Viper Hunter, on Apr 4 2009, 03:29 PM, said:
Magic 8 Ball, on Apr 4 2009, 03:01 PM, said:
Viper Hunter, on Apr 2 2009, 02:34 PM, said:
I'm just being a d!ck about the homosexual thing (like always) and my issue with Tatum is strickly on a cosmetic level with regards to MY interpretation of the character Conrad Hauser (DUKE) and what this less than rugged, tough and MAN-like actor brings to the table in ability to bring that to life for us, on the big screen. POOR selection..IMHO!
Oh, well that's good. For a moment I thought you were using "homosexual" as an insult.
I was and am!
What part of being a "d!ck" did you not get?
Quote
I know most of us are adults who play with toys, but I like to think we're all mature enough to able express our dislike for one or two people without slighting an entire group of people... especially given that the ones we're expressing dislike for will never read our comments, but members of the slighted group likely will.
You have your lifestyle and I have my objections to it, and in the end we should ALL be "free to be you and me"...right? People get insulted for a ton of various life choices and other such reasons, like over a religious/non-religious choice, a political choice, a choice of reading material, movies, toys, comic books, sports teams, music likes, appetites, food choices, education choices, ideals, opinions, attitudes, convictions, life changing decisions, to be or not to be..etc..etc.. etc...
I have a friend that's cheating on his wife and kids, and while I disagree with his sexual choices and extras...he's my friend! I have several gay friends, and while I hold an objectionable opinion on the lifestyle, they're still my friends. My gay friends have a friend that holds an objectionable opinion to their lifestyle, yet he's STILL they're FRIEND!
Seems pretty "mature" and "adult" to me...what's your problem?
The use of a descriptor of any group of people as an insult demeans that entire group of people, not just the person you apply it to. When that descriptor can't even apply to the person you're insulting even under normal circumstances, it's even more demeaning to the group.
Or to put it more bluntly: my problem is that you didn't insult Channing Tatum, as the term doesn't apply. You insulted gay people, who the term does apply to, by using "homosexual" as a derogatory term. That's not "mature" or "adult", that's just rude.
Yeah, you admitted to that... but it doesn't work. Calling yourself a name while you laugh about it doesn't excuse or absolve it. That sort of defense implies that you not only think it's okay, but that you're going to continue to do it (especially since you flat-out said so) and think that no one can or should get upset, because hey, you admitted to being a jerk, and that's part-and parcel, right? And the "it's okay because some of my best friends..." stuff has been a tired excuse for literally decades.
Ironically, you're trying to insult a guy for not being "manly" enough, but you seem unwilling to man up and be responsible for the things you say and do, and the effect it has on others. You want others to buy that's what you're doing, but it appears more like a transparent CYA attempt to prove you shouldn't be held accountable.
It's not even like I'm saying you shouldn't insult the guy. I'm just saying that you should properly target HIM. If you'd done that in the first place, it's much less likely that anyone would have questioned it, or that you'd be defending it multiple times.
Help
hmmmm? Sounds like something Clint Eastwood would say? Am I warm?
~slash warning~ 
dont judge me.....
