Indianapolis Bakery refuses service to gay student group

[SpuriusMaximus]

I'm expecting them to be able to parse Dr Seuss level English though. Seriously, I don't buy it that they just happen to not be able to use big words like "explicit" or "obscenity".

I think what they are doing is basically lying. They're reaching for some words as an excuse when they know those words don't mean that.

Now I can understand why a bigot would use lies and fallacies to justify his bigotry. Sure, that's trivial to understand. But lying it still is.

ETA: and really, I have no problems with calling a lie a lie. I don't see any reason to pretend that someone actually literally sees "sexually explicit" stuff in a cookie, just so I don't offend some bigot by calling his lie a lie.

 

[Alan]

Well, exactly. That's what I don't get about such exercises in justifying bigotry.

"Mommy, why are the cookies so weird coloured?"
"No idea, honey. Someone wanted them that way."

Heck, even in cases like that woman who was upset that some Flash game allowed her daughter to play a character married to another woman and the girl _asked_ about it... Dunno, whatever happened to just saying "it's a bug, honey. Programs on the computer often do weird stuff."

There seems to be some assumption that there's no way to avoid going into the sordid details, when really not only they're trivial to avoid, but everyone already does when it comes to heterosexual stuff.

What's wrong with "some women marry women"? Saying it's a "bug", a problem with the computer program and something "weird" is not good.

 

[quadraginta]

I'm expecting them to be able to parse Dr Seuss level English though. Seriously, I don't buy it that they just happen to not be able to use big words like "explicit" or "obscenity".

I think what they are doing is basically lying. They're reaching for some words as an excuse when they know those words don't mean that.

Now I can understand why a bigot would use lies and fallacies to justify his bigotry. Sure, that's trivial to understand. But lying it still is.

ETA: and really, I have no problems with calling a lie a lie. I don't see any reason to pretend that someone actually literally sees "sexually explicit" stuff in a cookie, just so I don't offend some bigot by calling his lie a lie.

I can go with that. They lie a lot, too.

 

[Shrike]

- you'll go to jail for saying things such as that.

And in jail your cellmate will be Bubba who, how shall we say this, will confirm to you all prejudices about a certain body part of African-American men.... He WILL have his way with you and this, as you know, will turn you gay as well!
So, rejoice. The liberal/gay/Islamofacist/Americanfacist/New World Orderfacist agenda is good for you!

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

What's wrong with "some women marry women"? Saying it's a "bug", a problem with the computer program and something "weird" is not good.

There's nothing wrong, of course. I was just playing the devil's advocate and offering a solution to someone who's supposedly that disturbed by having to answer a question like "mommy, why can my character marry another woman." All I'm saying is that if they just want to dodge that question, dodging it is actually very trivial, or at least much easier than expecting the whole rest of the world to pretend same-sex marriage doesn't happen.

Sure, I can see your point too. But if that's not going to happen, well, I'm just saying it's still not the end of the world. The whole "OMG, how do you explain something like that to a child" argument is still bunk. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Zontar]

It's getting really hard to find a decent cream puff these days.....

 

[Piggy]

Well, exactly. That's what I don't get about such exercises in justifying bigotry.

"Mommy, why are the cookies so weird coloured?"
"No idea, honey. Someone wanted them that way."

Heck, even in cases like that woman who was upset that some Flash game allowed her daughter to play a character married to another woman and the girl _asked_ about it... Dunno, whatever happened to just saying "it's a bug, honey. Programs on the computer often do weird stuff."

There seems to be some assumption that there's no way to avoid going into the sordid details, when really not only they're trivial to avoid, but everyone already does when it comes to heterosexual stuff.

You're still not getting this guy.

You don't understand why he's doing what he's doing, or what he's saying.

Which doesn't mean he's right, or justified, or anything like that. But still, you're wrong about him, if you don't mind my saying so.

He mentions the kids because he's saying that his business is a family business. Which means that he's not even going to consider putting anything sexual on a cookie decoration -- I know, I can hear you hollering at me "A rainbow isn't sexual!" and I agree -- regardless of actually imagining any scenario in which the girls might ask him about it.

He wouldn't ice cookies with a sexual pun that kids would ignore, either. (At least, that's the implication.)

And because he considers homosexuality to be a sexual perversion on the order of bestiality and pedophilia, baking rainbow cookies for a gay group isn't going to happen, even if neither of his girls is likely to ask about the meaning of the rainbow.

So it's not that he has some gay porn flick playing in his head (or not) or that he believes that his daughters will see the cookies and begin asking about homosexuality (or not), it's simply his totally wrong ideas about gay people and human sexuality more generally.

That right there's the problem. It's pretty simple.

 

[Piggy]

Hans, maybe I should have summed it up this way....

You seem to be accusing him of making up false justifications for a bigotry that he's trying to hide.

From where I stand, he's being pretty up front about his bigotry, but he comes from a worldview in which its not bigotry, in which sympathy for homosexuals is like sympathy for thieves or child molesters -- yeah, they may want to do that, but they chose to actually do it, and it's a sin.

What he's saying adds up from his point of view.

He's not trying at all to hide the fact that he thinks homosexuality is something we shouldn't risk exposing kids to, and which the government shouldn't require private citizens to participate in or condone or accept as "normal", even symbolically.

And given that he sees the world that way, it matters that he's running a family business and his kids are around the workplace. To him, that's entirely pertinent.

So what I'm saying is, sure, he's wrong, but he's not lying, or trying to hide his bigoted opinions under a veneer of slick justifications.

 

[cwalner]

And because he considers homosexuality to be a sexual perversion on the order of bestiality and pedophilia, baking rainbow cookies for a gay group isn't going to happen, even if neither of his girls is likely to ask about the meaning of the rainbow.

The Irony here, of course, is that his turning away the order from the gay students has probably had the exact opposite effect because of the the local media furor this has created.

 

[Uncayimmy]

You're still not getting this guy.

You don't understand why he's doing what he's doing, or what he's saying.

Which doesn't mean he's right, or justified, or anything like that. But still, you're wrong about him, if you don't mind my saying so.

He mentions the kids because he's saying that his business is a family business. Which means that he's not even going to consider putting anything sexual on a cookie decoration -- I know, I can hear you hollering at me "A rainbow isn't sexual!" and I agree -- regardless of actually imagining any scenario in which the girls might ask him about it.

He wouldn't ice cookies with a sexual pun that kids would ignore, either. (At least, that's the implication.)

And because he considers homosexuality to be a sexual perversion on the order of bestiality and pedophilia, baking rainbow cookies for a gay group isn't going to happen, even if neither of his girls is likely to ask about the meaning of the rainbow.

So it's not that he has some gay porn flick playing in his head (or not) or that he believes that his daughters will see the cookies and begin asking about homosexuality (or not), it's simply his totally wrong ideas about gay people and human sexuality more generally.

That right there's the problem. It's pretty simple.

You're making good sense to me, Piggy. I understand what you're driving at.