i just kicked a drunk woman out of my hotel for calling my gay coworker a fag

So ridiculous that this thread turned into such a shitstorm. If you work in an establishment that serves booze, it's your goddamned job to remove ANY patrons that are disturbing others.

i kindof love it when i get a fresh opportunity to tell some stupid person off. u just get to be all calm - oftentimes i find if you're calm enough, you can reflect their stupidity back to them and they end up digging their own grave

OKAY, removing the initial post entirely from the context of what's happened since, my own personal reaction to it is that it errs a tiny bit towards the side of self-promotion, BUT that there's no real problem with this, because if as I believe it's a true story, then he has every right to post about his life experiences on here. HOWEVER, I believe that given the nature of this board, he might have thought twice before posting it, and then refrained, because it isn't a particularly rich tale, more an open-and-shut case, and so the devotion of an entire thread to it comes across as a little more self-aggrandising than it actually is. The potential for flaming so far outweighed the potential for decent discussion that I believe Hoosteen was rash in starting this thread. I myself have been guilty of this countless times in the past, so I reckon I have a fair stance from which to make such a judgement.

1) nobody is clowning hoos for kicking some drunk bitch out the hotel, its for manufacturing a heroic captain planet slamdunk about it - id do the same if any other smug goober had posted this thread

2) the thread is about hate speech laws now because ppl kept using the term 'hate speech' as some kinda valid description & i said its something i associate with ppl who are interested in restricting speech - homophobic bigotry has a name already and theres no need to get on some orwellian newspeak 'hate speech' shit about it unless youre defining it legally

i would do the same if somebody started a thread complaining about 'homicide bombers' or 'the democrat party', and i would not actually be defending any of those things either

Leaving it up to judge and jury opens up why we have degrees of murder and such.

Darraghmac has just fallen into the great lie/fear that's at the center of people fearing this stuff -- this bizarre leap to assume that things are being dealt with based on the identity of the victim, as if someone's being offered "special protection," or it's suddenly "more of a crime" to harm a minority than it is to harm a white person. And this very, very obviously isn't the logic: it's that some crimes carry an element of terrorism and threat.

Way late, but this seems off from the typical justification of hate-crime laws afaik, which actually says that 'yes, special protection and yes, they need it.' Maybe that is a harder sell though.

here's the article i was thinking of, by debbie nathan. and - my bad - it just talks about new york, not all of the US. it's long but it is really really good.

http://www.citylimits.org/content/articles/viewarticle.cfm?article_id=3069

"After 9/11, many New Yorkers feared hate crimes were a new epidemic. But what's happening on the streets may be more familiar stories: fights over girlfriends, mugging easy marks and rumbles between revved-up teenagers."

um yeah but it's pretty ridiculous to have to stop and wonder what you all are gonna think of a story. if posters did that all the time, no one would ever say anything.

and again, i don't think HOOS was "manufacturing a heroic captain planet slamdunk." he was telling a story, something that affected him. that we have to berate him for his maybe intentions instead of thinking about the story seems so silly to me. picking apart other people should not be a hobby, and it also just seems like a blatant missing of the point.

if you don't have any reaction to the story of interest, why even post at all?

because on ILX you are JUDGED by what you say :-D

honestly when did being so cunty become a way of life?

"hi guys, i just had a weird run-in with a drunk homophobe and i told her off"

"you fucking idiot!"

it's like, what?

You're OTM, but I think you're arguing a lost cause on this board.

rock otm via surmounter

'bitch' is as bad if not worse than 'faggot', when you get down to it, except that it's effect has been dulled by over-use. it's almost saved by directing it at men and women in equal measure just as readily but ah, not really. [/pc plod]

That quote is very romantic (!), Tracer.

In a way I actually really like the fact that ILX is so quick to pounce on the merest perceived error; it means that any bullshit statement (of which I have written more than a few) is generally corrected/ripped to shreds within a very short space of time, and one's argumentative technique is honed. You've gotta be on your toes here, which is something I appreciate. I'm not saying that Hoosteen is a bullshitter, far from it, and some of the treatment he's gotten here is harsh, but this harsh treatment is a pretty inevitable by-product of the sharply intellectual, skeptical culture that prevails (and long may it prevail) here.

"hi guys, i just had a weird run-in with a drunk homophobe and i told her off"

"you fucking idiot!"

it's like, what?

no it's more like:

"hi guys, i just had a weird run-in with a drunk homophobe and i told her off"

"so what you want a medal? quit showing off how righteous and valiant you are"

"uhh waaaht? *cries*"

but really only a couple of people did that anyway.

same difference.

newsflash: negativity is not a good thing.

Non Aeon Flux discussion - prejudice charged taboo words within a society.

Just got offed: i see your point, but like everything, balance is key.

i salute Surmounter for defending the humanitarian cause. however, i think we have to live with a few grizzle-pots soiling threads now and then as that's just the way impersonal internet communication works sometimes. which is not to say that such remarks shouldn't be reproofed.

negativity is much, much funnier than self-righteousness

Haha, ILX sucks

also surmounter wasn't your first thread about how you don't tip bartenders or something? IS THAT ANY BETTER THAN CALLING THEM NAMES??

also, there's a way to challenge people without being obnoxious.

i love how that's just taken as a given: that impersonal internet communication is just nasty. why? it's just a reflection of the people behind the screens. are people with computers nasty?

that was hilarious when you said that it sucks. ghost rider OTM. (xpx2)

my first thread was a long while before the tipping thread, i just don't usually post on ILE, i post on ILM a lot. i think i know why.

and no it wasn't about how i don't tip bartenders, it was about how i don't like tipping in general. i'm a pretty generous tipper as a rule.

and no, negativity isn't funny. sorry. that's a really sad thing to believe.

nabisco beyond whether you agree or not with the concept of making "hateful" (yet not specifically threatening or harassing) speech illegal (i don't)

Good f'ing lord, why do we keep circling back to this ridiculous idea that anyone anywhere in the US is talking about making speech illegal? Why are we even mentioning it? For the record, I am AGAINST painting a giant penis on the surface of the moon.

you can say this is because of "prosecutorial misuse" and that such misuse may be intellectually separable from the law itself but that's what some people say about the death penalty too. "just because some public defenders do a bad job doesn't mean the principle of the death penalty is invalid!"

I'd agree -- there's a difference between moral objections to the whole notion of capital punishment and objections to it's being poorly administered to the point of harm. (There's also nothing inconsistent or silly about the position you've made up there, assuming someone believed that the court system could be reformed to administer capital punishment properly!)

But I'm not here to argue whether the laws are well administered, or whether they can be made to be well administered; I've been arguing that they're philosophically sound, because whenever they get mentioned there's this sudden upswell of people on ILX saying "but they make SPEECH/THOUGHT ILLEGAL" and "BRAIN POLICE" and a bunch of ridiculous stuff that has zero to do with the laws' intents or how they function.

Way late, but this seems off from the typical justification of hate-crime laws afaik, which actually says that 'yes, special protection and yes, they need it.'

Whose justification do you mean? I'm talking largely about the legal rationale, which was why I quoted Rehnquist upthread: the idea is that crimes of racial intimidation -- especially when applied in areas like voting, school attendance, seeking employment, etc. -- have broader social harms than whatever the nugget of crime is (assault, arson, etc.), and that the state has a legitimate interest in countering that.

maybe the save-a-hoos brigade doesnt know that most ppl clowning him here have also been clowning him in ilm rap threads for like 8 months now instead of just happening to read this thread & feeling the spontaneous urge to defend a homophobe

surmounter pls send me jpg for addition to sassiest boy in america contest

negativity is much, much funnier than self-righteousness

Not the kind of predictable, formulaic negativity seen on ILX. It's about as funny as a bunch of white teenage boys giving some schmuck cigarette burns in the toilet.

I mean, I suppose the very fact of thinking up and implementing such laws is necessary a result of someone needing it (namely black people in 1969) -- haha and I'm ironically quoting Rehnquist's opinion upthread, from a guy who knows what's what, having been EMPLOYED during said period to interfere with black people's ability to vote.

and what otm xxxxpost

also plz remember capn positivity's 1st post was:

great story hoos. i mean, i have to say, sometimes i kindof enjoy witnessing people that fucking out of the loop, cuz you get to just look at them and think/say, damn, ur a big fucking moron, and i am so much fucking better at life than you. of course, you say it politely. if you're at work.

-- Surmounter, Sunday, May 27, 2007 11:55 AM (2 days ago) Bookmark Link

LIBCRYPT OTM. UNLIKE HOOSTEEN.JPG, PREDICTABLE, FORMULAIC SANCTIMONY AND CONDESCENSION NEVER GET OLD. I CRACK UP EACH TIME SOMEONE EQUATES PHOTOSHOP ZINGS WITH VIOLENT HOOLIGANISM

For the record, I am AGAINST painting a giant penis on the surface of the moon.

What the fuck, man, do you hate fun?!

It's really the same mentality, taken to extremes.

i just hope threads like this don't discourage HOOS from making more threads like this

libcrypt otm.

so what, and what? i'm supposed t be positive to someone screaming faggot drunk? please, try and make sense :-)

But I'm not here to argue whether the laws are well administered, or whether they can be made to be well administered; I've been arguing that they're philosophically sound, because whenever they get mentioned there's this sudden upswell of people on ILX saying "but they make SPEECH/THOUGHT ILLEGAL" and "BRAIN POLICE" and a bunch of ridiculous stuff that has zero to do with the laws' intents or how they function.

You should rephrase this, because "philosophically sound" isn't equivalent to valid in intent or functionally sound.

frankly, for an extra $5.00 tip anybody who wants can call me prancing nancy cockgobblin mqfaggotpants is welcome to do so.

so i may have missed this but out of curiosity how did the woman know the co-worker was gay anyway? or was it an unlucky guess? if he wasn't gay how much difference would that have made?

He was wearing fancy shoes.

here's what: if you feel good about your snarky, negative attitude, go on with it. i guess i can just ignore you.

Did Big Hoos AKA the steendriver ever explain the provenance of that moniker?

-- forksclovetofu, Tuesday, 29 May 2007 05:27

On 2006 ILX I was "hoosteen." On the Sandbox I experimented with dropping "hoosteen" into various rap lyrics viz: "i kick hoosical flows/spit spat steen's that", "hoo got it for steen, vol. 3," etc.

On "9 Milli Bros" from last year's "Fishscale," Cappadonna announces himself as "DIGG-A-LA aka the cab driver." I misheard it as "BIG-A-LA" and BIG HOOS aka the steendriver was born. When I saw it made some people laugh (at and with me, variously), I carried it over to ILX 2.1.

"i kick hoosical flows/spit spat steen's that", "hoo got it for steen, vol. 3," etc.

more examples plz

nabisco you may think it as ridiculous as painting a penis on the moon, but calling someone "n*gger" while beating the crap out of them WILL net you a couple of extra years in jail in some states; if you had kept your mouth shut you would be out sooner. maybe there is a way to interpret this fact that doesn't include the idea of speech itself being illegal?

i really am not doctrinaire about this - i'm conflicted. because i agree with you that the state has an interest in punishing racial intimidation - and intimidation based on sexual orientation, gender, and other things.

"Salt'n'pepa and Hoosy D up in the limosteen."

so i may have missed this but out of curiosity how did the woman know the co-worker was gay anyway? or was it an unlucky guess? if he wasn't gay how much difference would that have made?

-- blueski, Tuesday, May 29, 2007 5:34 PM (1 minute ago)

"Unlucky guess" is probably about right. In certain respects he conforms to the gross stereotype of the girlish, lisping fey gay man.

HOOS up steen down while you mothafuckers bounce to this