You know, as a homosexual male, I do not find this story line funny at all.
Either the creators are trying to satirize the fact that zero tolerance can be taken to ludicrous extremes by making a farce out of something that can and does hurt a lot of peoples…
Or
They are poking fun at something that can and does hurt a lot of people and using zero tolerance policies to do so.
Both of these concepts disturbs me and to be honest I considering dropping the strip. This would only be the second time I have done this (the other was allowing avowed homophobe Orson Scott Card guest write the strip.)
@Psychodad (re: yesterday): I don’t think this arc is funny, and I’m expressing my freedom of speech. You got a problem with that? Some people seem to think that “Freedom of speech” means nobody should say anything about what they say. Ridiculous. And it rather proves my point: you’re seeing censorship where someone expresses an opinion; you’re crying PC! PC! PC Police! when nobody is trying to shut you up. We just don’t like it, and we’re going to say so. Ooooh, go hide under your bed from the evil PC Police. rolls eyes
@Joey: When this strip is apolitical, it’s cute, interesting, sometimes even heartwearming. I mean, it’s not one of the cutting-edge clever strips out there or laugh-out-loud funny, but I like the characters. But every so often, the Johns break out the conservative talking points and create a caricature universe in which bullying liberals are destroying the world. I’ve thought about dropping it, too, but for now, I’m going to keep reading and express my disappointment when they start in with the ignorance. For what it’s worth, I think of your two options, it’s the first—they don’t see how using “gay” as a negative term is a bad thing at all, so they are going to use it as a way to talk about zero tolerance policies.
I fully expect to see Zack go through “sensitivity training” in the strip. I also expect that the sensitivity trainer will make one or two good points but that the arc overall will not favor their side. That’s how the Johns have treated global warming, for instance.
This is offensive because it basically denies that the term “gay” is being used to insult a minority group. The strip’s insistence that the word gay has only its original dictionary meaning (that would be pre-1950 or thereabouts) is false – and not amusing.
As I pointed out previously, it would make a much better point for Zack to confront WHY this word might be offensive, might be associated with bullying, and how he came to use it at all.
Only recently has the word gay become a generic term meaning “stupid, unacceptable, etc.”. I am truly curious as to where and when this began.
I know and embrace the term as the positive and self affirming word that a population formerly referred to as “homosexuals” chose for themselves.
This strip could be a force for education and enlightenment, rather than reinforcing ridiculous ideas of “political correctness”.
You grow up hearing everybody in school use “gay” as a slang for “bad”. Then you discover that it also means somebody who is attracted to their own gender. AND you discover that you are one of those people. Can’t you understand how hurtful it is to find out that YOU are a living symbol of badness?
Michael Peterson Premium Member over 12 years ago
I suppose it would be inappropriate to use the expression “beat it to death” in this context, but I’ll be glad when this storyline wraps up.
Yukoneric over 12 years ago
TJ, I think it is rather gay…………….
Smaus over 12 years ago
I could understand if he referred to it as some ‘fa—ot ass sh-t’ then discipline would be understandable.
timebear Premium Member over 12 years ago
You know, as a homosexual male, I do not find this story line funny at all.
Either the creators are trying to satirize the fact that zero tolerance can be taken to ludicrous extremes by making a farce out of something that can and does hurt a lot of peoples…
Or
They are poking fun at something that can and does hurt a lot of people and using zero tolerance policies to do so.
Both of these concepts disturbs me and to be honest I considering dropping the strip. This would only be the second time I have done this (the other was allowing avowed homophobe Orson Scott Card guest write the strip.)
Comic Minister Premium Member over 12 years ago
Looks like there is no way out of this one. Sorry Zack!
ladywyntre over 12 years ago
@Psychodad (re: yesterday): I don’t think this arc is funny, and I’m expressing my freedom of speech. You got a problem with that? Some people seem to think that “Freedom of speech” means nobody should say anything about what they say. Ridiculous. And it rather proves my point: you’re seeing censorship where someone expresses an opinion; you’re crying PC! PC! PC Police! when nobody is trying to shut you up. We just don’t like it, and we’re going to say so. Ooooh, go hide under your bed from the evil PC Police. rolls eyes
@Joey: When this strip is apolitical, it’s cute, interesting, sometimes even heartwearming. I mean, it’s not one of the cutting-edge clever strips out there or laugh-out-loud funny, but I like the characters. But every so often, the Johns break out the conservative talking points and create a caricature universe in which bullying liberals are destroying the world. I’ve thought about dropping it, too, but for now, I’m going to keep reading and express my disappointment when they start in with the ignorance. For what it’s worth, I think of your two options, it’s the first—they don’t see how using “gay” as a negative term is a bad thing at all, so they are going to use it as a way to talk about zero tolerance policies.
I fully expect to see Zack go through “sensitivity training” in the strip. I also expect that the sensitivity trainer will make one or two good points but that the arc overall will not favor their side. That’s how the Johns have treated global warming, for instance.
cynthia staples Premium Member over 12 years ago
This is offensive because it basically denies that the term “gay” is being used to insult a minority group. The strip’s insistence that the word gay has only its original dictionary meaning (that would be pre-1950 or thereabouts) is false – and not amusing.
As I pointed out previously, it would make a much better point for Zack to confront WHY this word might be offensive, might be associated with bullying, and how he came to use it at all.
Only recently has the word gay become a generic term meaning “stupid, unacceptable, etc.”. I am truly curious as to where and when this began.
I know and embrace the term as the positive and self affirming word that a population formerly referred to as “homosexuals” chose for themselves.
This strip could be a force for education and enlightenment, rather than reinforcing ridiculous ideas of “political correctness”.
dcp9142 over 12 years ago
You grow up hearing everybody in school use “gay” as a slang for “bad”. Then you discover that it also means somebody who is attracted to their own gender. AND you discover that you are one of those people. Can’t you understand how hurtful it is to find out that YOU are a living symbol of badness?