Jump to content
xnatex

Homophobia in gaming - and bigotry in homosexuals

Recommended Posts

So...you've gotten offended at the opinion piece because you use the words 'gay' and 'fag' when gaming and the article labelled you a homophobe?

Nah i never said i use those words and i didnt say i was offended at the article. I was just pointing out that when 2 parties are sitting there calling each other names be it homophobic or gay that it will solve nothing, by involving yourself in the name calling process you are generating the bigotry that generated this problem in the first place.

 

Waltish, just having a moment to reflect on what the actual problem is. Lets have a look at what actual homophobia looks like... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Anti-Homosexuality_Bill

 

The problem is all yours, reasonable people agree that using someone's identifier as a pejorative is not a good thing to do.

 

you have a problem with the fact that engaging in the use pejorative language gets you called a homophobe , but here you are whining about it and expecting folks to stop using a label that you see as offensive or at the least that you don't want to be called.

 

circular logic dude and highly ironic, your position seems to be " they should stop doing that but hey I want my right to keep doing it"

 

 

This is the part where I call you out on the sincerity of this OP, as far as I am concerned your just stirring shit.

 

And I repeat my previous question about the posting of that picture.

 

What is it that you want to trivialise , your position? , the counter-position? , or both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm the bigot? Well, that's fascinating.

 

Thanks for the insight :)

But you are. You're intolerant of anti-queer sentiment, especially sentiment derived from poolitics and ignorance :p

 

xnatex: I agree that terms like homophobic are thrown around in a pejorative sense, too, which is also not good.

Edited by Nich...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be giving the OP more credibility than it deserves by refuting it directly but here goes:

 

Re: using the terms "gay" and "fag" with impunity

Whilst it is correct that the reader needs to see through alternate meanings and overcome fear of how the message might be intended, there is a greater onus in play. The Author (or speaker) who uses terms that they know can be offensive, in a manner that can easily be interpreted as offensive, is knowingly engaging in an act that they know will offend. This is forgivable in a child, but is worthy of being a trigger to open a conversation that will increase the child's worldview to the wider implications of language, and responsibly of all people not to be deliberately offensive. An adult who deliberately engages in offensive behaviors is worthy of derision and loathing. An adult who engages in offensive behavior without knowing they did so, is immature to the point of being unworthy of the term adult, however deserves pity and will only mature with education and support.

 

tl;dr if your message can be offensive, be mature and find a better way to deliver your message.

 

Re:homophobia

Whilst a technical/semantic definition of homophobia limits the included demographic to those with an actual fear LBGT individuals, people who deliberately invoke those fears are more heinous. A person suffering from an irrational fear is one that should be pitied. A person who provokes an irrational fear in others is one who should be kept from society for the benefit of the wider community. To a lesser degree this also applies to persons who turn a blind eye whilst others provoke irrational fears.

 

tl;dr incorrect use of the term homophobia is forgivable when applied to a person who technically falls into a more menacing category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be giving the OP more credibility than it deserves by refuting it directly but here goes:

 

Re: using the terms "gay" and "fag" with impunity

Whilst it is correct that the reader needs to see through alternate meanings and overcome fear of how the message might be intended

Unless the user is saying that being happy or a bundle of sticks is a bad thing, it is always a statement denigrating homosexuality. So no. The reader need not try to see through alternate meanings.

 

It's kind of like how you shouldn't call someone a retard as an insult. Just because you don't make a connection in your head, you're still saying that retard is an insult. It's not about insulting a specific person, it's using a self-identifying label as a slur.

 

Thats the thing. Being mentally retarded is sub optimal. Calling someone a retard is saying that they display the characteristics of someone who is mentally retarded. Its the same as calling someone an idiot. Its just we tend to cut the mentally retarded a break on that out of sympathy.

 

There is nothing sub optimal about being homosexual, as much as there is nothing sub optimal about being left handed. They are both as capable as non homo and right handed folk, without any kind of "handicapable" sympathies we extend.

 

So while I agree with the crux of the point you're making in this post, it doesn't hold up when you realise that being retarded is actually a deficiency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm the bigot? Well, that's fascinating.

 

Thanks for the insight :)

No, but you are using your editorial position to push a personal agenda. I think that might be inappropriate.
It may be hawkeye's personal agenda, but it's also the position that all of the Atomic staff take on the issue. So it's less a singular opinion on a very important topic, and more us using our position as communicators to raise the issue across a broad chunk of the community it directly involves.

 

If anyone felt uncomfortable or challenged when they read the article, then I think it's had the intended impact. If a person feels offended, perhaps they should wait a day, and re-read the piece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a kid "gay" meant having a fun time, and "fag" was a cigarette. I want our words back damn it :P

Quoted for truth, the origin of these names are harmless, now all of a sudden they are offensive and bleeding hearts like waltish reckons they "cause grievous emotional harm".

 

I would take offensive to being called a Homophobic, as a red blooded male i would find it an insult to my fearless manhood. Why 2 sets of rules? what happened to equality?

 

All of a sudden, leaving aside decades of their use to keep certain people repressed?

I don't know if it's sadder people go this far to justify using words they probably shouldnt as an insult, or the possibility you believe everything you've written?

 

Novel alternative, find better, more imaginative insults/ways of demonstrating your disgust.

Then you don't need to defend your manliness, nor your vocabulary.

 

How hard is it to keep it in check, the way you presumably communicate without

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I got off topic a bit too much and my stance isnt very clear, Im not defending people who use "gay"words as insults, im trying to point out that the pot is calling the kettle black.

 

Calling someone homophobic is a "politically correct" insult to slander someones character by implying they are hateful because they dont accept their sexual preference. Most the time in our society its a sensationalised word loosely thrown at anyone who is not in line with your ideology.

Its a massive case of the boy who cried wolf.

 

Waltish - do i really need to explain why a "first would problems" meme is relevant in a topic about name calling in online video games? ;p

 

TinBane - I was using myself as an example on how i would react to being called homophobic, but i dont get called that as i dont call homosexuals names to offend them. Just as I would expect them not to call me names. I also support gay marriage, another hot topic that everyone who doesnt support it is labelled a homophobe. so your post is kinda invalid, sorry

Edited by xnatex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I got off topic a bit too much and my stance isnt very clear, Im not defending people who use "gay"words as insults, im trying to point out that the pot is calling the kettle black.

 

Calling someone homophobic is a "politically correct" insult to slander someones character by implying they are hateful because they dont accept their sexual preference. Most the time in our society its a sensationalised word loosely thrown at anyone who is not in line with your ideology.

Its a massive case of the boy who cried wolf.

 

Waltish - do i really need to explain why a "first would problems" meme is relevant in a topic about name calling in online video games? ;p

Ok Its the counter-position you are trivialising, that using pejorative language as in calling people one is angry at fags and saying bad things are gay is a trivial first world issue.

 

And you are still carping about them that do use pejorative language, as in calling people one is angry at fags, and saying bad things are gay, being incorrectly called/labled Homophobic.

 

Your position is still highly ironic and not any less circular.

Edited by Waltish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling someone an anything-phobe is describing an irrational fear of something

Phobia, from the Greek "phobos" meaning fear.

 

That's right, gold star sticker for you.

 

so calling someone a homophobe is describing an irrational fear of homosexuals.

Basic word building, you get first pick of the toys at recess.

 

Sensationalism at its most ridiculous

Oh the irony.

 

even if i was anti-homosexual, ive lived in Afghanistan,

Even if I was taking you seriously, I'm on a horse.

 

why would I have an irrational fear of 2 same sex ppl hooking up?

If you knew, it wouldn't be irrational, would it?

 

someone may consider it gross but they are allowed to feel so, and express it in a non violent way just as you are legally allowed to protest anything and believe in anything in Australia.

Vilification and hate speech are neither non-violent, nor legally allowed.

 

When someone clearly states they use the "gay" or "Fag" word in a completely different context to what you interpret the word to mean, how about stop being a bigot and objecting to their use of their langauge, the language they are allowed speak in a democracy and in Australia.

"You are a fag"

 

There's only one definition of "fag" that makes any sense at all.

 

Saying "I MEANT A BUNCH OF STICKS" is the equivalent of saying "she ran into a door" to get that shiner, or "that doesn't normally happen" when you blow your load 10 seconds in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my mrs calls me a fag when i dont finish my dinner, she also says doing the dishes is gay. Is she a homophobic using a word with only 1 definition?

I'm on a horse.

irrelevant, because im on a boat. Edited by xnatex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my mrs calls me a fag when i dont finish my dinner, she also says doing the dishes is gay. Is she a homophobic using a word with only 1 definition?

 

"I'm on a horse." - irrelevant, because im on a boat.

 

no but the birth of these words as insults came out of homophobia.

 

Also the dishes being gay is different to you being a fag.

 

I'd also say that gay dishes are queer dishes, as in strange?

 

Because the other meanings of the word don't fit in, if she is meaning that she doesn't like doing the dishes.

Edited by PointZeroOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my mrs calls me a fag when i dont finish my dinner, she also says doing the dishes is gay. Is she a homophobic using a word with only 1 definition?

She may not be homophobic, but she certainly can offend homosexuals with her speech - whether intended or not.

 

Two types imo:

 

Actively trying to offend by using 'gay' as an insult

 

Passively using incorrect language that can be seen as offensive to homosexuals

 

Your wife is the second type. Say the dishes are annoying, they're a chore, they're a pain in the arse - but calling them 'gay' is definitely incorrect and trivialises the word and those that identify with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my mrs calls me a fag when i dont finish my dinner, she also says doing the dishes is gay. Is she a homophobic using a word with only 1 definition?

She may not be homophobic, but she certainly can offend homosexuals with her speech - whether intended or not.

 

Two types imo:

 

Actively trying to offend by using 'gay' as an insult

 

Passively using incorrect language that can be seen as offensive to homosexuals

 

Your wife is the second type. Say the dishes are annoying, they're a chore, they're a pain in the arse - but calling them 'gay' is definitely incorrect and trivialises the word and those that identify with it.

 

Not to mention the distinction between things said in the home between family members, and spraying such language across a game full of people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my mrs calls me a fag when i dont finish my dinner, she also says doing the dishes is gay. Is she a homophobic using a word with only 1 definition?

 

"I'm on a horse." - irrelevant, because im on a boat.

 

no but the birth of these words as insults came out of homophobia.

 

Also the dishes being gay is different to you being a fag.

 

I'd also say that gay dishes are queer dishes, as in strange?

 

Because the other meanings of the word don't fit in, if she is meaning that she doesn't like doing the dishes.

 

Yeah and these words have since turned into a slang and lost their meaning just like their original meanings turned into insults. unlike the politically correct insults kicking around like homophobia and racism. Which unjustly label most people as haters, and no one likes haters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah and these words have since turned into a slang and lost their meaning just like their original meanings turned into insults. unlike the politically correct insults kicking around like homophobia and racism. Which unjustly label most people as haters, and no one likes haters

They havn't lost their meaning

An adult who deliberately engages in offensive behaviors is worthy of derision and loathing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which unjustly label most people as haters, and no one likes haters

What makes it unjust? That you don't like not being able to say what you want without impact on others?

 

Because unjust means unjustified, and I believe it's more than justified when some people are, in fact, 'haters'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah and these words have since turned into a slang and lost their meaning just like their original meanings turned into insults. unlike the politically correct insults kicking around like homophobia and racism. Which unjustly label most people as haters, and no one likes haters

They havn't lost their meaning

 

I dont discriminate on the basis of sexual preference so in my world they have lost their meanings.

 

Which unjustly label most people as haters, and no one likes haters

What makes it unjust? That you don't like not being able to say what you want without impact on others?

 

Because unjust means unjustified, and I believe it's more than justified when some people are, in fact, 'haters'.

 

Real world scenario - Christian groups opposes gay marriage because its against their religion and what they believe marriage should be, is it justified to label them all homophobic like they are currently doing over all avenues of media ?

Edited by xnatex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a kid "gay" meant having a fun time, and "fag" was a cigarette. I want our words back damn it :P

 

haha, remember the fag lollies?

 

Yea I sure do, but they are still around but called fads these days. And 'Big Boss Cigars" I loved those things. :)

 

Here you go dude :)

 

Posted Image

 

(and from a marketing perspective, I LOVE the tag :D)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real world scenario - Christian groups opposes gay marriage because its against their religion and what they believe marriage should be, is it justified to label them all homophobic like they are currently doing over all avenues of media ?

Organised religion is practically the definition of irrationality.

 

These people are phobic of a lot of things, homosexuals being just one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont discriminate on the basis of sexual preference so in my world they have lost their meanings.

You might be the centre of your universe, but I can tell you that the actual centre of the Universe is a long way away from you.

 

Also your world seriously needs to find a way to mesh with the Real World, if it don't, you will find that as you get older "your world" will be come an increasingly lonely and sad little place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real world scenario - Christian groups opposes gay marriage because its against their religion and what they believe marriage should be, is it justified to label them all homophobic like they are currently doing over all avenues of media ?

Organised religion is practically the definition of irrationality.

 

These people are phobic of a lot of things, homosexuals being just one.

 

lol good answer, both parties in that situation are fighting bigotry with bigotry

 

I dont discriminate on the basis of sexual preference so in my world they have lost their meanings.

You might be the centre of your universe, but I can tell you that the actual centre of the Universe is a long way away from you.

 

Also your world seriously needs to find a way to mesh with the Real World, if it don't, you will find that as you get older "your world" will be come an increasingly lonely and sad little place.

 

Lol why is that? because i believe no one has the right to call people names to insult them whether it be calling people fags or calling people homophobic? the world i live in is one of equality, what world do you live in?

Edited by xnatex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Real world scenario - Christian groups opposes gay marriage because its against their religion and what they believe marriage should be, is it justified to label them all homophobic like they are currently doing over all avenues of media ?

Organised religion is practically the definition of irrationality.

 

These people are phobic of a lot of things, homosexuals being just one.

 

No I'm not. Great stupid generalization which is just as stupid as a phobia against gay people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol good answer, both parties in that situation are fighting bigotry with bigotry

I don't think bigotry means what you think it means.

 

Lol why is that? because i believe no one has the right to call people names to insult them whether it be calling people fags or calling people homophobic? the world i live in is one of equality, what world do you live in?

There's a strong consensus from the community surrounding use of those three-letter-words.

 

Conversely, "homophobia" has a quite specific meaning, and is used quite deliberately to convey that meaning.

 

You're making an argument, petitio principii, that "homophobe" is an insult. You haven't explained why you think that.

 

No I'm not. Great stupid generalization which is just as stupid as a phobia against gay people.

I'm not generalising at all.

 

If I was generalising, I'd have simply said religious people. But I know that's not the case. I'm talking about The Church, not your church, with a little c.

 

Organised religions, the ones with lobby groups and billions in the coffers, have made their positions quite clear.

 

If you disagree with such a fundamental part of their dogma, you're not really part of that machine, prepare for excommunication, etc.

 

But let's not get off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×