you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]ThiccDropkickGay 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think I’ve found out problem within seconds of reading the article.

typically young (millennial), straight, white cisgender males of privilege”

When you dismiss a group of people in this way and tell them they’re ‘privileged’ it’s no wonder they might think twice about supporting you.

Also, the researcher included “queer” as a slur when counting anti-lgbt language.. so, it’s offensive when dudebros use it but apparently fine for everyone else? Also ‘no homo’. Which I almost never see being used in an offensive way nowadays.

The original study (though you have to pay to read all of it)

[–]Shadow_Lurker 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What these idiots seem to forget is that some of these 'dude bros' are gay or bissexual, but closeted.

It's not like this 'mean girl' shit has the potential of alienating them, not at all!

[–]IridescentAnacondastrictly dickly 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Also ‘no homo’. Which I almost never see being used in an offensive way nowadays.

I always read "no homo" as a semi-conscious recognition of the ambiguity around male/male bonding. It's not so much a denunciation of gay men as an acknowledgment that sometimes the line might be finer than society as whole wants to recognize. I'm not saying every straight man is secretly bisexual, just that the world is filled with subterranean tensions under the surface and sometimes straight guys are willing to acknowledge that.

[–]personwhoknows 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not if you use Sci Hub! Best website ever.