of dealing with our discomfort over something when our discomfort makes us uncomfortable (I hope that makes sense).

But some jokes are just plain mean and indicative of (subtle but) intense hostility.

And really, sometimes it just depends on the person saying it and the way it's said. If the person who has been out gathering petitions for marriage equality cuts a gay joke, it's probably the first one, maybe the second. If the opponent of Equality tells one, it's probably the last one.

[Tyo]

35. In most cases being "politically correct" is only good manners

When the RW makes fun of the concept they are really saying that they don't like being called on their rudeness and insensitivity.
Most Rethugs, on top of everything else, have no class or cool. And from my experience it is not a function of money or social class, it's a function of their politics and religion.

[TygrBright]

58. Maybe. Sometimes. But not right now, I don't think...

...I look at the need for extra levels of attention to how we communicate (PC has become co-opted by the unevolved, I'm not gonna use it here,) in direct proportion to how heavy the specific attempts elsewhere to marginalize or exclude people might be.

IOW, I no longer feel a requirement to be reflexively finger-wagging about Irish jokes or Polish stereotypes, etc. There are still feelings of marginalization and resentment in some of those communities in some places, but by and large there has not been any substantive or systematic attempts to marginalize or exclude them from America's economic, political, and social mainstream for more than a generation. And pockets of bigotry directed at them are relatively small and aberrant.

Right now there are horrific attempts to systematically marginalize and exclude gay people, so much so that the bigotry is being INSTITUTIONALIZED via state constitutional amendments, laws, etc. That's pretty amazing when you think about it. Not since the Dredd Scott decision and the wave of Jim Crow laws in the South post-reconstruction have America's rabid exclusionary bigots tried to institutionalize bigotry to this extent.

So right now, I've pretty much put a moratorium on pushing the envelope even slightly where it comes to the GLBT issues. If I'm hanging out with gay friends and THEY tell a joke, I'll laugh. But I'm not telling jokes, and I'm not laughing unless I'm damn' sure that it IS someone gay telling the jokes. People know (or think) I'm not gay. So I don't want the slightest intimation that I think anti-gay bigotry is in any way acceptable or tolerable to be drawn from any of my talk or actions.

If/when all these appalling laws/amendments/etc. get repealed, gay people get full civil rights, bigotry dies down to a few pockets of marginal nutjobs, MAYBE then I'll resurrect my joke list. But until then, I've no sense of humor when it comes to non-gay people making fun of gay people, even when it's well-intended and 'all in good fun' and they aren't really homophobic at all. If they genuinely aren't homophobic, just a little thoughtless, I'll share my reasoning with them nicely. If I think they're bigots, they'll get a damn' earful.

pugnaciously,
Bright

[LostinVA]

125. Very, very nice post

May I borrow this bit to use as my own to certain relatives, etc.?:

"Right now there are horrific attempts to systematically marginalize and exclude gay people, so much so that the bigotry is being INSTITUTIONALIZED via state constitutional amendments, laws, etc. That's pretty amazing when you think about it. Not since the Dredd Scott decision and the wave of Jim Crow laws in the South post-reconstruction have America's rabid exclusionary bigots tried to institutionalize bigotry to this extent."

[TygrBright]

142. Help yourself...

...if anything I say/do/write does anything to help fight this disgusting tide of bigotry, I'm very happy indeed. It grinds my crank more than I can say to know that my sister, my uncle, my friends are having their civil rights slowly taken away and restricted all across this nation by frightened bigots and cynical manipulators. It pisses me off even more that there are so many otherwise low-toxicity Americans going along with and enabling this because they "don't think it's a big deal" or it doesn't affect anyone they know, or whatever.

Geeeeeez, people, WAKE UP!

It just FLOORS me when I hear some of today's young people use "Oh, that's so GAY," as a put-down. What are their parents and teachers THINKING, to not call them on this unthinking bigotry?

furiously,
Bright

[mitchtv]

65. I laugh when it's funny

but I don't laugh when it's cruel. What i object to is name calling, ie: calling everyone we hate gay. Jokes don't bother me most of the time, provided I can return the slam.

[NMMNG]

106. In a word,

No.

Every time I see one of those "Do you think Bush (or Rove/Cheney/Rice) is Gay?" posts I want to puke. It seems that here on DU being Gay is a joke, something for peoples' amusement and something with which to insult their enemies.

Could you imagine how the sh*t would hit the fan if I were to start a thread that said, "Bush is one evil SOB. Do you think he's a Christian?"

Equating evil and/or enmity with homosexuality is just one more form of bigotry and it can't be tolerated.


As to the Haggard et. al. posts, they always claim it's "about the hypocrisy, not the homosexuality", but just look how many references there are to hamsters, blow jobs, male prostitutes, and so on, and how few actually mentioning hypocrisy.

And don't even get me started about "Mann" Coulter....

[Catherine Vincent]

112. Okay, help me out here....

"Equating evil and/or enmity with homosexuality is just one more form of bigotry and it can't be tolerated."

Asking if someone is gay is equating gay with evil? That doesn't make sense to me. Just because Bush happens to be evil and some ask if he's gay, that doesn't mean that we believe every gay person is evil. Is that what you guys believe?

[NMMNG]

113. Lately it has been the DU practice

To claim that the most loathed RWers are gay, or ask if we think they are. Could you imagine the furor if somebody started a thread that said:


Cheney is an evil f*ckwad. Do you think he is a Christian?

Whenever somebody asks "Is (insert name of hated person here) gay?" they are essentially equating that evil person with homosexuality. They are using homosexuality as an insult, because calling that person gay is just one more way of making them seem bad.

It's a very right-wing tactic.

[Catherine Vincent]

115. That is not true.

I'm sorry but I don't know where you guys came up with that. We here on DU do not think gay is bad. Why on earth would we think that?

"Cheney is an evil f*ckwad. Do you think he is a Christian? "

So what's so offensive about that? Cheney is an evil f*ckwad. And he is a christian. And that is not equating evil fuckwads with christians. It just so happens Cheney is both.

[NMMNG]

116. It has long been the practice to accuse people of being gay

(whether they are or not, and whether there is evidence or not) in order to derail their career, to taint their reputation, or to merely make their life a living hell. The way gays are viewed by much of society the mere implication that someone is gay is often enough to put them in danger of psychological and/or physical abuse, losing their job and/or home, suffering intrafamily discord, being ostracized from loved ones, and more.

To see such accusations from RWers is par for the course. To see them, and worse yet to see them widely accepted and even defended here on DU is disheartening and disgusting. Calling people "gay" as a joke or a weapon is underhanded, dirty and beneath us as Democrats and Liberals.

We here on DU do not think gay is bad. Why on earth would we think that?

Every time a DUer uses homosexuality as a joke or a weapon they are stating that they think gay is bad. Every time they respond to a "gay Republican" thread with cracks about hamsters and kneepads, they are stating that they think gay is bad. We are not a joke. We are not something to use as an insult. We are human beings. People need to think of that next time they're ready to taint somebody's reputation by insinuating that the person is gay.

If anybody doesn't get that I'm not able to help them.

[Smarmie Doofus]

135. That's the *heart* of it, seems to me. Nicely explicated.

>>Every time a DUer uses homosexuality as a joke or a weapon they are stating that they think gay is bad.>>>

[Catherine Vincent]

137. ...

"Every time a DUer uses homosexuality as a joke or a weapon they are stating that they think gay is bad. Every time they respond to a "gay Republican" thread with cracks about hamsters and kneepads, they are stating that they think gay is bad."

Yes, those are the ones that definitely need to be alerted. Although kneepad is referenced for women too. But simply asking if Bush is gay is not saying that being gay is bad.

[NMMNG]

168. You still don't get it

But simply asking if Bush is gay is not saying that being gay is bad.


That is using homosexuality as a weapon (or even as a joke). That is accusing somebody of being gay to smear their image or to make fun of them because you don't like them.


In effect, you are saying that being gay is bad, because you are labeling your enemy as gay in hopes that doing so will cause them harm.

[Catherine Vincent]

179. No, you don't get it.

You're just wrong in trying to read into what I'm asking. Accusing and asking are two different things.

Peace!

[NMMNG]

195. ...

Are you obtuse on purpose or by nature.


BTW, asking and accusing are two different things. :sarcasm:

[foreigncorrespondent]

119. You don't know where we come up with it?

Well try, being gay and being the butt of stupid jokes that pop up constantly. Or the constant threads about right wingers who straight people on the left believe are gay, then maybe, just maybe you might see where we come up with "it." Ohhhhh but yes, I remember, sorry I forgot, we are meant to sit on the back of the bus and just shut up and put up with straight people telling us what is and isn't good for us, right?

[Catherine Vincent]

138. "right wingers who straight people on the left believe are gay"

Just so you'll know, it's not just straight people that criticize right wingers for being closet gays. You know they are talking about the hypocrisy which doesn't have to be spelled out every time.

[LostinVA]

126. Yes, it is true, and you know it

You've been in quite a few of those threads -- even calling us whiners, I believe.

You're so cute and adorable when you're being dishenipus.... fucking NOT.

So.... blah blah blah blah blah...

[Catherine Vincent]

139. No, I have not been in quite a few of those threads.

And the only poster I called a whiner was a continuing juvenile name calling (yes, I admit that) from another thread which have nothing to do with the rest of you. And you don't have to read or respond to my posts either.

[Vorta]

171. I've never been comfortable with the gay-basher is probably gay thing.

I was thinking that it had somewhat faded as an expression of pop-psychology that the guys who make the most anti-gay noise are self-hating closet cases. Then a few of the prototype are exposed in the press and it lends credibility to the concept.

[ScreamingMeemie]

184. You are not the only one.

I will, I admit, point out the hypocrisy... but often times that gets mixed in with the stereotype. In my mind, that crosses the line, making it not about being PC but about being able to spot homophobia.

[readmoreoften]

111. Do I have to laugh at DEMONRAT too? Their shit isn't funny!

I love to laugh. If a homophobe tells a funny-ass gay joke, you know what, I'll laugh. I might try to kick his ass, but I'll laugh before I do. BUT THEIR SHIT ISN'T FUNNY. IT'S TIRED AND WEAK. How many childish butthole jokes do I need to hear? How many pole smoking jokes? Do I have to laugh at "wrong hole" jokes too?

This is exactly the crap that we were complaining about before about reducing gay life to buttholes and lesbian porn. Now add hypocrisy. Make a joke or two. Make it good. And then fucking be done with it. Not a week of butt joke threads when there is an election-- not to mention the massive loss of civil liberties-- going on.

[provis99]

114. origin of political correctness shown here

the term "political correctness" originated when some left-wing academics noticed that some of their radical colleagues were demanding everyone on the left think and speak according to a radical plan of correct political thinking. In effect, the attempt of some left-wing academics to critique the radicals fanaticism was being shouted down, leading to the creation of the phrase, "politically correct", which only much later was adopted by right wingers. Such examples of political correctness included lookism (noticing that another person was physically attractive), weightism (noticing someone weighed outside the healthy medium), and the like. It typically entailed radicals shouting at the leftists that they were as bad or worse than the right wingers, and had hidden prejudices because they didn't accept the radicals stances.

The attacks against ruggerson here are a prime example of the kind of demented radical political correctness that is practised against other liberals. Or maybe the critics are merely right wing trolls baiting ruggerson. You be the judge

[Jamastiene]

117. Looks who is calling the rest of us right wing trolls.

More right wing talking points from someone who calls the rest of us trolls. Typical. :eyes:

[LostinVA]

128. I know -- crazy

I also alerted. Against DU rules.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

132. I think you mean cazy.

:rofl:

[LostinVA]

134. hehehe

[foreigncorrespondent]

118. ROFLMAO

That is rich!!!

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ruggerson]

136. Nowhere did I attack the "community"

you are lying through your teeth.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

131. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Oh shit, you're serious.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Okay, Mr. I have 29 posts so I'm going to call members with 17,000 posts RW trolls Provis, you're really funny. It comes so naturally. You don't even have to try. I highly suggest you go into standup.

:rofl:

[LeftCoast]

140. I think a good definition of cheeky would be

to have 29 posts and no star while posting accusations of trolldom against users who've been here for years.

Pardon me while I...

:rofl:

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

141. And no profile.

:rofl:

[mitchtv]

164. chutzpah

I think

[readmoreoften]

143. Thanks for the incorrect history. It was a right-wing term.

I was in academia before it began and it originated as a RW term.
"Demented political correctness."
Right-wing trolls indeed.

See this is the kind of comedy I like.

[ruggerson]

154. Incorrect

see post #151

[davidinalameda]

145. I've been called a freeper and a troll today

I must be doing my job

:bounce:

[mitchtv]

165. If the pumps fit.....

[davidinalameda]

191. and they look just fabu!

[ruggerson]

151. You are correct

the term was coined by the Left.

From Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness


The contemporary use of the term political correctness is said to derived from Marxist-Leninist vocabulary to describe the Party Line. <1>

The term was transformed and used jokingly within the Left by the early 1980s, possibly earlier. In this context, the phrase was applied to either an over-commitment to various left-wing political causes, especially within Marxism or the feminist movement; or to a tendency by some of those dedicated to these causes to be more concerned with rhetoric and vocabulary than with substance.



The Right then co opted in the 90's and made it even more of a pejorative. But the three or four posters here who keep shrieking that it's a "rightwing" term are either just flat out wrong or lying to support an intellectually dishonest position.

[readmoreoften]

159. Yeah, the key word is JOKINGLY. This was not a common phrase in academia until the RWers made it one

People on the left were not hurling PC at one another until the right wing co-opted it. And unfortunately, this is a perfect example if it.

[NMMNG]

166. Oh yes, do enlighten us about right wing trolls

In the meantime I'll eat this :popcorn: while I wait for the pizza to be done.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

167. .

:spray:

Great. Now I have Vitamin Water on my screen. Thanks a lot.

[NMMNG]

169. Glad to be of service

:evilgrin:

[LostinVA]

170. I always go to bed too early...

[NMMNG]

196. Don't feel bad

I often miss the action myself, but I got lucky this time.

[ThomCat]

185. Ask any professor who was in any American Studies department

in the 80s and they'll tell you that the term Politically Correct first came into Common Usage when the right wingers started using it as an insult against the left during that period of time.

One professor who was a dear friend of mine (until she passed away recently), Lilian Robinson, was a women's studies professor who was often attacked with the Political Correctness club for pointing out racism in academia. She famously commented, "How can it be worse to call someone a racist than for them to actually be a racist?"

[Sapphocrat]

144. Before I even look at the rest of this long, long thread...

Do We Sometimes Take Political Correctness Too Far?

"Political correctness": When X feels that X's freedom of expression is limited by Y's idea of what's offensive, and X resents it, and X accuses Y of being P.C. -- almost always in lieu of X making an effort to understand and respect Y's perspective, and modify X's own behavior in the future.

And does that cause unneeded and unwarranted hostility from people who feel their right to free expression is being squelched by schoolmarmish codes of behaviour when it comes to joking around about straights and gays?

The hostility is unneeded and unwarranted -- but it's not the responsibility of the person who's offended. And that hostility is almost always the result of the offender's embarrassment at being called out on inappropriate behavior, and not wanting to cop to it.

Think of a casual shoplifter who gets caught, and then wails about "the system" from his jail cell. It wasn't "the system" that landed him in jail; he just can't own up to the fact that what he did was wrong, and now he is being punished.

That is the reaction of a child: Instead of taking responsibility for one's actions and their consequences, blame everyone and everything else.

I knew a white man whose family employed (long before I was born) a black maid/cook. His wife told me a story that was typical of his often well-meaning but completely inappropriate (and ignorant) behavior: One evening, as the maid was serving dinner, the man was talking about another man he admired. He kept saying, "He's a real white man. When he did (such-and-such), that was real white of him. He's a real white man." The wife was mortified, and finally resorted to kicking him under the table. His response was to question her, loudly, as to why she was kicking him. Later, when she explained to him how praising someone as "a real white man" just might have been unbelievably offensive to their black maid, he didn't shrink in embarrassment (as well he should have) or promise to watch his words more carefully in the future; instead, he got pissed off at his wife.

Was the wife being P.C.? No. Was the man's hostility warranted? Absolutely not. He was angry because he didn't like being told he had done something offensive. It was less embarrassing for him to cling to his own ignorance than take responsibility for the offense. The sad thing is, he really liked their maid, and would never dream of hurting her feelings deliberately. But did he ever apologize to the maid? Of course not; that would have meant admitting he was wrong. And ignorant.

It's the same deal for LGBTs who keep getting shot down for saying, "That offends me. Stop that." (Does anyone have that cartoon of the fundy whacking the gay guy over the head repeatedly, until the gay guy finally says, "Stop that" -- to which the fundy whines about Christian persecution? I would have liked to have posted that to illustrate the point, but I can't find it.)

It is not the same deal with straights, however; I don't recall a single joke made at the expense of straights just because they were straight. Ditto any other group; why is it OK to crack wise about gay people because they're gay when it's not OK to do the same with women, African-Americans, the disabled, deaf people, Jews?

Imagine the backlash if anyone dared post "Pope Gregory IX was responsible for the Spanish Inquisition. Hitler massacred 11 million people, and he was Catholic, too. Now, I have nothing against Catholics, but I'm beginning to see a pattern here: Are all Catholics insane, bloodthirsty dictators? No offense to Catholics -- but I think this is a topic worthy of discussion."

No one here would be stupid enough to ever post such a thing (even if they believed it) -- and yet that is the tone of thread after thread after thread regarding LGBTs: Is every Republican gay? Is every Republican a gay meth addict? Is every gay Republican meth addict...? yada yada yada.

There are straights who will always make nasty remarks about LGBTs. There are men who will always make crude jokes about women. There are white people who will always think Stepin Fetchit and minstrel shows are brilliant entertainment.

There's nothing anyone can do about that. But can't these "jokers" at least keep their bigotry confined to places where it will be appreciated? There's been much talk about men who wouldn't dare degrade women in the presence of a woman; they keep their filth confined to the locker room.

Is that too much to ask? That if a person wants to make gerbil jokes, he at least have the decency not to do it in front of me?

Do we not have a right to laugh at Reverend Haggard at the same time we see the tragedy in his situation and the situation of all people in the closet?

We have a right to laugh at anyone we want. We have a right to laugh openly about anything we want, and we have the right to offend anyone we want. But do we want to be offensive?

As for laughing at the tragedy of "the situation of all people in the closet" -- Wow, man, that's harsh. I'm all for outing closeted gay Republicans and firebreathing preachers, and I certainly relish the Schadenfreude -- but I don't laugh at the tragedy of all closet cases. Not in the least. I'm pained by it. We all started out in the closet, and we all know how soul-killing it is to be there. I could never laugh at that.

Or do we have to be relentlessly sanctimonious and humorless about ourselves and our stature in America in 2006?

The day gay people lose our sense of humor is the day it really will snow in hell. But there's a big difference between laughing at ourselves and being laughed at -- especially after trying every way imaginable to make the "jokers" understand that there is a line you don't cross, and then watching those jokes leap over that line again and again, with nary a thought as to how the targets of their "jokes" may be hurt. Many do this not because they're stupid, but out of obvious defiance (and probably because they think since they're in the majority, i.e., non-LGBT, the majority will back them up). They're like the man who called his friend "a real white man" -- they don't like being told what they've done is hurtful, so they cling even more fiercely to the idea that those offended are "relentlessly sanctimonious and humorless" -- and, usually, "politically correct."

You see, imho, people like Lisa Lampanelli (sp?) serve a real purpose in our society. She plays on stereotypes that most people just mutter under their breaths, and in so doing exposes them to the light of day and reduces their stigma. She makes us all one in the human experience.

She makes me want to vomit, mainly because she embarrasses me as a woman. She may be an equal-opportunity offender, but my specific beef with her is that she reduces women to the function of our vaginas. Which, if you think about it, is exactly what anti-gay "humor" does: reduce us to the function of our genitalia.

The problem with Lampanelli is that there's nothing to counter her. I know, she's supposed to be making some sort of "point" about stereotypes -- but I don't buy that; I believe that's just a cover, an excuse, to allow her to pull out all the stops. It would take a lot to convince me she does her shock-value act for the purpose of some greater good; I think the joke is on her fans who think she's doing anything other than making a buck. I think she delights in reinforcing stereotypes, and I think she's laughing all the way to the bank.

By comparison, look at "All in the Family" (which probably would never make it to the airwaves today), a show in which the main character was a bigot, who freely and regularly tossed out such epithets as "kike," "Hebe," "fag," and "chink" with aplomb -- in prime time, no less. Why am I OK with that? Because Archie never got away with it; he was always shown up as a stupid bigot. "All in the Family" was a morality play, and a fine one at that. What's the lesson from Lampanelli? That it's OK to call women "c---s"? What's the point? Is the audience supposed to feel smart and hip for laughing because somebody used the word "c---"?

She makes me want to take a very hot shower, and use a lot of soap.

Shouldn't gays and lesbians be able to laugh at themselves at the exact same time we are deadly seriously fighting for our rights and our lives?

Again, there's a big difference between laughing at ourselves and being laughed at.

Now, the day somebody starts a joke thread about all the Republicans who have been caught in flagrante with members of the opposite sex, and the straight jokes start flying, and not one hetero objects to being called a "breeder," then I might reconsider.

[ruggerson]

153. Good points

I think there's a fine line between what we find funny and what we find offensive and that line is different for many of us. Perhaps Lampanelli was not the best example to use in the OP, but certainly someone like Staphanie Miller or David Letterman is. The OP was prompted by the pulling of a thread which was a top ten spoof a la Letterman which made light of the fact that Mrs. Haggard must have been fairly clueless these many years her husband was prowling around Colorado Springs. I think that's a legitimate use of humor, I think it makes light of a pretty sad situation, but makes a political point as well. I think we shoot ourselves in the foot if we become utterly humorless and angry (as witnessed, unfortunately in this thread). I think you know I'm pretty uncompromising in my beliefs about gay equality in society. It's a shame that a relatively innocuous post about keeping our senses of humor intact riled a few to the point of such anger.

[Puglover]

186. Crap I am gonna hate myself for weighing in here in the morning.

One because you're 40 times the writer that I am Saph and two because my butt is just now healing from some bite marks I received in a thread a week or so ago. That being said...

LostinVA and I had a good dialog on political correctness a few months back. We sorta agreed to disagree. And both of us also acknowledged the perils of on line debate between on line pals. What would be an absolute wonderful discussion over a beer,coffee or glass of wine can become a goddamn cesspool on line if one is not careful. I think of few of the folks who put their 2 cents in this thread would do well to remember that.

I do have somewhat of a different take on Lampanelli than you Saph. I saw her once at a comedy club and one of the things I got from her was well, a sort of warmth. She softens all of her harshness with a well timed smile. Not sly, not smartassed but warm and disarming. Maybe that is dangerous in itself but it worked for me. She of course is in it for the money but what I took away was that she was saying "folks if you want to you can reduce ALL of us to a vile nasty word. IT. IS. POINTLESS. Don't let it have power over you. My best pals sister is a lesbian and an up and coming stand up in the LA area and her take is the same. We arrived at this separately BTW.

[ruggerson]

147. I guess you guys must all loathe Stephanie Miller

because she and her sidekicks do EXACTLY the kind of humor I'm referring to in the OP. And gays and lesbians are not spared in the least, as long as it's funny and not cruel.

I think she's incredibly effective. Obviously, you don't.

[mondo joe]

149. I hate to see gays get as humorless and fragile as happens now and then.

Humor is our strength.

[ruggerson]

150. Which is exactly what I was saying in the OP

which perversely unleashed a wave of humorlessness. :)

[mondo joe]

152. Wha'd ya expect?

:rofl:

[hyde]

156. i agree that humor is necessary

i think humor is universally necessary no matter what your life situation is. i do understand that there is a difference between humor and homophobia. i think gays and lesbians can take themselves too seriously sometimes, myself included, but i also understand that we are under attack, so some seriousness is required.

it's a thin line we walk between sharing our experiences with the rest of the straight world and opening our community up to hateful attacks. i think it would be sad if our humor and and our ability to laugh at ourselves were yet two more things lost to us in our fight for equality.

[mondo joe]

157. I think we should be deadly serious in our intent and strategy, and never

stop laughing while we carry it out. :-)

[readmoreoften]

161. There shit isn't funny. When it is, I'll laugh, ok?

ANN COULTER IS MANN!!!111
BUSH IS A GAY!!!!1111
THEY TAKE IT UPS THE BUTT!!!11
UNLIKE, REPUBLICANS MY BUTT IS AN EXIT-ONLY!!!!111
HAGGARD STANDS FOR HOMO-ANAL-GAY-GAY-ANAL-REPUBLICAN-DICKLOVER!!!!!1111
LOOK AT THESE GUYS!!!!111 THEY ALL LOOK GAY!!!!!!1111

None of the above statements adhere to my standards of humor, which I guess are just too goddamn highbrow and elitist to be shocked by caca-fart-butt-homo jokes.

Meanwhile, warships are in the Straits of Hormuz. Excuse me if I've lost my sense of humor. This is childish bullshit and we've got more important work to do.

[hyde]

163. i agree that none of those things is funny

except maybe the ann coulter one. That is kinda funny, or at least it used to be. It's way too overdone now.

I think those are all examples of hate speech disguised as humor, and really unfunny "humor" at that.

I'm black with mostly white friends. I make white jokes and they make black jokes. Sometimes our jokes come thisclose to being offensive, but because we are friends we give each other graces. I'm not white, they aren't black, but we find a way to share humor even concerning racial issues. There is a line. Nobody, I don't care how close we are, black or white, is gonna call me a ni**er. Period. And there are some lines I wouldn't cross with them either. I know in our situation we were all pretty color blind to begin with, but humor helps to even further destroy those racial barriers that unfortunately seem to exist no matter what. I think it can work that way in all situations.

Nobody should apologize for homophobes, racists, sexists, etc, and hateful attacks against our community should be universally condemned and combated. But exploring and sharing the fantastic and humorous aspects of our community with the straight world will no doubt go along way to bring us all together.

[sui generis]

173. We are our own worst enemy. And there are plenty of schoomarms

right here in this thread.

Tell you what, schoolmarms: Allow us adults to use our own judgement. If someone's feelings get hurt I expect them to speak up and say so, but I also have a fairly decent sense of when irreverence is not the same thing as bigotry.

We don't need a comprehensive set of inflexible rules. And we sure don't need a standing judgement from a schoolmarm.

[Vorta]

174. While you are at it

As a newbie here I have noticed the practice of using " * " in place of Bush. IS there some history to that, or is it merely shorthand?

[sui generis]

175. I'm actually unsure. I think it's Kanji for "asshole"

:P

[Vorta]

177. OIC, Thanks.

[Catherine Vincent]

180. The * is to denote that he is illegitimate prez or an a-hole as the other poster said.

Your choice. And he never gets called president here. It's either pResident, Resident Bush or just plain Bush.

[Puglover]

187. I think i has something to do with Marie Antoinette.

The French called her "elle" and would not use her name In fact at the Conciegerie on the list of victims of the guillotine she is referred to as "Elle" Therefore "*". I've seen other takes on this as well. Something about being a footnote but not sure about that.

[Wickerman]

192. The * stands for Bush not being a legitimately elected President

When Roger Maris beat Babe Ruth's single season home run record they placed an asterisk next to his name as many old timers said that Maris achieved his feat illegitimately since the seasons in the Maris era were longer (more games) and the game had advanced, blah, blah, blah.

Likewise, Bush was not legitimately elected, but selected by the Supremes. The 2nd election is also viewed by many as illegitimate due to voting irregularities in Ohio and other locations.

Bush** will forever have asterisks next to his name.

[Vorta]

176. IS there an official history of Political Correctness?

Some here have said that it originated as Right Wing terminology. I don't remember that being the case, but then I didn't have a lot of discussion with rightwingers before AOL forums and then the internet. My first memories of the term was it being used (and often mocked) amongst very liberal people.

The difference between now and fifteen years ago seems to be that back then people were trying to out-do each other in a joking way, whereas now those trying to drive PC to new levels are serious.

[sui generis]

178. that's another annoying thing

ceding a term or it's use to "the other side".

Who cares.

Your assessment is correct. It was never originally right wing terminology, but again, who cares.

In today's world both sides use it as a club to beat the non-conformists and malcontents into submission.

The real answer that nobody seems to stand by is 1. practice the golden rule, and 2. use your judgement.

What is used comically or irreverently is not the same thing as using it in ignorance or malice, at all. Some people just can't distinguish.

[Jamastiene]

189. most of mainstream America had never heard of PC before

right wingers started using it AGAINST liberals. So, whatever meaning it originally had has long since been replaced with right wingers using it to justify whatever racist, sexist, homphobic, antisemitic, other other hateful bigotry they spew. Your mention of it being used by liberals against other liberals is the first I've heard of liberals ever using it.

[pinto]

193. iirc, It began as a slam on liberals. We were typed as being

"politically correct" in our support of fair pay demands, women's issues, gay issues; support for the disenfranchised, equitable tax schedules, environmental concerns etc, etc. They couldn't attack us directly on the issues, at the time, so they labeled us with a straw man label, meant to imply that we were in cahoots with - and cowered by - some evil liberal cognoscenti, much as they now try to tie us to some alleged tie with world wide terrorists and appeasers. (Think the UN...)

[LeftCoast]

194. Yep and it's invariably used to try to stop discussion

The republicans have some scary-smart people working on using language like Orwell warned us about.

[Duncan Grant]

183. My sense of humor is fine. I just don't find 'haggay', 'deviant' and 'cocksucker' funny.

You raise a good point, ruggerson but I think most of us can tell the difference between satire/parody and contempt/hostility. Count me among the many who are seeing a lot of contempt for GLBT people here in recent weeks.

ps: I do remember your efforts to take a certain well-known DUer to task for his blatantly homophobic comments earlier this summer. I think we're seeing a similar situation lately -- it's just expressed a little less explicitly.