I still find it difficult to believe that your friends would be so stupid as to trash talk to a waitress. Scraping the bottom of the barrel there, aren't we? Not only is it uncourteous - she <b>handles your food!</b> I'm on my best behavior around those that choose whether or not to spit in my meal.

Well, we're the cooks at the restaurant. So she doesn't handle our food.

<sigh>The reasoning isn't "because it's true of someone else it's true of you". That's a straw-man argument.

The reasoning is "If people who *are* queer have trouble with homophobia, how can just having a relationship--no matter how close--with a queer person be evidence your own lack of homophobia"?
I didn't say you harbor strong resentment of homosexuals. I said your use of "fag" as a perjorative, even in jest, even just to your intimates, promotes homophobic thinking, regardless of your concious intentions. I don't have to get inside your head to know that.

Well said. That's pretty much hitting the nail on the head as far as I'm concerned. You can't imagine the amount of times that I MUST tell people that they absolutely do.not.own such a "power" over people.

My bad. I misunderstood. I see now - you know exactly the effects my words have on these other very specific people. How silly of me to doubt you.

While we're here and you're showcasing your omniscience, do you mind telling me who's gonna win the Superbowl in 2013 and what the spread will be? I think I could make a lot of money from that information, and I would definitely be willing to share.

Perhaps in the same way as me openly admitting "I hate faggots" would be evidence of homophobia? I don't know Maggie. I don't know how your brain works. It has been my experience that people who are homophobic do not generally carry on lengthy personal relationships with people who are openly not straight (nor bi).

Regardless, I still feel that you are painting everyone with a broad stroke. We are all individuals in this world, and what applies to one (or many) does not necessarily apply to all. If some gays have trouble accepting their sexuality, it is because they have been brought up believing that it is wrong to be different. I have mostly raised myself, and it's been in an environment of "so she likes girls... so what?" I don't have the trouble with it that a lot of people do (I have a friend who is very openly homophobic and when he called me "gay" in a restaurant last month, I had no trouble saying "Honey, I thought that was <b>our</b> secret!" and lovingly putting my arm around him), and it quite simply is nothing to me. "Word, she's a lesbian. I guess I should cross her off the Possible Wife List." That's the extent of my concern.

Now, comments regarding my elders in general:

Why is it that middle aged people seem to always go through a phase of "I have been here long enough to know how everything works, and while you say one thing, I know that it is not the truth"? It seems to be the exact opposite of older people (70's, 80's), as they seem more accepting of new ideas. I have ran into this <b>many</b> times in my life, where someone will tell me that I am <b>wrong</b> even when I am right (take, as an example, the Havarti Cheese Incident, the Dryer Incident or the Maggie Knows How I Feel Better Than I Do Incident). It is one of the most absurd phenomenons I have witnessed in my little time on this silly Earth. The thinking seems to be "because I am older, I am right" or "because you are younger, you are incapable of having a valid argument". The closed-mindedness is simply astounding to me - these people could never utter "touché" because they are unable to see any flaw in their argument (or truth in their adversary's). Has anyone else noticed this? And what the fuck is going on?

Using "fag" as a perjorative promotes homophobia. Knowing this doesn't require omnicience, prescience, telepathy, or a deep knowlege of your friends.
There's precious little connection between those two cases.

"I hate fags" is nearly a "performative utterance"; it demonstrates its own truth. "I have queer friends" really offers little assurance that the speaker doesn't engage in behavior that promotes homophobia...any more than "I am queer" can, which is why I mentioned internalized homophobia.


None of this has anything to do with "how my brain works"...evidence and argumentation aren't matter of relativism.
Can you really put these two sentences in the same posting without laughing?

Look, I'm not trying to contradict your report of what's in your concious mind. But I can say confidently that certain behaviors promote homophobia. I don't need to get inside either your head or your listener's head to do this....hearing your report of what you say is quite enough. This has nothing to do with intonation, context or subtle shadings of meaning possible between close friends.

Hammering a negative connotation for a word (which you *must* to do use it perjoratively) reinforces the connection between the negativity and the word This is why advertising and other forms of propaganda emphasize repetition. There's nothing in how understanding, tolerant, accepting or enlightened you or your friends may be that changes any of this.

Is the only way for me to not be a condesecnding old fart in your eyes on this issue for me to say "OK, dham, I'll accept your report that you only talk like this to people who you know don't take it the wrong way, so therefore it's a harmless practice, and has no impacts outside your circle. I'll ignore what I know about how the use of language affects people, just to show how much I respect younger folks."?

'Cuz that ain't gonna happen.

No. Perhaps not being such a hypocrite would be a good start. Your facts are facts; my facts are opinion. Mmmmhmmmmmmmmmm.

All right, then: "<i><b>In my opinion</b></I> your use of "fag" as a perjorative promotes homophobic thinking."

Now, convince me I'm wrong by answering the already-asked questions: "What <b>does</b> "fag" actually mean when you say it in this special way to these special people? And why do you use "fag" to convey that meaning?"

... again?
 

Please do correct me, but I believe that I tried to address that issue <a href="http://www.cellar.org/showthread.php?postid=20408#post20408">here</a>, with dhamsaic then agreeing to disagree.

This may sound patronizing, but surely we can go our separate ways on this issue without resorting to ad hominem attacks; to pre-empt further barbs: dhamsaic is ignorant and uneducated, and Maggie is an old know-it-all fart. :-)

I won't even mention Tony...

Flame on.

X.

PS: Thus, dhamsaic thinks that using what others perceive to be racial slurs in a familiar, friendly context is perfectly acceptable, since those supposedly hate-filled words are redefined to mean something else, harmless, in his own socio-etymological context (which is good), whereas Maggie believes that any usage of supposed racial slurs promotes their general use, with their general definition being that of hate and fear (which is bad).

Re: ... again?
 

OK.

You do say in that post that you won't speak for me...so let's note nowhere did I call dham either ignorant or uneducated. In fact, I characterized him as "sophisticated in most other ways".

He called me old only by implication..and "fart" was my word, not his. But he did call me "a hypocrite" and "ugly".

"Not that there's anything wrong with that." --Seinfeld

During the 1960's, a rabbi was commenting on sudden interest in Quaker beliefs among his congregation. When asked if this trend disturbed him, he replied "Not at all. Some of my best Jews are Friends. "

I didn't <b>call</b> you ugly. I said that I think you are ugly. The difference is that I don't mean it as an insult.

The irony of that statement is so perfect I fear I might sully it by commenting on it in any way.

When dhamsaic says "I think" he means it as an oxymoron.

That's a good one! I'm going to have to add that to my repertoire.

Hey, do us a favor and post more often. You seem to <b>always</b> have something useful to add. Thanks!

The argument isn't "words mean nothing". The argument is, "Words only have the meaning that people give them". That's a huge difference.

Please don't get angry and assume someone is dumb just because you don't understand their argument. It's okay to disagree. Really.