ZP - Anti Homosexual Slurs Why the new trend on Zero Punctuation ? 03.04.2009
#1
Posted 04 March 2009 - 07:01 PM
Mutant_Pie
P.S. gentle readers, before the flame war begins, please consider that this is anti-tribalistic request.
#2
Posted 04 March 2009 - 07:25 PM
Less Is More v4
Now resigned to a readership of me, my cat and some fish
#3
Posted 05 March 2009 - 12:50 AM
"Oh lawdy ah is sho gonna rape some white wimmin."
Even with THAT out there, I need more tangible evidence of HATE literature. Simply making a joke at the expense of another's race, culture, gender, whatever, is not HATE. Not even legally, despite what the 90s tried to say.
By the way welcome to the forums, and good on your for trying to start a debate with your first post, mutant pie.
#4
Posted 05 March 2009 - 01:07 AM
I agree, the racial stereo typing crossed the line too. What's the line? (you might ask). Tribalism. Attempts at dehumanizing the "other" by use of labeling. Labels that then are imbued with emotional context, love or hate. Do you have any gay friends (that you know of)? Ask them if "faggot" is an offensive or hate filled word to them. What do you think the answer is?
BTW, any chance that the guy who named himself after a dice game will review these comments? I was hoping to have an impact on his life.
Mutant_Pie
"Oh lawdy ah is sho gonna rape some white wimmin."
Even with THAT out there, I need more tangible evidence of HATE literature. Simply making a joke at the expense of another's race, culture, gender, whatever, is not HATE. Not even legally, despite what the 90s tried to say.
By the way welcome to the forums, and good on your for trying to start a debate with your first post, mutant pie.
#5
Posted 05 March 2009 - 01:25 AM
"Faggot" is a term that gay men would self-apply, say, 20 years ago. Dan Savage of Savage Love fame opened the letters in his colum, with "Hey faggot." Now the term of choice is the gender-neutral "queer."
I believe that all the fags I know are open about it.
If it's "tribalism" and "dehumanizing (???) the other" that you're worried about, Ben spends a lot more time picking on nerds than he ever could on faggots. And yeah, by def he is a nerd. So, humour targeting a group you're a member of is ok, and similar humour targeting any other group is HATE! This is so Chris Rock territory here.
Speaking of that negro looking to rape some white wimmins ... do you think there's a chance that Croshaw did NOT create the entire history of the American South, and that his one-liner is a joking reference to a period of history that might have existed even if he had decided not to review video games? Do you think that even if something gets a laugh, if there is a chance that someone out there might find it offensive you should never ever say it? I have my answer but I'm curious about yours.
#6
Posted 05 March 2009 - 02:16 AM
http://www.escapistm...Guitar-Hero-III
Also, the review of "Army of Two" as I recall pushed that button a bit. The acid test I suppose is not whether you think in some PC liberal psudo-correct way that it might offend a gay person, but whether you are a gay person and for reasons related directly to that it offends you. It still wouldn't prove it qualified as hate speech, but at least it would mean something.
#7
Posted 05 March 2009 - 07:29 AM
You don't think he was mocking the tired idea that black=evil?
No.
#8
Posted 05 March 2009 - 09:33 AM
"Faggot" is a term that gay men would self-apply, say, 20 years ago. Dan Savage of Savage Love fame opened the letters in his colum, with "Hey faggot." Now the term of choice is the gender-neutral "queer."
I believe that all the fags I know are open about it.
If it's "tribalism" and "dehumanizing (???) the other" that you're worried about, Ben spends a lot more time picking on nerds than he ever could on faggots. And yeah, by def he is a nerd. So, humour targeting a group you're a member of is ok, and similar humour targeting any other group is HATE! This is so Chris Rock territory here.
Speaking of that negro looking to rape some white wimmins ... do you think there's a chance that Croshaw did NOT create the entire history of the American South, and that his one-liner is a joking reference to a period of history that might have existed even if he had decided not to review video games? Do you think that even if something gets a laugh, if there is a chance that someone out there might find it offensive you should never ever say it? I have my answer but I'm curious about yours.
A hate message self directed is still a hate message. Even though a person of African descent might use the word "nigger" (or it's variants), it's still hateful. Nerd is a pretty mild and widely accepted version of this behavior, however, however mildly the intent to put down a group of people, that's still the intent.
Having written all of this, I have to admit that I have two groups of people that I'm prejudice against. People who drive gold colored cars, and people who drive Volkswagons. I'm working on changing that attitude, but it's hard. . . oh so hard.
Mutant_Pie
This post has been edited by Mutant_Pie: 05 March 2009 - 09:34 AM
#9
Posted 05 March 2009 - 09:42 AM
Yes, I'm sure that all those gangster rappers out there secretly retreat to a quiet little corner each day at five to practice some self-loathing.
Quote
#11
Posted 05 March 2009 - 04:45 PM
Words are words. On their own there is only so much they can do. Most of the so-called "hate" words are necessary for a particular category of HUMOUR. You need to go a lot further to show that the use of words, even in an overt context of a put-down joke, necessarily implies HATE. Hate speech and hate crimes in general were defined in an effort to prevent things like racial discrimination and ethnic cleansing. They weren't created so that we could define a new race of people, the PC cops, who look for any form of "a blond walks into a bar" and decry it as hate speech. That was the 1990s, and we are so past that now. We done climbed down from them trees and is living in communities now.
That said, there's a good chance that yahtzee doesn't like faggots. And I'm not necessarily talking about homosexuals here, but faggots, since that's the word he used. And there's damn little society ought to do to make him like them. Not liking an entire category of people, however trivial or ill-informed your motive, is defended in your charter of rights and freedoms. Hate speech is something else and of course we will continue to challenge it.
#12
Posted 05 March 2009 - 06:19 PM
Those who are grinding their teeth over the issue should look up the words "irony" and "sarcasm" in a thesaurus.
#13
Posted 05 March 2009 - 06:32 PM
Mutant, welcome to the forums 'n' all, but really, your argument is getting:
1) Thin
and
2) Old.
The point of ZP is edgy humour. If each video consisted of YZ fairly weighing up the pros and cons of the game and then presenting his findings in a fair, equal presentation, I wouldn't watch it.
Plus, it's entirely possible the faggots being beaten up are any of those mentioned here.
-The League Against Tedium
#14
Posted 06 March 2009 - 02:48 AM
I... nah, no, this speaks for itself, nothing else to add.
Quote
#15
Posted 08 March 2009 - 05:40 PM
civilian: a bigoted statement, whether it is uttered by someone who is a member of the demographic it is directed at or not, is STILL bigoted. So either a word is offensive, or it isn't. You cannot say it is okay for a single group of people to hold court over language. It is the intent rather than the content of one's speech that attention should be paid to; it doesn't make any sense for a black dude to innocuously refer to another black dude as a nigger, yet a white dude offensively. If neither of them use the word with malice, both of them should recieve the same treatment. Either racial, sexual, etc. slurs are offensive, or they aren't; they cannot be both. So which do you think, civilian? Can we all go around calling each other faggots and niggers, or can't we?