Is this homophobic.

[ccharles000]

I have a question is calling Ann Coulter "man coulter" and posting doctored pics of president bush in certain situations homophobic? I ask because on another thread someone posted a pic of Lieberman kneeling down in front of bush. I personally think it is homophobic.

[blondeatlast]

1. If you need to ask others, you know the answer already. nt

[bicentennial_baby]

2. Yes, and the Coulter thing is transphobic, and

Skinner recently stated in the GLBT forum that there in now a zero tolerance policy on it at DU, so if you see someone call her that, please alert on it. :hi:

[liberal N proud]

6. Can we just say she isn't human?

The beast!

Has nothing to do with questioning her gender status but rather her attacking, hateful personality

[bicentennial_baby]

7. Yes, I believe that that is allowed

:hi:

[liberal N proud]

8. Good!

[ccharles000]

21. I think that is ok.

[DarkTirade]

34. What do you have against nonhumans, huh?

:P

[liberal N proud]

49. Just the hateful ones

[izquierdista]

9. I have zero tolerance

for "zero tolerance" policies. :evilgrin:

[mikelgb]

3. the people may be but the words and images arent

[Cerridwen]

4. Let me back you up one question...

Why is being thought of/labeled as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transsexual considered an insult?

If we start there, I think it's easier for many people to see how using words or images of LGBT as though they are indicative of the absolute "worst" thing a person can be, might help some to see the "phobia" and prejudice and insult that is intended in those words and images.

There's more to it than that, of course, but I'm not up for writing a dissertation this morning. :D

[Clovis Sangrail]

10. DING DING DING

Why is being thought of/labeled as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transsexual considered an insult?

if the creator of the content doesn't see being GLBT as something that is "wrong" or "less than" then it's likely that they are aiming for humor based on something else... maybe the target's own hangups, or their parties hangups, or whatever.
:shrug:

[Cerridwen]

20. Then, I would argue the intent of the creator is, in fact, to promote

homophobic reaction. Wouldn't that make the creator's intent, in and of itself, homophobic, or at the very "least", hateful?

[Clovis Sangrail]

29. you're assuming their intent

if the creator doesn't think being GLBT is somehow "less than" and if they are doing to to capitalize on the homophobia of others... it's wrong.

but if the creator of the image in question (whatever image) hasn't provided something else to demonstrate their intent, you making those assumptions doesn't 'make them so'.
it just means you've made assumptions.

I said in another post if the intent is to capitalize on the homophobia of somebody other than the target I don't think it's OK.

If I make an image of Jesse Helms with over the top make up to emphasize what a bullshitter he is... I think that's completely acceptable.
My goal isn't to deride him for 'being gay' .... because I don't think he is nor do I think there is anything wrong with 'being gay'.. and my intended audience wouldn't be people who are homophobic. It would be people who understand that I'm saying he's a very fake person.

If somebody else makes the same image with the intent of passing it off as a picture of 'the real' Jesse in an attempt to get bigots to hate Jesse Helms... because they think being gay is "less than" or at least that those viewing it will think that... then it's wrong.
(it would be funny... but wrong)

The range of artistic/creative intent is huge and to a large degree it needs to be judged based on the creator/artist more than the product.
Without really knowing that intent all you have is your interpretation of the product.. which you are completely entitled to but it's just that.. your interpretation.
It doesn't change if the product is or isn't what you think it is.

[Cerridwen]

31. Actually, I was replying to your assumptions.

if the creator of the content doesn't see being GLBT as something that is "wrong" or "less than" then it's likely that they are aiming for humor based on something else... maybe the target's own hangups, or their parties hangups, or whatever.

"humor based on something else...maybe the target's own hangups, or their parties hangups, or whatever.

Based on the bolded portion, I suggested that an attempt to invoke homophobic reactions (I'm not sure what other "hangups...or whatever" you may have been implying in this context) was homophobic or, as I said, hateful.

[Clovis Sangrail]

42. assumptions about assumptions?

;)
you assumed "hangups, or their parties hangups, or whatever" meant attempting to invoke 'homophobic reactions'.

It doesn't have to be about trying to provoke that... look at the example I gave about a Jess Helms picture.

[Cerridwen]

44. I almost typed that in my reply

I also thought of saying "assumptions about implications".

[RedCappedBandit]

22. Exactly.

[Rosemary2205]

33. What you said.

The very fact questioning someone's sexual identity is seen a way to insult someone is the problem right there.

[Clovis Sangrail]

5. only if you want it to be

I think making fun of the target's homophobia by portraying them the opposite gender is fair game.
If you're doing it to capitalize on somebody else's homophobia it's really not OK.

It's hard to say because a lot of those things can be taken different ways, and only the creator of the piece in question knows the real intent.

The Lieberman bj, for instance... is it saying
"look! he's a fag! hate him for being queer!"
or is it saying
"look! he's a Bush sycophant! he's willing to do anything for him!" ?

Only the author knows the original intent and it will mean different things to those who view it.

[Hydra]

11. Coulter is a harpy

But if it makes people feel better to try and puncture her image as some sort of female support for the quite misogynist GOP, I can understand that.

As to Bush being gay...circumstantial evidence abounds, so I don't see that as insulting. Besides, as someone pointed out, why should the suggestion of being LBGT engender an insult?

[slackmaster]

15. "Harpy" is an inherently sexist term

Unless of course it refers to the bird.

Harpy:



Bitch:

[Hydra]

17. Harpy in the classical sense, rather than the offhand insult.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This

Harpy
Har"py\, n.; pl. Harpies.

1. (Gr. Myth.) A fabulous winged monster, ravenous and filthy, having the face of a woman and the body of a vulture, with long claws, and the face pale with hunger. Some writers mention two, others three.

Both table and provisions vanished guite. With sound of harpies' wings and talons heard. --Milton.

2. One who is rapacious or ravenous; an extortioner.

The harpies about all pocket the pool. --Goldsmith.

Fairly close to my POV. I use harpy in this context to denote "spitter of vitriol"

[Solon]

12. The "Ann the Man" shit is against DU's rules, and should be alerted on...

and hopefully the post is deleted and the poster is tombstoned as a result.

As far as the other stuff, yes its homophobic, it's used as a pejorative to disparage or denigrate people based on their perceived sexuality.

[slackmaster]

13. Other - Petty, juvenile, anti-intellectual

And not even funny.

[Hugabear]

14. Honestly, I think it depends on the situation

I don't think you draw a broad brush and say that it's all homophobic.

I think calling Ann Coulter "Man Coulter" or "Ann the Man" is definitely either sexist or homophobic.

Calling Lieberman "gay" because you think that's an insult is probably homophobic.

However, if you say that Bush and Lieberman are lovers, I don't know if that is automatically homophobic. If you were to have a cartoon showing Bush and Condi Rice in a sexual situation, would that necessarily be sexist, or could it be simply implying a very close relationship between the two?

It's a common saying to say that two people or organizations that enjoy a close relationship are "in bed together" - ie Big Oil and the Rethugs.

[bicentennial_baby]

18. re: Ann

It's transphobic...And, no longer allowed on DU, per Skinner :)

[lonestarnot]

16. I think that is a nickname that has stuck, and I have even used it.

Never even thought about it until now, so I guess I won't be repeating that any more. And on edit, is Ann the fuckwit ok? LOL

[Indenturedebtor]

19. Other - most of that is homophobic

The intimation that Lieberman is blowing Bush however could easily only be intended to show that he's subservient to BushCo.

[hokies4ever]

23. I don't think it's necessarily homophobic, but it is in very bad taste.

Having Coulter kneeling down in front of Bush would be in bad taste the same way but might be described as sexist and not homophobic. I don't think it's necessary to fully describe why something is in bad taste to know that it is in bad taste.

[Hugabear]

25. Is it homophobic to say that two people are in bed together?

For instance, if one were to draw a political cartoon showing Lieberman and Bush in bed together, with one of them smoking a cigar in an obvious inference that a sexual act had just taken place, is that homophobic?

The reason I ask is that saying two people or groups are "in bed together" is a pretty common phrase.

[hokies4ever]

27. I think that's being a little too politically correct

That phrase isn't exclusively used for two people of the same gender.

[IndianaJones]

24. these poll results are a shining example of progressive values. nt.

[FreeState]

26. Sad isnt it? We have a LOT of work to do n/t

[Clovis Sangrail]

30. no... I really *do think these types of polls are a good thing

it shows people are willing to think about things.

[FreeState]

36. No Im talking about education

this poll does none of that. It might make people think - however how 50% of the respondents don't see calling someone a transgendered woman as an insult is not phobic is beyond me.

Would it be appropriate to put up pictures of Alan Keyes with a cob of corn or watermelon and vote on weather that is raciest or not? Just because someone is a political enemy does not give anyone a right to use homophobia/rasism/trasphobia/sexism etc as a weapon.

[Clovis Sangrail]

41. thinking about things and agreeing with your particular view aren't the same thing /nt

[FreeState]

45. Hu? I dont get what your implying or saying here n/t

[Clovis Sangrail]

46. that people discussing if something is good or bad

is, in itself, good
regardless of if they agree with my, or your, view on the subject.

I think the acceptance and practice of introspection about the things we say or do, regardless of the taboo of the subject, is one of the defining traits of progressives.

[KamaAina]

28. It's so easy to avoid

just call Coulter "Annthrax" or "Coultergeist".

And if you're jonesing for a pic of Bush** in a compromising position:



(of course, now the PETA types will be calling for my head... :-) )

[susankh4]

32. Worse.

It is not only phobic.

It is outright bashing by insinuation.

Should be banned from any progressive website.

[DarkTirade]

35. It's implying that something outside the 'normal' gender binary is a bad thing

and using it as an insult... so yes.

[4_Legs_Good]

37. I don 't like the term "homophobic" being used instead of "homo-hatred" or something

Homophobia should mean that one has an irrational *fear* of homosexuals. While unfortunate, it can be a condition (and usually is) brought on by ignorance and inexperience, and I think education can "cure" it.

Homo-hatred (or some better term like maybe anti-homosexual bigotry) would describe someone who has an irrational hatred of homosexuals based on any number of circumstances, ignorance, prejudice, fear, etc.

But, in answer to your actual question, I have no idea.

David

[ccharles000]

39. I think homophobic works just fine.

It would take to long to implant new words into the the minds of people.

[frickaline]

38. I consider the name "Man" Coulter an insult to men.

While "Ann" Coulter is an insult to women.

I guess you just can't win.

[rucky]

40. The "goin' south" analagy is demeaning, but equal opportunity.

as a general symbol of submission. It could apply to men or women - straight or gay.

[Forkboy]

43. Agree on one, not on the other.

The Coulter one is to me because it suggests that there's something wrong with being transgender, a "feminine" man, or just an ugly woman. The butt of the joke is the sexuality of the target.

The second is different to me because I don't see it as them being gay but as Lieberman just being subservient to Bush and his wishes, regardless of sex. If this was with a woman in the same political position (made sure to clarify how I meant "position" there) I'd take the pic the same way. To me this is more of an insult to Lieberman's compliance with the Bush agenda than it is to his sexual preference.

I can understand how some will see it differently though.

[ccharles000]

47. I think both are homophobic.

[insleeforprez]

48. It's not homophobic, it's transphobic.

(semantics).

You think that some person is bad. Therefore, you refer to that person as transgendered, with the intent of expressing your belief that this person is bad. Thus, you believe that it is bad to be transgendered. Hence, transphobic.

It's rather simple.

[Truth2Tell]

50. What if it's an image of Condi Rice kneeling in front of Bush?

Would that be sexist? Or just "sexual?" :shrug: