weird how “allies” like yourself always use the same rhetoric as the people who want us dead. if you were actually an ‘ally’ you’d just acknowledge your comment sucked and learn to be less of a piece of shit.
Actually, it's quite humorous to imply that someone is gay. You're just too emotional to admit that being gay is actually really funny, because bad people are gay and gay things are bad. You can't be mad for saying this, because I am actually calm and mature for making jokes like this.
you just called it a joke, so you’re saying it would be funny if Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un were secretly gay? Is it funny when people are gay? Do you think it would diminish the reputations of these two people if it turned out they were both gay and would you revel in that possibility?
i don’t have to look hard at all, you said that implying two people being secretly gay is a joke. That’s a funny concept to you.
Mite fuck around and regret posting this, but I generally think the idea of “boy crush” and “girl crush” are not really about sexuality at all.
Unfortunately the rest of your post is implying actually rude insulting things about the DPRK, so I’m not trying to defend you as much as defend the concept of heterosexual non-sexual homosexual crushes. Because it IS interesting.
Edit:
I have not been able to stop ruminating on this and have come to the conclusion that the “non sexual” heterosexual “boy crush” / “girl crush” language is actually a reflection of internalised homophobia. When used in the way I’m thinking, it is used to express complex same-gender attraction, while maintaining a veneer of deniability which would not be necessary outside of a homophobic culture.
Further more, I suspect it has dropped out of currency in the English language because we pioneered the phrase “no homo” to serve the same purpose.
not only is it homophobic, it’s kinda infantilizing too right? It’s middle school level bullying, saying two people are gay together because you don’t like either of them. It’s only used in an insulting or patronizing way. I don’t think there’s a positive way to imply two people are secretly gay.
It certainly is in the context of the post we’re discussing.
Its possible that my elder millennial exposure to the term allows me to be way more generous than I should be, since it is possible to converge on “boy crush” as an insult from first principles (lol) working forward from simple homophobia and juvenile attacks.
“i would be your ally as long as you don’t get mad when i call people gay bc i don’t like them, but i’ll throw a fit when you call me out on that” just STFU breeder scum
“no i wasn’t being deeply ignorant i was being mildly homophobic instead” cool maybe shut the fuck up though?
deleted by creator
weird how “allies” like yourself always use the same rhetoric as the people who want us dead. if you were actually an ‘ally’ you’d just acknowledge your comment sucked and learn to be less of a piece of shit.
deleted by creator
Actually, it's quite humorous to imply that someone is gay. You're just too emotional to admit that being gay is actually really funny, because bad people are gay and gay things are bad. You can't be mad for saying this, because I am actually calm and mature for making jokes like this.[says homophobic shit]
[gets called out for it]
“Wow, you need to grow up sweetie”
You used it as an insult, it’s not that complicated.
you just called it a joke, so you’re saying it would be funny if Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un were secretly gay? Is it funny when people are gay? Do you think it would diminish the reputations of these two people if it turned out they were both gay and would you revel in that possibility?
i don’t have to look hard at all, you said that implying two people being secretly gay is a joke. That’s a funny concept to you.
Mite fuck around and regret posting this, but I generally think the idea of “boy crush” and “girl crush” are not really about sexuality at all.
Unfortunately the rest of your post is implying actually rude insulting things about the DPRK, so I’m not trying to defend you as much as defend the concept of heterosexual non-sexual homosexual crushes. Because it IS interesting.
Edit:
I have not been able to stop ruminating on this and have come to the conclusion that the “non sexual” heterosexual “boy crush” / “girl crush” language is actually a reflection of internalised homophobia. When used in the way I’m thinking, it is used to express complex same-gender attraction, while maintaining a veneer of deniability which would not be necessary outside of a homophobic culture.
Further more, I suspect it has dropped out of currency in the English language because we pioneered the phrase “no homo” to serve the same purpose.
not only is it homophobic, it’s kinda infantilizing too right? It’s middle school level bullying, saying two people are gay together because you don’t like either of them. It’s only used in an insulting or patronizing way. I don’t think there’s a positive way to imply two people are secretly gay.
It certainly is in the context of the post we’re discussing.
Its possible that my elder millennial exposure to the term allows me to be way more generous than I should be, since it is possible to converge on “boy crush” as an insult from first principles (lol) working forward from simple homophobia and juvenile attacks.
Removed by mod
oof, caught slipping. bad habits die hard ig
well, habits anyway.
Just because it’s against the rules doesn’t mean it’s bad
oh hell yeah
KIM JONG UN IS THE ALLY OF THE WORKING MASSES OF THE WORLD. WHO IS INSULTING ALLIES?! ITS YOU!
“i would be your ally as long as you don’t get mad when i call people gay bc i don’t like them, but i’ll throw a fit when you call me out on that” just STFU breeder scum