Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  majoring in violence

Notre Dame’s College Newspaper Filled With Boring Student Government Reports, Pro-Gay Bashing Cartoons

Because college students are, so often, stupid, and they live in a bubble of keg stands and study groups, sometimes they do very terrible things. Like publish a cartoon in a student newspaper that advocates beating the crap out of homos.

Notre Dame University’s The Observer newspaper published the above “The Mobile Party” cartoon this week; its message is pretty self-explanatory. Except regular readers of the paper might not be all that shocked by its tone: “The original version of the cartoon, which included the gay-bashing response of ‘AIDS,’ was rejected by the paper,” relays PrideSource. “Both versions were posted on a blog presumably run by the cartoonist, but were taken down on Jan. 14. This is not the first time Mobile Party cartoons have caused a stir, noted Notre Dame student Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick in an e-mail to Between The Lines. Past cartoons – both accepted and rejected by The Observer’s editors – have included racist, sexist and generally prejudiced comments, including jokes about kidnapping, racial profiling, rape and overweight women.”

And color us surprised to hear GLAAD is actually on the case, demanding an apology from the paper. Which is should deliver. Writes the org:

GLAAD contacted The Observer immediately upon seeing this cartoon. The Editor in Chief Jenn Metz relayed a tearful and what appeared to be heartfelt apology by phone. She explained that she was not present when the decision to run this cartoon was made, and that she was incredibly upset that others on staff had made that decision.

Metz plans to run what she describes as a “full retraction and apology,” in Friday’s edition of The Observer. GLAAD will watch for that retraction and apology. Additionally, GLAAD asked Metz to ensure that the staff responsible for running this cartoon – both the cartoonist and editor who decided it was fit for print – be reprimanded.

But hey, how cute is it that GLAAD found an entity to criticize that is not a corporate sponsor of the organization?

Meanwhile, in the amount of time it took GLAAD to issue its “say you’re sorry or else, uh, nothing” release about a small college newspaper, websites like MediaMatters.org have found about 25 instances of anti-gay rhetoric to respond to.


UPDATE: The newspaper has posted an apology, of sorts, which makes no mention as to whether The Observer will continue to publish “The Mobile Party” cartoons.

The editors of The Observer would like to publicly apologize for the publication of “The Mobile Party” in the Jan. 13 edition. The burden of responsibility ultimately lies on us for allowing it to go to print.

There is no excuse that can be given and nothing that can be said to reverse the damage that has already been done by this egregious error in judgment.

The Observer, though an independent newspaper, is representative of the community of the University of Notre Dame and the values it so cherishes: family, understanding, service, respect and love.

Allowing this cruel and hateful comic a place on our pages disgraced those values and severely hurt members of our Notre Dame family — our classmates, our friends. For this, we sincerely apologize.

Unfortunately, the language of hate is an everyday reality in our society. Earlier this week, surprising comments made by Sen. Harry Reid about President Barack Obama’s accent and skin color were made public and caused uproar. Now, at Notre Dame, a comic strip including hurtful language was printed in this publication, also causing — and rightly so — serious concern. It becomes clear that hurtful language is still present among some circles, and, too often, it’s not until comments like these become public that their true hatred is acknowledged.

The truth is, these comments should not be made at all, and we will not allow our pages to be a forum for such hatred. Publishing commentary that seems to encourage or support hate against fellow human beings is inexcusable.

We must, however more forward, and look to promote instead a culture of acceptance and support for all.

The Office of Student Affairs and the Gender Relations Center, as well as student groups like the Core Council for Gay and Lesbian Students, have worked tirelessly to foster an educated community and an environment of acceptance and love. We would ask that those currently working toward ending discourses of hate on campus continue to do so. We greatly thank you for your tireless effort.

On our part, we must practice more responsible journalism and editing. That this comic was published reveals holes in our editing practices, which are currently being addressed.

In reevaluating our policies, we hope to ensure The Observer will be able to recover from this low point in its almost 50-year history and once again be able to serve the Notre Dame and Saint Mary’s community with the dignity it deserves.

We would like to thank all of those who have called, e-mailed, written and visited our offices this week in outrage.

The content of “The Mobile Party” is in no way representative of the views and opinions of The Observer or the Editorial Board. We hope that as we work together to address this serious issue, we will be able to regain your trust.

We vow to continue to represent the University of Notre Dame and Saint Mary’s College in a way that is respectful and accepting of each member of our community.


UPDATE JAN. 18: Not only did today’s Observer carry a note that “The Mobile Party” will no longer be published in the paper, there was also a resignation statement from Kara King, the assistant managing editor: “A miscommunication between another editor and myself led to the comic running without me first reading and approving the material. Regardless, no excuse can justify the comic even being considered for publication, and the duty to censor it fell to me. I failed to do so, and am solely responsible for providing a forum for this message of hate.”

By:           editor editor
On:           Jan 15, 2010
Tagged: , , , , ,

  • 111 Comments
    • Lady Ga-Gasp
      Lady Ga-Gasp

      Well, but Notre Dam is also a Catholic University, bursting at the seams with young men who grew up as I did staring at the sexy depictions of loin cloths and cozy apostolate Faeries sharing wine and home cooking, all while listening to elaborate rambling lectures from their priest. Its a recipe for sheer ecstatic and furtive sexual encounters in the shadows of the Student Union bathroom. So if I had to vote, I would vote for not changing a thing. Otherwise where would one go to see to it that all the cute horny guys could be so easily ensnared and deflowered?

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bruce
      Bruce

      It seems one of Colin Hofman’s favorite movies is “Milk.” It’s at the end of the list, so probably a recent addition. http://www.nd.edu/~chofman1/

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • domer
      domer

      Can you not see the sarcasm? It may be low brow and stupid, but the “tool” making the joke is just that. A tool.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Republican
      Republican

      I don’t think this is anti-gay at all. Domer has the right idea.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo
      romeo

      Actually, demanding a hypocritical retraction is beside the point. The fact that the staff of a newspaper at America’s pre-eminent catholic university passed this for publication is the only real point. It should just stand as is, with criticism coming from outside the university. They can print a retraction, but we all know they won’t mean it.

      This cartoon should be remembered the next time an archbishop or cardinal is launching an anti-marriage equality campaign, and they’re blathering on about not wishing gay people any harm, they just want to preserve the sanctity of marriage. My ass. This cartoon should also be entered into evidence at the current trial going on in San Francisco. You know, where the defense is trying to prove we’re not a persecuted minority.

      And will you look at how primitive the graphics are?

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo
      romeo

      Tool, shmool, it doesn’t look like sarcasm or irony at all. It just looks like gay bashing. If sarcasm was intended, then more talented cartoonist were needed.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Republican
      Republican

      Romeo, do you really think this is anti-gay? To me, it was clearly mocking drunken frat idiots who make anti-gay “jokes”. Only “tools” make those kind of stupid comments, in other words.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo
      romeo

      I get your point, Republican. But in this instance I must say the sarcasm is so opaque as to be non-existent. Also, if that was the case, why was the editor blubbering over the phone to GLAAD? Seems to me she would have put up more of a defense in order to save the publication’s face. I think she knows this was intended to be precisely what it appears to be to the casual observer, with the “sarcasm” defense being a hedge.

      Republican, I always respect your viewpoint, but if this cartoon was intended as sarcasm, it was stupidly done, and, conveniently, far too easy to misinterpret. It obviously should not have been passed by the staff, and yet it was.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SFNative
      SFNative

      I think it’s a bit confusing for a reasonable person to grasp the sarcasm and “tool” reference. Regardless, jokes about homophobia and bashing gay people are fundamentally off-color and in my mind do little to help curb the legitimization of dehumanizing gay people.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 12:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Marcito
      Marcito

      Well, Queerty readers, give the Observer a shout out…

      Viewpoint Desk
      viewpoint.1@nd.edu
      (574) 631-5303

      General Phone: (574) 631-7471
      General Fax: (574) 631-6927

      Postal Address
      The Observer
      P.O. Box 779
      Notre Dame, IN 46556

      Editor-in-Chief: Jenn Metz
      (574) 631-4542

      Managing Editor: Bill Brink
      (574) 631-4541

      Frances L. Shavers, who is the Chief of Staff to the president of the Notre Dame. Contact:

      http://president.nd.edu/about-the-office/staff-directory/chief-of-staff

      I was given Frances’s name by someone in Student Affairs at ND. Frances was identified as the person who “oversees the Observer”.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 12:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RomanHans
      RomanHans

      I’ll second the tool, schmool. If I just see it as a saw, it’s a straight gay-bashing joke. Replace it with a joke about beating up women and let’s see how far it gets.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 12:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Republican
      Republican

      Romeo,

      On this issue, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. If they hadn’t had drunken fratboy types (and one of them literally being a ‘tool’ at that), I would be on your side, but when you add in the drawings (as poorly drawn as they are), for me, the meaning changes entirely.

      And after doing a little more research, it appears that this “tool” character might have been used before, being portrayed as an idiot there as well, which would kind of support my interpretation.

      However, even if my take on the comic is correct (in other words, that an anti-hate message is what they intended to get across with the comic), I must concede that they could’ve done a better job of it. This is one of those areas where misunderstandings can be hurtful.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 12:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Wade MacMorrighan
      Wade MacMorrighan

      I’ll believe the apology when I see it! Notre Dame is a VERY hostile and anti-Gay environment, according to an ex-lover of mine who was educated there.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 12:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Republican
      Republican

      And just for the record, I am willing to be wrong on this. Without knowing more, that’s how I take the comic, but if more evidence comes to light, I’ll change my opinion. Nothing wrong with that. This is a serious matter, so it’s important for the truth to come out, whatever it may be.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 12:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Republican
      Republican

      Wade,

      From what I’ve heard from some fellow gays who went there, that is very true, though it’s supposedly getting better.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 12:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Former Fighting Irish Lass
      Former Fighting Irish Lass

      @Wade MacMorrighan:

      Wade, yes, there are some idiot students. There are even more idiot “Christians” with no connection to the university who love to show up on campus with dolls in strollers covered in fake blood. They drive down in blizzards to protest The Vagina Monologues–every year–to present misinformation and get escorted off campus.

      Yet, there are also some incredibly supportive faculty who continue to volunteer with the campus gay and lesbian club and fight for it’s recognition. There are those of us who as students bought the ugly, bright orange shirts reading “Gay? Fine by me” and wore them.

      And absolutely, a Catholic institution is going to have issues with homosexuality. And with women’s issues. Dismissing the institution as a whole though, is unfair.

      This is not the first moronic editorial decision The Observer has made (anyone else remember when they published the “official” Knights of Columbus statement about how The Vagina Monologues being performed would destroy the school?). It will definitely not be their last.

      However, having gone to schools both public and private, both secular and Catholic worldwide (everywhere from Little Rock, Arkansas to Moscow, Russia), this was the place with the most students who truly wanted to become better people, who truly wanted to help make the world better. Don’t give up on them because the Observer remains mired in incompetence and ignorance. The Observer is not the school. Just ask the next priest you run into at Truman’s on a Saturday night in South Bend. Or any of the alumni friends I have whose facebook status messages have temporarily shifted focus from Haiti to their continued disappointment in the paper, calls for staff changes, and links letting other alumni know where to register complaints.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 3:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      On the ‘tool’ issue: Maybe. The thing is, just reading this one strip, it doesn’t come across that way. He may be a saw for any number of reasons or for none at all, and the ‘joke’ is just presented as-is, so it’s a lot to ask that readers come up with that interpretation considering the more obvious alternative. Now, if these are ongoing characters, and it’s been set up that way, it makes more sense… but still a bad way to present it because *every* strip is someone’s first.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeff
    • jason
      jason

      The college students of today are the homophobic politicians of tomorrow. Don’t ever forget this.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 4:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike
      Mike

      Did you actually read the dialog balloons in the cartoon?

      “What is the easiest way to turn a fruit into a vegetable?
      No idea.
      A baseball bat.”

      It seems to me that the inference of taking a baseball bat to a gay person and causing brain injury to make one comatose is pretty clear.

      This seems to me to be unconscionable. I certainly hope Matthew Shepard’s family doesn’t read this hilarious cartoon.

      And this originated with some of our country’s best and brightest at the elite Notre-Dame. How Christian!

      Yes, I understand that “The Observer” is not an official publication of the university. It gets funding from somewhere.

      This is unacceptable and it needs follow-up.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 4:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Three people work on the strip and the best they could come up with was this? It’s not even original in either version. That whole “AIDS turns fruits into vegetables” dates back at least 25 years and I’m pretty sure I’ve seen the “baseball bat” answer a number of times before. Anti-gay or not, they should be disciplined for plagiarism.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 5:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      I think if you throw the term fomenting a hate crime at the Observer you might get some serious action…I didn’t ‘get’ the tool reference at all. I think it’s more than just sarcasm gone awry, considering the Univ. it came from and the anti-gay attitudes it’s ‘parent comany’ hold.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 6:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Former Fighting Irish Lass
      Former Fighting Irish Lass

      @Mike:

      Agreed. It needs follow up. Both Observer and school offices have been bombarded with emails and calls. As they should be. As they will continue to be.

      Unfortunately, The Observer is a sub-par publication that has been allowed to putter along and periodically publish this type of refuse.

      I just don’t want the student body to be blamed, again, for something it could not control. We (ND) seem to be constantly embroiled in idiotic debates and needing to explain that 98% of the student body chose the word “honored” on the poll asking how they felt about Obama as their commencement speaker, and that the few raving lunatics making national headlines not only do not speak for us, but aren’t even representing our majority opinions.

      And I have emailed about this. And I have spoken to students/alumni/staff about how I feel not allowing the LGB club official school recognition is alienating many of the donors of the future. And I will continue to do so.

      And I will argue that the few people who came up with this cartoon are not our country’s best and brightest, and certainly they are not Notre Dame’s best and brightest. They are three prejudiced students who need to receive a very large (figurative) slap in the face.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 7:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      I did write to one of the names on the cartoon and this was the response.
      Dear James,

      I am in complete agreement with everything you’ve said. I cannot begin to explain how terrible I feel for the pain that has been inflicted on so many people, which is far more important to me than any damage to my own reputation (which is considerable, I know). I’m forwarding you the email I’ve sent to my friends here, hoping they will still consider me a friend. I explain that I did not take part in the creation or submission of the horrible comic. But at the same time, it appeared under my name and is therefore my responsibility. Furthermore, even if I did not create it, I am associated with those that did. I have seriously reconsidered these friendships. I really don’t know what to do right now, and completely agree that the apology that appeared in the paper was severely inadequate. I had originally sent in my own individual apology that the paper was going to run, but they didn’t have space for 3 letters so some major compromises were made in forming a group apology, which I regret. I’m working on something to send to the entire community now. I really do thank you for your response. All of the responses I’ve gotten about this actually make me feel good that so many people took notice of this awful, cruel, and seriously wrong “joke”. Thank you for standing up for something that far too many people here do not. If you have further questions/comments/concerns, please email me.

      Respectfully,

      Lauren Rosemeyer

      Jan 15, 2010 at 7:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Biki
      Biki

      I was shocked when reading this “comic” to say the least. And, yes I could see that it might be taken as sarcasm, however how many people will see this and only take this to be acceptable behavior? This is on par with the sickest of racial, anti-female, etc jokes. Allowing this to be labeled as sarcasm is nothing short of agreeing with this sick viewpoint.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 8:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      Thanks, Jeff, for the lead.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 8:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Queer Supremacist
      Queer Supremacist

      What’s the easiest way to turn a bigot into a vegetable?

      A fucking gun.

      KILL BREEDERS.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 9:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo
      romeo

      @ Queer Supremacist: where have you been all my life? LOL

      One thing, though, remember we need the breeders to manufacture more gayboys. LMAO

      Jan 15, 2010 at 9:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • sal(the original)
      sal(the original)

      i get the tool part but what is the lesson?baseball bat a gay and you get called a tool?the sick injustice is that in reality thats the biggest justice this kinda act can get in these times ,just say “gay panic” and ya off free

      Jan 15, 2010 at 9:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lukas P.
      Lukas P.

      Comedy is about context. That’s why satirical paper the Onion gets away with what they do, and many of us have laughed at their articles poking jabs at the homophobes. The Notre Dame comic is in no context other than that a comic is supposed to be funny and, one hopes, makes a point.

      They missed the mark, big time.

      Kudos to Lauren Rosemeyer for taking ownership of the situation.

      P.s. @Romeo, Georgetown U, in DC is a much better school academically than ND! ;- p

      Jan 15, 2010 at 10:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChrisM
      ChrisM

      Republican, I am less willing to believe that they are making fun of homophobic frat boys by making the teller of the joke a “tool (which I do believe was the intent of the saw).” Instead, I believe that by making the teller a tool, they believe to be making the telling of the joke more acceptable. Which would explain why other off-color jokes were explained by this stupid saw character – he’s their excuse to tell prejudiced jokes without being called prejudiced. It’s clear that the gay-bashing joke is what is meant to be taken from this comic strip, not irony. But don’t yell at the creator – it’s that tool that told it!

      It’s just like the people who say “no offense” after every offensive thing they utter. I don’t excuse either.

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lukas P.
      Lukas P.

      @ChrisM: It’s like those dimwits who preface a statement with either “I don’t mean to be rude, but….” or “I don’t mean to pry but….” and proceed to try parking themselves uninvited into your bidness — but they never turn into “Our Lady of Sorrows” once they’ve gone about their evil ways!

      Jan 15, 2010 at 11:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Labs
      Labs

      @Former Fighting Irish Lass:

      As a 2009 grad who was one of the “raving lunatics” involved in the protest against awarding President Obama an honorary degree, I would like to point out that comparing the peaceful, university sanctioned, STUDENT-led protest last year to the actions of these three idiots is entirely unfair. For those of us on campus who RESPECTFULLY disagreed with the university, it was in a desire for an open and respectful dialogue on the issues at hand. The “cartoon” presented in The Observer was not in any way contributing to an open and respectful debate on anything and as such should not be thrown into the same category as the on-campus events surrounding Commencement last spring. Now if you want to talk about the way off-campus organizations handled last spring, then I would agree with you that the two are in the same vein.

      Jan 16, 2010 at 8:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Notre Dame Censors Comments
      Notre Dame Censors Comments

      The Notre Dame Observer has cleared the comments from their non-apology post. The comments were heavily in favor of an apology that did not deflect criticism by bringing up Senator Reid’s comments, and that spoke about specific actions they were taking in light of their publishing of the comic. This is censorship at the very least and denies those following the story that ability to both engage and learn from their epic failure as journalists and community members.

      Jan 16, 2010 at 10:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      Is anyone getting these ‘commercials’ playing automatically? I’m bombarded every time on his site now and it sucks!!!!!!!!!!

      Jan 16, 2010 at 11:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      An apology “of sorts”? Why is this an apology “of sorts”? They acknowledge poor judgment, take full responsibility, admit there is no excuse for it and promise to work harder in future to keep it from happening again. What exactly else should they have said? This is a good result. This is the way it’s supposed to go when nasty stuff gets said. Nastiness happens, concern is expressed over the nastiness, nastiness is owned up to. Would you have preferred the usual responses to complaints about supposedly humorous material, which is “lighten up” or “you just don’t get it”?

      Jan 16, 2010 at 2:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo
      romeo

      Like I said, hypocritical retraction. Bringing up Reid was bullshit, totally beside the point. If they were in any way sincere in that apology, then the Reid business would not in any way have been mentioned.

      Jan 16, 2010 at 3:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChrisM
      ChrisM

      I don’t believe this is a bad apology. They acknowledged they were wrong. The one thing you notice is they do avoid mentioning the homophobia of the cartoon, broadly labeling it as hateful language. But then again, they shouldn’t be condoning that kind of punchline towards anybody, so hateful language characterizes it pretty well.

      I believe the editor is truly sorry. If she cried during GLAAD’s call and wrote this, I have no reason to doubt her genuineness. It would be nice if it didn’t happen in the first place, but at least it’s being acknowledged.

      Jan 16, 2010 at 3:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChrisM
      ChrisM

      Also, the Reid comment struck me as strange as well. But I don’t think it was meant to take criticism off of their paper (these are [Notre Dame] college students after all – they’re not clever enough to use those kinds of tactics). It’s probably the person’s writing style – connecting things to current events as journalists generally try to do. I know I have a certain style of writing, even on online comments like these. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if that paragraph was simply a relic of the Editor’s style.

      Jan 16, 2010 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      To ChrisM, I think the editors and cartoonists might genuinely feel bad/regretful for what was published; however, I do not believe they should be forgiven just because they are college students. Universities might be a place for individuals to grow and learn, but they are not a stomping ground for students to push the limits of homophobia, bigotry and hate. These comments are not acceptable and using Harry Reid or society at large as scapegoats is not acceptable or appropriate. I do not believe the students responsible can do much to earn my forgiveness. As a victim of a hate crime, it’s a little too late for me to consider all of this acceptable. I do think that we should not focus on the past negatives and we should look to encourage inclusiveness and acceptance at Notre Dame.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 3:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      I can’t believe some want to swept this away because the speaker in the toon is a “tool”. It’s blatantly exactly what it seems to be; it’s blatantly a slap in the face to every person who’s ever been assaulted just for being, and to every mother like Judy Shepard who’s had to bury a child because of a hate crime.

      Some things are never funny. Pulverizing a gay person into a vegetative state is one of them. I find it astonishing beyond belief that the persons responsible for the decision to publish still work for the paper.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 10:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      How many pounds of flesh exactly need to be extracted to satisfy you people? How many strikes of the flail? They fucked up, they said they were sorry and they’re going to do their best to see that it doesn’t happen again. What more do you want?

      Jan 17, 2010 at 11:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Blake
      Blake

      @FakeName: You’re a faggot. Oops, sorry. I shouldn’t have said that, and I’m sorry. I know you’ll forgive me.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 11:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      No. 42 · FakeName

      I haven’t seen a pound of flesh yet, maybe I missed it amidst the Harry Reid diversion. Someone read that ‘comic’ and thought “Oooh, thats funny, lets run with it.”

      The only pounds of flesh relevant here is that person’s malfunctioning brain.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 11:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Irish Alum
      Irish Alum

      First of all…thanks for posting this. I heard about this and wanted to see what all the commotion was about. I am glad you have it posted here to give witness to what happened.

      At best, it was a total failure. And I’m not just talking about the crappy drawing. It is 3rd or 4th grade cartooning…in which you take a joke or riddle and have two characters run through the script. “Knock, knock…” So even if it had been funny, it failed.

      And it takes three people to come up with that. At least the cartoon above it (“Schade and Freud”) had the common sense to take the day off when they hit the wall.

      But I’m not buying that there’s sarcasm here. The cartoonists apologized to the Notre Dame student body, but their explanation is weak, at best. They say that we know that the joke is bad because it’s told by the hacksaw-shaped character and, before the punchline is delivered, the “reasonable” character did not “get” the joke. For the price of a couple more squiggles and one more panel — they could have had the hacksaw character get some kind of comeuppance. A really witty comment from the “reasonable” character would have totally altered the way everyone looked at this. Or a piano falling on the head of the hacksaw character.

      Notwithstanding what the authors claim and “Republican” argues above, the fact remains that the last panel in a cartoon is the one that’s supposed to deliver the laughs and the irony and the last panel is flat out offensive. The reasonable character, at the very least, could have been in that third frame rolling his eyes if the cartoonists weren’t clever enough to create a good comeback. For all the creative tools at their disposal to make their point, they chose to let their hacksaw persona get the last word and I see no reasonable explanation other than to assume that they thought it was funny for him to say that without anything further for us to reflect on or ponder.

      At best, this is the most incompetently inked cartoon I have seen outside of grammar school — but when you throw in the unrebutted venom, it’s shameful and embarrassing and reflects poorly on my alma mater. There are no excuses that I can think of for it and the cartoonist’s weasly apologies are rightly falling on deaf ears…but do understand that Notre Dame is hardly as one-dimensional as the publication of this miserable cartoon makes it appear. I appreciate those of you who are outraged by this who exercise the considerable restraint needed to not lash out and reduce Notre Dame to a caricature on the basis of this.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 11:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      @Blake: Had the response from the paper been as flippant as yours then your point might actually, you know, be a point.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 11:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      @Taylor Siluwé: Yes, someone did read the cartoon and decide to run it. And then when their error was pointed out to them, they apologized for it and pledged to do better in the future. This is a good outcome of a bad situation.

      I asked before and no one’s really said what’s so unsatisfactory about the apology, other than the attempt to contextualize it with a comparison to a similar contemporaneous situation. The comparison is not only apt, it’s exactly the sort of comparisons that we ourselves make over and over. How many times have we all said in response to some anti-gay words or action something like “if you substituted the n word for the word ‘fag’…” or “if this were a white guy doing the same thing to a black guy…”? To condemn the paper for doing the exact same thing you’ve all done repeatedly is ridiculous.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 12:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B.J.
      B.J.

      @FakeName: Relax, man. I’m sure Blake was just trying to be funny — you know — humor. And, he said he was sorry. Can’t you take a joke?

      Jan 17, 2010 at 12:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      @B.J.: Which is the answer we usually get in these sorts of situations. Isn’t the response of the paper so much better?

      Jan 17, 2010 at 12:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Matt
      Matt

      If this cartoon had advocated violence against any other minority group other than gays, do you think these characters would still be enrolled at Notre-Dame?

      Happy Martin Luther King Day, everyone.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 12:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • terrwill
      terrwill

      @Matt: 100% agree. If there was any kind of alluding to violence to any other group there would have been outrage. There have been firings and expulsions from universites for simply showing a noose in drawings and cartoons because it was alleged it was a reference to lynching of blacks. And for them to try and simmer the outrage by mentioning the Harry Reid comments were unexcusabe. As always the Gays are the only still acceptable group who can be used as a punching bag…………

      Jan 17, 2010 at 12:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      @FakeName

      The problem with the apology that I have is that the authors never take responsibility for or seem to realize the seriousness of violence. They try to deflect blame toward society at large. This was not a simple offensive comment. If it were, this apology would be good enough. The comic goes beyond that notion and suggests violence is funny. The seriousness of the offense requires an apology that matches that. Instead, the authors think this is all about hurting the feelings of a bunch of gays. Its a lot worse than that.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 12:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      I agree, Kevin. The apology was way weak and the attempted deflection was an insult to my intelligence.

      No. 50 · Matt
      And I don’t even want the culprits kicked out of school, I just want them off the paper – forever.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 1:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tired Old Queen
      Tired Old Queen

      @Matt: I so agree with Matt and Terrwill.

      Have any official consequences been announced? Other than this site, I haven’t seen any media coverage about this.

      I’ve mellowed enough with age to believe in redemption. Expulsion may be a bit severe. Social probation and significant community service at a place such as a shelter for homeless gay youth may be appropriate.

      We are truly the last minority. Old and mellow I may be, but life has also taught me that we must be vigilant and militant about this kind of prejudice.

      I hope to live long enough to see a Harvey Milk USPS commemorative stamp. The way things are, other than in California, I doubt that any of us will ever be wishing each other Happy Harvey Milk Day on a national level — at least in my lifetime.

      The words I’m sorry can come easily. They need to be backed up with action.

      Matt, Terrwill, and others, I pass the torch to you. Keep up the good fight so that the younger generations will never have to grow up under the fear and self-loathing that so many of us seniors did. God Bless You.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 1:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo
      romeo

      @TOD #54: Thanks for your post. I think it’s important that we see and appreciate the continuity of our struggle across the generations.

      Regarding this issue, as I’ve stated earlier, forcing an insincere apology is less useful than letting the offensive cartoon be admitted to the historical record and referenced when catholics go on in, among other places, court rooms, that they “mean gays no harm.” This was their university, their students, their mentality. This is the catholic church with it’s mask (and pants) down, and this is what their universities produce. Saw Georgetown referenced in this thread. Haven’t heard that it’s really any better regarding us.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 1:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Curt
      Curt

      “What is the easiest way to turn a Leprechaun into a vegetable?
      No idea.
      A baseball bat.”

      Let’s say, for example, that the “joke” above appeared in a cartoon of the student-run newspaper of one of Notre-Dame’s rivals prior to facing the Irish on the gridiron.

      To stay in the spirit of humor of “The Observer” cartoon, the word “Mick” should be substituted for Leprechaun.

      I wonder how the good people of Notre-Dame would react if this were to happen today.

      Sadly, only a few decades ago, this could have happened with no repercussions, or perhaps only a tearful apology.

      Fortunately, today, there would be outrage and national coverage. Bill Donahue, president of the Catholic League would be all over this. And, being Catholic is a choice.

      But we’re only fags, right?

      Tired Old Queen speaks the truth!

      FakeName, pounds of flesh, no. A few ounces, yes.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 1:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      Deflecting anger on Catholics is counter-productive, just like deflecting prop 8 anger on racial minorities was counter productive. The Catholic Church has a specific policy that encourages oppression, but it is important that we do not reduce ourselves to labeling all Catholics or all Notre Dame students as bigots. If we allow ourselves to do that, then we become no better than those who seek to denigrate us. I do not mean to minimize the harm that the Catholic Church, as a powerful religious institution, creates; however, being angry at Catholics or Notre Dame students and alumni will produce no further gains for the LGBTQ community. It is important to recognize where oppression exists and address it. The most immediate action that needs to come of this is a university conversation (resulting in specific policy creation) on the rights of and the treatment of LGBTQ individuals at Notre Dame. I hope to see a movement started by the LGBTQ student orgs at Notre Dame and St. Mary’s.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 2:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lukas P.
      Lukas P.

      “Revenge is mine, sayeth Google.” Anyone associated with the cartoon will someday apply for a job, and the hiring manager and/or the Human Resources person will do a search on the name, and LO and Behold, guess what ‘s going to pop up? Might or might not hinder the job search, no?

      The stupid ass stuff I did/said in college and before may be dimly remembered by my friends, but there’s virtually no trail of documentation, no blogs featuring my adolecent rantings or drunken orgy photos on Facebook and so on.
      And if there are, it’s all been Photoshopped so I look like I’m a bodybuilder from Senegal.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 2:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tony
      Tony

      @Kevin: Well said, Kevin.

      Certainly, noone can dispute the bigotry of the Roman Catholic Church as an institution. Not long ago, the Vatican refused to join the European nations in signing a UN resolution to decriminalize homosexuality. Pope Benedict has invited disaffected (anti-gay) Anglicans to join the Catholic Church, and just a few weeks ago, His Holiness announced that homosexuality endangers humanity.

      Here in the States, New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan and Washington Archbishop Donald Wuerl have campaigned fiercely against gay marriage.

      They have plenty of company with the Mormons, Born-Agains, etc.

      Sorry for the digression. Venting can be therapeutic.

      Of course, you are correct. All Catholics are not bigots. I would not want a citizen of another country to dislike me because I am an American and that person disagrees with a policy of our federal government over which I have no control.

      Your view is very constructive. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if this incident turns out to be the catalyst for genuine dialogue and change at these two respectable schools.

      I don’t know if these schools currently have LGBTQ organizations. I believe one was started not too long ago at Georgetown.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 3:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chitown Kev
      Chitown Kev

      @Tony:

      My alma mater, Loyola University-Chicago has had a LGBTQ organization for some time. Sometimes it’s well attanded, sometimes not, but that’s because it is kind of a commuter school.

      I’d be willing to bet that if you went through the websites of these Jesuit schools, that a good portion of them would have LGBTQ groups.

      http://www.ajcunet.edu/Member-Institutions

      Jan 17, 2010 at 3:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hephaestion
      hephaestion

      Whoever made this cartoon needs to be expelled forever.
      Whoever allowed it to be published needs to be fired and run out of town.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 7:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      @hephaestion: Wow, not too vindictive. Must be awesome never to have made a mistake.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 8:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeff (a different one)
      Jeff (a different one)

      I have just read through this post, the “apology” and the thought-provoking comments of Queerty’s viewers. In fact, I read through all of this several times.

      Many of the comments about this post are better written than the apology.

      The cartoon is indefensible. Period.

      The semi-defensive apology was presumably written by a senior editor of a publication at a quasi Ivy League school. I trust that the person is not an English or a journalism major.

      It’s not so much the mediocre journalistic style in which the apology was written that troubles me. Again, presuming, this should have been written as a result of reflection, the tone is one of spin and damage control, not sincere remorse. The deflective comment about Harry Reid had no place in the article.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 9:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jake
      Jake

      At best: This cartoon is the type pathetic, sophomoric humor I might understand coming from some redneck middleschoolers.
      (That’s understand, not excuse.)

      At worst: It’s provoking a hate crime.

      I suppose the reality lies somewhere between the two, and only Colin Hofman and Jay Wade really know. They do need to be held accountable.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 9:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jonathan
      Jonathan

      The non-apology is lame. Suggesting that you were only doing what the Senate Majority Leader was doing is not accepting responsibility.

      Jan 17, 2010 at 11:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Patrick T
      Patrick T

      Considering that my husband had a baseball bat upside his head by his devoute father to “cure” him of “the Gay” and now has the mentality of a 9 yr old with a speech impediment, it’s obvious that this is a “tradional Catholic value”. Needless to say, he’s not a Practicing Catholic after(which had been a thorn in my side before…).

      Jan 18, 2010 at 6:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      @Tony: “All Catholics are not bigots.”

      Really? There are no Catholic bigots in the world, at all? I can think of a few bishops that have well earned that label.

      I suspect you intended to say, “Not all Catholics are bigots.”
      Meaning, that there do exist some Catholics who are not bigots.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 7:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      This isn’t just an example of sophomoric judgment.

      Inciting a crime is itself a crime, in almost every jurisdiction.

      If anyone is attacked using a baseball bat or similar implement, and particularly if that attacker has read the cited article, then the publisher may be liable.

      To minimize that liability, the publisher needs to fire the editor who approved the article, and publish a full apology and retraction, before any such attack occurs. The publisher probaby also needs to adopt a policy of supporting fair and equal treatment for gay people, and publish an editorial about that policy.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 8:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      The cartoon is not inciting a crime. Get a grip.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 9:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tony
      Tony

      @Steve: This is Tony, and I thank you for pointing out my error. You are correct. I did, indeed, mean not all Catholics are bigots.

      Also, you make an excellent point about the publisher in 68.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 9:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      @FakeName:

      What happens when a couple of drunk college boys are walking home from the bar, spot a “fruit” and decide to beat the sh*t out of him? Maybe they’d have done it anyway, but making jokes out of violent crimes only encourages things. Believe me, before I came out, a lot of my friends were ignorant homophobes. I can definitely see them getting drunk and thinking this cartoon is hysterical.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 10:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Eric
      Eric

      @Kevin: Right on, Kevin! I’m starting to think that FakeName must be related to one of the cartoonists.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 10:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rich
      Rich

      @Eric: Eric, you flatter these jerks by referring to them as cartoonists. They are bigots, plain and simple.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 4:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      @Kevin: I would love to be in the court room when a defendant tries to point to a single comic strip in a single obscure newspaper and claim that it induced him to commit a battery. Or a prosecutor bringing charges against the cartoonists. The idea is ludicrous and the claim gives the strip far more power than it would ever have had, had the ridiculous claim not been made in the first place.

      The strip ran, people expressed concern and anger about it, the paper apologized. But that’s not good enough for the professional victims who say “fuck the First Amendment, they should be expelled and prosecuted.” The initial response to the cartoon was appropriate and effective. The continuing outbursts are histrionic and make the complainers look like foolish children.

      You do realize that by your logic you should be condemning Queerty and every other media outlet that has redistributed the strip, right? If it’s “incitement” when the paper prints it it’s “incitement” when Queerty publishes it too.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 4:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      @FakeName:

      Just because something cannot be proven in a court of law, does not mean it isn’t reality. Ignoring a problem might remove it from consciousness, but it doesn’t reduce the power of the statement. Sweeping the comic under the rug does nothing to change the climate that allowed it to be created. Actually, if the authors truly were intending to point out bigotry (by showing the homophobe as a tool) then they have succeeded in provocatively stimulating conversation.

      I too disagree with further disciplinary action on these students. If you look at my comments, I think I’ve made it clear that we should shift focus to the source of the problem and create a positive message. The apology was inadequate, in my opinion and others, but that doesn’t matter anymore. You’re right – what’s done is done. Now, lets work to have something positive come of this.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 5:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tim
      Tim

      @edgyguy1426: I agree. The University is culpable for fostering an atmosphere where gays are treated as second-class citizens.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 5:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Kevin sez: Just because something cannot be proven in a court of law, does not mean it isn’t reality.

      But we’re not talking about whether it’s “reality” or not. The specific charge, made by Steve in post 68, is that the cartoon legally constitutes an incitement to commit a crime and that the paper may have legal liability in the event of a bashing. That puts the discussion in the realm of law, which as we all know is often divorced from reality.

      No one has suggested that this incident be ignored. I’m certainly not. But the incident has been dealt with. The strip will no longer run and the editor responsible for it has resigned. But I would bet you a dollar that there will be more posts from people calling that inadequate and calling the editor’s statement “lame” and demanding more and more punitive action.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 5:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      @FakeName: Then ignore them. This is the internet and a lot of people have a lot of different opinions. Getting angry helps some people feel better about the situation at hand. I personally believe (and I think you do too) that this is not ultimately productive. So be it. Obviously its very important to you how people react to this, so take action and do something about it. Complaining about things in the comment section of a blog does little to promote change. Personally, I’m going to be contacting the LGBTQ organizations at Notre Dame and St. Mary’s and encourage them to organize a positive image campaign for their community. Approaching the University’s with changing policy is also the next step. I know this has been unsuccessfully tried at Notre Dame before but that was several years ago and its worth another shot.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 6:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      Clarification from my last post: Approaching the respective Universities to change policy is also the next step.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 6:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      @Kevin: It’s not that this particular situation is of such great interest to me. This incident and the reaction to it are just the latest examples of the culture of victimhood that some in the gay community seem intent on fostering and maintaining. These little issues, even when resolved satisfactorally, get blown so far out of proportion and and assigned such tremendous import that when other much more serious things happen it makes it that much easier for straight society to dismiss it as just one more silly thing the dizzy queens are fussing about.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 6:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dwight
      Dwight

      @Kevin: I think you are taking a very mature, constructive approach with your suggestion.

      I understand that this cartoon is the work of only one or two individuals, but I don’t think it’s too much of a stretch to conclude that a student newspaper, for the most part, echos the sentiment of the student body at large, and that is what I find to be so disheartening.

      I thought that the demographic of young, sophisticated, educated adults were the most open and likely to support issues such as gay marriage. Notre-Dame has a reputation for being very selective and competitive in its admission process. I would have imagined that their students would be a cut above, and I am disappointed. I would like to think that something like this would not happen at a true Ivy League School or a school like Stanford or Carnegie-Mellon. It does make me wonder if the the school’s association with the Roman Catholic Church isn’t a significant factor.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 6:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris
      Chris

      @Tony: Good points. I try to live my life with the idea of Live and Let Live, and I think our country would be a more civilized place if the Catholics, Mormons, and Christian wingnuts would stop promoting homophobia. Yes, I know it’s not ALL Catholics, Mormons, and Christian wingnuts, but their instituions have donated enormous sums of tax exempt money to work against us.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 7:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)
      John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)

      @FakeName:

      What’s the biggie? You been all over this comment list and I’ve not seen you behave this way with Uganda or the Malawi gays…

      How funny you are.

      You’d rather argue out with people who did something bad to gays and were asked to apologise, yet you care nothing for gays being killed?

      I guess one lot is dark as the night and the other is pure as white as snow, even if they were against you with the cartoon.

      Nice.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 8:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark
      Mark

      The actions of one or two jerks have caused the name of a prominent university to be given national, negative attention and have resulted in the resignation of a student editor.

      What do we know about these students. I know they haven’t (exactly) broken a law, but presumably they’re over eighteen and wouldn’t fall under juvenile identity protection.

      Does anyone know anything about them (profile)etc.? I’m curious, because I’m going to stereotype (I try not to and I judge others for doing it.) I just wonder if they’re football recruits or come from Alabama or Mississippi. I just don’t picture them being philosophy majors from Manhattan.

      Again, I know I’m stereotyping, and I’m working on being sorry about it.

      Jan 18, 2010 at 9:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Disgusted
      Disgusted

      Now why don’t our gay celebrities, those so many here wish to protect, come out and say enough to this bigotry, hate, and violence? Where are Anderson Cooper, QUinto, Matt Boner, and so many others? Oh, i forgot, they’re sucking cock in secret.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 12:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      No. 83 · John from England(used to be just John but there are other John’s)

      @FakeName:

      What’s the biggie? You been all over this comment list and I’ve not seen you behave this way with Uganda or the Malawi gays…

      What a coincidence. I was thinking the exact same thing.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 4:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Angelo
      Angelo

      We need to educate children on the value of diversity and the evil of hating those who are different. we need to make homophobia a sin and a shame. Homophobes are scum, vermin that should be eradicated.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 4:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • J. C.
      J. C.

      @schlukitz:

      What’s Notre Dame and, especially, the Catholic church doing about Uganda or the Malawi gays…oh, that’s right they’re helping the savages write the laws to make it “legal” to throw another faggot on the fire.

      That is, when they’re not eating their own. And no, that is not a racist remark. It is a fact. Cannibalism and human sacrifices are on the rise in Uganda.

      Click on the link below and read it for yourself.

      http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2010/01/07/human-sacrifices-in-uganda-higher-than-authorities-thought-report.aspx

      and

      http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=0h&oq=canni&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS339US339&q=cannibalism+in+uganda

      Jan 19, 2010 at 9:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      No. 87 · J. C.

      Maybe we’ll get lucky with this Ugandan trend. Maybe they’ll bring back that festive party practice of barbecuing missionaries. After all, providing physical sustenance is all they’re good for anyway.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 1:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      @Taylor Siluwé: You *do* realize your remark is as bad as the original cartoon, right?

      Jan 19, 2010 at 1:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      …and the ‘Flag?’ thing isn’t working again. It just says ‘are you sure you want to do this?’ with no option to say yes.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 1:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Taylor Siluwé
      Taylor Siluwé

      No. 90 · hyhybt

      As bad? Possibly. Funnier? Certainly.

      And actually, I think going after groups that seek my subjugation and demise is really an act of self defense. Those missionaries assisting and guiding the drafting of the “kill the gays” bill should be BBQ’d, and I won’t issue an apology for saying it – not even a half-assed one.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 1:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Victim
      Victim

      @FakeName: “victimhood” “little issues” comment no. 80

      The sad reality, FakeName, is that we ARE victims.

      Two dozen cars at a gay nightclub in Orlando had their tires slashed this past weekend, and a gay business recently had “Die Fags” graffiti sprayed on it.

      The gay owner of a greenhouse in Cranston, RI has been receiving threatening hate mail for five months and this past weekend his business had windows smashed, lights broken, and hateful graffiti sprayed on it.

      There was a gay bashing outside the glbt Roxy bar on Main Street in Buffalo on New Year’s eve.

      Barely a week goes by that we don’t read about a gay bashing covered by one of the blogs like Queerty, Towleroad, or Joe My God. I recall reading, recently, about a gay bashing in Dupont Circle (DC) of all places.

      These can’t all be, to use your words, “dizzy queens.”

      Major religious institutions are vigorously attempting to deny us our rights.

      Perhaps, you are a lucky exception that has been spared, but based on my life experienceos the many, many gays that I know have at least once in their life, (and usually many more times than that), have been the recipient of bulllying, hurtful slurs, harassment, job discrimination, etc., Much of this has been internalized.

      To these, yes, victims, these are not “little things.”

      We can’t just bend over and keep taking it, and a strong response from our community to the N-D cartoon was, in my opinion, justified.

      It is apparent to me from reading your gazillion comments about this post that you are a very intelligent person, but for the life of me I can’t understand your attitude.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 4:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      @John from England(used to be just John but there are other John’s): You’re a race-baiting idiot. The difference between this situation and the Uganda and Malawi situations is that in this situation the perpetrators have acknowledged their error and tried to make amends for it only for people to keep bitching, whereas in Uganda and Malawi the threats continue. The difference here has nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with the actions of the perps. Trying to turn this into a race issue and accusing me of being a racist is the act of a disgusting coward. You can’t rebut my statements so you try to paint me as a bigot. You’re scum.

      Schlukitz, the same goes for you.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 4:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Victim sez: The sad reality, FakeName, is that we ARE victims.

      The sad reality is that we are sometimes victimized. The sadder reality is that even when we’re not being victimized, too many of us still think and act like victims.

      We can’t just bend over and keep taking it, and a strong response from our community to the N-D cartoon was, in my opinion, justified.

      I did not suggest that that we should not have responded to the cartoon, nor did I suggest that the initial response to the cartoon wasn’t justified. What isn’t justified is the continuing drama queen antics after the people responsible have apologized and pledged to do better. The editor-in-chief of the paper was literally in tears, she was so upset about this. She apologized on the phone and she apologized in print. The strip will never run in the paper again and the editor who let it slip past her resigned. But no, because the original apology mentioned Harry Reid or some shit, the professional victims are calling for expulsion and criminal sanctions. It is that hysterical response that is not justified and which makes it easier for straight people to ignore the tire slashings and the job discrimination and the attacks.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 4:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      @FakeName: To be honest, I seriously doubt the average person gives LGBTQs enough thought to think of us as actual victims or simply hysterical. Most people are not aware of the actual level of injustice which we are subjected to in society and whether or not our response is appropriate. No one will deny us rights because we’re too whiny. We’re denied rights because people are bigoted, not because we didn’t ask politely enough. When we hold hands, we are flaunting our sexuality. When we want rights, we’re whiny. I’d rather be whiny than ignored.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 5:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      No. 87 · J. C.

      We are both exactly on the same page here, which is why I agreed with John of England.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 5:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      No. 93 · FakeName said to John of England…

      You’re scum.

      Schlukitz, the same goes for you.

      I am so relieved that I was included in the name-calling fest. Nothing succeeds like a good, rational and intelligent argument.

      I would definitely have felt like a “victim”, had I been omitted from your umbrage.

      Oh, and lest I forget, thanks for the cover you gave to the hetero criminal types who continue their ongoing, unrelenting and escalating attacks on the LGBT community as follows;

      It is that hysterical response that is not justified and which makes it easier for straight people to ignore the tire slashings and the job discrimination and the attacks.

      Yep. Yep. We of the LGBT community who are displaying a bad attitude, certainly do have it coming to us, don’t we? *sarcasm font on*

      Um…tell me, FakeName…how do you feel about women who wear their skirts and dresses that leave their ankles and knees exposed? Are they too “making it easier for the straight people to ignore the rape attacks”?

      Jan 19, 2010 at 5:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Schlukitz bleats: I am so relieved that I was included in the name-calling fest. Nothing succeeds like a good, rational and intelligent argument.

      Says one who resorted to race-baiting. Race-baiting sure is “good, rational and intelligent argument”, huh?

      Schlukitz blathers: Yep. Yep. We of the LGBT community who are displaying a bad attitude, certainly do have it coming to us, don’t we?

      Wow, way to fundamentally misunderstand every single thing I’ve said in this thread. No thinking person could possibly read anything that I’ve written and come away with the notion that I believe victims deserve what they get.

      Schlukitz further vomits forth: Um…tell me, FakeName…how do you feel about women who wear their skirts and dresses that leave their ankles and knees exposed? Are they too “making it easier for the straight people to ignore the rape attacks”?

      First, only a drooling idiot could possibly interpret anything I’ve said as condoning either violence against gays or rape. Second, I’ve said repeatedly that the initial response to the cartoon was justified and appropriate, not to mention successful. Finally, your scenario doesn’t come close to corresponding to the cartoon incident. The closer analogy would be women making false rape allegations, which may lead people to be less likely to believe actual rape victims.

      Jan 19, 2010 at 6:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      Um, FakeName, manufacturer of fake claims, where exactly was it that either John of England or I made any mention of race in any of my comments on this thread…or any other, for that matter?

      Or is it now racist to speak up about the proposed killing of gays by Uganda and Malawi?

      Jan 20, 2010 at 12:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Techtard
      Techtard

      @FakeName: Off-topic, but can you please explain how you can italicize something in a comment. I truly don’t know.

      Jan 20, 2010 at 12:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      Says one who resorted to race-baiting. Race-baiting sure is “good, rational and intelligent argument”, huh?

      Well then, idiot, coward, scum, bleater, blatherer and drooling idiot, among some of the demeaning terms you tossed at John of England and I, despite the fact that neither of us has resorted to name-calling and tossing epithets your way, also makes for good, rational and intelligent argument.

      Oh wait…I forgot. It was you who created a racial incident here, simply by calling us “race baiters”.

      Just like the Christian Churches and the Mormons, who call us abominations, pedophiles and people who indulge in incest and bestiality, just saying it makes it true, doesn’t it?

      And, just like the Christian Churches and the Mormons, it also justifies the emotional outburst of indignation when the victims of that verbal abuse speak out in defense of themselves.

      Jan 20, 2010 at 2:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Schlukiz lies: Oh wait…I forgot. It was you who created a racial incident here, simply by calling us “race baiters”.

      You’re nothing but a liar. John from England threw out the racism accusation in post 83 and you agreed with him in post 86. A word of advice: the next time you want to pretend you didn’t do something that you did, don’t try it in the same thread.

      Jan 20, 2010 at 12:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Techtard asks: Off-topic, but can you please explain how you can italicize something in a comment.

      Code it like this, but without spaces:
      Italicized comment

      Jan 20, 2010 at 12:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Oops, it still reads the code even spaced.

      Code it like this, only use signs instead of parens:
      (i)Italics(/i)

      Jan 20, 2010 at 12:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Jesus! Use the less than and greater than signs.

      Jan 20, 2010 at 12:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      No. 103 · FakeName

      John from England threw out the racism accusation in post 83 and you agreed with him in post 86

      There is nothing racial about drawing attention to the fact that you are making a big stink over gays being upset over the anti-gay cartoon posted on Notre Dame’s College Newspaper, while having absolutely nothing to say about Uganda’s President Museveni proposed legislation to criminalize and execute homosexuals as well as the calling of the Heinous Ugandan pastor Martin Ssempa for a “Million Man March” against homosexuals in that country.

      Criticism of Uganda bring a righteous cry of racism from your lips. But, the anti-gay reign of terror and holocaust like actions taking place in Uganda brings not a peep out of you.

      Branding John of England and I as racists for bringing this glaring omission of facts to your attention and calling us liars for denying that charge, is so typical of hypocrites like you.

      As I said in an earlier post, when hypocrites like the Church, the Mormons and you can’t win an argument fairly, they have to resort to baseness of hurling insults and invectives.

      I will add liar to your constantly expanding lexicon of invectives that you are proving yourself so good at tossing at those who dare to express a viewpoint that differs from yours.

      Censorship much, do you?

      Jan 20, 2010 at 4:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt
      hyhybt

      @FakeName: It is racism to assume that criticism of Uganda’s evil behavior is automatically racist just because the person saying it is (probably) a different race than most Ugandans. I doubt either of them would approve of gays being jailed and executed even if those doing it were white.

      Jan 20, 2010 at 4:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • schlukitz
      schlukitz

      No. 107 · hyhybt

      Precisely.

      Thank you for helping me to clarify that point. You are absolutely right. The jailing and execution of gays is heinous and totally unacceptable, regardless of the color of the people calling for these horrendous actions.

      I will state, yet once again for the record, as I have in the past, that while I am white, racism has never been on my agenda. Nor, will it ever be.

      For all of my life, I have fought racism with the same fervor and passion, as I would fight homophobia. Both have no place in anyone’s agenda, be they straight, gay, white or black.

      Nor, will I just sit on my thumbs and allow anyone to accuse of me of racism or homophobia without defending myself from such charges.

      As it so happens, I feel very strongly about this issue of accusing people of racism as a means of getting them banned from posting on Queerty, because it has already happened to me. It is cowardly, below-the-belt fighting and slanderous character assassination which is behavior very unbecoming of anyone who sinks to that level.

      I would like to believe that this is NOT the intent of FakeName and if, indeed, that is true, then he should cease and desist tossing the term “race-baters” around with such abandon and like Notre Dame, apologize for playing the race card and having slandered both John and me with such abandon.

      Jan 20, 2010 at 4:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      Schlukitz prevaricates: There is nothing racial about drawing attention to the fact that you are making a big stink over gays being upset over the anti-gay cartoon posted on Notre Dame’s College Newspaper,

      Again you deliberately misrepresent and distort. What I have said, many times, is that the initial response to the cartoon was appropriate and effective.

      Schlukitz prevaricates: while having absolutely nothing to say about Uganda’s President Museveni proposed legislation to criminalize and execute homosexuals as well as the calling of the Heinous Ugandan pastor Martin Ssempa for a “Million Man March” against homosexuals in that country.

      I have condemned these actions not only in this forum on multiple occasions but in many other forums across the Internet. Stop lying.

      Schlukitz prevaricates: Criticism of Uganda bring a righteous cry of racism from your lips.

      I never said that criticizing Uganda was racist. Stop lying.

      Schlukitz prevaricates: Branding John of England and I as racists for bringing this glaring omission of facts to your attention and calling us liars for denying that charge, is so typical of hypocrites like you.

      I did not call you racists. I called you race-baiters because you injected race into a discussion that had nothing to do with it until John accused me of racism in post 83 and you agreed with him in post 86. I have no idea whether either of you is racist. But you are both race-baiters for injecting a racial issue into this discussion and your continued attempts to play-act like I’m the one who brought race into this is dishonest and pathetic.

      Schlukitz prevaricates: I feel very strongly about this issue of accusing people of racism as a means of getting them banned from posting on Queerty, because it has already happened to me. It is cowardly, below-the-belt fighting and slanderous character assassination which is behavior very unbecoming of anyone who sinks to that level.

      Then I strongly encourage you not to do it again to anyone else as you did to me in post 86. You are not the offended party here. You are not the target of baseless accusations. Deny it all you want but all anyone has to do is read post 86 and you’re shown up as the pathetic race-baiting liar.

      Jan 21, 2010 at 1:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName
      FakeName

      @hyhybt: You misunderstand what’s happened here. John from England accused me of not caring if gays were killed in Uganda and Malawi because the people of Uganda and Malawi are black. This is a vile false accusation and injects race into a discussion in which race had not previously been an issue. Classic race-baiting. Schlukitz expressed his agreement with John’s assessment three posts later. And now that they have been called on their reprehensible behaviour, Schlukitz is now trying to insist that it is he who is the innocent victim of racial accusations. Unfortunately for him, his own words in post 86 amply demonstrate that it is he who is indulging in scurrilous racial accusations, and all of his pantomime bosom-clutching and swooning can’t change that.

      Jan 21, 2010 at 1:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.