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).
It’s not just the top/bottom part that’s problematic, it’s the entire post. The punchline is “Trump and Elon are gay for each other, isn’t that funny?” which centers the idea that it would be bad or wrong for them to be gay for each other, perpetuating the conservative stereotype that there’s something wrong with being gay.
We (gay people) have been pointing out the hypocrisy of homophobes with this sort of joke for ages and will continue to do it because it’s fucking hilarious. We are, in doing so, celebrating that it’s wonderful to be gay and sad that they don’t see that or see there at times in-the-closet-like behavior.
The last thing thing I need is a bunch of word police telling me what I can and cannot say.
You know who IS making it seem like there’s something wrong with being gay? People like you.
lol, the idea that I’ve said there is something wrong with being gay or being called gay is rich.
You’ve said that using jokes about being gay is derogatory. Literally what you are saying is that calling someone gay has negative connotations. It’s bad to be gay.
Let’s try to put this in simple terms:
If one of my many very gay male friends calls someone a fag they are owning the definition of “fag”. If I call myself a dyke I own that word.
If we joke about homophobes being secretly gay we own the language and we erect a shield against that being used in a derogatory manner against us.
You want to police those definitions and tell people what they can and cannot say and can and cannot joke about. You want to take away that shield.
I suspect you are young and did not live through a time when it was absolutely CRITICAL for the queer community writ large to take control of our language. Literally that was the only way we gained power and the only way we made jokes about fags and dykes NOT be derogatory.
I disagree. If someone came up to me and said “Buenos dias! Donde estas el bano?” and I was like “that is Spanish, by the way”, I have simply made an observation and have not implied that they aren’t allowed to speak Spanish.
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.
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.
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.
Yeah, it is. It reinforces the idea that there is something wrong with a gay homophobe being gay, rather than the problem being that they are a homophobe.
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.
I remember when calling someone a Karen was a word with a meaning, specifically calling out bigoted white women - those who would punch down. This is the opposite; someone calling out bigotry.
Tell us you are not a gay man without telling us you are not a gay man.
Edit: Probably 85% of my social circle is some delicious flavor of queer. Kinda comes with being queer I guess. We make these jokes in part to normalize this sexuality and to make fun of hypocrites and bullies. It’s the same thing as when the kid in school says “that’s so gay” and you reply “oh really? You wanna get together later?”. This has come up a few times - the sensitivity of some groups to these kinds of jokes - and the conclusion is basically that people who object to them are generally either not queer or insecure about being queer and want to exert control over the conversation either to get cred with the community or to assuage their fears.
and the conclusion is basically that people who object to them are generally either not queer or insecure about being queer and want to exert control over the conversation either to get cred with the community or to assuage their fears.
You have some pretty intense coping mechanisms. What’s wild is I’d wager it’s much more effort to make up these stories than to actually understand the point being made, yet here you are.
Talk to any queer person who lived through the 80s and 90s and you will find that desire to own the language of being queer was kind of a priority. I’ve been beaten, escaped rape, disowned by my family. So yeah figuring out how to cope was something we did.
You on the other hand?
What’s wild is I’d wager it’s much more effort to make up these stories than to actually understand the point being made, yet here you are.
Go FYS. No seriously. I paid for this with blood. You can fuck ALL they way off. You make NO effort yourself to understand why I say the things I say and why it’s so incredibly offensive to me to have someone try to police my language.
At some point, some people lose the ability (or never had it) to understand or care about the perspectives of others. Instead you get this knee jerk “anyone who is offended by what I say is the thought police and didn’t live my life, blah blah blah”. They never stop to realize that they didn’t live the other person’s life and they might have different, equally valid reasons for finding something offensive.
But no, it’s you being persecuted as you’re more entitled to say whatever you’d like and anyone who is offended should just shut the fuck up and deal with it. This sounds familiar… It’s what your lot’s MAGAs blather on about! Great job, you’re no smarter than a red hat. LOL
They never stop to realize that they didn’t live the other person’s life and they might have different, equally valid reasons for finding something offensive.
Just because you are gay does not mean you are not homophobic.
They likely meant that it’s a joke about power dynamics implying sexual preference. That is homophobic, but funny, but also homophobic.
In short, just cause you like it up your arse doesn’t mean you are a spineless idiot with no power.
Instead Let people enjoy things and try to stop the spread of these stereotypes even in jokes. You never know who hears them and what social climate you might propagate into the heads of others and youth.
If you are aware of these caveats you are allowed to make the most offensive jokes.
This is just homophobia, by the way
I’m gay. lol You don’t need to be upset on my behalf, thank you.
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).
It’s not just the top/bottom part that’s problematic, it’s the entire post. The punchline is “Trump and Elon are gay for each other, isn’t that funny?” which centers the idea that it would be bad or wrong for them to be gay for each other, perpetuating the conservative stereotype that there’s something wrong with being gay.
Oh FFS.
We (gay people) have been pointing out the hypocrisy of homophobes with this sort of joke for ages and will continue to do it because it’s fucking hilarious. We are, in doing so, celebrating that it’s wonderful to be gay and sad that they don’t see that or see there at times in-the-closet-like behavior.
The last thing thing I need is a bunch of word police telling me what I can and cannot say.
You know who IS making it seem like there’s something wrong with being gay? People like you.
As a “joke” it treats being gay as derogatory. You’re welcome to make shitty homophobic jokes if you want to.
Are you gay?
Are you not ok with being gay if you are? Are you not and experiencing latent homophobia?
Because that’s the only way you can possible conclude that it’s derogatory to call someone gay.
lol, the idea that I’ve said there is something wrong with being gay or being called gay is rich.
You’ve said that using jokes about being gay is derogatory. Literally what you are saying is that calling someone gay has negative connotations. It’s bad to be gay.
Let’s try to put this in simple terms:
If one of my many very gay male friends calls someone a fag they are owning the definition of “fag”. If I call myself a dyke I own that word. If we joke about homophobes being secretly gay we own the language and we erect a shield against that being used in a derogatory manner against us.
You want to police those definitions and tell people what they can and cannot say and can and cannot joke about. You want to take away that shield.
I suspect you are young and did not live through a time when it was absolutely CRITICAL for the queer community writ large to take control of our language. Literally that was the only way we gained power and the only way we made jokes about fags and dykes NOT be derogatory.
Nobody’s telling you what you can and can’t say. They’re telling you that what you said is in bad taste, and youre telling them to stop saying that.
LOL. I’m pretty sure saying “that is just homophobia, by the way” is exactly trying to tell people what they can and can’t say.
I disagree. If someone came up to me and said “Buenos dias! Donde estas el bano?” and I was like “that is Spanish, by the way”, I have simply made an observation and have not implied that they aren’t allowed to speak Spanish.
LOL. And you seriously don’t see the difference between “hey that’s homophobic” and someone speaking a different language and pointing that out?
Wow. Ok then.
Good call, I missed it. We’ve got layers of shittiness in this meme.
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.
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.
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 really can’t see how using sexuality to mock someone you hate is homophobic?
Calling a homophobe gay isn’t homophobia though, is it
Yeah, it is. It reinforces the idea that there is something wrong with a gay homophobe being gay, rather than the problem being that they are a homophobe.
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.
😒
Thanks for trying.
Oh please do fuck off with that shit, Karen.
I remember when calling someone a Karen was a word with a meaning, specifically calling out bigoted white women - those who would punch down. This is the opposite; someone calling out bigotry.
It’s an attack on their perception of the community, not the community.
It would seem that’s too complicated a concept for some folks.
Tell us you are not a gay man without telling us you are not a gay man.
Edit: Probably 85% of my social circle is some delicious flavor of queer. Kinda comes with being queer I guess. We make these jokes in part to normalize this sexuality and to make fun of hypocrites and bullies. It’s the same thing as when the kid in school says “that’s so gay” and you reply “oh really? You wanna get together later?”. This has come up a few times - the sensitivity of some groups to these kinds of jokes - and the conclusion is basically that people who object to them are generally either not queer or insecure about being queer and want to exert control over the conversation either to get cred with the community or to assuage their fears.
When some narc on the internet would say “no homo”, I liked to hit them back with a “yass homo”. Or “homo where?”
You have some pretty intense coping mechanisms. What’s wild is I’d wager it’s much more effort to make up these stories than to actually understand the point being made, yet here you are.
Talk to any queer person who lived through the 80s and 90s and you will find that desire to own the language of being queer was kind of a priority. I’ve been beaten, escaped rape, disowned by my family. So yeah figuring out how to cope was something we did.
You on the other hand?
Go FYS. No seriously. I paid for this with blood. You can fuck ALL they way off. You make NO effort yourself to understand why I say the things I say and why it’s so incredibly offensive to me to have someone try to police my language.
At some point, some people lose the ability (or never had it) to understand or care about the perspectives of others. Instead you get this knee jerk “anyone who is offended by what I say is the thought police and didn’t live my life, blah blah blah”. They never stop to realize that they didn’t live the other person’s life and they might have different, equally valid reasons for finding something offensive.
But no, it’s you being persecuted as you’re more entitled to say whatever you’d like and anyone who is offended should just shut the fuck up and deal with it. This sounds familiar… It’s what your lot’s MAGAs blather on about! Great job, you’re no smarter than a red hat. LOL
I’ll just leave this here:
Holy shit this is peak white cishet liberal lol
While you just have to assume I’m any or all of those, your commentary means I don’t have to assume you’re an idiot.
Just because you are gay does not mean you are not homophobic.
They likely meant that it’s a joke about power dynamics implying sexual preference. That is homophobic, but funny, but also homophobic.
In short, just cause you like it up your arse doesn’t mean you are a spineless idiot with no power. Instead Let people enjoy things and try to stop the spread of these stereotypes even in jokes. You never know who hears them and what social climate you might propagate into the heads of others and youth. If you are aware of these caveats you are allowed to make the most offensive jokes.
Um… WHAT?