Support NeoGAF

[Alucrid]

That's fine. If you were in that classroom, then you could say to the kid something like "Hey, you know I don't think it's cool that you're handing out no-homo chocolates", and we could go from there.

The fact that none of the students did that indicates to me that no one was offended. The other conclusion is that we've all become so desensitized to casual homophobia that no one noticed that they...ought to be offended?

Or that no one wanted to start shit with some dude handing out chocolates. Is that really hard to believe?

 

[marrec]

That's fine. If you were in that classroom, then you could say to the kid something like "Hey, you know I don't think it's cool that you're handing out no-homo chocolates", and we could go from there.

The fact that none of the students did that indicates to me that no one was offended. The other conclusion is that we've all become so desensitized to casual homophobia that no one noticed that they...ought to be offended?

I work in Western Pennsylvania where there just so happens to be a large concentration of racist people. These racist people are not meaning to be offensive when they say things like 'I'd let him park my car, but he's black you know, so I'll just do it myself.' They think that these types of statements are perfectly acceptable. It's not a matter of if one intends to be maleficent when making a bigoted statement because most of the time they were raised to believe that making those statements is perfectly fine.

Do you understand what I'm saying here?

Apparently you didn't understand what I was saying.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Or that no one wanted to start shit with some dude handing out chocolates. Is that really hard to believe?

I find this:

And I'll reiterate, I'm not a mind reader and I can't look into the hearts of men (or women), but just going by context that they are grad students in some class, I would imagine that there was no malice in the giving of these chocolates. I think it was intended in a sense of fun, and that the other students understood that.

to be the most believable scenario.

 

[Pavaloo]

It does not matter if anyone was offended in that classroom. These are graduate students they should have more professionalism than that.

 

[bishoptl]

Disagree 100%. And I was a game design teacher for 2 years.

I've been doing it for 4. You want to lay dicks on the table and start measuring those next?

The course syllabus specifically notes that industry professionalism and career preparation is part of the course, not just game design and portfolios. But you wouldn't know that.

 

[Alucrid]

I find this:



to be the most believable scenario.

Look at marrecs post. Just because it was his 'sense of fun' doesn't mean it's not inappropriate.

 

[marrec]

I find this:



to be the most believable scenario.

You are again then making the assumption that for something to be offensive then someone has to intend offense.

That is an incorrect assumption.

 

[crowphoenix]

I find this:



to be the most believable scenario.

You keep saying your not a mind reader and then telling us what his intentions were. Either stop or tell us what his intention for the no homo bit was for.

 

[btkadams]

That's fine. If you were in that classroom, then you could say to the kid something like "Hey, you know I don't think it's cool that you're handing out no-homo chocolates", and we could go from there.

The fact that none of the students did that indicates to me that no one was offended. The other conclusion is that we've all become so desensitized to casual homophobia that no one noticed that they...ought to be offended?

i'm assuming you're not gay and don't or didn't encounter casual homophobia from other students. you don't cause a scene because it really just happens too often. it doesn't make it ok.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Let me be clear on this, since I'm starting to get some flak.

I'm coming from the premise that "No homo" doesn't represent casual homophobia.

If the chocolates said "F*****s go home" or, since marrec seems keen on using racist equivalency, "N*****s go home", the malicious intent to offend would be clear. And I'd be saying pretty much exactly what you guys are saying.

But that malicious intent is precisely what is absent in this case, and I think some people have lost sight of that.

 

[Circle Jerk]

Disagree 100%. And I was a game design teacher for 2 years.

You were probably a shitty teacher.

 

[Auron_Kale]

Totally siding on Bish's side for this.

In a professional environment, this would get you canned so fast due to being wholly inappropriate and offensive.

Also, since the other students failed to speak up about it, I'm glad he did it publicly versus privately as it's really a good teaching point to make, especially when being taught on how to behave in a professional setting.

The sad thing is that these are graduate students, all old enough to know fully well that some supposedly 'harmless' prank like this could be seen and regarded as offensive to others.

 

[crowphoenix]

Let me be clear on this, since I'm starting to get some flak.

I'm coming from the premise that "No homo" doesn't represent casual homophobia.

If the chocolates said "F*****s go home" or, since marrec seems keen on using racist equivalency, "N*****s go home", the malicious intent to offend would be clear. And I'd be saying pretty much exactly what you guys are saying.

But that malicious intent is precisely what is absent in this case, and I think some people have lost sight of that.

Tell me how you know there was no malicious intent? And why do you assume No Homo has no homophobia attached? You have continually argued that it is the intent that matters.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

But that malicious intent is precisely what is absent in this case, and I think some people have lost sight of that.

And you seem to have lost sight that regardless of intent its against bish's class guidelines:

The course syllabus specifically notes that industry professionalism and career preparation is part of the course, not just game design and portfolios. But you wouldn't know that.

As many of us have noted earlier, that sort of shit can potentially get you fired in the industry and involved in harassment lawsuit hell, no matter the intent.

 

[legacyzero]

I've been doing it for 4. You want to lay dicks on the table and start measuring those next?

The course syllabus specifically notes that industry professionalism and career preparation is part of the course, not just game design and portfolios. But you wouldn't know that.

I just heard the sound of the worlds biggest tape measure unraveling in the distance.

 

[Suite Pee]

Personally, I facepalm every time I hear/see the term. It's ridiculous. If I were the type to use it, I think I'd know well enough not to present it to my colleagues in a professional environment. I joke around with the other grad students and some faculty, but I'm always careful about it.

That being said, there probably wasn't malice involved. Still, this is a great lesson for the young student.

 

[marrec]

Let me be clear on this, since I'm starting to get some flak.

I'm coming from the premise that "No homo" doesn't represent casual homophobia.

If the chocolates said "F*****s go home" or, since marrec seems keen on using racist equivalency, "N*****s go home", the malicious intent to offend would be clear. And I'd be saying pretty much exactly what you guys are saying.

But that malicious intent is precisely what is absent in this case, and I think some people have lost sight of that.

Not many people think this kid intended to spread his homophoic agenda via confection. Again, malicious intent is not a pre-requisite for something to be offensive or venomous.

 

[Mumei]

I find this:

And I'll reiterate, I'm not a mind reader and I can't look into the hearts of men (or women), but just going by context that they are grad students in some class, I would imagine that there was no malice in the giving of these chocolates. I think it was intended in a sense of fun, and that the other students understood that.

to be the most believable scenario.

The objection to "no homo" is the same regardless of what his intent might have been; it simply does not matter what scenario you think is most believable.

 

[Croc]

Let me be clear on this, since I'm starting to get some flak.

I'm coming from the premise that "No homo" doesn't represent casual homophobia.

If the chocolates said "F*****s go home" or, since marrec seems keen on using racist equivalency, "N*****s go home", the malicious intent to offend would be clear. And I'd be saying pretty much exactly what you guys are saying.

But that malicious intent is precisely what is absent in this case, and I think some people have lost sight of that.

Like I said before the intent seriously does not matter at all. I completely agree with what marrec is saying with the racism comparison. Some people probably didn't see my post on the last page since it was on of the last ones so I'll reiterate here:

It doesn't really matter what someone's intention with the phrase is. If you jokingly call a white person a nigger in a room full of white people, it's pretty likely that no one is going to be personally offended by that. But that doesn't mean the other implications of the word no longer exist just because you don't want them to. And it doesn't suddenly make it okay because you used it in a context where the people it's referencing aren't around. Everyone in that room; white or other has the right to be offended by that. The same thing goes for the phrase no homo.

Because this kid had the balls to pass out these chocolates with no homo on them to a class full of people whose personal beliefs he did not know, he deserves whatever repercussions he got.

 

[Perspicacity]

Let me be clear on this, since I'm starting to get some flak.

I'm coming from the premise that "No homo" doesn't represent casual homophobia.

If the chocolates said "F*****s go home" or, since marrec seems keen on using racist equivalency, "N*****s go home", the malicious intent to offend would be clear. And I'd be saying pretty much exactly what you guys are saying.

But that malicious intent is precisely what is absent in this case, and I think some people have lost sight of that.

Give me an example of what you think casual homophobia is.

 

[Partial Gamification]

You were probably a shitty teacher.

There are cultural differences from where he's coming from. He could just as easily be an amazing teacher for his particular content area. Let's not fling poo, and try to at least understand each other even if we don't agree.

 

[-KRS-]

It's okay man.

Tell them: http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/

How you really feel.

Why isn't there something like this for students too? So teachers could enter all the shitty students there as a wall of shame for the rest of their lives?

 

[Trike]

Let me be clear on this, since I'm starting to get some flak.

I'm coming from the premise that "No homo" doesn't represent casual homophobia.

If the chocolates said "F*****s go home" or, since marrec seems keen on using racist equivalency, "N*****s go home", the malicious intent to offend would be clear. And I'd be saying pretty much exactly what you guys are saying.

But that malicious intent is precisely what is absent in this case, and I think some people have lost sight of that.

Okay, so "******* go home" is causal homophobia to you then? Or do you just not understand the words "casual", "homophobia", or grouping them together to make "casual homophobia"?

 

[Pavaloo]

Yeah, "F***** go home" is pretty direct homophobia.

 

[Famassu]

Is no homo hate speech? I thought it was just a way to make it clear you aren't making an advance on another man when you compliment how he looks.

edit: not quite what the poor fool who upset bish meant by it though

But why do you "need" to make it clear? Can't a man compliment, hug or give another man chocolate without having to be defensive about his sexuality? Not to even mention it makes being gay seem like it's some horribly negative thing, like you just HAVE to make sure nobody thinks you're one of those EWWWW-HOMOS.

 

[commedieu]

Cumpkin,

It supports an atmosphere where homophobia can thrive. NO HOMO, means I'm telling you this, but ayyyee I aint gay or nothin, as that would be different than me just saying it. Homo is still an offensive term as well.

Its not appropriate in class/work environments.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

And you seem to have lost sight that regardless of intent its against bish's class guidelines:

I conceded on the previous page that bish's standards and rules should apply. He's the teacher, and even though I was unaware of those guidelines, if he personally has a problem with it then of course he's got every right.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Okay, so "******* go home" is causal homophobia to you then? Or do you just not understand the words "casual", "homophobia", or grouping them together to make "casual homophobia"?

I was using the polar opposite of "casual" homophobia to make the point clear.

 

[crowphoenix]

I was using the polar opposite of "casual" homophobia to make the point clear.

Can you provide an example of casual homophobia?

 

[Seanspeed]

But why do you "need" to make it clear? Can't a man compliment, hug or give another man chocolate without having to be defensive about his sexuality? Not to even mention it makes being gay seem like it's some horribly negative thing, like you just HAVE to make sure nobody thinks you're one of those EWWWW-HOMOS.

If somebody thought I was gay, I would be a little offended. Not because being gay is 'ewww', but because its kind of saying, "Hey, you dont seem very masculine to me."

As a straight guy, its normal to be proud of your masculinity, so if you think somebody is kind of insulting that part of you, its going to be taken as offensive.

Just like if you were tell a girl, "Hey, you look like a guy." Not that there's anything wrong with guys, its just that girls tend to pride themselves on their femininity, so saying they look like a guy is an insult to that part of them.

 

[marrec]

If somebody thought I was gay, I would be a little offended. Not because being gay is 'ewww', but because its kind of saying, "Hey, you dont seem very masculine to me."

As a straight person, its normal to be proud of your masculinity, so if you think somebody is kind of insulting that part of you, its going to be taken as offensive.

Just like if you were tell a girl, "Hey, you look like a guy." Not that there's anything wrong with guys, its just that girls tend to pride themselves on their femininity, so saying they look like a guy is an insult to that part of them.

Why does gay != masculine?

 

[crowphoenix]

If somebody thought I was gay, I would be a little offended. Not because being gay is 'ewww', but because its kind of saying, "Hey, you dont seem very masculine to me."

As a straight person, its normal to be proud of your masculinity, so if you think somebody is kind of insulting that part of you, its going to be taken as offensive.

Just like if you were tell a girl, "Hey, you look like a guy." Not that there's anything wrong with guys, its just that girls tend to pride themselves on their femininity, so saying they look like a guy is an insult to that part of them.

As a straight person, I could not care less. And why does being gay imply a lack of masculinity?

 

[Alucrid]

If somebody thought I was gay, I would be a little offended. Not because being gay is 'ewww', but because its kind of saying, "Hey, you dont seem very masculine to me."

As a straight person, its normal to be proud of your masculinity, so if you think somebody is kind of insulting that part of you, its going to be taken as offensive.

Just like if you were tell a girl, "Hey, you look like a guy." Not that there's anything wrong with guys, its just that girls tend to pride themselves on their femininity, so saying they look like a guy is an insult to that part of them.

Well that's because you wrongly attribute gay men with feminine traits and gay women with masculine traits for whatever reason.

 

[Volimar]

Can you provide an example of casual homophobia?

Using washable marker to write your hate message instead of spray paint.

 

[legacyzero]

We're talking about legal adults. If they choose to be idiots so be it.

Pretty sure that stuff ends at High School unless the class is specifically called 'Ethics.'
After high school you got adults who are paying to sit in that class. The only thing that should warrant getting kicked out of class is if theyre actively disrupting it.

That's just bullshit. A terrible excuse. Teachers in general should command respect (much like bish does.).

Its beyond me how anybody could say that it not a teachers/instructors/proffessors job and duty to guide their students in a professional, and moral manner.

Parents pay taxes for public schools. Does that mean that the teacher should STFU if the child to acting offensive like that, unless its distracting the class? Sure, they arent adults, but that makes little difference.

 

[marrec]

Using washable marker to write your hate message instead of spray paint.

I was going to say all of Glee, but this is funnier.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Give me an example of what you think casual homophobia is.

Can you provide an example of casual homophobia?

Well damn, I think these two posts have actually got me. Ok, I'll leave this thread be and give it some introspection.


Whew, I think that was my first Gaf pile-on. Not a pleasant experience and pretty exhausting!

 

[Volimar]

Well damn, I think these two posts have actually got me. Ok, I'll leave this thread be and give it some introspection.


Whew, I think that was my first Gaf pile-on. Not a pleasant experience and pretty exhausting!

It's not a pile-on till KHarvey makes you cry.

 

[Famassu]

If somebody thought I was gay, I would be a little offended. Not because being gay is 'ewww', but because its kind of saying, "Hey, you dont seem very masculine to me."

As a straight guy, its normal to be proud of your masculinity, so if you think somebody is kind of insulting that part of you, its going to be taken as offensive.

Just like if you were tell a girl, "Hey, you look like a guy." Not that there's anything wrong with guys, its just that girls tend to pride themselves on their femininity, so saying they look like a guy is an insult to that part of them.

And that's idiotic. You think giving someone chocolates is somehow not masculine or it's a bad thing if someone thinks you're gay just because you hug a man. That kind of thinking is just sad. There's nothing not-masculine about hugging, that's just some homophobic cultural artifact from a time when men were better off not showing any emotions in public, especially not towards other men (other than high-fives).

Another idiotic thing is that you think gays are less masculine than straight people. Or the fact that you think some idiotic definition of masculinity is important at all.

 

[btkadams]

If somebody thought I was gay, I would be a little offended. Not because being gay is 'ewww', but because its kind of saying, "Hey, you dont seem very masculine to me."

As a straight guy, its normal to be proud of your masculinity, so if you think somebody is kind of insulting that part of you, its going to be taken as offensive.

Just like if you were tell a girl, "Hey, you look like a guy." Not that there's anything wrong with guys, its just that girls tend to pride themselves on their femininity, so saying they look like a guy is an insult to that part of them.

what the fuck?

 

[Seanspeed]

Why does gay != masculine?

Gay guys aren't typically less masculine than straight guys on average?

 

[Croc]

If somebody thought I was gay, I would be a little offended. Not because being gay is 'ewww', but because its kind of saying, "Hey, you dont seem very masculine to me."

As a straight guy, its normal to be proud of your masculinity, so if you think somebody is kind of insulting that part of you, its going to be taken as offensive.

Just like if you were tell a girl, "Hey, you look like a guy." Not that there's anything wrong with guys, its just that girls tend to pride themselves on their femininity, so saying they look like a guy is an insult to that part of them.

The fact that everything you're saying is even being said and that you probably don't see anything wrong with it is proof that no homo needs to go away.

Why shouldn't a gay person be proud of their masculinity? Whenever I came out to people growing up I almost always got the same answer, "wow, but you don't seem gay." Uh, okay? Is that supposed to be a compliment?

There's this ridiculous idea in society that gay = feminine and straight = masculine that is 100% bullshit. Saying no homo is just helping dig those ideas in even further, by saying as a straight male you can't show affection towards another male without it being misconstrued as gay.

Why don't you look up some gay bears and see some real masculinity?

 

[marrec]

Gay guys aren't typically less masculine than straight guys on average?

Not generally, in fact there is a large variance in the gay community just as there is in the straight community. You aren't gay because you identify with feminine traits more, you're gay because you're attracted to the same gender.

This realization usually doesn't send you skipping to the track-lighting store to buy George Michael CDs and pink mesh tops.

Edit:

FUCK I should have shoved some musical theater reference in there too

 

[Alucrid]

Gay guys aren't typically less masculine than straight guys on average?

I take it you don't know many...do you?

Hey marrec, as a straight man I buy George Michael CDs and mesh tops.

 

[marrec]

Seanspeed,

Do you consider men who let their significant others 'peg' them less masculine?

This is VERY important to the conversation.

 

[Croc]

These dudes are totally just platonically cuddling. There's no way they could be doing the gay cause they have beards and chest hair:

Seanspeed,

Do you consider men who let their significant others 'peg' them less masculine?

This is VERY important to the conversation.

Getting fucked is like the most masculine thing you could possibly do.

Seanspeed, if you're really a man you'd let another guy fuck you in the ass.

 

[Seanspeed]

I take it you don't know many...do you?

Thats actually what I'm going by. I guess its just a complete coincidence that pretty much every gay guy I've known is notably more effeminate than your average straight guy then?

Of course I'm not saying every gay guy is like that, but it has been my experience that there is definitely something to that stereotype.

 

[dragonlife]

Not because being gay is 'ewww', but because its kind of saying, "Hey, you dont seem very masculine to me."

You should see all the gay people that downplay other gays' lack of masculinity with comments like, "There's a reason I like men."

 

[Famassu]

Gay guys aren't typically less masculine than straight guys on average?

of course not. You probably couldn't even recognize 99% of gays, the flamboyant ones are the minority. From the gay people I know not a single one is in any way feminine (in fact, they are pretty butch, one even plays rugby) and the only slightly feminine man I know is straight yet people keep thinking he is gay.

 

[Volimar]

Masculinity is so bullshit. If your self worth is so tied into how manly you think other people think you are that you have to add a footnote "no homo" to any act of kindness to someone of the same sex, you've got some introspection to do.

Being called or alluded to as gay or having done something "gay" should be no more offensive than being called Canadian if you're not. It's not true, but what's wrong with being Canadian?

Some day I hope we'll get to that point with most people.