this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2024
966 points (98.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

6024 readers
1814 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 13 points 5 hours ago (3 children)
[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 13 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (3 children)

Assuming good faith question: The (false) dichotomy of top/bottom implies a power dynamic in which the bottom is subservient to the top. In reality, it's often a simple preference and bottoms can domineer just as well as tops. Some prefer it that way. And there's more than top and bottom. Versatile is the obvious third option (no or changing preference for position) as well as side (prefers non-penetrative sex).

There's this stereotype (may not be the right word) that extends from the above in that tops are more masculine or powerful by virtue of topping, due to the tie with being dominant. Thus bottoms are more feminine and subservient. All of that is false and represents the gay community in a pretty bad, oversimplified, sexist-somewhere-along-the-line way.

The dom/sub axis is not the same as the top/bottom axis (not really an axis).

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

It’s not just the top/bottom part that’s problematic, it’s the entire post. The punchline is “Trump and Elon are gay for each other, isn’t that funny?” which centers the idea that it would be bad or wrong for them to be gay for each other, perpetuating the conservative stereotype that there’s something wrong with being gay.

[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago

Good call, I missed it. We've got layers of shittiness in this meme.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -3 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

Oh FFS.

We (gay people) have been pointing out the hypocrisy of homophobes with this sort of joke for ages and will continue to do it because it's fucking hilarious. We are, in doing so, celebrating that it's wonderful to be gay and sad that they don't see that or see there at times in-the-closet-like behavior.

The last thing thing I need is a bunch of word police telling me what I can and cannot say.

You know who IS making it seem like there's something wrong with being gay? People like you.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 34 minutes ago* (last edited 8 minutes ago) (1 children)

Nobody's telling you what you can and can't say. They're telling you that what you said is in bad taste, and youre telling them to stop saying that.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -1 points 21 minutes ago (1 children)

LOL. I'm pretty sure saying "that is just homophobia, by the way" is exactly trying to tell people what they can and can't say.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 minutes ago

I disagree. If someone came up to me and said "Buenos dias! Donde estas el bano?" and I was like "that is Spanish, by the way", I have simply made an observation and have not implied that they aren't allowed to speak Spanish.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

As a “joke” it treats being gay as derogatory. You’re welcome to make shitty homophobic jokes if you want to.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Are you gay?

Are you not ok with being gay if you are? Are you not and experiencing latent homophobia?

Because that's the only way you can possible conclude that it's derogatory to call someone gay.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

lol, the idea that I’ve said there is something wrong with being gay or being called gay is rich.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

lol, the idea that I’ve said there is something wrong with being gay or being called gay is rich.

You've said that using jokes about being gay is derogatory. Literally what you are saying is that calling someone gay has negative connotations. It's bad to be gay.

Let's try to put this in simple terms:

If one of my many very gay male friends calls someone a fag they are owning the definition of "fag". If I call myself a dyke I own that word. If we joke about homophobes being secretly gay we own the language and we erect a shield against that being used in a derogatory manner against us.

You want to police those definitions and tell people what they can and cannot say and can and cannot joke about. You want to take away that shield.

I suspect you are young and did not live through a time when it was absolutely CRITICAL for the queer community writ large to take control of our language. Literally that was the only way we gained power and the only way we made jokes about fags and dykes NOT be derogatory.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 53 minutes ago (1 children)

Jokes that treat being gay as bad are themselves homophobic, yes - they do not reclaim the word, they perpetuate hatred. You’re welcome to make those jokes - I’m not stopping you by calling out your internalized homophobia.

You can also reclaim any words you want to. Nothing wrong with that.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 0 points 41 minutes ago (1 children)

Jokes that treat being gay as bad are themselves homophobic

You are interpreting this particular joke as saying being gay is bad. I'm not. So I'm reclaiming the words and rolling with it. 'MMmmkay?

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 34 minutes ago (1 children)

Maybe it's just me, but Republicans having two daddies seems kind of woke

Please explain the joke to me, because I don’t get it.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 1 points 31 minutes ago (1 children)

Please explain the joke to me, because I don’t get it.

Perhaps that's the problem. You have no sense of humor.

[–] Trying2KnowMyself@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 26 minutes ago

Understandable, thanks!

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Sure, but the joke here is turning the dumb jokes of the homophobes against them, right? Calling a homophobe "haha u'r gay n a bottom" is kinda using their homophobia against them, no?

Also, I'm gay myself. If someone said "haha, u like taking it up the ass", I would be like, "sure I do!". Say this to a homophobe n they would be incredibly offended. So ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

But sure, I get why the morals of this aren't so straightforward.

[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

You aren't wrong. It's rather philosophical at that point. There's the "don't say it because it's shitty angle" (quasi-mine, though mine was more a explanation vs a held belief) vs the "take it back from them" angle. Both have pros/cons and I'm not going to pretend I have the 'perfect' answer. The truth is probably that whichever is more effective/least damaging probably varies by context.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

This is just absolutely ridiculous. It's thought police over-engineering for clout.

[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 8 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

It's a dissection of why some people in the LGBT community may be offended. If you're unwilling to try to see the perspective of others and choose to instead reject empathy, that's a problem for you and the people around you. This internet stranger will continue to have a good day.

Also, clout? On Lemmy? Oh good, I've got the support of all 12 of us...

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

It’s a dissection of why some people in the LGBT community may be offended. If you’re unwilling to try to see the perspective of others

I don't think you see the hypocrisy in your own comments.

Empathy would be you not trying to tell people what to think and say and being willing to see their perspective.

Also, clout? On Lemmy? Oh good, I’ve got the support of all 12 of us…

Hey maybe that's meaningful to you. It certainly seems to be to many.

[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I don’t think you see the hypocrisy in your own comments.

I never misunderstood that you're close minded. I'll even grant that it can be frustrating to feel like you need a formal course on such things and that it changes entirely too fast and that sometimes it all feels like bullshit (ask me about using the term demisexual wrong* on the internet one time). But the world is made better when we work to understand others, which you've demonstrated that as being a non-priority for you.

It certainly seems to be to many.

Then why are you here?

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -2 points 38 minutes ago (2 children)

But the world is made better when we work to understand others, which you’ve demonstrated that as being a non-priority for you.

That's your interpretation because I don't agree with you because as a queer person I want to not be told how to use queer words. Thus demonstrating that working to understand others is a non-priority for you.

That's the hypocrisy.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 1 points 29 minutes ago (1 children)

It's not since Reddit that I've seen anyone engage in such masterful mental gymnastics to completely avoid getting the point. We have at least silver medal material right here.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world 0 points 23 minutes ago

Just because you don't get it doesn't mean I don't make sense.

No seriously dude. Go talk to some older gay people, particularly men. Try to make some minimal effort to understand why communities who have been beaten to shit by society want to own their language. It's gotta be something to have never been in that position.

[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 0 points 20 minutes ago (1 children)

I understand that you don't want to learn. Because that's what you're doing. You want to ignore why people don't want you to say things like that so that the onus isn't on you to change your behavior because that's difficult and/or inconvenient. As above, it's really frustrating to have to learn yet more terms (I still don't quite get allosexual even though I apparently am that or something along those lines?) and then also to have to break associations with things that haven't aged well because then you feel obligated to feel bad for making mistakes even if most of the time people don't care/understand the difficulty.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -1 points 16 minutes ago (1 children)

I understand that you don’t want to learn.

The sheer arrogance of your comment.... wow.

You want to ignore why people don’t want you to say things like that so that the onus isn’t on you to change your behavior because that’s difficult and/or inconvenient.

You are the one wanting to ignore people here. You are so convinced that only your perspective can be right that you are unwilling to even process the words I write. You don't have to agree but to willfully ignore that what I'm saying has legitimacy is just disgusting. And I've no doubt you don't even realize your oppression and your own bigotry. Do you?

[–] maniclucky@lemmy.world 1 points 6 minutes ago* (last edited 4 minutes ago)

I've read everything you've written and it's all very immature, self-centered, abdication of responsibility paired with conservative level mental gymnastics. You've given me no perspective that I, a gay man from a small midwestern town, haven't personally borne witness to and a little of what I've done once upon a time.

I'm not saying your perspective is wrong, I'm saying it's self centered, lazy, and ultimately detrimental to you and the people around you.

And I’ve no doubt you don’t even realize your oppression and your own bigotry. Do you?

I make no demands upon you so oppression is out. You are free to ignore my observations at any moment and I couldn't care less. Hell, at this point I'm writing for everyone that's not you that's reading this. My statements are based on how your online persona comes across because I don't know anything about you beyond that to be bigoted against. By definition, I'd have to be prejudiced against you for membership in a particular group to be bigoted and the only one you've listed is 'queer' and I'm not that self-hating. You are free to be all the negative things that your online persona appears to be. I'm telling you why people may not want to be around you because of your behavior.

[–] noodlejetski@lemm.ee 7 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

you really can't see how using sexuality to mock someone you hate is homophobic?

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

you really can’t see how using sexuality to mock someone you hate is homophobic?

It's not using sexuality to mock someone. It's using hypocrisy to mock someone.

You know what's the same thing? When gay men call each other fags or lesbians dykes. It's taking what was intended as derogatory and flipping it around to celebrate it. It's the ideal response to bullying assholes of any kind.

[–] noodlejetski@lemm.ee 5 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

It's not using sexuality to mock someone. It's using hypocrisy to mock someone.

I guess it would make it okay to call a black right-winger an N-word and talk about how he can't swim and only eats chicken and watermelon, then?

When gay men call each other fags or lesbians dykes

and I'm sure you know that not everyone is comfortable doing that because of their lived experiences. it's awesome that homophobic jokes don't affect you, but not everyone can distance themselves from them.

[–] enbyecho@lemmy.world -3 points 1 hour ago

I guess it would make it okay to call a black right-winger an N-word and talk about how he can’t swim and only eats chicken and watermelon, then?

If you are black, yes, it would be ok. And many black people do. It's the exact same defense mechanism.

and I’m sure you know that not everyone is comfortable doing that because of their lived experiences.

Then let them not be comfortable with it and let me and my people alone. Do not try to police my language just because perceive someone somewhere to have experienced some mild discomfort... and why? WHY DO I SAY THIS?

Because honey, they need to arm themselves against that discomfort. You need to have a shield and that shield is OWNING the words. If you let people who use derogatory words own them you have lost power.

[–] UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 0 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

Calling a homophobe gay isn't homophobia though, is it

Yeah, it is. It reinforces the idea that there is something wrong with a gay homophobe being gay, rather than the problem being that they are a homophobe.

[–] noodlejetski@lemm.ee 1 points 1 hour ago

it's perpetuating the view that calling someone "gay" is somehow an insult.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml -2 points 5 hours ago (2 children)
[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 hours ago

... you could just explain your logic you know.

It isn't the general consensus.

calls out a post for being homophobia topped with an extra serving of homophobia

less upvotes than someone who thinks “haha gay” isn’t homophobic

😒

Thanks for trying.