> I think these days 'gay' is just used to mean 'lame'.
and that doesn't seem wrong?
'lame' is at worst light namecalling (and at best it is just funny jabbing; verbal teasing is a fine part of socializing).
on the other hand, if gays are always confronted with the lame stereotype it isn't exactly welcoming. it's easy to imagine group-think moving from self-aware funny stereotyping to habitual discrimination.
ditto for 'girls are whinier'. it's a funny comment, which I personally up-voted. ultimately, the whole context of joel's quote was comedic and not directed at a person.
writing this response has made me a little more thoughtful than goofy, so bear with this idea in the case of dealing directly with other people (eit):
trivializing someone else's concerns is kind of antisocial. most disagreements between people, from nerd flame wars to crimes against humanity, at heart stem from an inability to see someone else's perspective. do you really want to be that person?
the internet spreads information, but does it really help us connect with varied individuals and walk in other people's shoes? the least we can do is try.
"'lame' is at worst light namecalling (and at best it is just funny jabbing; verbal teasing is a fine part of socializing)."
So... the handicapped are fair game, but certain other groups shouldn't ever be used as pejoratives? :) Lots of words we use to show disapproval used to be merely descriptive, but became slurs, like "moron"; that might be a reason not to use them, for you, but at least be consistent.
I feel the same but then I'm an educated, middle-class, straight, white male. It's always easy to disregard discrimination when one is part of the group currently having most of the money/power/prestige.
I'm a glasses wearing skinny geek with a big head, who is rubbish at sport. I'd say that's not the position of power in school anyway, and not really in society as a whole.
maybe you see no reason to be angered or annoyed when someone calls you names, but handling words maturely does not mean that you haven't been insulted.
let's suppose there is an objective truth out there. some people are lame and some people are not. calling someone "lame" who is not lame is wrong as in false. stereotypes allow for such falsehoods.
the world is also more complicated than this simple logic. beyond (mythical) objective truth are the social interactions and even economic, political and medical disparities that are wrong and result from seeing only one's own perspective and whatever culture/habits/stereotypes we end up believing.
in the case of "whining like emo girls" the goal was likely entertainment. was that worth the small but nonetheless derogatory slight against emo girls* ? we call our own shots.
the rest of the article is somewhat angsty and desperate itself. joel tends towards entertainment and one-sidedness rather than well spoken and well thought out ideas. that's fine. i'm standing by my argument out of some larger principle.
* funny, but "girls" probably means "non-macho guys".
[edit: fixed formatting so footnote didn't italicize everything]
>> "some people are lame and some people are not. calling someone "lame" who is not lame is wrong as in false. stereotypes allow for such falsehoods."
It's false,..... which makes it funny....
Next you'll be analyzing why drag queens are funny :/
I don't believe that derogatory words exist, no. I get offended by actions, not words. It's also in the context. If someone calls me a "crazy brain dead retard" that's fine if I already know them, but if it's a stranger, I'd think them rude. I wouldn't be offended though... just surprised.
