Comments on 13334

And stavros, yes, I know what 'phobia' means, thank you very much.

Well, I dunno. I wouldn't have copied and pasted that definition if there were evidence so far that you actually did.

Hatin' on folks is bad, as you have suggested. Racism: bad. Sexism: bad. Gaypeoplehatin': bad. All bad bad bad.

It may be argued that the roots of racism and sexism and so on are actually in the swampwater of fear -- phobic feelings -- of the other. A good argument may be made, probably.

But saying that use of the word 'fruity' is homophobic (by which you seem to mean 'intended by it's use to express, condone and/or propagate hatred of homosexual people', despite the fact that that's not what it means at all) -- I have to suggest that's pretty dumb.

(About as dumb as the idiots who fight their imaginary War against the equally imaginary War On Christmas because Happy Holidays isn't the same as Merry Christmas, and that's discrimination, damn it. Ironic, funny, sad.)

I'm a great one for yelling from my porch that words have meanings, but words (as I've also said before (in fact last time was probably the whole 'drama queen' idiot festival)) are only words. Calls for silencing people who use them, for limiting the range of words they may use, are more repulsive than anything that might tumble out of those people's mouths.

People who say unpleasant things, who use words like 'gook' or 'fag' or 'bitch' in ways that are intended to wound, or in ways that inadvertently do so because they're too stupid or insensitive to know what they're doing -- they make themselves look bad. We don't need to go around shushing them -- that's helping them get away with it, for christ's sakes. It's the worst thing we can do. Let them pour out the bile uninterruptedly, that we may more easily identify, ridicule, or avoid them.

Regardless, in this case, I don't think caddis said anything wrong. Some clearly do. caddis may or may not be aware that the words he/she chose could give offense to some people. I suspect that that was not in any way his or her intention. So it is, so let it be.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:34 AM on December 19, 2006 [5 favorites]

Assless chaps.

Discuss.
posted by bardic at 5:36 AM on December 19, 2006 [3 favorites]

caddis mentions that he has a closet, but not whether he's in it or out of it. If the latter, it's probably okay for him to call a suit 'fruity'.

Otherwise, I dunno, it's maybe a bit iffy (not to mention bizarre - I'd've thought a double-breasted suit was as straight as can be).

mullingitover writes 'Don't be such a drama queen.'

Tee hee.
posted by jack_mo at 5:37 AM on December 19, 2006

roofus writes '"Fruity" has lots of meanings apart from "camp" or "gay". In the UK "fruity" would usually be construed as meaning "eccentric". I agree that the call-out is unjustified, and assumes homophobia, where none may be implied.'

Good point - if this wasn't a mostly American site, I'd assume 'fruity' referred to a tweedy ex-military gentleman of advanced years given to drinking too much port, spilling devilled kidneys down his old school tie and making unwanted advances towards the long-suffering waitresses at his club. Though again, the description wouldn't fit a double breasted or four button suit.
posted by jack_mo at 5:42 AM on December 19, 2006

this word, fruity, does not mean what you think it means.
posted by 3.2.3 at 5:45 AM on December 19, 2006

'fruity', as he used it, is a pejorative word for men who appear to be gay/effeminate.

This is untrue. The word was clearly used as an antonym for "conservative" as caddis later says:

Get yourself a three-button suit, somewhat conservative so as to make it useful for many different events.

Now, are you really using "gay" and "effeminate" as interchangeable terms in the middle of your homophobia callout? That's what a slash "/" generally means, but I don't want to make assumptions about your intended meaning.
posted by scottreynen at 5:52 AM on December 19, 2006

On the subject of ass-less chaps, I think Prince is pretty dern fruity, but he's certainly not gay. He loves the ladies.
posted by Brittanie at 5:59 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

Wolf! There's a wolf! Help!!!
posted by i_cola at 6:06 AM on December 19, 2006

One can be a mincing nancy-boy without being homosexual. As a mincing nancy-boy I am deeply offended by this callout.
posted by Ryvar at 6:12 AM on December 19, 2006

How very typical. Straight people just don't get it. I understand some gay people not agreeing--you have the toolkit to understand it in the first place.

Homophobia, rock on!
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:14 AM on December 19, 2006

"Fruity" can also mean ridiculous and dippy. Jeez, if we got any more sensitive around here we'd all break out in a collective rash.
posted by jonmc at 6:14 AM on December 19, 2006

you have the toolkit

Hey leave my toolkit out of it. Just because I'm straight doesn't mean I have a small penis.

(caddis has earned the benefit of the doubt a 1000 times over.)
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 6:17 AM on December 19, 2006

dirtynumb, seriously, you didn't used to be so reflexively offended by stuff.

How very typical. Straight people just don't get it.

Well, if you speak real slow maybe we'll understand. Hand puppets might help, too.

I understand some gay people not agreeing--you have the toolkit to understand it in the first place.

So, gay people are allowed a multitude of opinions, but straight people only one, otherwise they're wrong. Send me the rulebook so I don't mess up. Dude, you don't have to be gay to observe the world around you and subtle differences in meanings of words depending on context. But I'm just a dumb straight white guy, so what the hell do I know.
posted by jonmc at 6:18 AM on December 19, 2006 [5 favorites]

Heterophobia will not be tolerated, period.
posted by slimepuppy at 6:22 AM on December 19, 2006

My point is, wait for it, that homophobic comments are not acceptable. Racist ones clearly aren't, nor are sexist ones.

How very typical. Straight people just don't get it.

Make up your mind.
posted by blind.wombat at 6:25 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

How very typical. Straight people just don't get it.

Ha! Now who's painting people with a broad brush?
posted by smackfu at 6:26 AM on December 19, 2006

Let's see... all of the straight people in this thread who understand what I'm saying, please raise your hands...

*crickets*
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:28 AM on December 19, 2006

How very typical. Straight people just don't get it.

So ... now it's okay to assign arbitrary traits to people based on their sexuality? I just want to make sure I have the rules clear before I start making asinine comments.
posted by scottreynen at 6:29 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

Dude, he's a cyclist in Seattle.

He wants double-breasted.

You know what I'm saying.
posted by dreamsign at 6:29 AM on December 19, 2006

Right, okay, whatever.

According to the dictates of MeFi, I'm not allowed to be offended by bigoted, homophobic language.

Does that mean I can now tell all the Asians and blacks and browns that they can't be offended by racist language? Someone please clarify for me.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:31 AM on December 19, 2006

Let's see... all of the straight people in this thread who understand what I'm saying, please raise your hands...

Look, I understand what you're saying. That doesn't mean that I'm not entitled to the opinion that what you're saying is stupid.

Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that they don't the 'mental toolkit' to understand you.
posted by chrismear at 6:32 AM on December 19, 2006

And I'm not assigning arbitrary traits, scottyreynan. Straight people don't grok homophobia the same way men--gay or straight--don't really grok what women go through.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:32 AM on December 19, 2006

According to the dictates of MeFi, I'm not allowed to be offended by bigoted, homophobic language.

No. You're entitled to be offended at anything you like. That doesn't mean that everybody else has to follow suit.
posted by chrismear at 6:33 AM on December 19, 2006

Despite my comment above, I'd like to add that I hate the phrase "lame callout", especially at the beginning of a thread. If he was offended by the comment, dirtynumbangelboy did the right thing by bringing it to metatalk.

I don't *think* I ever use 'fruity' in conversation, but I will be more cognizant from now on that some people might find it offensive.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 6:33 AM on December 19, 2006

That doesn't mean that I'm not entitled to the opinion that what you're saying is stupid.

But that is precisely my point. You think that being offended by homophobic language is stupid. Ergo, you simply do not understand the issue. QED.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:33 AM on December 19, 2006

"Lame" callout? Do you hate the physically disabled or something?
posted by smackfu at 6:34 AM on December 19, 2006 [3 favorites]

Let's see: if you're saying that we wouldn't allow words like 'nigger' or 'cunt' to be used here (or even any term that was iffy), no matter what the context, but that 'fruity' which could be considered a gay slur passes unnoticed, you maybe have a point.

But I hate linguistic policing on general principles and I also think most of us are smart enough to understand shades of meaning and context, and getting upset about minor gaffes like these reinforces the stereotype of progressive people as oversensitive humorless neurotics.

PORCH MONKEY 4 LIFE! PEACE!
posted by jonmc at 6:35 AM on December 19, 2006

Straight people don't grok homophobia the same way men--gay or straight--don't really grok what women go through.

dirtynumb, we've been over this. You don't have to be gay to be gay-bashed. It's happened to me. You can feel prejudice just for looking the wrong way or associating with the wrong people. Bigots aren't sticklers for accuracy.
posted by jonmc at 6:37 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

You think that being offended by homophobic language is stupid.

Not a single person has said that it's stupd to be offended by homophobic language! Your critics are saying that "fruity" does not qualify as homophobic language. Now who's being obtuse?
posted by Faint of Butt at 6:37 AM on December 19, 2006

But it's not a minor gaffe, jon. It's indicative of an attitude which is completely unacceptable.

But fine. Is MetaFilter going to tolerate homophobia? It certainly seems to be the case. In that case, I expect to see ZERO callouts for sexism, ZERO callouts for racism, ZERO callouts for personal insults. Equality or nothing.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:38 AM on December 19, 2006

Actually, FoB, chrismear did. What I am saying is stupid = my opinion is stupid = being offended by homophobic language is stupid.

Do I need to use smaller words?
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:39 AM on December 19, 2006

dnb: it seems painfully obvious that you lack the, er, cognitive ratchet set to handle differences of opinion outside of your chosen political hair-fine splinter group.

Gee, this is fun! All of you who ever disagreed with me? You LACK THE CAPACITY to understand me! Take that!
posted by dreamsign at 6:39 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

You think that being offended by homophobic language is stupid.

No, I think that branding that AskMe answer as 'homophobic' is stupid. And I think that dragging it into MetaTalk was stupid.
posted by chrismear at 6:39 AM on December 19, 2006

Overreacting never hurt anyone.
posted by smackfu at 6:40 AM on December 19, 2006

But it's not a minor gaffe, jon. It's indicative of an attitude which is completely unacceptable.

Not neccessarily. A guy uses a questionable (and I maintain that's all it is, questionable at worst) and all of a sudden he's Fred Phelps?
posted by jonmc at 6:41 AM on December 19, 2006

I'm bored with bagel boy.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:42 AM on December 19, 2006

FINE

You all fucking win. I'm not allowed to be offended. Straight privilege must be fucking nice. Fuck you.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:42 AM on December 19, 2006

The good old time of dramaqueeness.
posted by nims at 6:43 AM on December 19, 2006

At 1:33 into the Replacements interview linked to only moments ago here on the blue, one of the band members says "we're not fruity" while affecting a classic gay/effeminate voice/demeanor. That is all.
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:43 AM on December 19, 2006

Equality or nothing.

Fine. I think so little of your sexual orientation that I'm gonna bust your balls as hard as I'd bust anyone else's. Free at last, Free at last...
posted by jonmc at 6:43 AM on December 19, 2006

Angel, your remark about straights not getting it is far more offensive than calling a given style of suit-jacket "fruity."

You don't know the backgrounds or personalities of any of the posters in this thread nearly well enough to call us all clueless, and in doing so reflexively in response to the general disagreement with your callout, you reveal yourself as far more narrow and closed-minded than any "fruity"-using fashion critic.
posted by BigLankyBastard at 6:44 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

flapjax, he actually said 'we're not pretty.' and disrespecting the Replacements IS unacceptable. violators will be shot.
posted by jonmc at 6:44 AM on December 19, 2006

I am in awe watching this, but do I feel bad for dirtynumbangelboy.

Whatever the real problem is behind this outburst, I hope it gets better for you, man.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:45 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

and as I said before, DNAB, You didn't used to be like this. You used to be proud and strong, but relaxed and individualistic, not oversensitive and dismissive. I don't mind telling you I'm a little disappointed.
posted by jonmc at 6:46 AM on December 19, 2006

flapjax, he actually said 'we're not pretty.'

Damn, shoulda listened to that on headphones...
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:47 AM on December 19, 2006

Where's the fear implied by the word 'phobia'? I don't see any evidence that the person who made the post is afraid of homosexuals or homosexuality. Oh, wait -- you're too entitled by your put-upon cadre to actually care whether the words you're using correspond to what they're supposed to describe. The important thing is that you're angry, right? Since you're the victim here, you just get to use whatever language you feel is appropriate to describe the motivation of the person who tapped a crack in your dainty little shell of self-esteem.

caddis does seem to imply that certain clothing choices may often be inferred as indicators of homosexuality. And let's be honest, some are. For example, ascots on men (otherwise, Fred would have been all over Daphne, right?). I don't agree that double-breasted suits are fruity per se (I'm straight and I have a couple double-breasted jackets), but they do tend to imply more of a preoccupation with clothing than most straight (American) men have. As far as four-button suits, they just look tacky (the accidental kind, not the deliberate kitschy kind), which is certainly not a characteristic that many people would associate with the gay male wardrobe.
posted by bingo at 6:47 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

not oversensitive and dismissive

Well, we all get a little oversensitive from time to time, no?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:49 AM on December 19, 2006

Unlike the original poster, I actually went through Caddis's posting history a fair bit. The idea that he's even marginally homophobic is pretty stupid.

"Straight people just don't get it."

Actually we don't "get" how you can be so obtuse about this. You seem to think that Caddis can spend his entire posting history expressing the opposite of homophobia, but as soon as he talks about men's fashion with your personal hot-button word all that gets thrown out.

dirtynumbangelboy - You have a problem. Seeing hatred of gays and lesbians (which is ugly and wrong) where it doesn't exist isn't going to help your cause. Accusing someone who supports gay rights of being the enemy isn't going to help much either.

Straight up - I hate to speak for him, but Caddis seems to be 100% in support of gay rights and homosexuality in general. If you're going to lump him together with folks who think homosexuality is wrong then you end up with a pretty watered down version of homophobia.
posted by Bael'Gar at 6:50 AM on December 19, 2006

My yogurt says fruity on the label. Does this mean I'll catch teh gay?

Seriously, this is getting ridiculous.
posted by chillmost at 6:50 AM on December 19, 2006 [2 favorites]

Is it soy yogurt?
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:52 AM on December 19, 2006

My yogurt says fruity on the label. Does this mean I'll catch teh gay?

Dude, your eating yogurt. You've obviously already caught teh gay.
posted by jonmc at 6:53 AM on December 19, 2006

Can't someone just page Caddis, tell him we have a clean-up on aisle 7, and ask him what he meant by 'fruity'?
posted by matty at 6:54 AM on December 19, 2006

But fine. Is MetaFilter going to tolerate homophobia? It certainly seems to be the case. In that case, I expect to see ZERO callouts for sexism, ZERO callouts for racism, ZERO callouts for personal insults. Equality or nothing.

Calling out the use of "fruity" as a case of homophobic language ranks right up there with calling out "bitch" as a case of sexism, or "thugged out" as a case of racism, or "you are bad at logic" as a personal insult.

People are making the case that "fruity" is a desriptive word that does not mean the same thing as "gay". All you are doing is say "Gawd, you just don't get it, and I'm not going to explain it to you, because based on what I assume your sexual orientation is, you are just not GOING TO GET IT."

Make a better case if you want people to listen to you.
posted by 23skidoo at 6:56 AM on December 19, 2006

Analogy:
A woman asks 'what should I do about having my period when my boyfriend visits?'

50% of women respond 'it probably won't bother him at all, don't do anything'. 50% say 'you can use birth control so it doesn't happen'. These are all valid responses because the women 'get it'.

50% of men respond 'it probably won't bother him at all, don't do anything'. 50% say 'you can use birth control so it doesn't happen'. At least half of these men (probably all, really) are WRONG because they just DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE A WOMAN.
posted by jacalata at 6:56 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

Paging languagehat....
posted by solid-one-love at 6:58 AM on December 19, 2006

I don't know for sure whether the use of "fruity" here is code word for gay, but am inclined to think it is. So the defense that "fruity" was being used in some other sense doesn't scan for me. To that extent, it is associating types of suits with increasing levels of "gayness" and I agree with dnab (and I am a straight person no less! maybe it is because my roommate is gay I can understand?). Whether that makes it truly homophobic is debatable (and I asked the aforementioned gay roommate what he thought, so I am relating his point of view, so dnab, you can't contradict me!)

But what really tickles me is that dnab (a generally annoyingly didactic and hortative commenter) is having such a snit, yet feels it is acceptable to call people "fat" and "retarded" when he (deservedly) doesn't agree with them. And when called out on it, makes up pathetic justifications that are clearly post hoc lies.
posted by Falconetti at 6:59 AM on December 19, 2006

Sadly, jacalata, I can picture that situation exactly as described.

In fact, are you dredging that up from a recent thread? Cause it seems familiar.
posted by dreamsign at 7:01 AM on December 19, 2006

But what really tickles me is that dnab (a generally annoyingly didactic and hortative commenter) is having such a snit

He didn't used to be like that, falconetti. He used to be a pretty laid back guy with a sense of humor. So while I generally enjoy a good flameout, I'd be sorry to see that happen here.
posted by jonmc at 7:02 AM on December 19, 2006

jonmc, don't call him "pretty!" He might get offended!
posted by Faint of Butt at 7:04 AM on December 19, 2006

Well that is a shame, jonmc, because in the last year or so since I began actually participating, my impression has been one of somebody who strolls into a thread, states their opinion, and then shouts at everyone who doesn't agree, which makes a persona hard to like, even when you agree with their points a lot of the time.
posted by Falconetti at 7:05 AM on December 19, 2006

Heh. You called him a 'laid back guy'. That's mildly offensive.
posted by slimepuppy at 7:06 AM on December 19, 2006

seriously, back off, we've all made the obvious wisecracks, I hope in an earnest attempt to let him see that he was getting heeated up about something unneccessarily, but I don't like watching people get piled on. Too Lord Of The Flies for my taste.
posted by jonmc at 7:12 AM on December 19, 2006

The difference is that the guy in Lord of the Flies didn't completely bring it on himself.
posted by bingo at 7:13 AM on December 19, 2006

This callout is gay.
posted by jdroth at 7:14 AM on December 19, 2006

Heh, jon. I pretty much agree with you, but you've made 10 comments here in under an hour. Telling people to 'back off' is kinda funny.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 7:17 AM on December 19, 2006

jonmc, you're right, of course. That last jab of mine was out of line, and I'm sorry.
posted by Faint of Butt at 7:19 AM on December 19, 2006

"Faint of Butt"?

That tag is kinda... froody.
posted by dreamsign at 7:22 AM on December 19, 2006

And gay equals bad is not homophobic.
posted by Joeforking at 7:24 AM on December 19, 2006

And gay equals bad is not homophobic.

I hope that's a joke.
posted by Falconetti at 7:25 AM on December 19, 2006

I hope it's not a joke, because it's objectively true. Saying that something is bad does not necessarily mean that the speaker is afraid of what he/she is calling bad.
posted by bingo at 7:28 AM on December 19, 2006

but you've made 10 comments here in under an hour

Yeah, the Replacements thread kept the number way down.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 7:29 AM on December 19, 2006

While we're all enjoying dnab's overreaction, it should be noted in passing that sharply anti-gay language *is* tolerated here to a greater degree than racist or sexist language. That's a fact. This example was a silly one to make a stand on, but dnab's got a point mixed in with all his insulting garbage about how straights can never understand what queers go through.

(I mean, a lot of straights don't understand half as much as they *think* they understand, but dnab still reaches for that attack way too often.)
posted by mediareport at 7:29 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

I've always thought that the word 'gay' has outlived it's use as a term for 'homosexual.' It has too many la-de-da connotations owing to word's original meaning of 'happy.' So it kind of perpetuates the stereotype of the mincing, effeminate fairy.

'Queer' is better in my opinion. It's strong, even a little menacing ("We're here, We're Queer, Get Used To It") and by including bisexuals, trannies etc, it's more inclusive.

Just a theory.
posted by jonmc at 7:30 AM on December 19, 2006

dirtynumbangelboy, I get what you're saying, but like others, I think you are overreacting. Certainly, as the owner of a "fruity" four-button suit I take umbrage at the comment, but I don't think the comment was particularly homophobic. Unkind towards people with fashion sense or effeminate men perhaps, but not explicitly homophobic. Like jonmc, I love a good flameout as much as the next guy, but this just makes me sad. You're not a knob. (Knobs, please continue to flame out. And always remember to Cc: languagehat). It seems like a pretty small issue to me. Certainly you're allowed to have your opinion, but I think you're off-base.

To offset my overbearing earnestness, here's a picture of a cat wearing a toque.
posted by GuyZero at 7:31 AM on December 19, 2006

And when called out on it, makes up pathetic justifications that are clearly post hoc lies.

I already explained that. Call them post-hoc lies if you want, but you're wrong. Doubtful that you'll admit that, but I don't fucking care. Ascribe to me whatever underhanded motioves you want to. Says a lot more about you than it does about me. Look up 'projection' sometime.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 7:31 AM on December 19, 2006

Would it be homophobic to use the term "flame out" in this thread? Man, I kill myself.

Having gotten my snark out of the way - use of the word "fruity" could certainly be considered as pejorative towards gays in this context. Personally, I think caddis was using it as a synonym for effeminate, and it certainly wasn't put across as "OMG YOU'LL LOOK LIKE A GEY!". If caddis had used "effeminate" instead of fruity in this context, would it have been as offensive to you, DNAB? Is it offensive to gays (not all necessarily effeminate, of course) that somebody might label certain styles of clothes as being effeminate? I suppose you could have a fairly interesting discussion about it, if you could contain the screechiness a bit.
posted by antifuse at 7:33 AM on December 19, 2006

I hope it's not a joke, because it's objectively true. Saying that something is bad does not necessarily mean that the speaker is afraid of what he/she is calling bad.

I think people are over-emphasising the etymology of homophobia. I realise the 'phobia' suffix implies strong, irrational fear, but in day-to-day usage, 'homophobia' has a acquired a broader meaning of hatred of or aversion to homosexuals, similar in meaning to 'racism' or 'sexism'. Indeed, the OED defines homophobia as "Fear or hatred of homosexuals and homosexuality."

Using the OED's definition of homophobia, "And gay equals bad is not homophobic" clearly is homophobic, in the same way that "and black equals bad" would be racist.
posted by Burger-Eating Invasion Monkey at 7:36 AM on December 19, 2006

dirtynumbangelboy: i don't think caddis was using the term in a homophobic manner. if caddis was using fruity like "that's so gay", then a simple email to him or maybe a less aggressive metatalk thread would have been more approriate.
posted by Stynxno at 7:37 AM on December 19, 2006

This callout is gay.

Ahh, the inevitable. As much as I love the edgy type comics who can pull off this kind of stuff, I regret their effect on the rest of us.

I'm also just going to echo mediareport and Stynxno who said what I was going to say in a more pithy and less didactic manner.
posted by Divine_Wino at 7:39 AM on December 19, 2006

Whatever. I'm not allowed to be offended, I'm not allowed to be pissed off. ANYTHING ELSE I AM NOT ALLOWED TO DO? PLEASE TELL ME NOW OK?
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 7:42 AM on December 19, 2006

dirtynumbangelboy, I'm beginning to think your response is misdirection. How much homophobia have you experienced, and what did it entail?
posted by gsb at 7:42 AM on December 19, 2006

It's not hard to imagine orientation-aesthetic entering into a thread on fashion for goodness sake.

I certainly hope if I ever have cause to ask for wardrobe advice for the straight bar scene, you leave out the hot pink muscle shirts and aforementioned assless chaps.

dnab: fine, go ahead and be offended, but realize that anyone can get offended by anything. If you're not willing to subject the situation to a little analysis, I don't see how you'll be able to object, ever, if someone takes offence at even the most innocuous of your words or deeds (even in satire, as a result of this post)

on preview: the 'phobia' element was always a mistake. It's not over-emphasis to point this out. Misogyny/Misandry/Misanthropy is straightforward, as language should be. Using psychology to prop up a misnomer doesn't help.
posted by dreamsign at 7:42 AM on December 19, 2006

This is why I always use the word orchidaceous to mean fruity.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:43 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

YOU'RE ALLOWED TO BE AS OFFENDED AS YOU LIKE! We're just saying based on a general impression of caddis as a decent guy, that maybe another approach might have worked better.
posted by jonmc at 7:43 AM on December 19, 2006

ANYTHING ELSE I AM NOT ALLOWED TO DO?

Use all caps.

You're welcome.
posted by mediareport at 7:44 AM on December 19, 2006

You all fucking win. I'm not allowed to be offended. Straight privilege must be fucking nice. Fuck you.

Hey now everybody, stop not allowing dirtynumbangelboy to be offended!
posted by bonaldi at 7:44 AM on December 19, 2006

I certainly hope if I ever have cause to ask for wardrobe advice for the straight bar scene, you leave out the hot pink muscle shirts and aforementioned assless chaps.

*slaps forehead*

Ohh. That's why I could never pick up chicks back in the day.
posted by jonmc at 7:44 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

Fruity Pebbles used to be my favorite cereal when I was a kid.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 7:45 AM on December 19, 2006

I just realized something... is this the guy 'dnab' who flamed out spectacularly in #mefi about 2-3 years ago?
posted by dios at 7:47 AM on December 19, 2006

I realise the 'phobia' suffix implies strong, irrational fear, but in day-to-day usage, 'homophobia' has a acquired a broader meaning of hatred of or aversion to homosexuals, similar in meaning to 'racism' or 'sexism'.

I know. But it shouldn't have acquired that additional meaning, because that only confuses a complicated issue more. Now, the inane "homosexuality is a choice" rhetoric from the right is countered with the equally inane "You must be secretly gay yourself to think that" rhetoric from the left. To use a catch-all word that may mean "you hate gays" and may mean "you are afraid of gays" is showing the same lack of regard for truth that fundies show when they say that homosexuality is a "sin" or a "choice."

ANYTHING ELSE I AM NOT ALLOWED TO DO? PLEASE TELL ME NOW OK?

Yes, you need to stop ruining good songs for me. Every time I hear "Born Slippy" I have to think of how fucking irritating you are, and that really breaks the mood. Kindly change your name to a lyric from a Joni Mitchell song, or maybe something from Hedwig. I'll paypal you the $5.
posted by bingo at 7:47 AM on December 19, 2006 [2 favorites]

~~You're~~Your welcome.

Fixed that for you.
Otherwise it's just not the internet.
posted by dreamsign at 7:48 AM on December 19, 2006

Whatever. I'm not allowed to be offended, I'm not allowed to be pissed off. ANYTHING ELSE I AM NOT ALLOWED TO DO? PLEASE TELL ME NOW OK?

you're allowed to be offended. it's just that we're also allowed to disagree with you- not with you being offended but at the knee jerk reaction that you are displaying in this thread.

welcome to the world beyond you- if you don't take an objective look at it, you're just perpetuating the behavior and actions that you decry in the first place.
posted by Stynxno at 7:49 AM on December 19, 2006

Me: This callout is gay.
Divine_Who: Ahh, the inevitable. As much as I love the edgy type comics who can pull off this kind of stuff, I regret their effect on the rest of us.

Yeah, that was dumb. I apologize. Seriously. I'm in the camp that's completely baffled by this thread. I tried to craft something smart to say, but couldn't think of anything, so resorted to stupid instead of silence. Again: I apologize.
posted by jdroth at 7:49 AM on December 19, 2006

Wow, this thread is starting to look like the Alex Reynolds flameout. dnab, please don't do that. I am sorry if you were offended by my smart alec comment. I really did mean silly and dippy in an overly fashionable sort of way, foppish I guess, not gay. Such suits are fine in many circumstances but are not as universally useful as a more conservative and traditional three button suit, and the person asking was going to only have one suit so universal utility seems like a good goal there. It probably was not the best choice of words because obviously it was misinterpreted and has hurt your feelings. Sorry about that. However, I think calling me a homophobe over it was a bit much.
posted by caddis at 7:50 AM on December 19, 2006

Also, I think caddis is wrong. I've never associated 4+ button suits with gays. I've always thought they were darkies. Or crackers who wanted to look like darkies.
posted by dios at 7:51 AM on December 19, 2006 [2 favorites]

Yay! Now we can all switch to dios!
posted by mediareport at 7:53 AM on December 19, 2006

Dnab, I wish you'd taken this to MetaTalk earlier since it's pretty anti-AskMe to have someone calling someone else a homophobe in that thread. We have language callouts in MeTa all the time and this one should have come here before you and caddis mixed it up in that thread. If people think MeFi is filling up with a bunch of homophobic insults, please feel free to either flag it and move on, or talk to mathowie or I directly.
posted by jessamyn at 7:53 AM on December 19, 2006

After watching a documentary on MLK last night, I do not feel quite so bad about being a cracker trying to look like a darkie.

Also, let me say this: who are you people that have so little to do in life that you actually give a shit about how many buttons a suit jacket has? Had I known a four-button suit was like wearing orange to a St. Patrick's Day Parade, I'd have stuck with going to interviews naked.
posted by GuyZero at 7:57 AM on December 19, 2006

Also, I think caddis is wrong. I've never associated 4+ button suits with gays. I've always thought they were darkies. Or crackers who wanted to look like darkies.

we wear what your white women like.
posted by Stynxno at 7:58 AM on December 19, 2006

white women like skinny guys in plaid flannel. duh.
posted by jonmc at 8:02 AM on December 19, 2006

Whatever. I'm not allowed to be offended, I'm not allowed to be pissed off.

You can be as offended and pissed off as you want. But ignoring the people whore are genuinely trying to engage you in rational conversation certainly isn't helping your cause. The fact is, you are accusing caddis of being homophobic when he uses the word "fruity." People here have pointed out to you that caddis is a pretty forward thinking character, generally speaking out in defense of homosexual issues, and that his use of the word fruity was likely not meant as a pejorative synonym for the word "gay." (And on preview, it appears that this is in fact the case). But you interpret that disagreement as being some sort of attack on your freedom to be offended as a gay person. It's really not. It's just people disagreeing with you. Be as offended as you want. But calling somebody a homophobe because of ONE SENTENCE? One sentence that could arguably (and reasonably) be interpreted in a way other than your interpretation of homophobia? People are going to call you out on that knee jerk overreaction. Have you never been to MetaTalk before, that you thought this would go by without challenge?
posted by antifuse at 8:03 AM on December 19, 2006

white women like skinny guys in plaid flannel. duh.

and Dave Matthews. They love Dave Matthews.
posted by dreamsign at 8:04 AM on December 19, 2006

*hisses, pounces*
posted by jonmc at 8:06 AM on December 19, 2006

dirtynumbangelboy, you're clearly feeling ganged up on by the big, bad heterosexuals. So, here's some input from a real, live gay.
There's a lot of homophobia out there, and it's important to call it out when you see it or you're never going to raise awareness. However, make sure that the punishment fits the crime. The word "fruity" was lightly used in a benign context, and while its connotations were questionable, the issue has perhaps been blown out of proportion. You have every right to be put off by this, and every right to say so, but trust me, kiddo, this is not the worst you're going to have to deal with in your life. When we have another Laramie, I'll fly off the handle with you. When someone calls a suit fruity, take a deep breath and get a little perspective. We're not asking you to stop being offended; we're asking you to meet us halfway. We admit that a better word could be used, but you can help by recognizing that this is a very minor transgression.
posted by Help, I can't stop talking! at 8:06 AM on December 19, 2006 [2 favorites]

you know who else called things "fruity"?

Hitler.
posted by cosmicbandito at 8:10 AM on December 19, 2006

I really did mean silly and dippy in an overly fashionable sort of way, foppish I guess, not gay.

I take umbrage at this. Fops know better than to wear four-button suits.
posted by bingo at 8:10 AM on December 19, 2006

You're a fop? You told me you were a dandy.
posted by jonmc at 8:12 AM on December 19, 2006

New York Times: Anti-Gay Slurs: The Latest in Hilarity.
posted by ericb at 8:12 AM on December 19, 2006

and... cosmicbandito wins the price for most laughter coerced from this MeFite tonight.
posted by dreamsign at 8:13 AM on December 19, 2006

I'm not allowed to be offended, I'm not allowed to be pissed off.

We can't disallow something like that. You have no idea what we're gonna ask. We could AskMe what we're gonna AskMe, and your natural response could be to be offended. Then, through no fault of your own, you woulda broken the rule.
posted by blue mustard at 8:14 AM on December 19, 2006

Thank you, caddis.

I'm curious, though. Falconetti, would you call that a post-hoc lie? I'm guessing not. But, of course, caddis deserves the benefit of the doubt. I do not. Interesting.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 8:15 AM on December 19, 2006

DNAB, you came in swinging and accusing, that didn't leave much room for doubt.
posted by jonmc at 8:20 AM on December 19, 2006

*sees tattoo parlor -- slams on brakes!*

*looks at note*

"of course, caddis deserves the benefit of the doubt. I do not."

You have to have a system.
posted by dreamsign at 8:21 AM on December 19, 2006

*tap tap tap*

Is this thing on?
posted by antifuse at 8:23 AM on December 19, 2006

jonmc: dandy is the more PC term, but "fopphobia" has a better alliterative ring to it. Plus it has that double-p, which makes the speaker sound like he's spewing milk if he's not careful.
posted by bingo at 8:26 AM on December 19, 2006

(caddis has earned the benefit of the doubt a 1000 times over.)

Indeed. And I resent your claiming straight people can't possibly get it. I'm straight, but my brother is gay and [insert lame remark about "some of my best friends"] and I get it, I despise homophobia in any and all manifestations, but this is not homophobia. Get it?

*kind of hoping for a flameout*
posted by languagehat at 8:27 AM on December 19, 2006

I pronounce it 'foffobia' myself. Makes it sound like some newly independent Eastern European nation filled with six-fingered dwarves and women in kerchiefs.
posted by jonmc at 8:27 AM on December 19, 2006

On non-preview:

Thank you, caddis.

I guess an apology would be a bridge too far.
posted by languagehat at 8:30 AM on December 19, 2006

jonmc: That's my ancestral homeland you're talking about. Fie upon you. You couldn't possibly understand.
posted by bingo at 8:33 AM on December 19, 2006

Let's avoid this tar baby in the future by being more niggardly with our use of homophones.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:34 AM on December 19, 2006 [10 favorites]

Wow, this thread is starting to look like the Alex Reynolds flameout.

Yeah, only in reverse. Kinda. (Not that I would compare you to AlexReynolds for a second, dirtynumbangelboy!)
posted by jack_mo at 8:36 AM on December 19, 2006

Do you know what I hate? People who use QED for inane arguments.
posted by Loto at 8:37 AM on December 19, 2006

jonmc: That's my ancestral homeland you're talking about. Fie upon you. You couldn't possibly understand.

you forget, My homeland is the neighboring nation of Slobbphobia. We were one people until the horrible conflict known as The War Of The Styling Mousse.
posted by jonmc at 8:38 AM on December 19, 2006

I guess an apology would be a bridge too far.

Apology for...? You all seem to think that if I behave in n manner, you can call me n. Another double standard?

Fine. Have it your way: caddis, I'm sorry for misinterpreting your statement. It was a reasonable mistake to make.

Now, everyone in this thread who has called me stupid, schreeching, shrill, a liar... I am waiting for your fucking apologies.

Or do they not have to?
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 8:38 AM on December 19, 2006

what exactly does 'QED' mean anyway? I'm an ignoramus.
posted by jonmc at 8:38 AM on December 19, 2006

Quod Erat Dumbass-strandum.
posted by Divine_Wino at 8:40 AM on December 19, 2006

JFGI: QED
posted by jessamyn at 8:40 AM on December 19, 2006

"Quod Erat Demonstrandum", or Quite Easily Done as a joke. You use it in proofs to show that you are done and have proved what you set out to prove.
posted by Loto at 8:41 AM on December 19, 2006

JFGI

What'd you just call me?
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 8:41 AM on December 19, 2006

thank you.
posted by jonmc at 8:41 AM on December 19, 2006

QED is a Latin acronym: Quod Erat Demonstrandum ("which has been demonstrated", or something like that.) It means, in essence, that you have proved your point, or more informally, that others have previously done so.
posted by solid-one-love at 8:42 AM on December 19, 2006

Oh. proofs. I had to take "proofless geometry" in high school. It met right after my Honors english class. the contrast was jarring. It was like going from meets Dead Poets Society to Beavis & Butthead meets feeding time at the zoo.
posted by jonmc at 8:43 AM on December 19, 2006

jessamyn, I've just bookmarked that site. Thank you.
posted by MrMoonPie at 8:43 AM on December 19, 2006

from The Paper Chase meets...

see? ignoramus
posted by jonmc at 8:44 AM on December 19, 2006

(and jess, I'm not an idiot. merely lazy)
posted by jonmc at 8:45 AM on December 19, 2006

Wait, proofless geometry? Was it like church, where the teacher sat up there waving her hands and telling you things that you should take as the gospel truth?
posted by Loto at 8:45 AM on December 19, 2006

Sorry jonlad that was not for you - although, ha ha!. I always preferred "quit and eat dinner".
posted by Divine_Wino at 8:46 AM on December 19, 2006

FRUITY, e.g., describing the peachy taste of BRANDY.

BRANDY - initially, wine was distilled as a preservation method and as a way to make the wine easier for transpertation by MERCHANTS.

MERCHANTS and tourists were the primary purchasers of the nearly 2000 paintings, drawings, and postcards produced before World War I by ADOLF HITLER.

cosmicbandito, you can't just mention the name, ya know? You've gotta back it up with facts!
posted by dmd at 8:46 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

I don't remember. Most of the class was stoned, drunk or merely completely indifferent. and the teacher seemed to really hate us all.
posted by jonmc at 8:46 AM on December 19, 2006

Matty said, way too far back for a reply now to make sense:

I'm usually deeply offended when playing WoW and see people saying "that's so gay" in the chat windows... so maybe it deserves more consideration. Is this situation any different?

IMO, it's no different. I generally report these people to Blizzard. The way I describe it to the GM is paraphrased as follows:

"Look, they may or may not have meant offense, so I'm not campaigning for official sanction, but I see it as bad as the n-word or some such, and I really think a 'please don't use homophobic comments in chat, kkthx, love Blizzard' would do some good," and, while they of course won't tell you what action they do or do not take, I have never gotten a "what a lame complaint" vibe, and they generally seem quite understanding of my concerns.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 8:47 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

Now, everyone in this thread who has called me stupid, schreeching, shrill, a liar... I am waiting for your fucking apologies.

You were stupid, screeching and shrill. Only one person called you a liar. Perhaps they could "apologize" in kind, with a disclaimer that it was a reasonable mistake to assume you were lying.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:52 AM on December 19, 2006

~~You're~~Your welcome.

Fixed that for you.
Otherwise it's just not the internet.

Homophone.
posted by trip and a half at 8:55 AM on December 19, 2006

Oh! I get it!

It's totally fucking okay for YOU to say that someone is stupid.. but it's NOT okay for ME to say someone was being homophobic!

Gee, I love these double standards. I guess us uppity faggots better get back in the closet, huh?
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 8:56 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

Gee, I love these double standards. I guess us uppity faggots better get back in the closet, huh?

is it okay to be anti-stupid and not be anti-gay? because, right now, i'm getting more and more anti-stupid.
posted by Stynxno at 8:59 AM on December 19, 2006

Hey, off the mark. No one's calling you a faggot but you.
posted by Help, I can't stop talking! at 9:01 AM on December 19, 2006

i'm getting more and more anti-stupid.

LET MY PEOPLE GO!!
posted by jonmc at 9:01 AM on December 19, 2006

I guess us uppity faggots better get back in the closet, huh?

Although I find this statement hateful and vehemently disagree with it, I am a staunch supporter of freedom of expression and therefore will oppose anyone who tries to impinge on dirtynumbangelboy's right to say this.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:02 AM on December 19, 2006

Oh, FoB, that's oh-so-sanctimonious. Get over yourself.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 9:04 AM on December 19, 2006

It's totally fucking okay for YOU to say that someone is stupid.. but it's NOT okay for ME to say someone was being homophobic!

Your original complaint about homophobia was merely mistaken.

It's your screeching and shrill followup comments that are stupid.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 9:06 AM on December 19, 2006

John Kenneth Fisher - thanks for the WoW advice. My only saving grace is that I'm in a great guild who doesn't tolerate that kind of language... so usually if I just turn off the local chat I don't have to be barraged by it.

dnab... gay man to gay man - I think you're blowing this out of proportion, and this has escalated WAY to far. Caddis has already said he didn't mean to offend - so can't you just write the rest of the communications off as a misunderstanding? It's really not worth raising your blood pressure over.
posted by matty at 9:07 AM on December 19, 2006

Somebody really needs a pity fuck.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 9:08 AM on December 19, 2006

I am still thinking about trying WoW. Seems like it would take up too much time though. Damn addictive games suck your life away.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 9:09 AM on December 19, 2006

It's totally fucking okay for YOU to say that someone is stupid.. but it's NOT okay for ME to say someone was being homophobic!

One of these things is not like the other...
posted by hugsnkisses at 9:09 AM on December 19, 2006

Weretable - please start playing WoW. I've found that the only way to end my addiction (and regain my life) is to 'pass the torch' on to someone else.

WoW demands a soul, with no net loss in it's number of captured lives. If you start playing, it may allow me to leave...
posted by matty at 9:10 AM on December 19, 2006

One of these things is not like the other...

How, exactly? I'm not stupid. You all and caddis claim that he's not homophobic. So if I'm not allowed to call him homophobic for what was perceived as a homophobic statement--and make no mistake, it was a homophobic statement, even if he didn't mean it that way--then why the gibbering fuck are you all allowed to call me stupid?

Make up your minds. If you can do it, I can do it. You can't have it both ways.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 9:13 AM on December 19, 2006

dirtynumbangelboy: Oh, FoB, that's oh-so-sanctimonious. Get over yourself.

Ahahaahaahaha.
Thanks for that, man. Really.
posted by dreamsign at 9:13 AM on December 19, 2006

WoW demands a soul, with no net loss in it's number of captured lives.
If you are undead, do you have a soul?
posted by caddis at 9:15 AM on December 19, 2006

Somebody really needs a pity fuck.

Somebody needs to get his head out of his ass. I got laid last night--and do pretty much every night.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 9:15 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

How, exactly? I'm not stupid.

Hate to break it to you....
posted by solid-one-love at 9:16 AM on December 19, 2006 [2 favorites]

....................................
posted by jonmc at 9:16 AM on December 19, 2006

Just pity, then.
posted by dreamsign at 9:16 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

"...then why the gibbering fuck are you all allowed to call me stupid?"

um. you did call him homophobic. and we did call you stupid.

the circle of life.
posted by Stynxno at 9:17 AM on December 19, 2006

WoW demands a soul, with no net loss in it's number of captured lives.
If you are undead, do you have a soul?

hmmmm... good point. Maybe Blizzard just counts those people with an undead toon as 'neutral buoyancy'.
posted by matty at 9:18 AM on December 19, 2006

"It was a reasonable mistake to make."

I really disagree. It took me all of 60 seconds looking into Caddis's posting history for me to conclude (as you've now accepted) that he wasn't using "fruity" to slander homosexuals. Contrast that with you calling him out for being a homophobic bigot. Which is more reasonable?

"It's totally fucking okay for YOU to say that someone is stupid."

There is a case being made for Caddis being a homophobe. These is another case being made for you being stupid/hyperbolistic/Pavlovian. In my humble opinion the second argument seems to be supported in a more substantive manner.

Also - We're just talking here. The "Look, look. I'm being repressed. Come and see the homophobia inherent in the system!!!!!" seems a bit overly defensive.

Perhaps stupid is the wrong word. Perhaps you'd admit to being belligerently irrational when confronted by potential homophobia?
posted by Tiddles at 9:18 AM on December 19, 2006

Ok, IANAD, but something is really off with you today. I (well, a previous handle I used) consider you a friend. But your continued and sincere insistence of FUUUCCKK!!1! indicatesyour stress level needs popping.
posted by and hosted from Uranus at 9:18 AM on December 19, 2006

So if I'm not allowed to call him homophobic ...then why the gibbering fuck are you all allowed to call me stupid?

Caddis has pretty well answered the charge that he is a homophobe. When are you going to demonstrate your lack of stupidity?

On preview, Tiddles said it better.
posted by PhatLobley at 9:20 AM on December 19, 2006

As for homphobia not being tolerated around here, please remember that 111 left of its own accord, without being banned.
posted by signal at 9:21 AM on December 19, 2006

Fruity
posted by Kirth Gerson at 9:21 AM on December 19, 2006

dirtynumbangelboy, calm down. For serious. What is it you want out of this thread? Do you want MetaTalk as a whole to admit that we were wrong and you were right? Do you want caddis to make some sort of further peace offering? Do you want a pride parade? A blow job? What will it take to make you reasonable? You've gotten an apology and all the attention in the world. You got to pretend that someone called you an uppity faggot. You've had more than your fair share of righteous indignation for the day, now breathe deep and let it die. People get stoned to death for being gay in other parts of the world; this is not a big deal.
posted by Help, I can't stop talking! at 9:22 AM on December 19, 2006

I'm curious, though. Falconetti, would you call that a post-hoc lie? I'm guessing not. But, of course, caddis deserves the benefit of the doubt. I do not. Interesting.

I wrote a long defense of myself, but then deleted it all because I am visiting family and feeling the love and don't think it is necessary to continue this argument. My opinions haven't changed in general, but I will say that when you have a lot of people attacking you, it is pretty normal to overreact of become really defensive. Everyone does that, including me, so your responses are very understandable. I apologize for rehashing an old, minor argument and for adding to the pile on here. I don't think you were correct in your call out, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and not attribute your actions to hubris or maliciousness. Sorry, dirtynumbangelboy.
posted by Falconetti at 9:22 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

and make no mistake, it was a homophobic statement, even if he didn't mean it that way

Wow. You don't learn, do you?

*still hoping for flameout; signs are promising*
posted by languagehat at 9:22 AM on December 19, 2006

If you can do it, I can do it. You can't have it both ways.

You can do it. You just can't force everyone else to agree with you.

Why do you insist on conflating "being permitted to say something" with "having everyone agree with you"? Are they normally the same in your life? Perhaps it's a white male privilege thing.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 9:25 AM on December 19, 2006

Oops! I forgot the "/opposite day" tag on my last post.
posted by Falconetti at 9:27 AM on December 19, 2006

Woops, my bad.
posted by signal at 9:28 AM on December 19, 2006

I motion that we shut this clusterfuck down.
posted by Divine_Wino at 9:28 AM on December 19, 2006

it was a homophobic statement, even if he didn't mean it that way

Umm... if his usage of the word fruity wasn't in any way relating to homosexuals, then technically it WASN'T a homophobic statement, correct? The only place it was homophobic was in your mind. However, it's pretty undeniable that you have been screechy and shrill (and willfully ignored those of us trying to talk to you rationally, preferring instead to be shrill and screechy at those who keep poking you), and nobody really needs to apologize for calling you out on it. So all this "Where's my apology, motherfuckers? I'm the poor oppressed homosexual here!" bullshit really just needs to stop.
posted by antifuse at 9:30 AM on December 19, 2006

Let's get fruity.

And DNAB, I respect and honor your right to say this, but do not agree with you. At all.
posted by boo_radley at 9:33 AM on December 19, 2006

While we're all here, does anyone know what this was about?
posted by brain_drain at 9:37 AM on December 19, 2006

It was about Tom Cruise.
posted by PhatLobley at 9:39 AM on December 19, 2006

I really don't understand why he should have to apologize just because you are a offended. It's obvious you are hyper-sensitive, so the problem lies with you.

People often make negative and gross generalizations about others all the time. The only time there is an apology is when it offends community standards. I don't think anything said does so; it only offends your hyper-sensitivity.

The only thing that should be insulting to gay people is your behavior in this thread as representative member.
posted by dios at 9:40 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

One of the things I like about MeFi is that, for a web forum, the emotional experience level is relatively high and people don't fall for this kind of thing much. Routine attempts at exercising the power of victimhood, along with other forms of emotional blackmail and passive-aggression don't usually succeed very well.
posted by George_Spiggott at 9:40 AM on December 19, 2006 [2 favorites]

dirtynumbangelboy, I loves ya and all, but what's up with this callout? Weren't we just discussing the fact that effeminate does not equal gay?
posted by desuetude at 9:44 AM on December 19, 2006

It was about Tom Cruise.

I heard he was kind of fruity. Oh wait, that was 'fruitcake.'
posted by jonmc at 9:45 AM on December 19, 2006

DNAB, if I remember correctly, you were one (of many) shouting down Alex Reynolds for interpreting "drama queen" as a gay slur and overreacting when others disagreed. Your reasoning being that, well, he was being a drama queen, so it was an apt description, and not in any way related to his sexuality.

Now caddis describes a suit as "fruity", and you interpret that as a gay slur and overreact when others disagree. His reasoning being, well, those suits are fruity (commonly read: crazy / eccentric), so it is an apt description, and not in any way related to the wearer's sexuality given the context.

No point, really. I just don't see any significant difference in the two situations, so it seems like an amazing shift in viewpoints and/or sensitivity in the last few years. Don't flame out please, you're usually fun to have around here.
posted by chundo at 9:46 AM on December 19, 2006

DNAB, if you flame out you'll become a 'flamer'. Don't do it!!
posted by matty at 9:52 AM on December 19, 2006

Why am I even typing this? I don't know.

I thought the comment was insensitive, regardless of whether it means "gay" or "effeminate" or what. The logic behind it was "these suits are fruity, and therefore you don't want to wear them;" that conclusion only makes sense if one assumes there is something wrong with being "fruity."

Frankly it seems to me that all of the defenses are just rationalizations. Is it really too much of an inconvenience to avoid saying a couple of measly words when it would mean so much to a lot of people? It's not even a good adjective.

Yeah, I know. STFU n00B. I'm going now.
posted by AV at 9:57 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

talk to mathowie or I directly.

Jess, that's twice today you've said that. It's "mathowie or me."

Friends don't let friends commit solecisms.
posted by ottereroticist at 10:11 AM on December 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

dnab: I've really enjoyed your comments and insight in the past. But your more recent me-against-the-world tone has had me worried as well. Seriously, coming to MeTa for this kind of adrenalin fix is no good, my friend. You're pointing to some legitimate problems, certainly, but they're better handled in private emails and discussions with Matt & Jess. Threads like this are just plain destructive.

I'm also hoping that whatever is eating at you gets better soon. You have many friends here.
posted by felix betachat at 10:12 AM on December 19, 2006

that conclusion only makes sense if one assumes there is something wrong with being "fruity."

Finally, someone has put their finger on it. As a tangerine, I am deeply offended by all this negative characterization of fruits. I'll have you know that many of us are quite well seeded.
posted by boaz at 10:14 AM on December 19, 2006

As a tangerine, I am deeply offended by all this negative characterization of fruits.

Lousy fruits, always complaining.

(I'm a vegetable. we and the fruits don't get along)
posted by jonmc at 10:16 AM on December 19, 2006

The "Rooty Tooty Fresh and Fruity" breakfast at IHOP and Post "Fruity Pebbles" cereal are also homophobic and insensitive, whether their markholders intended, I guess.
posted by solid-one-love at 10:18 AM on December 19, 2006

No they're not, s-o-l, and you are as usual being wilfully obtuse. Both of those products involve fruit, therefore 'fruity' is a perfectly cromulent adjective. A man in a suit does not involve any fruit, therefore.. oh ffs, why do I bother? I learned a while ago that trying to get you to understand anything is an exercise in futility.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 10:21 AM on December 19, 2006

Both of those products involve fruit

I would infer that you have never eaten Fruity Pebbles.
posted by solid-one-love at 10:22 AM on December 19, 2006 [3 favorites]

that conclusion only makes sense if one assumes there is something wrong with being "fruity."

As mentioned before, context (and sometimes extended explainations) is key:

caddis: I really did mean silly and dippy in an overly fashionable sort of way, foppish I guess, not gay. Such suits are fine in many circumstances but are not as universally useful as a more conservative and traditional three button suit, and the person asking was going to only have one suit so universal utility seems like a good goal there.
posted by hugsnkisses at 10:23 AM on December 19, 2006

oh, and Falconetti? Fuck you.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 10:25 AM on December 19, 2006

that conclusion only makes sense if one assumes there is something wrong with being "fruity."

And your conclusion only makes sense if you assume that being "fruity" is bad because being gay is bad/a sin/disgusting, etc. Another reasonable interpretation could be that a straight man might not want to dress like a gay guy because he might give the wrong signals, not because he thinks being gay is icky. If a straight guy looks gay, he might miss out on some nice trim. I can already see the comment pointing out that he might have a better chance at getting some if he looked stylish, but that is a point which doesn't refute mine that there might be reasons to not look gay beyond the fact that one is homophobic.

December 19, 2006 4:47 AM Subscribe

December 19, 2006
4:47 AM Subscribe