The Official Woody Woodpecker Thread

Groaner

@kt_ said:

Yeah, you just made my day.

You're welcome.

aliceif

He's Australian.

flabdablet

@Groaner said:

the problem with fear and anxiety is that they are not necessarily subject to rationality.

That is true. And irrational fears and anxieties are known to respond well to appropriate psychological treatments. Nobody who lives in a society where such treatments are available and suffers from an irrational fear or anxiety needs to remain stuck with it for life.

@Groaner said:

You might reasonably label such behavior as biphobia.

Quite so.

Polygeekery

And you're an enabler.

flabdablet

@aliceif said:

He's Australian.

And we all sleep in eucalyptus trees.

tufty

@Groaner said:

@tufty said:
Thing is, though, prostate exams and incarcertion with a big man called "Bubba" excluded, there is no particular prospect of someone shoving something up your bumhole without your explicit consent.

Okay, so we've reduced it to unlikely, but we have not reduced the probability to zero.

Yep, but without consent, it's rape, and we were talking about consenting sexual relationships.
@Groaner said:

I dunno, I have been groped before. Must be because I was asking for it!

So have I. But it's never gone any further because my response is "hey, man, not my thing". Well, at least, that's my response when it's men doing the groping. I probably was "asking for it", in that one of my favourite late night drinking holes was also an almost exclusively gay bar (the alternatives being filled with the local yardies smacking people over the head with pool sticks). If you weren't hanging about "cruising" spots, then maybe you have to countenance the idea that you might just look really really gay. You big bum-loving gayer bumlord, you.

@Groaner said:

Also, the problem with fear and anxiety is that they are not necessarily subject to rationality.

Irrational fear, you say? That's pretty much the textbook definition of a phobia.

@http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/phobia said:

An extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something

@Groaner said:

You might reasonably label such behavior as biphobia.

You might well. I would.

loopback0

@Lorne_Kates said:

@Polygeekery said:
First I need to consult the Idiot Fox for a list of acceptable words that I can use to make my joke with. I will get back to you in 2-4 weeks.

Don't forget to fill out the forms in triplicate.

And get them stamped by the FBI. Don't want them turning up.

LaoC

@flabdablet said:

Then don't google "pegging", lest your tiny mind be completely blown.

You beat me to it</url>

loopback0

@ben_lubar said:

FUN WITH LOJBAN

Unpossible.

fbmac

@Polygeekery said:

Fox defined @-mentioning as harassment?

@Fox could ask for mods to put an underline in the end of his username and he would be immune to it. see, discourse works! i.e. @LB_

LaoC

@LaoC said:

@Polygeekery said:
False trichotomy.

Do you mean it could be all at the same time (how?) or there are other possibilities? Feel free to add your favorite one.

... and the faint rustling of the tumbleweed was drowned out by the howl of cognitive dissonances.

boomzilla

@LaoC said:

Exactly, that's why a psychologist probably wouldn't put "homophobic" on a diagnosis but something like "suffering from homophobia issues".NB: we're not even discussing the fact that it's a medical condition to be traumatized by having had a pleasurable sexual experience mistakenly perceived as homosexual any more, just your personal offense at the name for the diagnosis

You're not my doctor, so what you're saying isn't coming across in the way you think it is. It comes across as a slur.

@LaoC said:

Y'know, I'm just saying it like it is ...

I don't know you well enough to be able to say if you really believe that or what.

boomzilla

@LaoC said:

@boomzilla said:
Yeah...but whenever someone COMPLAINs about how some *phobia isn't about irrational fear/aversion, he's told that the language has moved on and it's more about hating someone/thing.

Straw man.

Is this a short attention span thing or just another attempt to avoid admitting that you're wrong?

tufty

@boomzilla said:

It comes across as a slur.

Good.

boomzilla

@flabdablet said:

In order to preserve any shred of credibility your claim about my incredulousness might have in the mind of any reasonable observer?

No reasonable observer thinks you've forgotten what you've many times claimed to be incredulous about. I'm not the person saying you're incredulous. That's what you were doing.

boomzilla

@flabdablet said:

If you prefer "reliable" or "accurate" to "documentary", I'm fine with that.

Those don't sound right. "Recording of a performance of..." seems about right.

boomzilla

@tufty said:

Filed under : The best thing about having sex with a 3 year old girl is that you can turn them over and pretend you're having sex with a 3 year old boy

DON'T MISGENDER PEOPLE YOU INSUFFERABLE HATER

boomzilla

@tufty said:

@boomzilla said:
It comes across as a slur.

Good.

See, I'm good with some cunt who is honest about when he's calling other people out. At least we know that we're communicating honestly.

Lorne Kates

Does Lily Allen like anal sex?

Does Lily Tomlin like anal sex?

If Lily Allen transitioned, would she have anal sex with Lily Tomlin?

aliceif

@Lorne_Kates said:

Lily Allen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFE6qQ3ySXE

loopback0

I'd not heard that before. It's catchy.

aliceif

I always search for it by typing "fuck you lily allen".

LaoC

@boomzilla said:

You're not my doctor, so what you're saying isn't coming across in the way you think it is. It comes across as a slur.

If the next sentence that clarified the phobia I meant as "A real, medical, full-blown, huddling-in-a-corner-rocking-back-and-forth phobia" (emphasis added) wasn't sufficient to tell you that I was talking about a real phobia in the medical sense, I can't help you. Maybe you should just make Discourse put trigger warnings on all my posts.

@LaoC said:
Y'know, I'm just saying it like it is ...
I don't know you well enough to be able to say if you really believe that or what.

I thought it had been established[tm] (with your approval that is) that "'[t]o "tell it like it is' means that you are describing a situation without regard for telling someone something they may not want to hear." That's exactly what I'm doing here.

boomzilla

@LaoC said:

I thought it had been established[tm] (with your approval that is) that "'[t]o "tell it like it is' means that you are describing a situation without regard for telling someone something they may not want to hear."That's exactly what I'm doing here.

Sure, that's not a terrible definition. I was pointing out that you weren't doing a good job communicating what you claim that you wanted to communicate based on your choices of words. Your ability to communicate a message is orthogonal to the message itself. Not that I think you really care what I think.

LaoC

@boomzilla said:

@LaoC said:
@boomzilla said:
Yeah...but whenever someone COMPLAINs about how some *phobia isn't about irrational fear/aversion, he's told that the language has moved on and it's more about hating someone/thing.

Straw man.

Is this a short attention span thing or just another attempt to avoid admitting that you're wrong?

"Just another", eh? Last time you tried this on me, I called you out on it and you just disappeared. It's not working. It's up to you to back up your fuzzy claims.

Polygeekery

Do we have yet another rabid SJW with a crusade on our hands?

LaoC

@boomzilla said:

I was pointing out that you weren't doing a good job communicating what you claim that you wanted to communicate based on your choices of words.

It's up to you if you find the word "medical" a poor choice for communicating that one is speaking about something in a medical sense; I just fail to see how that's my problem.

boomzilla

@LaoC said:

Last time you tried this on me, I called you out on it and you just disappeared. It's not working. It's up to you to back up your fuzzy claims.

It...wasn't much of a question. What "fuzzy claims?"

But...as to the strawman thing...yes, it's obvious that you're wrong. You may be ignorant of common use of terms like, homophobia, transphobia, islamophobia, etc, and how they are really about hate or bigotry, not irrational fears. But it was a nice trolling technique.

@LaoC said:

It's up to you if you find the word "medical" a poor choice for communicating that one is speaking about something in a medical sense; I just fail to see how that's my problem.

Yeah, like I said, you can't really get that toothpaste back into the bottle. I'm sorry that the language has moved on, but you need to adjust. Goddamn, you're like the people who say that men have penises!

tufty

@boomzilla said:

common use of terms

Common usage is not always correct usage. PHP, for example, is sometimes referred to as a valuable programming language or valid web technology

In this case, the word "homophobia" really does mean "having an irrational fear", and the common usage describes extreme behaviour based on that irrational fear. Which is why I said it was good that you took it as a slur, because that might possibly make you think about the underlying reasons for your feelings regarding the possibility of being involved in a consenting homosexual activity.

Yes, that was a huge run-on sentence, and by "you" I don't necessarily mean @boomzilla personally / exclusively.

LaoC

@boomzilla said:

@LaoC said:
Last time you tried this on me, I called you out on it and you just disappeared. It's not working. It's up to you to back up your fuzzy claims.

It...wasn't much of a question.

No, it was a request to back up your claims: "Could you quote the part where I supposedly misrepresented it so far, or do you prefer to just change the topic?"

What "fuzzy claims?"

The one I called a straw man of course.

But...as to the strawman thing...yes, it's obvious that you're wrong.

Nice Appeal to the Stone.

@LaoC said:
It's up to you if you find the word "medical" a poor choice for communicating that one is speaking about something in a medical sense; I just fail to see how that's my problem.

Yeah, like I said, you can't really get that toothpaste back into the bottle. I'm sorry that the language has moved on, but you need to adjust. Goddamn, you're like the people who say that men have penises!

Weren't you just complaining (obviously still without evidence) about being told by others that "language has moved on", whatever that means?

boomzilla

@tufty said:

Which is why I said it was good that you took it as a slur, because that might possibly make you think about the underlying reasons for your feelings regarding the possibility of being involved in a consenting homosexual activity.

I don't have any fear of being involved in consensual homosexual activity.

@tufty said:

In this case, the word "homophobia" really does mean "having an irrational fear", and the common usage describes extreme behaviour based on that irrational fear

And yet, that's not at all what the thread has been about (even translated from homo- to trans-).

boomzilla

@LaoC said:

Weren't you just complaining (obviously still without evidence) about being told by others that "language has moved on", whatever that means?

The discussion has come up in the past, yes, about how *phobia is used today. I've been told that I was basically a reactionary pedant for complaining about it, and probably also a *phobic, for good measure. Now you're defending using the terms in the old way that's apparently Not How It's Done.

I'm just pointing out that you're fighting a losing battle. I'm not sure what's vague about all that, but there you go.

xaade

@Fox said:

I've stated several times that trans status is relevant to a relationship long enough for marriage to be on the table. Get the fuck out of here with your straw man.

But why.

If they are functionally equivalent, why can't a trans never tell their partner, and if their partner never finds out what damage is done right?

I don't understand how it works for one but not the other.

Is a trans functionally equivalent, but not emotionally and psychologically equivalent? Are you admitting that? Because that undermines a lot of what you've said before.

Oh, yeah, that's right, one night stands are selfish acts. And therefore you owe nothing to the other party.

That's very shallow.... don't be shallow.

tufty

@boomzilla said:

that's not at all what the thread has been about

And yet it is. Lots of fear. Fear of being bumsexed by gayers. Fear of finding themselves fucking (or worse, being fucked by) some chick-with-a-dick.

It's all fear, and it's all irrational.

Polygeekery

By your rationality, all sexual preferences or orientations would be phobic then. All anyone is asking for is the that status to be disclosed. Well, if you subtract all the rabid and merciless trolling. Do we really have to consider transwoman to be exactly equal to ciswoman in order for it to not be transphobia? If so, that is a pretty high bar that you have set there.

boomzilla

@tufty said:

And yet it is. Lots of fear. Fear of being bumsexed by gayers. Fear of finding themselves fucking (or worse, being fucked by) some chick-with-a-dick.

Hang on, you're not confusing it with git are you?

flabdablet

@boomzilla said:

I'm not the person saying you're incredulous. That's what you were doing.

And you still have a face like a squashed tomato as any fule kno.

boomzilla

@flabdablet said:

@boomzilla said:
I'm not the person saying you're incredulous. That's what you were doing.

And you still have a face like a squashed tomato as any fule kno.

For the record, you're silencing yourself again by posting gibberish.

flabdablet

Silence will fall when the question is asked.

tufty

@Polygeekery said:

By your rationality, all sexual preferences or orientations would be phobic then.

Not at all. Not wanting to partake in a particular sexual activity because you suspect it wouldn't be very pleasurable is not at all the same as having feelings of disgust, revulsion or terror at the very thought of that same activity.

@boomzilla said:

Hang on, you're not confusing it with git are you?

Ah, you got me there.

Filed under : Bumsexed up the hole by Linus Torvalds

LaoC

@boomzilla said:

@LaoC said:
Weren't you just complaining (obviously still without evidence) about being told by others that "language has moved on", whatever that means?

The discussion has come up in the past, yes,

Yeah, that's pretty much what I imagined you'd consider "evidence".

about how *phobia is used today. I've been told that I was basically a reactionary pedant for complaining about it, and probably also a *phobic, for good measure. Now you're defending using the terms in the old way that's apparently Not How It's Done.

I fail to see how that's supposed to be an argument against anything I said.

I'm just pointing out that you're fighting a losing battle. I'm not sure what's vague about all that, but there you go.

You're complaining about "about how \*phobia is used today", i.e. the dual meaning of a greek loan word that has been used like this for at least well over 100 years – and you're telling *me* I'm fighting a losing battle. SRSLY?

I'll tell you what is vague though: "someone COMPLAINs", "he's told", "The discussion has come up in the past" – only Cthulhu knows who or what you're referring to.

Polygeekery

@tufty said:

Not at all.

Sort of.

@tufty said:

Not wanting to partake in a particular sexual activity because you suspect it wouldn't be very pleasurable is not at all the same as having feelings of disgust, revulsion or terror at the very thought of that same activity.

A lot of what you label *phobic, I would not agree with and neither would many others. As I have stated, I have absolutely no issues with gay people, the fact that they have sex, that they are now finally allowed to marry, if they express tasteful PDAs, etc. None of that bothers me in the slightest. I have gay friends, I know they have sex, that does not phase me in the slightest.

But, you want to expand the definition of homophobia to the point that if someone asks you to envision yourself having sex with another man and you experience even the slightest bit of dread or revulsion, they are homophobic.

I don't think that roving bands of the gays are stalking through the night ready to anally rape me, that is irrational of course. But to say that if you phrase it in the context of me personally having a gay encounter and me expressing revulsion at that single thought as homophobia is not something that I believe society would agree with.

There are lots of things that we find distasteful when framed as that person experiencing them. Most of them are not phobias.

boomzilla

@LaoC said:

I fail to see how that's supposed to be an argument against anything I said.

I get that.

@LaoC said:

You're complaining about "about how *phobia is used today", i.e. the dual meaning of a greek loan word that has been used like this for at least well over 100 years – and you're telling me I'm fighting a losing battle. SRSLY?

Yes. Sorry to be the one to inform you.

tufty

@Polygeekery said:

A lot of what you label *phobic, I would not agree with and neither would many others

Because they think of it as being a slur. "I don't go out beating up gays, I'm not a homophobe". But in the same way that agreeing with something doesn't make it right, disagreeing with something doesn't make it wrong.

I mean, what's your take on anal sex, generally? Totally out of the question because "ewwww, bumholes, poo comes out of there, gross", okay with a consenting female partner but out of the question with men because "ewww, he's got a dick, gross", okay as the one doing the penetrating but "no fucker's stuffing things up my chocolate starfish, gross", what?

Serious question.

LaoC

@boomzilla said:

@LaoC said:
You're complaining about "about how *phobia is used today", i.e. the dual meaning of a greek loan word that has been used like this for at least well over 100 years – and you're telling me I'm fighting a losing battle. SRSLY?

Yes. Sorry to be the one to inform you.

A debater could not but be gay in such a jocund company!

boomzilla

You weren't asking me, but we were talking about this earlier, so...

@tufty said:

"ewwww, bumholes, poo comes out of there, gross",

That one is the best approximation of my take on anal sex.

Polygeekery

@tufty said:

I mean, what's your take on anal sex, generally? Totally out of the question because "ewwww, bumholes, poo comes out of there, gross", okay with a consenting female partner but out of the question with men because "ewww, he's got a dick, gross", okay as the one doing the penetrating but "no fucker's stuffing things up my chocolate starfish, gross", what?

Serious question.

#2, which is amusing that is my honest answer given the context. But not:

@tufty said:

because "ewww, he's got a dick, gross"

Because I don't find men attractive, and the thought of me personally having a sexual encounter with a man is a repulsive thought for me. But, to say that I find that thought personally repulsive means it is a phobia, does not make it a phobia. There are lots of things that I find personally repulsive when framed in the context of me and a personal experience for me, but if you said that other people liked it my honest thought would be, "Not my thing, but whatever works for them".

Shit man (pun setup), if you asked me, "How would you feel if someone shit all over you and then played with it as a form of foreplay?" I would be revulsed to have to frame that in the concept of me. But if someone else wants to...I don't really care what they do behind their doors.

But by your standard you would label me as a coprophiliaphobe.

tufty

Honesty is refreshing. Both you and @boomzilla have gone up a good few notches in my esteem. Not that it matters worth a fuck, but thanks.

While we're being honest, though, now is the time to look inside yourself and see if you have an idea of why you have feelings of revulsion or fear. No need to tell anyone about it, it's an exercise in being honest with yourself.

boomzilla

@tufty said:

While we're being honest, though, now is the time to look inside yourself and see if you have an idea of why you have feelings of revulsion or fear.

Here's the thing: sex and romantic relationships are and always have been, to me, about mating and reproducing and so forth. Since I was very young, I found females attractive, sexually. I guess sometime in elementary school. There is strong desire there that feels beyond just the mental (though what are all of the connections between the body, emotions, chemistry, etc?).

I've never had anything like that with respect to a male. And for obvious reasons, that sort of relationship cannot be about reproducing with the other person (maybe science and ethics will allow that at some point, but that's besides the point). It's not just about the physical sensations. One just seems natural to me, both intellectually and experentially. Like, "Born that way." The other does not. It just seems obvious and the way we've evolved. I can accept that others feel differently. I don't feel the need to change them and don't think they should feel the need to change me.

None of this necessarily leads to "fear and revulsion" that implies a phobia. It sure doesn't seem like that to me. No doubt there are females about whom I'd feel fear / revulsion if I thought about this stuff with them.

Polygeekery

@tufty said:

While we're being honest, though, now is the time to look inside yourself and see if you have an idea of why you have feelings of revulsion or fear.

I wouldn't say "fear". If I have, I misphrased it. I do not fear someone having gay sex with me. But, if you forced me to consider how I would feel if I had sex with a man...that could easily be considered revulsion. I do not feel those attractions. I would imagine it would be at least similar to what gay people feel if you forced them to consider having sex with someone of the opposite sex.

We are animals. Sex is about procreation. But it is also a hell of a lot of fun. We are attracted to those who typically look somewhat similar to us, but not too similar as we also have inbred animal instincts against inbreeding. (I like that play on words). This is why most white people are primarily attracted to white people. Why most Asian people are primarily attracted to Asian people. Why most black people are primarily attracted to black people.

Part of that animal instinct that leads us to procreate leads us to not want to have sex that at an animalistic level could not lead to reproduction, so there is an aversion to homosexual sex.

Yes, there is homosexuality (more like bisexuality, for the most part) in nature. No one doubts that. At least no one here.

And yes, there is a societal component. Less so for females. As I have stated before, bisexual girls round down to straight. Bisexual men round up to gay. Horrible double standard.

For me, homophobia is not revulsion at the thought of a homosexual encounter happening to you on a personal level. That is sexual orientation, and that should not be taboo whether it is gay, straight, or "prefers trannies".

If you see two gay men kiss briefly in public as a tasteful PDA and experience revulsion...you are a homophobe.

If you see two gay men sucking face like two teenagers on Lover's Lane in the back seat of their parents car and that revulses you...it could go either way. I don't want to see that between straight people either. I might give lesbians a pass though, cause that is hot. ;)