![This is a link post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 2:17, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I told you so:
“Grindr has seen a surge of users in Milwaukee, WI, during the Republican National Convention, so much so that an executive of the gay dating app has said the RNC is ‘basically Grindr’s Super Bowl’.”
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 6:00, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
But he'll be a lot more exciting than Biden.
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 12:33, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/06/24/gops-sudden-turn-away-gay-rights-acceptance/
and then going out and fucking gay prozzers
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 14:03, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
They might be hypocrites, but I'd argue that these alleged LGBT 'allies' are hypocrites too for taking the 'Haha, you're gay' route.
Hardly surprising, though. The Onion has gone down the shitter since embracing the shortform social media format. Likely quite difficult to come up with fresh satire when the real world is beating you to the punch every time i.e. the ear bandages link up there ⬆️
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 14:25, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 14:33, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
you're really tying yourselves in knots
speaking of enjoyable hypocrisy, I do like it how people who spend half their time whining about wokeness and reading all those spectator articles that are variations on the "PC gone mad" will bleat on about how offensive something is if ever given a sniff of an angle. It's almost like their values are entirely transactional.
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 15:36, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 21:24, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
perhaps there'll be a moment of self reflection when you're reading your next article about mad woke uni students cancelling someone or similar
"What about someone who goes onto a british humour site and takes offence on behalf of closeted anti-gay republicans about someone posting a link to a satirical news clip about them going to gay prostitutes?"
I mean, maybe I've got you pegged wrong, no pun intended, and you care deeply about closeted republicans trying to wind back gay rights, and want to protect them from the shame of their hypocrisy being satirised should they be reading links. Bravo for standing up against jokes on B3ta.
But it kinda seems pretty PC and woke to me
( , Thu 18 Jul 2024, 23:35, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Next you’ll be bleating that democracy is in danger of extinction.
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 0:02, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
so the PC pretending to care about homophobia didn't work, so now it's "pearl clutching for gay rights" in the space of one thread
like I said, transactional values.
someone who was genuinely concerned about how some onion satire might be homophobic would be much more concerned about a christain-right dominated movement with an anti-gay agenda. We could argue about how much they're likely to do if they come to power, but given how they've already overturned abortion rights I'd hardly dismiss it as fantasy
Is it wokeness over petty bullshit that really bothers the right, because they certainly like having their turn at it? I don't mean to single you out, you're probably thinking no more deeply than, "they're attacking republicans, I've got to respond" a bit like how you felt the need to set the record straight when someone made a joke about trump not caring about the people who were shot. I'm just using it to illustrate a broader hypocrisy I find amusing
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 3:43, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I don't give a fuck about Republicans. I do give a fuck about people's sexual orientation being used against them.
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 5:29, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
What's the difference between a priest and acne? Acne doesn't come onto to you face until you're 13
While you could interpret this joke as using someone sexual orientation against them, the essence is the shared knowledge that priests sexually abuse young boys.
Likewise the onion satire could be interpreted as an attack on sexual orientation, but it really only works if the target is both closeted, and closeted because they have a party that is increasingly anti gay fundamentalist. It's the hypocrisy that's funny. It relies on its audience being sophisticated enough to understand that.
The rest wasn't aimed at you, I've little idea if you care so much about homophobia that you can't stand humour that even references gay sex , but I'm certain prufrock doesn't.
My reply to you where I reference "people who spend half their time whining about wokeness" was just bait to flush that hypocrisy out of him. It's not much sport, but the board's a little slow.
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 9:51, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You would only interpret it that way if you believed there was some correlation between homosexuality and child sexual abuse.
Most normal people would realise that these priests are paedophiles and that their sexual orientation has fuck all to do with their choice of victim.
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 10:32, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I'd say about 99% of priest reported paedophilia is a male abusing a boy, so there is clearly very strong correlation in that pesky thing called reality, and to say the priests have no sexual orientation in their choice of victim is kind of idiotic, rather than what "normal people would realise".
I think what you meant to say, if you were a bit less confused, is that being gay doesn't make you any more likely to be paedophile, which I'd agree with. It's got fuck all to do with with the joke, mind, which doesnt mention gender.
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 13:27, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You're really digging yourself into a corner here. I suggest you go and re-educate yourself.
zeroabuseproject.org/victim-assistance/jwrc/keep-kids-safe/sexuality-of-offenders/
I'm not sure the re-education will do anything to cure your internalised homophobia, though...
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 14:14, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
but respect for referring to research, so I'll do you the respect of a decent answer
Here's a more modern meta-analysis of the research jaapl.org/content/48/2/146
"Perhaps the most comprehensive review of the evidence potentially in favor of the idea that pedophilia is an orientation is embedded in a fifty-page treatise on the subject of “sexual orientation.” These authors define sexual orientation as “attraction to members of the same sex, both sexes, or the other sex”
I think the issue in the past was that many forensic psychiatrists defined homosexuality as a pathology in itself, with the obvious difference to the pathology of paedophiles in age preference. Therefore a gay is not a paedo, as paedo is its own sexual orientation. (It was a bit like saying wayne rooney fucking grannies isn't heterosexual because he has a preference for old people). We now no longer consider homosexuality a pathology, nor do modern psychiatrists and the DSM5 consider paedophilia a sexual orientation of its own (though a few still do). Sexual orientation and gender preference in the normal sense is now considered a relevant clinical feature of paedophilia in modern psychiatry.
You can argue about precise definitions, but personally I think if you get aroused getting naked with boys and touching boys cocks and sticking you dick in bums, but don't get aroused by girls, it's probably a sign that homosexuality is part of it. Not all of it, but part of it.
And I'd speculate that those who are aroused by young boys are attracted to the priesthood where they get opportunity. Unless they teach it in the seminary. And I reckon it's a public service to keep it in the public consciousness that these these sanctimonious hypocrite cunts fuck vulnerable kids by telling jokes about them
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 15:21, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Priests historically had and still have better access to vulnerable boys. That;s why 80% of children sexually abused by priests were/are boys but that isn't the same in the non-priest sexual abuser population.
( , Sat 20 Jul 2024, 11:29, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
kevin spacey might be into abusing young male actors, and cosby into drugging chicks and raping them, but their sexual preference informs who they choose. cosby isnt drugging men, and spacey women. Paedo's are particularly fucked in the head if that doco by Louis theroux was any guide, but like us most of them have a sexual orientation, a sexual preference that they're aroused by. That's what these terms mean. Sexual orientation, who you get aroused by, is actually a more straightforward characteristic than gender identity. people might not know who they are, but they know what turns them on
I don't know what the overall stats are for sexual preference among paedos. It'd be interesting to see if the comibined priest and scoutmaster numbers skew the results towards boys, or the creepy uncles and PE teachers tip the balance the other way
( , Sat 20 Jul 2024, 15:15, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You can pretend otherwise if you want, if that’s the delusion that keeps you sane. You can pretend Joe Biden has all his marbles if you want. Just spare us your angry and inane sophistry. Haven’t you got a reading of kiddies’ books to toddlers by drag queens to attend? You’ve got to defend these gay rights or they’ll disappear forever!
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 13:02, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
rather than people like yourself who are revulsed by gay sex and assume other people must be so this is the point of the video. It's ok, there's other, simpler kinds of humour than satire where you don't get confused about what it all means
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 13:44, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 13:54, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
it'd be like watching the Brass Eye bit about the dangers of Cake and assuming it's all about shaming drug users. I guess if you don't get it you don't get it
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 14:33, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You know you’ve exposed your idiocy, so now you claim I don’t get an entirely different sketch, about an entirely different subject. The Brass Eye sketch actually is sophisticated satire, that works on many levels, and contains much more parody (not the same thing as satire, although I doubt you know the difference). This is how your sophistry always goes, fatuity exposed, you try and shift the focus onto something else. Comparing that profoundly lowbrow and infantile onion skit to Brass Eye is just moronic. Brass Eye was so very funny because it was clever, but superficially appeared to be just silly. The onion is just puerile. The onion is much more your level.
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 14:54, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
"relying on the sophistication of the audience" just means that the producers are assuming the audience has sufficient intelligence not to mistake satire for direct comment. I know it's a subtle difference, between that and saying the satire is sophisticated, but that's why people do their english gsce.
They even explicitly signpost one joke just in case, with the newsreader saying "the average well adjusted gay man does not engage in spreading fecal matter...but these are particularly repressed". This isn't to add to the humour, but for the benefit of particularly slow viewers so that they won't misinterpret this as a comment about all gay men, though still operating somewhat above your level it seems.
I think the parallels are obvious between the two sketches, both pretend to be real news and mimic their respective country's formats and style, but both deal with a fictious subject, a fake drug crisis or gay prostitution surge, and both have targets that are real and hypocritical. The difference is the brass eye has less parody, using real celebrities to make its point while the onion uses actors to play the prostitutes. Bernard manning is not parodying himself, he's genuinely taken in by the fake premise. I know these terms can be difficult. As to your opinion about the two shows, thanks for sharing, but I'd put a bit more stock in someone who demonstrates they understand them first.
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 23:43, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Bit rich from the most long winded bore on /links. Just do a word count mate. I’m surprised you hadn’t done your old trick of deleting the most fatuous of your replies. Anyway can’t talk now- I’m trying to understand the sophisticated satire of the onion. Republicans are coprophiliacs! What could it possibly mean?
( , Sat 20 Jul 2024, 15:45, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
We all learn at our own speeds
( , Sat 20 Jul 2024, 23:46, Share, Reply)
![This is a normal post](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I'll file that one along with "No, Your values are entirely transactional" in the 'Can't think of any counterargument' folder
( , Fri 19 Jul 2024, 14:41, Share, Reply)