Judge Dredd gay........ WTF

Black Barney wrote: I thought Cook's post seemed ok

Same here, it could have easily been Loter who wrote that. The thing is anytime an announcement like this is made there is a pretty big chance it's part of a bid to get themselves in the media. Anyone who points that out, or thinks it doesn't suit the character or has any problems with it is pretty much guaranteed to be labelled homophobic in some way.. or at least intolerant.

That's what Cook is doing in his typical sarcastic way.

He can hate on people around here without any thoughts as to the morality of that but heavens forbid anyone paints any group with such a broad brush... which hasn't happened in this case anyway. I think that's more the issue for people responding negatively to his bit. Which is a point he could have made without using Repoman's quote to do it. There would have been more integrity in that.

tscook wrote:
If you're a straight white cismale you're not really lacking in people like you in media so of course you don't give a fuck.

You two are fucking nuts. There's plenty wrong with that. Like I said, there's plenty of gay people of all colors and flavors on TV. So just on it's face it's factually incorrect. Then let's remember that there's openly gay members of congress, mayors, all that. So stating that somehow the US is lacking in "gay people to look to for inspiration" us an outright bullshit statement.

What's also bullshit is that he is stating that if you're a straight white "cismale" (a totally bullshit word based on the idea that physiology no longer defines gender) you don't care. So I guess there's no straight white advicates of gay rights, either.

In short, fuck him fr trying to pass this "woe is me" shit with a straight face and fuck the both of you for buying into it.

I'm not buying into it. I think it's a typical modern judgment made in the most stereotypical hipster fashion... I'm just saying it's nothing to be shocked by as it's an answer we could have guessed was coming if we had tried and indeed we've seen the sentiment around here in various incarnations before. If you didn't know Cook was a modern anti-gender morality hipster you haven't been reading his posts very closely.

B saying there's nothing wrong with it, you're accepting it as truth. That's my point, JJ. You know me pretty well by now, you know what I'm saying.

If he said gays have gotten a shitty deal in the past, he is right on that, and he can get in line behind Native Americans, Africans (and then African Americans, and then Africans again), women, asians, mexicans, and so on. The fact is that societies change gradually and slowly, not overnight, and let's all remember that how 'bad' they have it is actually better than the many countries that would hang them dead, let alone the 75% of organized religions that think they're abhorrent.

All I'm asking for is a little observance of facts, that there are plenty of non-gay folks that advocate for gays as well as prominent gay folks in the media. This place's hallmark is that if you say something, you need to back it up. He didn't, he took a shot at Repo, so he can go fuck his cishand in a dark room. Maybe in that room he can get some facts and perspective.

Well I'm pretty sure Repo is cis, but that could be wrong and if you're gay there is a higher chance you will "give a fuck". What he said wasn't wrong, it was just rude. What he implied was wrong though and that's the reason for the reaction.

SuperflyTNT wrote: a straight white "cismale" (a totally bullshit word based on the idea that physiology no longer defines gender)

Just to be clear, you're saying that being transgender and/or identifying as a gender different than the one you're physically born with is bullshit?

I've tried to just stay away from these threads lately, but come the fuck on, that's some ignorant hateful shit right there if I'm reading you right. Fuck that noise.

I'm loving this thread, kudos to Matt for showing up.

I get what Pete is saying and I don't think it's hateful, just last generation. Gender is a word that is in flux right now. To the old people all it means is how you were born or maybe what you've become as a result of surgery. In other words a purely biological label with no psychology taken into account. To the new generation it's a floating concept that can mean any number of things. It's also a concept that limits what people can be and how they feel about themselves so naturally there is a movement that is all about redefining gener labels.

Neither is right or wrong, they just are. The word will probably change it's meaning given time as the young folks become the old folks and then they too will get to feel what it's like to be the bad guys as the younger generation to them changes words and moral principles in some new way that they don't understand.

I'm not of either opinion really and feel that this is just an age gap and little else. I can understand both sides but have a really hard time giving enough of a fuck to judge anyone for their opinion on the matter. It's just language and as I've said here before I don't really give a shit about it. I like when the words carry impact and have multiple meanings because that makes them richer and more likely to cause reactions from people.

Which is all I'm really concerned about.

MattLoter wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: a straight white "cismale" (a totally bullshit word based on the idea that physiology no longer defines gender)

Just to be clear, you're saying that being transgender and/or identifying as a gender different than the one you're physically born with is bullshit?

I've tried to just stay away from these threads lately, but come the fuck on, that's some ignorant hateful shit right there if I'm reading you right. Fuck that noise.

Hold off onthe righteous indignation, Matt. That's not at all what I said. What I said is that if you walk up to a bovine, cat, dog, cheetah, or any creature on earth, it's gender is equivalent to the plumbing. A male of a species has a set of balls, generally, and a female has a vagina. A gender is a gender, irrespective of what a person identifies with.

The whole idea that you can choose your gender is fallacious and psychobabble bullshit. One can be a male who identifies with women more or beieves themselves to have more female characteristics than their plumbing would indicate, but the plumbing is what it is, and if you have a dick, you're gender is male. You may want to be a female, but fate and your genes had other plans.

Beat thing about science is that belief isn't a prerequisite of it being true.

SuperflyTNT wrote:

MattLoter wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: a straight white "cismale" (a totally bullshit word based on the idea that physiology no longer defines gender)

Just to be clear, you're saying that being transgender and/or identifying as a gender different than the one you're physically born with is bullshit?

I've tried to just stay away from these threads lately, but come the fuck on, that's some ignorant hateful shit right there if I'm reading you right. Fuck that noise.

Hold off onthe righteous indignation, Matt. That's not at all what I said. What I said is that if you walk up to a bovine, cat, dog, cheetah, or any creature on earth, it's gender is equivalent to the plumbing. A male of a species has a set of balls, generally, and a female has a vagina. A gender is a gender, irrespective of what a person identifies with.

The whole idea that you can choose your gender is fallacious and psychobabble bullshit. One can be a male who identifies with women more or beieves themselves to have more female characteristics than their plumbing would indicate, but the plumbing is what it is, and if you have a dick, you're gender is male. You may want to be a female, but fate and your genes had other plans.

Beat thing about science is that belief isn't a prerequisite of it being true.

Congrats on being a shitlord that doesn't know the difference between sex and gender.

Allow me to elaborate on my thinking before Matt calls me a cancer or some other such shit.

If gender meant "what you feel like", despite conventional wisdom and the medical definition, "transgender" would not exist. Transgender means "someone who identifies more with the opposite gender" and thus gender by definition must be synonomous with "birth sex". If it meant "identifies more with the opposite gender role" then it would be stating that genders are associated with sexes, which would in itself define the word "sex" as synonomous with "gender".

Further, in language, were I to say senor (spanish n ommitted thanks to ipad) it is a male gender word. Senora is a female gender word. Thus, calling a homosexual or transgender man a senora would be grammatically inaccurate.

The problem with groups attempting to redefine wordsmto suit their purpose is in face the antithesis of what JJ is saying: it muddies words and gives them less meaning.

Matt, you know where I stand on gay folks. I have no problem with them, their lifestyle, or any of that himophobic bullshit. I'm speaking only of the bastardization of language.

SuperflyTNT wrote:

MattLoter wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: a straight white "cismale" (a totally bullshit word based on the idea that physiology no longer defines gender)

Just to be clear, you're saying that being transgender and/or identifying as a gender different than the one you're physically born with is bullshit?

I've tried to just stay away from these threads lately, but come the fuck on, that's some ignorant hateful shit right there if I'm reading you right. Fuck that noise.

Hold off onthe righteous indignation, Matt. That's not at all what I said. What I said is that if you walk up to a bovine, cat, dog, cheetah, or any creature on earth, it's gender is equivalent to the plumbing. A male of a species has a set of balls, generally, and a female has a vagina. A gender is a gender, irrespective of what a person identifies with.

The whole idea that you can choose your gender is fallacious and psychobabble bullshit. One can be a male who identifies with women more or beieves themselves to have more female characteristics than their plumbing would indicate, but the plumbing is what it is, and if you have a dick, you're gender is male. You may want to be a female, but fate and your genes had other plans.

Beat thing about science is that belief isn't a prerequisite of it being true.

If you erase Dredd's dick and draw a vagina he becomes a female. That's the science of comics.

Hey TS, go fuck your mother, or father, or both. I'm being nonspecific so I don't offend your hipster sensibilities.

SuperflyTNT wrote: I have no problem with them, their lifestyle, or any of that himophobic bullshit. I'm speaking only of the bastardization of language.

I'm going to try real hard to keep civil.

Language is not unalterably set in stone. Languages are generally very old and from time to time need updating, revisions, and additions to work. Language exists because you cannot generally transmit who you are, how you feel, and what you want in other ways.

If transgendered folks bother you because 'they're ruining languages', you're no better than someone who thinks gays are ruining marriage.

So tell me if I have this straight (see what I did there)... Judge Dredd isn't actually going to come out as gay at all, and all this angst is being caused by the writer saying it's plausible he could be gay, bi or whatever? Sounds remarkably like another non-story in the media to me.

Personally, I find the thought of Judge Dredd going into a gay-bar where most of the patrons are dressed as Judges very amusing.

Also, if you can't be civil or are struggling to maintain civility, go back to talking about board games.

Bull Nakano wrote:

SuperflyTNT wrote: I have no problem with them, their lifestyle, or any of that himophobic bullshit. I'm speaking only of the bastardization of language.

I'm going to try real hard to keep civil.

Language is not unalterably set in stone. Languages are generally very old and from time to time need updating, revisions, and additions to work. Language exists because you cannot generally transmit who you are, how you feel, and what you want in other ways.

If transgendered folks bother you because 'they're ruining languages', you're no better than someone who thinks gays are ruining marriage.

You take a stupid pill today or are you just feeling hypersensitive? What I SAID was that the word transgender in and of itself applies the meaning of the word GENDER as synonomous with sex. Ie. you can't be TRANSGENDER if GENDER can mean whatever you want it to.

DAT: Thats just what I was thinking. There's a gay bar in San Francisco (or was) where all the leatherheads show up. Thats the first thing that I thought when I read this. LOL