Torrii Hunter: Homophobe

[PseudoSABR]

Shame is perfectly fine if combined with a genuine effcort to change someone's mind. Shame and then celebrating a half-ass non apology as a victory is stupid. Many reasonable, well stated attempts have been madxe to try and show you howtruly effective, lasting change is best accomplished through reason, building new relationships, and exposing bigotry through thoughtful dedication. Essentially - what MLK did. You have taken a more militant position which has not historicaly been very effective at lasting change. Bigotry is best used as a weapon against itself, exposed by reasonable people for what it is.

No one has suggested anything alternative to this. Again, I really don't think you have a point of view here, you just like being a d!ck.

[TheLeviathan]

Um my point of view was just reiterated in what you quoted....seriously...read what you are responding to in context! And your own responses several posts ago suggested that what no one disagrees with" is bigot coddling! Which sounds a lot like disagreement to me.

[flpmagikat]

Lev, maybe it's just your message board persona, but you might be the last person anyone here should take advice from on how to use reason to bring people to your side.

[TheLeviathan]

Message board personas are always different plus discourse here has snark and a variety of other factors that totally change the context of a discussion. It's true of any message board or comment section in existence. Reason is incredibly valid as a tool in real discourse but it is much less effective here. Shooting the messenger in this case hardly matters - I'm making a serious argument about something that matters in my life too. You and Psuedo have been falling all over yourselves to be offended rather than have a conversation. None of the points being made by me, riverbrian, or richard are offensive. You can certainly disagree but in this case the argument was not spun out by me, I've been trying like hell to keep it on the tracks. In essence, the exchange between howeda and I could've summed up the whole thing.

[PseudoSABR]

Message board personas are always different plus discourse here has snark and a variety of other factors that totally change the context of a discussion. It's true of any message board or comment section in existence. Reason is incredibly valid as a tool in real discourse but it is much less effective here. Shooting the messenger in this case hardly matters - I'm making a serious argument about something that matters in my life too. You and Psuedo have been falling all over yourselves to be offended rather than have a conversation. None of the points being made by me, riverbrian, or richard are offensive. You can certainly disagree but in this case the argument was not spun out by me, I've been trying like hell to keep it on the tracks. In essence, the exchange between howeda and I could've summed up the whole thing.

 

Look, no one really disagrees with the notion that we should appeal to people's reason, though I think that's naive. Where the rub is that somehow it's imprudent and offensive to want to shame behavior like Torii's. That you went so far as to bring in MLK into the discussion seems tonedeaf, as if MLK would invite the KKK to a round table of ideas. Again, I think there's a confusion between balance and objectivity. To characterize my point of view as offended sentimentality is craptastic and isn't reasonable, it's petty and disingenuous.

 

I don't necessarily want a response here because I don't think you really disagree with me on any of these points, but you're hellbent on seizing some higherground and maybe I am too, and that's just an impasse.

[flpmagikat]

Message board personas are always different plus discourse here has snark and a variety of other factors that totally change the context of a discussion. It's true of any message board or comment section in existence. Reason is incredibly valid as a tool in real discourse but it is much less effective here. Shooting the messenger in this case hardly matters - I'm making a serious argument about something that matters in my life too. You and Psuedo have been falling all over yourselves to be offended rather than have a conversation. None of the points being made by me, riverbrian, or richard are offensive. You can certainly disagree but in this case the argument was not spun out by me, I've been trying like hell to keep it on the tracks. In essence, the exchange between howeda and I could've summed up the whole thing.

 

And I would argue none of the points offered up by anyone else are offensive, though you characterized them as hate speech and referred to pseudo's pov as militant. I mean, come on. Someone in this thread basically implied that we can't really criticize hunter because he's black and from the south, and you really want to say that isn't offensive? I'm not going to pretend that it's easy to have a level headed conversation about this for me, but it's pretty disingenuous coming from you, the guy who invents new sides to argue against and won't reply to specific points in like, every thread you get involved in. Or like pseudo said, you just like being a dick.

[TheLeviathan]

Where the rub is that somehow it's imprudent and offensive to want to shame behavior like Torii's.

 

No, for the umpteenth time (comprehension!) it's about it being incomplete. Hollow if not followed up with more meaningful gestures. You continue to skew my perspective, making it akin to MLK sitting down with the KKK. (Seriously, talk about being a d!ck. Read what you quoted last post and didn't read than then try and make that comparison again) I don't have to seize the higher ground, you're giving it to me with asshat interpretations like that. Nowhere has anything akin to that been said. If you stop trying to be offended and listened to what is being said you might find that there isn't much disagreement, you're just emphasizing the initial reaction and some of the rest of us are emphasizing the much more difficult, more lasting, more effective work that has to be done after it.

[TheLeviathan]

characterized them as hate speech and referred to pseudo's pov as militant.

 

Constantly berating the use of reason and compassion as tools in the discussion is certainly bordering on militant. If you have a better term for it - aggressive perhaps? - it amounts to the same distinction but I'll certainly change the term. My comments about hate speech you continue to skew, I've explained that context already, at least try to be fair enough to include it rather than using it as a tool to demonize.

 

Someone in this thread basically implied that we can't really criticize hunter because he's black and from the south, and you really want to say that isn't offensive?

 

Please, when did I say it wasn't offensive? If we're talking about the same post, several other very intelligent, respectable posters attacked that stupidity and slammed it for what it is. While piling on to it was certainly tempting, I chose to address people I didn't think had idiotic points of view. Using upbringing as an excuse for bigotry is offensive, I just didn't pile on. I am baffled about where I said it wasn't offensive....care to share when that happened or are you once again twisting things to justify this need to be offended?

 

(I continue to find that odd considering, at heart, we don't disagree. This should be a civil discussion about tact rather than you slanting everything said that disagrees with your perspective on that as akin to the bigotry Hunter said publically)

[flpmagikat]

Constantly berating the use of reason and compassion as tools in the discussion is certainly bordering on militant. If you have a better term for it - aggressive perhaps? - it amounts to the same distinction but I'll certainly change the term. My comments about hate speech you continue to skew, I've explained that context already, at least try to be fair enough to include it rather than using it as a tool to demonize.

 

 

 

Please, when did I say it wasn't offensive? If we're talking about the same post, several other very intelligent, respectable posters attacked that stupidity and slammed it for what it is. While piling on to it was certainly tempting, I chose to address people I didn't think had idiotic points of view. Using upbringing as an excuse for bigotry is offensive, I just didn't pile on. I am baffled about where I said it wasn't offensive....care to share when that happened or are you once again twisting things to justify this need to be offended?

 

(I continue to find that odd considering, at heart, we don't disagree. This should be a civil discussion about tact rather than you slanting everything said that disagrees with your perspective on that as akin to the bigotry Hunter said publically)

 

Youactually didn't explain those comments or make clear what you were referring to. You actually said you weren't going to, because no matter what you referenced I wouldn't accept it. So there's that.

 

And I took you saying nothing riverbrian has said in this thread is offensive, as nothing being offensive. But you know who posted that thing about being black and from the south basically making you homophobic and how we cant really blame those people? Well I'll let you look that up while you're looking for that hate speech. Or not.

[TheLeviathan]

Youactually didn't explain those comments or make clear what you were referring to. You actually said you weren't going to, because no matter what you referenced I wouldn't accept it. So there's that.

 

I explained what Brock said and how I was illustrating that it is easy to fall into the same trap. I referenced only Dave as bordering on that. Go back and read, we had this exchange and it was explained. I had the page a minute ago but accidently closed it, I believe it was in the 8-10 range.

 

But you know who posted that thing about being black and from the south basically making you homophobic and how we cant really blame those people? Well I'll let you look that up while you're looking for that hate speech. Or not.

 

I don't, I remember someone posting it but I looked back through the thread and it looks to have been deleted. I remember Brock attacking that post effectively enough that I left it at that. If someone else did, then I didn't read their post.

[PseudoSABR]

No, for the umpteenth time (comprehension!) it's about it being incomplete. Hollow if not followed up with more meaningful gestures. You continue to skew my perspective, making it akin to MLK sitting down with the KKK. (Seriously, talk about being a d!ck. Read what you quoted last post and didn't read than then try and make that comparison again) I don't have to seize the higher ground, you're giving it to me with asshat interpretations like that. Nowhere has anything akin to that been said. If you stop trying to be offended and listened to what is being said you might find that there isn't much disagreement, you're just emphasizing the initial reaction and some of the rest of us are emphasizing the much more difficult, more lasting, more effective work that has to be done after it.

For the umpteenth time (you patronizing, douche),no one disagrees with this. No one ever said shame was a complete response to issues of homophobia. No one ever choose shaming over "the more lasting...more effective work." You are making a false choice, (a sort of reverse strawman). The rub was that somehow people were bringing up the fact that somehow Hunter's first amendment rights were at stake. (Go back and read yourself!) If you want to revise your entire argument as some champion of reason, that's fine, but anyone paying attention knows different.

 

Seriously, you can't be a total douche about being reasonable and not being a total douche. My contention is that you really don't have perspective, so there's nothing to skew. No disagrees with the lasting power of thoughtful discourse--so if that's your argument, one wonders why you keep finding a place of disagreement. I've got my own theories, but I'm tired of your defensive flailing so I'll keep them to myself.

[TheLeviathan]

The rub was that somehow people were bringing up the fact that somehow Hunter's first amendment rights were at stake.

 

Shane and I settled that misunderstanding awhile back....where were you? That has little to nothing to do with things. You've continually attacked every notion of conversation as akin to "sitting down at the table with the KKK". That's the problem. If you want to know why I still have a problem, it's because you spin the argument as that or "bigot coddling".

 

Yeah, it's quite strange why I have a problem with those sorts of butchered interpretations. I don't have to revise anything, your comments speak for themselves. The way your tone and responses have been interpreted by multiple other people expressing the same thoughts vindicate that as well. Insult away, I've read my thoughts - other than taking some potshots at liberals (which, yeah, was unnecessary) - they are advocating reason and compassion from start to finish. I've multiple times made clear points that it in no way defend's Hunter's dumbass comments. Your twisting is all over this thread in reply to multiple posters. I would suggest you'd take a few of your remarks and look in the mirror and leave it at that.

[PseudoSABR]

Shane and I settled that misunderstanding awhile back....where were you?

Settled? As long as it you cleared it with the magistrate and you were satisfied, right? Wtf

The way your tone and responses have been interpreted by multiple other people expressing the same thoughts vindicate that as well..... Your twisting is all over this thread in reply to multiple posters. .

And it is I, alone, who get tired of your schtick. You've never had problems with more than one poster in a thread, god knows. I make no alms about my capacity for politeness and I'm not pretending I'm welcoming of just any old opinion, either.

[TheLeviathan]

I make no alms about my capacity for politeness and I'm not pretending I'm welcoming of just any old opinion, either.

 

I haven't made any such claims either, you just tried to make this into an "everyone can see....blah blah" and I pointed out that, in fact, it hasn't been that way in this thread. In fact, more than a few people are calling you out for the same thing, you're just getting particularly defensive about it with me. Which is fine, but I've made my point more than a few times pretty clearly. If you don't accept that, I can't say it any more clearly.

[Riverbrian]

And I took you saying nothing riverbrian has said in this thread is offensive, as nothing being offensive.

 

I'm actually kinda mortified... I sincerly apologize... I hope you understand that the last thing I wanted to be was offensive.

 

I was just participating in the discussion and trying to rationalize why so many people sound like Torii. I just believe that understanding where people come from is important and was trying to express that.

 

I do not want to be perceived as offensive or a bigot and regret whole heartedly if I came across that way. I hope that you, Psuedosabr or anyone else that may have been offended accepts my apology. That is honestly where "I" come from.

 

I honestly had no idea that my words could be taken that way. I really thought it was just a discussion... I apologize.

[Fatt Crapps]