To the right-wingers posting about students response and free speech issues- when Churchill came #1- he did not insult or demean students. #2- The DCA and republicans were calling for the event to be cancelled before it happened. ASU and DSAW never called for the warrior event to be cancelled, unless he harassed students. Further any "disclaimer" doesn't count because it's still school property. You can't say "ok we're going to start beating people with baseball bats and anyone who objects to this has been warned and can't complain later." Doesn't float.
To Captain Queero and GLN- chill. I think we can all agree that there is a big difference between Captain Queero using the word in a positive way to reclaim it, and the "Warrior" using it in a way to undermine LGBTQA rights. While not the same, it's simelar to the difference between a socially aware rap group like Dead Prez using the N word as compared to some white conservative using the N word.
captain queero-
If you were at the event I think you would have a better understanding about the issues at stake in the discussion of queer labeling that went on there.
What was contested was not the use of the word queer by self-identified LGBTQ people and allies, but the use of it by the "Warrior" in a derogatory way. Some students brought up that as a homophobic straight person who repeatedly spoke hatefully about LGBTQs and said that all queers are mentally and emotionally unstable, that they are unnatural, and who himself related his usage of the word "queer" to its definition of abnormality, he had no claim to the word and could only use it in a discriminatory and prejudiced way. He also compared "queers" to pedophiles, among other things. His speech was hateful and violent.
Many queers have reclaimed the term as empowering or the most fitting label for their identity, but reject its usage as derogatory. Again, the example used by others, its the difference between a woman self-identifying as a dyke and being called a dyke by a homophobe.
That was the issue.
captain queero-
If you were at the event I think you would have a better understanding about the issues at stake in the discussion of queer labeling that went on there.
What was contested was not the use of the word queer by self-identified LGBTQ people and allies, but the use of it by the "Warrior" in a derogatory way. Some students brought up that as a homophobic straight person who repeatedly spoke hatefully about LGBTQs and said that all queers are mentally and emotionally unstable, that they are unnatural, and who himself related his usage of the word "queer" to its definition of abnormality, he had no claim to the word and could only use it in a discriminatory and prejudiced way. He also compared "queers" to pedophiles, among other things. His speech was hateful and violent.
Many queers have reclaimed the term as empowering or the most fitting label for their identity, but reject its usage as derogatory. Again, the example used by others, its the difference between a woman self-identifying as a dyke and being called a dyke by a homophobe.
That was the issue.
Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
Date Edited: 06 Apr 2006 01:39:38 PM
To Captain Queero and GLN- chill. I think we can all agree that there is a big difference between Captain Queero using the word in a positive way to reclaim it, and the "Warrior" using it in a way to undermine LGBTQA rights. While not the same, it's simelar to the difference between a socially aware rap group like Dead Prez using the N word as compared to some white conservative using the N word.
Comments
Re: Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
If you were at the event I think you would have a better understanding about the issues at stake in the discussion of queer labeling that went on there.
What was contested was not the use of the word queer by self-identified LGBTQ people and allies, but the use of it by the "Warrior" in a derogatory way. Some students brought up that as a homophobic straight person who repeatedly spoke hatefully about LGBTQs and said that all queers are mentally and emotionally unstable, that they are unnatural, and who himself related his usage of the word "queer" to its definition of abnormality, he had no claim to the word and could only use it in a discriminatory and prejudiced way. He also compared "queers" to pedophiles, among other things. His speech was hateful and violent.
Many queers have reclaimed the term as empowering or the most fitting label for their identity, but reject its usage as derogatory. Again, the example used by others, its the difference between a woman self-identifying as a dyke and being called a dyke by a homophobe.
That was the issue.
Re: Re: "Ultimate Warrior" shows need to remove hate speech platform
06 Apr 2006
If you were at the event I think you would have a better understanding about the issues at stake in the discussion of queer labeling that went on there.
What was contested was not the use of the word queer by self-identified LGBTQ people and allies, but the use of it by the "Warrior" in a derogatory way. Some students brought up that as a homophobic straight person who repeatedly spoke hatefully about LGBTQs and said that all queers are mentally and emotionally unstable, that they are unnatural, and who himself related his usage of the word "queer" to its definition of abnormality, he had no claim to the word and could only use it in a discriminatory and prejudiced way. He also compared "queers" to pedophiles, among other things. His speech was hateful and violent.
Many queers have reclaimed the term as empowering or the most fitting label for their identity, but reject its usage as derogatory. Again, the example used by others, its the difference between a woman self-identifying as a dyke and being called a dyke by a homophobe.
That was the issue.