(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank?
(Anonymous)
2011-07-21 03:27 pm UTC (link)

Yes, you've said it already.

This is for fiction, right? Full of fictional characters? You sound as if you are being too insulted by it too easily by harping about implications about fictional scenarios. You are the one that doesn't get it. Thanks for the generalizations about straight people never getting bashed for their sexuality. Guess what? You just did it. Ever think about the straight people who aren't interested in romance and sex being called gay? Ever think about the straight people who don't want to have children being called pedophiles? It's a ridiculous world out there. Guess what? There are straight people that also like straight romance. Oooooooooo........

Sure there are implications, but those implications concerning this particular fictional meme haven't even been written yet and are already being judged as homophobic with no proof of it at all. So yes, it was bullying to call them homophobic for daring to go the reverse from turning straight people gay. Sexual orientation is sexual orientation. It doesn't matter in the least who turns what fictional character to a different sexual orientation. You don't have to read it. It's not a hate crime to your sensibilities no matter how angry it makes you. You can talk about it, but disagreeing with you doesn't necessarily make me or anyone else homophobic on principle.

Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank?
(Anonymous)
2011-07-21 05:11 pm UTC (link)

I'm more on the fence with this whole debate, so I'm not arguing against your other points, but I think the other anon was not generalizing the fact that straight people don't get bashed for their sexuality, but that their experiences are no way near the institutionalized hatred that homosexuals face every day. And whereas you can easily find straight romances with the media in pretty much *everywhere*, it's hard to find gay romances.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-07-21 10:41 pm UTC (link)
	it's hard to find gay romances. True, in RL. On the internet within fandom though? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-07-22 02:08 am UTC (link)
	Yeah, this is a pretty ridiculous claim when the kinkmeme is 90% Tiger/Barnaby, and about 8% other slash (and a significant part of that remaining 2% is threesomes of some sort). (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank?
(Anonymous)
2011-07-22 12:21 am UTC (link)

You know, I was actually with you up until this point, because I like the idea of sexuality as a spectrum and exploring the variations between straight and gay.

But implying that sexuality discrimination against heterosexuals is comparable to that against queer people is ridiculous. I don't want children, everyone I know knows I don't want children, and I've never been called a pedo. This is the first I've ever heard of it happening. Not to say it doesn't happen, but it's hardly like the systemic abuse queer people face.

And calling a straight pserson gay is "bashing" them? Seriously, think about this. You've managed to imply that being called gay is an insult while reducing bashing to name-calling. There's just so much wrong with that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-07-22 02:48 am UTC (link)
	As a childless person my friends often whisk away their children into another room for fear of me running about molesting them. There needs to be a telethon for childless straights where they raise funds for fertility treatments so our pedo tendencies can finally be cured. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-07-22 06:30 am UTC (link)
	LOL! Okay, seriously - has this ever happened to anyone? Are there really evil straightphobes out there that connect childlessness by choice to being a molester? Is this an accepted truth of the heterophobic world? I don't want to have giant blue jellyfish; do the straightbashers think I'm some kind of sick sealife fetishist? (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-07-22 07:35 am UTC (link)
	You are making no sense. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank?
(Anonymous)
2011-07-22 12:05 pm UTC (link)

To be brutally honest? Chances are that this is not happening since you are straight or childless, but since you come across as a complete and utter creep. I wouldn't let someone who rambles as incoherently as you near my children, either.

Notice that even when taken at face value, nothing you describe has to do with discrimination against straight people as a group: It'd be discriminating against childless people. Brain. Use it.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-07-22 12:09 pm UTC (link)
	I think they were being sarcastic. As is, this doesn't happen so the argument about straight childless people being assumed to be paedophiles is invalid. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-07-24 09:35 pm UTC (link)
	I was! Which makes the poster above look a bit of a complete tit. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-08-01 02:34 am UTC (link)
	Your sarcasm meter is on the fritz. Unclench. (Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank?
(Anonymous)
2011-07-22 06:24 pm UTC (link)

I never said anything about it being comparable. The point I made was that being a jerk to anyone no matter what sexual orientation is involved is a very shitty thing to do.

I'll explain it to you again. The stories for the prompt are not written. The prompt itself is the reverse from the usual turning a straight person gay, but there are no suggestions as to how to make it happen in a story. YET, there is already an outrage at the idea itself directed toward fictional characters when there is no proof of gay bashing whatsoever. Conclusion= JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS. You talk of implications, and yet those implications never appeared in any story format whatsoever. All that appeared were accusations of homophobia. That's all! There is no proof of justification for it that I can see. It doesn't make your side look good at all. I see it as attempted censorship, and a missed opportunity of possible creative compassion and understanding of existing real life issues. If the stories turned out to be what you feared, then, and only then, is it justified to bash them. Guess what? It hasn't existed yet in this particular situation.

"And calling a straight pserson gay is "bashing" them? Seriously, think about this. You've managed to imply that being called gay is an insult while reducing bashing to name-calling. There's just so much wrong with that." I agree that it's wrong, but it happens. It's heterosexual peer pressure by closed minded shitty individuals, and that was my point. It perpetuates the real life implications you talked about for gay individuals and spreads hate about them. They really do say that to each other. Trying to point out that I was doing the insulting there with my implied statement? You're the one who missed the point, then. A shitty individual that does this is a shitty individual, and just mentioning that it happens in the world doesn't make me or anyone else a shitty individual for it.

So, another point here. I'm totally okay with warning people at that prompt about the knowledge of real life implications for the idea, but calling people homophobic for it is jumping the fucking gun. It's forcing your personal conclusion on them without any proof that they have ever done what you think they've done. If there is to be any mutual understanding about this, hold the jerk reflex of past human implications and talk it out instead. There is no use for telling anyone that they are homophobic right off the bat.

And for the rest of you commenting about people who do not want children- it called childfree, not childlessness. Childlessness is not having the ability to have children, yet wanting them. Childfree people want nothing to do with them regardless of the ability to conceive and give birth. There really is current societal pressure and misunderstanding of this. This includes a lack of proper health care because society as a whole want people who are childfree to stay fertile and change their minds. When they express a lack of interest or dislike for children, they are looked at as monsters.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank?
(Anonymous)
2011-07-22 11:18 pm UTC (link)

I'm childless by choice, not childfree. I like children; I'm a teacher. I enjoy other people's children and their company. I just don't want my own. Please don't tell me how to identify.

As for expressing a dislike for children, referring to human beings as "crotch droppings" and parents as "breeders" or "moos", a common practice among hardcore childfree types, will earn you some dislike. Childlessness can be a personal choice and a good one, but it doesn't give you the right to degrade large segments of society.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank?
(Anonymous)
2011-07-23 01:01 am UTC (link)

"I'm childless by choice, not childfree. I like children; I'm a teacher. I enjoy other people's children and their company. I just don't want my own. Please don't tell me how to identify." How did I tell you how identify? I don't know you at all. You can identify yourself however you want, and I'll accept that. All I did was say how it was for others that are childless or childfree that I've read from personal accounts on the internet. Yours is a personal account I just now read, so...okay. All the power to you. It's not that different from some that identify as childfree, and that was also their choice to identify as that as well. It doesn't invalidate their experiences, and it doesn't invalidate yours.

"As for expressing a dislike for children, referring to human beings as "crotch droppings" and parents as "breeders" or "moos", a common practice among hardcore childfree types, will earn you some dislike." Thanks for the info, though I already knew this and felt it too insulting, myself, to even mention in it my explanation. There are childfree that are not hardcore and respect humanity enough to not say those horrible things. How do I know that? I refuse to follow the hardcore type of communities.

"Childlessness can be a personal choice and a good one, but it doesn't give you the right to degrade large segments of society." I agree. Which is why I brought it up. Hasn't that been my point all along that being shitty to others is wrong? I'm sorry, but I can't be anymore clear than that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Re: Tiger & Bunny fandom's first wank? (Anonymous) 2011-07-23 05:35 am UTC (link)
	When you say something like "It's called childfree, not childlessness" and go on to specify that childlessness refers to infertility, then it comes across as telling a person how to identify. I believe that wasn't your intention, but it did read that way. Thank you, though, for your willingness to reconsider that. Much appreciated. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -