| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 01/25/2007 : 18:41:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Randall
I happen to live in a city with a large gay population. I shudder even to write this, but "some of my best friends are gay."
Well, at least you shudder. I cringe so much when anyone says that. It's like a carte blache claim to innocence.
quote:
Perhaps the difference is that these men and women are living in a society which doesn't give a shit whether they're gay or not.
Is that really true? Can they get married? Can they adopt children? Can they kiss or hold hands in literally every location that straight people can?
quote:
I can tell you that many, if not most, gay people in my experience use those "homophobic" words with each other, and laugh about them. [Example: one of our friends has a beautiful house in Tuxedo Park. We all call it the "Winter Palace," and frequently inquire if "the queen is in residence."] To some this might be offensive. To our friends it is not.
It is fine for such terms to be used in a specific group. However, the important thing is that one cannot then transfer this to general situations.
quote:
This may be because they are comfortable in their sexuality, and they recognize that I am so in my own.
I don't think so. I don't think many people (of at least eighteen) are 'uncomfortable' with their sexuality nowadays - it would be extremely backwards. I suggest the actual reason is that your friends are in an extremely gay environment where there is no risk of homophobia. Within closed and (relatively) homogeneous contexts, language and behaviours can develop in a way that they cannot society-wide. What one can or cannot say to one's friends makes no difference to what is an acceptable way to talk to or about strangers, or about abstract people.
quote:
What I would offer is that there is no such thing as a monolithic gay culture.
Obviously. However, there is a mainstream uniform language. I meant to say above that is one wants to know what words are intrinsically demeaning (and which are thus demeaning to use in a general context), it's not rocket surgery. How does one verify the objective meaning of a word? By looking in the dictionary. (This is not in charge of language, but reflects it extremely accurately.) It will say derogatory or similar by words which are, you guessed it, derogatory. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 01/26/2007 16:40:45 |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 18:46:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
PS I too have been upset by the number of homosexual referenced reviews for Brokeback Mountain - not least because they are almost all sexual in nature, as if sex was the only relevant thing in the film about the exploration of being homosexual in that environment.
Quite. There are many cases where the language is not demeaning itself, but the fact that the (virtually non-existent) sex in the film is relentlessly and cheaply focused upon is very saddening to me. I cannot look at the page on my favourite site for my favourite film, and that does not seem fair. It would be something if the attempts at 'humour' were often original, but the vast majority are so tired and repetitive that the idea that anyone would consider submitting them to have any function is beyond me. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 18:49:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by Shiv
There is a review for Hotel Rwanda 'Machete importer makes killing'. This offends me, as I believe it is a sick joke at the expense of the Rwandan people, many of whom were slaughtered using machetes.
I've voted for this as it's clever. There are two meanings:-
a) The machete importer bears some responsibility for the genocide by supplying the weapons, i.e., he has helped make the killlings. I can't see anything offensive about this.
b) The machete importer made a lot of money importing and selling the machetes, i.e., a "killing". This is also very likely although it wasn't discussed in the movie. I can't see anything offensive referring to this likely fact either.
I do not often like to joke about death personally, but this is a different sort of thing. I would much rather my death were joked about than my actual self. Also, as you say, the review does actually criticise the party at fault. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 18:55:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
I find the front page of Brokeback very funny, as to the countless people who've written (and voted for) 'naughty' reviews for the movie.  I'm an unashamed toilet humourist.
While I find toilet 'humour' in general rather a bore (and rather a lazy choice), I think the key issue is that it should be applied to appropriate contexts (i.e. in our case silly films). I also think that including gay sex in the category of toilet humour is actually prejudiced in itself. Why do you find gay sex funnier than straight sex? This is obviously the case since no serious drama featuring a straight romance is littered with this bollocks.
You may try to deny this, but I also very strongly suspect that you would not be happy for Lost in Translation to be suffocated by reviews on one unimportant matter, such as Scarlett Johanssen being an inadequate bore. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 18:56:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
This is all a fine debate, but can we please stay on the topic that I started this thread for? That topic is the "official" FWFR policy on films with racist epithets in their titles.
I'm sorry, that is how threads go. I've given my answer. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 18:59:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by duh
From what I know of the boyfriend (who is also a dear friend of mine), the latter is the most likely reaction.
That is his right (although he is helping the brother-in-law to continue his racism which he will then apply to others), and the reverse would be his right just the same. There is no obligation to kowtow to people in order to avoid generic disrespect. "Please missa..." |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:03:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by damalc
i find an insensitive fwfr much more offensive than a movie title. for instance, i think "Chink in Japanese armoury," for "Fist of Legend," is over the line. but i'll defend Mguy's right to say it.
It's his legal right and his right within the rules of the site, but is it his ethical right? The ideal is for him to choose not to say it - the ideal isn't for anyone to just say any old thing regardless of meaning. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:09:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Conan The Westy
Sorry to wade in so late but your sensitivity to homosexual vilification combined with the judgemental generalities you've trotted out about religion and swearing smacks of hypocrisy.
It does not. It may be objectionable to any number of people, but it is not hypocritical, since there is a discrete distinction. People can be criticised for their choices. People cannot rightly be criticised for their essences. Similarly offensive slang referring to instrinsic categories of people demeans people. Offensive slang not referring to intrinsic categories of people does not demean people. Personally, I doubt I would use slang to refer to members of any religions, but religions are concepts and can thus be argued against. Arguing against a sexuality or skin colour is not even meaningful. |
|
|
|
Downtown 
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:25:33
|
When I first saw that Fist of Legend review (which was when damalc pointed it out), I also found it to be "over the line," although I still didn't want it removed. However, I initially didn't get the pun. All I saw was a Chinese slur, it might have said "Gook in Japanese armory" or "slanty-eye in Japanese armory" and it would have had the exact same meaning to me.
But then I noticed the pun, and that changes a lot...at least for me. Why? Because it's no longer a gratuitous use of a slur just for its own sake. There's wit behind it. Of course, that doesn't make it any less of a slur, but I find it far less offensive now.
Before anyone bothers to ask, YES, I'm saying it's not as bad to be offensive when there's humor behind it...depending on the context, audience, etc (don't go off telling offensive jokes in public and then blaming me if you get punched in the face). I'll anticipate the follow-up question: "Why does being funny make it okay?" Well, it just does. |
|
|
|
Downtown
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:27:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
Personally, I doubt I would use slang to refer to members of any religions, but religions are concepts and can thus be argued against. Arguing against a sexuality or skin colour is not even meaningful.
Careful there. If you ask me about my religion, I'll tell you I'm Jewish. If you ask me about my race, I'll tell you I'm Jewish. If you ask me about my ethnicity, I'll tell you I'm Jewish. |
|
|
|
duh 
"catpurrs"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:31:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Conan The Westy
Sorry to wade in so late but your sensitivity to homosexual vilification combined with the judgemental generalities you've trotted out about religion and swearing smacks of hypocrisy.
As a WASP (white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant) I'm certain that I belong to the only category in my state (Victoria, Australia) with no protection under our draconian religious and racial vilification laws.
I dislike bad language, I'm not a fan of many reviews lambasting Christ but I exercise my democratic right to not vote for those reviews and I move on.
Thank you, Conan.
Life's a bitch and then you die. I can't think of anyone in my own circle of acquaintances who has ever had it completely simple and easy, regardless of race, sex, or sexual preference.
To quote a line from Muppets Take Manhattan, "Peoples is peoples."
The best anyone can do is to just keep trudging away.
If someone gets their jollies by carrying an enormous chip around on their shoulder, then I salute them. Way to go! Wow, look at how magnificently he/she/intergender totes that really nasty, oozing, putrid stinking chip! Woo hoo!
I would have to admit that the one "group" of people I really do not like are those who have narcissistic personality disorder. "...and the Dutch." JUST KIDDING, bife! (Thinking of your lovely bride.) I couldn't help it, I just had to quote Nigel Powers.
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:33:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
Personally, I doubt I would use slang to refer to members of any religions, but religions are concepts and can thus be argued against. Arguing against a sexuality or skin colour is not even meaningful.
Careful there. If you ask me about my religion, I'll tell you I'm Jewish. If you ask me about my race, I'll tell you I'm Jewish. If you ask me about my ethnicity, I'll tell you I'm Jewish.
Yes, don't worry - I covered that ambiguity before. Thus I would feel at liberty to say "The teachings of the Torah are nonsensical", but not to use slang for Jews. Slang for Christians is different (and much more limited) because Christianity is only a set of chosen beliefs. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:34:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
"Why does being funny make it okay?" Well, it just does.
Yeah, this is the best anyone seems able to come up with. Hhmmmm... |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:37:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by duh
If someone gets their jollies by carrying an enormous chip around on their shoulder, then I salute them.
It's not having a chip on one's shoulder to fight what is wrong. Some people like to endear themselves to prejudiced people in the hope that they deign to pretend to show them respect. It's better to tell people they are wrong and lose than tell them they are right and hope for the best with regards to their attitudes. |
Edited by - Demisemicenturian on 01/25/2007 19:38:02 |
|
|
|
damalc 
"last watched: Sausage Party"
|
Posted - 01/25/2007 : 19:38:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Downtown
Nice post damalc.
Part of the fun of being a member of a minority is that you get the honor of speaking for your entire race.
one bad thing about electronic communication -- it's hard to tell if someone is being sarcastic. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Film of highly questionable taste
