jlprk
The ESPN mod is insane.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 30,672
- Likes
- 8,852
- Points
- 113
Of course not. If something in a post can't outrage you, it can't outrage anyone. You are the board thermometer and outrage is your mercury.
OT: Roy Hibbert Fined $75,000 for...
- Thread starter PapaG
- Start date
Welcome to our community
Be a part of something great, join today!
Of course not. If something in a post can't outrage you, it can't outrage anyone. You are the board thermometer and outrage is your mercury.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 32,870
- Likes
- 291
- Points
- 0
Not the point, but whatever. Ramble on...
blue9
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2012
- Messages
- 10,729
- Likes
- 7,169
- Points
- 113
I've seen a fair bit of what I consider to be homophobic content on the board. I'm not one to make a big deal over it (unless I see a pattern of behavior), but when there's an entire thread started by someone else I'm going to chime in. So yeah, whenever someone types "no homo" or "that's gay" it quickly jumps out as homophobic - either from bigotry or ignorance (hopefully ignorance).
To your question - it's not the same, but it's also not that different. Why does he need to let people know he's not gay? ESPECIALLY why is he bringing it up in a basketball interview? And extra especially, there was no reason for anyone to think he was gay (at least based on the interview). He essentially both passed judgement on ("eww, gross, I'm not gay") and mocked ("ha ha, I said 'stretched out'") a large part of the population's sexuality.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 32,870
- Likes
- 291
- Points
- 0
If he were gay, why would he need to let people know it?
blue9
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2012
- Messages
- 10,729
- Likes
- 7,169
- Points
- 113
He doesn't. And in the context of a post-game interview it would be inappropriate.
I'm not sure if you're trying to allude to Jason Collins pronouncement - but I'll assume you aren't.
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 32,870
- Likes
- 291
- Points
- 0
No, I was just pointing out inconsistent logic.
Natebishop3
Don't tread on me!
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2008
- Messages
- 94,242
- Likes
- 57,506
- Points
- 113
This is ridiculous.
So if he said, "I love you man..... in a purely heterosexual way." Would that be homophobic? Because that's essentially the context of "no homo".
You say something that could be construed as a gay sexual innuendo, and in a joking manner you laugh it off by recognizing the humor in the statement and saying "no homo".
I personally have never used it, but seriously.... this is getting ridiculous. This isn't even a case of someone saying "that's gay" when referring to something lame or bad. If that were the case I would agree that it could be construed as bigoted, even if the intent wasn't to slam homosexuals. I am a supporter of gay rights, but it really fucking annoys me when people are so overly sensitive about things that are said with no malice or hurtful intent.
So if he said, "I love you man..... in a purely heterosexual way." Would that be homophobic? Because that's essentially the context of "no homo".
You say something that could be construed as a gay sexual innuendo, and in a joking manner you laugh it off by recognizing the humor in the statement and saying "no homo".
I personally have never used it, but seriously.... this is getting ridiculous. This isn't even a case of someone saying "that's gay" when referring to something lame or bad. If that were the case I would agree that it could be construed as bigoted, even if the intent wasn't to slam homosexuals. I am a supporter of gay rights, but it really fucking annoys me when people are so overly sensitive about things that are said with no malice or hurtful intent.
crandc
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2008
- Messages
- 23,518
- Likes
- 30,454
- Points
- 113
I am always amused by straight guys saying oh no that's not homophobic! (or sexist)
No, this is not by far the worst thing I've heard in the NBA or elsewhere.
But, what it comes down to is Hibbert figured it was worth $75 grand to tell the world:
1) he's not gay
2) he would consider it a problem if someone thought he was gay
3) he's so insecure about sexuality he has to bring it up in the midst of a completely nonsexual conversation
And that's stupid.
NateBishop, it's always OK to tell another person you love him/her and it's also OK to love another person nonsexually. No need to say "not homosexually" or "no homo". If you had a son, would you tell him "I love you, no homo"? Because if you love one another it would be obvious to both if it were sexual or nonsexual love.
No, this is not by far the worst thing I've heard in the NBA or elsewhere.
But, what it comes down to is Hibbert figured it was worth $75 grand to tell the world:
1) he's not gay
2) he would consider it a problem if someone thought he was gay
3) he's so insecure about sexuality he has to bring it up in the midst of a completely nonsexual conversation
And that's stupid.
NateBishop, it's always OK to tell another person you love him/her and it's also OK to love another person nonsexually. No need to say "not homosexually" or "no homo". If you had a son, would you tell him "I love you, no homo"? Because if you love one another it would be obvious to both if it were sexual or nonsexual love.
blue9
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2012
- Messages
- 10,729
- Likes
- 7,169
- Points
- 113
Oh? How's that?
Reep
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 5,545
- Likes
- 3,569
- Points
- 113
This thread lost me when the term "homophobic" started getting tossed around. This has to be one of the most bastardized terms in the history of the English language. Just because someone is hetero, or doesn't think it's morally right for people of the same gender to have sex doesn't mean they have a fear of such people.
I guess I'm a L@kerphobe then? Or at least a Kobephobe. End let's not forget my brussel-sprout-phobia.
I guess I'm a L@kerphobe then? Or at least a Kobephobe. End let's not forget my brussel-sprout-phobia.
Wizard Mentor
Wizard Mentor
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2008
- Messages
- 14,679
- Likes
- 14,943
- Points
- 113
Weird post, because this sounds as much like you as it does Roy Hibbert.
You want people to know...
1) You're female
2) You want people to know you're female
3) You are so insecure about sexuality you have to "bring it up in the midst of a completely nonsexual conversation. And that's stupid".
Not only do I think you should NOT be fined $75,000, I actually like having you on these boards.
You want people to know...
1) You're female
2) You want people to know you're female
3) You are so insecure about sexuality you have to "bring it up in the midst of a completely nonsexual conversation. And that's stupid".
Not only do I think you should NOT be fined $75,000, I actually like having you on these boards.
- Joined
- May 24, 2007
- Messages
- 73,114
- Likes
- 10,945
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 10,705
- Likes
- 2,837
- Points
- 113
But is it context from an external perspective or from the person saying the words?
I am careful when I speak and I attempt to be respectful, but I don't believe that language can be dictated only by those that might be offended by what is said.
I still don't understand what the core beef is here (not aimed at you in particular, BNM, but I wanted to comment to your post above)... is it the phrase "no homo"? Is it the word "homo"? Or is it the notion that he can't make a joke about not being gay?
The "not that there's anything wrong with that" skirts along the lines of the last idea (that straight guys can't joke about being straight) and it's a pretty terrible place to be if that's where we are.
Ed O.
jlprk
The ESPN mod is insane.
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2009
- Messages
- 30,672
- Likes
- 8,852
- Points
- 113
It's like "anti-semitic" and "misogynist." I think the same linguist invented all 3. Pro-choice and pro-life. Drug-free.
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 10,705
- Likes
- 2,837
- Points
- 113
That's because it seems you are one who believes in expanding the language to further your own politics, rather than allowing society to dictate what words actually mean.
Ed O.
Reep
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
- Messages
- 5,545
- Likes
- 3,569
- Points
- 113
Except I that anti-, mis-, and pro- are all standard prefixes meaning for or against. phobias are fears. Anti-homo or pro-hetero would be correct. It would be like calling pro-abortion people lifophobes or fetuphobes. It is a subtle way of building a straw man to tilt the rhetoric in your favor. If someone disagrees with you that is debate, but if someone fears you then it is irrational.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2008
- Messages
- 127,016
- Likes
- 147,624
- Points
- 115
No Ed O!
noknobs
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2008
- Messages
- 4,924
- Likes
- 6,343
- Points
- 113
You calling anyone else insecure about sexuality is a fucking joke.
And speaking of jokes, that's all this comment was meant to be. It's not hateful, it certainly didn't come across as insecure, it was just a joke!
#2 doesn't even make sense, given the context of his comments. His original line didn't make him look homosexual, so saying 'no homo' clearly wasn't an attempt to cover up, it was an attempt at humor. (If you're not familiar with 'humor' I encourage you to google it) This is called a double entendre, and he only brought attention to it when he said 'no homo'.
How can you even list #3 with a straight face? My previous paragraph once again applies but forget all that. Let's start and end with the fact that you don't know the guy, you only think you do. You must have a preconceived opinion of how every straight guy on earth really feels about gays, and I say that because you're clearly projecting your own insecurities onto Hibbert. I don't see how a person could otherwise arrive at your conclusions, given the context of his comments.
Quit spending your life searching for ways to be offended. It's much too short.