|
Post by Amazing Kitsune on Apr 24, 2014 17:33:32 GMT -5
That's about one selfless act in his 5 year Rattlesnake run. He also helped Foley win his first WWF title didn't he? And didn't he also help The Rock beat HHH at Backlash 2000? I'm sure I can think of other instances if I try hard enough. He also tried to make Kane feel better when he struggled with his perceived physical disability shortly after unmasking. He's a rattlesnake with a heart of gold. Unless you refuse to drink beer with him, then you'll WHAM! get a Stone Cold Stunner like Stacy Keebler.
|
|
|
Post by rapidfire187 on Apr 24, 2014 17:35:05 GMT -5
I have a couple of bi male friends. I live with one of them and at one point I introduced them to each other. They proceeded to have a fing that ended in drama. I'm not gonna lie, I feel that I'm a progressive kinda guy but my house got VERY gay for a minute there. As a straight male, it was a bit uncomfortable at times. Not sure how this is relevant at all but whatever.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,976
|
Post by chazraps on Apr 24, 2014 17:42:44 GMT -5
I have a couple of bi male friends. I live with one of them and at one point I introduced them to each other. They proceeded to have a fing that ended in drama. I'm not gonna lie, I feel that I'm a progressive kinda guy but my house got VERY gay for a minute there. As a straight male, it was a bit uncomfortable at times. Not sure how this is relevant at all but whatever. You sure you just weren't uncomfortable by the loud copious coitus happening all the time? Like, would it have been more comfortable if it was the same sex and same drama of a heterosexual couple?
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,976
|
Post by chazraps on Apr 24, 2014 17:51:52 GMT -5
You missed the first half of my initial post in regards to majority ownership of media. I'm speaking about it in absolutist terms there, I agree, and I'm more than aware of other factors in personal social exclusion/inclusion, but that wasn't my argument if you read my original post, unless you mean people's personal opinions with certain elements of power can be pushed onto a larger scale, in which case I entirely agree. Nothing's ever that simple, I agree, but my admittedly simple argument re: influence of the media wasn't so much about each individual white hetero man, more about the overriding power/roles that white hetero cis men have in media & the world as a whole allowing their opinions to filter through etc. Sorry if I seemed at all blunt with my last post too, that wasn't intentional (late evening posting), but when I was brought up seeing headlines in the Daily Mirror/Mail about burning down suspected pedophiles homes, and then the next day suggesting gay people should be suspected of being pedophiles by default (with no backing, opinion pieces, then some fluff about the nuclear family being the only safe haven for children despite that being absolute bollocks) by the same newspapers owned by the same people it sticks in my craw a bit y'know? I get what you're saying. I understand your anger and your frustration. You have a legitimate reason to be upset with the media, especially certain sectors of that. No harm/no foul on your bluntness either, I appreciate it. My point is simple. We should be careful of using language that blames one sector of society on any problem. That's unfair. It's unfair when people blame gays for pedophilia and it's just as unfair when people try to say that a problem was caused by straight white men. Because they're the essentially the same statement. Language is powerful and blame should be given out responsibly. Are straight white guys intolerant? Yes. Are they the only ones? No. Intolerance is a human problem. It's not a problem where there is one race, sexuality, gender, etc. causing all of the problems. As I understand, you've stated that you don't believe that straight white men are the problem, just the global media structure that they happen to control. That's fair enough. I just humbly think that you could have chosen your words better, which you have reasonably admitted. It's also, again, important to note that the same problems occur in other regions of the world where that media structure has substantial less power. Again, it's a human problem. Blaming another group of people, even in passing, only keeps the cycle going. Absolutely nobody is saying homophobia is a "Straight white male" problem. It exists all over. What Paul seems to be saying is the media's perpetuation of that sort of minority subjugation stems from the heteronormative straight while male gaze that has been the majority of the mainstream media's framework since its existence. Straight while males as a whole aren't to blame, and those who plant the seeds of insensitivity aren't to blame because they're straight white males. It's when there's a lack of self-awareness regarding the perpetual straight white male standard that these issues arise. For instance, absolutely no one could ever sincerely say "I sure hope straight white males some day have a fair representation in media and a say in world affairs." Straight white males, just by being straight white males, have the privilege of not ever having to think about the challenges they could face if they were not-straight, not-white and not-males. That's not to say they should suffer, or that straight white males as a whole aren't sympathetic/empathetic or progressive enough to opt to not make the world a better place. Rather, if they wanted to go through life just going about their straight white male business, they could do so without any socio-economic adverse effect. Any and all of those who don't fall under the umbrella of "Straight white male" can't say that. So when terms like "Straight white male" come up in these discussions, it's not an immediate liberal guilt cultural studies blame game. You can't fight prejudice with prejudice, no matter how uneven that is. It's a term for the unfortunately media-perpetuated "normalcy."
|
|
|
Post by rapidfire187 on Apr 24, 2014 18:01:01 GMT -5
I have a couple of bi male friends. I live with one of them and at one point I introduced them to each other. They proceeded to have a fing that ended in drama. I'm not gonna lie, I feel that I'm a progressive kinda guy but my house got VERY gay for a minute there. As a straight male, it was a bit uncomfortable at times. Not sure how this is relevant at all but whatever. You sure you just weren't uncomfortable by the loud copious coitus happening all the time? Like, would it have been more comfortable if it was the same sex and same drama of a heterosexual couple? Well, my room mate had brought over a dude one night that ended up spending the whole night hitting on me and even getting naked. So yea, in this situation, if the person he brought over had been female it would have been a COMPLETELY different story. But the subsequent fallout from that night (friend A & B's breakup over that dude being here) would have been equally uncomfortable regardless of genders.
|
|
|
Post by Amazing Kitsune on Apr 24, 2014 18:12:04 GMT -5
I get what you're saying. I understand your anger and your frustration. You have a legitimate reason to be upset with the media, especially certain sectors of that. No harm/no foul on your bluntness either, I appreciate it. My point is simple. We should be careful of using language that blames one sector of society on any problem. That's unfair. It's unfair when people blame gays for pedophilia and it's just as unfair when people try to say that a problem was caused by straight white men. Because they're the essentially the same statement. Language is powerful and blame should be given out responsibly. Are straight white guys intolerant? Yes. Are they the only ones? No. Intolerance is a human problem. It's not a problem where there is one race, sexuality, gender, etc. causing all of the problems. As I understand, you've stated that you don't believe that straight white men are the problem, just the global media structure that they happen to control. That's fair enough. I just humbly think that you could have chosen your words better, which you have reasonably admitted. It's also, again, important to note that the same problems occur in other regions of the world where that media structure has substantial less power. Again, it's a human problem. Blaming another group of people, even in passing, only keeps the cycle going. Absolutely nobody is saying homophobia is a "Straight white male" problem. It exists all over. What Paul seems to be saying is the media's perpetuation of that sort of minority subjugation stems from the heteronormative straight while male gaze that has been the majority of the mainstream media's framework since its existence. Straight while males as a whole aren't to blame, and those who plant the seeds of insensitivity aren't to blame because they're straight white males. It's when there's a lack of self-awareness regarding the perpetual straight white male standard that these issues arise. For instance, absolutely no one could ever sincerely say "I sure hope straight white males some day have a fair representation in media and a say in world affairs." Straight white males, just by being straight white males, have the privilege of not ever having to think about the challenges they could face if they were not-straight, not-white and not-males. That's not to say they should suffer, or that straight white males as a whole aren't sympathetic/empathetic or progressive enough to opt to not make the world a better place. Rather, if they wanted to go through life just going about their straight white male business, they could do so without any socio-economic adverse effect. Any and all of those who don't fall under the umbrella of "Straight white male" can't say that. So when terms like "Straight white male" come up in these discussions, it's not an immediate liberal guilt cultural studies blame game. You can't fight prejudice with prejudice, no matter how uneven that is. It's a term for the unfortunately media-perpetuated "normalcy." We already came to an agreement on the issue. I'll add this: It's incorrect to say that "absolutely nobody" says homophobia is a straight white male problem. People do say that--it's pretty popular in several circules. I see it in online discussions, I've seen it in academia, in the media and I've also seen the argument in print as early as the 1960s. It's a pretty long standing argument that gets used. It's also a problematic argument for all the reasons I said above. SalineSolutions made it clear that nothing negative was meant specifically about straight white men in the aforementioned post. And that's great. My point being that better care should be used in discussions of this nature. Singling out one group--no matter how innocently--is problematic and only serves to divide and muddy up the issue. For some people, it's an attempt to create a bogeyman. All I'm saying is that people should choose their words more carefully. Edit: It also just occurred to me that I may be being Captain Serious Kitsune and when you said "absolutely nobody" you meant "absolutely nobody in this thread"
If so, then yeah you're right.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,976
|
Post by chazraps on Apr 24, 2014 18:17:31 GMT -5
Absolutely nobody is saying homophobia is a "Straight white male" problem. It exists all over. What Paul seems to be saying is the media's perpetuation of that sort of minority subjugation stems from the heteronormative straight while male gaze that has been the majority of the mainstream media's framework since its existence. Straight while males as a whole aren't to blame, and those who plant the seeds of insensitivity aren't to blame because they're straight white males. It's when there's a lack of self-awareness regarding the perpetual straight white male standard that these issues arise. For instance, absolutely no one could ever sincerely say "I sure hope straight white males some day have a fair representation in media and a say in world affairs." Straight white males, just by being straight white males, have the privilege of not ever having to think about the challenges they could face if they were not-straight, not-white and not-males. That's not to say they should suffer, or that straight white males as a whole aren't sympathetic/empathetic or progressive enough to opt to not make the world a better place. Rather, if they wanted to go through life just going about their straight white male business, they could do so without any socio-economic adverse effect. Any and all of those who don't fall under the umbrella of "Straight white male" can't say that. So when terms like "Straight white male" come up in these discussions, it's not an immediate liberal guilt cultural studies blame game. You can't fight prejudice with prejudice, no matter how uneven that is. It's a term for the unfortunately media-perpetuated "normalcy." We already came to an agreement on the issue. I'll add this: It's incorrect to say that "absolutely nobody" says homophobia is a straight white male problem. People do say that--it's pretty popular in several circules. I see it in online discussions, I've seen it in academia, in the media and I've also seen the argument in print as early as the 1960s. It's a pretty long standing argument that gets used. It's also a problematic argument for all the reasons I said above. SalineSolutions made it clear that nothing negative was meant specifically about straight white men in the aforementioned post. And that's great. My point being that better care should be used in discussions of this nature. Singling out one group--no matter how innocently--is problematic and only serves to divide and muddy up the issue. For some people, it's an attempt to create a bogeyman. All I'm saying is that people should choose their words more carefully. Edit: It also just occurred to me that I may be being Captain Serious Kitsune and when you said "absolutely nobody" you meant "absolutely nobody in this thread"
If so, then yeah you're right. Yeah, that's what I meant.
|
|
|
Post by Amazing Kitsune on Apr 24, 2014 18:19:31 GMT -5
We already came to an agreement on the issue. I'll add this: It's incorrect to say that "absolutely nobody" says homophobia is a straight white male problem. People do say that--it's pretty popular in several circules. I see it in online discussions, I've seen it in academia, in the media and I've also seen the argument in print as early as the 1960s. It's a pretty long standing argument that gets used. It's also a problematic argument for all the reasons I said above. SalineSolutions made it clear that nothing negative was meant specifically about straight white men in the aforementioned post. And that's great. My point being that better care should be used in discussions of this nature. Singling out one group--no matter how innocently--is problematic and only serves to divide and muddy up the issue. For some people, it's an attempt to create a bogeyman. All I'm saying is that people should choose their words more carefully. Edit: It also just occurred to me that I may be being Captain Serious Kitsune and when you said "absolutely nobody" you meant "absolutely nobody in this thread"
If so, then yeah you're right. Yeah, that's what I meant. Ah, OK. I see. That's unfortunate. What's even more unfortunate is that I'm big enough not to apologize. Captain Serious Kitsune apologizes to no one. No one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2014 18:24:36 GMT -5
Kind of sad that a man holding such open minded views and supporting this issue in 2014 is still considered to be news. Eh...for athletes it kinda is. In fairness wrestlers and NBA players tend to fall more on the progressive spectrum but a lot of MLB/NFL/NHL players are still living in a slightly darker age when it comes to these issues. Homophobia in sports is a still a big deal so the more news coverage disclaiming the neanderthal jock stereotype the better it is for the younger generation of kids who want to play sports. Oh hockey is very progressive. Look up the You Can Play Project. Almost every household hockey player from every team is on the project and shot commercials and trying to create awareness. Hell I forgot who but one of The Blackhawks last year spent his day with the cup with the gay community of Chicago and dedicated to the memory of Brendan Burke
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2014 18:25:00 GMT -5
Kind of sad that a man holding such open minded views and supporting this issue in 2014 is still considered to be news. Eh...for athletes it kinda is. In fairness wrestlers and NBA players tend to fall more on the progressive spectrum but a lot of MLB/NFL/NHL players are still living in a slightly darker age when it comes to these issues. Homophobia in sports is a still a big deal so the more news coverage disclaiming the neanderthal jock stereotype the better it is for the younger generation of kids who want to play sports. Oh hockey is very progressive. Look up the You Can Play Project. Almost every household hockey player from every team is on the project and shot commercials and trying to create awareness. Hell I forgot who but one of The Blackhawks last year spent his day with the cup with the gay community of Chicago and dedicated to the memory of Brendan Burke
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 24, 2014 19:29:18 GMT -5
Isn't this a political discussion?
|
|
|
Post by Mayonnaise on Apr 24, 2014 19:35:30 GMT -5
Isn't this a political discussion? I haven't read everything in the thread but from what I have seen so far it has been either shock that something this old is just now getting out, discussion of what they means because of Austin's stature and where he is from, and finally why it is a story. Haven't seen much that I would call political yet.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Apr 24, 2014 19:38:53 GMT -5
Not entirely. He saved Stephanie when Undertaker was going to make her his dark bride. That's about one selfless act in his 5 year Rattlesnake run. It was a crucial one though. As far as I recall it was the point Stephanie realised how evil her father truly was, and that led to her joining HHH. One important act means more than many trivial ones.
|
|
|
Post by The Tee Why on Apr 24, 2014 20:28:07 GMT -5
I still don't get homophobia. Nothing about it makes any sense at all. I remember in school when someone would be labeled (against their will) as "gay" and all the sudden, other people would be like "whoa, stay away from me". Like, are you afraid that you're going to "get it" or are you afraid of getting raped? Like, this confuses me to no end. I could go on and on, but I don't know what falls under the rules here as far as this goes. I think it all comes down to these guys assuming that if another man is gay, that they have no self control and will try and put their willy up their poopchute. Meanwhile they all go fap to lesbian porn online. Thats the thing I get a kick out of, a lot of guys are like "hey man I dont mind if you're gay but DONT HIT ON ME" meanwhile the guy saying dont hit on me, cant get laid by a WOMAN let alone a gay guy...
|
|
Ginger Beer Man
Dennis Stamp
Jam Up Guy
The kids can call you HoJu!
Posts: 4,221
|
Post by Ginger Beer Man on Apr 25, 2014 12:09:57 GMT -5
Austin's attitude is how everybody's should be on this subject.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2014 12:33:18 GMT -5
Thank you, Mr. Austin, for sayin' what needed to be said! IT'S STILL REAL EQUAL TO ME, DAMMIT!
|
|
ASYLUMHAUSEN
Fry's dog Seymour
GIFs | Shitposts | Fun
Posts: 24,372
|
Post by ASYLUMHAUSEN on Apr 25, 2014 17:32:58 GMT -5
Stone Cold's podcast? YOU MEAN THE PODCAST FOR THE WORKIN' MAN? WITH THAT BIG OL' CAN OF *pssst* AUDIO WHOOP ASS? the hour plus podcast that dedicates at least 30 minutes to sponsors? I love Austin & when he's not shilling (I understand WHY it happens...doesn't make it less aggravating though) his podcast is aces. His recent 2 parter with Heyman was pure audio GOLD.
|
|
|
Post by Lance Uppercut on Apr 25, 2014 18:08:51 GMT -5
Stone Cold's podcast? YOU MEAN THE PODCAST FOR THE WORKIN' MAN? WITH THAT BIG OL' CAN OF *pssst* AUDIO WHOOP ASS? the hour plus podcast that dedicates at least 30 minutes to sponsors? I love Austin & when he's not shilling (I understand WHY it happens...doesn't make it less aggravating though) his podcast is aces. His recent 2 parter with Heyman was pure audio GOLD. Personally, love the shilling. When it's him doing it. Listening to Steve Austin Talk about Sherry's Berries > Trojan Man commercials.
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Apr 25, 2014 18:22:12 GMT -5
This thread denigrates the memory of the Ultimate Warrior, that's all I'm saying.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Apr 25, 2014 18:22:57 GMT -5
AND THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE CUZ STONE COLD SAID SO!!!
|
|