Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes!

[Good Lt]

Tangentially related:

I think the use of the word "(fill in the blank)fags" in these entries is purely a colloquialism of the subculture rather than a genuine "slur." The people who write these entries use the term quite loosely and about others (furfags, emofags, etc.). Think about how you might have used to speak with your high-school buddies. In my personal experience, PC didn't even exist in the high school I was brought up, and this kind of crude banter was rather common.

They'll grow out of it. Hopefully.

 

[GreNME]

Agree 100% Infantile and silly. But then so is Monty Python.. But then, that's also funny. I'm suprised to know people find this stuff funny. Some of it is in extremely bad taste.

Monty Python were not openly hostile and cruel in their infantile humor. That's how it's different. I don't find all of their (Monty Python's) stuff funny either, but I can see the harmlessness in that kind of humor even when I'm not laughing.

Yeah, I can see how this would be a bit off-key to someone not familiar with 4chan.

Good stuff though

4Chan? Are you talking about that site consisting mostly of 13-year-olds and pedophiles? How does that make it okay or funny?

 

[cisco]

They're satirizing people who use that word.

 

[Arus808]

My favorite:

The Ballad of 9/11 Truth - [...]Usually all twenty people at a Truther march will be singing this."

 

[T.A.M.]

This is extremely unhelpful.

Agree 100% Infantile and silly. But then so is Monty Python.. But then, that's also funny. I'm suprised to know people find this stuff funny. Some of it is in extremely bad taste.

Monty Python were not openly hostile and cruel in their infantile humor. That's how it's different. I don't find all of their (Monty Python's) stuff funny either, but I can see the harmlessness in that kind of humor even when I'm not laughing.




4Chan? Are you talking about that site consisting mostly of 13-year-olds and pedophiles? How does that make it okay or funny?

8 to 12 months ago, I would have wholeheartedly agreed. Now, after arguing and pulling my hair out for over a year and a half w.r.t. the nonsense that is the truth theory on 9/11, I think most of them deserve nothing more than mockery.

Sorry.

TAM

 

[GreNME]

You realize the cognitive dissonance involved in that, right?

Look, I'm not anyone's parent here. Go ahead and do what you like. However, if one is going to do stuff like this and then pretend they have a moral high ground when someone comes here making wild claims or behaving trollishly I personally don't see how that's any different than the Loose Change bulletin boards.

Of the people I've argued with on this board I can think of two or three who, while we still might not agree completely on things like 9/11 or other things, we've developed at least an amicable rapport and, in at least one case, a fairly friendly line of communication. It doesn't have to be as contentious as some people have a habit of making it (on both sides).

 

[Arus808]

Its their site, they can do what they want, target who they want, and if they want to call truthers potheaded, living in moms' basement, sociopaths, who listen to equally moronic sociopaths, then its not our problem. If the site owner had a problem with any of the articles being posted, he (or they) can edit and eliminate any "juvenile" comments.


Dont like what is posted? then dont go to the site. Simple really.

 

[Sizzler]

Its their site, they can do what they want, target who they want, and if they want to call truthers potheaded, living in moms' basement, sociopaths, who listen to equally moronic sociopaths, then its not our problem. If the site owner had a problem with any of the articles being posted, he (or they) can edit and eliminate any "juvenile" comments.


Dont like what is posted? then dont go to the site. Simple really.

Fully agree.

However it was posted here and as such deserves praise and/or critcism. The entry could have been super funny. I almost laughed out loud a couple of times but in the end I left feeling it was tasteless. If I were the author I'd tone done the faggotry to make the entry more entertaining.

 

[SpitfireIX]

I'm going to have to get on board with the 'too much anti-gay to be amusing"

I somewhat agree with this, but I'd like to point out that homophobia appears to be prevalent among "truthers," as many of them seem to delight in insinuating that prominent debunkers are gay. This might explain the authors' attempt to label "truthers" as gay.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

You realize the cognitive dissonance involved in that, right?

Look, I'm not anyone's parent here. Go ahead and do what you like. However, if one is going to do stuff like this and then pretend they have a moral high ground when someone comes here making wild claims or behaving trollishly I personally don't see how that's any different than the Loose Change bulletin boards.

You are aware that no one here has taken credit for the content of that article, and only one has expressed their desire to contribute to the article in an unspecified way, right?

Your complaint seems mistargeted.

ETA (quite a bit later, yes): As such, your posting in this thread comes off sounding more like "Don't laugh at that," rather than "Don't do that."

 

[dudalb]

So we are not to supposed to poke fun at Truthers?

 

[Sizzler]

So we are not to supposed to poke fun at Truthers?

Yes that is what we are saying. You are not supposed to poke fun at truthers or anyone for that matter. Jelly beans and gum drops (?!?!) all around please. Gimme a break....

The word faggot is unnecessary. It not only takes away from the overall comical value of the entry, but it also has the potential to offend and/or turn-off a lot of people at the same time.

Satires and edgy comedy can be good when its done right. This however is not.

 

[JCM]

btard ED article on Randi's forums what is the world coming to
Funny stuff thanks leetman

 

[Good Lt]

btard ED article on Randi's forums what is the world coming to
Funny stuff thanks leetman

Fortunately, the entire Troof movement is a laughing stock, so the ED entry is just gasoline on the fire.

I think the point is that even the 4chans and btards and legions of Anonymous think Trooferism is teh stoopid.

It's entertainment.

 

[Tweeter]

The thread title sounded kinda faggy to me.

 

[Myriad]

The thread title sounded kinda faggy to me.

Really? To me that expression immediately and vividly brings to mind orgasm resulting from heterosexual intercourse. I would have thought that most heteros would associate it the same way, by experience with either their own orgasms or their partners', or both. How odd that it should instead seem "kinda faggy" to you. But I guess peoples' experiences are different.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[quixotecoyote]

I somewhat agree with this, but I'd like to point out that homophobia appears to be prevalent among "truthers," as many of them seem to delight in insinuating that prominent debunkers are gay. This might explain the authors' attempt to label "truthers" as gay.

I thought of that, but as someone else mentioned, the entire site is riddled with the 'ha-ha, you're a fag' mentality. It isn't ironic or satirical, it's just their insult of choice.

 

[GreNME]

You are aware that no one here has taken credit for the content of that article, and only one has expressed their desire to contribute to the article in an unspecified way, right?

Your complaint seems mistargeted.

ETA (quite a bit later, yes): As such, your posting in this thread comes off sounding more like "Don't laugh at that," rather than "Don't do that."

Let me clarify what I'm saying, then:

What's the point of glorifying that entry at all except to behave like some kind of a-hole?

Like I said, I ain't your daddy so you don't have to do what I tell you, but that doesn't mean I can't hold an opinion about the crude and derogatory crap on that link. It doesn't stop me from believing that the only thing threads like this do is promote flame wars.

 

[e^n]

I thought of that, but as someone else mentioned, the entire site is riddled with the 'ha-ha, you're a fag' mentality. It isn't ironic or satirical, it's just their insult of choice.

It also has practically zero to do with sexual orientation. There are many homosexual btards and ED contributors, it's just a generic insult much as 'jew' has also become. Part of the point is to be excessive to the extent you upset people, because these people are then taking the point more seriously than you ever did.

It's a hard subculture to explain, but rest assured that calling truthers 'fags' has nothing to do with their sexual orientation. It's just an insult.

 

[uk_dave]

Homer: They turned the Navy into a floating joke. They ruined all our best names like Bruce and Lance and Julian. Those were the toughest names we had! Now they're just...

John: Queer?

Homer: Yeah, and that's another thing! I resent you people using that word. That's our word for making fun of you! We need it!

http://www.tv.com/the-simpsons/homers-phobia/episode/1453/trivia.html