Lol, who exactly am I attacking? I’m just stating it’s odd that you think you know more about homophobia than a queer author.
Argumentum ad populum.
Only because you haven’t stated your interpretation, what else is there to judge? A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Straight men hanging out with each other is labelled as “pretty gay.” This is irrational because straight men can hang out with each other without being gay.
You’re purposely conflating what the author wrote, and misquoting them. Not exactly academically honest.
The quote was that “All Male Monday” sounds pretty gay. Which it does. That’s not homophobic, in fact it would be pretty rad if the context was at an lgbtq bar, and not a gathering of bigots.
Why do you instinctually believe All Male Monday has an inherent negative connotation?
Never said not suggested this. I think they’re idiots. Just like the author of this piece and the tweet, and the editors for allowing it. Multiple times youve falsely out words in my mouth
You have, by ignoring the purpose of the article and just interpreting statements taken out of context. You have also stated it’s gay people’s fault for driving men away from affection from other men.
“An all-male Monday sounds pretty gay to me.”
Yes, if someone advertised for a bar with “All Male Mondays”, It would be easy to assume it’s a gay bar. That by no means implies males hanging out makes you gay. Nor does it imply that being gay is bad, which would be homophobic.
What does context have to do with this? , when my level of homophobia has no bearing on the content of my argument.
What does context have to do with any arguments…? Every argument requires context so you can’t just misinterpret a piece of a body of work.
You tried to attack me, by calling me homophobic
No, your argument implies you are homophobic. Being called gay is not homophobic unless the person calling you gay is doing so as an insult. You are implying that being gay is inherently insulting.
In the context of the article, the writer would have to believe their own sexuality is inherently insulting.
when my level of homophobia has no bearing on the content of my argument.
Well at least we agree that you are homophobic, just apparently not at what level?
And yes, personal biases are important to determining the logical framework of an argument.
Only because you haven’t stated your interpretation, what else is there to judge?
Your logical fallacy is not my fault.
Why do you instinctually believe All Male Monday has an inherent negative connotation?
I don’t. The one who “instinctually” believes it means something other than men hanging out are the people who think it sounds gay.
You have, by ignoring the purpose of the article
First, that’s you inferring it from me not saying something, not me implying it. You’re also wrong, in both that I don’t think it and I absolutely called out the bar owner in my very first post.
What does context have to do with any arguments…?
I clarified the question, which you ignored.
Being called gay is not homophobic unless the person calling you gay is doing so as an insult.
The quote was clearly mean to offend; it was clearly an insult.
And yes, personal biases are important to determining the logical framework of an argument
Personal bias and logic are too different things. My points are either wrong or they are right. Whether they come from someone who is biased or unbiased does not change whether they are wrong or right.
I don’t think you know what an ad hominem is… Attacking someone’s argument is not attacking them as a person. Who was I attacking?
Your logical fallacy is not my fault.
Lol, I think you need to relearn your logical fallacies.
I don’t. The one who “instinctually” believes it means something other than men hanging out are the people who think it sounds gay.
Again, unsubstantiated. And you haven’t explained how it would be homophobic.
First, that’s you inferring it from me not saying something, not me implying it.
Insisting a pro lgbtq website is being homophobic because one sentence taken out of context…
clarified the question, which you ignored
Because you didn’t add any clarity, you just questioned what the point of context was.
Personal bias and logic are too different things. My points are either wrong or they are right.
Personal biases affect how you developed an argument in the first place.
Whether they come from someone who is biased or unbiased does not change whether they are wrong or right.
Yes, and in this point of the argument you still haven’t sufficiently explained how a gay person labeling something as gay is homophobic. You know the entire point of the argument.
Your biases are leading you to draw conclusions from information taken out of context.
Lol, who exactly am I attacking? I’m just stating it’s odd that you think you know more about homophobia than a queer author.
Only because you haven’t stated your interpretation, what else is there to judge? A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
You’re purposely conflating what the author wrote, and misquoting them. Not exactly academically honest.
The quote was that “All Male Monday” sounds pretty gay. Which it does. That’s not homophobic, in fact it would be pretty rad if the context was at an lgbtq bar, and not a gathering of bigots.
Why do you instinctually believe All Male Monday has an inherent negative connotation?
You have, by ignoring the purpose of the article and just interpreting statements taken out of context. You have also stated it’s gay people’s fault for driving men away from affection from other men.
Yes, if someone advertised for a bar with “All Male Mondays”, It would be easy to assume it’s a gay bar. That by no means implies males hanging out makes you gay. Nor does it imply that being gay is bad, which would be homophobic.
What does context have to do with any arguments…? Every argument requires context so you can’t just misinterpret a piece of a body of work.
No, your argument implies you are homophobic. Being called gay is not homophobic unless the person calling you gay is doing so as an insult. You are implying that being gay is inherently insulting.
In the context of the article, the writer would have to believe their own sexuality is inherently insulting.
Well at least we agree that you are homophobic, just apparently not at what level?
And yes, personal biases are important to determining the logical framework of an argument.
Look up the meaning.
Your logical fallacy is not my fault.
I don’t. The one who “instinctually” believes it means something other than men hanging out are the people who think it sounds gay.
First, that’s you inferring it from me not saying something, not me implying it. You’re also wrong, in both that I don’t think it and I absolutely called out the bar owner in my very first post.
I clarified the question, which you ignored.
The quote was clearly mean to offend; it was clearly an insult.
Personal bias and logic are too different things. My points are either wrong or they are right. Whether they come from someone who is biased or unbiased does not change whether they are wrong or right.
I don’t think you know what an ad hominem is… Attacking someone’s argument is not attacking them as a person. Who was I attacking?
Lol, I think you need to relearn your logical fallacies.
Again, unsubstantiated. And you haven’t explained how it would be homophobic.
Insisting a pro lgbtq website is being homophobic because one sentence taken out of context…
Because you didn’t add any clarity, you just questioned what the point of context was.
Personal biases affect how you developed an argument in the first place.
Yes, and in this point of the argument you still haven’t sufficiently explained how a gay person labeling something as gay is homophobic. You know the entire point of the argument.
Your biases are leading you to draw conclusions from information taken out of context.