• GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    23 hours ago

    Here’s a comment from one of the threads you posted:

    Who gives a fuck, it’s an insult, people don’t throw out insults with a deep dark plan in mind, they do it to piss someone off at being called something.

    I’ve called someone a cunt, does that mean I think vaginas are the ultimate insult? Am i deeply woman hating? No, of course not, I was mad at someone being a cunt, so I called them a cunt.

    Stop reading into things, and ignore the people in this thread that think you can imply/infer deeper meanings from the surface language people use.

    About sums up how i feel about this issue. Most people using the word aren’t intending to insult homosexuals. You and everyone that takes offence with this should go outside.

    If i say someone is ‘riding d’ I don’t give a fuck who or who doesn’t do it. I’m alluding to a specific action using a metaphor. It’s basic literature. Stop getting offended by everything.

    Also i don’t see the point of the first article you linked

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Ah yes, telling a pansexual man that he needs to go outside because I recognize the way problematic language you personally are a fan of using works. Excellent strategy there. By your line of logic, we should keep using the r-slur, racial slurs, etc, if it weren’t for the fact that people already successfully pointed out the same things queer people and feminists have been pointing out about words like “dicksucker.”

      Rather than telling people not to be offended by homophobic language you enjoy, you should be capable of self-critique and learn to be a bigger person. There are good reasons we no longer call people the r-word, or f-slur, and these same reasons apply to calling people “dicksuckers.” You aren’t referring to the literal actions, but likening real submissive actions to gay sex as a means to make the submissive actions more shameful. Your intent does not matter when it comes to the messages your words actually convey.

      As for the article, it’s Lemmy.ml’s slur filter, you can replace the removed part with “c-sucker” spelled out.

      • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        23 hours ago

        By your line of logic, we should keep using the r-slur, racial slurs, etc

        Yes i actually believe this. I’m an absolutist when it comes to this stuff, and i don’t apply this thinking in isolated instances. I have no qualms with a non-black person using the n-word—and i say this as a black person myself. Obviously, this is a fringe opinion, but it is what it is.

        Rather than telling people not to be offended by homophobic language you enjoy

        Why do you still follow this line of thinking? It’s not that people are offended by homophobic language, it’s that you’re looking for homophobia where there is none. That’s what i take issue with.

        You aren’t referring to the literal actions, but likening real submissive actions to gay sex as a means to make the submissive actions more shameful

        Refer to the quote linked above and whether you think calling someone a cunt all of a sudden makes me misogynist because it’s also a vulgar synonym for vagina

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Being an absolutist in favor of slur usage is wierd, period. Slurs are phased out because it perpetuates harmful sterotypes and societal hatred towards marginalized groups. Secondly, I explained where the homophobia was. You can’t just say “nuh-uh.” Yes, calling someone a cunt is also misogynistic.

          • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            23 hours ago

            Again, you’re using emotions to make an argument. From a purely logical standpoint there should be no issue with using whatever is considered a ‘slur’ if there is no mal-intent. ‘Slurs’ are social constructs already, and I don’t believe in social constructs.

            Yes, calling someone a cunt is also misogynistic.

            😂

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              23 hours ago

              No, I’m not using emotions to make an argument, I’m talking about the systemic usage of language to passively punish those society deems “outsiders.” It doesn’t matter if you don’t believe that words have meanings and that using them conveys messages.

              • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                22 hours ago

                I can use the term ‘wigga’, and it wouldn’t nearly carry the same impact as the ‘n-word’ does. This is a social construct.

                Rather than policing language, I’d rather focus on the structural factors that continue to perpetuate racial discrimination.

                I’m not gonna lose my marbles over a Caucasian who uses the n-word while rapping a song that happens to contain, and I find it pretty cringe that anyone does tbh

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  22 hours ago

                  The base and superstructure mutually reinforce each other. The base is primary, but the superstructure still has an impact on reinforcing bigotry, and part of the way that works is through language. Perpetuating bigoted language perpetuates cultural perceptions on the marginalized groups they target.

                  • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    22 hours ago

                    I would actually push back on that quite a bit. Institutionalized racism is sustained because capitalism creates the means through which it can remain so. You get rid of that, you get rid of the social incentives keeping racism and power structures currently used to reinforce it. No need for policing language