Faggot Fez or No Faggot Fez?

[lleeder]

Today on he show they played a drop of Fez saying faggot to insult Al Dukes. That was some funny stuff. Now he says he's against use of the word. Do you like Fez saying faggot or no faggot Fez?

[shittles]

I like new, politically aware, no fag Fez. If only he would come out of the closet, he could be this generation's Milk.

[Phild]

This is a Ron & Fez fan site - Really? :dry:

[jetdog]

this is the greatest poll ever...

[instrument]

i wish every new thread with the word "fez" in it would automatically be deleted.

[lleeder]

i wish every new thread with the word "fez" in it would automatically be deleted.

Then I'd just use Todd.

[BlackSpider]

i wish every new thread with the word "fez" in it would automatically be deleted.



^^^_____ This...

[IMSlacker]

i wish every new thread with the word "fez" in it would automatically be deleted.

^^^_____ This...

This RonFez.net. Shouldn't there be lots of threads with "Fez" in the title?

[TheMojoPin]

Pretty shitty choices. It's not like "old Fez" was just dropping the word left and right, so the "lots and lots" option is bullshit.

[mikeyboy]

Pretty shitty choices. It's not like "old Fez" was just dropping the word left and right, so the "lots and lots" option is bullshit.

A poll on rf.net with inaccurate and limited choices? Say it ain't so!!!!!

[Gvac]

This is a perfect poll with perfect options.

Screw all of you faggots who can't make up your minds.

[jetdog]

It really breaks my heart that Fez is so distraught about the word "fag." In my mind, it's such a red herring to any sort of civil rights discussion. Being so offended by a word that can be interpreted in so many different ways, according to intent, completely distracts from an intelligent discussion about what should or should not be afforded to same-sex couples, THE IMPORTANT DISCUSSION. I say this from the point of view that same-sex couples are no different, in terms of civil rights or recognition of partners rights, than heterosexual couples. QUIT FEELING LIKE A VICTIM EVERY TIME YOU HEAR THAT WORD AND DO SOMETHING IMPORTANT FOR GAY RIGHTS!













wow, i feel so empowered after typing that...oh wait should i have put that last sentence in italics?

[TheMojoPin]

This is a perfect poll with perfect options.

Screw all of you faggots who can't make up your minds.

Says the backpeddler.

[Gvac]

Says the backpeddler.

Ha!

Never.

[Serpico1103]

Fez has said he doesn't like the word "faggot." So, if you don't want to upset Fez, don't use the word.
If you don't care about upsetting him, continuing using the word.

The excuse that the word "faggot" doesn't mean "gay", but someone who is bad at sports, weak, afraid, dresses like a woman, is a weak excuse. Because in reality you are saying that all gays are bad at sports, weak, afraid, and dress like women. No one appreciates negative stereotypes.

[Gvac]

Fez has said he doesn't like the word "faggot." So, if you don't want to upset Fez, don't use the word.
If you don't care about upsetting him, continuing using the word.

I agree to a point. If someone I know tells me they're offended by something I say I'll do my best to not say it in front of them, but I think expecting everyone else to change is a little less logical than dealing with it yourself.

The excuse that the word "faggot" doesn't mean "gay", but someone who is bad at sports, weak, afraid, dresses like a woman, is a weak excuse. Because in reality you are saying that all gays are bad at sports, weak, afraid, and dress like women. No one appreciates negative stereotypes.

It's not an excuse, it's the truth. The word "faggot" was always used to mean "wimpy" and not "homosexual" in my circles.

And again, it's up to each individual to decide what is offensive to them and what isn't and how to deal with it. Thinking everyone else should think and feel as you do doesn't seem very reasonable.

[chefdoug68]

Thinking back regarding that word, it may be the first " bad" word i can remember repeating/ hearing as a child.

[biozombie]

I can't catch & I throw like a girl, so I'm pretty sure I'm still allowed to use the new F word.

[jetdog]

Fez has said he doesn't like the word "faggot." So, if you don't want to upset Fez, don't use the word.
If you don't care about upsetting him, continuing using the word.

The excuse that the word "faggot" doesn't mean "gay", but someone who is bad at sports, weak, afraid, dresses like a woman, is a weak excuse. Because in reality you are saying that all gays are bad at sports, weak, afraid, and dress like women. No one appreciates negative stereotypes.

You are completely missing the point of intent. what you defined "faggot" as is totally invalid. People used the word faggot as a generic term long beofre it was associated with gay men. Now that gay men feel like being offended by it, they should dictate what everyone elses intent is? ridiculous.

Again, it's such a cop out to bitch about the word "fag" and what meaning you dictate that it has for society. Man up and talk about real issues, not this bullshit, "oh, I;m so offended by your slang...don't talk like that because it ofends my sensibilities and thus I must shun you and your opinion..."

Fuck that.

[jetdog]

I can't catch & I throw like a girl, so I'm pretty sure I'm still allowed to use the new F word.

whatever faggot.

[jetdog]

Thinking back regarding that word, it may be the first " bad" word i can remember repeating/ hearing as a child.

One of my dreams is to kill a deer and have your avatar cook it for me...

[nevnut]

I have the same opinion for all the "offending" words people seem to be bothered by today.

You're the one that puts the power into that "f" , "n" or whatever word you are offended by. If you would just man up a little bit and ignore the source it's coming from, there would be no more power in those "words".

The person that's offended is the one that gives it the power to offend, act like you didn't hear it, and it'll probably disappear.

[TheMojoPin]

I have the same opinion for all the "offending" words people seem to be bothered by today.

You're the one that puts the power into that "f" , "n" or whatever word you are offended by. If you would just man up a little bit and ignore the source it's coming from, there would be no more power in those "words".

The person that's offended is the one that gives it the power to offend, act like you didn't hear it, and it'll probably disappear.

And again, this is just a cop-out that puts zero responsibility on the people using the words to use some common sense or basic decency. You're basically blaming the victim.

[Dash77]

Can we as a people stop being assholes and just except that words don't hurt and just let freedom of speech live..

[Gvac]

And again, this is just a cop-out that puts zero responsibility on the people using the words to use some common sense or basic decency. You're basically blaming the victim.

People who decide a certain word is offensive to them are "victims" if they happen to hear it?

Really?

[GreatAmericanZero]

you call someone a "faggot" "nigger" "fat ass" "idiot" "poo poo head" in this world then you have to take the consequences towards the people that you call that

but no one gets upset if you just say words like "fat ass" or "idiot", you can say them. These special words that are offensive no matter what context is one of the most ridiculous things out there

[Gvac]

Once upon a time, the words "moron" "idiot" and "imbecile" were actual medical terms used to describe those that fell into a certain spectrum of the Intelligence Quotient.

Then it was decided that to label people by their intelligence was degrading and those terms also came to be considered degrading.

Ditto for the word "crippled."

These were actual medical terms and over time those that the words were used to describe decided they were offensive.

When does it end?

[TheMojoPin]

People who decide a certain word is offensive to them are "victims" if they happen to hear it?

Really?

We're not talking about "deciding" that a word is offensive. You're making it sound like a small group of people decided to be offended by a normally inoffensive word like "butter" or something. Then you'd have the people hearing something deciding a word is offensive or having the "power" in that regard. We're clearly not talking about situations like that. We're talking about the select few words that loaded with vitriol and anger. Sure, sometimes the context is clear that those emotions are not beind the word and they're not being used to hurt someone, but words like "faggot," "nigger" and "cunt" and their ilk are clearly beyond the pale and aren't words that people are arbitrarily deciding are offensive to them.

The idea that "words don't hurt" or that "things are only offensive if people let themselves be offended" just aren't realistic. Communication is a two-way street: someone is making the decision to use those words and it's not fair at all to act like the person using those words has no obligation to take into consideration where they are and who they're around and the inescapable fact that certain words basically exist as insults and slurs first formost before anything else.

Like I said, it's a two-way street. I agree to an extent that the people hearing things do have an obligation to judge the context and intetions of what they've heard and not just leap to condemning the person doing the speaking. At the same time, the speaker has an equal obligation to not just assume they can spout off slurs and insults and not have people respond negatively.

Words aren't "just words."

[Gvac]

We're not talking about "deciding" that a word is offensive. You're making it sound like a small group of people decided to be offended by a normally inoffensive word like "butter" or something. Then you'd have the people hearing something deciding a word is offensive or having the "power" in that regard. We're clearly not talking about situations like that. We're talking about the select few words that loaded with vitriol and anger. Sure, sometimes the context is clear that those emotions are not beind the word and they're not being used to hurt someone, but words like "faggot," "nigger" and "cunt" and their ilk are clearly beyond the pale and aren't words that people are arbitrarily deciding are offensive to them.

The idea that "words don't hurt" or that "things are only offensive if people let themselves be offended" just aren't realistic. Communication is a two-way street: someone is making the decision to use those words and it's not fair at all to act like the person using those words has no obligation to take into consideration where they are and who they're around and the inescapable fact that certain words basically exist as insults and slurs first formost before anything else.

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH

Sounds nice and flowery, but says nothing.

Try again.

[TheMojoPin]

I wasn't finished.

Not that I expect you to actually read it or attempt some sort of dialogue. I said plenty. I'd appreciate if you did the courtesy of actually responding as I did for you.

[BlackSpider]

I'll stop using the word when Fez does.
He must've said it a hundred times today...

[lleeder]

I wasn't finished.

Not that I expect you to actually read it or attempt some sort of dialogue. I said plenty. I'd appreciate if you did the courtesy of actually responding as I did for you.

Sounds like butter to me.

[TheMojoPin]

You dirty motherbutter.

[GreatAmericanZero]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KrapC2a_3Xg&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KrapC2a_3Xg&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Gvac]

I wasn't finished.

Not that I expect you to actually read it or attempt some sort of dialogue. I said plenty. I'd appreciate if you did the courtesy of actually responding as I did for you.

You didn't say "plenty." Rather, you attempted to sound like you were speaking from some higher moral ground.

Do you really censor yourself on a daily basis for fear that your words may offend someone?

Really?

I just can't believe it.

Instead of "faggot" is "cocksucker" OK?

No?

How about "wimp"?

No?

How about "pussy"?

No?

What can I use to bust a buddy's balls when he's acting less than macho?

Which governing board do I have to run it by?

It's madness. Sorry if you don't see it that way.

I do.

[disneyspy]

any of you butters touches my stuff,i'll kill you

[underdog]

What can I use to bust a buddy's balls when he's acting less than macho?

Mojo.

[West.Coast.Skippy]

We're not talking about "deciding" that a word is offensive. You're making it sound like a small group of people decided to be offended by a normally inoffensive word like "butter" or something. Then you'd have the people hearing something deciding a word is offensive or having the "power" in that regard. We're clearly not talking about situations like that. We're talking about the select few words that loaded with vitriol and anger. Sure, sometimes the context is clear that those emotions are not beind the word and they're not being used to hurt someone, but words like "faggot," "nigger" and "cunt" and their ilk are clearly beyond the pale and aren't words that people are arbitrarily deciding are offensive to them.

The idea that "words don't hurt" or that "things are only offensive if people let themselves be offended" just aren't realistic. Communication is a two-way street: someone is making the decision to use those words and it's not fair at all to act like the person using those words has no obligation to take into consideration where they are and who they're around and the inescapable fact that certain words basically exist as insults and slurs first formost before anything else.

Like I said, it's a two-way street. I agree to an extent that the people hearing things do have an obligation to judge the context and intetions of what they've heard and not just leap to condemning the person doing the speaking. At the same time, the speaker has an equal obligation to not just assume they can spout off slurs and insults and not have people respond negatively.

Words aren't "just words."

mojo, i agree with you. what you're right about is how to be a pleasant and civil part of society. but that is separate from a dispassionate, "open" discussion about the subjectivity of these words. i think gvac's response at 5:26 is a pretty fair one.

personally, i rarely "swear". i find it unattractive when women do. (maybe that makes me a faggot!) but there is no "reason" for any word to upset me.

intentions are different, and so is real hate. what fez is upset about is that some people hate gays. and he's upset about the stigma about being gay, and the subsequent slander the term carries.

[TheMojoPin]

You didn't say "plenty." Rather, you attempted to sound like you were speaking from some higher moral ground.

Do you really censor yourself on a daily basis for fear that your words may offend someone?

Really?

I just can't believe it.

You really can't?

You go into every conversation, regardless of who it is with, with absolutely no consideration to what you should or shouldn't say? Sky's the limit?

And was my "speaking from a high moral ground" somehow less haughty than your repeated declarations of what is definitively right and wrong? I offered, as I always do, my opinion. Yes, I do think my opinion is correct. I know you want everything in black and white terms, but I don't think that's the case here. As I said, the responsibility falls with both the speaker and the listener to determine what is and what isn't too far. There's no set fast line that's the same for everyone. I just disagree with the repeated assertion that the responsibility and the power falls totally with the listener. That completely lets the speaker off the hook in terms of using common sense and sensible judgement.

Instead of "faggot" is "cocksucker" OK?

No?

How about "wimp"?

No?

How about "pussy"?

No?

What can I use to bust a buddy's balls when he's acting less than macho?

Which governing board do I have to run it by?

It's madness. Sorry if you don't see it that way.

I do.

Like I just said, there's no hard and fast rule as to what is wrong and what is right. It changes from person to person and situation to situation. I tried to make my statement clear that I was talking social situations beyond just friends who are comfortable with each other. This message board is perfect example: not everyone here knows each other or are automatically at ease with each other. That makes it a very conscious choice on the part of the people using certain words to realize what that might result in. That doesn't mean they can't use those words: they just have to be willing to accept the negative responses that could result. People who take offense at having an insult or a slur directed at them aren't doing something wrong. I'm not talking about "governing bodies" at all: I'm talking about people using personal judgement and common sense and realizing that things aren't said in a vacuum. It's not all on the listener.

[Meataball23]

So much reading!

If my buddy leaves a putt 15 ft short can I tell him he putts like a faggot or not?

[Gvac]

So much reading!

If my buddy leaves a putt 15 ft short can I tell him he putts like a faggot or not?

YES!

[TheMojoPin]

So much reading!

If my buddy leaves a putt 15 ft short can I tell him he putts like a faggot or not?

Who cares?

Honestly, people are talking like bullshitting with their buddies is going to somehow be monitored.

[Meataball23]

Just looking for a ruling

Thanks gvac

[Gvac]

Just looking for a ruling

Thanks gvac

Anytime, brother!

Just give a quick glance around and make sure the PC police (aka Mojo) aren't around when you say it.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

There's too many of these "faggot" threads. Can we merge them all, they're spreading worse than cockroaches.

[TheMojoPin]

Anytime, brother!

Just give a quick glance around and make sure the PC police (aka Mojo) aren't around when you say it.

How am I being the "PC police?"

I just choose to not use certain insults. It's no big deal.

I also just ask that people people respect that when talking to me, strangers or friends. If they don't, fuck 'em. I'm not going to waste my time with them.

[West.Coast.Skippy]

Anytime, brother!

Just give a quick glance around and make sure the PC police (aka Mojo) aren't around when you say it.

gvac, don't you think mojo has a point that it is pretty easy to build a short list of words to avoid with strangers or in public settings? and that in doing that the world could be an incrementally more pleasant place?

[CofyCrakCocaine]

How am I being the "PC police?"

I just choose to not use certain insults. It's no big deal.

I also just ask that people people respect that when talking to me, strangers or friends. If they don't, fuck 'em. I'm not going to waste my time with them.

PCP brutality!!!! Someone, help me light the Molotov!

[TheMojoPin]

PCP brutality!!!!!

Great, now I'll just end up in Deebo's pigeon coop the next morning.

[Gvac]

gvac, don't you think mojo has a point that it is pretty easy to build a short list of words to avoid with strangers or in public settings? and that in doing that the world could be an incrementally more pleasant place?

No. Mojo himself admitted the list is constantly changing for each little sub-culture out there.

That's my point.

It's IMPOSSIBLE to know each and every hot button word.

[Serpico1103]

I agree to a point. If someone I know tells me they're offended by something I say I'll do my best to not say it in front of them, but I think expecting everyone else to change is a little less logical than dealing with it yourself.

Yes. Fez should not be insulted. But, what is more realistic. You, not using a word that is not acceptable in many circles or places (work, school, "polite company") or for Fez, a friend, to get over deep psychological issues? Yes, he should cope, and you should help. It's not like he asked you to stop saying the word "yellow", stop using a word that many find offensive, and no one finds complimentary.

It's not an excuse, it's the truth. The word "faggot" was always used to mean "wimpy" and not "homosexual" in my circles.
I have to think that "wimpy" is code for gay. Or am I supposed to believe that it is a mere coincidence that a slur for gays (commonly seen as wimpy by manly man) just happened to mean "wimpy" but for a totally different reason? Even if true, you have to see how people would not accept that leap, however small or big.

And again, it's up to each individual to decide what is offensive to them and what isn't and how to deal with it. Thinking everyone else should think and feel as you do doesn't seem very reasonable.

You are completely missing the point of intent. what you defined "faggot" as is totally invalid. People used the word faggot as a generic term long beofre it was associated with gay men. Now that gay men feel like being offended by it, they should dictate what everyone elses intent is? ridiculous.


Generic? Man, woman, person, people. These are generic terms. Nigger, spic, dyke, kike, faggot. These are not generic terms.
Do I think the nation should stop using words because a "spokesman" for a group says it is offensive. No. Do I think you should stop using a word because a friend might find it offensive. That's up to you.

[TheMojoPin]

No. Mojo himself admitted the list is constantly changing for each little sub-culture out there.

That's not what I said at all.

That's my point.

It's IMPOSSIBLE to know each and every hot button word.

All the words you listed are just varying degrees of insults. What sensible person just uses those with abandon in public situations or with people they don't know well or at all?

What I said and fully recognize is that social situations and contexts are wildly different and that it's impossible to have hard and fast rules as to what's "OK" and what isn't. My point in this thread is that it's irresponsible to place the fault totally on the people listening or being spoken to and not placing any responsibility on the person speaking. I don't expect at all for people to always be polite or to "censor" themselves at every moment. It's just a matter of rolling with the punches and simply having the common sense to think, "maybe THIS wouldn't be the best thing to say right now or to this person" (and the listener should do the same when considering what is said. Again, two-way street).

[underdog]

That's not what I said at all.

Yes it is :

the list is constantly changing for each little sub-culture out there.

[TheMojoPin]

Yes it is :

You dirty cheater butter.

[Recyclerz]

How about we all agree to this rule?

All the oppressed white men on this board are free to use any slur their hearts desire regardless of time or place or context but, if as a consequence of the exercise of said right they happen to lose a couple of teeth or, more parochially, someone they consider a friend, they agree not to come crying here like some little [fill in pejorative of choice] and expect us to feel badly about it.

[vegeta]

First off, I'm pro ALL words. I feel that people need to be free to speak, because if they say something stupid, or "offensive" then they hopefully get an education on how ignorant they are being.

I do have to laugh at people who want to use certain slurs and terms behind closed doors, in every place except for out in the open where you're either get screamed at or attacked physically. I'm addressing specifically anyone who talks a tough game on the internet. I know you don't want to get your teeth kicked in, but if you're a real man/woman, stand up for your freedom of speech.

I had to laugh at Gvac's justification of using the word faggot. "I've used the word since I was a kid" SO why don't you use "Ga ga goo goo" anymore? Because you fucking grew up. I'm for using whatever words you feel you have to use, but you're just stuck with the same vocabulary?

Yes, it would be hypocritical to stop using it when you've never had any shame in it before, but I ask this of all words: do you really NEED to say some of the words you use?


PS:

I hate P.C. fuckers as well. Politial Correctness is nonsense.

[TheMojoPin]

I had to laugh at Gvac's justification of using the word faggot. "I've used the word since I was a kid" SO why don't you use "Ga ga goo goo" anymore? Because you fucking grew up. I'm for using whatever words you feel you have to use, but you're just stuck with the same vocabulary?

The thing that that is disturbing when people talk about their use of a slur as a child as being a result of "blissful ignornace" of its larger meaning is that it just seems to harken back to how kids in this country so blindly used so many different slurs and terms to degrade blacks. Most of those kids "just did it" then, too. They didn't "know any better." I see little difference between that and kids who are raised to think calling someone else a "fag" or a "queer" is normal. That they "didn't know" the larger implications is just reflective of a society at large that tolerates the idea that someone is a lesser human being or weak or should be looked at with scorn or mocked or even hated simply because of who they are. Why is that something to be looked back on as being OK or even as an excuse for the words to be used by adults who know better? Recognizing that that was a "normal" thing to do as a kid should be an awful realization for an adult.

[grlNIN]

It's IMPOSSIBLE to know each and every hot button word.

If you are thinking of the word before you speak it and it sounds like it may come out wrong, be misinterpreted or offend people i would think that your own internal judgment would come in to play.

[Aqualad]

I hate when guys try to defend racist and/or sexist terms as "free speech" like they're some sort of patriot for using slurs. Either embrace your prejudice or quit using the words, don't act like it's somehow noble. Fuckin queers.

[vegeta]

Well, you are free to use whatever words you want, but when you take those words and couple them with violence, threats or terrorist activities, then you're not practicing free speech.

Wow, Gvac said it's impossible to recognize what the hot button words are? Chances are, when you are in a group, in public, and you go from talking freely to shutting up when a certain person walks by, then you are aware of what pushes who's buttons. I think the general public knows what's going to turn peoples heads at what time.

[Gvac]

Looks like I won this argument hands down!

What else is new.

I wish there was someone here capable enough to debate me intelligently and coherently.

Oh well. A guy can dream, can't he?

[Gvac]

And in all seriousness, let me just say that there are things posted on this message board every single day that I find offensive. No lie.

I cringe when someone mocks a dead celebrity, or worse yet, their dead child.

Do I campaign to have those kinds of posts stopped or deleted, or do I just deal with it and not participate in them?

It's insane to expect the rest of the world to think like you or have the same sensibilities as you.

[disneyspy]

quit your preachin and go work on that roast!

[Farthammer]

I am partial to Faggot Fez.

[jetdog]

Generic? Man, woman, person, people. These are generic terms. Nigger, spic, dyke, kike, faggot. These are not generic terms.
Do I think the nation should stop using words because a "spokesman" for a group says it is offensive. No. Do I think you should stop using a word because a friend might find it offensive. That's up to you.


Yes, faggot is a generic insult, it doesn't mean anything except in the traditional sense as a piece of wood. The issue here is not what vocabulary you use in front of particular friends (I agree, you should treat a friend with respect, that's your personal responsibility). The issue is that people want the word "faggot" banned, and everyone who uses the word "faggot," regardless of the intent, judged as horrible homophobes.

[Gvac]

I guess radio personalities (including Ron and Fez) should be punished with fines and/or firings every time something they say offends someone.

[mikeyboy]

I guess radio personalities (including Ron and Fez) should be punished with fines and/or firings every time something they say offends someone.

That describes the state of terrestrial radio 2 years ago.

[jetdog]

I am partial to Faggot Fez.

Here's an example of obvious intent, and as such I do think it's meant as an insult and meant to offend.
But let's use some goddamn common sense, let's use our intelligences and delineate between hateful, homophobic bullshit and everyday bullshitting. Maybe that's why we want certain words banned, because we're to damn lazy to interpret people's statements for ourselves.

[Gvac]

That describes the state of terrestrial radio 2 years ago.

Exactly, and I'm astounded at the number of members here who seem to agree with that line of thinking.

[mikeyboy]

Exactly, and I'm astounded at the number of members here who seem to agree with that line of thinking.

I didn't see anyone agreeing with that line of thinking.

[Gvac]

I didn't see anyone agreeing with that line of thinking.

Then you didn't read the whole thread.

The majority of people think everyone should constantly be censoring themselves for anything that might be remotely offensive to someone.

[TheMojoPin]

And in all seriousness, let me just say that there are things posted on this message board every single day that I find offensive. No lie.

I cringe when someone mocks a dead celebrity, or worse yet, their dead child.

Do I campaign to have those kinds of posts stopped or deleted, or do I just deal with it and not participate in them?

It's insane to expect the rest of the world to think like you or have the same sensibilities as you.

Where were people "campaigning" to have these things stopped or deleted here?

That last line is incredibly hypocritical coming from you.

[Gvac]

Where were people "campaigning" to have these things stopped or deleted here?

That last line is incredibly hypocritical coming from you.

You only read the words you want to and attribute the meaning you want to them, don't you?

I'm merely saying that for anyone to expect the rest of the world to know what offends them and to expect them to avoid doing so at all costs is insane.

[dino_electropolis]

You only read the words you want to and attribute the meaning you want to them, don't you?

I'm merely saying that for anyone to expect the rest of the world to know what offends them and to expect them to avoid doing so at all costs is insane.

Gvac,

PLEASE lose some of the USA flag motif you got going on .....its a bit hard on the eyes, and frankly, i hear "America the Beautiful" everytime i read your posts.....which is a bit unnerving considering some of the content contained therein.

A simple God Bless the USA and its soccer team thread would suffice.......

[TheMojoPin]

Then you didn't read the whole thread.

The majority of people think everyone should constantly be censoring themselves for anything that might be remotely offensive to someone.

The current track of discussion is clearly not in regards to things that only might be "remotely offensive" to people. It's talking about people using common sense when they're about to toss out something that is more often than not perceived as slur and designed to hurt and insult people by dehumanizing them. It has nothing to do with these notions of "manliness" or people "having a spine." I'm not telling anyone here what they can and can't say: I've been arguing about the idea that's been brought up that it's the fault of the people being insulted by these words or that there's no responsibility to be placed on the people saying them when someone is attacked by these words. If someone feels they have to say the, great, go nuts...but then they're being ridiculous if they flip it around and act like THEY'RE being inconvenienced by people who take those words as the insults and slurs that they are.

Are you seriously telling me that people should never act with ANY consideration of what they should or shouldn't say around others?

[Gvac]

Gvac,

PLEASE lose some of the USA flag motif you got going on .....its a bit hard on the eyes, and frankly, i hear "America the Beautiful" everytime i read your posts.....which is a bit unnerving considering some of the content contained therein.

A simple God Bless the USA and its soccer team thread would suffice.......

That sig is from 2001 and was the one I used for a looooooooong time. I always go back to it.

And the USA soccer ball avatar is from the last World Cup. I brought it back because we made the finals in this latest tournament.

[TheMojoPin]

You only read the words you want to and attribute the meaning you want to them, don't you?

You're the king of ignoring the bulk of responses to the points you make. Just skip to the point where you chuckle about it was all just one big windup and how you sure got us, OK? And nobody has to pick and choose with your responses because you're Mr. "I always say exactly what I mean," right?

I'm merely saying that for anyone to expect the rest of the world to know what offends them and to expect them to avoid doing so at all costs is insane.

Where did I say this?

Do you honestly not see the difference between hoping people use some common sense before spouting off with words like "faggot" or "nigger" and their ilk and demanding that nobody ever say anything offensive? The gulf between what I've been talking about and what you're accusing me and others of wanting is gigantic.

Nowhere did I say I want people banned or fined or threads locked or shows tossed off the air because of these words. I'm just challenging the repeated assertion that anyone using those words isn't doing anything wrong regardless of the context and all the scorn should be placed on anyone who dares to take those words for what they ultimately are. People are free to use those words, and people are just as free to stand up against them.

[dino_electropolis]

That sig is from 2001 and was the one I used for a looooooooong time. I always go back to it.

And the USA soccer ball avatar is from the last World Cup. I brought it back because we made the finals in this latest tournament.

i dont mean to imply some sort of new found patriotism or bandwagon jumpin on your part. Im just sayin, so many stars and stripes in such a short space can cause an epileptic episode.


I'm just lookin out for da children.

[mikeyboy]

Then you didn't read the whole thread.

The majority of people think everyone should constantly be censoring themselves for anything that might be remotely offensive to someone.

I don't see that at all. First of all, no one cares what terms you use with your friends. Call each other whatever you like. I don't think anyone even expressed anything like that or called for a moratorium on the use of the word. Offending people generally wasn't brought up an an issue either. There is a very small group of "hot button" terms that generally people don't use among strangers or mixed company. I think there are really only three of these words -- "nigger", "cunt" and "faggot" -- but I supposed some of the harsher ethnic slurs might be close. Of the three, "faggot" is probably the least offensive, but it's still not one that most people use in casual conversation with people they don't know. If you were around a group of black people you didn't know, would you honestly start throwing around the N-word casually and blame them if they got offended? I doubt it. I just didn't see people going beyond that.

Yes, they are just words, and they don't offend me as such, but I do recognize that those terms can offend. The terms are loaded in such a way, that in certain contexts the terms contain a lot of anger. As such, I don't use them generally, and certainly wouldn't in a conversation with strangers.

[Gvac]

Do you honestly not see the difference between hoping people use some common sense before spouting off with words like "faggot" or "nigger" and their ilk and demanding that nobody ever say anything offensive? The gulf between what I've been talking about and what you're accusing me and others of wanting is gigantic.

Talk about making a gigantic leap! Since when was "faggot" the equivalent of "nigger"?

That's my point exactly.

It was never this horrible, hateful word. NEVER. Until recently, despite what you might like to think.

If the NAACP comes out with a press release next week and says the term "African-American" is now considered gravely offensive and they want everyone to refer to black people as "_______" (fill in the blank) should we all just say "OK...whatever you want!" and everyone who still uses the previous term should now be labeled a racist?

It's ridiculous, and I can't believe YOU can't understand THAT.

[Gvac]

Furthermore, Mojo, you're comparing apples and oranges when you equate using "faggot" with using the word "nigger."

I don't use "faggot" to describe homosexuals like some would use the "n" word to describe blacks. As I've stated, it's used to describe mamby-pamby, wimpy behavior; someone exhibiting no backbone.

If YOU choose to think that implies a homosexual, then you're the one stereotyping, not me.

[TheMojoPin]

Talk about making a gigantic leap! Since when was "faggot" the equivalent of "nigger"?

That's my point exactly.

It was never this horrible, hateful word. NEVER. Until recently, despite what you might like to think.

I don't think they're exaclty the same historically, but "faggot" is definitely the equivalent of "nigger" when it comes to homosexuals. Regardless of its origins, it has taken on the role of the word that completely dehumanizes homosexuals as something worthy of hatred and ridicule. The only reason it's used as any kind of insult, even jokingly, is due to that conotation. "Faggot" has been a term of scorn and derision directed towards homosexuals for almost a century now. Despite what it once meant, we all know what it means now and what it's talking about.

If the NAACP comes out with a press release next week and says the term "African-American" is now considered gravely offensive and they want everyone to refer to black people as "_______" (fill in the blank) should we all just say "OK...whatever you want!" and everyone who still uses the previous term should now be labeled a racist?

I know you'll refuse to even acknowledge this, but the black identity national indentity is still constantly shifting due to the traumatic nature of how blacks are viewed and treated in this country. Are you really inconvenienced or harmed in any way because they no longer want to be called "colored" or "negro?"

On top of that, what does that have to do with terms like "faggot" or "nigger?" Neither was ever an acceptable term towards homosexuals or blacks except to people that view either group as subhumans worth little more than an insult, ridicule or worse.

[jetdog]

I think alot of the confusion in this conversation comes from the fact that we are talking about Fez's opinion of the word. Yes, let's agree that if we ever found ourselves in his company we would refrain from using the word out of respect. But is it not a valid argument that the word has intent as a ballbusting insult, without malice? Obviously the context defines the meaning...so are we too much on tilt to disregard this? For the sake of everyone's comfortability/sensibility/morality/touchiness do we automatically punish someone for speaking the word? do the people who read/hear the word get carte blanch to define the intent however they please?

[Gvac]

Please go back and read the post above yours, Mojo.

[TheMojoPin]

Furthermore, Mojo, you're comparing apples and oranges when you equate using "faggot" with using the word "nigger."

I don't use "faggot" to describe homosexuals like some would use the "n" word to describe blacks. As I've stated, it's used to describe mamby-pamby, wimpy behavior; someone exhibiting no backbone.

If YOU choose to think that implies a homosexual, then you're the one stereotyping, not me.

That's a complete cop-out. The only reason it's used in the context you're talking about is because of its role for decades as a slur against homosexuals, and again you're trying to duck out of the idea personal responsibility and put all the blame on anyone who takes the word for what we all know it is.

[Gvac]

I know you'll refuse to even acknowledge this

Who are you to presume to know what I think or what I'll acknowledge?

All I was saying was that when blacks decided they didn't want to be called "Negro" anymore but instead wanted to be called "colored" should everyone who still used the term "Negro" have been considered a racist?

Maybe they didn't get the form letter.

It's all so silly.

It's also why I dislike labels, such as "Italian-American" or "African-American" or "Gay-American."

Pure nonsense.

[Gvac]

That's a complete cop-out. The only reason it's used in the context you're talking about is because of its role for decades as a slur against homosexuals, and again you're trying to duck out of the idea personal responsibility and put all the blame on anyone who takes the word for what we all know it is.

No, not at all.

You're putting your own preconceived notions into the equation.

It's not a cop-out; it's 100% fact.

And the highlighted part of your post proves that you think everyone should feel as you do.

FYI, the word "cabron" means something very different to a Mexican, a Dominican, and a Puerto Rican.

Same word, same language, different meaning.

To think everyone in the world should view a word as you do is foolish and illogical.

[sailor]

actually, it was an insult (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faggot) for women and children before being slang for homosexuals.

[vegeta]

Sure, you're a real winner, Gvac.

Why don't you update your sig to Cap's corpse, BTW?

[TheMojoPin]

do the people who read/hear the word get carte blanch to define the intent however they please?

Of course not. I specifically said earlier in the thread that it's a two-way street: the speaker needs to realize who they're tlaking to and decide whether or not it's the best idea to toss out a slur like that and the listener has an obligation to try and realize the context and/or intentions of the speaker.

I just take issue with the idea that the certain very few words I'm talking about that exist out of a perceived need to dehumanize entire groups of people as less than human or inferior or abnormal are only damaging because of the people that perceive them as such. That places zero responsibility on the people who say them and the society that created them and instead dumps all the blame all the people targeted by this hate to begin with. How is that fair or logical at all? It's essentially saying, "well, if you don't want me to call you faggot, stop being so gay."

[Gvac]

actually, it was an insult (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faggot) for women and children before being slang for homosexuals.

Oh, but everyone knows what it really means!

According to Mojo, anyway.

[Gvac]

Sure, you're a real winner, Gvac.

Why don't you update your sig to Cap's corpse, BTW?

I hear he's coming back.

[jetdog]

That's a complete cop-out. The only reason it's used in the context you're talking about is because of its role for decades as a slur against homosexuals, and again you're trying to duck out of the idea personal responsibility and put all the blame on anyone who takes the word for what we all know it is.

It's really not that cut-and-dried. for myself it does not resemble the N-word at all, nor does it specifically refer to homosexuals. I'll go out on a limb here, because I don't have any statistics (but neither does anybody else) and suggest that a lot of people share my interpretation. And to be fair a lot of people probably share your interpretation. So what do we do? Flip a coin?

[sailor]

Oh, but everyone knows what it really means!

According to Mojo, anyway.

i know the context we used it growing up it had zero to do with homosexuality. if i use it today, depending on context it either is or isn't about homosexuals. also, i don't think it's anywhere near unanimous in the homosexual community that it's looked down upon.

[TheMojoPin]

Who are you to presume to know what I think or what I'll acknowledge?

All I was saying was that when blacks decided they didn't want to be called "Negro" anymore but instead wanted to be called "colored" should everyone who still used the term "Negro" have been considered a racist?

Maybe they didn't get the form letter.

It's all so silly.

It's also why I dislike labels, such as "Italian-American" or "African-American" or "Gay-American."

Pure nonsense.

Of course it's "silly" to you. You can't possibly fathom what it's like to be on the receiving end of these terms being used to attempt to negate your worth and value as a human being. "Negro" and "colored" were both terms to emphasize the perceived inferiority of an entire group of people and to seperate them from "normal" society as much as possible. There's a difference between recognizing differences and using those differences to place one group on top of the other. That's the actions and eras that "negro" and "coloreD" represented. Of course blacks from those times often adapted those terms themselves: what else could most of them know? The role and identity of blacks in America is still evolving and it's going to be evolving a long time so long as the racial divide in this country socially, politically and economically keeps getting worse. Your snide comments about not getting the memo are just indicative of the widespread apathy most white Americans have towards this issue. How dare we waste time attempting to recognize the inequality in this country...white people shouldn't say "negro" or "colored" anymore! THAT's the real problem!

[lleeder]

There were never any homo only water fountains. Just trying to help.

[Gvac]

Of course it's "silly" to you. You can't possibly fathom what it's like to be on the receiving end of these terms being used to attempt to negate your worth and value as a human being. "Negro" and "colored" were both terms to emphasize the perceived inferiority of an entire group of people and to seperate them from "normal" society as much as possible. There's a difference between recognizing differences and using those differences to place one group on top of the other. That's the actions and eras that "negro" and "coloreD" represented. Of course blacks from those times often adapted those terms themselves: what else could most of them know? The role and identity of blacks in America is still evolving and it's going to be evolving a long time so long as the racial divide in this country socially, politically and economically keeps getting worse. Your snide comments about not getting the memo are just indicative of the widespread apathy most white Americans have towards this issue. How dare we waste time attempting to recognize the inequality in this country...white people shouldn't say "negro" or "colored" anymore! THAT's the real problem!

You're completely going off on a tangent over an analogy I made. My point wasn't about the choice to use the words, it was about those who didn't "update" fast enough being labeled as a racist when it may have never been their intent.

You're obviously too emotionally charged right now to have an intelligent debate.

Go have a nice cool drink, relax, breathe deeply, and we'll chat later when you're a bit more rational.

[vegeta]

(Yeah, Cap'll come back, just in time for the live action film. YAWN)

I think that words are all about context. You say a certain word on a radio show or on a comedy stage, trying to go for a laugh is one thing. You're cornering gay guys with a bat in an alley and saying the same word is another context entirely.

My point in all this faggoty mess is that if you say certain words in your daily life, own that shit and don't make excuses for anyone who comes along. I know the consequences for a Caucasian, heterosexual man, especially if he is an important figure, are high if you get caught using certain terms; but when did we get to the point where words are like acid thrown on people's faces?

R&F need to bring back the pussification of america drop back. The best work Steve C ever did.

[TheMojoPin]

i know the context we used it growing up it had zero to do with homosexuality. if i use it today, depending on context it either is or isn't about homosexuals. also, i don't think it's anywhere near unanimous in the homosexual community that it's looked down upon.

You can't excape the modern context of "faggot." It's perceived to mean being wimpy or weak and so on precisely BECAUSE of it's overall use as a slur against homosexuals. If it's being used to say someone is weak it's doing say in saying that they're weak because they're gay.

No, it's not unanimous, nor did I say it's exactly the same historically or socially as "nigger," but it's essentially the modern equivalent of that word in regards to homosexuals.

[jetdog]

Of course not. I specifically said earlier in the thread that it's a two-way street: the speaker needs to realize who they're tlaking to and decide whether or not it's the best idea to toss out a slur like that and the listener has an obligation to try and realize the context and/or intentions of the speaker.

I just take issue with the idea that the certain very few words I'm talking about that exist out of a perceived need to dehumanize entire groups of people as less than human or inferior or abnormal are only damaging because of the people that perceive them as such. That places zero responsibility on the people who say them and the society that created them and instead dumps all the blame all the people targeted by this hate to begin with. How is that fair or logical at all? It's essentially saying, "well, if you don't want me to call you faggot, stop being so gay."

But we are not agreeing that the word exists solely to dehumanize a certain population. if that were the case i would be in full aggrement. I suggest that the people who feel targeted by this particular word are not equivalent to those targeted by the N-word. the use of the N-word is unique for a certain population, in contrast the other word is widely distributed and used as a generic insult. Also I don't think what i suggested earlier resolves anybody from the responsibilty of using a loaded word. Intent so easily shoots of into space, that its necessary for both parties to take responsibility. so again, do we take the easy way out and ban a word because we are too stupid or lazy to figure out its context?

[jetdog]

So we should entomb these words forever, and god help the sole who dares utter them....

[TheMojoPin]

You're completely going off on a tangent over an analogy I made. My point wasn't about the choice to use the words, it was about those who didn't "update" fast enough being labeled as a racist when it may have never been their intent.

These things don't just suddenly change overnight.

[Gvac]

These things don't just suddenly change overnight.

Apparently they do.

When did "queer" become acceptable?

I wasn't notified.

I was stunned when I saw a TV show with the word proudly in the title.

Time was, that was worse than the word faggot.

[sailor]

You can't excape the modern context of "faggot." It's perceived to mean being wimpy or weak and so on precisely BECAUSE of it's overall use as a slur against homosexuals. If it's being used to say someone is weak it's doing say in saying that they're weak because they're gay.

No, it's not unanimous, nor did I say it's exactly the same historically or socially as "nigger," but it's essentially the modern equivalent of that word in regards to homosexuals.

do you think maybe it's the converse of that? i'm no student of etymology, but i see it as more likely.

[underdog]

Exactly, and I'm astounded at the number of members here who seem to agree with that line of thinking.

I think Fez might be one of those people.

There were never any homo only water fountains. Just trying to help.

I think you're helping.

[TheMojoPin]

But we are not agreeing that the word exists solely to dehumanize a certain population. if that were the case i would be in full aggrement. I suggest that the people who feel targeted by this particular word are not equivalent to those targeted by the N-word. the use of the N-word is unique for a certain population, in contrast the other word is widely distributed and used as a generic insult. Also I don't think what i suggested earlier resolves anybody from the responsibilty of using a loaded word. Intent so easily shoots of into space, that its necessary for both parties to take responsibility. so again, do we take the easy way out and ban a word because we are too stupid or lazy to figure out its context?

I don't want any words banned. I just want everyone to take responsiblity for what they say, beit as the insitgator or the person responding.

I agree that "nigger" is largely unqiue in its history and use. What I'm saying is that "faggot" is the closest thing to an equivalent in regards to homosexuals. It's become a loaded word over the better part of the 20th Century, and that needs to be taken into consideration when it's being used in a public setting. Arguably it can be used somewhat seperate from its role attacking homosexuals, but its evolution as being an insult to call someone "weak" is an extension of it being a slur against homosexuals.

[TheMojoPin]

Apparently they do.

When did "queer" become acceptable?

I wasn't notified.

I was stunned when I saw a TV show with the word proudly in the title.

Time was, that was worse than the word faggot.

There's been an effort to reclaim "queer" as a self-empowering term for almost 40 years now. That's hardly "overnight."

Personally, I'd look at "queer" as the gay equivalent to "negro" in terms of being derogatory terms, but that's just my opinion.

[jetdog]

I don't want any words banned. I just want everyone to take responsiblity for what they say, beit as the insitgator or the person responding.

I agree that "nigger" is largely unqiue in its history and use. What I'm saying is that "faggot" is the closest thing to an equivalent in regards to homosexuals. It's become a loaded word over the better part of the 20th Century, and that needs to be taken into consideration when it's being used in a public setting. Arguably it can be used somewhat seperate from its role attacking homosexuals, but its evolution as being an insult to call someone "weak" is an extension of it being a slur against homosexuals.

Fair enough, I understand the word's evolution, but how do we define its impact, a "hurtfulness quotient?" Who decides when it is or is not acceptable? I'm not sure I understand your perspective, do we regulate it (not ban it)? Do we punish people for saying it in public venues (thus shunning it)? Where is a safe place to step in and dictate people's intent?

[GreatAmericanZero]

has there ever been a word that was really offensive and then became something no one cared about?

I'm guessing a lot of italian slurs are like that. When Italians were first coming to this country they were treated badly, and stuff like WOP and Dago were meant to be hurtful, but i never knew any italian that didn't take those words as a source of pride. Like, being from Long Island i've known many italians in my life, not one would i ever hesitate at using those words

[sailor]

I don't want any words banned. I just want everyone to take responsiblity for what they say, beit as the insitgator or the person responding.

I agree that "nigger" is largely unqiue in its history and use. What I'm saying is that "faggot" is the closest thing to an equivalent in regards to homosexuals. It's become a loaded word over the better part of the 20th Century, and that needs to be taken into consideration when it's being used in a public setting. Arguably it can be used somewhat seperate from its role attacking homosexuals, but its evolution as being an insult to call someone "weak" is an extension of it being a slur against homosexuals.

i still think you have that part backwards.

heck, what about "fag" in the british school sense of "fagging"?

[TheMojoPin]

Fair enough, I understand the word's evolution, but how do we define its impact, a "hurtfulness quotient?" Who decides when it is or is not acceptable? I'm not sure I understand your perspective, do we regulate it (not ban it)? Do we punish people for saying it in public venues (thus shunning it)? Where is a safe place to step in and dictate people's intent?

I don't think anyone should be dictated along those lines. I just don't like people who take issue with those words to automatically be blamed as the reason for those words' existence as slurs. Like I said, people can definitely take things the wrong way, but these words aren't slurs only because of the people who take them that way. Just as much as people can use them people can speak up against them. I don't want anything banned...I just don't want the attitude of "people can say whatever they want and anyone who takes issue with it is wrong and tough shit for them." I guess I just want discussion, debates; even arguments.

[TheMojoPin]

i still think you have that part backwards.

heck, what about "fag" in the british school sense of "fagging"?

That had a dual conotation of in terms of underclassmen being in "service" to seniors.

Besides, the American evolution of the word is drastically different than the British.

[jetdog]

I don't think anyone should be dictated along those lines. I just don't like people who take issue with those words to automatically be blamed as the reason for those words' existence as slurs. Like I said, people can definitely take things the wrong way, but these words aren't slurs only because of the people who take them that way. Just as much as people can use them people can speak up against them. I don't want anything banned...I just don't want the attitude of "people can say whatever they want and anyone who takes issue with it is wrong and tough shit for them." I guess I just want discussion, debates; even arguments.

Well you got it brother!!! Woooo!!! Let's tear this ambiguous motherfucker down!!!
:smoke:

[TheMojoPin]

Well you got it brother!!! Woooo!!! Let's tear this ambiguous motherfucker down!!!
:smoke:

I wanna battle using those big Q-Tip-looking sticks they had on American Gladiators.

[sailor]

That had a dual conotation of in terms of underclassmen being in "service" to seniors.

Besides, the American evolution of the word is drastically different than the British.

so, that's the 2nd part of my statement (which i wasn't solidly behind anyways), but what of the first part?

[jetdog]

I wanna battle using those big Q-Tip-looking sticks they had on American Gladiators.

fuck that...I say hanging wrings!!!

(insert "legs wrapping around opponent" joke here.)

[lleeder]

Queers need a Rosa Parks. Or at least a Jackie Robinson.

[sailor]

Queers need a Rosa Parks. Or at least a Jackie Robinson.

get famous.

[lleeder]

get famous.

I'd need a metro card too or a bat.

[Serpico1103]

Then you didn't read the whole thread.

The majority of people think everyone should constantly be censoring themselves for anything that might be remotely offensive to someone.

Playing the victim? Again?

Use whatever words you want. Just be surprised that people are offended. Is it necessary for you to call someone a "faggot." Or does your weak vocabulary not contain a more suitable substitute?

There is a fairly clear line of what is offensive and what is not. This reminds me of Fred From Brooklyn's logic that since he called his wife a "cunt" and she didn't mind, he should be able to call everyone a "cunt."
Call people "faggots" or "cunts" all you want. However, the words have strong negative connotations, if people insist on using some "bundle of sticks" definition.

[TheMojoPin]

so, that's the 2nd part of my statement (which i wasn't solidly behind anyways), but what of the first part?

I can't find anything that talks about it being anything in the states besides a derogatory term for women that became a derogatory term for homosexuals early in the 20th Century. I'm not saying you're wrong, but the history seems to indicate that its use over the last 30 or so years in regards to being "weak" are an extension of it being a slur in regards to homosexuals.

[jetdog]

Playing the victim? Again?

Use whatever words you want. Just be surprised that people are offended. Is it necessary for you to call someone a "faggot." Or does your weak vocabulary not contain a more suitable substitute?

There is a fairly clear line of what is offensive and what is not. This reminds me of Fred From Brooklyn's logic that since he called his wife a "cunt" and she didn't mind, he should be able to call everyone a "cunt."
Call people "faggots" or "cunts" all you want. However, the words have strong negative connotations, if people insist on using some "bundle of sticks" definition.

Are you a member of "men against rape?"

[Serpico1103]

Are you a member of "men against rape?"

Are you a member of "men for rape?"

Or "Men who have been raped and LOVED IT?"

[jetdog]

Are you a member of "men for rape?"

Or "Men who have been raped and LOVED IT?"

hmmmm...my attempt at witty banter has been thwarted, obviously I cannot admit to membership in either society, lest i am ruined...

Fuck It! Wanna duke it out with big Q-tips!?

[TheMojoPin]

Didn't they have an event where they were on big bungee cords and had to try and knock the Gladiators off their platforms? That was a good one.

[jetdog]

Didn't they have an event where they were on big bungee cords and had to try and knock the Gladiators off their platforms? That was a good one.

Can you imagine the feeling in your balls, bouncing up and down in those harnesses?

[TheMojoPin]

Stop with all the sexy talk.

[Serpico1103]

hmmmm...my attempt at witty banter has been thwarted, obviously I cannot admit to membership in either society, lest i am ruined...

Fuck It! Wanna duke it out with big Q-tips!?

Enjoy a long cylindrical object being rammed and slapped against you?

[sailor]

I can't find anything that talks about it being anything in the states besides a derogatory term for women that became a derogatory term for homosexuals early in the 20th Century. I'm not saying you're wrong, but the history seems to indicate that its use over the last 30 or so years in regards to being "weak" are an extension of it being a slur in regards to homosexuals.

apology accepted.

[Gvac]

apology accepted.

Same here.

[jetdog]

Enjoy a long cylindrical object being rammed and slapped against you?

Now your getting it! Are you insinuating something? Are you suggesting, as an insult, that I'm gay? How long until you call me a faggot?

[TheMojoPin]

Seemed like the courteous thing to do after you both said I was right.

And that I'm so handsome.

[Serpico1103]

Now your getting it! Are you insinuating something? Are you suggesting, as an insult, that I'm gay? How long until you call me a faggot?

I am asking if you like cylindrical things rammed into your face. I could be implying that you are gay. Do you find being called "gay" an insult? Why? What is wrong with being gay?

[jetdog]

I am asking if you like cylindrical things rammed into your face. I could be implying that you are gay. Do you find being called "gay" an insult? Why? What is wrong with being gay?

eww, poor response.

[Death Metal Moe]

Heh, this reminds me of some white people I knew who use to try to say that "nigger" didn't specifically refer to a black person when used, that it was in fact just a basic insult that they used all the time no matter the race.

Things change, so do words. You know you wouldn't use the word faggot right off the bat in mixed company, so you know there's a negative connotation to the word.

If faggot is so great use it on a job interview or with a client. See how it goes over.

I can't say I haven't used the word and I can't say I won't say it again, but I know it offends certain people. It's not about guilt or censorship, it's just understanding what the word does to people.

Now that I know it hurts Fez I'm probably gonna try to stop using it here and on the air.

[sailor]

Heh, this reminds me of some white people I knew who use to try to say that "nigger" didn't specifically refer to a black person when used, that it was in fact just a basic insult that they used all the time no matter the race.

Things change, so do words. You know you wouldn't use the word faggot right off the bat in mixed company, so you know there's a negative connotation to the word.

If faggot is so great use it on a job interview or with a client. See how it goes over.

no one said it wasn't a bad word, we were just debating it's role as a supposed homosexual slur. i wouldn't go throwing around fuck in a job interview either, but that's not a slur. heck, that's another example of a similar concept - when people use the word fuck it doesn't always mean having sex.

[grlNIN]

has there ever been a word that was really offensive and then became something no one cared about?

I'm guessing a lot of italian slurs are like that. When Italians were first coming to this country they were treated badly, and stuff like WOP and Dago were meant to be hurtful, but i never knew any italian that didn't take those words as a source of pride. Like, being from Long Island i've known many italians in my life, not one would i ever hesitate at using those words


I take lukewarm offense to the use of "guinea" and "guido" and i am not full blooded Italian, but mostly (in terms of makeup) from both sides of my family. I don't ask people to not say it, i don't get really pissed off but if anyone ever tried to call me any of those words in a joking manner-i don't see myself letting it pass.

Maybe to me these words are more offensive because i was raised with pride in my heritage and traditions that came with it. I don't see these stereotyped words as a threat or huge crime against me or my family but i would never, ever take pride in being associated with any of them.

[K.C.]

I take lukewarm offense to the use of "guinea" and "guido"

Uhhhhh.....yeaaaaaaah....

may want skip over most of my posts...
:unsure:

[grlNIN]

Uhhhhh.....yeaaaaaaah....

may want skip over most of my posts...
:unsure:

I meant when it's directed at a more personal level, amongst myself, family, friends etc.

i don't get offended by people's general ignorance towards others, it just makes them look like a fool.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

I take lukewarm offense to the use of "guinea" and "guido" and i am not full blooded Italian, but mostly (in terms of makeup) from both sides of my family. I don't ask people to not say it, i don't get really pissed off but if anyone ever tried to call me any of those words in a joking manner-i don't see myself letting it pass.

Maybe to me these words are more offensive because i was raised with pride in my heritage and traditions that came with it. I don't see these stereotyped words as a threat or huge crime against me or my family but i would never, ever take pride in being associated with any of them.

Tory is a pretty neutral term these days. It was the N-word equivalent to George Washington fans, back in the day.

[grlNIN]

Tory is a pretty neutral term these days. It was the N-word equivalent to George Washington fans, back in the day.

I don't even understand this sentence.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

I meant when it's directed at a more personal level, amongst myself, family, friends etc.

i don't get offended by people's general ignorance towards others, it just makes them look like a fool.

basically, you get upset if someone stabs a meaty finger in your direction and snarls "GUIDO!", baring his teeth with a slather of drool slithering out the side of his mouth and his pupils glowing red with hatred. Personally, I too would be offended if that happened to me. Anything that guy says woulda offended me, if I were in that situation. Even the word "the".


Btw, have you ever infuriated someone in the past by calling them a DIPTHONG? People get genuinely pissed if you emphasize the syllables in just the right way. "Hey Ohm! You're a fucking DIPTHONG!"

[CofyCrakCocaine]

I don't even understand this sentence.

Tory=Loyalist=People who favored having the British control the American colonies during the whole Boston Tea Party-->American Revolution Win period. If you really didn't like someone, you called 'em Tory in public and everyone swore off their ties to the accused. Even got a couple people hanged on baseless claims in Philly.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that word doesn't mean a thing to anybody anymore.

[grlNIN]

basically, you get upset if someone stabs a meaty finger in your direction and snarls "GUIDO!", baring his teeth with a slather of drool slithering out the side of his mouth and his pupils growing red with hatred. Personally, I too would be offended if that happened to me. Anything that guy says woulda offended me, if I were in that situation. Even the word "the".


Btw, have you ever infuriated someone in the past by calling them a DIPTHONG? People get genuinely pissed if you emphasize the syllables in just the right way.



Maybe take a few and get back to me when you have a response that both makes sense in terms of coherence and utilizes the use of the English language.

[shittles]

Tory=Loyalist=People who favored having the British control the American colonies during the whole Boston Tea Party-->American Revolution Win period. If you really didn't like someone, you called 'em Tory in public and everyone swore off their ties to the accused. Even got a couple people hanged on baseless claims in Philly.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that word doesn't mean a thing to anybody anymore.

fucking dipthong!

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Maybe take a few and get back to me when you have a response that both makes sense in terms of coherence and utilizes the use of the English language.

I wasn't trying to confront you but be funny in my dreadfully unfunny style.

[K.C.]

Tory=Loyalist=People who favored having the British control the American colonies during the whole Boston Tea Party-->American Revolution Win period. If you really didn't like someone, you called 'em Tory in public and everyone swore off their ties to the accused. Even got a couple people hanged on baseless claims in Philly.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that word doesn't mean a thing to anybody anymore.

And that's the whole point.

Language is ever-evolving, and words that upset us now may not mean dick in 50 years. "Empowered" words are a bullshit social construct that only have the power we assign them in our heads.

That's why word censoring/denying is all nonsense and only designed to politically empower different groups.

People should focus more on intent and context, but sadly, most people aren't capable of that.

I'm not saying people should feel free to run around throwing out racial and ethnic slurs, nor should be people not be free to call others out on it.

But if someone does drop one, they shouldn't have to fear for their jobs/safety/social standing at least until people actually think of the intent behind it.

[TheMojoPin]

And that's the whole point.

Language is ever-evolving, and words that upset us now may not mean dick in 50 years.

On the flipside, there are words that have been around for hundreds of years that still have such power.

[underdog]

On the flipside, there are words that have been around for hundreds of years that still have such power.

Like "English" and "white".

[K.C.]

On the flipside, there are words that have been around for hundreds of years that still have such power.

Very true.

But they only have the power that we assign them.



After blacks, the Irish were easily the second most oppressed ethnic/racial minority group in this country's history.

They were treated like animals through much of the 19th century into the early parts of the 20th century, especially by the British-American ancestry that made up much of the power structure in early America.

I am probably about as close to 100% Irish as a person can get...but the slurs and stereotypes that came out of the time period don't mean much of anything to me, because they just have no power in my mind.

If someone attacks me with them and I decipher the intent as malicious, yeah, that will piss me off...but not because they're using certain words...they could be using any words...what would upset me is that I've made the interpretation and put it in the context of being malicious.

And taking that approach is not shunning or being disrespectful to one's heritage. It doesn't mean I understand any less about the time period or have any less respect for what happened back then.

It doesn't mean I don't get why my grandfather used to be pissed off at Irish stereotypes to the point where he wanted many of them censored, or at least "something done about it."

It just means that it's been let go.

The words don't have power. The intent does.



Now, maybe you can argue that using the n-word (or any of these racial or ethnic slurs) can have no context or intent other than maliciousness...but I've seen many, many, many people in the different arts (for example), who have already proven that to be false.

[brettmojo]

After blacks, the Irish were easily the second most oppressed ethnic/racial minority group in this country's history.
http://freemanpress.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/crying-indian_fullhead80p.jpg

[K.C.]

http://freemanpress.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/crying-indian_fullhead80p.jpg

Technically were never part of the country. Still considered sovereign on their territory, although I obviously see your point.

[grlNIN]

The words don't have power. The intent does.

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/8381/sarah204.jpg

You have no power over me!

[TheMojoPin]

After blacks, the Irish were easily the second most oppressed ethnic/racial minority group in this country's history.

They were treated like animals through much of the 19th century into the early parts of the 20th century, especially by the British-American ancestry that made up much of the power structure in early America.

I am probably about as close to 100% Irish as a person can get...but the slurs and stereotypes that came out of the time period don't mean much of anything to me, because they just have no power in my mind.

Right, because the larger societal context so drastically changed. The Irish obviously got it raw when they came to America. What changed was their place in society. The irish were replaced as the urban boogeyman by "ethnic" minority groups that began flocking to American cities in the late 19th Century. The only reason the Irish "got over it" was because they were seen as the lesser of "evils" because when all was said and done they were white. The slurs lost their power because the American power structure accepted the Irish. The Irish did not overcome or defeat the slurs.

If someone attacks me with them and I decipher the intent as malicious, yeah, that will piss me off...but not because they're using certain words...they could be using any words...what would upset me is that I've made the interpretation and put it in the context of being malicious.

And taking that approach is not shunning or being disrespectful to one's heritage. It doesn't mean I understand any less about the time period or have any less respect for what happened back then.

But it's not really an accurate comparison to look at what the Irish went through then and what groups like blacks and homosexuals are going through NOW simply because one persecution clearly stopped in America and others have been ongoing (some as far back or before the Irish). That's not dismissing what the Irish faced, but the Irish aren't facing that now or really anytime over the better part of a century. On the one hand, yes, the animosity towards the Irish didn't last. On the other hand, it only died off because that animosity was transplanted to other groups and the Irish were accepted into the American power and social dynamic because they were white. That's not really applicable to non-white groups facing the same predjudice and segregation now. Homosexuals throw an even bigger spanner in the works since that transcends the issues of race and skin color.

It doesn't mean I don't get why my grandfather used to be pissed off at Irish stereotypes to the point where he wanted many of them censored, or at least "something done about it."

It just means that it's been let go.

The words don't have power. The intent does.

The words and the intent are all backed by the context of what those words represent. Someone obviously could use Irish slurs maliciously, but what's the power backing those words up? How do they reflect on the Irish standing in America now? There's not an exisiting power dynamic in America out there actively working to segregate or marginalize or whatever the Irish. Someone using slurs against the Irish in America is basically just being an asshole. Someone using specific slurs in regards to or at, say, homosexuals or blacks are reflecting the active segregation and persecution of those groups. The Irish "let go" of those slurs because they were accepted as a part of the white power dynamic. How are the minorities currently facing such animosity going to be able to "let go?"

Now, maybe you can argue that using the n-word (or any of these racial or ethnic slurs) can have no context or intent other than maliciousness...but I've seen many, many, many people in the different arts (for example), who have already proven that to be false.

I am in no way saying that it is impossible to use these words without being prejudiced or racist. As I've said, it's the responsibility of the speaker and the listener to judge what is being said and why.

[D isf or Dangerous]

I think of it like this. If Im just a regular dude sittin around at a party or something and i know a gay or black or spanish or asian or what the hell ever person is there im going to have to cut some things out of the conversation. no "dude, dont be a f*" or "hey stop n* lipping that blunt" or things like that unless you already know the people present dont really give a shit. thats just the decent thing to do.

However if I write a book or make a movie, or just generally do something you have to actually have to make an effort to receive, and when you receive it you get offended by it, thats not my problem. You bought my book or borrowed it and sat and read it or you bought a ticket to my movie and sat and watched it, or listened to my radio show and heard something, it is completely up to you to deal with that, and I should not have to change anything about it. Just stop patronizing me an leave anyone else who wants to alone.

As far as just happening to hear something as you walk down the street or listen to some asshole on his phone at a red light or something...just get over it, that person will pretty much not even exist to you in 2 minutes.

[sg2000]

LLeeder are you trolling?

[bodie406]

now that he knows he is one, he hates himself for it and he hates to be reminded about it, he is a typical miserable self loathing old queen, fuk him ,if it wasn't for his "bad" days when dopey Dave talks the show would be unlistenable how Ronnie can deal with him and all his baggage is the only true mystery of the universe

[Hosstetler]

Not sure I get the point of the new Fez character. Maybe he's trying to fill the Jesus gap left without Earl.

[RENFIELD]

world war 2....

UK cigarettes were printed with
F.A.G.S on them

which stands for..... For A Good Smoke (fags)


the power comes from YOU...

FEZ SHOULD LIGHTEN UP...
everything else is 'funny...
people shouldn't have the right to laugh at other people's sacred cows
if they don't take their turn in the barrel...