Assuming good faith question: The (false) dichotomy of top/bottom implies a power dynamic in which the bottom is subservient to the top. In reality, it’s often a simple preference and bottoms can domineer just as well as tops. Some prefer it that way. And there’s more than top and bottom. Versatile is the obvious third option (no or changing preference for position) as well as side (prefers non-penetrative sex).
There’s this stereotype (may not be the right word) that extends from the above in that tops are more masculine or powerful by virtue of topping, due to the tie with being dominant. Thus bottoms are more feminine and subservient. All of that is false and represents the gay community in a pretty bad, oversimplified, sexist-somewhere-along-the-line way.
The dom/sub axis is not the same as the top/bottom axis (not really an axis).
Sure, but the joke here is turning the dumb jokes of the homophobes against them, right? Calling a homophobe “haha u’r gay n a bottom” is kinda using their homophobia against them, no?
Also, I’m gay myself. If someone said “haha, u like taking it up the ass”, I would be like, “sure I do!”. Say this to a homophobe n they would be incredibly offended. So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
But sure, I get why the morals of this aren’t so straightforward.
You aren’t wrong. It’s rather philosophical at that point. There’s the “don’t say it because it’s shitty angle” (quasi-mine, though mine was more a explanation vs a held belief) vs the “take it back from them” angle. Both have pros/cons and I’m not going to pretend I have the ‘perfect’ answer. The truth is probably that whichever is more effective/least damaging probably varies by context.
It’s a dissection of why some people in the LGBT community may be offended. If you’re unwilling to try to see the perspective of others and choose to instead reject empathy, that’s a problem for you and the people around you. This internet stranger will continue to have a good day.
Also, clout? On Lemmy? Oh good, I’ve got the support of all 12 of us…
Complicated. Everyone gets to have opinions and some of those opinions are going to offend people. It’s arguably inevitable. The social consequences of having opinions of one kind or another is a pretty standard facet of being human. And validity is non-trivial to define. People have their experiences and they are valid to them but that won’t excuse them from the consequences of having an opinion that is shitty (e.g. “Nazis weren’t that bad” is an opinion that some people honestly hold and also merits a punch in the nose). So my shitty not really answer is “sort of?”.
One caveat (arguably unrelated) is that a lot of people like to state wrong things as opinions (e.g “I think the earth is flat”) and will claim that you can’t refute them because “that’s just my opinion”. It’s not, it’s an objective fact. Those aren’t valid.
Side note: I feel like you’re trying to lead me to something and I approve of your style even though I feel like I’m about to be wrong about something.
I don’t think you see the hypocrisy in your own comments.
I never misunderstood that you’re close minded. I’ll even grant that it can be frustrating to feel like you need a formal course on such things and that it changes entirely too fast and that sometimes it all feels like bullshit (ask me about using the term demisexual wrong* on the internet one time). But the world is made better when we work to understand others, which you’ve demonstrated that as being a non-priority for you.
But the world is made better when we work to understand others, which you’ve demonstrated that as being a non-priority for you.
That’s your interpretation because I don’t agree with you because as a queer person I want to not be told how to use queer words. Thus demonstrating that working to understand others is a non-priority for you.
I understand that you don’t want to learn. Because that’s what you’re doing. You want to ignore why people don’t want you to say things like that so that the onus isn’t on you to change your behavior because that’s difficult and/or inconvenient. As above, it’s really frustrating to have to learn yet more terms (I still don’t quite get allosexual even though I apparently am that or something along those lines?) and then also to have to break associations with things that haven’t aged well because then you feel obligated to feel bad for making mistakes even if most of the time people don’t care/understand the difficulty.
You want to ignore why people don’t want you to say things like that so that the onus isn’t on you to change your behavior because that’s difficult and/or inconvenient.
You are the one wanting to ignore people here. You are so convinced that only your perspective can be right that you are unwilling to even process the words I write. You don’t have to agree but to willfully ignore that what I’m saying has legitimacy is just disgusting. And I’ve no doubt you don’t even realize your oppression and your own bigotry. Do you?
It’s not since Reddit that I’ve seen anyone engage in such masterful mental gymnastics to completely avoid getting the point. We have at least silver medal material right here.
Just because you don’t get it doesn’t mean I don’t make sense.
No seriously dude. Go talk to some older gay people, particularly men. Try to make some minimal effort to understand why communities who have been beaten to shit by society want to own their language. It’s gotta be something to have never been in that position.
you really can’t see how using sexuality to mock someone you hate is homophobic?
It’s not using sexuality to mock someone. It’s using hypocrisy to mock someone.
You know what’s the same thing? When gay men call each other fags or lesbians dykes. It’s taking what was intended as derogatory and flipping it around to celebrate it. It’s the ideal response to bullying assholes of any kind.
It’s not using sexuality to mock someone. It’s using hypocrisy to mock someone.
I guess it would make it okay to call a black right-winger an N-word and talk about how he can’t swim and only eats chicken and watermelon, then?
When gay men call each other fags or lesbians dykes
and I’m sure you know that not everyone is comfortable doing that because of their lived experiences. it’s awesome that homophobic jokes don’t affect you, but not everyone can distance themselves from them.
I guess it would make it okay to call a black right-winger an N-word and talk about how he can’t swim and only eats chicken and watermelon, then?
If you are black, yes, it would be ok. And many black people do. It’s the exact same defense mechanism.
and I’m sure you know that not everyone is comfortable doing that because of their lived experiences.
Then let them not be comfortable with it and let me and my people alone. Do not try to police my language just because perceive someone somewhere to have experienced some mild discomfort… and why? WHY DO I SAY THIS?
Because honey, they need to arm themselves against that discomfort. You need to have a shield and that shield is OWNING the words. If you let people who use derogatory words own them you have lost power.
How?
Assuming good faith question: The (false) dichotomy of top/bottom implies a power dynamic in which the bottom is subservient to the top. In reality, it’s often a simple preference and bottoms can domineer just as well as tops. Some prefer it that way. And there’s more than top and bottom. Versatile is the obvious third option (no or changing preference for position) as well as side (prefers non-penetrative sex).
There’s this stereotype (may not be the right word) that extends from the above in that tops are more masculine or powerful by virtue of topping, due to the tie with being dominant. Thus bottoms are more feminine and subservient. All of that is false and represents the gay community in a pretty bad, oversimplified, sexist-somewhere-along-the-line way.
The dom/sub axis is not the same as the top/bottom axis (not really an axis).
Sure, but the joke here is turning the dumb jokes of the homophobes against them, right? Calling a homophobe “haha u’r gay n a bottom” is kinda using their homophobia against them, no?
Also, I’m gay myself. If someone said “haha, u like taking it up the ass”, I would be like, “sure I do!”. Say this to a homophobe n they would be incredibly offended. So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
But sure, I get why the morals of this aren’t so straightforward.
You aren’t wrong. It’s rather philosophical at that point. There’s the “don’t say it because it’s shitty angle” (quasi-mine, though mine was more a explanation vs a held belief) vs the “take it back from them” angle. Both have pros/cons and I’m not going to pretend I have the ‘perfect’ answer. The truth is probably that whichever is more effective/least damaging probably varies by context.
This is just absolutely ridiculous. It’s thought police over-engineering for clout.
It’s a dissection of why some people in the LGBT community may be offended. If you’re unwilling to try to see the perspective of others and choose to instead reject empathy, that’s a problem for you and the people around you. This internet stranger will continue to have a good day.
Also, clout? On Lemmy? Oh good, I’ve got the support of all 12 of us…
Are you part of the community?
I am.
Do you think the perspective of everyone in the community is equally valid?
Complicated. Everyone gets to have opinions and some of those opinions are going to offend people. It’s arguably inevitable. The social consequences of having opinions of one kind or another is a pretty standard facet of being human. And validity is non-trivial to define. People have their experiences and they are valid to them but that won’t excuse them from the consequences of having an opinion that is shitty (e.g. “Nazis weren’t that bad” is an opinion that some people honestly hold and also merits a punch in the nose). So my shitty not really answer is “sort of?”.
One caveat (arguably unrelated) is that a lot of people like to state wrong things as opinions (e.g “I think the earth is flat”) and will claim that you can’t refute them because “that’s just my opinion”. It’s not, it’s an objective fact. Those aren’t valid.
Side note: I feel like you’re trying to lead me to something and I approve of your style even though I feel like I’m about to be wrong about something.
I don’t think you see the hypocrisy in your own comments.
Empathy would be you not trying to tell people what to think and say and being willing to see their perspective.
Hey maybe that’s meaningful to you. It certainly seems to be to many.
I never misunderstood that you’re close minded. I’ll even grant that it can be frustrating to feel like you need a formal course on such things and that it changes entirely too fast and that sometimes it all feels like bullshit (ask me about using the term demisexual wrong* on the internet one time). But the world is made better when we work to understand others, which you’ve demonstrated that as being a non-priority for you.
Then why are you here?
That’s your interpretation because I don’t agree with you because as a queer person I want to not be told how to use queer words. Thus demonstrating that working to understand others is a non-priority for you.
That’s the hypocrisy.
I understand that you don’t want to learn. Because that’s what you’re doing. You want to ignore why people don’t want you to say things like that so that the onus isn’t on you to change your behavior because that’s difficult and/or inconvenient. As above, it’s really frustrating to have to learn yet more terms (I still don’t quite get allosexual even though I apparently am that or something along those lines?) and then also to have to break associations with things that haven’t aged well because then you feel obligated to feel bad for making mistakes even if most of the time people don’t care/understand the difficulty.
The sheer arrogance of your comment… wow.
You are the one wanting to ignore people here. You are so convinced that only your perspective can be right that you are unwilling to even process the words I write. You don’t have to agree but to willfully ignore that what I’m saying has legitimacy is just disgusting. And I’ve no doubt you don’t even realize your oppression and your own bigotry. Do you?
It’s not since Reddit that I’ve seen anyone engage in such masterful mental gymnastics to completely avoid getting the point. We have at least silver medal material right here.
Just because you don’t get it doesn’t mean I don’t make sense.
No seriously dude. Go talk to some older gay people, particularly men. Try to make some minimal effort to understand why communities who have been beaten to shit by society want to own their language. It’s gotta be something to have never been in that position.
you really can’t see how using sexuality to mock someone you hate is homophobic?
Calling a homophobe gay isn’t homophobia though, is it
it’s perpetuating the view that calling someone “gay” is somehow an insult.
It’s not using sexuality to mock someone. It’s using hypocrisy to mock someone.
You know what’s the same thing? When gay men call each other fags or lesbians dykes. It’s taking what was intended as derogatory and flipping it around to celebrate it. It’s the ideal response to bullying assholes of any kind.
I guess it would make it okay to call a black right-winger an N-word and talk about how he can’t swim and only eats chicken and watermelon, then?
and I’m sure you know that not everyone is comfortable doing that because of their lived experiences. it’s awesome that homophobic jokes don’t affect you, but not everyone can distance themselves from them.
If you are black, yes, it would be ok. And many black people do. It’s the exact same defense mechanism.
Then let them not be comfortable with it and let me and my people alone. Do not try to police my language just because perceive someone somewhere to have experienced some mild discomfort… and why? WHY DO I SAY THIS?
Because honey, they need to arm themselves against that discomfort. You need to have a shield and that shield is OWNING the words. If you let people who use derogatory words own them you have lost power.
Are you serious?
… you could just explain your logic you know.
It isn’t the general consensus.